# Can dark energy be expressed as a power series of the Hubble parameter?

## TL;DR

This paper investigates whether dark energy density can be modeled as a power series of the Hubble parameter and its derivatives, fitting these models to cosmological data to assess their viability and impact on cosmological tensions.

## Contribution

It introduces and tests a class of dynamical dark energy models expressed as power series of Hubble parameters, comparing their fit to observational data against the standard Lambda-CDM model.

## Key findings

- Models with additive constant and dynamical terms fit data better than entropic-force and QCD-ghost models.
- Dynamical models predict lower sigma_8, reducing structure formation tension.
- Predicted H_0 values lie between local and Planck measurements, easing the Hubble tension.

## Abstract

In this work we examine the possibility that the dark energy (DE) density, $\rho_{de}$ can be dynamical and appear as a power series expansion of the Hubble rate (and its derivatives), i.e.$\rho_{de}(H,\dot{H},...)$. For the present universe, however, only the terms $H$, $\dot{H}$ and $H^2$ can be relevant, together with an additive constant term. We fit these models to the current cosmological data on the main observables SNIa+$H(z)$+BAO+LSS+CMB+BBN. Our analysis involves both the background as well as the cosmic perturbation equations. The latter include, apart from the matter density perturbations, also the DE density perturbations. We assume that matter and dynamical DE are separately self-conserved. As a result the equation of state of the DE becomes a nontrivial function of the cosmological redshift, $w_D=w_D(z)$. The particular subset of DE models of this type having no additive constant term in $\rho_{de}$ include the so-called entropic-force and QCD-ghost DE models, as well as the pure linear model $\rho_{de} \sim H$ all of which are strongly disfavored in our fitting analysis. In contrast, the models that include the additive term plus one or both of the dynamical components $\dot{H}$ and $H^2$ appear more favored than the $\Lambda$CDM. In particular, the dynamical DE models provide a value of $\sigma_8\simeq 0.74-0.77$ which is substantially lower than that of the $\Lambda$CDM and hence more in accordance with the observations. This helps to significantly reduce the $\sigma_8$-tension in the structure formation data. At the same time the predicted value for $H_0$ is in between the local and Planck measurements, thus helping to alleviate this tension as well.