- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review D

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access
  • Access by Xinjiang University

One-parameter dynamical dark energy: Hints for oscillations

Daniel A. Kessler1,*, Luis A. Escamilla1,2,†, Supriya Pan3,4,‡, and Eleonora Di Valentino1,§

  • 1School of Mathematical and Physical Sciences, University of Sheffield, Hounsfield Road, Sheffield S3 7RH, United Kingdom
  • 2Department of Physics, Istanbul Technical University, 34469 Maslak, Istanbul, Turkey
  • 3Department of Mathematics, Presidency University, 86/1 College Street, Kolkata 700073, India
  • 4Institute of Systems Science, Durban University of Technology, Durban 4000, Republic of South Africa

  • *Contact author: ph4dke@sheffield.ac.uk
  • †Contact author: l.a.escamilla@sheffield.ac.uk
  • ‡Contact author: supriya.maths@presiuniv.ac.in
  • §Contact author: e.divalentino@sheffield.ac.uk
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 114, 063501 – Published 1 September, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/1x6w-4tnd

Abstract

There is mounting evidence from multiple cosmological probes that dark energy may be dynamical, with an equation of state that evolves over cosmic time. While this evidence is typically quantified using the Chevallier-Polarski-Linder (CPL) parametrization, based on a linear expansion of w(a) in the scale factor, nonparametric reconstructions frequently suggest nonlinear features, particularly at late times. In this work, we investigate four minimal one-parameter models of dark energy with nonlinear dependence on the scale factor. These models are constrained using cosmic microwave background data from Planck, lensing reconstruction from Planck and ACT-DR6, baryon acoustic oscillation measurements from DESI-DR2, and three type Ia supernovae (SNe) samples (PantheonPlus, DESY5, and Union3), considered independently. Although our conclusions depend on the choice of SNe sample, we consistently find a preference, as measured by the chi-squared statistic and the Bayesian evidence, for these dynamical dark energy models over the standard ΛCDM (cold dark matter) model. Notably, with the PantheonPlus dataset, one model shows strong Bayesian evidence (ΔlnB≃4.5) over CPL, favoring an equation of state that peaks near a≃0.7 and oscillates near the present day. These results highlight the impact of SNe selection and contribute to the growing collection of evidence for late-time deviations from ΛCDM.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (207)

  1. A. G. Riess et al. (Supernova Search Team), Observational evidence from supernovae for an accelerating universe and a cosmological constant, Astron. J. 116, 1009 (1998).
  2. S. Perlmutter et al. (Supernova Cosmology Project), Measurements of Ω and Λ from 42 high redshift supernovae, Astrophys. J. 517, 565 (1999).
  3. S. Weinberg, The cosmological constant problem, Rev. Mod. Phys. 61, 1 (1989).
  4. I. Zlatev, L.-M. Wang, and P. J. Steinhardt, Quintessence, cosmic coincidence, and the cosmological constant, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 896 (1999).
  5. A. Joyce, B. Jain, J. Khoury, and M. Trodden, Beyond the cosmological standard model, Phys. Rep. 568, 1 (2015).
  6. P. Bull et al., Beyond ΛCDM: Problems, solutions, and the road ahead, Phys. Dark Universe 12, 56 (2016).
  7. N. Aghanim et al. (Planck Collaboration), Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys. 641, A6 (2020); 652, C4(E) (2021).
  8. A. G. Riess et al., A comprehensive measurement of the local value of the Hubble constant with 1  km s−1 Mpc−1 uncertainty from the Hubble space telescope and the SH0ES team, Astrophys. J. Lett. 934, L7 (2022).
  9. Y. S. Murakami, A. G. Riess, B. E. Stahl, W. D. Kenworthy, D.-M. A. Pluck, A. Macoretta, D. Brout, D. O. Jones, D. M. Scolnic, and A. V. Filippenko, Leveraging SN Ia spectroscopic similarity to improve the measurement of H0, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2023) 046.
  10. L. Breuval, A. G. Riess, S. Casertano, W. Yuan, L. M. Macri, M. Romaniello, Y. S. Murakami, D. Scolnic, G. S. Anand, and I. Soszyński, Small magellanic cloud cepheids observed with the Hubble space telescope provide a new anchor for the SH0ES distance ladder, Astrophys. J. 973, 30 (2024).
  11. E. Di Valentino et al., Cosmology intertwined III: fσ8 and S8, Astropart. Phys. 131, 102604 (2021).
  12. E. Di Valentino and S. Bridle, Exploring the tension between current cosmic microwave background and cosmic shear data, Symmetry 10, 585 (2018).
  13. A. Amon et al. (DES Collaboration), Dark energy survey year 3 results: Cosmology from cosmic shear and robustness to data calibration, Phys. Rev. D 105, 023514 (2022).
  14. L. F. Secco et al. (DES Collaboration), Dark energy survey year 3 results: Cosmology from cosmic shear and robustness to modeling uncertainty, Phys. Rev. D 105, 023515 (2022).
