- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review D

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Multifield dilaton screening beyond the thin-shell mechanism

Philippe Brax1, Carsten van de Bruck2, Anne-Christine Davis3, and Adam Smith2

PDF

Phys. Rev. D 114, 063541 – Published 23 September, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/243v-vc7d

Abstract

We analyze screening in multifield scalar-tensor theories, focusing on systems with a dilaton coupled to matter and an axion with a dilaton-dependent kinetic term, in the presence of both planetary and stellar density profiles. Using analytic arguments and fully coupled numerical solutions, we identify a regime in which full screening for a dark-energy-light, effectively unpinned string dilaton, can arise dynamically as the energy minimizing field configuration in the low-energy theory. The backreaction of the dilaton’s partnered axion field can suppress the exterior scalar charge by selecting a minimum-energy configuration (the Brax-Burgess-Quevedo mechanism), yielding robust screening for generic axion gradients. In this regime screening is achieved by cancelling the dilaton’s gradient rather than localizing it. This reduces the exterior scalar charge and allows for gravity tests in the solar system to be passed. We then show that the more familiar thin-shell intuition need not apply in the multifield setting. Axion surface gradients can drastically reshape the dilaton profile and drive a more localied transition without generically suppressing the fifth force. The exterior charge can remain essentially unchanged or even be enhanced as the shell is made thinner by a kinetically coupled field. Multifield two-derivative dynamics therefore decouple localization in thin shells from screening, evade single-field no-go arguments, and reopen viable parameter space for cosmologically light dilatonlike scalars with strong couplings to matter.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (143)

  1. C. van de Bruck, G. Poulot, and E. M. Teixeira, Scalar field dark matter and dark energy: A hybrid model for the dark sector, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2023) 019.
  2. M. Archidiacono, E. Castorina, D. Redigolo, and E. Salvioni, Unveiling dark fifth forces with linear cosmology, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2022) 074.
  3. M. Baryakhtar, O. Simon, and Z. J. Weiner, Cosmology with varying fundamental constants from hyperlight, coupled scalars, Phys. Rev. D 110, 083505 (2024).
  4. M. Baryakhtar, O. Simon, and Z. J. Weiner, Searching for coupled, hyperlight scalars across cosmic history, Phys. Rev. D 111, 115026 (2025).
  5. M. Costa, C. Creque-Sarbinowski, O. Simon, and Z. J. Weiner, Dark forces suppress structure growth, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 06 (2026) 055.
  6. S. Castello, Z. Wang, L. Dam, C. Bonvin, and L. Pogosian, Disentangling modified gravity from a dark force with gravitational redshift, Phys. Rev. D 110, 103523 (2024).
  7. X. Gan, D. Liu, D. Liu, X. Luo, and B. Yu, Detecting ultralight dark matter with matter effect, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2026) 043.
  8. S. Ghosh, K. K. Boddy, and T.-T. Yu, Early Universe constraints on variations in fundamental constants induced by ultralight scalar dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 114, 023525 (2026).
  9. N. Frusciante et al. (Euclid Collaboration), Euclid preparation. Review of forecast constraints on dark energy and modified gravity, arXiv:2512.09748.
  10. C. Zheng, W. Liu, Z. Zhan, and W. Fang, An updated constraint on the effective field theory of dark energy, Res. Astron. Astrophys. 25, 125015 (2025).
  11. M. van der Westhuizen, A. Abebe, and E. Di Valentino, III. Interacting dark energy: Summary of models, pathologies, and constraints, Phys. Dark Universe 50, 102121 (2025).
  12. S. Bhattacharya, G. Borghetto, A. Malhotra, S. Parameswaran, G. Tasinato, and I. Zavala, Cosmological constraints on curved quintessence, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 09 (2024) 073.
  13. Y. Olguin-Trejo, S. L. Parameswaran, G. Tasinato, and I. Zavala, Runaway quintessence, out of the swampland, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2019) 031.
  14. E. M. Teixeira, W. Giarè, N. B. Hogg, T. Montandon, A. Poudou, and V. Poulin, Implications of distance duality violation for the H0 tension and evolving dark energy, Phys. Rev. D 112, 023515 (2025).
