Complex quintessence theory, Tsallis and Kaniadakis holographic dark energy and Brans–Dicke cosmology
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.
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".