  15. M. Asgari et al. (KiDS Collaboration), KiDS-1000 cosmology: Cosmic shear constraints and comparison between two point statistics, Astron. Astrophys. 645, A104 (2021).
  16. M. Asgari et al., KiDS+VIKING-450 and DES-Y1 combined: Mitigating baryon feedback uncertainty with COSEBIs, Astron. Astrophys. 634, A127 (2020).
  17. S. Joudaki et al., KiDS+VIKING-450 and DES-Y1 combined: Cosmology with cosmic shear, Astron. Astrophys. 638, L1 (2020).
  18. G. D’Amico, J. Gleyzes, N. Kokron, K. Markovic, L. Senatore, P. Zhang, F. Beutler, and H. Gil-Marín, The cosmological analysis of the SDSS/BOSS data from the effective field theory of large-scale atructure, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2020) 005.
  19. T. M. C. Abbott et al. (Kilo-Degree Survey Collaboration and DES Collaboration), DES Y3 + KiDS-1000: Consistent cosmology combining cosmic shear surveys, Open J. Astrophys. 6, 2305.17173 (2023).
  20. T. Tröster et al., Cosmology from large-scale structure: Constraining ΛCDM with BOSS, Astron. Astrophys. 633, L10 (2020).
  21. C. Heymans et al., KiDS-1000 cosmology: Multi-probe weak gravitational lensing and spectroscopic galaxy clustering constraints, Astron. Astrophys. 646, A140 (2021).
  22. R. Dalal et al., Hyper Suprime-Cam Year 3 results: Cosmology from cosmic shear power spectra, Phys. Rev. D 108, 123519 (2023).
  23. S. Chen et al., Not all lensing is low: An analysis of DESI×DES using the Lagrangian Effective Theory of LSS, Phys. Rev. D 110, 103518 (2024).
  24. J. Kim et al. (ACT Collaboration and DESI Collaboration), The Atacama Cosmology Telescope DR6 and DESI: Structure formation over cosmic time with a measurement of the cross-correlation of CMB Lensing and Luminous Red Galaxies, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 12 (2024) 022.
  25. N. Sailer et al., Cosmological constraints from the cross-correlation of DESI Luminous Red Galaxies with CMB lensing from Planck PR4 and ACT DR6, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 06 (2025) 008.
  26. L. Faga et al. (DES Collaboration), Dark energy survey year 3 results: Cosmology from galaxy clustering and galaxy-galaxy lensing in harmonic space, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 536, 1586 (2024).
  27. J. Harnois-Deraps et al., KiDS-1000 and DES-Y1 combined: Cosmology from peak count statistics, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 534, 3305 (2024).
  28. A. Dvornik et al., KiDS-1000: Combined halo-model cosmology constraints from galaxy abundance, galaxy clustering and galaxy-galaxy lensing, Astron. Astrophys. 675, A189 (2023).
  29. T. M. C. Abbott et al. (DES Collaboration), Dark energy survey year 3 results: Cosmological constraints from galaxy clustering and weak lensing, Phys. Rev. D 105, 023520 (2022).
  30. A. H. Wright et al., KiDS-Legacy: Cosmological constraints from cosmic shear with the complete Kilo-Degree Survey, Astron. Astrophys. 703, A158 (2025).
  31. E. Di Valentino, O. Mena, S. Pan, L. Visinelli, W. Yang, A. Melchiorri, D. F. Mota, A. G. Riess, and J. Silk, In the realm of the Hubble tension-a review of solutions, Classical Quantum Gravity 38, 153001 (2021).
  32. E. Abdalla et al., Cosmology intertwined: A review of the particle physics, astrophysics, and cosmology associated with the cosmological tensions and anomalies, J. High Energy Astrophys. 34, 49 (2022).
  33. L. Perivolaropoulos and F. Skara, Challenges for ΛCDM: An update, New Astron. Rev. 95, 101659 (2022).
  34. A. R. Khalife, M. B. Zanjani, S. Galli, S. Günther, J. Lesgourgues, and K. Benabed, Review of Hubble tension solutions with new SH0ES and SPT-3G data, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 04 (2024) 059.
  35. E. Di Valentino and D. Brout, eds., The Hubble Constant Tension, Springer Series in Astrophysics and Cosmology (Springer, New York, 2024).
  36. A. R. Cooray and D. Huterer, Gravitational lensing as a probe of quintessence, Astrophys. J. Lett. 513, L95 (1999).
  37. G. Efstathiou, Constraining the equation of state of the universe from distant type Ia supernovae and cosmic microwave background anisotropies, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 310, 842 (1999).
  38. P. Astier, Can luminosity distance measurements probe the equation of state of dark energy, Phys. Lett. B 500, 8 (2001).
  39. J. Weller and A. Albrecht, Future supernovae observations as a probe of dark energy, Phys. Rev. D 65, 103512 (2002).
  40. P. S. Corasaniti and E. J. Copeland, A Model independent approach to the dark energy equation of state, Phys. Rev. D 67, 063521 (2003).
