- 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

Interpretation of the binned SNe Ia master sample data via a scalar quintessence component: Phantom transition?

Giovanni Montani1,2,*, Iolanda Navone1,†, Maria Giovanna Dainotti3,4,5,‡, and Shigehiro Nagataki6,7,8,§

  • 1Physics Department, Sapienza University of Rome, Piazzale Aldo Moro 5, 00185 Roma, Italy
  • 2ENEA, Nuclear Department, Centro Ricerche Frascati, Via E. Fermi 45, 00044 Frascati, Italy
  • 3Division of Science, National Astronomical Observatory of Japan, 2-21-1 Osawa, Mitaka 181-8588, Tokyo, Japan
  • 4Graduate University for Advanced Studies (SOKENDAI), 2-21-1 Osawa, Mitaka, Tokyo 181-8588, Japan
  • 5Space Science Institute, 4765 Walnut St Ste B, Boulder, Colorado 80301, USA
  • 6Astrophysical Big Bang Laboratory (ABBL), RIKEN Pioneering Research Institute (PRI), 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan
  • 7RIKEN Center for Interdisciplinary Theoretical and Mathematical Sciences (iTHEMS), 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan
  • 8RIKEN-Berkeley Center (RBC), RIKEN iTHEMS, 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan

  • *Contact author: giovanni.montani@enea.it
  • †Contact author: navone.1867377@studenti.uniroma1.it
  • ‡Contact author: maria.dainotti@nao.ac.jp
  • §Contact author: shigehiro.nagataki@riken.jp
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 114, 043512 – Published 11 August, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/xthk-9854

Abstract

We study a modified cosmological scenario for the late Universe, involving an evolutionary dark energy model associated with the dynamics of a self-interacting scalar field in a potential-dominated regime. Through the analogy with a fluid energy-momentum tensor, we introduce a viscous contribution to the scalar dynamics, accounting for effective nonequilibrium behavior of the self-interacting scalar cluster. The resulting picture is that of an intrinsic quintessence contribution that, due to the bulk viscosity, admits an effective equation of state parameter that can also take values below −1. Within this framework, we set up the diagnostic tool of the so-called “effective running Hubble constant,” which allows us to trace possible deviations from a standard ΛCDM model. We then compare this theoretical function with binned data from the master sample of Supernovae Ia [1], constructed assuming a ΛCDM model in the Markov Chain Monte Carlo procedure performed in each bin. We show that the self-interacting scalar field corresponding to the best fit satisfies a slow-rolling condition, since the kinetic energy remains small compared to the potential contribution throughout the redshift interval. The key finding is that, when limiting the model to specific regions of the parameter space and fitting it to the data, the transition only occurs at redshifts significantly lower than the value z∼0.5 identified by the DESI Collaboration [2,3]. Furthermore, for the parameter values ensuring the best fit, no quintessence-to-phantom transition occurs (i.e., the effective equation of state parameter remains below −1 across the whole redshift domain). In other words, supernova data alone provide no indication of a change in the nature of the dark energy.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (91)

  1. M. G. Dainotti et al., A new master Supernovae Ia sample and the investigation of the Hubble tension, J. High Energy Astrophys. 48, 100405 (2025).
  2. M. Abdul Karim et al., DESI DR2 results II: Measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations and cosmological constraints, Phys. Rev. D 112, 083515 (2025).
  3. A. G. Adame et al., DESI 2024 VI: Cosmological constraints from the measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2025) 021.
  4. A. G. Riess, W. Yuan, L. M. Macri 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, L7 (2022).
  5. N. Aghanim, Y. Akrami, M. Ashdown et al., Planck 2018 results-VI. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys. 641, A6 (2020).
  6. M. Dainotti, B. De Simone, G. Montani et al., The Hubble constant tension: Current status and future perspectives through new cosmological probes, Proc. Sci. CORFU2022 (2023) 235 [arXiv:2301.10572].
