Paper detail

Red-shift parametrizations of dark energy and observational constraint on their parameters: Galileon gravity as background

In this work, FRW universe filled with dark matter (perfect fluid with negligible pressure) along with dark energy in the background of Galileon gravity is considered. Four dark energy models with different EoS parametrizations have been employed namely, Linear, CPL, JBP and Logarithmic parametrizations. From Stern, Stern+BAO and Stern+BAO+CMB joint data analysis, we have obtained the bounds of the arbitrary parameters $ω_{0}$ and $ω_{1}$ by minimizing the $χ^{2}$ test. The best-fit values and bounds of the parameters are obtained at 66\%, 90\% and 99\% confidence levels which are shown by closed confidence contours in the figures. For the logarithmic model unbounded confidence contours are obtained and hence the model parameters could not be finitely constrained. The distance modulus $μ$(z) against redshift $z$ has also been plotted for our predicted theoretical models for the best fit values of the parameters and compared with the observed Union2 data sample and SNe Type Ia 292 data and we have shown that our predicted theoretical models permits the observational data sets. From the data fitting it is seen that at lower redshifts $(z<0.3)$ the SNe Type Ia 292 data gives a better fit with our theoretical models compared to the Union2 data sample. So, from the data analysis, SNe Type Ia 292 data is the more favoured data sample over its counterpart given the present choice of free parameters. From the study, it is also seen that the logarithmic parametrization model is less supported by the observational data. Finally we have generated the plot for the deceleration parameter against the redshift parameter for all the theoretical models and compared the results with the work of Farooq et al, 2013.

preprint2015arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.