  41. C. Wetterich, Phenomenological parameterization of quintessence, Phys. Lett. B 594, 17 (2004).
  42. B. A. Bassett, P. S. Corasaniti, and M. Kunz, The Essence of quintessence and the cost of compression, Astrophys. J. Lett. 617, L1 (2004).
  43. B. Feng, M. Li, Y.-S. Piao, and X. Zhang, Oscillating quintom and the recurrent universe, Phys. Lett. B 634, 101 (2006).
  44. S. Hannestad and E. Mortsell, Cosmological constraints on the dark energy equation of state and its evolution, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 09 (2004) 001.
  45. J.-Q. Xia, B. Feng, and X.-M. Zhang, Constraints on oscillating quintom from supernova, microwave background and galaxy clustering, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 20, 2409 (2005).
  46. U. Alam, V. Sahni, and A. A. Starobinsky, The Case for dynamical dark energy revisited, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 06 (2004) 008.
  47. A. Upadhye, M. Ishak, and P. J. Steinhardt, Dynamical dark energy: Current constraints and forecasts, Phys. Rev. D 72, 063501 (2005).
  48. Y.-g. Gong and Y.-Z. Zhang, Probing the curvature and dark energy, Phys. Rev. D 72, 043518 (2005).
  49. H. K. Jassal, J. S. Bagla, and T. Padmanabhan, Observational constraints on low redshift evolution of dark energy: How consistent are different observations?, Phys. Rev. D 72, 103503 (2005).
  50. S. Nesseris and L. Perivolaropoulos, Comparison of the legacy and gold SnIa dataset constraints on dark energy models, Phys. Rev. D 72, 123519 (2005).
  51. K. N. Ananda and M. Bruni, Cosmo-dynamics and dark energy with non-linear equation of state: A quadratic model, Phys. Rev. D 74, 023523 (2006).
  52. E. V. Linder, On oscillating dark energy, Astropart. Phys. 25, 167 (2006).
  53. S. Nojiri and S. D. Odintsov, The Oscillating dark energy: Future singularity and coincidence problem, Phys. Lett. B 637, 139 (2006).
  54. D. Jain, A. Dev, and J. S. Alcaniz, Cosmological bounds on oscillating dark energy models, Phys. Lett. B 656, 15 (2007).
  55. A. Kurek, O. Hrycyna, and M. Szydlowski, Constraints on oscillating dark energy models, Phys. Lett. B 659, 14 (2008).
  56. K. Ichikawa and T. Takahashi, The Hubble constant and dark energy from cosmological distance measures, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 04 (2008) 027.
  57. D.-J. Liu, X.-Z. Li, J. Hao, and X.-H. Jin, Revisiting the parametrization of Equation of State of Dark Energy via SNIa Data, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 388, 275 (2008).
  58. E. M. Barboza, Jr. and J. S. Alcaniz, A parametric model for dark energy, Phys. Lett. B 666, 415 (2008).
  59. E. M. Barboza, J. S. Alcaniz, Z. H. Zhu, and R. Silva, A generalized equation of state for dark energy, Phys. Rev. D 80, 043521 (2009).
  60. A. Kurek, O. Hrycyna, and M. Szydlowski, From model dynamics to oscillating dark energy parametrisation, Phys. Lett. B 690, 337 (2010).
  61. J.-Z. Ma and X. Zhang, Probing the dynamics of dark energy with novel parametrizations, Phys. Lett. B 699, 233 (2011).
  62. U. Mukhopadhyay, P. P. Ghosh, M. Khlopov, and S. Ray, Phenomenology of Λ-CDM model: A possibility of accelerating Universe with positive pressure, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 50, 939 (2011).
  63. I. Sendra and R. Lazkoz, SN and BAO constraints on (new) polynomial dark energy parametrizations: Current results and forecasts, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 422, 776 (2012).
  64. L. Feng and T. Lu, A new equation of state for dark energy model, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2011) 034.
  65. F. Pace, C. Fedeli, L. Moscardini, and M. Bartelmann, Structure formation in cosmologies with oscillating dark energy, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 422, 1186 (2012).
  66. E. M. Barboza, Jr. and J. S. Alcaniz, Probing the time dependence of dark energy, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2012) 042.
  67. A. De Felice, S. Nesseris, and S. Tsujikawa, Observational constraints on dark energy with a fast varying equation of state, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2012) 029.
  68. C.-J. Feng, X.-Y. Shen, P. Li, and X.-Z. Li, A new class of parametrization for dark energy without divergence, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 09 (2012) 023.
  69. H. Wei, X.-P. Yan, and Y.-N. Zhou, Cosmological applications of Padé approximant, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2014) 045.
  70. S. Sello, A general parametric model for the dynamic dark energy, arXiv:1308.0449.
  71. J. Magaña, V. H. Cárdenas, and V. Motta, Cosmic slowing down of acceleration for several dark energy parametrizations, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2014) 017.