  15. W. J. Wolf, C. García-García, T. Anton, and P. G. Ferreira, Assessing cosmological evidence for nonminimal coupling, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 081001 (2025).
  16. R. Shah, P. Mukherjee, and S. Pal, Interacting dark sectors in light of DESI DR2, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 542, 2936 (2025).
  17. Y. Tiwari, U. Upadhyay, and R. K. Jain, Exploring cosmological imprints of phantom crossing with dynamical dark energy in Horndeski gravity, Phys. Rev. D 111, 043530 (2025).
  18. E. M. Teixeira, G. Poulot, C. van de Bruck, E. Di Valentino, and V. Poulin, Alleviating cosmological tensions with a hybrid dark sector, Phys. Rev. D 113, 023514 (2026).
  19. T. Simon, T. Adi, J. L. Bernal, E. D. Kovetz, V. Poulin, and T. L. Smith, Toward alleviating the H0 and S8 tensions with early dark energy-dark matter drag, Phys. Rev. D 111, 023523 (2025).
  20. Y.-M. Zhang, T.-N. Li, G.-H. Du, S.-H. Zhou, L.-Y. Gao, J.-F. Zhang, and X. Zhang, Alleviating the H0 tension through new interacting dark energy model in light of DESI DR2, arXiv:2510.12627.
  21. E. Bellini and I. Sawicki, Maximal freedom at minimum cost: Linear large-scale structure in general modifications of gravity, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2014) 050.
  22. G. Gubitosi, F. Piazza, and F. Vernizzi, The effective field theory of dark energy, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2013) 032.
  23. N. Frusciante and L. Perenon, Effective field theory of dark energy: A review, Phys. Rep. 857, 1 (2020).
  24. G. Efstathiou, Challenges to the ΛCDM cosmology, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 383, 20240022 (2025).
  25. G. Efstathiou, Evolving dark energy or supernovae systematics?, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 538, 875 (2025).
  26. A. Bedroya, G. Obied, C. Vafa, and D. H. Wu, Evolving dark sector and the dark dimension scenario, arXiv:2507.03090.
  27. M. Hong, K. Mukaida, and T. T. Yanagida, No-scale Brans-Dicke gravity—Ultralight scalar boson & heavy inflaton, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2025) 032.
  28. J. Bagger and E. Witten, The gauge invariant supersymmetric nonlinear sigma model, Phys. Lett. 118B, 103 (1982).
  29. J. P. Conlon, Moduli stabilisation and applications in IIB string theory, Fortschr. Phys. 55, 287 (2007).
  30. M. Cicoli, String loop moduli stabilisation and cosmology in IIB flux compactifications, Fortschr. Phys. 58, 115 (2010).
  31. U. H. Danielsson and T. Van Riet, What if string theory has no de Sitter vacua?, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 27, 1830007 (2018).
  32. D. Andriot, M. Rajaguru, and G. Tringas, Single versus multifield scalar potentials from string theory, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2025) 046.
  33. D. Andriot, Phantom matters, Phys. Dark Universe 49, 102000 (2025).
  34. D. J. Kapner, T. S. Cook, E. G. Adelberger, J. H. Gundlach, B. R. Heckel, C. D. Hoyle, and H. E. Swanson, Tests of the gravitational inverse-square law below the dark-energy length scale, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 021101 (2007).
  35. B. Bertotti, L. Iess, and P. Tortora, A test of general relativity using radio links with the Cassini spacecraft, Nature (London) 425, 374 (2003).
  36. B. Jain, V. Vikram, and J. Sakstein, Astrophysical tests of modified gravity: Constraints from distance indicators in the nearby Universe, Astrophys. J. 779, 39 (2013).
  37. P. Touboul et al. (MICROSCOPE Collaboration), MICROSCOPE mission: Final results of the test of the equivalence principle, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 121102 (2022).
  38. H. Desmond, P. G. Ferreira, G. Lavaux, and J. Jasche, Fifth force constraints from galaxy warps, Phys. Rev. D 98, 083010 (2018).
  39. A. P. Naik, E. Puchwein, A.-C. Davis, D. Sijacki, and H. Desmond, Constraints on chameleon f(R)-gravity from galaxy rotation curves of the SPARC sample, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 489, 771 (2019).
