CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 17Cosmology and Gravitation TheoriesDark Matter and Cosmic PhenomenaNeutrino Physics Research

Measure of the impact of future dark energy experiments based on discriminating power among quintessence models

Open access
Barnard, Michael, Abrahamse, Augusta, Albrecht, Andreas, Bozek, Brandon, Yashar, Mark·2008·Physical Review D
DOI 10.1103/physrevd.78.043528
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

We evaluate the ability of future data sets to discriminate among different quintessence dark energy models. This approach gives an alternative (and complementary) measure for assessing the impact of future experiments, as compared with the large body of literature that compares experiments in abstract parameter spaces (such as the well-known ${w}_{0}\ensuremath{-}{w}_{a}$ parameters) and more recent work that evaluates the constraining power of experiments on individual parameter spaces of specific quintessence models. We use the Dark Energy Task Force (DETF) models of future data sets and compare the discriminative power of experiments designated by the DETF as stages 2, 3, and 4 (denoting increasing capabilities). Our work reveals a minimal increase in discriminating power when comparing stage 3 to stage 2, but a very striking increase in discriminating power when going to stage 4 (including the possibility of completely eliminating some quintessence models). We also see evidence that even modest improvements over DETF stage 4 (which many believe are realistic) could result in even more dramatic discriminating power among quintessence dark energy models. We develop and demonstrate the technique of using the independently measured modes of the equation of state (derived from principle component analysis) as a common parameter space in which to compare the different quintessence models, and we argue that this technique is a powerful one. We use the PNGB, Exponential, Albrecht-Skordis, and Inverse Tracker (or inverse power law) quintessence models for this work. One of our main results is that the goal of discriminating among these models sets a concrete measure on the capabilities of future dark energy experiments. Experiments have to be somewhat better than DETF stage 4 simulated experiments to fully meet this goal.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1103/physrevd.78.043528

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Barnard et al. (2008) showed that in a high-dimensional dark energy model space, LSST data could improve precision by a factor of 100 to 1000 over precursor experiments, confirming LSST as a premier Stage IV experiment.

    “Barnard et al. ( 2008 ) showed that in a high-dimensional dark energy model space, LSST data could lead to a hundred- to thousand-fold increase in precision over its precursor experiments, thereby con fi rming its status as a premier Stage IV experiment in the sense of Albrecht et al. ( 2006 ) .”

    From LSST: From Science Drivers to Reference Design and Anticipated Data Products (2019) · cites this paper as Barnard et al. ( 2008 )

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Phys. D15, 1753 (2006), hep-th/0603057. · arXiv
  2. [23]M. Schneider, L. Knox, H. Zhan, and A. Connolly, As- trophys. J. 651, 14 (2006), astro-ph/0606098. · arXiv
  3. [24]H. Zhan, JCAP 0608, 008 (2006), astro-ph/0605696. · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Barnard, M., Abrahamse, A., Albrecht, A., Bozek, B., & Yashar, M.
Affiliations
University of California, Davis (US)
ORCID
Venue
Physical Review D
Publisher
American Physical Society (APS)
Published
2008-08-15
Volume
78
Issue
4
ISSN
  • 0556-2821 (ISSN-L)
  • 1550-7998
  • 1550-2368
DOI
10.1103/physrevd.78.043528
OpenAlex
W2173173665
Cited by
17
References
19
Citations by year
2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
link.aps.org/licenses/aps-default-license (vor)
Locations
  • Physical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D. Particles and fields (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Cosmology and Gravitation Theories
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Nuclear and High Energy Physics › Dark Matter and Cosmic Phenomena
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Nuclear and High Energy Physics › Neutrino Physics Research
Keywords
quintessence, dark energy, model discrimination, equation of state, principal component analysis, inverse power law, cosmological constraints

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