FRW cosmological models with cosmological constant in <i>f</i>(<i>R</i>, <i>T</i>) theory of gravity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the present paper, we have generalized the behaviors of the transit-decelerating to accelerating FRW cosmological model in f(R, T) gravity theory, where R and T are Ricci scalar and trace of the energy–momentum tensor, respectively. The solution of the corresponding field equations is obtained by assuming a linear function of the Hubble parameter H (i.e., q = c1 + c2H), which gives a time-dependent deceleration parameter [Formula: see text], where c3 and c2 are arbitrary integrating constants (Tiwari et al. Eur. Phys. J. Plus, 131, 447 (2016); Ibid. 132, 126 (2017)). There are two scenarios in which we explain the particular form of scale factor thus obtained: (i) by using the recent constraints from observational Hubble data (OHD) and joint light curves (JLA) data, which show a cosmic deceleration to acceleration and (ii) by using new constraints from supernovae type Ia union data, which show accelerating expansion of the universe (q < 0) throughout its evolution. We have observed that EoS parameter, energy density parameters, and important cosmological planes yield results compatible with the modern observational data. For the derived models, we have calculated various physical parameters as luminosity distance, distance modulus, and apparent magnitude versus redshift for both current supporting observations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".