  40. J. Scherk and J. H. Schwarz, Dual models for nonhadrons, Nucl. Phys. B81, 118 (1974).
  41. C. G. Callan, Jr., E. J. Martinec, M. J. Perry, and D. Friedan, Strings in background fields, Nucl. Phys. B262, 593 (1985).
  42. E. S. Fradkin and A. A. Tseytlin, Effective field theory from quantized strings, Phys. Lett. 158B, 316 (1985).
  43. M. Gasperini and G. Veneziano, Pre-big bang in string cosmology, Astropart. Phys. 1, 317 (1993).
  44. C. Brans and R. H. Dicke, Mach’s principle and a relativistic theory of gravitation, Phys. Rev. 124, 925 (1961).
  45. R. V. Wagoner, Scalar-Tensor theory and gravitational waves, Phys. Rev. D 1, 3209 (1970).
  46. T. Damour and A. M. Polyakov, The String dilaton and a least coupling principle, Nucl. Phys. B423, 532 (1994).
  47. T. Damour, F. Piazza, and G. Veneziano, Violations of the equivalence principle in a dilaton runaway scenario, Phys. Rev. D 66, 046007 (2002).
  48. T. Damour, F. Piazza, and G. Veneziano, Runaway dilaton and equivalence principle violations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 081601 (2002).
  49. T. Damour and J. F. Donoghue, Equivalence principle violations and couplings of a light dilaton, Phys. Rev. D 82, 084033 (2010).
  50. P. Brax, C. van de Bruck, A.-C. Davis, and D. Shaw, The dilaton and modified gravity, Phys. Rev. D 82, 063519 (2010).
  51. P. Brax, C. van de Bruck, A.-C. Davis, B. Li, and D. J. Shaw, Nonlinear structure formation with the environmentally dependent dilaton, Phys. Rev. D 83, 104026 (2011).
  52. P. Brax, A.-C. Davis, B. Li, and H. A. Winther, A unified description of screened modified gravity, Phys. Rev. D 86, 044015 (2012).
  53. P. Brax, Weinberg’s theorem, phantom crossing, and screening, Phys. Rev. D 112, 083544 (2025).
  54. E. Di Valentino, A. Melchiorri, and O. Mena, Can interacting dark energy solve the H0 tension?, Phys. Rev. D 96, 043503 (2017).
  55. W. Giarè, Y. Zhai, S. Pan, E. Di Valentino, R. C. Nunes, and C. van de Bruck, Tightening the reins on nonminimal dark sector physics: Interacting dark energy with dynamical and nondynamical equation of state, Phys. Rev. D 110, 063527 (2024).
  56. A. Smith, M. Mylova, C. van de Bruck, C. P. Burgess, and E. Di Valentino, The serendipitous axiodilaton: A self-consistent recombination-era solution to the hubble tension, arXiv:2512.13544.
  57. N. Schöneberg and L. Vacher, Gravitational wave oscillations in bimetric cosmology, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 03 (2024) 004.
  58. R. Catena and J. Moller, Quantum Zeno effect and the impact of flavour in leptogenesis, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 03 (2007) 012.
  59. C. P. Burgess, D. Dineen, and F. Quevedo, Gravitational dark matter production in Palatini preheating, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 03 (2021) 064.
  60. R. Kallosh and A. Linde, Dilaton-axion inflation with PBHs and GWs, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 08 (2022) 037.
  61. S. Alexander, H. Bernardo, and M. W. Toomey, Gravitational wave background from mergers of large primordial black holes, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 03 (2022) 037.
  62. H. Bernardo, R. Brandenberger, and J. Fröhlich, Towards a dark sector model from string theory, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 09 (2022) 040.
  63. A. Smith, M. Mylova, P. Brax, C. van de Bruck, C. P. Burgess, and A.-C. Davis, CMB implications of multi-field axio-dilaton cosmology, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 12 (2024) 058.
  64. S. Rahimy, E. M. Teixeira, and I. Zavala, Deciphering coupled scalar dark sectors, Phys. Rev. D 112, 043512 (2025).
  65. A. Smith, P. Brax, C. van de Bruck, C. P. Burgess, and A.-C. Davis, Screened axio-dilaton cosmology: Novel forms of early dark energy, Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 1062 (2025).
  66. A. Smith, M. Mylova, P. Brax, C. van de Bruck, C. Burgess, and A.-C. Davis, A minimal axio-dilaton dark sector, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2025) 023.
  67. M. W. Toomey, E. Hughes, M. M. Ivanov, and J. M. Sullivan, Kinetic mixing and the phantom illusion: Axion-dilaton quintessence in light of DESI DR2, arXiv:2511.23463.
  68. P. Brax, C. P. Burgess, and F. Quevedo, Nova neutrinos in the multi-messenger era, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 03 (2023) 015.
  69. A. Smith, https://github.com/Adam-Smith-2001/Multi-field-astrophysical-profiles-and-Screening (2026).
  70. S. R. Coleman, J. Wess, and B. Zumino, Structure of phenomenological Lagrangians. 1., Phys. Rev. 177, 2239 (1969).
  71. C. P. Burgess, Introduction to effective field theory, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 57, 329 (2007).
  72. C. P. Burgess, H. M. Lee, and M. Trott, Power-counting and the validity of the classical approximation during inflation, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2009) 103.
  73. R. Penco, An introduction to effective field theories, arXiv:2006.16285.
  74. S. Weinberg, Phenomenological Lagrangians, Physica A 96, 327 (1979).
  75. A. Pich, Effective Field Theory with Nambu-Goldstone Modes (Oxford Academic, Oxford, 2020).
  76. M. R. Douglas and S. Kachru, Flux compactification, Rev. Mod. Phys. 79, 733 (2007).
  77. D. Baumann and L. McAllister, Inflation and String Theory, Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 2015).
  78. C. Gordon, D. Wands, B. A. Bassett, and R. Maartens, Adiabatic and entropy perturbations from inflation, Phys. Rev. D 63, 023506 (2000).
  79. S. Groot Nibbelink and B. J. W. van Tent, Scalar perturbations during multiple field slow-roll inflation, Classical Quantum Gravity 19, 613 (2002).
  80. L. Senatore and M. Zaldarriaga, Notes on the bulk viscosity of holographic gauge theory plasmas, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2010) 024.
  81. A. Achucarro, J.-O. Gong, S. Hardeman, G. A. Palma, and S. P. Patil, Effective theories of single field inflation when heavy fields matter, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2012) 066.
  82. G. Shiu and J. Xu, Effective field theory and decoupling in multi-field inflation: An illustrative case study, Phys. Rev. D 84, 103509 (2011).
  83. J. Khoury and A. Weltman, Chameleon fields: Awaiting surprises for tests of gravity in space, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 171104 (2004).
  84. J. Khoury and A. Weltman, Chameleon cosmology, Phys. Rev. D 69, 044026 (2004).
  85. K. Hinterbichler and J. Khoury, Symmetron fields: Screening long-range forces through local symmetry restoration, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 231301 (2010).
  86. C. P. Burgess and F. Quevedo, Kilobyte Cosmic Birefringence from ALP domain walls, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 04 (2021) 007.
  87. J. Polchinski, String Theory. Vol. 2: Superstring Theory and Beyond, Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 2007).
  88. T. W. Grimm and J. Louis, The Effective action of N = 1 Calabi-Yau orientifolds, Nucl. Phys. B699, 387 (2004).
  89. J. J. M. Carrasco, R. Kallosh, A. Linde, and D. Roest, Hyperbolic geometry of cosmological attractors, Phys. Rev. D 92, 041301 (2015).
  90. M. Cicoli, J. P. Conlon, A. Maharana, S. Parameswaran, F. Quevedo, and I. Zavala, String cosmology: From the early universe to today, Phys. Rep. 1059, 1 (2024).
  91. F. Apers, J. P. Conlon, E. J. Copeland, M. Mosny, and F. Revello, String theory and the first half of the universe, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 08 (2024) 018.
  92. C. Wetterich, Cosmology and the Fate of Dilatation Symmetry, Nucl. Phys. B302, 668 (1988).
  93. C. Wetterich, Warping with dilatation symmetry and self-tuning of the cosmological constant, Phys. Rev. D 81, 103508 (2010).
