Constraints on growth index parameters from current and future observations

TL;DR

This paper investigates how current and future observational data can constrain the growth index parameters, which are crucial for understanding the nature of gravity and cosmic acceleration, using new parameterizations and simulations.

Contribution

It introduces new redshift-dependent parameterizations of the growth index and demonstrates their effectiveness in constraining models with future data, unlike current data.

Findings

Current data cannot tightly constrain growth parameters.

Future data can significantly rule out incorrect models.

Redshift-dependent parameterizations improve model discrimination.

Abstract

We use current and future simulated data of the growth rate of large scale structure in combination with data from supernova, BAO, and CMB surface measurements, in order to put constraints on the growth index parameters. We use a recently proposed parameterization of the growth index that interpolates between a constant value at high redshifts and a form that accounts for redshift dependencies at small redshifts. We also suggest here another exponential parameterization with a similar behaviour. The redshift dependent parametrizations provide a sub-percent precision level to the numerical growth function, for the full redshift range. Using these redshift parameterizations or a constant growth index, we find that current available data from galaxy redshift distortions and Lyman-alpha forests is unable to put significant constraints on any of the growth parameters. For example both $\Lambda$CDM and flat DGP are allowed by current growth data. We use an MCMC analysis to study constraints from future growth data, and simulate pessimistic and moderate scenarios for the uncertainties. In both scenarios, the redshift parameterizations discussed are able to provide significant constraints and rule out models when incorrectly assumed in the analysis. The values taken by the constant part of the parameterizations as well as the redshift slopes are all found to significantly rule out an incorrect background. We also find that, for our pessimistic scenario, an assumed constant growth index over the full redshift range is unable to rule out incorrect models in all cases. This is due to the fact that the slope acts as a second discriminator at smaller redshifts and therefore provide a significant test to identify the underlying gravity theory.