Dark Energy Constraints and Joint Cosmological Inference from Mutually Inconsistent Observations

Abstract Recent results regarding dark energy are mutually inconsistent under the ΛCDM cosmological model, hinting at the possibility of undiscovered physics. However, the currently accepted cosmological parameters come from a joint inference between observational data sets, a process that is formally invalid for inconsistent observations. We will show that many problems can arise when using joint inference on disagreeing observations such as significantly underestimated margins of error, high dependencies on priors, and sensitivities to boundary constraints. Because we do not know if these inconsistencies arise due to errors in observation, poor statistical techniques, or an improper model, it is difficult to fix these problems. Each scenario in which the analysis method breaks is discussed alternative resampling techniques are explored, demonstrating that ΛCDM should not yet be rejected based on current data.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
Published
2026-10-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stag1989
Primary Topic
Cosmology and Gravitation Theories
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Dark Energy Constraints and Joint Cosmological Inference from Mutually Inconsistent Observations

Radosław Wojtak, Charles Louis Steinhardt
1 links
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
Cosmology and Gravitation Theories
article

Dark Energy Constraints and Joint Cosmological Inference from Mutually Inconsistent Observations

Radosław Wojtak, Charles Louis Steinhardt
article en

Abstract

Abstract Recent results regarding dark energy are mutually inconsistent under the ΛCDM cosmological model, hinting at the possibility of undiscovered physics. However, the currently accepted cosmological parameters come from a joint inference between observational data sets, a process that is formally invalid for inconsistent observations. We will show that many problems can arise when using joint inference on disagreeing observations such as significantly underestimated margins of error, high dependencies on priors, and sensitivities to boundary constraints. Because we do not know if these inconsistencies arise due to errors in observation, poor statistical techniques, or an improper model, it is difficult to fix these problems. Each scenario in which the analysis method breaks is discussed alternative resampling techniques are explored, demonstrating that ΛCDM should not yet be rejected based on current data.

Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
University of Missouri (US), The University of Texas at Austin (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 99%
Cosmology and Gravitation Theories
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon