Dark Energy Survey: Implications for cosmological expansion models from the final DES baryon acoustic oscillation and supernova data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Dark Energy Survey (DES) recently released the final results of its two principal probes of the expansion history: Type Ia Supernovae (SNe) and Baryonic Acoustic Oscillations (BAO). We explore the cosmological implications of these data in combination with external Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB), Big Bang Nucleosynthesis (BBN), and age-of-the-Universe information. The BAO measurement, $\sim2σ$ away from Planck's $Λ$CDM predictions, pushes for low values of $Ω_{\rm m}$ compared to Planck, in contrast to SN which prefers a higher value. We identify several tensions among datasets in the $Λ$CDM model that cannot be resolved by including either curvature or a constant dark energy equation of state. By combining BAO+SN+CMB despite these mild tensions, we obtain $Ω_k$=$-5.5^{+4.6}_{-4.2}\times10^{-3}$ in $kΛ$CDM, and $w=-0.948^{+0.028}_{-0.027}$ in $w$CDM. In $w$CDM, BAO and SN push again in different directions of parameter space, favoring, respectively $w<-1$ and $w>-1$. If we open the parameter space to $w_0w_a$CDM, all the datasets are mutually more compatible, and we find concordance in the $w_0>-1,w_a<0$ quadrant, with BAO pushing for $w_a<0$ and SN for $[w_0>-1,w_a<0]$. For DES BAO and SN in combination with Planck-CMB, we find a $3.2σ$ deviation from $Λ$CDM, with $w_0=-0.673^{+0.098}_{-0.097}$, $w_a = -1.37^{+0.51}_{-0.50}$, a Hubble constant of $H_0=67.81^{+0.96}_{-0.86}$km s$^{-1}$Mpc$^{-1}$, and an abundance of matter of $Ω_{\rm m}=0.3109^{+0.0086}_{-0.0099}$. For the combination of all the background cosmological probes considered we still find a deviation of $2.8σ$ from $Λ$CDM in the $w_0-w_a$ plane. Assuming a minimal neutrino mass, this work provides tentative evidence for non-$Λ$CDM physics, which is consistent with recent claims in support of evolving dark energy, or a source of unknown systematics.
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 | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".