Cited by 1Cosmology and Gravitation TheoriesDark Matter and Cosmic PhenomenaGamma-ray bursts and supernovae

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Revisiting the evidence for dynamical dark energy: from DES-SN5Y to DES-Dovekie

Open access

Abstract

Recent analyses combining DESI DR2 BAO measurements with CMB and supernova data have suggested a preference for dynamical dark energy, particularly when using the DES-SN5Y and DES-SN5Y $$(z>0.1)$$ ( z > 0.1 ) supernova samples. With the revision of this dataset into the DES-Dovekie compilation, it is important to reassess the robustness of this result. In this work, we analyze a broad class of dark energy parametrizations, including w CDM, $$w_0w_a$$ w 0 w a CDM, BA, JBP, Efstathiou, and GEDE models, using DESI DR2 BAO, a compressed CMB likelihood, and supernova data. We find that the DES-SN5Y dataset consistently yields a stronger preference for deviations from $$\Lambda $$ Λ CDM compared to DES-Dovekie. In particular, redshift-dependent parametrizations favor the region $$w_0 > -1$$ w 0 > - 1 and $$w_a < 0$$ w a < 0 , corresponding to a Quintom-B–type evolution with phantom crossing. This behavior is observed across multiple models, indicating that it is not specific to a single parametrization. We find that the DES-SN5Y $$(z>0.1)$$ ( z > 0.1 ) sample also preserves the same qualitative behavior, although the deviations from the $$\Lambda $$ Λ CDM limit become significantly weaker compared to the full DES-SN5Y sample. However, when DES-Dovekie is used, the statistical preference for dynamical dark energy is significantly reduced. The improvement over $$\Lambda $$ Λ CDM drops to below the $$1\sigma $$ 1 σ level for most models, and the Bayesian evidence weakens from moderate to weak or inconclusive. Similarly, for the DES-SN5Y $$(z>0.1)$$ ( z > 0.1 ) sample, the preference for dynamical dark energy becomes intermediate between the DES-SN5Y and DES-Dovekie cases, with mostly weak or inconclusive evidence. Overall, the DES-Dovekie and DES-SN5Y $$(z>0.1)$$ ( z > 0.1 ) datasets weaken the preference for dynamical dark energy compared to the full DES-SN5Y dataset.

Overview

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 · 10.1140/epjc/s10052-026-16010-6