  7. M. G. Dainotti, G. Bargiacchi, A. Ł. Lenart, S. Capozziello, E. Ó Colgáin, R. Solomon, D. Stojkovic, and M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, Quasar standardization: Overcoming selection biases and redshift evolution, Astrophys. J. 931, 106 (2022).
  8. M. G. Dainotti, A. Ł. Lenart, M. G. Yengejeh, S. Chakraborty, N. Fraija, E. Di Valentino, and G. Montani, A new binning method to choose a standard set of quasars, Phys. Dark Universe 44, 101428 (2024).
  9. S. Mukherjee, S. S. Pandey, and A. S. Majumdar, Constraining the Hubble parameter with the 21-cm brightness temperature signal in a universe with inhomogeneities, Phys. Rev. D 112, 063520 (2025).
  10. M. G. Dainotti, G. Bargiacchi, A. Ł. Lenart, and S. Capozziello, The Scavenger hunt for quasar samples to be used as cosmological tools, Galaxies 12, 4 (2024).
  11. M. G. Dainotti, A. Ł. Lenart, A. Chraya et al., The gamma-ray bursts fundamental plane correlation as a cosmological tool, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 518, 2201 (2023).
  12. M. G. Dainotti, G. Sarracino, and S. Capozziello, Gamma-ray bursts, supernovae Ia, and baryon acoustic oscillations: A binned cosmological analysis, Publ. Astron. Soc. Jpn. 74, 1095 (2022).
  13. G. Bargiacchi, M. G. Dainotti, and S. Capozziello, High-redshift cosmology by gamma-ray bursts: An overview, New Astron. Rev. 100, 101712 (2025).
  14. S. A. Adil, M. G. Dainotti, and A. A. Sen, Revisiting the concordance ΛCDM model using gamma-ray bursts together with supernovae Ia and Planck data, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 08 (2024) 015.
  15. B. P. Abbott, R. Abbott, T. D. Abbott et al., GW170817: Observation of gravitational waves from a binary neutron star inspiral, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 161101 (2017).
  16. S. Kalita, A. Uniyal, T. Bulik, and Y. Mizuno, Revealing limitation in the standard cosmological model: A redshift-dependent Hubble constant from fast radio bursts, Astrophys. J. 996, 50 (2026).
  17. A. Faucher, D. Benisty, and D. F. Mota, Hubble-constant and -mass determination of centaurus a and M83 from tip-of-red-giant-branch distances, Astron. Astrophys. 705, A112 (2026).
  18. G. N. Gadbail and K. Bamba, A model-independent measurement of the Hubble constant from gravitational-wave standard sirens and electromagnetic observations, Phys. Rev. D 113, 123557 (2026).
  19. Y. Zhan, D. Wang, S.-X. Yi, and F.-Y. Wang, Hubble constant measurement from quasiperiodic eruptions as electromagnetic counterparts to extreme mass ratio inspirals, Astrophys. J. 997, 134 (2026).
  20. M. Chevallier and D. Polarski, Accelerating universes with scaling dark matter, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 10, 213 (2001).
  21. E. V. Linder, Exploring the expansion history of the universe, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 091301 (2003).
  22. K. Lodha et al., Extended dark energy analysis using DESI DR2 BAO measurements, Phys. Rev. D 112, 083511 (2025).
  23. D. D. Y. Ong, D. Yallup, and W. Handley, The bayesian view of DESI DR2 with unimpeded: Evidence and tension in a combined analysis with CMB and supernovae across cosmological models, arXiv:2603.05472.
  24. G. Efstathiou, Evolving dark energy or supernovae systematics?, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 538, 875 (2025).
  25. S. Capozziello, H. Chaudhary, G. Mustafa, and S. K. J. Pacif, Evidence of dynamical dark energy found via the DESI DR2 Lymanα forest, Astron. Astrophys. 709, A258 (2026).
  26. H. Chaudhary, S. Capozziello, S. Praharaj et al., Is the ΛCDM model in crisis?, J. High Energy Astrophys. 50, 100507 (2026).
  27. H. Chaudhary, V. K. Sharma, S. Capozziello, and G. Mustafa, Probing departures from ΛCDM by late-time datasets, Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 283, 73 (2026).
