Probing Dark Energy Evolution Post-DESI 2024

Probing Dark Energy Evolution Post-DESI 2024

September 30, 2024 | Lili Orchard, Victor H. Cárdenas
The paper investigates the evolution of dark energy (DE) at low redshift using baryonic acoustic oscillations (BAOs) from the DESI Early Data Release, Type Ia supernovae (SNe-Ia) from the Pantheon+ sample, redshift space distortions (RSDs), and angular acoustic scale information from the cosmic microwave background (CMB). The authors use a quadratic parametrisation, \(X(z)\), to represent the DE density, aiming to identify deviations from the standard \(\Lambda\)CDM model. They find evidence for DE evolution in all cases, with \(X(z)\) deviating from unity, indicating dynamical DE behavior. The best-fit parameters for \(X(z)\) show that DE density starts to exhibit dynamical behavior at \(z \sim 0.5\) and assumes negative values beyond \(z \sim 1.5\). The data do not significantly prefer the \(X(z)\)CDM model over the \(\Lambda\)CDM model, as both models perform well according to reduced \(\chi^2\) and the Durbin-Watson statistic. The addition of CMB information, represented by the angular acoustic scale, lowers the Hubble constant \(H_0\) in all analyses. The study concludes that the \(X(z)\)CDM model does not resolve the Hubble tension but provides insights into the nature of DE at low redshift.The paper investigates the evolution of dark energy (DE) at low redshift using baryonic acoustic oscillations (BAOs) from the DESI Early Data Release, Type Ia supernovae (SNe-Ia) from the Pantheon+ sample, redshift space distortions (RSDs), and angular acoustic scale information from the cosmic microwave background (CMB). The authors use a quadratic parametrisation, \(X(z)\), to represent the DE density, aiming to identify deviations from the standard \(\Lambda\)CDM model. They find evidence for DE evolution in all cases, with \(X(z)\) deviating from unity, indicating dynamical DE behavior. The best-fit parameters for \(X(z)\) show that DE density starts to exhibit dynamical behavior at \(z \sim 0.5\) and assumes negative values beyond \(z \sim 1.5\). The data do not significantly prefer the \(X(z)\)CDM model over the \(\Lambda\)CDM model, as both models perform well according to reduced \(\chi^2\) and the Durbin-Watson statistic. The addition of CMB information, represented by the angular acoustic scale, lowers the Hubble constant \(H_0\) in all analyses. The study concludes that the \(X(z)\)CDM model does not resolve the Hubble tension but provides insights into the nature of DE at low redshift.
Reach us at info@study.space
[slides and audio] Probing dark energy evolution post-DESI 2024