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 55

  1. A.G. Riess et al., Observational evidence from supernovae for an accelerating universe and a cosmological constant. Astron. J. 116(3), 1009 (1998) · DOI · Paper page
  2. S. Perlmutter et al., Measurements of $$\omega $$ and $$\lambda $$ from 42 high-redshift supernovae. Astrophys J 517(2), 565 (1999) · DOI · Paper page
  3. C.L. Bennett et al., Nine-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Final Maps and Results. Astrophys. J. Suppl. 208, 20 (2013) · DOI
  4. A. Adame et al., Desi 2024 vi: cosmological constraints from the measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations. J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 2025(02), 021 (2025) · DOI
  5. B. Popovic, P. Shah, W. Kenworthy, R. Kessler, T. Davis, A. Goobar, D. Scolnic, M. Vincenzi, P. Wiseman, R. Chen, The dark energy survey supernova program: A reanalysis of cosmology results and evidence for evolving dark energy with an updated type ia supernova calibration (2025), arXiv:2511.07517 · arXiv
  6. S. Capozziello, H. Chaudhary, G. Mustafa, S. Pacif, Evidence for dynamical dark energy using desi dr2 ly$$\alpha $$ forest, arXiv:2510.21976 (2025) · arXiv
  7. S. Capozziello, H. Chaudhary, T. Harko, G. Mustafa, Is dark energy dynamical in the desi era? a critical review. Physics of the Dark Universe , 102196 (2025) · DOI
  8. Q. Gao, Z. Peng, S. Gao, Y. Gong, On the evidence of dynamical dark energy. Universe 11(1), 10 (2024) · DOI
  9. G.-B. Zhao, R.G. Crittenden, L. Pogosian, X. Zhang, Examining the evidence for dynamical dark energy. Phys. Rev. Lett. 109(17), 171301 (2012) · DOI
  10. U. Alam, V. Sahni, A.A. Starobinsky, The case for dynamical dark energy revisited. J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 2004(06), 008–008 (2004) · DOI
  11. W. Giarè, T. Mahassen, E. Di Valentino, S. Pan, An overview of what current data can (and cannot yet) say about evolving dark energy. Phys. Dark Univ. 48, 101906 (2025) · DOI
  12. H. Chaudhary, V.K. Sharma, S. Capozziello, G. Mustafa, Probing Departures from $$\Lambda $$CDM by Late-time Datasets. Astrophys. J. Suppl. 283(2), 73 (2026) · DOI
  13. G.-B. Zhao, M. Raveri, L. Pogosian, Y. Wang, R.G. Crittenden, W.J. Handley, W.J. Percival, F. Beutler, J. Brinkmann, C.-H. Chuang et al., Dynamical dark energy in light of the latest observations. Nat. Astron. 1(9), 627–632 (2017) · DOI
  14. V.K. Sharma, H. Chaudhary, S. Kolekar, Probing generalized emergent dark energy with desi dr2. Journal of High Energy Astrophysics , 100518 (2025) · DOI
  15. H. Chaudhary, S. Capozziello, S. Praharaj, S. K. J. Pacif, G. Mustafa, Is the $$\lambda $$cdm model in crisis?, Journal of High Energy Astrophysics 100507 (2025) · DOI
  16. H. Chaudhary, S. Capozziello, V.K. Sharma, G. Mustafa, Does desi dr2 challenge $$\lambda $$cdm paradigm? Astrophys. J. 992(2), 194 (2025) · DOI
  17. R. Nagpal, H. Chaudhary, H. Gupta, S. Pacif, Late-time constraints on dynamical dark energy models using desi dr2, type ia supernova, and cc measurements. J. High Ener Astrophys. 47, 100396 (2025) · DOI
  18. H. Chaudhary, S. Capozziello, V. K. Sharma, I. Gómez-Vargas, G. Mustafa, Evidence for evolving dark energy from desi dr2 bao and pantheon$$^+$$, des-dovekie, and union3, arXiv:2508.10514 (2025) · DOI
  19. Z. Zhang, T. Xu, Y. Chen, Dynamical Dark Energy and the Unresolved Hubble Tension: Multi-model Constraints from DESI 2025 and Other Probes. Astrophys. J. 999(2), 248 (2026) · DOI
  20. T. Xu, S. Kumar, Y. Chen, A. J. S. Capistrano, Ö. Akarsu, Probing Dynamical Dark Energy with Late-Time Data: Evidence, Tensions, and the Limits of the $$w_0w_a$$CDM Framework (2 2026). arXiv:2602.11936 · arXiv
  21. E. Abdalla et al., Cosmology intertwined: a review of the particle physics, astrophysics, and cosmology associated with the cosmological tensions and anomalies. JHEAp 34, 49–211 (2022)
  22. E. Di Valentino et al., The CosmoVerse white paper: addressing observational tensions in cosmology with systematics and fundamental physics. Phys. Dark Univ. 49, 101965 (2025) · DOI
  23. N. Aghanim, et al., Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys. 641 (2020) A6, [Erratum: Astron.Astrophys. 652, C4 (2021)]
  24. L. Balkenhol et al., Measurement of the CMB temperature power spectrum and constraints on cosmology from the SPT-3G 2018 TT, TE, and EE dataset. Phys. Rev. D 108(2), 023510 (2023) · DOI
  25. T. Louis et al., The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: DR6 power spectra, likelihoods and $$\Lambda $$CDM parameters. JCAP 11, 062 (2025) · DOI
  26. A.G. Riess, W. Yuan, L.M. Macri, D. Scolnic, D. Brout, S. Casertano, D.O. Jones, Y. Murakami, G.S. Anand, L. Breuval et al., A comprehensive measurement of the local value of the hubble constant with 1 km s- 1 mpc- 1 uncertainty from the hubble space telescope and the sh0es team. Astrophys. J. Lett. 934(1), L7 (2022) · DOI · Paper page
  27. B. Ratra, P.J. Peebles, Cosmological consequences of a rolling homogeneous scalar field. Phys. Rev. D 37(12), 3406 (1988) · DOI · Paper page
  28. R.R. Caldwell, R. Dave, P.J. Steinhardt, Cosmological imprint of an energy component with general equation of state. Phys. Rev. Lett. 80(8), 1582 (1998) · DOI
  29. R.R. Caldwell, A phantom menace? cosmological consequences of a dark energy component with super-negative equation of state. Phys. Lett. B 545(1–2), 23–29 (2002) · DOI
  30. B. Feng, The quintom model of dark energy (2006), astro-ph/0602156 · arXiv
