CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 463Cosmology and Gravitation TheoriesNoncommutative and Quantum Gravity TheoriesDark Matter and Cosmic Phenomena

Dark Energy Versus Modified Gravity

Open access
Joyce, Austin, Lombriser, Lucas, Schmidt, Fabian·2016·Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science
DOI 10.1146/annurev-nucl-102115-044553
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Understanding the reason for the observed accelerated expansion of the Universe represents one of the fundamental open questions in physics. In cosmology, a classification has emerged among physical models for this acceleration, distinguishing between dark energy and modified gravity. In this review, we provide a brief overview of models in both categories as well as their phenomenology and characteristic observable signatures in cosmology. We also introduce a rigorous distinction between dark energy and modified gravity based on the strong and weak equivalence principles.

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 · 10.1146/annurev-nucl-102115-044553

Cites

157 of 157 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?

  • Joyce et al. (2016) state that using SEP can be motivated by the conjecture that GR is the only metric theory that satisfies the SEP.

    “They state that using the SEP to make this distinction can be motivated further by the conjecture that GR is the only metric theory that satisfy the SEP, see Will (2014).”

    From Testing general relativity in cosmology (2019) · cites this paper as Joyce et al. (2016)

  • Joyce et al. (2016) propose to use the strong equivalence principle to distinguish GR dark energy models from MG models: any model satisfying SEP is dark energy, any violating SEP is MG.

    “Joyce et al. (2016) and possibly others, propose to use the strong equivalence principle (SEP) (see Sect. 2.1) to draw a distinction between GR dark energy models versus MG models. They suggest to call any model that satisfies the SEP as a dark energy model and any model that violates SEP to be an MG model.”

    From Testing general relativity in cosmology (2019) · cites this paper as Joyce et al. (2016)

  • Joyce et al. (2016) state that the SEP forbids the presence of a fifth force.

    “They state that, heuristically, the SEP forbids the presence of a fifth force which motivates the use of such a discriminant.”

    From Testing general relativity in cosmology (2019) · cites this paper as Joyce et al. (2016)

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

1 of the 158 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. [41]Woodard RP. Scholarpedia 10(8):32243 (2015)
  2. [53]Fierz M, Pauli W. Proc. R. Soc. A 173:211 (1939)
  3. [92]Press WH, Schechter P. Astrophys. J. 187:425 (1974)
  4. [118]Planck Collab. arXiv:1502.01589 [astro-ph] (2015) · arXiv
  5. [136]LIGO Sci. Collab., Virgo Collab. arXiv:1602.03841 [gr-qc] (2016) · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Joyce, A., Lombriser, L., & Schmidt, F.
Affiliations
  • University of Chicago (US)
  • Royal Observatory (GB)
  • Max Planck Institute for Astrophysics (DE)
Corresponding author
Schmidt, Fabian
ORCID
Venue
Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science
Publisher
Annual Reviews
Published
2016-10-19
Volume
66
Issue
1
Pages
95-122
ISSN
  • 0163-8998 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-4134
DOI
10.1146/annurev-nucl-102115-044553
OpenAlex
W2253235198
Cited by
463
References
158
Citations by year
2026: 30 · 2025: 56 · 2024: 57 · 2023: 46 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 42 · 2020: 52 · 2019: 46 · 2018: 43 · 2017: 46 · 2016: 8
FWCI
3.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (publishedVersion)
  • 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 › Dark Matter and Cosmic Phenomena
Keywords
dark energy, modified gravity, cosmic acceleration, equivalence principle, strong equivalence principle, weak equivalence principle, cosmological models, observational signatures

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