  72. O. Akarsu, T. Dereli, and J. A. Vazquez, A divergence-free parametrization for dynamical dark energy, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 06 (2015) 049.
  73. S. Pan, J. de Haro, A. Paliathanasis, and R. J. Slagter, Evolution and dynamics of a matter creation model, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 460, 1445 (2016).
  74. E. Di Valentino, A. Melchiorri, and J. Silk, Reconciling planck with the local value of H0 in extended parameter space, Phys. Lett. B 761, 242 (2016).
  75. R. C. Nunes, A. Bonilla, S. Pan, and E. N. Saridakis, Observational constraints on f(T) gravity from varying fundamental constants, Eur. Phys. J. C 77, 230 (2017).
  76. R. C. Nunes, S. Pan, E. N. Saridakis, and E. M. C. Abreu, New observational constraints on f(R) gravity from cosmic chronometers, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2017) 005.
  77. J. Magana, V. Motta, V. H. Cardenas, and G. Foex, Testing cosmic acceleration for w(z) parameterizations using fgas measurements in galaxy clusters, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 469, 47 (2017).
  78. W. Yang, S. Pan, and A. Paliathanasis, Latest astronomical constraints on some non-linear parametric dark energy models, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 475, 2605 (2018).
  79. S. Pan, E. N. Saridakis, and W. Yang, Observational constraints on oscillating dark-energy parametrizations, Phys. Rev. D 98, 063510 (2018).
  80. G. Panotopoulos and A. Rincón, Growth index and statefinder diagnostic of Oscillating Dark Energy, Phys. Rev. D 97, 103509 (2018).
  81. W. Yang, S. Pan, E. Di Valentino, E. N. Saridakis, and S. Chakraborty, Observational constraints on one-parameter dynamical dark-energy parametrizations and the H0 tension, Phys. Rev. D 99, 043543 (2019).
  82. L. G. Jaime, M. Jaber, and C. Escamilla-Rivera, New parametrized equation of state for dark energy surveys, Phys. Rev. D 98, 083530 (2018).
  83. A. Das, A. Banerjee, S. Chakraborty, and S. Pan, Perfect fluid cosmological universes: One equation of state and the most general solution, Pramana 90, 19 (2018).
  84. W. Yang, S. Pan, E. Di Valentino, and E. N. Saridakis, Observational constraints on dynamical dark energy with pivoting redshift, Universe 5, 219 (2019).
  85. M. Du, W. Yang, L. Xu, S. Pan, and D. F. Mota, Future constraints on dynamical dark-energy using gravitational-wave standard sirens, Phys. Rev. D 100, 043535 (2019).
  86. X. Li and A. Shafieloo, A simple phenomenological emergent dark energy model can resolve the Hubble tension, Astrophys. J. Lett. 883, L3 (2019).
  87. W. Yang, S. Pan, A. Paliathanasis, S. Ghosh, and Y. Wu, Observational constraints of a new unified dark fluid and the H0 tension, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 490, 2071 (2019).
  88. S. Pan, W. Yang, E. Di Valentino, A. Shafieloo, and S. Chakraborty, Reconciling H0 tension in a six parameter space?, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 06 (2020) 062.
  89. D. Tamayo and J. A. Vazquez, Fourier-series expansion of the dark-energy equation of state, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 487, 729 (2019).
  90. M. Rezaei, Observational constraints on the oscillating dark energy cosmologies, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 485, 550 (2019).
  91. S. Pan, W. Yang, and A. Paliathanasis, Imprints of an extended Chevallier–Polarski–Linder parametrization on the large scale of our universe, Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 274 (2020).
  92. M. Rezaei, T. Naderi, M. Malekjani, and A. Mehrabi, A Bayesian comparison between ΛCDM and phenomenologically emergent dark energy models, Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 374 (2020).
  93. E. Di Valentino, A. Mukherjee, and A. A. Sen, Dark energy with phantom crossing and the H0 tension, Entropy 23, 404 (2021).
  94. D. Perkovic and H. Stefancic, Barotropic fluid compatible parametrizations of dark energy, Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 629 (2020).
  95. A. Banihashemi, N. Khosravi, and A. Shafieloo, Dark energy as a critical phenomenon: A hint from Hubble tension, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 06 (2021) 003.
  96. M. Jaber-Bravo, E. Almaraz, and A. de la Macorra, Imprint of a steep equation of state in the growth of structure, Astropart. Phys. 115, 102388 (2020).
  97. H. B. Benaoum, W. Yang, S. Pan, and E. Di Valentino, Modified emergent dark energy and its astronomical constraints, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 31, 2250015 (2022).
  98. W. Yang, E. Di Valentino, S. Pan, A. Shafieloo, and X. Li, Generalized emergent dark energy model and the Hubble constant tension, Phys. Rev. D 104, 063521 (2021).
  99. M. Jaber, G. Arciniega, L. G. Jaime, and O. A. Rodríguez-López, A single parameterization for dark energy and modified gravity models, Phys. Dark Universe 37, 101069 (2022).
  100. G. Alestas, D. Camarena, E. Di Valentino, L. Kazantzidis, V. Marra, S. Nesseris, and L. Perivolaropoulos, Late-transition versus smooth H(z)-deformation models for the resolution of the Hubble crisis, Phys. Rev. D 105, 063538 (2022).
  101. J. Yang, X.-Y. Fan, C.-J. Feng, and X.-H. Zhai, Latest data constraint of some parameterized dark energy models, Chin. Phys. Lett. 40, 019801 (2023).
  102. H. G. Escudero, J.-L. Kuo, R. E. Keeley, and K. N. Abazajian, Early or phantom dark energy, self-interacting, extra, or massive neutrinos, primordial magnetic fields, or a curved universe: An exploration of possible solutions to the H0 and σ8 problems, Phys. Rev. D 106, 103517 (2022).
  103. M. N. Castillo-Santos, A. Hernández-Almada, M. A. García-Aspeitia, and J. Magaña, An exponential equation of state of dark energy in the light of 2018 CMB Planck data, Phys. Dark Universe 40, 101225 (2023).
  104. W. Yang, W. Giarè, S. Pan, E. Di Valentino, A. Melchiorri, and J. Silk, Revealing the effects of curvature on the cosmological models, Phys. Rev. D 107, 063509 (2023).
  105. S. Dahmani, A. Bouali, I. El Bojaddaini, A. Errahmani, and T. Ouali, Smoothing the H0 tension with a phantom dynamical dark energy model, Phys. Dark Universe 42, 101266 (2023).
  106. L. A. Escamilla, W. Giarè, E. Di Valentino, R. C. Nunes, and S. Vagnozzi, The state of the dark energy equation of state circa 2023, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2024) 091.
  107. M. Rezaei, S. Pan, W. Yang, and D. F. Mota, Evidence of dynamical dark energy in a non-flat universe: current and future observations, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2024) 052.
  108. S. A. Adil, O. Akarsu, E. Di Valentino, R. C. Nunes, E. Özülker, A. A. Sen, and E. Specogna, Omnipotent dark energy: A phenomenological answer to the Hubble tension, Phys. Rev. D 109, 023527 (2024).
  109. J. A. Lozano Torres, Generalized emergent dark energy in the late-time Universe, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 533, 1865 (2024).
  110. J. K. Singh, P. Singh, E. N. Saridakis, S. Myrzakul, and H. Balhara, New parametrization of the dark-energy equation of state with a single parameter, Universe 10, 246 (2024).
  111. M. Rezaei, Oscillating dark energy in light of the latest observations and its impact on the Hubble tension, Astrophys. J. 967, 2 (2024).
  112. M. Reyhani, M. Najafi, J. T. Firouzjaee, and E. Di Valentino, Structure formation in various dynamical dark energy scenarios, Phys. Dark Universe 44, 101477 (2024).
  113. A. Paliathanasis, Observational constraints on dark energy models with Λ as an equilibrium point, Phys. Dark Universe 48, 101956 (2025).
  114. A. Paliathanasis, Dark energy within the generalized uncertainty principle in light of DESI DR2, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 09 (2025) 067.
  115. D. Huterer and G. Starkman, Parameterization of dark-energy properties: A Principal-component approach, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 031301 (2003).
  116. A. Shafieloo, U. Alam, V. Sahni, and A. A. Starobinsky, Smoothing supernova data to reconstruct the expansion history of the Universe and its age, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 366, 1081 (2006).
  117. C. Bogdanos and S. Nesseris, Genetic algorithms and supernovae type Ia analysis, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2009) 006.
  118. T. Holsclaw, U. Alam, B. Sanso, H. Lee, K. Heitmann, S. Habib, and D. Higdon, Nonparametric reconstruction of the dark energy equation of state, Phys. Rev. D 82, 103502 (2010).
  119. M. Seikel, C. Clarkson, and M. Smith, Reconstruction of dark energy and expansion dynamics using Gaussian processes, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 06 (2012) 036.
  120. S. Nesseris and J. Garcia-Bellido, A new perspective on Dark Energy modeling via Genetic Algorithms, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2012) 033.
  121. S. Yahya, M. Seikel, C. Clarkson, R. Maartens, and M. Smith, Null tests of the cosmological constant using supernovae, Phys. Rev. D 89, 023503 (2014).
  122. G.-B. Zhao et al., Dynamical dark energy in light of the latest observations, Nat. Astron. 1, 627 (2017).
  123. Y. Wang, L. Pogosian, G.-B. Zhao, and A. Zucca, Evolution of dark energy reconstructed from the latest observations, Astrophys. J. Lett. 869, L8 (2018).
  124. Z. Zhang, G. Gu, X. Wang, Y.-H. Li, C. G. Sabiu, H. Park, H. Miao, X. Luo, F. Fang, and X.-D. Li, Non-parametric dark energy reconstruction using the tomographic Alcock-Paczynski test, Astrophys. J. 878, 137 (2019).
