Comparing LambdaCDM, wCDM, and w0waCDM models with DESI DR2 BAO: Redshift-Resolved Diagnostics and the Role of rd
Seokcheon Lee

TL;DR
This study reanalyzes DESI DR2 BAO data to compare dark energy models, finding that the preference for dynamical dark energy diminishes when fixing the sound horizon, emphasizing the importance of early-universe anchoring.
Contribution
It introduces a robustness test fixing the sound horizon to isolate its impact on dark energy model preferences in BAO data analysis.
Findings
All models fit BAO data well with similar chi2 values.
Weak preference for LCDM over more complex models.
Fixing rd reduces evidence for dynamical dark energy.
Abstract
We reanalyze DESI DR2 baryon acoustic oscillation (BAO) measurements to compare LambdaCDM, wCDM, and w0waCDM. Using DM/rd, DH/rd in seven redshift bins, we reconstruct the covariance and run Markov Chain Monte Carlo in Omegam, h rd, w0, wa. In the BAO-only case, all models fit well (tilde chi2 simeq 0.8 - 1.05). Model-selection metrics show at most weak preference for LCDM; the slightly lower chi2 of w0waCDM is offset by complexity, and the pivoted equation of state is consistent with -1 (omegap = -0.899 pm 0.087 at zp simeq 0.34). These results agree with the DESI DR2 analysis. To assess the role of early-universe information, we add a Gaussian prior on rd from Planck DR3 rather than using the full CMB likelihood. Fixing rd isolates the BAO-ruler calibration and yields no significant evidence for dynamical dark energy. The key discriminator is which early-time anchor is held fixed;…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