  31. M. Chevallier, D. Polarski, Accelerating universes with scaling dark matter. Int. J. Modern Phys. D 10(02), 213–223 (2001) · DOI · Paper page
  32. E.V. Linder, Exploring the expansion history of the universe. Phys. Rev. Lett. 90(9), 091301 (2003) · DOI · Paper page
  33. E. Barboza Jr., J. Alcaniz, A parametric model for dark energy. Phys. Lett. B 666(5), 415–419 (2008) · DOI
  34. H. Jassal, J. Bagla, T. Padmanabhan, Wmap constraints on low redshift evolution of dark energy. Mon. Notices R. Astron. Soc. 356(1), L11–L16 (2005) · DOI
  35. A. Tripathi, A. Sangwan, H. Jassal, Dark energy equation of state parameter and its evolution at low redshift. J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 2017(06), 012 (2017) · DOI
  36. X. Li, A. Shafieloo, Evidence for emergent dark energy. Astrophys. J. 902(1), 58 (2020) · DOI
  37. A. Gelman, D.B. Rubin, Inference from Iterative Simulation Using Multiple Sequences. Stat. Sci. 7, 457–472 (1992) · DOI · Paper page
  38. A. Lewis, GetDist: a Python package for analysing Monte Carlo samples. JCAP 08, 025 (2025) · DOI
  39. M.A. Karim, J. Aguilar, S. Ahlen, S. Alam, L. Allen, C.A. Prieto, O. Alves, A. Anand, U. Andrade, E. Armengaud, Desi dr2 results. ii. measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations and cosmological constraints. Phys. Rev. D 112(8), 083515 (2025) · DOI · Paper page
  40. T. Abbott, M. Acevedo, M. Aguena, A. Alarcon, S. Allam, O. Alves, A. Amon, F. Andrade-Oliveira, J. Annis, P. Armstrong, The dark energy survey: Cosmology results with 1500 new high-redshift type ia supernovae using the full 5-year dataset (2024), arXiv:2401.02929 · arXiv
  41. D. Brout et al., The Pantheon+ Analysis: Cosmological Constraints. Astrophys. J. 938(2), 110 (2022) · DOI
  42. Y. Chen, S. Kumar, B. Ratra, T. Xu, Effects of Type Ia Supernovae Absolute Magnitude Priors on the Hubble Constant Value. Astrophys. J. Lett. 964(1), L4 (2024) · DOI
  43. B. Popovic, et al., The Dark Energy Survey Supernova Program: A Reanalysis Of Cosmology Results And Evidence For Evolving Dark Energy With An Updated Type Ia Supernova Calibration (11 2025). arXiv:2511.07517 · arXiv
  44. R.E. Kass, A.E. Raftery, Bayes Factors. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 90(430), 773–795 (1995) · DOI · Paper page
  45. R. Trotta, Bayes in the sky: Bayesian inference and model selection in cosmology. Contemp. Phys. 49, 71–104 (2008) · DOI
  46. Y. Cai, X. Ren, T. Qiu, M. Li, X. Zhang, The quintom theory of dark energy after desi dr2, National Science Review. nwag115 (2026) · DOI
  47. G. Gu, X. Wang, Y. Wang, G.-B. Zhao, L. Pogosian, K. Koyama, J.A. Peacock, Z. Cai, J.L. Cervantes-Cota, M. Ishak et al., Dynamical dark energy in light of the desi dr2 baryonic acoustic oscillations measurements. Nat. Astron. 9(12), 1879–1889 (2025) · DOI
  48. B. Feng, X. Wang, X. Zhang, Dark energy constraints from the cosmic age and supernova. Phys. Lett. B 607(1–2), 35–41 (2005) · DOI
  49. P. Thanankullaphong, P. Sahoo, P.H. Puttasiddappa, N. Roy, Quintom dark energy: Future attractor and phantom crossing in light of desi dr2 observation (2026), arXiv:2601.02284 · DOI
  50. E. Özülker, E.D. Valentino, W. Giarè, Dark energy crosses the line: Quantifying and testing the evidence for phantom crossing (2025), arXiv:2506.19053 · arXiv
  51. E. Silva, R.C. Nunes, Testing signatures of phantom crossing through full-shape galaxy clustering analysis. J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 2025(11), 078 (2025) · DOI
  52. Z. Yao, G. Ye, A. Silvestri, A general model for dark energy crossing the phantom divide. J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 2025(10), 078 (2025) · DOI
  53. D. Efstratiou, E.A. Paraskevas, L. Perivolaropoulos, Addressing the desi dr2 phantom-crossing anomaly and enhanced $$h_0$$ tension with reconstructed scalar-tensor gravity (2025), arXiv:2511.04610 · arXiv
  54. K. Lodha, A. Shafieloo, R. Calderon, E. Linder, W. Sohn, J. Cervantes-Cota, A. De Mattia, J. García-Bellido, M. Ishak, W. Matthewson et al., Desi 2024: Constraints on physics-focused aspects of dark energy using desi dr1 bao data. Phys. Rev. D 111(2), 023532 (2025) · DOI
  55. K. Lodha, R. Calderon, W. Matthewson, A. Shafieloo, M. Ishak, J. Pan, C. Garcia-Quintero, D. Huterer, G. Valogiannis, L. Ureña-López, Extended dark energy analysis using desi dr2 bao measurements (2025), arXiv:2503.14743 · arXiv

Metadata

Authors
Kandel, A., Atamurotov, F., Güdekli, E., Channuie, P., & Rakhimova, G.
Affiliations
  • Tribhuvan University (NP)
  • Khazar University (AZ)
  • Istanbul University (TR)
  • Walailak University (TH)
  • University of Tashkent for Applied Sciences (UZ)
Corresponding author
Channuie, Phongpichit
Venue
The European Physical Journal C
Published
2026-07-03
Volume
86
Issue
7
ISSN
  • 1434-6044 (ISSN-L)
  • 1434-6052
OpenAlex
W7167248583
Cited by
1
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 1
FWCI
2.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The European Physical Journal C (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Springer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
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 › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Gamma-ray bursts and supernovae
Keywords
dynamical dark energy, supernova sample, dark energy parametrization, quintom, phantom crossing, marginal likelihood, LambdaCDM model

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