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

Physical Review D

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Cosmological evolution of interacting dark energy with a Chevallier-Polarski-Linder equation of state

Gerald Neumann1,2,*, Dorian Araya1,†, and Nelson Videla1,‡

  • *Contact author: gerald.neumann.d@mail.pucv.cl, gneuman@usm.cl
  • †Contact author: dorian.araya.a@mail.pucv.cl
  • ‡Contact author: nelson.videla@pucv.cl
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 114, 063508 – Published 4 September, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/4l7f-jqhj

Abstract

This paper examines interacting dark energy models within the Chevallier-Polarski-Linder (CPL) parametrization, emphasizing both theoretical structure and observational viability. Two commonly adopted interaction terms are considered: Q=βHρde and Q=βHρc. We derive exact analytic solutions that describe how the dark sector evolves. These solutions involve incomplete gamma functions and reveal a nontrivial mathematical structure that is often missed in numerical analyses. We perform a Bayesian analysis using current cosmological observations, including the Hubble parameter, Type Ia supernovae, baryon acoustic oscillations, and CMB data. Relative to the non-interacting CPL scenario, the interacting model with Q=βHρde yields a modestly improved fit, as indicated by the Akaike information criterion. However, the Bayesian information criterion penalizes increased model complexity, leading to a continued preference for Λ cold dark matter. In contrast, the interaction model that depends on dark matter density does not provide observational support. The preferred interacting scenario indicates that the dark energy equation of state evolves dynamically, transitioning from an effective phantom regime at high redshift to quintessencelike behavior at late times. Further analysis suggests the possibility of a future transition from accelerated to decelerated expansion, primarily associated with the reconstructed CPL dynamics, while the interaction alters the detailed evolution of the dark sector and the precise transition epoch. These findings suggest that interacting dark energy models within the CPL framework enrich the standard cosmological model by introducing more diverse phenomenology while maintaining consistency with current observations.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (103)