  28. H. Chaudhary, S. Capozziello, V. K. Sharma, I. Gómez-Vargas, and G. Mustafa, Evidence for evolving dark energy from DESI DR2 BAO and Pantheon+, DES-Dovekie, and Union3, Eur. Phys. J. C 86, 564 (2026).
  29. H. Chaudhary, S. Capozziello, V. K. Sharma, and G. Mustafa, Does DESI DR2 challenge ΛCDM paradigm?, Astrophys. J. 992, 194 (2025).
  30. J. Rebouças, V. Lloyd, J. Gordon, G. Brando, and V. Miranda, Modeling nonlinear scales for dynamical dark energy cosmologies with cola, Phys. Rev. D 113, 103513 (2026).
  31. M. Ishak and L. Medina-Varela, Persistent and serious challenge to the λCDM throne: Evidence for dynamical dark energy rising from combinations of different types of datasets, arXiv:2507.22856.
  32. C.-G. Park and B. Ratra, Updated observational constraints on ϕcdm dynamical dark energy cosmological models, arXiv:2509.25812.
  33. A. C. Alfano and O. Luongo, Cosmic distance duality after DESI 2024 data release and dark energy evolution, Phys. Dark Universe 51, 102205 (2026).
  34. M. Cortês and A. R. Liddle, Interpreting DESI’s evidence for evolving dark energy, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 12 (2024) 007.
  35. W. J. Wolf, C. García-García, D. J. Bartlett, and P. G. Ferreira, Scant evidence for thawing quintessence, Phys. Rev. D 110, 083528 (2024).
  36. W. J. Wolf, C. García-García, T. Anton, and P. G. Ferreira, Assessing cosmological evidence for nonminimal coupling, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 081001 (2025).
  37. W. J. Wolf, P. G. Ferreira, and C. García-García, Cosmological constraints on Galileon dark energy with broken shift symmetry, Phys. Rev. D 113, 023551 (2026).
  38. M. Cortês and A. R. Liddle, Interpreting DESI’s evidence for evolving dark energy, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 12 (2024) 007.
  39. R. Calderon, K. Lodha, A. Shafieloo et al., DESI 2024: Reconstructing dark energy using crossing statistics with DESI DR1 BAO data, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2024) 048.
  40. S. Tsujikawa, Quintessence: A review, Classical Quantum Gravity 30, 214003 (2013).
  41. R. Caldwell, A phantom menace? cosmological consequences of a dark energy component with super-negative equation of state, Phys. Lett. B 545, 23 (2002).
  42. S. M. Carroll, M. Hoffman, and M. Trodden, Can the dark energy equation-of-state parameter w be less than −1?, Phys. Rev. D 68, 023509 (2003).
  43. Y. Yang, Q. Wang, C. Li, P. Yuan, X. Ren, E. N. Saridakis, and Y.-F. Cai, Gaussian process reconstructions and model building of quintom dark energy from latest cosmological observations, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 08 (2025) 050.
  44. Y. Cai, X. Ren, T. Qiu, M. Li, and X. Zhang, The quintom theory of dark energy after DESI DR2, Natl. Sci. Rev. 13, nwag115 (2026).
  45. X. Ren, S.-Y. Li, Y. Liu, Y. Cai, H. Li, and X. Zhang, A short review on quintom dark energy theory, arXiv:2606.01360.
  46. T. Schiavone and G. Montani, Evolution of an effective Hubble constant in f(R) modified gravity, Nuovo Cimento C 48, 105 (2025).
  47. M. G. Dainotti, B. De Simone, T. Schiavone, G. Montani, E. Rinaldi, and G. Lambiase, On the Hubble constant tension in the SNe Ia Pantheon sample, Astrophys. J. 912, 150 (2021).
  48. E. Fazzari, M. G. Dainotti, G. Montani et al., The effective running Hubble constant in SNe Ia as a marker for the dark energy nature, J. High Energy Astrophys. 49, 100459 (2026).