  94. T. Henz, J. M. Pawlowski, and C. Wetterich, Scaling solutions for dilaton quantum gravity, Phys. Lett. B 769, 105 (2017).
  95. C. Wetterich, Fundamental scale invariance, Nucl. Phys. B964, 115326 (2021).
  96. M. Gasperini, F. Piazza, and G. Veneziano, Quintessence as a runaway dilaton, Phys. Rev. D 65, 023508 (2002).
  97. E. E. Flanagan, The Conformal frame freedom in theories of gravitation, Classical Quantum Gravity 21, 3817 (2004).
  98. C. M. Will, The confrontation between general relativity and experiment, Living Rev. Relativity 17, 4 (2014).
  99. M. B. Green, J. H. Schwarz, and E. Witten, Superstring Theory Vol. 1: 25th Anniversary Edition, Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 2012).
  100. D. J. E. Marsh, Axion cosmology, Phys. Rep. 643, 1 (2016).
  101. C. P. Burgess and F. Quevedo, Dual is different: EFTs, axions and nonpropagating form fields in cosmology, arXiv:2509.11340.
  102. C. Burrage and J. Sakstein, Axion cosmology, Living Rev. Relativity 21, 1 (2018).
  103. S. Tsujikawa, T. Tamaki, and R. Tavakol, Chameleon scalar fields in relativistic gravitational backgrounds, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2009) 020.
  104. P. Brax, A.-C. Davis, and R. Jha, Neutron stars in screened modified gravity: Chameleon vs dilaton, Phys. Rev. D 95, 083514 (2017).
  105. P. Yin, R. Li, C. Yin, X. Xu, X. Bian, H. Xie, C.-K. Duan, P. Huang, J.-h. He, and J. Du, Experiments with levitated force sensor challenge theories of dark energy, Nat. Phys. 18, 1181 (2022).
  106. C. Burrage and J. Sakstein, A compendium of chameleon constraints, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2016) 045.
  107. H. Fischer, C. Käding, and M. Pitschmann, Screened scalar fields in the laboratory and the solar system, Universe 10, 297 (2024).
  108. H. Oyaizu, Non-linear evolution of f(R) cosmologies I: Methodology, Phys. Rev. D 78, 123523 (2008).
  109. H. Oyaizu, M. Lima, and W. Hu, Nonlinear evolution of f(R) cosmologies. 2. Power spectrum, Phys. Rev. D 78, 123524 (2008).
  110. B. Li, W. A. Hellwing, K. Koyama, G.-B. Zhao, E. Jennings, and C. M. Baugh, The non-linear matter and velocity power spectra in f(R) gravity, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 428, 743 (2012).
  111. P. Brax, A.-C. Davis, B. Li, H. A. Winther, and G.-B. Zhao, Systematic simulations of modified gravity: Symmetron and dilaton models, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2012) 002.
  112. H. A. Winther and P. G. Ferreira, Fast route to nonlinear clustering statistics in modified gravity theories, Phys. Rev. D 91, 123507 (2015).
  113. H. A. Winther et al., Modified gravity N-body code comparison project, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 454, 4208 (2015).
  114. P. Brax, C. van de Bruck, D. F. Mota, N. J. Nunes, and H. A. Winther, Chameleons with field dependent couplings, Phys. Rev. D 82, 083503 (2010).
  115. J. G. Williams, S. G. Turyshev, and D. H. Boggs, Progress in lunar laser ranging tests of relativistic gravity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 261101 (2004).
  116. J. G. Williams, S. G. Turyshev, and D. Boggs, Lunar laser ranging tests of the equivalence principle, Classical Quantum Gravity 29, 184004 (2012).
  117. A. Fienga, J. Laskar, P. Kuchynka, H. Manche, M. Gastineau, and C. Leponcin-Lafitte, The non-linear matter and velocity power spectra in f(R) gravity, IAU Symp. 261, 159 (2010).
  118. A. Fienga and O. Minazzoli, Testing theories of gravity with planetary ephemerides, Living Rev. Relativity 27, 1 (2024).
