Scrutinizing Exotic Cosmological Models Using ESSENCE Supernova Data Combined with Other Cosmological Probes

By T. Davis, E. Mörtsell, J. Sollerman, A. Becker, S. Blondin, P. Challis, A. Clocchiatti, A. Filippenko, R. Foley, P. Garnavich and 18 more. 2007

564 citations recorded by the source corpus.

The first cosmological results from the ESSENCE supernova survey (Wood-Vasey and coworkers) are extended to a wider range of cosmological models including dynamical dark energy and nonstandard cosmological models. We fold in a greater number of external data sets such as the recent Higher-z release of high-redshift supernovae (Riess and coworkers), as well as several complementary cosmological probes. Model comparison statistics such as the Bayesian and Akaike information criteria are applied to gauge the worth of models. These statistics favor models that give a good fit with fewer parameters. Based on this analysis, the preferred cosmological model is the flat cosmological constant model, where the expansion history of the universe can be adequately described with only one free parameter describing the energy content of the universe. Among the more exotic models that provide good fits to the data, we note a preference for models whose best-fit parameters reduce them to the cosmological constant model.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7e3df93307a698e024145cc862e07a90c16fdda4

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Astronomy and Astrophysics

Citations in the corpus

IMPROVED DARK ENERGY CONSTRAINTS FROM ∼100 NEW CfA SUPERNOVA TYPE Ia LIGHT CURVES (2009, background): “…element in the discovery that the universe is accelerating and dominated by dark energy (e.g., Riess et al. 1998; Perlmutter et al. 1999; Knop et al. 2003; Tonry et al. 2003; Barris et al. 2004; Astier et al. 2006; Riess et al. 2007; Wood-Vasey et al. 2007; Davis et al. 2007; Kowalski et al. 2008).”
Cosmic dynamics in the era of Extremely Large Telescopes (2008, methodology): “As already mentioned above, Davis et al. (2007) have fitted all four of our alternative models to current SNIa, CMB and BAO data.”
SEVEN-YEAR WILKINSON MICROWAVE ANISOTROPY PROBE (WMAP) OBSERVATIONS: COSMOLOGICAL INTERPRETATION (2010, methodology): “By adding BAO of Eisenstein et al. (2005) and the supernova data of Davis et al. (2007), they found w = −0.991 ± 0.045 (stat) ± 0.039 (syst) (68% CL).”
CHANDRA CLUSTER COSMOLOGY PROJECT III: COSMOLOGICAL PARAMETER CONSTRAINTS (2008, background): “…the distancemoduli estimated for the Type Ia supernovae from the HST sample of Riess et al. (2007), SNLS survey (Astier et al. 2006), and ESSENCE survey (Wood-Vasey et al. 2007), combined with the nearby supernova sample (we used a combination of all these samples compiled by Davis et al. 2007).”
The clustering of galaxies in the SDSS-III Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: Testing gravity with redshift-space distortions using the power spectrum multipoles (2013, unknown): “One example of a model which does predict smaller structure growth is the DGP model (Dvali, Gabadadze & Porrati 2000), which however has theoretical issues (Gorbunov, Koyama & Sibiryakov 2006) and also seems to predict the wrong expansion history (e.g. Davis et al. 2007; Fang et al. 2008).”
Improved constraints on dark energy from Chandra X-ray observations of the largest relaxed galaxy clusters (2007, methodology): “In the first case, we use the compilation of Davis et al. (2007) which includes results from the ESSENCE survey (60 targets; Wood-Vasey et al. 2007, Miknaitis et al. 2007), the SNLS first year data (57 targets; Astier et al. 2006), 45 nearby supernovae (Jha et al. 2007) and the 30 high-redshift…”
Improved Constraints on the Acceleration History of the Universe and the Properties of the Dark Energy (2007, methodology): “The SN samples studied here include those of Davis et al. (2007), Riess et al. (2007), and Astier et al. (2006); these authors provide the pertinent details about their measurements.”
Multi-fidelity Gaussian Process Bandit Optimisation (2016, methodology): “this is the first line of work to formalise a notion of regret and provide a theoretical analysis for multi-fidelity optimisation. Subsequent to our work, there has been a line of research on multi-fidelity optimisation in various settings. Sen, Kandasamy, and Shakkottai (2018, 2019) develop an algo”
Improved Cosmological Constraints from New, Old, and Combined Supernova Data Sets (2008, methodology): “Again, the constraints are consistent with, but stronger KOWALSKI ET AL.766 Vol. 686 than, those from Riess et al. (2007) and Davis et al. (2007).”
A Cosmology-Independent Calibration of Gamma-Ray Burst Luminosity Relations and the Hubble Diagram (2008, methodology): “THE CALIBRATION OF THE LUMINOSITY RELATIONS OF GAMMA-RAY BURSTS We adopt the data for 192 SNe Ia (Riess et al. 2007; WoodVasey et al. 2007; Astier et al. 2007, Davis et al. 2007), shown in Figure 1.”
Gaussian Process Bandit Optimisation with Multi-fidelity Evaluations (2016, methodology): “Type Ia Supernovae: We use Type Ia supernovae data [7] for maximum likelihood inference on 3 cosmological parameters, the Hubble constant H0 ∈ (60, 80), the dark matter and dark energy fractions ΩM ,ΩΛ ∈ (0, 1).”
Gravitational lensing analysis of the Kilo-Degree Survey (2015, background): “An example of an early blind cosmological data analysis is Davis et al. (2007) where the analysis team was given supernova data in which the redshifts had been stretched.”
FIRST-YEAR SLOAN DIGITAL SKY SURVEY-II (SDSS-II) SUPERNOVA RESULTS: CONSTRAINTS ON NONSTANDARD COSMOLOGICAL MODELS (2009, methodology): “With the new SDSS-II supernova data and updated data on the first-peak position of the CMB, combined with the new approach to the BAO constraints, we show below that it is worthwhile retesting the non-standard cosmological models examined by Davis et al. (2007).”