  125. L. A. Escamilla and J. A. Vazquez, Model selection applied to reconstructions of the Dark Energy, Eur. Phys. J. C 83, 251 (2023).
  126. L. A. Escamilla, S. Pan, E. Di Valentino, A. Paliathanasis, J. A. Vázquez, and W. Yang, Testing an oscillatory behavior of dark energy, Phys. Rev. D 111, 023531 (2025).
  127. J.-Q. Jiang, D. Pedrotti, S. S. da Costa, and S. Vagnozzi, Non-parametric late-time expansion history reconstruction and implications for the Hubble tension in light of DESI, Phys. Rev. D 110, 123519 (2024).
  128. G. Ye, M. Martinelli, B. Hu, and A. Silvestri, Non-minimally coupled gravity as a physically viable fit to DESI 2024 BAO, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 181002 (2025).
  129. A. N. Ormondroyd, W. J. Handley, M. P. Hobson, and A. N. Lasenby, Nonparametric reconstructions of dynamical dark energy via flexknots, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 541, 3388 (2025).
  130. A. N. Ormondroyd, W. J. Handley, M. P. Hobson, and A. N. Lasenby, Comparison of dynamical dark energy with ΛCDM in light of DESI DR2, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 547, staf2207 (2026).
  131. M. Berti, E. Bellini, C. Bonvin, M. Kunz, M. Viel, and M. Zumalacarregui, Reconstructing the dark energy density in light of DESI BAO observations, Phys. Rev. D 112, 023518 (2025).
  132. G. Gu et al., Dynamical Dark Energy in light of the DESI DR2 baryonic acoustic oscillations measurements, Nat. Astron. 9, 1879 (2025).
  133. S. Nesseris, Y. Akrami, and G. D. Starkman, To CPL, or not to CPL? What we have not learned about the dark energy equation of state, arXiv:2503.22529.
  134. E. V. Linder, Exploring the expansion history of the universe, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 091301 (2003).
  135. M. Chevallier and D. Polarski, Accelerating universes with scaling dark matter, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 10, 213 (2001).
  136. M. Abdul Karim et al. (DESI Collaboration), DESI DR2 Results II: Measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations and cosmological constraints, Phys. Rev. D 112, 083515 (2025).
  137. K. Lodha et al., Extended Dark Energy analysis using DESI DR2 BAO measurements, Phys. Rev. D 112, 083511 (2025).
  138. U. Andrade et al., Validation of the DESI DR2 measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations from galaxies and quasars, Phys. Rev. D 112, 083512 (2025).
  139. D. Scolnic et al., The pantheon+ analysis: The full data set and light-curve release, Astrophys. J. 938, 113 (2022).
  140. D. Brout et al., The pantheon+ analysis: Cosmological constraints, Astrophys. J. 938, 110 (2022).
  141. M. Vincenzi et al. (DES Collaboration), The dark energy survey supernova program: Cosmological analysis and systematic uncertainties, Astrophys. J. 975, 86 (2024).
  142. T. M. C. Abbott et al. (DES Collaboration), The dark energy survey: Cosmology results with ∼1500 new high-redshift type Ia supernovae using the full 5 yr data set, Astrophys. J. Lett. 973, L14 (2024).
  143. B. O. Sánchez et al. (DES Collaboration), The dark energy survey supernova program: Light curves and 5 yr data release, Astrophys. J. 975, 5 (2024).
  144. D. Rubin et al., Union through UNITY: Cosmology with 2,000 SNe using a unified Bayesian framework, Astrophys. J. 986, 231 (2025).
  145. A. G. Adame et al. (DESI Collaboration), DESI 2024 VI: Cosmological constraints from the measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2025) 021.
  146. K. Lodha et al. (DESI Collaboration), DESI 2024: Constraints on physics-focused aspects of dark energy using DESI DR1 BAO data, Phys. Rev. D 111, 023532 (2025).
  147. R. Calderon et al. (DESI Collaboration), DESI 2024: Reconstructing dark energy using crossing statistics with DESI DR1 BAO data, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2024) 048.
  148. M. Cortês and A. R. Liddle, Interpreting DESI’s evidence for evolving dark energy, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 12 (2024) 007.
  149. D. Shlivko and P. J. Steinhardt, Assessing observational constraints on dark energy, Phys. Lett. B 855, 138826 (2024).
  150. O. Luongo and M. Muccino, Model-independent cosmographic constraints from DESI 2024, Astron. Astrophys. 690, A40 (2024).
  151. W. Yin, Cosmic clues: DESI, dark energy, and the cosmological constant problem, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2024) 327.
  152. I. D. Gialamas, G. Hütsi, K. Kannike, A. Racioppi, M. Raidal, M. Vasar, and H. Veermäe, Interpreting DESI 2024 BAO: Late-time dynamical dark energy or a local effect?, Phys. Rev. D 111, 043540 (2025).
  153. B. R. Dinda, A new diagnostic for the null test of dynamical dark energy in light of DESI 2024 and other BAO data, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 09 (2024) 062.