  119. C. Burrage, E. J. Copeland, and J. Stevenson, Ellipticity weakens chameleon screening, Phys. Rev. D 91, 065030 (2015).
  120. C. Burrage, B. March, and A. P. Naik, Search for neutrino counterparts to the gravitational wave sources from LIGO/Virgo O3 run with the ANTARES detector, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 04 (2023) 004.
  121. A. Almasi, P. Brax, D. Iannuzzi, and R. I. P. Sedmik, Force sensor for chameleon and Casimir force experiments with parallel-plate configuration, Phys. Rev. D 91, 102002 (2015).
  122. P. Brax, C. van de Bruck, A.-C. Davis, D. F. Mota, and D. J. Shaw, Detecting chameleons through Casimir force measurements, Phys. Rev. D 76, 124034 (2007).
  123. T. Anson and E. Babichev, Vainshtein screening for slowly rotating stars, Phys. Rev. D 102, 044046 (2020).
  124. M. R. Douglas and G. Torroba, Kinetic terms in warped compactifications, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2009) 013.
  125. A. Dubey, S. Krippendorf, and A. Schachner, JAXVacua—a framework for sampling string vacua, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2023) 146.
  126. Z. K. Baykara, H. P. De Freitas, and H.-C. Tarazi, String islands, discrete theta angles and the 6D N= (1) string landscape, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2026) 249.
  127. F. Perrotta, C. Baccigalupi, and S. Matarrese, Extended quintessence, Phys. Rev. D 61, 023507 (1999).
  128. B. Boisseau, G. Esposito-Farese, D. Polarski, and A. A. Starobinsky, Reconstruction of a scalar tensor theory of gravity in an accelerating universe, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 2236 (2000).
  129. A. De Felice and S. Tsujikawa, Solar system constraints on f(G) gravity models, Phys. Rev. D 80, 063516 (2009).
  130. C. de Rham, G. Gabadadze, and A. J. Tolley, Resummation of massive gravity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 231101 (2011).
  131. R. Kimura, T. Kobayashi, and K. Yamamoto, Observational constraints on kinetic gravity braiding from the integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect, Phys. Rev. D 85, 123503 (2012).
  132. A. Banijamali and B. Fazlpour, Phantom divide crossing with general non-minimal kinetic coupling, Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 44, 2051 (2012).
  133. C. de Rham, A. J. Tolley, and D. H. Wesley, Vainshtein mechanism in binary pulsars, Phys. Rev. D 87, 044025 (2013).
  134. H. Y. Ip, J. Sakstein, and F. Schmidt, Solar system constraints on disformal gravity theories, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2015) 051.
  135. M. Crisostomi, M. Lewandowski, and F. Vernizzi, Vainshtein regime in scalar-tensor gravity: Constraints on degenerate higher-order scalar-tensor theories, Phys. Rev. D 100, 024025 (2019).
  136. J. T. Deskins, Constraints on massive gravity: A numerical study of Galileons, Ph.D. thesis, Case Western Reserve University, 2019.
  137. A. Iyonaga and T. Kobayashi, Distinguishing modified gravity with just two tensorial degrees of freedom from general relativity: Black holes, cosmology, and matter coupling, Phys. Rev. D 104, 124020 (2021).
  138. T. Kobayashi and T. Hiramatsu, Weak-field regime of scalar-tensor theories with an instantaneous mode, Phys. Rev. D 109, 064091 (2024).
  139. M. Mylova and N. Afshordi, Soft-parton contributions to heavy-quark production at low transverse momentum, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2023) 144.
  140. S. Tsujikawa, Crossing the phantom divide in scalar-tensor and vector-tensor theories, Phys. Rev. D 113, L041301 (2026).
  141. Z. Yao, G. Ye, and A. Silvestri, A general model for dark energy crossing the phantom divide, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2025) 078.
  142. S. Chandrasekhar, An Introduction to the Study of Stellar Structure (Dover Publications, New York, 1939).
  143. R. Kippenhahn, A. Weigert, and A. Weiss, Stellar Structure and Evolution, 2nd ed. (Springer, New York, 2012).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 114, 063541– Published 23 September, 2026
  • Received 5 April 2026
  • Accepted 19 August 2026
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation