Paper detail

Parameter splitting in dark energy: is dark energy the same in the background and in the cosmic structures?

We perform an empirical consistency test of General Relativity/dark energy by disentangling expansion history and growth of structure constraints. We replace each late-universe parameter that describes the behavior of dark energy with two meta-parameters: one describing geometrical information in cosmological probes, and the other controlling the growth of structure. If the underlying model (a standard wCDM cosmology with General Relativity) is correct, that is under the null hypothesis, the two meta-parameters coincide. If they do not, it could indicate a failure of the model or systematics in the data. We present a global analysis using state-of-the-art cosmological data sets which points in the direction that cosmic structures prefer a weaker growth than that inferred by background probes. This result could signify inconsistencies of the model, the necessity of extensions to it or the presence of systematic errors in the data. We examine all these possibilities. The fact that the result is mostly driven by a specific sub-set of galaxy clusters abundance data, points to the need of a better understanding of this probe.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.