Exploring the expansion history of the universe.

By Eric Linder. Physical Review Letters, 2002

1,916 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Exploring the recent expansion history of the universe promises insights into the cosmological model, the nature of dark energy, and potentially clues to high energy physics theories and gravitation. We examine the extent to which precision distance-redshift observations can map out the history, including the acceleration-deceleration transition, and the components and equations of state of the energy density. We consider the ability to distinguish between various dynamical scalar field models for the dark energy, as well as higher dimension and alternate gravity theories. Finally, we present a new, advantageous parametrization for the study of dark energy.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Nuclear and High Energy Physics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ad35d321f4994123bb72cc60f9ef080f1ed88eb5

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

In Nuclear and High Energy Physics

Citations in the corpus

The Hubble Diagram to Redshift >6 from 69 Gamma-Ray Bursts (2006, background): “16 w(z) ¼ w0 þ w0z or w(z) ¼ w0 þ waz(1þ z) 1 (Chevallier & Polarski 2001; Linder 2003).”
Distance priors from Planck final release (2018, methodology): “In this section, we use the distance priors derived for the base ΛCDM model in the former subsection to constrain the cosmological parameters in the base ΛCDM model, the wCDM model and the CPL model [28, 29], and compare our results with the Planck 2018 results to test the validity of the distance p”
Robust preference for Dynamical Dark Energy in DESI BAO and SN measurements (2024, methodology): “Unexpectedly, these results have heated up the recent debate, fueling a multitude of re-analyses and re-interpretations [59, 251, 262, 264, 349–365].”
SNLS3: CONSTRAINTS ON DARK ENERGY COMBINING THE SUPERNOVA LEGACY SURVEY THREE-YEAR DATA WITH OTHER PROBES (2011, background): “We investigate a non-flat, w = −1 cosmology (fitting for Ωm and ΩΛ), a flat, constant w cosmology (fitting for Ωm and w), a non-flat cosmology with w free (fitting for w, Ωm and Ωk), and a cosmology where w(a) is allowed to vary via a simple linear parameterization w(a) = w0 + wa(1 − a) ≡ w0 + waz/(”
Updated results on neutrino mass and mass hierarchy from cosmology with Planck 2018 likelihoods (2019, neutral): “This is the Chevallier-Polarski-Linder (CPL) parametrization [68, 69]:”
The Observed Growth of Massive Galaxy Clusters I: Statistical Methods and Cosmological Constraints (2009, methodology): “The first is the commonly used model of Chevallier & Polarski (2001) and Linder (2003), w(a) = w0 + wa(1 − a), (1) where a = 1/(1 + z) is the scalefactor, in which the equation of state makes a smooth transition from value w0 at z = 0 to w0 + wa at high redshift.”
Testing modified gravity at cosmological distances with LISA standard sirens (2019, methodology): “dard approach is rather to use a parametrization for this function, that catches the qualitative features of a large class of models. The most common is the Chevallier{Polarski{Linder parametrization [47,48], which makes use of two parameters (w0;wa), wDE(a) = w0 + wa(1 a); (2.29) corresponding to t”
Simultaneous measurement of cosmology and intrinsic alignments using joint cosmic shear and galaxy number density correlations (2009, methodology): “We incorporate a variable dark energy model by parametrising its equation of state, relating pressurepDE to density ρDE, as (Chevallier & Polarski 2001; Linder 2003) pDE(z) = ( w0 + wa z 1+ z ) ρDE(z) c2 , (27) where theΛCDM Universe is chosen as the fiducial model, i.e. w0 = −1 andwa = 0.”
Maximal freedom at minimum cost: linear large-scale structure in general modifications of gravity (2014, methodology): “It is frequently parameterised using the first two terms of a Taylor expansion [16, 17].”
SEVEN-YEAR WILKINSON MICROWAVE ANISOTROPY PROBE (WMAP) OBSERVATIONS: COSMOLOGICAL INTERPRETATION (2010, methodology): “Time-dependent Equation of State As for a time-dependent equation of state, we shall find constraints on the present-day value of the equation of state and its derivative using a linear form, w(a) = w0 + wa(1−a) (Chevallier & Polarski 2001; Linder 2003).”
Possible signals of vacuum dynamics in the Universe (2017, methodology): “Interestingly, when we confront the same data with a simple XCDM (Turner & White 1997) or CPL (Chevallier & Polarski 2001; Linder 2003, 2004) parametrizations of the DDE (Amendola & Tsujikawa 2015) we can still extract significant evidence of vacuum dynamics, showing that the signal is not…”
Systematic errors in future weak-lensing surveys: requirements and prospects for self-calibration (2005, methodology): “In addition to the constant w case, we also consider a commonly used two-parameter description of dark energy w(z) = w0 + waz/(1 + z) (Linder 2003) where wa becomes the seventh cosmological parameter in the analysis.”
Improved constraints on dark energy from Chandra X-ray observations of the largest relaxed galaxy clusters (2007, background): “…the scale factor, w0 and wet are the equation of state at late (present day) and early times, and zt and at are the redshift and scale factor at the transition between the two, respectively (Rapetti et al. 2005; see also Chevallier & Polarski 2001; Linder 2003; Corasaniti et al. 2003; Linder 2007).”
Observational Constraints on the Nature of Dark Energy: First Cosmological Results from the ESSENCE Supernova Survey (2007, methodology): “We here provide the global constraints – 34 – on models characterized by w = w0+wa(1−a) (Linder 2003; Albrecht et al. 2006).”