  154. H. Wang and Y.-S. Piao, Dark energy in light of recent DESI BAO and Hubble tension, Phys. Lett. B 873, 140180 (2026).
  155. Y. Tada and T. Terada, Quintessential interpretation of the evolving dark energy in light of DESI observations, Phys. Rev. D 109, L121305 (2024).
  156. Y. Carloni, O. Luongo, and M. Muccino, Does dark energy really revive using DESI 2024 data?, Phys. Rev. D 111, 023512 (2025).
  157. C.-G. Park, J. de Cruz Pérez, and B. Ratra, Using non-DESI data to confirm and strengthen the DESI 2024 spatially flat w0waCDM cosmological parametrization result, Phys. Rev. D 110, 123533 (2024).
  158. O. F. Ramadan, J. Sakstein, and D. Rubin, DESI constraints on exponential quintessence, Phys. Rev. D 110, L041303 (2024).
  159. A. Notari, M. Redi, and A. Tesi, Consistent theories for the DESI dark energy fit, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2024) 025.
  160. L. Orchard and V. H. Cárdenas, Probing dark energy evolution post-DESI 2024, Phys. Dark Universe 46, 101678 (2024).
  161. A. Hernández-Almada, M. L. Mendoza-Martínez, M. A. García-Aspeitia, and V. Motta, Phenomenological emergent dark energy in the light of DESI Data Release 1, Phys. Dark Universe 46, 101668 (2024).
  162. S. Pourojaghi, M. Malekjani, and Z. Davari, Cosmological constraints on dark energy parametrizations after DESI 2024: Persistent deviation from standard ΛCDM cosmology, Phys. Rev. D 111, 083547 (2025).
  163. J. a. Rebouças, D. H. F. de Souza, K. Zhong, V. Miranda, and R. Rosenfeld, Investigating late-time dark energy and massive neutrinos in light of DESI Y1 BAO, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2025) 024.
  164. W. Giarè, Dynamical dark energy beyond Planck? Constraints from multiple CMB probes, DESI BAO and type-Ia supernovae, Phys. Rev. D 112, 023508 (2025).
  165. C.-G. Park, J. de Cruz Perez, and B. Ratra, Is the w0waCDM cosmological parameterization evidence for dark energy dynamics partially caused by the excess smoothing of Planck CMB anisotropy data?, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 34, 2550058 (2025).
  166. N. Menci, A. A. Sen, and M. Castellano, The excess of JWST bright galaxies: A possible origin in the ground state of dynamical dark energy in the light of DESI 2024 data, Astrophys. J. 976, 227 (2024).
  167. T.-N. Li, Y.-H. Li, G.-H. Du, P.-J. Wu, L. Feng, J.-F. Zhang, and X. Zhang, Revisiting holographic dark energy after DESI 2024, Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 608 (2025).
  168. J.-X. Li and S. Wang, A comprehensive numerical study on four categories of holographic dark energy models, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2025) 047.
  169. A. Notari, M. Redi, and A. Tesi, BAO vs SN evidence for evolving dark energy, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 04 (2025) 048.
  170. Q. Gao, Z. Peng, S. Gao, and Y. Gong, On the evidence of dynamical dark energy, Universe 11, 10 (2025).
  171. R. Fikri, E. ElKhateeb, E. S. Lashin, and W. El Hanafy, A preference for dynamical phantom dark energy using one-parameter model with Planck, DESI DR1 BAO and SN data, Ann. Phys. (Amsterdam) 481, 170190 (2025).
  172. J. Zheng, D.-C. Qiang, and Z.-Q. You, Cosmological constraints on dark energy models using DESI BAO 2024, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 08 (2025) 056.
  173. A. Gómez-Valent and J. Solà Peracaula, Composite dark energy and the cosmological tensions, Phys. Lett. B 864, 139391 (2025).
  174. S. Roy Choudhury and T. Okumura, Updated cosmological constraints in extended parameter space with planck PR4, DESI baryon acoustic oscillations, and supernovae: Dynamical dark energy, neutrino masses, lensing anomaly, and the Hubble tension, Astrophys. J. Lett. 976, L11 (2024).
  175. A. Lewis and E. Chamberlain, Understanding acoustic scale observations: The one-sided fight against Λ, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2025) 065.
  176. S. Bhattacharya, G. Borghetto, A. Malhotra, S. Parameswaran, G. Tasinato, and I. Zavala, Cosmological constraints on curved quintessence, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 09 (2024) 073.
  177. S. Bhattacharya, G. Borghetto, A. Malhotra, S. Parameswaran, G. Tasinato, and I. Zavala, Cosmological tests of quintessence in quantum gravity, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 04 (2025) 086.
  178. W. J. Wolf, C. García-García, D. J. Bartlett, and P. G. Ferreira, Scant evidence for thawing quintessence, Phys. Rev. D 110, 083528 (2024).
  179. W. J. Wolf, P. G. Ferreira, and C. García-García, Matching current observational constraints with nonminimally coupled dark energy, Phys. Rev. D 111, L041303 (2025).
  180. A. J. Shajib and J. A. Frieman, Scalar-field dark energy models: Current and forecast constraints, Phys. Rev. D 112, 063508 (2025).
  181. W. Giarè, T. Mahassen, E. Di Valentino, and S. Pan, An overview of what current data can (and cannot yet) say about evolving dark energy, Phys. Dark Universe 48, 101906 (2025).
  182. M. Najafi, S. Pan, E. Di Valentino, and J. T. Firouzjaee, Dynamical dark energy confronted with multiple CMB missions, Phys. Dark Universe 45, 101539 (2024).
  183. W. Giarè, M. Najafi, S. Pan, E. Di Valentino, and J. T. Firouzjaee, Robust preference for Dynamical Dark Energy in DESI BAO and SN measurements, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2024) 035.
  184. W. J. Wolf, C. García-García, and P. G. Ferreira, Robustness of dark energy phenomenology across different parameterizations, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2025) 034.
  185. E. J. Copeland, M. Sami, and S. Tsujikawa, Dynamics of dark energy, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 15, 1753 (2006).
  186. A. Lewis, A. Challinor, and A. Lasenby, Efficient computation of CMB anisotropies in closed FRW models, Astrophys. J. 538, 473 (2000).
  187. W. Hu and I. Sawicki, A parameterized post-Friedmann framework for modified gravity, Phys. Rev. D 76, 104043 (2007).
  188. W. Fang, W. Hu, and A. Lewis, Crossing the phantom divide with parameterized post-Friedmann dark energy, Phys. Rev. D 78, 087303 (2008).
  189. J. Torrado and A. Lewis, Cobaya: Code for Bayesian Analysis of hierarchical physical models, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2020) 057.
  190. A. Gelman and D. B. Rubin, Inference from iterative simulation using multiple sequences, Stat. Sci. 7, 457 (1992).
  191. A. Lewis, getdist: A Python package for analysing Monte Carlo samples, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 08 (2025) 025.
  192. N. Aghanim et al. (Planck Collaboration), Planck 2018 results. VIII. Gravitational lensing, Astron. Astrophys. 641, A8 (2020).
  193. N. Aghanim et al. (Planck Collaboration), Planck 2018 results. I. Overview and the cosmological legacy of Planck, Astron. Astrophys. 641, A1 (2020).
  194. N. Aghanim et al. (Planck Collaboration), Planck 2018 results. V. CMB power spectra and likelihoods, Astron. Astrophys. 641, A5 (2020).
  195. M. S. Madhavacheril et al. (ACT Collaboration), The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: DR6 gravitational lensing map and cosmological parameters, Astrophys. J. 962, 113 (2024).
  196. F. J. Qu et al. (ACT Collaboration), The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: A measurement of the DR6 CMB lensing power spectrum and its implications for structure growth, Astrophys. J. 962, 112 (2024).
  197. B. Popovic et al., A reassessment of the pantheon+ and DES 5YR calibration uncertainties: Dovekie, arXiv:2506.05471.
  198. B. Popovic et al. (DES Collaboration), The dark energy survey supernova program: A reanalysis of cosmology results and evidence for evolving dark energy with an updated type Ia supernova calibration, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 548, stag632 (2026).
  199. A. Heavens, Y. Fantaye, A. Mootoovaloo, H. Eggers, Z. Hosenie, S. Kroon, and E. Sellentin, Marginal Likelihoods from Monte Carlo Markov Chains, arXiv:1704.03472.
  200. W. Giare, wgcosmo: A set of tools, codes, and methodologies for cosmology (2025), accessed: 2025-03-30.
  201. R. E. Kass and A. E. Raftery, Bayes factors, J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 90, 773 (1995).
  202. P. Bansal and D. Huterer, Expansion-history preferences of DESI and external data, Phys. Rev. D 112, 023528 (2025).
  203. P. Mukherjee and A. A. Sen, A new ∼5σ tension at characteristic redshift from DESI-DR1 BAO and DES-SN5YR observations, arXiv:2503.02880.
  204. A. Smith, M. Mylova, P. Brax, C. van de Bruck, C. P. Burgess, and A.-C. Davis, A minimal axio-dilaton dark sector, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2025) 023.
  205. J. Khoury, M.-X. Lin, and M. Trodden, Apparent w<−1 and a lower S8 from dark axion and dark baryons interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 181001 (2025).
  206. T. J. Hoyt, D. Rubin, G. Aldering, S. Perlmutter, A. Cuceu, and R. Gupta, Union3.1: Self-consistent measurements of host galaxy properties for 2000 type Ia supernovae, arXiv:2601.19424.
  207. B. Popovic, D. Brout, R. Kessler, and D. Scolnic, The pantheon+ analysis: Forward modeling the dust and intrinsic color distributions of type Ia supernovae, and quantifying their impact on cosmological inferences, Astrophys. J. 945, 84 (2023).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 114, 063501– Published 1 September, 2026
  • Received 12 April 2025
  • Accepted 31 July 2026
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation