Complex quintessence theory, Tsallis and Kaniadakis holographic dark energy and Brans–Dicke cosmology
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we study two different dynamic structures of holographic dark energy, namely Tsallis and Kaniadakis, within the framework of Brans–Dicke cosmology. We consider the complex form of the quintessence model and examine both non-interacting and interacting cases, calculating various cosmological parameters such as the equation of state [Formula: see text] and discussing the behavior of [Formula: see text]. We modify the potential and study the scalar field dynamics of complex quintessence cosmology. Additionally, we examine the effects of the two parts of the quintessence field (real and complex) and the fractional energy density [Formula: see text], determining whether they can describe a real universe. We note that the fractional energy density cannot be arbitrary between 0 and 1, as it depends on the Tsallis, Kaniadakis and Brans–Dicke cosmology-free parameters. For each model, we establish a relationship between the fractional energy density and other parameters such as [Formula: see text], [Formula: see text], [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text].
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it