4.6 Article

Testing the ΛCDM paradigm with growth rate data and machine learning

Journal

Publisher

IOP Publishing Ltd
DOI: 10.1088/1475-7516/2022/05/047

Keywords

dark energy theory; Machine learning; modified gravity

Funding

  1. Centro de Excelencia Severo Ochoa Program [SEV-2016-0597]
  2. Ramon y Cajal program [RYC-2014-15843]
  3. Iniziativa Specifica INFN, TASP
  4. [PGC2018-094773-B-C32]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This article proposes a method for cosmological consistency test using future survey data, by analyzing the growth of matter perturbation data to assess the accuracy of different cosmological models. By reconstructing these models using genetic algorithms, the results show that our test method is able to rule out multiple cosmological models and helps to check for tensions in the data and alleviate the existing tension of matter fluctuations.
The cosmological constant A and cold dark matter (CDM) model (Lambda CDM) is one of the pillars of modern cosmology and is widely used as the de facto theoretical model by current and forthcoming surveys. As the nature of dark energy is very elusive, in order to avoid the problem of model bias, here we present a novel null test at the perturbation level that uses the growth of matter perturbation data in order to assess the concordance model. We analyze how accurate this null test can be reconstructed by using data from forthcoming surveys creating mock catalogs based on Lambda CDM and three models that display a different evolution of the matter perturbations, namely a dark energy model with constant equation of state w (wCDM), the Hu & Sawicki and designer f (R) models, and we reconstruct them with a machine learning technique known as the Genetic Algorithms. We show that with future LSST-like mock data our consistency test will be able to rule out these viable cosmological models at more than 5 sigma, help to check for tensions in the data and alleviate the existing tension of the amplitude of matter fluctuations S-8 = sigma(8) (Omega(m,0)/0.3)(0.5).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available