  49. M. G. Dainotti, B. De Simone, T. Schiavone, G. Montani, E. Rinaldi, G. Lambiase, M. Bogdan, and S. Ugale, On the evolution of the Hubble constant with the SNe Ia pantheon sample and baryon acoustic oscillations: A feasibility study for GRB-cosmology in 2030, Galaxies 10, 24 (2022).
  50. C. Krishnan, E. Ó. Colgáin, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, and T. Yang, Running Hubble tension and a H0 diagnostic, Phys. Rev. D 103, 103509 (2021).
  51. E. Ó. Colgáin, M. G. Dainotti, S. Capozziello et al., Does DESI 2024 confirm ΛCDM?, J. High Energy Astrophys. 49, 100428 (2026).
  52. E. Di Valentino, O. Mena, S. Pan, L. Visinelli, W. Yang, A. Melchiorri, D. F. Mota, A. G. Riess, and J. Silk, In the realm of the Hubble tension—a review of solutions, Classical Quantum Gravity 38, 153001 (2021).
  53. E. Di Valentino et al., The CosmoVerse White Paper: Addressing observational tensions in cosmology with systematics and fundamental physics, Phys. Dark Universe 49, 101965 (2025).
  54. G. Montani, E. Fazzari, N. Carlevaro, and M. Giovanna Dainotti, Two dynamical scenarios for binned master sample interpretation, Entropy 27, 895 (2025).
  55. G. Montani, N. Carlevaro, and M. G. Dainotti, Running Hubble constant: Evolutionary dark energy, Phys. Dark Universe 48, 101847 (2025).
  56. G. Montani, M. De Angelis, and M. G. Dainotti, Decay of dark energy into dark matter in a metric f(R) gravity: Effective running Hubble constant, Phys. Dark Universe 49, 101969 (2025).
  57. G. Montani, N. Carlevaro, L. A. Escamilla, and E. Di Valentino, Kinetic model for dark energy—dark matter interaction: Scenario for the Hubble tension, Phys. Dark Universe 48, 101848 (2025).
  58. G. Efstathiou, To H0 or not to H0?, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 505, 3866 (2021).
  59. E. Elizalde, M. Khurshudyan, and S. D. Odintsov, Can we learn from matter creation to solve the H0 tension problem?, Eur. Phys. J. C 84, 782 (2024).
  60. M. G. Dainotti, V. Petrosian, J. Singal, and M. Ostrowski, Determination of the intrinsic luminosity time correlation in the x-ray afterglows of gamma-ray bursts, Astrophys. J. 774, 157 (2013).
  61. B. D. Simone, M. H. P. M. van Putten, M. G. Dainotti et al., A doublet of cosmological models to challenge the H0 tension in the Pantheon Supernovae Ia catalog, J. High Energy Astrophys. 45, 290 (2025).
  62. T. Schiavone, G. Montani, and F. Bombacigno, f(R) gravity in the Jordan frame as a paradigm for the Hubble tension, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 522, L72 (2023).
  63. M. G. Dainotti, A. Banerjee, A. LeClair et al., Parameterizations of the Hubble constant: Logarithmic vs power-law expansion from the binned master sample of SNE Ia, arXiv:2603.00497.
  64. A. LeClair, Quantum vacuum energy as the origin of gravity, J. High Energy Astrophys. 51, 100546 (2026).
  65. S. Weinberg, Gravitation and Cosmology: Principles and Applications of the General Theory of Relativity (John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1972).
  66. G. Montani, M. V. Battisti, R. Benini et al., Primordial Cosmology (World Scientific, Singapore, 2009).
  67. V. A. Belinskii and I. M. Khalatnikov, Influence of viscosity on the character of cosmological evolution, Sov. JETT 42, 205 (1975).
  68. V. A. Belinskii and I. M. Khalatnikov, Viscosity effects in isotropic cosmologies, Sov. Phys. JETP 45, 19 (1977).
  69. V. A. Belinskii, E. S. Nikomarov, and I. M. Khalatnikov, Investigation of the cosmological evolution of viscoelastic matter with causal thermodynamics, Sov. Phys. JETP 50, 21 (1979).
