Cited by 185Cosmology and Gravitation TheoriesNoncommutative and Quantum Gravity TheoriesBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics

Effective description of higher-order scalar-tensor theories

Open access
Langlois, David, Mancarella, Michele, Noui, Karim, Vernizzi, Filippo·2017·Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics

Abstract

Most existing theories of dark energy and/or modified gravity, involving a scalar degree of freedom, can be conveniently described within the framework of the Effective Theory of Dark Energy, based on the unitary gauge where the scalar field is uniform. We extend this effective approach by allowing the Lagrangian in unitary gauge to depend on the time derivative of the lapse function. Although this dependence generically signals the presence of an extra scalar degree of freedom, theories that contain only one propagating scalar degree of freedom, in addition to the usual tensor modes, can be constructed by requiring the initial Lagrangian to be degenerate. Starting from a general quadratic action, we derive the dispersion relations for the linear perturbations around Minkowski and a cosmological background. Our analysis directly applies to the recently introduced Degenerate Higher-Order Scalar-Tensor (DHOST) theories. For these theories, we find that one cannot recover a Poisson-like equation in the static linear regime except for the subclass that includes the Horndeski and so-called “beyond Horndeski” theories. We also discuss Lorentz-breaking models inspired by Horava gravity.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1088/1475-7516/2017/05/033

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • DHOST theories generalize Horndeski and beyond-Horndeski models and are the most general class of ghost-free scalar-tensor theories.

    “They generalize Horndeski and beyond-Horndeski models and are the most general class of ghost-free scalar–tensor theories.”

    From Testing general relativity in cosmology (2019) · cites this paper as Langlois et al. 2017a

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Langlois, D., Mancarella, M., Noui, K., & Vernizzi, F.
Affiliations
  • Laboratoire AstroParticule et Cosmologie (FR)
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
  • Université de Tours (FR)
Venue
Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics
Published
2017-05-17
Volume
2017
Issue
05
Pages
033-033
ISSN
  • 1475-7508 (ISSN-L)
  • 1475-7516
OpenAlex
W2600450466
Cited by
185
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 10
FWCI
13.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • BOA (University of Milano-Bicocca) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Cosmology and Gravitation Theories
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Noncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Nuclear and High Energy Physics › Black Holes and Theoretical Physics
Keywords
DHOST, unitary gauge, degenerate Lagrangians, dispersion relation, linear perturbations, modified gravity, dark energy, Horndeski theories, beyond Horndeski theories, Poisson equation, Lorentz violation, Hořava gravity, quadratic action

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review