Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Detailed Answer
Quick Answer
Concise responses based on abstracts only
Detailed Answer
Well-researched responses based on abstracts and relevant paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 54 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 50 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 18 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 31 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 105 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 182 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 466 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4 40 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

A parametrization of the growth index of matter perturbations in various Dark Energy models and observational prospects using a Euclid-like survey (1105.4825v2)

Published 24 May 2011 in astro-ph.CO

Abstract: We provide exact solutions to the cosmological matter perturbation equation in a homogeneous FLRW universe with a vacuum energy that can be parametrized by a constant equation of state parameter $w$ and a very accurate approximation for the Ansatz $w(a)=w_0+w_a(1-a)$. We compute the growth index $\gamma=\log f(a)/\log\Om_m(a)$, and its redshift dependence, using the exact and approximate solutions in terms of Legendre polynomials and show that it can be parametrized as $\gamma(a)=\gamma_0+\gamma_a(1-a)$ in most cases. We then compare four different types of dark energy (DE) models: $w\Lambda$CDM, DGP, $f(R)$ and a LTB-large-void model, which have very different behaviors at $z\gsim1$. This allows us to study the possibility to differentiate between different DE alternatives using wide and deep surveys like Euclid, which will measure both photometric and spectroscopic redshifts for several hundreds of millions of galaxies up to redshift $z\simeq 2$. We do a Fisher matrix analysis for the prospects of differentiating among the different DE models in terms of the growth index, taken as a given function of redshift or with a principal component analysis, with a value for each redshift bin for a Euclid-like survey. We use as observables the complete and marginalized power spectrum of galaxies $P(k)$ and the Weak Lensing (WL) power spectrum. We find that, using $P(k)$, one can reach (2%, 5%) errors in $(w_0, w_a)$, and (4%, 12%) errors in $(\gamma_0, \gamma_a)$, while using WL we get errors at least twice as large. These estimates allow us to differentiate easily between DGP, $f(R)$ models and $\Lambda$CDM, while it would be more difficult to distinguish the latter from a variable equation of state parameter or LTB models using only the growth index.}

List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Dice Question Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Follow-Up Questions

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.