  70. M. M. Disconzi, T. W. Kephart, and R. J. Scherrer, New approach to cosmological bulk viscosity, Phys. Rev. D 91, 043532 (2015).
  71. G. Montani and M. Venanzi, Bianchi i cosmology in the presence of a causally regularized viscous fluid, Eur. Phys. J. C 77, 486 (2017).
  72. N. Carlevaro and G. Montani, Bulk viscosity effects on the early Universe stability, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 20, 1729 (2005).
  73. S. Weinberg, Cosmology (Oxford Academic Press, Oxford, 2008).
  74. E. W. Kolb and M. S. Turner, The Early Universe (Taylor and Francis, 2019).
  75. J. A. Peacock, Cosmological Physics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1999).
  76. M. E. Peskin and D. V. Schroeder, An Introduction to Quantum Field Theory (Addison-Wesley, Reading, USA, 1995).
  77. G. Efstathiou and S. Gratton, The evidence for a spatially flat universe, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 496, L91 (2020).
  78. I. Navone, M. G. Dainotti, E. Fazzari et al., Creation of viscous dark energy by the Hubble flow: Comparison with SNE Ia master sample binned data, arXiv:2511.16130.
  79. C. Krishnan, E. Ó Colgáin, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, and T. Yang, Running Hubble tension and a H0 diagnostic, Phys. Rev. D 103, 103509 (2021).
  80. C. Krishnan and R. Mondol, h0 as a universal flrw diagnostic, arXiv:2201.13384.
  81. D. C. T. M. C. Abbott, M. Acevedo, M. Aguena et al., The dark energy survey: Cosmology results with 1500 new high-redshift type Ia supernovae using the full 5-year dataset, Astrophys. J. Lett. 973, L14 (2024).
  82. D. Scolnic, D. Brout, A. Carr et al., The Pantheon+Analysis: The full data set and light-curve release, Astrophys. J. 938, 113 (2022).
  83. D. Brout, D. Scolnic, B. Popovic et al., The Pantheon+Analysis: Cosmological constraints, Astrophys. J. 938, 110 (2022).
  84. D. M. Scolnic, D. Jones, A. Rest et al., The complete light-curve sample of spectroscopically confirmed SNe Ia from Pan-STARRS1 and cosmological constraints from the combined pantheon sample, Astrophys. J. 859, 101 (2018).
  85. M. Betoule, R. Kessler, J. Guy et al., Improved cosmological constraints from a joint analysis of the SDSS-II and SNLS supernova samples, Astron. Astrophys. 568, A22 (2014).
  86. M. Dainotti, G. Bargiacchi, M. Bogdan et al., On the statistical assumption on the distance moduli of Supernovae Ia and its impact on the determination of cosmological parameters, J. High Energy Astrophys. 41, 30 (2024).
  87. M. G. Dainotti, G. Bargiacchi, M. Bogdan, A. Lukasz Lenart, K. Iwasaki, S. Capozziello, B. Zhang, and N. Fraija, Reducing the uncertainty on the Hubble constant up to 35% with an improved statistical analysis: Different best-fit likelihoods for type Ia supernovae, baryon acoustic oscillations, quasars, and gamma-ray bursts, Astrophys. J. 951, 63 (2023).
  88. G. Bargiacchi, M. G. Dainotti, S. Nagataki, and S. Capozziello, Gamma-ray bursts, quasars, baryonic acoustic oscillations, and Supernovae Ia: New statistical insights and cosmological constraints, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 521, 3909 (2023).
  89. A. Gelman and D. B. Rubin, Inference from iterative simulation using multiple sequences, Stat. Sci. 7, 457 (1992).
  90. A. Lewis, getdist: A python package for analysing Monte Carlo samples, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 08 (2025) 025.
  91. A. G. Adame, J. Aguilar, S. Ahlen et al., DESI 2024 VI: Cosmological constraints from the measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2025) 021.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 114, 043512– Published 11 August, 2026
  • Received 14 May 2026
  • Accepted 6 July 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