  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. D. M. Scolnic et al. (Pan-STARRS1 Collaboration), The complete light-curve sample of spectroscopically confirmed SNe Ia from pan-STARRS1 and cosmological constraints from the combined pantheon sample, Astrophys. J. 859, 101 (2018).
  4. N. Aghanim et al. (Planck Collaboration), Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys. 641, A6 (2020); 652, C4(E) (2021).
  5. D. J. Eisenstein et al. (SDSS Collaboration), Detection of the baryon acoustic peak in the large-scale correlation function of SDSS luminous red galaxies, Astrophys. J. 633, 560 (2005).
  6. S. Alam et al. (eBOSS Collaboration), Completed SDSS-IV extended baryon oscillation spectroscopic survey: Cosmological implications from two decades of spectroscopic surveys at the Apache Point Observatory, Phys. Rev. D 103, 083533 (2021).
  7. 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.
  8. E. J. Copeland, M. Sami, and S. Tsujikawa, Dynamics of dark energy, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 15, 1753 (2006).
  9. S. Weinberg, The cosmological constant problem, Rev. Mod. Phys. 61, 1 (1989).
  10. J. Martin, Everything you always wanted to know about the cosmological constant problem (but were afraid to ask), C. R. Phys. 13, 566 (2012).
  11. A. G. Riess, S. Casertano, W. Yuan, L. M. Macri, and D. Scolnic, Large magellanic cloud cepheid standards provide a 1% foundation for the determination of the Hubble constant and stronger evidence for physics beyond ΛCDM, Astrophys. J. 876, 85 (2019).
  12. 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).
  13. T. M. C. Abbott et al. (DES Collaboration), Dark energy survey year 1 results: Cosmological constraints from galaxy clustering and weak lensing, Phys. Rev. D 98, 043526 (2018).
  14. C. Heymans et al., KiDS-1000 Cosmology: Multi-probe weak gravitational lensing and spectroscopic galaxy clustering constraints, Astron. Astrophys. 646, A140 (2021).
  15. L. Verde, T. Treu, and A. G. Riess, Tensions between the early and the late universe, Nat. Astron. 3, 891 (2019).
  16. E. Di Valentino et al., Snowmass2021—Letter of interest cosmology intertwined II: The hubble constant tension, Astropart. Phys. 131, 102605 (2021).
  17. E. Di Valentino et al., Cosmology intertwined III: fσ8 and S8, Astropart. Phys. 131, 102604 (2021).
  18. 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).
  19. L. Perivolaropoulos and F. Skara, Challenges for ΛCDM: An update, New Astron. Rev. 95, 101659 (2022).
  20. S. Nojiri and S. D. Odintsov, Introduction to modified gravity and gravitational alternative for dark energy, eConf. C0602061, 06 (2006).
  21. T. Clifton, P. G. Ferreira, A. Padilla, and C. Skordis, Modified gravity and cosmology, Phys. Rep. 513, 1 (2012).
  22. K. Bamba, S. Capozziello, S. Nojiri, and S. D. Odintsov, Dark energy cosmology: The equivalent description via different theoretical models and cosmography tests, Astrophys. Space Sci. 342, 155 (2012).
  23. A. Joyce, L. Lombriser, and F. Schmidt, Dark energy versus modified gravity, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 66, 95 (2016).
  24. M. Chevallier and D. Polarski, Accelerating universes with scaling dark matter, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 10, 213 (2001).
  25. E. V. Linder, Exploring the expansion history of the universe, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 091301 (2003).
  26. 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).
  27. 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.
  28. M. Malekjani, Z. Davari, and S. Pourojaghi (DESI Collaboration), Cosmological constraints on dark energy parametrizations after DESI 2024: Persistent deviation from standard ΛCDM cosmology, Phys. Rev. D 111, 083547 (2025).
  29. G.-H. Du, P.-J. Wu, T.-N. Li, and X. Zhang, Impacts of dark energy on weighing neutrinos after DESI BAO, Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 392 (2025).
  30. W. Giarè, Dynamical dark energy beyond planck? Constraints from multiple CMB probes, DESI BAO, and type-Ia supernovae, Phys. Rev. D 112, 023508 (2025).
  31. 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.
  32. 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).
  33. 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, Phys. Rev. D.
  34. G. Gu et al. (DESI Collaboration), Dynamical dark energy in light of the DESI DR2 baryonic acoustic oscillations measurements, Nat. Astron. 9, 1879 (2025); 9, 1898(E) (2025).
  35. M. Scherer, M. A. Sabogal, R. C. Nunes, and A. De Felice, Challenging the ΛCDM model: 5σ evidence for a dynamical dark energy late-time transition, Phys. Rev. D 112, 043513 (2025).
  36. S. Capozziello, H. Chaudhary, T. Harko, and G. Mustafa, Is dark energy dynamical in the DESI era? A critical review, Phys. Dark Universe 51, 102196 (2026).
  37. S. L. Guedezounme, B. R. Dinda, and R. Maartens, Phantom crossing or dark interaction?, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2026) 062.
  38. C. Wetterich, The Cosmon model for an asymptotically vanishing time dependent cosmological ’constant’, Astron. Astrophys. 301, 321 (1995).
  39. L. Amendola, Coupled quintessence, Phys. Rev. D 62, 043511 (2000).
  40. W. Zimdahl and D. Pavon, Interacting quintessence, Phys. Lett. B 521, 133 (2001).
  41. L. P. Chimento, A. S. Jakubi, D. Pavon, and W. Zimdahl, Interacting quintessence solution to the coincidence problem, Phys. Rev. D 67, 083513 (2003).
  42. G. R. Farrar and P. J. E. Peebles, Interacting dark matter and dark energy, Astrophys. J. 604, 1 (2004).
  43. J. Valiviita, E. Majerotto, and R. Maartens, Instability in interacting dark energy and dark matter fluids, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2008) 020.
  44. J.-H. He, B. Wang, and E. Abdalla, Stability of the curvature perturbation in dark sectors’ mutual interacting models, Phys. Lett. B 671, 139 (2009).
  45. J.-H. He and B. Wang, Effects of the interaction between dark energy and dark matter on cosmological parameters, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 06 (2008) 010.
  46. B. M. Jackson, A. Taylor, and A. Berera, On the large-scale instability in interacting dark energy and dark matter fluids, Phys. Rev. D 79, 043526 (2009).
  47. Y. L. Bolotin, A. Kostenko, O. A. Lemets, and D. A. Yerokhin, Cosmological evolution with interaction between dark energy and dark matter, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 24, 1530007 (2015).
  48. B. Wang, E. Abdalla, F. Atrio-Barandela, and D. Pavón, Dark matter and dark energy interactions: Theoretical challenges, cosmological implications and observational signatures, Rep. Prog. Phys. 79, 096901 (2016).
  49. E. Di Valentino, A. Melchiorri, and O. Mena, Can interacting dark energy solve the H0 tension?, Phys. Rev. D 96, 043503 (2017).
  50. W. Yang, A. Mukherjee, E. Di Valentino, and S. Pan, Interacting dark energy with time varying equation of state and the H0 tension, Phys. Rev. D 98, 123527 (2018).
  51. W. Yang, S. Pan, E. Di Valentino, R. C. Nunes, S. Vagnozzi, and D. F. Mota, Tale of stable interacting dark energy, observational signatures, and the H0 tension, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 09 (2018) 019.
  52. S. Pan, W. Yang, E. Di Valentino, E. N. Saridakis, and S. Chakraborty, Interacting scenarios with dynamical dark energy: Observational constraints and alleviation of the H0 tension, Phys. Rev. D 100, 103520 (2019).
  53. E. Di Valentino, A. Melchiorri, O. Mena, and S. Vagnozzi, Interacting dark energy in the early 2020s: A promising solution to the H0 and cosmic shear tensions, Phys. Dark Universe 30, 100666 (2020).
  54. B. Wang, E. Abdalla, F. Atrio-Barandela, and D. Pavón, Further understanding the interaction between dark energy and dark matter: Current status and future directions, Rep. Prog. Phys. 87, 036901 (2024).
  55. M. van der Westhuizen, A. Abebe, and E. Di Valentino, I. Linear interacting dark energy: Analytical solutions and theoretical pathologies, Phys. Dark Universe 50, 102119 (2025).
  56. M. B. Gavela, D. Hernandez, L. Lopez Honorez, O. Mena, and S. Rigolin, Dark coupling, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2009) 034; 05 (2010) E01(E).
  57. A. A. Costa, X.-D. Xu, B. Wang, E. G. M. Ferreira, and E. Abdalla, Testing the interaction between dark energy and dark matter with planck data, Phys. Rev. D 89, 103531 (2014).
  58. S. Pan, S. Bhattacharya, and S. Chakraborty, An analytic model for interacting dark energy and its observational constraints, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 452, 3038 (2015).
  59. M. van der Westhuizen, A. Abebe, and E. Di Valentino, II. Non-linear interacting dark energy: Analytical solutions and theoretical pathologies, Phys. Dark Universe 50, 102120 (2025).
  60. M. van der Westhuizen, A. Abebe, and E. Di Valentino, III. Interacting dark energy: Summary of models, pathologies, and constraints, Phys. Dark Universe 50, 102121 (2025).
  61. T. Clemson, K. Koyama, G.-B. Zhao, R. Maartens, and J. Valiviita, Interacting dark energy—constraints and degeneracies, Phys. Rev. D 85, 043007 (2012).
  62. Y.-H. Li, J.-F. Zhang, and X. Zhang, Parametrized post-friedmann framework for interacting dark energy, Phys. Rev. D 90, 063005 (2014).
  63. M. A. van der Westhuizen and A. Abebe, Interacting dark energy: Clarifying the cosmological implications and viability conditions, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2024) 048.
  64. G. A. Hoerning, R. G. Landim, L. O. Ponte, R. P. Rolim, F. B. Abdalla, and E. Abdalla, Constraints on interacting dark energy revisited: Implications for the Hubble tension, Phys. Rev. D 112, 023523 (2025).
  65. W. Giarè, M. A. Sabogal, R. C. Nunes, and E. Di Valentino, Interacting dark energy after DESI baryon acoustic oscillation measurements, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 251003 (2024).
  66. D. Benisty, S. Pan, D. Staicova, E. Di Valentino, and R. C. Nunes, Late-time constraints on interacting dark energy: Analysis independent of H0, rd, and MB, Astron. Astrophys. 688, A156 (2024).
  67. P. Ghedini, R. Hajjar, and O. Mena, Redshift-space distortions corner interacting dark energy, Phys. Dark Universe 46, 101671 (2024).
  68. Z. Zhu, Q. Jiang, Y. Liu, P. Wu, and N. Liang, Cosmological constraints on the phenomenological interacting dark energy model with Fermi gamma-ray bursts and DESI DR2, J. High Energy Astrophys. 51, 100534 (2026).
  69. M. Tsedrik, S. Lee, K. Markovic, P. Carrilho, A. Pourtsidou, C. Moretti, B. Bose, E. Huff, A. Robertson, P. L. Taylor, and J. Zuntz, Interacting dark energy constraints from the full-shape analyses of BOSS DR12 and DES year 3 measurements, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.: Lett. 541, L65 (2025).
  70. V. Petri, V. Marra, and R. von Marttens, Dark degeneracy in DESI DR2 data: Interacting or evolving dark energy?, Phys. Rev. D 113, 023504 (2026).
  71. D. Figueruelo, M. van der Westhuizen, A. Abebe, and E. Di Valentino, Late-time background constraints on linear and non-linear interacting dark energy after DESI DR2, Phys. Dark Universe 52, 102238 (2026).
  72. T.-N. Li, W. Giarè, G.-H. Du, Y.-H. Li, E. Di Valentino, J.-F. Zhang, and X. Zhang, Strong evidence for dark sector interactions, arXiv:2601.07361.
  73. X.-D. Xu and B. Wang, Breaking parameter degeneracy in interacting dark energy models from observations, Phys. Lett. B 701, 513 (2011).
  74. S. Carneiro and H. A. Borges, On dark degeneracy and interacting models, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 06 (2014) 010.
  75. F. Schmidt and S. Dodelson, Modern Cosmology (Academic Press, London, 2021).
  76. S. M. Carroll, Spacetime and Geometry (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 2019).
  77. O. Piattella, Lecture Notes in Cosmology (Springer, New York, 2018), 10.1007/978-3-319-95570-4.
  78. NIST Digital Library of Mathematical Functions, NIST digital library of mathematical functions (2023), release 1.1.10.
  79. A. Favale, A. Gómez-Valent, and M. Migliaccio, Cosmic chronometers to calibrate the ladders and measure the curvature of the universe. A model-independent study, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 523, 3406 (2023).
  80. M. Moresco, Addressing the hubble tension with cosmic chronometers, arXiv:2307.09501.
  81. E. Tomasetti, M. Moresco, N. Borghi, K. Jiao, A. Cimatti, L. Pozzetti, A. C. Carnall, R. J. McLure, and L. Pentericci, A new measurement of the expansion history of the universe at z=1.26 with cosmic chronometers in vandels, Astron. Astrophys. 679, A96 (2023).
  82. K. Jiao, N. Borghi, M. Moresco, and T.-J. Zhang, New observational H(z) data from full-spectrum fitting of cosmic chronometers in the LEGA-C survey, Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 265, 48 (2023).
  83. J. R. Bond, G. Efstathiou, and M. Tegmark, Forecasting cosmic parameter errors from microwave background anisotropy experiments, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 291, L33 (1997).
  84. L. Chen, Q.-G. Huang, and K. Wang, Distance priors from planck final release, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2019) 028.
  85. W. Hu and N. Sugiyama, Small-scale cosmological perturbations: An analytic approach, Astrophys. J. 471, 542 (1996).
  86. D. Scolnic et al., The pantheon+analysis: The full data set and light-curve release, Astrophys. J. 938, 113 (2022).
  87. J. L. Bernal, T. L. Smith, K. K. Boddy, and M. Kamionkowski, Robustness of baryon acoustic oscillation constraints for early-universe modifications to λcdm, Phys. Rev. D 102, 123515 (2020).
  88. R. C. Nunes, S. K. Yada, J. Jesus, and A. Bernui, Cosmological parameter analyses using transversal BAO data, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 497, 2133 (2020).
  89. 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).
  90. D. J. Eisenstein and W. Hu, Baryonic features in the matter transfer function, Astrophys. J. 496, L2 (1998).
  91. D. Foreman-Mackey, D. W. Hogg, D. Lang, and J. Goodman, emcee: The MCMC Hammer, Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 125, 306 (2013).
  92. A. D. Sokal, Monte carlo methods in statistical mechanics: Foundations and new algorithms, in Functional Integration, NATO ASI Series B: Physics, edited by C. DeWitt-Morette, P. Cartier, and A. Folacci (Springer, Boston, MA, 1997), Vol. 361, pp. 131–192, 10.1007/978-1-4899-0319-8_6.
  93. H. Akaike, A new look at the statistical model identification, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 19, 716 (1974).
  94. G. Schwarz, Estimating the dimension of a model, Ann. Stat. 6, 461 (1978).
  95. J. Barrow, R. Bean, and J. Magueijo, Can the universe escape eternal acceleration?, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 316, L41 (2000).
  96. C. Z. Vargas, W. S. Hipolito-Ricaldi, and W. Zimdahl, Perturbations for transient acceleration, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 04 (2012) 032.
  97. M. Shahalam, S. Sami, and A. Agarwal, Om diagnostic applied to scalar field models and slowing down of cosmic acceleration, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 448, 2948 (2015).
  98. Y. Hu, M. Li, N. Li, and S. Wang, A comprehensive investigation on the slowing down of cosmic acceleration, Astrophys. J. 821, 60 (2016).
  99. 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.
  100. M.-J. Zhang and J.-Q. Xia, Physical condition for the slowing down of cosmic acceleration, Nucl. Phys. B929, 438 (2018).
  101. Y. L. Bolotin, V. A. Cherkaskiy, M. I. Konchatnyi, S. Pan, and W. Yang, Do current observations support transient acceleration of our universe?, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 31, 2250036 (2022).
  102. A. A. Escobal, J. F. Jesus, S. H. Pereira, and J. A. S. Lima, Can the Universe decelerate in the future?, Phys. Rev. D 109, 023514 (2024).
  103. J. A. S. Fortunato, W. S. Hipolito-Ricaldi, N. Videla, and J. R. Villanueva, Cosmic slowing down of acceleration with the Chaplygin–Jacobi gas as a dark fluid?, Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 274 (2025).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 114, 063508– Published 4 September, 2026
  • Received 1 May 2026
  • Accepted 23 July 2026
Crossmark - Check for updates button

© 2026 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation