Arxiv:2105.05208V2 [Astro-Ph.CO] 18 May 2021 II.2.3

Challenges for ΛCDM : An update

L. Perivolaropoulos1, ∗ and F. Skara1, † 1Department of Physics, University of Ioannina, 45110 Ioannina, Greece (Dated: May 20, 2021) A number of challenges of the standard ΛCDM model has been emerging during the past few years as the accuracy of cosmological observations improves. In this review we discuss in a unified manner many existing signals in cosmological and astrophysical data that appear to be in some tension (2σ or larger) with the standard ΛCDM model as defined by the Planck18 parameter values. In addition to the major well studied 5σ challenge of ΛCDM (the Hubble H0 crisis) and other well known tensions (the growth tension and the lensing amplitude AL anomaly), we discuss a wide range of other less discussed less-standard signals which appear at a lower statistical significance level than the H0 tension (also known as ’curiosities’ in the data) which may also constitute hints towards new physics. For example such signals include cosmic dipoles (the fine structure constant α, velocity and quasar dipoles), CMB asymmetries, BAO Lyα tension, age of the Universe issues, the Lithium problem, small scale curiosities like the core-cusp and missing satellite problems, quasars Hubble diagram, oscillating short range gravity signals etc. The goal of this pedagogical review is to collectively present the current status of these signals and their level of significance, with emphasis to the Hubble crisis and refer to recent resources where more details can be found for each signal. We also briefly discuss possible theoretical approaches that can potentially explain the non-standard nature of some of these signals.

CONTENTS II.2.9. Cosmic chronometers 21 II.2.10. HII galaxy measurements 21 I. Introduction2 II.2.11. Combinations of data 22 II.2.12. The current status - Historic II. Hubble Crisis6 evolution 23 II.1. Methods for measuring H0 6 II.3. Theoretical models 24 II.1.1. Standard candles as probes of II.3.1. Late time deformations of the luminosity distance7 Hubble expansion rate H(z) 24 II.1.2. Sound horizon as standard ruler: II.3.2. Late time modifications - early time calibrators9 Recalibration of the SnIa II.1.3. Time delays: gravitational absolute luminosity 29 lensing 12 II.3.3. Early time modifications 31 II.1.4. Standard sirens: gravitational waves 12 III. Other Tensions - Curiosities 35 II.1.5. Megamaser technique 13 III.1. Growth tension 35 II.1.6. Tully-Fisher relation (TFR) as III.1.1. Methods and data 35 distance indicator. 14 III.1.2. Theoretical models 38 II.1.7. Extragalactic background light III.2. CMB anisotropy anomalies 41 γ-ray attenuation 14 III.2.1. Hints for a closed Universe II.1.8. Cosmic chronometers 15 (CMB vs BAO) 41 II.1.9. HII galaxy measurements 15 III.2.2. Anomalously strong ISW effect 41 II.2. Observational data - Constraints 15 III.2.3. CMB cold spot 42 II.2.1. SnIa 15 III.2.4. Cosmic hemispherical power II.2.2. CMB 16 asymmetry 42 arXiv:2105.05208v2 [astro-ph.CO] 18 May 2021 II.2.3. Baryon acoustic oscillations 17 III.2.5. Quadrupole-octopole II.2.4. Strong gravitational lensing 18 alignment 42 II.2.5. Gravitational waves 20 III.2.6. Lack of large-angle CMB II.2.6. Megamaser data 20 temperature correlations 43 II.2.7. Tully Fisher 20 III.2.7. Anomaly on super-horizon II.2.8. Extragalactic background light scales 43 γ-ray attenuation 21 III.2.8. The lensing anomaly 44 III.2.9. High-low l consistency 44 III.2.10. The preference for odd parity correlations 44 ∗ [email protected] III.3. Cosmic dipoles 44 † [email protected] III.3.1. Velocity radio dipole 45 2

III.3.2. Quasar dipole 46 • There are six independent (free) parameters: the 2 III.3.3. Fine structure constant α baryon ωb = Ω0bh and cold dark matter ωc = 2 −1 dipole 47 Ω0ch energy densities (where h = H0/100 km s III.4. BAO curiosities 47 Mpc−1 is the dimensionless Hubble constant and III.5. Parity violating rotation of CMB linear ΩX ≡ ρX /ρcrit is the density of component X rel- 2 polarization (Cosmic Birefringence) 47 ative to the critical density, ρcrit = 3H /8πG), the III.6. Small-scale curiosities 48 angular diameter distance to the sound horizon at III.7. Age of the Universe 49 last scattering θs, the amplitude As and tilt ns of III.8. The Lithium problem 49 primordial scalar fluctuations and the reionization III.9. Quasars Hubble diagram 50 optical depth τ. III.10. Oscillating signals in short range gravity experiments 50 • The spatial part of the cosmic metric is assumed III.11. Anomalously low baryon temperature 51 to be flat described by the Friedmann-Lemaˆıtre- III.12. Colliding clusters with high velocity 51 Roberson-Walker (FLRW) metric ds2 = dt2 − a(t)2(dr2 + r2dθ2 + r2sin2θdφ2) (1.2) IV. Conclusions-Discussion-Outlook 51 which emerges from the CP. Acknowledgements 57 Assuming this form of the metric and Einstein’s References 57 field equations with a Λ-term we obtain the Fried- mann equations which may be written as a˙ 2 8πGρ + Λc2 I. INTRODUCTION H2 ≡ = (1.3) a2 3 The concordance or standard Λ Cold Dark Matter (ΛCDM) model [1,2] is a well defined, predictive and a¨ 4πG 3p Λc2 = − (ρ + ) + (1.4) simple cosmological model (for a review, see Ref. [3]). It a 3 c2 3 relies on a set of simple assumptions: 1 where a is the scale factor a = 1+z (with z the • The Universe consists of radiation (photons, neutri- redshift). The cosmological constant may also be nos), ordinary matter (baryons and leptons), cold viewed as a cosmic dark energy fluid with equation (non-relativistic) dark matter (CDM) [4–10] being of state parameter responsible for structure formation and cosmologi- p cal constant Λ [2], a homogeneous form of energy w = Λ = −1 (1.5) which is responsible for the late time observed ac- ρΛ celerated expansion. The cosmological constant is where ρΛ and pΛ are the energy density and the currently associated with a dark energy or vac- pressure of the dark energy respectively. uum energy whose density remains constant even in an expanding background (for a review, see Refs. • A primordial phase of cosmic inflation (a period of [1, 11, 12]). rapid accelerated expansion) is also assumed in order to address the horizon and flatness problems • General Relativity (GR) [13] is the correct theory [14–17]. During this period, Gaussian scale in- that describes gravity on cosmological scales. Thus, variant primordial fluctuations are produced from the action currently relevant on cosmological scales quantum fluctuations in the inflationary epoch. reads Fundamental generalizations of the standard ΛCDM Z √ 1 S = d4x −g (R − 2Λ) model may be produced by modifying the defining ac- 16πG tion (1.1) by generalizing the fundamental constants to 1 dynamical variables in the existing action or adding new + F F µν + L (ψ, A) (1.1) 4α µν m terms. Thus the following extensions of ΛCDM emerge: where α is the fine structure constant, G is New- • Promoting Newton’s constant to a dynamical degree of freedom by allowing it to depend on a scalar ton’s constant, Fµν is the electromagnetic field- field Φ as G → G(Φ(r, t)) where the dynamics of Φ strength tensor and Lm is the Lagrangian density is determined by kinetic and potential terms added for all matter fields ψm. to the action. This class of theories is known as • The Cosmological Principle (CP) states that the ’scalar-tensor theories’ with its most general form Universe is statistically homogeneous and isotropic with second order dynamical equations the Horn- in space and matter at sufficiently large scales (& deski theories [18, 19] (for a comprehensive review, 100 Mpc). see Ref. [20, 21]). 3

• Promoting the cosmological constant to a dynami- s−1Mpc−1 [53] while the local measurements using cal degree of freedom by the introduction of a scalar Cepheid calibrators indicate H0 = 74.03 ± 1.42 km field (quintessence) with Λ → V (Φ(r, t)) and the s−1Mpc−1 [57] (4.4σ, 9%). A wide range of local introduction of a proper kinetic term. observations appear to be consistently larger than the Planck/ΛCDM measurement of H0 at various • Allowing for a dynamical Fine Structure Constant levels of statistical significance [58, 59]. Theoretical (Maxwell Dilaton theories) with α → α(Φ(r, t)) models addressing the Hubble tension utilize either [22–26] (for a review, see Ref. [27]). a recalibration of the Planck/ΛCDM standard ruler • Addition of new terms to the action which may be (the sound horizon) assuming new physics before functions of the Ricci scalar, the torsion scalar or the time of recombination [60–62] or a deformation other invariants ((f(R), f(T ),... )) [28–34]. of the Hubble expansion rate H(z) at late times [63, 64] or a recalibration of the SnIa absolute lu- The ΛCDM model has been remarkably successful in ex- minosity due to late time new physics [65, 66] (for plaining most properties of a wide range of cosmologi- a review, see Refs. [67, 68] and for a relevant talk, cal observations including the accelerating expansion of see Ref. [69]). the Universe, [35, 36], the power spectrum and statistical properties of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) • The growth tension (2 − 3σ): Direct mea- anisotropies [37], the spectrum and statistical properties surements of the growth rate of cosmological per- of large scale structures of the Universe [3, 38] and the turbations (Weak Lensing, Redshift Space Distor- observed abundances of different types of light nuclei hy- tions (peculiar velocities), Cluster Counts) indicate drogen, deuterium, helium, and lithium [39–42]. a lower growth rate than that indicated by the Despite of its remarkable successes and simplicity, the Planck/ΛCDM parameter values at a level of about validity of the cosmological standard model ΛCDM is 2−3σ [70–72]. In the context of General Relativity currently under intense investigation (for a comprehen- such lower growth rate would imply a lower mat- sive review, see Ref. [43]). This is motivated by a range ter density and/or a lower amplitude of primor- of profound theoretical and observational difficulties of dial fluctuation spectrum than that indicated by the model. Planck/ΛCDM [73–76]. The most important theoretical difficulties that plague CMB anisotropy anomalies (2 − 3σ): These ΛCDM are the fine tuning [44–46] and coincidence prob- • anomalies include lack of power on large an- lems [47, 48]. The first fundamental problem is associated gular scales, small vs large scales tension (dif- with the fact that there is a large discrepancy between ferent best fit values of cosmological parame- observations and theoretical expectations on the value of ters), cold spot anomaly, hints for a closed Uni- the cosmological constant Λ (at least 60 orders of magni- verse (CMB vs BAO), anomaly on super-horizon tude) [44, 45, 49, 50] and the second is connected to the scales, quadrupole-octopole alignment, anoma- coincidence between the observed vacuum energy density lously strong ISW effect, cosmic hemispherical Ω and the matter density Ω which are approximately Λ m power asymmetry, lensing anomaly, preference for equal nowadays despite their dramatically different evo- odd parity correlations, parity violating rotation of lution properties. The anthropic principle has been con- CMB linear polarization (cosmic birefringence) etc. sidered as a possible solution to these problems. It states (for a review, see Refs. [77, 78]). that these ’coincidences’ result from a selection bias towards the existence of human life in the context of a • Cosmic Dipoles (2 − 4σ): The large scale veloc- multiverse [51, 52]. ity flow dipole [79, 80], the quasar density dipole In addition to the above theoretical challenges, there [81] and the fine structure constant dipole (quasar are signals in cosmological and astrophysical data that spectra) [82, 83] indicate that the validity of the appear to be in some tension (2σ or larger) with the stan- cosmological principle may have to be reevaluated. dard ΛCDM model as defined by the Planck18 parameter values [53]. The most intriguing large scale tensions are • Baryon Acoustic Oscillations (BAO) curiosi- the following (for a recent overview of the main tensions, ties (2.5 − 3σ): There is a discrepancy between see Refs. [54, 55] and for a list of papers, see [56]): galaxy and Lyα BAO at an effective redshift of z ∼ 2.34 [84–86]. • The Hubble crisis (> 4σ): Using a distance ladder approach, the local (late or low redshift) mea- • Small-scale curiosities: Observations on galaxy surements of the Hubble constant H0 are measured scales indicate that the ΛCDM model faces sev- to values that are significantly higher than those in- eral problems (core-cusp problem, missing satellite ferred using the angular scale of fluctuations of the problem, too big to fail problem, angular momen- CMB in the context of the ΛCDM model. Local di- tum catastrophe, satellite planes problem, baryonic rect measurements of H0 are in more than 4.4σ ten- Tully-Fisher relation problem, void phenomenon sion with CMB indirect measurements of H0. The etc.) in describing structures at small scales (for Planck/ΛCDM best fit value is H0 = 67.4 ± 0.5 km a review, see Refs. [87, 88]). 4

• Age of the Universe: The age of the Universe as The well known Hubble tension and the other less dis- obtained from local measurements using the ages cussed curiosities of ΛCDM at a lower statistical signiﬁ- of oldest stars in the Milky Way appears to be cance level may hint towards new physics (for a review, marginally larger and in some tension with the cor- see Ref. [98]). responding age obtained using the CMB Planck18 In the context of the above observational puzzles the data in the context of ΛCDM cosmology [89]. following strategic questions emerge

• The Lithium problem (2−4σ): Measurements • What are the current cosmological and astrophys- of old, metal-poor stars in the Milky Way’s halo ical datasets that include the above non-standard find 5 times less lithium than that BBN predicts signals? [90]. • What is the statistical significance of each signal? • Quasars Hubble diagram (∼ 4σ): The distance Is there a common theoretical framework that may modulus-redshift relation for the sample of 1598 • explain simultaneously many non-standard signals? quasars at higher redshift (0.5 < z < 5.5) is in in some tension with the concordance ΛCDM model These questions will be discussed in what follows. There indicating some hints for phantom late time expan- have been previous works [99, 100] collecting and dis- sion [91–93]. cussing signals in data that are at some statistical level in tension with the standard ΛCDM model but these are Oscillating signals in short range gravity ex- • by now outdated and the more detailed and extended periments: A reanalysis of short range gravity update provided by the present review may be a useful experiments has indicated the presence of an oscil- resource. lating force signal with sub-millimeter wavelength The plan of this review is the following: In the [94, 95]. next section (II) we focus on the Hubble crisis. We • Anomalously low baryon temperature (∼ provide a list of observational probes that can lead to 3.8σ): The Experiment to Detect the Global Epoch measurements of the Hubble constant, point out the of Reionization Signature (EDGES) collaboration current tension level among different probes and discuss [96] using global (sky-averaged) 21-cm absorption some of the possible generic extensions of ΛCDM model signal, reports anomalously low baryon tempera- that can address this tension. In sectionIII we present the current status of other less significant tensions, their ture Tb ≈ 4K at z ≈ 17 (half of its expected value). level of significance and refer to recent resources where • Colliding clusters with high velocity (∼ 6σ): more details can be found for each signal. We also The El Gordo (ACT-CL J0102-4915) galaxy clus- discuss possible theoretical approaches that can explain ter at z = 0.87 is in its formation process which the non-standard nature of these signals. Finally, in occurs by a colision of two subclusters with mass sectionIV we conclude and discuss potential future ratio 3.6 merging at a very high velocity Vinfall ' directions of the reviewed research. 2500km/s. Such cluster velocities at such a redshift are extremely rare in the context of ΛCDM In TableI we list the acronyms used in this review. [97].

Acronym Meaning Acronym Meaning

ACS Advanced Camera for Surveys KiDS Kilo Degree Survey ACT Atacama Cosmology Telescope LAT Large Aperture Telescope AEDGE Atomic Experiments for Dark Matter and LIGO Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Gravity Exploration Observatory AGB Asymptotic Giant Branch LISA Laser Interferometer Space Antenna AGN Active Galactic Nucleus LDE Late Dark Energy AO Adaptive Optics LOS Line-Of-Sight AvERA Average Expansion Rate Approximation LSS Large Scale Structure BAO Baryon Accoustic Oscillations LSST Large Synoptic Survey Telescope BBH Binary Black Holes LwMPT Late w − M Phantom Transition BBN Big Bang Nucleosynthesis MCP Megamaser Cosmology Project BBO Big Bang Observer MCT Multy-Cycle Treasury BH Black Hole MGS Main Galaxy Sample BNS Binary Neutron Stars MM Many Multiplet BOSS Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey NANOGrav North American Nanohertz Observatory for Gravitational-waves BTFR Baryonic Tully Fisher Relation NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration CC Cluster Counts NIR Near-InfraRed 5

CCH Cosmic CHronometric NRAO National Radio Astronomy Observatory CCHP Carnegie–Chicago Hubble Project NS Neutron Star CDI Cold Dark matter Isocurvature NVSS NRAO VLA Sky Survey CDM Cold Dark Matter PEDE Phenomenologically Emergent Dark Energy CE Cosmic Explorer PL Period–Luminosity CFHTLenS Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope Lensing PTAs Pulsar Timing Arrays CL Confidence Level QFT Quantum Field Theory CMB Cosmic Microwave Backgroun QSO Quasi-Stellar Object (quasar) COBE Cosmic Background Explorer ROSAT ROentgen SATellite COSMOGRAIL COSmological MOnitoring of GRAvItational RSD Redshift Space Distortions Lenses CP Cosmological Principle RVM Running Vacuum Model CSA Canadian Space Agency SATs Small Aperture Telescopes DE Dark Energy SBF Surface Brightness Fluctuations DECIGO DECi-hertz Interferometer Gravitational SDSS Sloan Digital Sky Survey wave Observatory DES Dark Energy Survey SH0ES Supernovae H0 for the Equation of State DESI Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument SKA Square Kilometre Array DM Dark Matter SLACS Sloan Lens ACS Survey EBL Extragalactic Background Light SM Standard Model eBOSS Extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic SMBH SuperMassive Black Hole Survey EDE Early Dark Energy SnIa Supernova Type Ia EDGES Experiment to Detect the Global Epoch of SneII Supernovae Type II Reionization Signature EDR Early Data Release SNR Signal-to-Noise Ratio EM ElectroMagnetic SO Simons Observatory EPTA European Pulsar Timing Array SOLME Stanford Optically Levitated Microsphere Experiment eROSITA extended ROentgen Survey with an Imaging SPH Smooth Particle Hydrodynamics Telescope Array ESA European Space Agency SPT South Pole Telescope ET Einstein Telescope STRIDES STRong-lensing Insights into Dark Energy Survey ETHOS Effective THeory Of Structure formation TBTF Too Big To Fail FJ Faber–Jackson TD Time-Delay FLRW Friedmann-Lemaˆıtre-Roberson-Walker TDCOSMO Time-Delay COSMOgraphy FMOS Fiber Multi-Object Spectrograph TFR Tully-Fisher Relation FP Fundamental Plane TGSS TIFR GMRT Sky Survey GAMA Galaxy and Mass Assembly TIFR Tata Instituteof Fundamental Research GAUSS Gravitation And the Universe from large TPCF Two-Point Correlation Functions Scale-Structures GDR Gaia Data Release TRGB Tip of the Red Giant Branch GEDE Generalised Emergent Dark Energy tSZ thermal Sunyaev-Zel’dovich GEHR Giant Extragalactic HII Region UV Ultraviolet GGL Galaxy-Galaxy Lensing UVES Ultraviolet and Visual Echelle Spectrograph GMRT Giant Metrewave Radio Telescope VCDM Vacuum Cold Dark Matter GP Gaussian Process VHE Very High Energy GR General Relativity VIKING VISTA Kilo-Degree Infrared Galaxy GRB Gamma-Ray Burst VIMOS VIsible MultiObject Spectrograph GW Gravitational Waves VIPERS VIMOS Public Extra-galactic Redshift Survey GWTC Gravitational Wave Transient Catalog VISTA Visible and Infrared Survey Telescope for Astronomy HMF Halo Mass Function VLT Very Large Telescope HSC Subaru Hyper Suprime-Cam lensing survey VM Vacuum Metamorphosis HST Hubble Space Telescope VSF Violent Star Formation H0LiCOW H0 Lenses in COSMOGRAIL’s Wellspring VVDS VIMOS-VLT Deep Survey ICM IntraCluster Medium WISE Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer IDE Interacting Dark Energy WL Weak Lensing IGM InterGalactic Medium WMAP Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe ISW Integrated Sachs–Wolfe WtG Weighting the Giant JWST James Webb Space Telescope ZTF Zwicky Transient Facility IndIGO Indian Initiative in Gravitational wave Obser- 2dFGRS 2-degree Field Galaxy Redshift Survey vations consortium 6

IPTA International Pulsar Timing Array 6dFGS 6-degree Field Galaxy Survey KAGRA Kamioka Gravitational

TABLE I: List of used acronyms.

II. HUBBLE CRISIS

II.1. Methods for measuring H0

The measurement of the Hubble constant H0 which is the local expansion rate of the Universe, is of fundamental importance to cosmology. This measurement has improved in accuracy through number of probes (for a review of most well established probes, see Ref. [101]). Distances to cosmological objects constitute the most common way to probe the cosmic metric and the expansion history of the Universe. In this subsection we review the use of the two main cosmological distances used to probe the cosmic expansion history. • Luminosity distance FIG. 1. The luminosity distance is obtained from the appar- Consider a luminous cosmological source of abso- ent and absolute luminosities. lute luminosity L (emitted power) and an observer (Fig.1) at a distance dL from the luminous source. In a static cosmological setup, the power radiated by the luminous source is conserved and distributed 2 in the spherical shell with area 4πdL and therefore the apparent luminosity l (energy ﬂux) detected by the observer is L l = 2 (2.1) 4πdL

Eq. (2.1) defines the quantity dL known as luminosity distance. It is straightforward to show that in an expanding flat Universe, where the energy is FIG. 2. The angular diameter distance obtained from the not conserved due to the increase of the photon angular and physical scales. wavelength and period with time, the luminosity distance can be expressed as [102, 103] A particularly useful standard ruler is the sound Z z 0 dz horizon at recombination calibrated by the peaks dL(z)th = c(1 + z) 0 (2.2) 0 H(z ) of the CMB anisotropy spectrum and observed either directly through the CMB anisotropies or The luminosity distance is an important cosmologi- through its signatures in the large scale structure cal observable that is measured using standard can- (Baryon Acoustic Oscillations (BAO)) (see Subsec- dles (see Subsection II.1.1) tion II.1.2). • Angular diameter distance It is straightforward to show that in an expanding flat Universe the physical angular diameter dis- Consider a source (standard ruler) with a physical tance can be expressed as [102] scale r that subtends an angle θ in the sky (Fig.2). In Euclidean space, assuming that θ is small, the c Z z dz0 D (z) = (2.4) physical angular diameter distance DA is defined A th (1 + z) H(z0) as (e.g. [102, 104]) 0 r The luminosity and angular diameter distances can be D (z) = (2.3) A θ measured using standard candles and standard rulers 7 thus probing the cosmic expansion rate at both the luminosities are correlated with their periods of 2 present time (H(z = 0) ≡ H0) and at higher redshifts variability . Then using the measured distances (H(z)). of the calibrated Cepheid stars the intrinsic luminosity of nearby SnIa residing in the same galaxies as the Cepheids is obtained. This SnIa calibra- II.1.1. Standard candles as probes of luminosity distance tion which fixes M is then used for SnIa at distant galaxies to measure H0 (z ∈ [0.01, 0.1]) and H(z) The luminosity distance to a source may be probed us- (z ∈ [0.01, 2.3]). ing standardizable candles like Type Ia supernovae (SnIa) SnIa-TRGB: Instead of Cepheid variable stars, (z < 1.7) and gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) (0.1 < z < 8.2). • the Tip of the Red Giant Branch (TRGB) stars The apparent magnitude1 m of SnIa in the context of th in the Hertzsprung-Russell diagram [108, 109] and a specified form of H(z), is related to their luminosity Miras [110, 111] (for a review, see Ref. [112]) can distance d (z) of Eq. (2.2) in Mpc as L be used as calibrators of SnIa. The Red Giant stars have nearly exhausted the hydrogen in their cores dL(z) m(z)th = M + 5 log + 25 (2.6) and have just began helium burning (helium flash 10 Mpc phase). Their brightness can be standardized us- Using now the dimensionless Hubble free luminosity dis- ing parallax methods and they can serve as bright tance standard candles visible in the local Universe for the subsequent calibration of SnIa. H d (z) D (z) = 0 L (2.7) L c • SnIa-Miras: Miras (named for the prototype star Mira) are highly evolved low mass variable stars the apparent magnitude can be written as at the tip of asymptotic giant branch (AGB) stars (e.g. [113]). The water megamaser as distance c/H0 indicator (see Subsection II.1.5) can be used to m(z)th = M+5 log10 [DL(z)]+5 log10 +25 (2.8) Mpc calibrate the Mira period–luminosity (PL) relation [110]. Miras with short period (< 400 days) have The use of Eq. (2.8) to measure H0 using the measured low mass progenitors and are present in all galaxy apparent magnitudes of SnIa requires knowledge of the types or in the halos of galaxies, eliminating the value of the SnIa absolute magnitude M which can be ob- necessity for low inclination SnIa host galaxies. tained using calibrators of local SnIa at z < 0.01 (closer than the start of the Hubble flow) in the context of a dis- • SnIa-SBF: Another method to determine the tance ladder (e.g. [105]) using calibrators like Cepheid Hubble constant based on calibration of the peak stars. absolute magnitude of SnIa is the Surface Bright- In the cosmic distance ladder approach each step of the ness Fluctuations (SBF) method [114–117]. SBF distance ladder uses parallax methods and/or the known is a secondary3 luminosity distance indicator that intrinsic luminosity of a standard candle source to deter- uses stars in the old stellar populations (II) and can mine the absolute (intrinsic) luminosity of a more lumi- reach larger distances than Cepheids even inside nous standard candle residing in the same galaxy. Thus the Hubble flow region where the recession velocity highly luminous standard candles are calibrated for the is larger than local peculiar velocities (z > 0.01) next step in order to reach out to high redshift luminosity [118–124]. distances. Assume that a galaxy includes a finite number of II.1.1.1. Calibrators of SnIa stars covering a range of luminosity. Using SBF in SnIa-Cepheid: Trigonometric parallax methods the galaxy image for the determination of its dis- • ¯ (geometric anchors) may be used to calibrate the tance, the ratio L of the second and first moments Cepheid variable star standard candles at the lo- of the stellar luminosity function in the galaxy is ¯ cal Universe (primary distance indicators) whose used along with the mean flux per star l as follows [118, 120] ¯ 2 L d = ¯ (2.9) 1 The apparent magnitude m of an astrophysical source detected 4πl with flux l is defined as l m = −2.5 log10 (2.5) l 0 2 The period–luminosity (PL) relation is also called the Leavitt where l0 is a refernce flux (zero point). The absolute magni- law [106, 107]. tude M of an astrophysical source is the apparent magnitude 3 Nearby Cepheids or stellar population models are used for the the source would have if it was placed at a distance of 10 pc empirical or theoretical calibration of the SBF distances respec- from the observer. tively. 8

where where Ω0m is the matter density parameter today. Using Eqs. (2.2), (2.7) and (2.12), the Hubble free R n(L)L2dL σ2 L¯ = = L (2.10) luminosity distance can be written as R n(L)LdL hLi Z z dz0 D (z, Ω ) = (1 + z) where n(L) is the expectation number of stars with L 0m 1/2 0 [Ω (1 + z0)3 + (1 − Ω )] luminosity L. Thus SBF can be viewed as provid- 0m 0m (2.13) ing an average brightness. A galaxy with double A key assumption in the use of SnIa in the measurement distance appears with double smoothness due to of H and H(z) is that they are standardizable and af- the effect of averaging. 0 ter proper calibration they have a fixed absolute magni- An independent method to determine the Hubble con- tude independent of redshift5. This assumption has been stant utilizes Type II supernovae (SneII) as cosmic dis- tested in Refs. [156–165]. tance indicators [125]. The use of SneII as standard can- Using the degenerate combination dles is motivated by the fact that they are more abundant c/H0 than SnIa [126, 127] (although 1-2 mag fainter [128]) and M = M + 5 log10 + 25 (2.14) are produced by different stellar populations than SnIa Mpc which are more difficult to standardize. SneII progenitors into Eq. (2.8) we obtain (red super giant stars) however are better understood than those of SnIa. m(z, M, H0, Ω0m)th = M(M,H0) + 5 log10 [DL(z, Ω0m)] Different SneII distance-measurement techniques have (2.15) been proposed and tested. These include, the expand- The theoretical prediction (2.15) may now be used to ing photosphere method [129–131], the spectral-fitting compare with the observed mobs data and to obtain the expanding atmosphere method [132, 133], the standard- best fits for the parameters M and Ω0m. Using the max- ized candle method [134], the photospheric magnitude imum likelihood analysis the best fit values for these pa- method [135] and the photometric color method [136]. rameters may be found by minimizing the quantity For example, the standardized candle method is based 2 X [mobs,i − mth(zi; M, Ω0m)] on the relation between the luminosity and the expan- χ2(M, Ω ) = (2.16) sion velocity of the photosphere [134, 137–139]. 0m σ2 i i In addition to SnIa and SneII, gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) are widely proposed as standard candles to The results from the recent analysis of Ref. [158] using trace the Hubble diagram at high redshifts [140– the latest SnIa (Pantheon) data [166] (consisting of 1048 142]. However gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) distance datapoints in the redshift range 0.01 < z < 2.3 sorting calibration is not easy and various cosmology indepen- them from lowest to highest redshift and dividing them in dent methods (e.g. [143]) or phenomenological relations four equal uncorrelated bins) in the context of a ΛCDM (e.g. [144, 145]) have been proposed for their calibration. model are shown in Figs.3 and4. 6 An oscillating signal for M and Ω0m (2σ) is apparent in Fig.4 and its statis- II.1.1.2. Using SnIa to measure H0 and H(z): tical significance may be quantified using simulated data The best fit values of the parameter H0 and the deceler- [160, 161]. 4 ation parameter q0 may be obtained [146] using local The presence of large scale inhomogeneities at low z distance ladder measurements (e.g. Cepheid calibration including voids or a supercluster [167] can be a plausi- up to z ' 0.01) to measure directly M, low z measure- ble physical explanation for this curious behavior. In the ments of the SnIa apparent magnitude m(z) and a kine- context of a local void model the analysis of [158] indi- matic local expansion of D (z)(z < 0.1) as (e.g. [147]) L cated that the value of H0 increases by 2−3% which is less 1 than the 9% required to address the Hubble tension. The DL(z, q0) = z 1 + (1 − q0)z (2.11) bias and systematics induced by such inhomogeneities on 2 the Hubble diagram within a well-posed fully relativistic framework (light cone averaging formalism [168]) has Alternatively, q0 may be fixed to its ΛCDM value q0 = been discussed in [169]. −0.55 and H0 may be fit as a single parameter [57, 148, 149]. Using higher z SnIa the best fit parameters of ΛCDM may be obtained by fitting the ΛCDM expansion rate 5 The possibility for intrinsic luminosity evolution of SnIa with H(z) redshift was first pointed out by Ref. [150]. Also, the assumption that the luminosity of SnIa is independent of host galaxy 2 2 3 H (z) = H0 Ω0m(1 + z) + (1 − Ω0m) (2.12) properties (e.g. host age, host morphology, host mass) and local star formation rate has been discussed in Refs. [151–155]. 6 For M = −19.24 as indicated by Cepheid calibrators [146] of SnIa at z < 0.01 and the SnIa local determination H0 = 2 74 km s−1Mpc−1 [57] Ref. [158] finds M = 23.80 which is con- 4 q is the deceleration parameter q ≡ − 1 d a(t) 0 0 H2 dt2 0 t=t0 sistent with the full Pantheon SnIa best fit shown in Fig.3. 9

FIG. 3. The 1σ − 3σ confidence contours in the parametric space (Ω0m, M). The blue contours correspond to the 1σ − 3σ full Pantheon dataset (1048 SnIa datapoints) best fit, while the red contours describe the 1σ − 3σ confidence contours of the four bins (from left to right). The black points represent the best fit of each bin, while the green dot represents the best fit value indicated by the full Pantheon dataset (Ω0m = 0.285 and M = 23.803) (from Ref. [158]).

FIG. 4. The best ﬁt values of M (left panel) and Ω0m (right panel) as well as the 1σ errors for the four bins, including the systematic uncertainties. This oscillating behaviour relatively improbable in the context of constant underlying M and Ω0m (from Ref. [158]).

II.1.2. Sound horizon as standard ruler: early time relation function ξ(s)7 as illustrated in Fig.7 or equiva- calibrators lently as damped oscillations in the LSS power spectrum [171, 175–177]. Before recombination (z > 1100), the primeval plasma The characteristic BAO scale is also imprinted in the of coupled baryons to photons (baryon-photon fluid) os- Lyman-α (Lyα) forest absorption lines of neutral hydro- cillates as spherical sound waves emanating from baryon gen in the intergalactic medium (IGM) detected in quasar gas perturbations are driven by photon pressure. At re- (QSO) spectra. combination when the Universe has cooled enough the The measured angular scale of the sound horizon θs electrons and protons combine to form hydrogen (e.g. [172]), photons decouple from baryons and propagate freely since the pressure becomes negligible. Thus the 7 The correlation function is defined as the excess probability of spherical sound wave shells of baryons become frozen. one galaxy to be found within a given distance of another. Using This process which was first detected in the galaxy power the Landy-Szalay estimator [174] this function can be computed spectrum by Refs. [171, 173] is illustrated in Fig.5. It in- [171] flicts a unique Baryon Acoustic Oscillations (BAO) scale DD(s) − 2DR(s) + RR(s) ξ(s) ≡ hδ(x)δ(x + s)i = (2.17) on the CMB anisotropy spectrum peaks shown in Fig.6 RR(s) and on the matter large scale structure (LSS) power spec- where s is the comoving galaxy separation distance and DD(s), trum on large scales at the radius of the sound horizon RR(s) and DR(s) correspond to the number of galaxy pairs with (the distance that the sound waves have traveled before separations s in real-real, random-random and real-random cat- recombination). This scale emerges as a peak in the cor- alogs, respectively. 10

FIG. 5. The snapshots show the radial mass proﬁle of perturbation as a function of the comoving radius of an initially point- like overdensity located at the origin for redshifts z = 6824, 1440, 848, 478, 79, 10. The time after the Big Bang are given in each snapshots. The black, blue, red, and green lines correspond to the dark matter, baryons, photons, and neutrinos (all perturbations are fractional for that species), respectively. The top snapshots are for the early time before recombination where the overdensities in photons and baryons evolve together, the middle snapshots for soon after but close to recombination where the baryons freeze at the location reached with the photons forming a thick spherical shell, and the bottom snapshots are for long after recombination where the baryon overdensities start to gravitationally grow like dark matter overdensities (from Ref. [170]). 11

TT FIG. 6. The Planck18 CMB angular power spectrum Dl ≡ TT l(l + 1)/(2π)Cl (top) and residual angular power spectrum (bottom) of temperature fluctuations as a function of multipole moment l. The light blue line in the upper panel is the best-fitting to the Planck TT, TE, EE+lowE+lensing likelihoods assuming the base-ΛCDM cosmology. The red points FIG. 7. The signature of baryonic acoustic oscillations in correspond to the binned Planck data. The lowest multipole galaxy two-point correlation function ξ(s) as measured by range (l ≤ 30) is dominated by cosmic variance (approximated Ref. [171] using the luminous red galaxy samples of the as Gaussian), while positions and amplitudes of the acoustic Sloan Digital Sky Survey. The data show the existence of a peaks are accurately constrained (from Ref. [53]). baryonic acoustic peak in the galaxy correlation function ξ(s) around the comoving separation scale 100 h−1Mpc. The solid green, red, and blue lines correspond to model predictions 2 with Ω0mh = 0.12, 0.13 and 0.14, respectively. All models at the drag epoch when photon pressure vanishes can 2 be used to probe the Hubble expansion rate using the are taken to have the same Ω0bh = 0.024 and n = 0.98. The magenta line corresponds to a model with no baryons standard ruler relation (e.g [178, 179]) 2 and Ω0mh = 0.105, which has no acoustic peaks (from Ref. [171]). rs θs = (2.18) dA speed in the photon-baryon fluid given by [181, 182] 0 DA R z dz where dA ≡ ≡ (1 + z) DA = c 0 is the co- a 0 H(z ) c c moving angular diameter distance to last scattering (at c = = (2.20) s r r redshift z ≈ 1100) and rs is the radius of sound horizon 3 1 + 3ρb 3 1 + 3ωb a at last scattering. 4ργ 4ωγ

The radius rs of the sound horizon at last scattering can be calculated by the distance that sound can travel The expansion rate H(z) depends on the ratio of the from the Big Bang, t = 0, to time td at the drag epoch matter density to radiation density and the sound speed when the photon pressure can no longer prevent gravita- determined by the baryon-to-photon ratio. Both the tional instability in baryons. This happens shortly after matter-to-radiation ratio and the baryon-to-photon ratio the time ts of the last scattering when the optical depth can be estimated from the details of the acoustic peaks due to Thomson scattering reaches unity [175]. Thus in CMB anisotropy power spectrum (e.g. [183]). Thus [180] the CMB is possible to lead to an independent determination of the radius of sound horizon. Alternatively an independent determination of the radius of sound horizon Z td c (a) Z ∞ c (z) r = s dt = s dz = can obtained using primordial deuterium measurements s a(t) H(z; ρ , ρ , ρ ) 0 zd b γ c [86, 184]. Now using the Eqs. (2.4) and (2.18) we can Z ad cs(a) write the angular size of the sound horizon as = 2 da (2.19) 0 a H(a; ρb, ργ , ρc) H0rs θs = 0 (2.21) c R zd dz where the drag redshift zd corresponds to time td, ρb, ρc 0 E(z0) and ργ denote the densities for baryon, cold dark matter and radiation (photons) respectively and cs is the sound where E(z) is the dimensionless normalized Hubble pa- 12 rameter and for a ﬂat ΛCDM model is given by

H(z) 3 1/2 E(z) ≡ = Ω0m(1 + z) + (1 − Ω0m) (2.22) H0 Eq. (2.21) indicates that there is a degeneracy between rs, H0 and E(z). Thus H0 can not be derived using the BAO data alone which constrain E(z) and the degeneracy is broken when rs is fixed using either CMB power spectra [185] or deuterium abundance [86, 184]. For example rs = 147.05 ± 0.30Mpc is inferred from Planck18 TT,TE,EE+lowE CMB data [53]. Using the independent determination of rs, measuring the angular acoustic scale θs from the location of the first acoustic peak in the CMB spectrum and fitting the integral in Eq. (2.21) using low z BAO or SnIa data, the Hubble FIG. 8. Schematic illustration of a typical gravitational lens constant H0 can be derived. This is the “inverse distance system. ladder” approach [180, 186] which uses the sound horizon scale calibrated by the CMB peaks or by Big Bang Nucleosynthesis (BBN) [187] instead of the SnIa absolute diameter distance between the lens and the source and magnitude M calibrated by Cepheid stars to obtain H0. φ(θ, β) is the Fermat potential (e.g. [198]) The deformation of the expansion rate H(a) before re- (θ − β)2 combination using additional components like early dark φ(θ, β) = − ψ(θ) (2.24) energy that increase H(a) in Eq. (2.19) and thus de- 2 crease rs and increase the predicted value of H0 for fixed with ψ(θ) the lensing potential at the image direction. measured θs in Eq. (2.21), has been used as a possible The time delay ∆tAB in Eq. (2.23) is thus connected to approach to the solution of the Hubble crisis. A chal- the time delay distance defined as (e.g. [198, 199]) lenge for this class of models is the required fine-tuning so that the evolution of H(z) returns quickly to its stan- 1 + z D (OL)D (OS) D = L A A (2.25) dard form after recombination for consistency with lower ∆t c D (LS) z cosmological probes and growth measurements [188]. A The assumed increase of H(z) at early times has been This distance is inversely proportional to H0 claimed to lead to a worsened growth tension [189] as discussed below even though the issue is under debate 1 D∆t ∝ (2.26) [190, 191]. H0

and thus its measurement constrains H0. Strongly lensed II.1.3. Time delays: gravitational lensing quasars (bright and time variable sources) lensed by a foreground lensing mass [58, 200] are used to measure the above observable time delay on cosmologically inter- Gravitational lensing time-delay cosmography can be esting scales. The inference of H from D is relatively used to measure H . This approach was first pro- 0 ∆t 0 insensitive to the assumed background cosmology. posed by Ref. [192] and recently implemented by Refs. [58, 193, 194] (for clear reviews, see Refs. [195, 196]). Strong gravitational lensing [192] arises from the gravi- II.1.4. Standard sirens: gravitational waves tational deflection of light rays of a background source when an intervening lensing mass distribution (e.g. a massive galaxy or cluster of galaxies) exists along the An independent and potentially highly effective ap- line of sight. The light rays go through different paths proach for the measurement of H(z) and the Hubble such that multiple images of the background source ap- constant is the use of gravitational wave (GW) obser- pear around the intervening lens [197]. vations and in particular those GW bursts that have an electromagnetic counterpart (standard sirens) [201–205]. The time delay ∆tAB between two images θA and θB by a single deflector originating from the same source at In analogy with the traditional standard candles, it is angle β shown in Fig.8 is given as [198] possible to use standard sirens to directly measure the luminosity distance dL of the GW source. 1 + zL DA(OL)DA(OS) Standard sirens involve the combination of a GW ∆tAB = [φ(θA, β) − φ(θB, β)] c DA(LS) signal and its independently observed electromagnetic (2.23) (EM) counterpart. Such counterpart may involve short where zL is the lens redshift, DA(OL) is the angular di- gamma-ray bursts (SGRBs) signal from binary neutron ameter distance to the lens, DA(OS) is the angular di- star mergers [206] or associated isotropic kilonova emis- ameter distance to the source, DA(LS) is the angular sion [207, 208]) and enables the immediate identification 13 of the host galaxy. In contrast to traditional standard distance can then be obtained from the relation candles such as SnIa calibrated by Cepheid variables, 1 standard sirens do not require any form of cosmologi- d(z) = dL(z) (2.28) cal distance ladder. Instead they are calibrated in the 1 + z context of general relativity through the observed GW For nearby sources, the recession velocity using the Hub- waveform. ble’s law is determined by the expression The simultaneous observations of the GW signal and its EM counterpart (multi-messenger observations) of υ(z) = H0d(z) (2.29) nearby compact-object merger leads to a measurement of the luminosity distance which depends on the inclination and using Eqs. (2.2), (2.7) and (2.28) is given by angle of the binary orbit with respect to the line of sight H d (z) cD (z) Z z dz0 and the redshift (measured using photons) of the host 0 L L υ(z) = = = cH0 0 (2.30) galaxy respectively. An EM counterpart detected with 1 + z 1 + z 0 H(z ) a GW observation can further constrain the inclination At low redshifts using the local expansion Eq. (2.11) we angle and may also indicate the source’s sky position and obtain the GW merger’s time and phase (e.g. [205]). In the case of GW events with small enough local- cz 1 υ(z) = 1 + (1 − q )z (2.31) ization volumes without an observed EM counterpart 1 + z 2 0 (dark sirens) [209] a statistical analysis over a set of potential host galaxies within the event localization re- which is approximated for d ≤ 100 Mpc (or z ≤ 0.03 ) as gion may provide redshift information. A candidate for such statistical method is a merger of stellar-mass bi- υ(z) = cz = H0d (2.32) nary black holes (BBH) which is usually not expected Using Eqs. (2.29) and (2.31), the equation for the deter- to result in bright EM counterparts unless it takes place mination of H0 as a function of observables, z and d is in significantly gaseous environment [210]. For example, (e.g. [224]) GW190521 [211] is a possible candidate with EM counterpart corresponding to a stellar-origin BBH merger in cz 1 H = 1 + (1 − q )z (2.33) active galactic nucleus (AGN) disks [212] detected by the 0 d(1 + z) 2 0 Zwicky Transient Facility (ZTF) [213, 214]. Alternatively, in the absence of an EM counterpart where the deceleration parameter may be set by a fit to the redshift can be determined by exploiting informa- the GW data or may be fixed to its Planck/ΛCDM best tion on the properties of the source (e.g. the knowledge fit form (q0 = −0.55). of neutron star equation of state) to derive frequency- dependent features in the waveform [215] or using the gravitational waveform to determine the redshift of the II.1.5. Megamaser technique mass distribution of the sources [216, 217]. The luminosity distance-redshift relation Eq. (2.2) de- Observations of water megamasers which are found termines the Universe’s expansion history and the as- in the accretion disks around supermassive black holes sociated cosmological parameters including the Hubble (SMBHs) in active galactic nuclei (AGN) have been constant H0 [218, 219]. In particular using the mergers demonstrated to be powerful one-step geometric probes of binary neutron stars (BNS), or a binary of a neutron for measuring extragalactic distances [225]. star with a stellar-mass black hole (NS-BH), which are Assuming a Keplerian circular orbit around the SMBH, excellent standard sirens, both the luminosity distance the centripetal acceleration and the velocity of a masing (from the gravitational wave waveform) and redshift of cloud are given as [225] the host galaxy (from the electromagnetic counterpart) can be measured. V 2 A = (2.34) Using a BNS or a NS-BH merger, the distance to the r source can be estimated from the detected amplitude hhi (r.m.s. - averaged over detector and source orientations) r GM of the GW signal by the expression [201, 220–223] V = (2.35) r d = Cf −2hhi−1τ −1 (2.27) where G is the Newton’s constant, M is the mass of the where f is the gravitational wave frequency, τ ≡ f/f˙ is central supermassive black hole, and r is the distance of the timescale of frequency change, C is a known numer- a masing cloud from the supermassive black hole. ical constant. Assuming a flat8 Universe the luminosity

χ χ 8 1 1 In an open (closed) Universe the distance in Hubble’s law is given d(z) = 1+z sinh χ dL(z)(d(z) = 1+z sin χ dL(z)) 14

The angular scale θ subtended by r is given by relation has been measured for hundreds of galaxies. The r rotation speed Vc can be measured independently of dis- θ = (2.36) tance while the total baryonic mass M may be used as d b distance indicator since it is connected to the intrinsic where d is the distance to the galaxy. luminosity. Thus, the BTFR is a useful cosmic distance Thus, from the velocity and acceleration measurements indicator approximately independent of redshift and thus obtained from the maser spectrum, the distance to the can be used to obtain H0 (e.g.[237]). maser may be determined The BTFR has a smaller amount of scatter with a cor- V 2 responding better accuracy as a distance indicator than d = (2.37) the classic TF relation [236]. In addition the BTFR re- Aθ covers two decades in velocity and six decades in mass where A is measured from the change in Doppler velocity [232, 235, 238–241]. with time by monitoring the maser spectrum on month A simple heuristic analytical derivation for the BTFR timescales. Using Hubble’s law the Hubble constant may is obtained [242] by considering a star rotating with ve- be approximated as [225] locity v in a circular orbit of radius R around a central υ mass M. Then the star velocity is connected with the H ≈ (2.38) 0 d central mass as where υ is the measured recessional velocity. 2 4 2 2 In order to constrain the Hubble constant the Mega- v = GMb/R =⇒ v = (GMb/R) ∼ Mb SG maser Cosmology Project (MCP) [226] uses angular (2.40) diameter distance measurements to disk megamaser- where G is Newton’s constant and S the surface density 2 hosting galaxies well into the Hubble ﬂow (50−200 Mpc). S ≡ M/R which may be shown to be approximately These distances are independent of standard candle dis- constant [243]. From Eqs. 2.39 and 2.40 we have tances and their measurements do not rely on distance −2 −1 ladders, gravitational lenses or the CMB [227]. Early Ac ∼ G S (2.41) measurements of H0 using masers tended to favor lower values of H ' 67 km s−1Mpc−1 while more recent mea- 0 which indicates that the zero point intercept of the BTFR surements favor higher values H ' 73 km s−1Mpc−1 as 0 can probe both galaxy formation dynamics (through e.g. shown e.g. in TableII. S) and possible fundamental constant dynamics (through G)[244]. II.1.6. Tully-Fisher relation (TFR) as distance indicator.

The Tully-Fisher (TF) method is a historically useful distance indicator based on the empirical relation be- II.1.7. Extragalactic background light γ-ray attenuation tween the intrinsic total luminosity (or the stellar mass) 9 of a spiral galaxy and its rotation velocity (or neutral This method is based on the fact that the extragalac- hydrogen (HI) 21 cm emission line width) [230]. This tic background light (EBL) which is a diffuse radiation method has been used widely in measuring extragalactic field that fills the Universe from ultraviolet through in- distances (e.g. [231]). frared wavelength induces opacity for very high energy The Baryonic Tully Fisher relation (BTFR) [232–235] (VHE) photons (≥ 30 GeV ) induced by photon-photon connects the rotation speed Vc and total baryonic mass interaction [245]. In this process a γ-ray and an EBL Mb (stars plus gas) of a spiral galaxy as photon in the intergalactic medium may annihilate and produce an electron-positron pair [246]. The induced at- M = A V s (2.39) b c c tenuation in the spectra of γ-ray sources is characterized where s (with s ≈ 3 − 4 [232, 235, 236]) is a parameter by an optical depth τγγ that scales as nσT l (where n is the photon density of the EBL, σ is the Thomson cross and log Ac is the zero point in a log-log BTFR plot. This T section, and l is the distance from the γ-ray source to Earth). The cosmic evolution and the matter content of the Universe determine the γ-ray optical depth and 9 Similarly, in the case of a elliptical galaxy the Faber–Jackson the amount of γ-ray attenuation along the line of sight (FJ) empirical power-law relation L ∝ σγFJ (where L is the lu- [247, 248]. Thus a derivation of H0 can be obtained by minosity of galaxy, σ the velocity dispersion of its stars and γFJ is a index close to 4) [228] can be used as a distance indicator. measuring the γ-ray optical depth with the γ-ray tele- The FJ relation is the projection of the fundamental plane (FP) scopes [249]. This derivation is independent and comple- s1 s2 of elliptical galaxies which defined as Reff ∝ σ Ieff (where mentary to that based on the distance ladder and cosmic Reff is the effective radius and Ieff is the mean surface bright- microwave background (CMB) and seems to favor lower ness within R )[229]. eff values of H0 as shown in TableII. 15

II.1.8. Cosmic chronometers and σ(Hβ) has a small enough scatter to define a cosmic distance indicator (that can be utilized out to z ∼ 4) Cosmic chronometers are objects whose evolution his- independently of redshift and can be approximated as tory is known. For instance such objects are some types [260–268] of galaxies. The observation of these objects at different redshifts and the corresponding differences in their evo- log L(Hβ) = ν log σ(Hβ) + κ (2.43) lutionary state has been used to obtain the value of H(z) where ν and κ are constants representing the slope and at each redshift z. the logarithmic luminosity at log σ(Hβ) = 0. The cosmic chronometer technique for the determina- From Eq. (2.1) the luminosity L(Hβ) is given by tion of H0 was originally suggested in Ref. [250] and is based on the quasi-local (0.07 z 2.36) measurements 2 . . L(Hβ) = 4πdLl(Hβ) (2.44) along the Hubble flow of the Hubble parameter expressed as Thus using Eq. (2.43), the distance modulus µ ≡ m − M of an HIIG can be obtained [263–268] 1 dz H(z) = − (2.42) 1 + z dt µ = 2.5 [ν log σ(Hβ) + κ − log l(Hβ)] − 100.2 (2.45) Thus, the expansion rate may be obtained by measur- obs ing the age difference ∆t between two old and passively 10 This observational distance modulus can be compared evolving galaxies which are separated by a small redshif with the theoretical distance modulus. From the Eq. interval ∆z, to infer the dz/dt (see also Refs. [251, 252]). (2.6) this is given This approach determines the H0 = H(z = 0) independent of the early-Universe physics and is not based on the distance ladder (e.g. [250, 253–256]). The es- dL(z) µ(z)th = 5 log10 + 25 (2.46) timated H0 values are more consistent with the values Mpc estimated from recent CMB and BAO data than those values estimated from SnIa. The value of H0 can not Using now the dimensionless Hubble free luminosity dis- be derived using the cosmic chronometers observations tance Eq. (2.7) this can be written as alone because there is a background degeneracy between c/H0 H0 and Ω0m and this degeneracy is broken when these µ(z)th = 5 log10 [DL(z)] + 5 log10 + 25 (2.47) observations are combined. Mpc In order to obtain the best fit values for the parame- II.1.9. HII galaxy measurements ters Ω0m and H0 this theoretical prediction may now be used to compared with the observed µobs data. Using the maximum likelihood analysis the best fit values for The ionized hydrogen gas (HII) galaxies (HIIG) emit these parameters may be found in the usual manner by massive and compact bursts generated by the violent star minimizing the quantity formation (VSF) in dwarf irregular galaxies. The HIIG measurements can be used to probe the background evo- 2 X [µobs,i − µth(zi; H0, Ω0m)] lution of the Universe. This method of H determination χ2(H , Ω ) = (2.48) 0 0 0m ε2 is based on the standard candle calibration provided by i i a L − σ (luminosity-velocity dispersion) relation. This relation exists in HIIGs and Giant extragalactic HII re- where εi is the uncertainty of the ith measurement. gions (GEHR) in nearby spiral and irregular galaxies. The turbulent emission line ionized gas velocity disper- II.2. Observational data - Constraints sion σ of the prominent Balmer lines11 H-alpha (Hα) and H-beta (Hβ) relates with its integrated emission line luminosity L [257–266]. The relationship between L(Hβ) The Hubble constant H0 values at 68% CL through direct and indirect measurements obtained by the different methods described in subsection II.1 are shown in Table II and described in more detail below in Fig.9. 10 These galaxies form only a few new stars and become fainter and redder with time. The time that has elapsed since they stopped star formation can be deduced. II.2.1. SnIa 11 The Balmer series, or Balmer lines is one of a set of six named series describing the spectral line emissions of the hydrogen atom. This is characterized by the electron transitioning from n ≥ 3 to It is known that SnIa are very bright standardiz- n = 2 (where n is the principal quantum number of the electron. able candles used as luminosity distance indicators The transitions n = 3 to n = 2 and n = 4 to n = 2 are called [35, 36, 269]. Surveys can indicate the distance-redshift H-alpha and H-beta respectively. relation of SnIa by measuring their peak luminosity that 16 is tightly correlated with the shape of their characteristic systematics) ± 1.9 (ZP) km s−1Mpc−1 for funda- light curves (luminosity as a function of time after the mental mode pulsators only (where ZP is the sec- explosion) and the redshifts of host galaxies. The latest ond Gaia data release (GDR2) [279] parallax zero and largest SnIa dataset available that incorporates point (see SectionIV)). data from six different surveys is the Pantheon sample consisting of a total of 1048 SnIa in the redshift range • SnIa-TRGB: The Carnegie–Chicago Hubble 0.01 < z < 2.3 (the number of SnIa with z > 1.4 is only Project (CCHP) using calibration of SnIa with six) [166]. the TRGB method estimates H0 = 69.8 ± 0.8 (±1.1%stat) ± 1.7 (±2.4%sys) km s−1Mpc−1 Calibration of SnIa [280] and a revision of their measurements has lead to H0 = 69.6 ± 0.8 (±1.1%stat) ± 1.7 (±2.4%sys) −1 −1 • SnIa-Cepheid: Using the analysis of the Hub- km s Mpc [109]. Using the same method to ble Space Telescope (HST) observations [105] the calibrate the SnIa distance ladder, the SH0ES team −1 −1 Hubble constant H0 value has been measured finds H0 = 72.4 ± 2 km s Mpc [281]. from Cepheid-calibrated supernovae (using 70 long- More recently Ref. [282] has reported a measure- −1 −1 period Cepheids in the Large Magellanic Cloud) ment of H0 = 72.1 ± 2.0 km s Mpc using the by the Supernovae H0 for the Equation of State TRGB distance indicator calibrated from the Euro- (SH0ES) of dark energy collaboration [57, 148, pean Space Agency (ESA) Gaia mission Early Data 149]. The analysis by the SH0ES Team using Release 3 (EDR3) trigonometric parallax of Omega this local model-independent measurement refers Centauri [271]. −1 −1 H0 = 74.03 ± 1.42 km s Mpc , which results in 4.4σ tension with the value estimated by CMB • SnIa-Miras: Calibration of SnIa in the host NGC Planck18 [53] assuming the ΛCDM model while in 1559 galaxy with the Miras method using a sample latest analysis by SH0ES Team [270] using the re- of 115 oxygen-rich Miras12 discovered in maser host cently released Gaia Early Data Release 3 (EDR3) NGC 4258 galaxy, has lead to a measurement of the −1 −1 parallaxes [271] and reaching 1.8% precision by im- Hubble constant as H0 = 73.3 ± 4 km s Mpc proving the calibration a value of H0 = 73.2±1.3 is [111]. obtained, a 4.2σ tension with the prediction from Planck18 CMB observations. Ref. [66] has pointed • SnIa-SBF: Calibrating the SnIa luminosity with SBF method and extending it into the Hubble flow out that this H0 crisis is related to the mismatch between the SnIa absolute magnitude calibrated by by using a sample of 96 SnIa in the redshift range Cepheids at z < 0.01 [146, 272] 0.02 < z < 0.075, extracted from the Combined Pantheon Sample has lead to the measurement −1 −1 M < = −19.2334 ± 0.0404 (2.49) H0 = 70.50 ± 2.37 (stat)±3.38 (sys) km s Mpc by Ref. [116]. Previously Ref. [115] combining and the SnIa absolute magnitude using the para- distance measurement with the corrected recession metric free inverse distance ladder calibrating SnIa velocity of NGC 4993 reported a Hubble constant −1 −1 absolute magnitude using the sound horizon scale H0 = 71.9 ± 7.1 km s Mpc . A new measure- [273] ment of the Hubble constant H0 = 73.3 ± 0.7 ± 2.4km s−1Mpc−1 has recently been obtained based M > = −19.401 ± 0.027 (2.50) on a set of 63 SBF [117] distances extending out to 100 Mpc.

Thus a transition in the absolute magnitude with SneII have also been used for the determination of H0. amplitude ∆M ' 0.2 may provide a solution to this Using 7 SneII as cosmological standardisable candles with crisis (see Subsection II.3.2 and Refs. [66, 274]). host-galaxy distances measured from Cepheid variables Alternatively if this discrepancy is not due to sys- or the TRGB the Hubble constant was measured to be +5.2 −1 −1 tematics [67, 275], it could be an indication of in- H0 = 75.8−4.9 km s Mpc [125]. correct estimate of the sound horizon scale due e.g. to early dark energy [276] or to late phantom dark energy [63]. II.2.2. CMB Ref. [277] analysing the HST data, using Cepheids The measurement of the Hubble constant H using as distance calibrators reports H0 = 73.48 ± 1.66 0 km s−1Mpc−1. In Ref. [278] by adopting compan- the sound horizon at recombination as standard ruler ion and average cluster parallaxes in place of direct calibrated by the CMB anisotropy spectrum is model Cepheid parallaxes revised values have been derived, H0 = 72.8±1.9 (statistical +systematics)± 1.9 (ZP) km s−1Mpc−1 when all Cepheids are 12 Miras can be divided into oxygen- and carbon-rich Miras. considered and H0 = 73.0 ± 1.9 (statistical + 17 dependent and is based on assumptions about the na- sorption lines of neutral hydrogen in the intergalactic ture of dark matter and dark energy as well as well medium (IGM) detected in quasar (QSO) spectra us- as on an uncertain list of relativistic particles. The ing the complete eBOSS survey. The measurement of best fit value obtained by the Planck18/ΛCDM CMB BAO scale using first the auto-correlation of Lyα func- temperature, polarization, and lensing power spectra is tion [302–304] and then the Lyα-quasar cross-correlation −1 −1 H0 = 67.36 ± 0.54 km s Mpc [53]. The measure- function [305, 306] or both the auto- and cross-correlation ments of the CMB from the combination Atacama Cos- functions [307] pushed BAO measurements to higher red- mology Telescope (ACT) [283] and Wilkinson Microwave shifts (z ∼ 2.4). Recent studies present BAO measure- Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) estimated the Hubble con- ments from the Lyα using the eBOSS sixteenth data re- −1 −1 stant to be H0 = 67.6±1.1 km s Mpc and from ACT lease (DR16) [308] of the SDSS IV (e.g. [307]). −1 −1 alone to be H0 = 67.9 ± 1.5 km s Mpc [284]. As discussed in subsection II.1.2 BAO data alone cannot constrain H0 because BAO observations measure the combination H0rs rather than H0 and rs individually II.2.3. Baryon acoustic oscillations (where rs is the radius of sound horizon). Using the CMB calibrated physical scale of the sound horizon and the The analysis of the wiggle patterns of BAO is an in- combination of BAO with SnIa data (i.e inverse distance −1 −1 dependent way of measuring cosmic distance using the ladder) the value H0 = 67.3 ± 1.1 km s Mpc was re- CMB sound horizon as a standard ruler. This measure- ported which is in agreement with the value obtained by ment has improved in accuracy through a number of CMB data alone [180]. The analysis of Ref. [309] using a galaxy surveys which detect this cosmic distance scale: combination of BAO measurements from 6dFGS [300], the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) supernova survey Main Galaxy Sample (MGS) [310], BOSS DR12 and [285, 286] encompassing the Baryon Oscillation Spectro- eBOSS DR14 quasar sample in a flat ΛCDM cosmology −1 −1 scopic Survey (BOSS) which has completed three dif- reports H0 = 69.13 ± 2.34 km s Mpc . Using BAO ferent phases [287]. Its fourth phase (SDSS-IV) [288] measurements and CMB data from WMAP, Ref. [311] +0.53 encompasses the Extended Baryon Oscillation Spectro- reported the constraints of H0 = 68.36−0.52. The anal- scopic Survey (eBOSS) [289] (see also Refs. [290–294]), ysis of Ref. [86] combining galaxy and Lyα forest BAO the WiggleZ Dark Energy Survey [295–297], the 2-degree with a precise estimate of the primordial deuterium abun- −1 −1 Field Galaxy Redshift Survey (2dFGRS) [173, 298], the dance (BBN) results in H0 = 66.98 ± 1.18 km s Mpc 6-degree Field Galaxy Survey (6dFGS) [299–301]. for the flat ΛCDM model. More recently, BAO measurements have been extended in the context of quasar redshift surveys and Lyα ab-

−1 −1 Dataset H0 [km s Mpc ] Year Refs.

Planck CMB 67.27 ± 0.60 2020 [53] Planck CMB+lensing 67.36 ± 0.54 2020 [53] ACT CMB 67.9 ± 1.5 2020 [284] ACT+WMAP CMB 67.6 ± 1.1 2020 [284] BAO+RSD 69.13 ± 2.34 2017 [309] +0.53 BAO+WMAP CMB 68.36−0.52 2019 [311] BAO+BBN 66.98 ± 1.18 2018 [86]

SnIa-Cepheid 73.20 ± 1.30 2021 [270] SnIa-Cepheid 74.03 ± 1.42 2019 [57] SnIa-Cepheid 73.48 ± 1.66 2018 [277] SnIa-Cepheid 72.80 ± 2.70 2020 [278] SnIa-Cepheid 73.00 ± 2.70 2020 [278] SnIa-TRGB 72.10 ± 2.10 2020 [282] SnIa-TRGB 69.60 ± 1.90 2020 [109] SnIa-TRGB 69.80 ± 1.90 2019 [280] SnIa-TRGB 72.40 ± 2.00 2019 [281] SnIa-Miras 73.30 ± 4.00 2020 [111] SnIa-SBF 73.30 ± 2.50 2021 [117] SnIa-SBF 70.50 ± 4.10 2020 [116] SnIa-SBF 71.90 ± 7.10 2018 [115] +5.2 SneII 75.8−4.9 2020 [125] +3.9 Time-delay (TD) lensing 71.8−3.3 2021 [312] 18

+1.7 TD lensing 73.3−1.8 2020 [58] +1.6 TD lensing 72.8−1.7 2020 [313] +2.7 TD lensing 74.2−3.0 2020 [193] +5.6 TD lensing 74.5−6.1 2020 [194] +4.1 TD lensing+SLACS 67.4−3.2 2020 [194] TD lensing+SLACS 76.8 ± 2.6 2019 [314] +59 GW Standard Sirens 75−13 2020 [315] +28.1 GW Standard Sirens 50.4−19.5 2020 [316] +4.3 GW Standard Sirens 67.6−4.2 2020 [316] +23 GW Standard Sirens 48−10 2020 [317] +16.0 GW Standard Sirens 69.0−8.0 2019 [318] +40 GW Standard Sirens 75−32 2019 [319] +4.7 GW Standard Sirens 68.9−4.6 2019 [320] +37.00 GW Standard Sirens 77.00−18.00 2019 [219] +12.0 GW Standard Sirens 70.0−8.0 2017 [218] Masers 73.90 ± 3.00 2020 [227] Masers 73.50 ± 1.40 2019 [321] Masers 66.0 ± 6.0 2016 [322] +26.0 Masers 73.0−22.0 2015 [323] Masers 68.0 ± 9.0 2013 [324] Masers 68.9 ± 7.1 2013 [225] Tully Fisher 76.00 ± 2.60 2020 [325] Tully Fisher 75.1 ± 2.80 2020 [241] +6.0 γ-ray attenuation 67.4−6.2 2019 [247] +4.6 γ-ray attenuation 64.9−4.3 2019 [248] Cosmic chronometers 67.06 ± 1.68 2018 [256] Cosmic chronometers 67.00 ± 4.00 2018 [255] +2.7 Cosmic chronometers 68.3−2.6 2017 [253] HII galaxy 71.00 ± 2.8 2018 [326] +3.47 HII galaxy 76.12−3.44 2017 [327]

CMB (rs-independent)+lensing+Pantheon 73.5 ± 5.3 2021 [328] SnIa-Cepheid and TD lensing 73.8 ± 1.1 2020 [58] +1.36 SnIa+BAO+TD lensing+cosmic chronometers+ LSS 70.30−1.35 2019 [329] +1.2 BAO+BBN+WL-CC 67.20−1.0 2018 [330] +0.94+2.51(sys) SnIa+BAO+CC 68.52−0.94 2018 [331]

TABLE II: The Hubble constant H0 values at 68% CL through direct and indirect measurements by diﬀerent methods.

was obtained which is in 3.1σ tension with Planck CMB. Assuming the Universe is ﬂat and using lensing systems from the lensing program H0LiCOW and the Pantheon supernova compilation a value of H0 = 72.2 ± 2.1 km −1 −1 II.2.4. Strong gravitational lensing s Mpc was reported by the analysis of Ref. [332]. +1.6 −1 −1 A similar value of H0 = 72.8−1.7 km s Mpc was Strong gravitational lensing time delay measurements found using updated H0LiCOW dataset consisting of six lenses [313]. The analysis of the strong lens system DES of H0 are consistent with the local measurements using late time calibrators and in mild tension with Planck (e.g. J0408 − 5354 by Ref. [193] for strong lensing insights into dark energy survey collaboration (STRIDES), infers [200]). The method of the measurement of H0 Lenses in +2.7 −1 −1 COSMOGRAIL’s Wellspring (H0LiCOW) collaboration H0 = 74.2−3.0 km s Mpc in the ΛCDM cosmology. [58] is independent of the cosmic distance ladder and is The analysis of Ref. [194] based on the strong lensing and using Time-Delay COSMOgraphy (TDCOSMO13) data based on time delays between multiple images of the same +5.6 −1 −1 source, as occurs in strong gravitational lensing. set alone infers H0 = 74.5−6.1 km s Mpc and using Using joint analysis of six gravitationally lensed quasars with measured time delays from the COSmo- logical MOnitoring of GRAvItational Lenses (COSMO- 13 TDCOSMO collaboration [333] was formed by members of +1.7 −1 −1 H0LiCOW, STRIDES, COSMOGRAIL and SHARP. GRAIL) project, the value H0 = 73.3−1.8 km s Mpc 19

Constraints on H0

67.27 Aghanim(2020) • Planck CMB 67.36 Early(assumeΛCDM) Aghanim(2020) • Planck CMB+lensing 67.9 Aiola(2020) • ACT CMB 67.6 Aiola(2020) • ACT+WMAP CMB 69.13 Wang(2017) • BAO+RSD 68.36 Zhang(2019) • BAO+WMAP CMB 66.98 • BAO+BBN Addison(2018

73.2 Riess(2021) 74.03 Late(model independent) Riess(2019) 73.48 Riess(2018) • SnIa-Cepheid 72.8 Breuval(2020) 73 Breuval(2020 72.1 Soltis(2020) 69.6 Freedman(2020) • SnIa-TRGB 69.8 Freedman(2019) 72.4 Yuan(2019) 73.3 • SnIa-Miras Huang(2020) 73.3 Blakeslee(2021) 70.5 Khetan(2020) • SnIa-SBF 71.9 Cantiello(2018) 75.8 • SneII deJaeger(2020) 71.8 Denzel(2020) 73.3 Wong(2020) 72.8 Liao(2020) 74.2 Shajib(2020) • TD lensing 74.5 Birrer(2020) 67.4 Birrer(2020) 76.8 Chen(2019) • GW Standard Sirens 75 Abbott(2020) 50.4 Mukherjee(2020) 67.6 Mukherjee(2020) 48 Chen(2020) 69 Abbott(2019) 75 Soares-Santos(2019) 68.9 Hotokezaka(2019) 77 Fishbach(2019) 70 Abbott(2017) 73.9 Pesce(2020) 73.5 Reid(2019) 66 Gao(2016) • Masers 73 Kuo(2015) 68 Kuo(2013) 68.9 Reid(2013) 76 Kourkchi(2020) • Tully Fisher 75.1 Schombert(2020) 67.4 Dominguez(2019) •γ-ray attenuation 64.9 Zeng(2019) 67.06 Gomez-Valent(2018) 67 • Cosmic chronometers Yu(2018) 68.3 Chen(2017) 71 Fernandez-Arenas(2018) • HII galaxy 76.12 Wang(2017) 73.5 Baxter(2020) 73.8 Wong(2020) 70.3 • Combinations Dutta(2019) 67.2 Abbott(2018) 68.52 Haridasu(2018)

50 60 70 80 90 100 -1 -1 H0 [km s Mpc ]

FIG. 9. The Hubble constant H0 values with the 68% CL constraints derived by recent measurements. The value of the Hubble constant H0 is derived by early time approaches based on sound horizon, under the assumption of a ΛCDM background. 20

a joint hierarchical analysis of the TDCOSMO and Sloan matter density Ω0m when the ΛCDM model is consid- +4.1 15 Lens ACS (SLACS) [334] sample reports H0 = 67.4−3.2 ered and using its EM counterpart ZTF19abanrhr as km s−1Mpc−1. Ref. [314] based on a joint analysis of 3 identified in Ref. [210] the Hubble constant was mea- +28.1 −1 −1 strong lensing system, using ground-based adaptive op- sured to be H0 = 50.4−19.5 km s Mpc . The same tics (AO) from SHARP AO effort and the HST finds study (Ref. [316]) choosing different types of waveform −1 −1 +24.6 −1 −1 +29.5 H0 = 76.8 ± 2.6 km s Mpc . Ref. [312] analysing finds H0 = 43.1−11.4 km s Mpc and H0 = 62.2−19.7 8 strongly, quadruply lensing systems presents a deter- km s−1Mpc−1. Combining their results with the binary +3.9 +4.3 mination of the Hubble constant H0 = 71.8−3.3 km neutron star event GW170817 leads to H0 = 67.6−4.2 s−1Mpc−1 which is consistent with both early and late km s−1Mpc−1. Ref. [317] for the same GW-EM event, +23 Universe observations. assuming a flat wCDM model has obtained H0 = 48−10 km s−1Mpc−1.

II.2.5. Gravitational waves II.2.6. Megamaser data The first multi-messenger detection of a BNS merger, GW170817, by LIGO [335] and Virgo [336] interfer- Resently, the Megamaser Cosmology Project (MCP) ometers enabled the first standard siren measurement [226] using geometric distance measurements to of the Hubble constant H0. Using the BNS merger megamaser-hosting galaxies and assuming a global GW170817, the distance to the source was estimated to −1 +2.9 velocity uncertainty of 250 km s associated with be d = 43.8−6.9 Mpc (i.e. at redshift z ∼ 0.01) from peculiar motions of the maser galaxies constrains the the detected amplitude hhi (r.m.s. - averaged over de- −1 −1 Hubble constant to be H0 = 73, 9 ± 3 km s Mpc tector and source orientations) of the GW signal by the [227]. Previously the MCP reported results on galaxies, Eq. (2.27)[218]. Also using the Hubble flow velocity −1 −1 UGC 3789 with H0 = 68.9 ± 7.1 km s Mpc [225], υ = 3017 ± 166 km s−1 inferred from measurement of −1 −1 H NGC 6264 with H0 = 68.0 ± 9.0 km s Mpc [324], the redshift of the host galaxy, NGC 4993 (NGC 4993 was +26 −1 −1 NGC 6323 with H0 = 73−22 km s Mpc [323] and identified as the unique host galaxy), the Hubble constant −1 −1 +12.0 −1 −1 NGC 5765b with H0 = 66.0 ± 6.0 km s Mpc [322]. was determined to be H0 = 70.0−8.0 km s Mpc [218] Ref. [321] uses a improved distance estimation of the (Fig. 10) by using Eq. (2.32). maser galaxy NGC 4258 (also known as Messier 106) to Ref. [320] using continued monitoring of the the calibrate the Cepheid-SN Ia distance ladder combined radio counterpart of GW17081 combining with earlier with geometric distances from Milky Way parallaxes GW and EM data obtains a improved measurement of +4.7 −1 −1 and detached eclipsing binaries in the Large Magellanic H0 = 68.9−4.6 km s Mpc . Note that using the BNS Cloud. The measured value of the Hubble constant is merger GW170817 in Ref. [219] and a statistical anal- H = 73.5 ± 1.4 km s−1Mpc−1. ysis (as first proposed in Ref. [201]) over a catalog of 0 potential host galaxies, the Hubble constant was determined to be H = 77.0+37.0 km s−1Mpc−1. Also using 0 −18.0 II.2.7. Tully Fisher the BBH merger GW170814 as a standard (dark) siren in the absence of an electromagnetic counterpart, combined with a photometric redshift catalog from the Dark The analysis of Ref. [325] using infrared (IR) data Energy Survey (DES) [337] the analysis of Ref. [319] of sample galaxies and the Tully Fisher relation deter- results in H = 75+40 km s−1Mpc−1. Using multiple mined the value of Hubble constant to be H0 = 76.0 ± 0 −32 −1 −1 GW observations (the BNS event GW170817 and the 1.1(stat.)±2.3(sys.) km s Mpc . In Ref. [241] a value −1 −1 BBH events observed by advanced LIGO and Virgo in of H0 = 75.1 ± 2.3(stat.) ± 1.5(sys.) km s Mpc was their first and second observing runs) in Ref. [318] the found using Baryonic Tully Fisher relation for 95 inde- Hubble constant was constrained as H = 69.0+16.0 km pendent Spitzer photometry and accurate rotation curves 0 −8.0 16 s−1Mpc−1. Using the event GW190814 from merger of (SPARC) galaxies (up to distances of ∼ 130Mpc). a black hole with a lighter compact object the Hubble +59 −1 −1 constant was measured to be H0 = 75−13 km s Mpc [315]. In Ref. [316] the BBH merger GW190521 was 15 analysed choosing the NRSur7dq4 waveform14 for the es- The ZTF19abanrhr event was reported by Zwicky Transient Fa- cility (ZTF) [213]. This candidate EM counterpart is flare after timation of luminosity distance, after marginalizing over a kicked BBH merger in the accretion disk of an active galactic nucleus (AGN) [212] with peak luminosity occurred 50 days after the BBH event GW19052. The ZTF19abanrhr was first observed after 34 days from the GW detection at the sky direction 14 NRSur7dq4 is a numerical relativity surrogate 7-dimensional ap- (RA = 192.426250, Dec = 34.824720) and was associated with proximate waveform model of binary black hole merger with mass an AGN J124942.3 + 344929 at redshift z = 0.438 [210]. m1 16 ratios q ≡ m2 ≤ 4 [338]. This model is made publicly available The SPARC catalogue contains 175 nearby (up to distances of through the gwsurrogate [339] and surfinBH [340] Python pack- ∼ 130Mpc) late-type galaxies (spirals and irregulars) [236, 351]. ages. The SPARC data are publicly available at [352]. 21

+12.0 −1 −1 FIG. 10. The probability of diﬀerent values of H0 with the maximum at H0 = 70.0−8.0 km s Mpc (solid blue curve) derived by BNS enent GW170817. The dashed and dotted lines show minimal 68.3% (1σ) and 95.4% (2σ) credible intervals. The shaded green and orange bands show the 1σ and 2σ constraints from the analysis of the CMB data obtained by the Planck [341] and from the analysis of the SnIa data obtained by SH0ES [149] respectively (from Ref. [218]).

II.2.8. Extragalactic background light γ-ray attenuation [354–357] method17 to determine a continuous H(z) function the Hubble constant is estimated to be H0 ∼ 67 ± 4 km s−1Mpc−1 by Ref. [255]. Also using the GP an The analysis of Ref. [247] using extragalactic back- extension of this analysis by Ref. [256], including the ground light γ - ray attenuation data from Fermi H(z) measurements obtained from Pantheon compilation Large Area Telescope (Fermi-LAT) derives H0 = +6.0 −1 −1 +0.06 and HST CANDELS and CLASH Multy-Cycle Treasury 67.4 km s Mpc and Ω0m = 0.14 . The anal- −1 −1 −6.2 −0.07 (MCT) programs, ﬁnd H0 = 67.06 ± 1.68 km s Mpc ysis of Ref. [248] ﬁting the > 10 GeV extragalactic which is more consistent again with the lower range of background data with modeled extragalactic background +4.6 −1 −1 values for H0. spectrum results in H0 = 64.9−4.3 km s Mpc and +0.13 Ω0m = 0.31−0.14. II.2.10. HII galaxy measurements

Using 156 HII galaxy measurements as a new distance indicator and implementing the model-independent II.2.9. Cosmic chronometers GP, the Hubble constant was found to be H0 = +3.47 −1 −1 76.12−3.44 km s Mpc which is more consistent with In Ref. [253] the value of Hubble constant was found the recent local measurements [327]. Using data of +2.7 to be H0 = 68.3−2.6 in the ﬂat ΛCDM model relying on 28 H(z) measurements and their extrapolation to redshift zero. Analysing 31 H(z) data determined by the cosmic chronometric (CCH) method, and 5 H(z) data by 17 For a discussion about GP as model independent method, see BAO observations and using the Gaussian Process (GP) Ref. [358]. 22

H0 Measurements(most do not assumeΛCDM)

— Planck CMB — ACT+WMAP CMB — BAO+RSD — BAO+WMAP CMB — BAO+BBN Planck CMB — SnIa-Cepheid — SnIa-TRGB — SnIa-Miras — SnIa-SBF — SneII — TD lensing — GW Standard Sirens SnIa-Cepheid — Masers — Tully Fisher —γ-ray attenuation Relative Probability Density, — Cosmic chronometers — HII galaxy

60 65 70 75 80 85 -1 -1 H0 [km s Mpc ]

FIG. 11. The one dimensional relative probability density value of H0 derived by recent measurements (Planck CMB [53], ACT+WMAP CMB [284], BAO+RSD [309], BAO+WMAP CMB [311], BAO+BBN [86], SnIa-Cepheid [270], SnIa-TRGB [282], SnIa-Miras [111], SnIa-SBF [117], SneII [125], TD lensing [58], GW Standard Sirens [315], Masers [227], Tully Fisher [325], γ-ray attenuation [248], cosmic chronometers [255], HII galaxy [326]). All measurements are shown as normalized Gaussian distributions. Notice that the tension is not so much between early and late time approaches but more between approaches that calibrate based on low z (z . 0.01) gravitational physics and those that are independent of this assumption. For example cosmic chronometers and γ-ray attenuation which are late time but independent of late gravitational physics are more consistent with the CMB-BAO than with late time calibrators.

130 giant HII regions in 73 galaxies with Cepheid The analysis of Ref. [58] using a combination of SH0ES determined distances the best estimate of the Hub- and H0LiCOW results reports H0 = 73.8 ± 1.1 km −1 −1 ble parameter is H0 = 71.0 ± 2.8 (random) ± s Mpc which raises the Hubble tension to 5.3σ be- −1 −1 2.1 (systematic) km s Mpc [326]. tween late Universe determinations of H0 and Planck. The analysis of Ref. [330] using a combination of the Dark Energy Survey (DES) [71, 361, 362] clustering and II.2.11. Combinations of data weak lensing measurements with BAO and BBN experiments assuming a ﬂat ΛCDM model with minimal neu- +1.2 trino mass (Σmν = 0.06 eV ) ﬁnds H0 = 67.2−1.0 km The relative probability density value of H0 was de- −1 −1 rived by recently published studies in the literature are s Mpc which is consistent with the value obtained shown in Fig. 11. Cosmological parameter degeneracies with CMB data. Using an extension of the standard GP from each individual probe can be broken using combina- formalism, and a combination of low-redshift expansion tion of probes. The multi-probe analysis are crucial for rate data (SnIa+BAO+CC) the Hubble constant was es- +0.94+2.51(sys) −1 −1 independent H0 determination and are required in order timated to be H0 = 68.52−0.94 km s Mpc to reduce systematic uncertainties [359, 360]. by Ref. [331]. Using an alternative method Ref. [328] 23

85 ◼ Distance Ladder(Cepheids) ◆ΛCDM KP 80

] SH0ES CHP - 1 SH0ES SH0ES SH0ES Mpc 75 ◼ ◼ SH0ES - 1 ◼ ◆ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◆ ◆ SH0ES [ km s 70 ◆ ◆WMAP9 WMAP3 0 WMAP5

H ◆ WMAP7 ◆ ◆ ◆ WMAP1 P15 65 P13 BAO P18

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 Year

FIG. 12. The Hubble constant as a function of publication date, using a set of different tools. Symbols in orange denote values of H0 determined in the late Universe with a calibration based on the Cepheid distance scale (Key Project (KP) [342], SH0ES [57, 148, 149, 270, 277, 343], Carnegie Hubble Program (CHP) [344]). Symbols in purple denote derived values of H0 from analysis of the CMB data based on the sound horizon standard ruler (First Year WMAP (WMAP1) [345], Three Year WMAP (WMAP3) [346], Five Year WMAP (WMAP5) [347], Seven Year WMAP (WMAP7) [348], Nine Year WMAP (WMAP9) [349], Planck13 (P13) [350], Planck15 (P15) [341], Planck18 (P18) [53], BAO [86]). The orange and purple shaded regions demonstrate the evolution of the uncertainties in these values which have been decreasing for both methods. The most recent measurements disagree at greater than 4σ. analysing the current CMB lensing data from Planck The uncertainties in these values have been decreasing combined with Pantheon supernovae and using con- for both methods and the recent measurements disagree servative describe the priors, finds an rs independent beyond 4σ. −1 −1 constraint of H0 = 73.5 ± 5.3 km s Mpc . Ref. Furthermore the comoving Hubble expansion rate as a [329] analysing low-redshift cosmological data from SnIa, function of redshift obtained from the Planck18 CMB is BAO, strong gravitanional lensing, H(z) measurements shown in Fig. 13 along with a few relevant data-points using cosmic chronometers and growth measurements demonstrating the Hubble tension. from LSS observations for ΛCDM model finds H0 = The basic strategic questions emerge +1.36 −1 −1 70.30−1.35 km s Mpc which is in ∼ 2σ tension with various low and high redshift observations. • How can H(z) derived from Cepheid late time calibrators (blue point in Fig. 13) become consistent with H(z) derived from the sound horizon early II.2.12. The current status - Historic evolution time calibrator (black line in Fig. 13)?

• What type of systematics could move the blue point During the last decades there has been remarkable down or shift black line up in Fig. 13 in early and progress in measuring the Hubble constant. The avail- late time calibrators? able technology and measurement methods determine the accuracy of this quantity. The Hubble constant as a func- • To what extend can dynamical dark energy address tion of publication date, using a set of diﬀerent methods the Hubble tension by distorting the black line in is shown in Fig. 12. The values of H0 determined in the Fig. 13? late Universe with a calibration based on the Cepheid distance scale and the derived values of H0 from anal- These important Hubble crisis questions will be dis- ysis of the CMB anisotropy spectrum data are shown. cussed in the next subsection. 24

FIG. 13. Left panel: The comoving Hubble parameter as a function of redshift. The black line corresponds to the best ﬁt obtained from the Planck18 CMB when the ΛCDM model is considered, while the grey areas are the 1σ regions. The blue point at redshift zero denotes the inferred Hubble measurement by HST survey [57]. The orange points, green point, and yellow points correspond to BAO data from BOSS DR12 survey [353], BOSS DR14 quasar sample [185], and SDSS DR12 Lyα sample [277] respectively. The arrows indicate approaches for the resolution of the Hubble tension: Down arrow (blue) corresponds to decrease of the Riess et. al. datapoint due to systematics or transition of the absolute magnitude M (light blue arrow). Up arrow (black) corresponds to recalibration of rs which shifts the whole curve up or and late time deformation of H(z) (adapted from [53]). Right panel: The comoving Hubble parameter as a function of redshift for a wCDM phantom modiﬁcation of ΛCDM model which drives upward the low z part of the H(z) curve shown in left panel. Thus it brings the z = 0 prediction of the CMB closer to the H0 result of the local measurements (late time H(z) deformation).

II.3. Theoretical models the radius rs of the sound horizon at the last scattering surface (see Subsection II.1.2). Many of these models ef- A wide range of models have been used to address the fectively fix the comoving distance to the last scattering surface and the matter energy density ω = Ω h2 to H0 tension by introducing additional degrees of freedom m 0m to ΛCDM model where additional parameters are allowed values consistent with Planck/ΛCDM to maintain con- to vary such as quintessence [363–373], in which a scalar sistency with the CMB anisotropy spectrum while intro- field plays the role of dark energy or modified gravity ducing late time phantom dark energy to deform H(z) [374–379], in which General Relativity is modified on cos- so that it matches the local measurements of H(z). The mological scales. required phantom behavior of such H(z) deformations The extensions of ΛCDM model which can be used to can not be provided by minimally coupled quintessence models and therefore such models have been shown to be resolve the Hubble constant H0 tension fall into two categories: models with late time and models with early time unable to resolve the Hubble tension [380]. These models modification (in the epoch before the recombination) (for have three problems a review, see Refs. [67, 68]). They tend to worsen the fit to low z distance probes The models with late time modification can be divided • such as BAO and SnIa (e.g. [63]) in two broad classes: deformation of the Hubble expansion rate H(z) at late times (e.g. late time phantom dark • They tend to worsen level of the growth tension energy [63, 64]) and recalibration of the SnIa absolute lu- [381]. minosity [158] (or combination of the previous two classes e.g. late (low-redshift) w − M phantom transition [274]). • They tend to predict a lower value of SnIa absolute magnitude than the one determined by local Cepheid calibrators shown in Eq. (2.6)[66, 146, 272]. II.3.1. Late time deformations of the Hubble expansion rate H(z) Thus, these models can not fully resolve the Hubble tension (see also Refs. [244, 382–385]). These late time models for the solution of the Hubble Physical models where the deformation of H(z) may tension use a late time smooth deformation of the Hub- be achieved include the following. ble expansion rate Planck18/ΛCDM H(z) so that it can II.3.1.1. Phantom dark energy: The deforma- match the locally measured value of H0 while keeping tion of H(z) through the implementation of late time 25

FIG. 14. The predicted value of h as a function of the fixed w assuming one parameter dark energy (wCDM) model. The theoretically predicted best fit values of h for different values of w in the case of the wCDM model (orange line), whereas the linear fitting that has been made (dashed blue line). The redpoints correspond to the actual best fit values, including the errorbars, of h for specific values of w obtained by fitting these models to the CMB TT anisotropy (from Ref. [63]).

FIG. 15. The predicted form of the CMB TT anisotropy spectrum with w = −1, h = 0.67, Ω0m = 0.314 for ΛCDM (blue line) and with w = −1.2, h = 0.74, Ω0m = 0.263 (green line). Red points correspond to the binned high-l and low-l Planck data (from Ref. [63]). 26 phantom dark energy [63, 64, 386–388] can address the it is straightforward to derive the degeneracy function Hubble tension as shown in Fig. 13. h(z = 0, w) ≡ h shown in Fig. 14 (continuous orange The analysis of Ref. [63] indicates that mildly phantom line). In the range w ∈ [−1.5, −1], h(w) is approximated models with mean equation of state parameter w = −1.2 as a straight line (dashed blue line in Fig. 14) have the potential to alleviate this tension. It was shown h(w) ≈ −0.3093w + 0.3647 (2.60) that the best fit value of H0 in the context of the CMB power spectrum is degenerate with a constant equation of For w = −1, this linear degeneracy equation leads to the state parameter w. The CMB anisotropy spectrum was best fit dimensionless Hubble constant h = 0.674 as ex- shown to be unaffected when changing H(z) provided pected while for w = −1.217 the corresponding predicted that specific parameter combinations remain unchanged. CMB best fit is h = 0.74 which is consistent with the These cosmological parameters fix to high accuracy the value obtained by local distance ladder measurements. form of the CMB anisotropy spectrum. The values of The invariance of the CMB power spectrum when the these parameters as determined by the Planck/ΛCDM cosmological parameters are varied along the above de- CMB temperature power spectrum are the following [53] scribed degeneracy directions is shown in Fig. 15. This

ωm,P lanck = 0.1430 ± 0.0011 (2.51) method of the Ref. [63] can be used to find general degeneracy relations between fDE(z) and H0 and fixing ωb,P lanck = 0.02237 ± 0.00015 (2.52) h = 0.74 gives infinite fDE(z), w(z) forms that can po- −5 ωr,P lanck = (4.64 ± 0.3) 10 (2.53) tentially resolve the H0 problem if they can also properly ωk,P lanck = −0.0047 ± 0.0029 (2.54) fit the low z date (e.g. BAO, SnIa, Cepheid value of absolute luminosity M). Low z distance data (BAO and SnIa) d = (4.62 ± 0.08) ( 100 km s−1Mpc−1)−1 A,P lanck will determine which one of these forms is observation- (2.55) ally favored. However, none of these forms can provide 2 a quality of fit to low z data equally good or better than where ωi,P lanck = Ω0i,P lanckh is the energy density of ΛCDM despite the introduced additional parameters. In component i and dA,P lanck is the comoving angular diameter distance. addition, these models suffer from the other two prob- Using the Eq. (2.4) the comoving angular diameter lems mentioned above (worse growth tension and lower value of SnIa absolute magnitude). distance dA to the recombination surface is (c = 1) II.3.1.2. Interacting dark energy: In the cosmo- z z Z r dz Z r dz logical interacting dark energy (IDE) models [389–429] dA = = −1 −1 (2.56) 0 H(z) 0 h(z) 100 km s Mpc (for a review, see Refs. [430, 431]) the dark components of the Universe i.e dark matter (DM) and dark where zr ' 1100 is the redshift of recombination and −1 −1 −1 energy (DE) have an extra non-gravitational interaction. h(z) = H(z)( 100 km s Mpc ) is the dimensionless The IDE model was proposed to address the coincidence Hubble parameter which in general takes the form problem (e.g. [432–440]). In addition the interaction 4 3 between the dark fluids has been shown to be effective h(z) = ωr(1 + z) + ωm(1 + z) + in substantially alleviating the Hubble constant H0 ten- 2 1/2 +(h − ωr − ωm)fDE(z) (2.57) sion [396, 415, 425, 441] or in addressing the structure growth σ tension between the values inferred from the where h = h(z = 0) and f (z) determines the evolution 8 DE CMB and the WL measurements [442–445] (see Subsec- of dark energy. tion III.1.2) or in solving the two tensions simultaneously In the context of a simple one parameter parametriza- [398, 409, 419]. tion where the equation of state w remains constant in In IDE cosmology assuming spatially flat Friedmann- time and redshift (wCDM model), f (z) takes the sim- DE Lemaˆıtre-Roberson-Walker background and pressureless ple form dark matter (wc = 0) the equations of evolution of the 3(1+w) fDE(z) = (1 + z) (2.58) dark matter and dark energy densities ρc and ρDE respectively are given by [446] If the four energy densities Eqs. (2.51), (2.52), (2.53) and (2.54) and the observed value of the comoving an- ρ˙c + 3Hρc = Q(t) (2.61) gular diameter Eq. (2.55) are fixed then they provide the analytically predicted best fit value of the Hubble ρ˙DE + 3H(1 + wDE)ρDE = −Q(t) (2.62) parameter H0 (or h) given the dark energy equation of state parameter w(w0, w1, ..., z) where w0, w1,... are the where the dot corresponds to the derivative with respect pDE parameters entering the w(z) parametrization. Thus as- to cosmic time t, wDE = is the equation of state ρDE suming a flat Universe (ωk = 0) and solving the following of dark energy and Q represents the interaction rate be- equation with respect to h tween the dark sectors (i.e. the rate of energy transfer between the dark fluids). For Q < 0 energy flows from d (ω , ω , ω , h = 0.674, w = −1) = A m,P lanck r,P lanck b,P lanck dark matter to dark energy, whereas for Q > 0 the energy dA(ωm,P lanck, ωr,P lanck, ωb,P lanck, h, w) (2.59) flow is opposite. 27

These models combine the deformation of H(z) with first analysed by Ref. [477] and studied by Refs.[478– an extra modification of the growth rate of perturbations 484], provides a promising scenario to relieve the Hubble due to the tuned evolution of Ωm(z) induced by the in- constant H0 tension (e.g. [485]). Also, it has been shown teraction term Q. This additional tuning allows for a that this scenario can resolve the σ8 growth tension [486, simultaneous improvement of the growth tension in con- 487] or the two tensions simultaneously [488] by a similar trast to models that involve a simple H(z) deformation. mechanism as in the IDE models. However, using the Various phenomenological IDE models were proposed Planck data the analysis of the model by Refs. [489, 490] in the literature where the rate of the interaction Q has has shown that the cosmological tensions are only slightly a variety of possible functional forms [447]. For example alleviated (for a different result, see Ref. [491]). in some classes of IDE models the rate of the interaction In these models assuming spatially flat Friedmann- Q is proportional to the energy density of dark energy Lemaˆıtre-Roberson-Walker Universe, pressureless dark Q = δ HρDE [398, 409, 415, 419] or cold dark matter matter, wc = 0 and equation of state of dark radiation Q = δ Hρc [396] (where δ is a constant and δ = 0 in the wDR = 1/3, the equations of evolution of the dark mat- ΛCDM coscology), or some combination of the two. Note ter and dark radiation densities ρc and ρDR respectively that in the case of functional form Q = δ Hρc instabilities are given by [446] develop in the dark sector perturbations at early times [448]. ρ˙c + 3Hρc = −Γρc (2.65) II.3.1.3. Running vacuum model: The running vacuum models (RVM) [449–461] (for a review, see Refs. [50, 462–465]) attempts to address both the Hubble con- ρ˙DR + 4HρDR = Γρc (2.66) stant H tension [466] and the σ growth tension using 0 8 where Γ = 1 is the decay rate of dark matter particles a mechanism that has common features with the IDE τ (with τ the particle’s lifetime). In the literature a variety models (e.g. [467–471]) (for relaxing the growth tension, of possible functional forms of the decay rate has been see Subsection III.1.2). explored [486, 489, 491, 492]. For example in some cases The RVM of the cosmic evolution is well motivated the decay rate is proportional to the Hubble rate, Γ ∝ H by the generic idea of renormalization group formalism [488]. Constraints on the decay rate of dark matter have which is used in Quantum Field Theory (QFT) [472–474]. been obtained by the analysis of Refs. [486, 493]. In the RVM the cosmological constant, the corresponding A model with decaying dark matter into dark radiation vacuum energy density and pressure are assumed to be in early/late Universe (τ t / τ t , where t is the functions of the Hubble rate e.g. a power series of the s s s time of last scattering) increases/decreases the expansion Hubble rate and its cosmic time derivative with even time rate H(a; ρ , ρ , ρ , ρ , ρ ) at high/low redshifts as it derivatives of the scale factor [475] b γ c DR DE predicts a smaller matter content and a larger radiation X X content as time evolves (the early/late Universe is dom- Λ = a + a H2k + b H˙ k, (2.63) 0 k k inated by the radiation/matter and the dark radiation k=1 k=1 density decreases more rapidly than the matter density, −4 −3 Λ(H) ρDR ∝ a and ρc ∝ a ). In the case of τ ts, the ρΛ = ρΛ(H) = 8πG and pΛ = pΛ(H) = −ρΛ(H) respectively. faster cosmological expansion H(z) decreases the scale of For the current Universe the vacuum energy density the sound horizon rs in Eq. (2.19) because the baryon- can be written in the relatively simple form (e.g. [463, to-photon ratio, and thus cs in Eq. (2.20), is tightly 466, 475, 476]) constrained by CMB fluctuations and BBN [494]. In the context of the degeneracy H0rs shown in Eq. (2.21) the Λ(H) 3 lower scale of the sound horizon rs yields a larger value ρ (H) = = (c + νH2) (2.64) Λ 8πG 8πG 0 of H0. In the case of τ ts, the lower dimensionless normalized Hubble rate E(z) in the late-time leads to 2 Λ0 where c0 = H0 (Ω0Λ − ν) ' 3 (with Λ0 the current a larger value of H0 since θs and rs must be kept fixed value) is an integration constant which is fixed by the in Eq. (2.21). Accordingly, both early and late decay- boundary condition ρΛ(H0) = ρΛ,0 (with ρΛ,0 the current ing dark matter model are able to alleviate the Hubble value) and ν is a dimensionless running parameter which constant H0 tension (for a detailed discussion, see Ref. characterizes the dynamics of the vacuum at low energy. [495]). For ν = 0 the vacuum energy remains constant at all There are alternative decaying dark matter models times and for ν > 0 the vacuum energy density decreases such as the many-body or 2-body decaying cold dark with the time. In QFT the running parameter is |ν| ' matter scenarios [496] and the decaying warm dark mat- 10−6 − 10−3 [472] but in RVM it has been treated as a ter scenario [497]. In the 2-body decaying cold dark mat- free parameter by fitting to the observational data (e.g. ter scenario the decaying dark matter produces two par- [475, 476]). ticles, one massive warm dark matter particle and one II.3.1.4. Decaying dark matter: Decaying dark massless relativistic particle (dark radiation). This sce- matter into dark radiation (i.e. an unknown relativistic nario can address the Hubble constant H0 tension [498– species that is not directly detectable), which has been 500] and the σ8 growth tension [501]. 28

II.3.1.5. Phenomenologically emergent dark II.3.1.7. Phase transition: energy: Phenomenologically emergent dark energy • Phase transition in dark energy explored by Refs. (PEDE) is a zero freedom dark energy scenario proposed [517–519] can address the Hubble tension. In Ref. by Ref. [502]. In this model the dark energy density has [520] the form of phase transition parametrized the following form phenomenologically by a hyperbolic tangent func- ˜ ΩDE(z) = Ω0DE [1 − tanh (log10(1 + z))] (2.67) tion. This scenario for dark energy is similar used independently as PEDE and GEDE. where Ω0DE = 1 − Ω0m − Ω0r. The dark energy in this model has no effective presence • Late dark energy (LDE) transition [383] at red- in the past and emerges at the later times and with the shifts z 0.1 can reduce the Hubble tension. This same number (six) of parameters compared to the spa- class of H(z) deformation models has a more in- tially flat ΛCDM scenario. It has the potential for allevi- tense form of the third problem of the deformation ating the H0 tension [502–506]. The generalised emergent class as they predict a significantly lower value of dark energy (GEDE) model has one extra dimensionless the SnIa absolute magnitude than the other H(z) free parameter ∆ including both ΛCDM model as well as deformation models [272, 274]. the PEDE model as two of its special limits introduced In this scenario the true Hubble constant is given by [507]. In the GEDE model the dark energy density by [383, 521] has the following form [508] H2 = H˜ 2(1 + 2δ) (2.72) 1+z 0 0 1 − tanh ∆ log10( ) 1+zt ˜ Ω˜ DE(z) = Ω0DE (2.68) where H0 is the prediction for a flat ΛCDM model 1 + tanh (∆ log10(1 + zt)) in the context of a CMB sound horizon calibration. where zt is the transition redshift where dark energy den- Refs. [383, 522] show that this model can not fully sity equals to matter density. For ∆ = 0 and ∆ = 1 this resolve the Hubble problem as it would imply a model recovers ΛCDM and PEDE model respectively. transition in the SnIa apparent magnitude which Ref. [509] revisited and constrained the free parameters is not observed. These models however become vi- of the PEDE and GEDE models using the latest obser- able in the context of a SnIa absolute magnitude vational Hubble dataset. transition [66, 274]. II.3.1.6. Vacuum metamorphosis: Vacuum phase transition [510–512] based on vacuum meta- II.3.1.8. Chameleon dark energy: Chameleon morphosis (VM) or vacuum cold dark matter model dark energy [523, 524] (see also Refs. [525–531]) attempts to address the Hubble constant H0 tension by introduc- (VCDM) [513–515] has the potential to address the H0 tension. This mechanism with six free parameters as the ing a cosmic inhomogeneity in the Hubble expansion rate spatially flat ΛCDM. It also assumes a phase transition at late-time from the chameleon field coupled to the local in the nature of the vacuum similar to Sakharov’s matter overdensities [532]. This field trapped at a higher induced gravity [516]. The phase transition occurs when potential energy density acts as an effective cosmological the evolving Ricci scalar curvature R becomes equal to constant and results in a faster local expansion rate than the value of scalar field mass squared m2 [510] that of the background with lower matter density. II.3.1.9. Cosmic voids: In cosmic void models the ˙ 2 2 R = 6(H + H ) = m (2.69) local H0 departs significantly from the cosmic mean H0 where the dot corresponds to the derivative with respect because of the presence of an under-dense region (local to cosmic time t. After the transition the Ricci scalar cur- void) [533]. However in Refs. [534, 535] it was shown vature remains constant with R = m2 and this changes that this alternative theory is inconsistent with current observations. The analysis was based on the assumption the expansion rate below (z < zt) due to the phase transition of the validity of standard ΛCDM and a study of the 2 sample variance in the local measurements of the Hubble H 3 3 constant this alternative theory has been shown inconsis- 2 = Ω0m(1 + z) + Ω0m(1 + z) + H0 tent with current observations. Ref. [534] estimated that   " 4 #−1 the required radius of void to resolve the tension in H0 is  4 3  ρ−ρ¯ +M 1 − 3 M(1 − M) , z > zt about 150 Mpc and density contrast of δ ≡ ρ¯ ' −0.8  3Ωom  which is inconsistent at ∼ 20σ with the ΛCDM cosmol- (2.70) ogy [237, 535]. In the context of this inconsistency, Ref. [237] con- H2 sidered a cosmological Milgromian dynamics or modi- = (1 − M)(1 + z)4 + M, z ≤ z (2.71) H2 t fied Newtonian dynamics (MOND) model [536] with the 0 presence of 11eV/c2 sterile neutrinos18 to show that the 2 m 3Ω0m where M = 2 and zt = −1 + is the transition 12H0 4(1−M) redshift. 18 Sterile neutrinos are a special kind of neutrino with right handed 29

Keenan-Barger-Cowie (KBC) void19 has the potential to could be due to a variation of the fine structure constant resolve the Hubble tension. α or the Newton’s constant G. II.3.1.10. Inhomogeneous Causal Horizons: If the absolute luminosity is proportional to the Chan- Ref. [543] proposed a simple solution to the H0 tension drasekhar mass L ∼ MChandr we have [546, 547] based on cuasally disconnected regions of the CMB temperature anisotropy maps from Planck [544]. It was L ∼ G−3/2 (2.74) pointed out that CMB maps show ”causal horizons” 20 where cosmological parameters have distinct values. Thus L will increase as G decreases . This could be justified by the fact that these regions Under these assumptions, we obtain of the Universe have never been in causal contact. 15 Thus it was shown that the Hubble constant H0 takes M(z) − M0 = log µG(z) (2.75) values which differ up to 20% among different causally 4

disconnected regions. These cosmological parameter where M0 corresponds to a reference local value of the G inhomogeneities are in agreement with the model pro- absolute magnitude and µG ≡ is the relative eﬀective G0 posed in Ref. [545] where the cosmological constant is gravitational constant (with G the strength of the grav- simply formulated as a boundary term in the Einstein itational interaction and G0 the locally measured New- equations and where ”Causal Horizons” naturally arise. ton’s constant). Thus if there are similar ”causal horizons” in the local Then, the Eq. (2.14) takes the following form universe (i.e, z < 1100), then 20% variations between the local and high-z measures of H0 are indeed to be 15 c/H M(z) = M + log µ (z)+5 log 0 +25 (2.76) expected [543]. 0 4 G 10 Mpc

and the apparent magnitude Eq. (2.15) can be written II.3.2. Late time modiﬁcations - Recalibration of the SnIa as absolute luminosity

m(z, H , Ω ) = M(z, H ) + 5 log [D (z, Ω )] This class of models can address the problems of the 0 0m th 0 10 L 0m (2.77) H(z) deformation models (especially the low M problem) A mild tension at 2σ level in the best ﬁt value of M by assuming a rapid variation (transition) of the SnIa was found in between the low-redshﬁt (z 0.2) data intrinsic luminosity and absolute magnitude due eg to a . and the full Pantheon dataset in the context of a ΛCDM gravitational physics transition at a redshift z 0.01 t . model. This tension can be interpreted as [158] [66, 244, 274].

II.3.2.1. Gravity and evolution of the Snia in- • a locally higher value of H0 by about 2%, corre- trinsic luminosity: As shown in the recent analysis sponding to a local matter underdensity. of Ref. [158] there are abnormal features which may be interpreted as evolution of the measured parameter • a time variation of Newton’s constant which im- combination M (see Section II.1.1). This measured pa- plies an evolving Chandrasekhar mass and thus an rameter combination M in Eq. (2.14) depends on the evolving absolute luminosity L and absolute mag- absolute magnitude M and on the Hubble constant H0 nitude M of low z SnIa. (M and H are degenerate parameters). Any variation of 0 In addition, the oscillating features shown in Fig.4 hint the parameter M is due to a variation of M which could G(z) also to the possibility of evolutionary eﬀects of M. As be induced by a varying µG(z) ≡ (where G0 is the G0 discussed below such evolutionary eﬀects if they exist in local value of the Newton’s constant G(z)). If the cali- the form of a transition may provide a solution to the brated SnIa absolute magnitude M were truly constant Hubble and growth tensions. then the parameter M should also be constant (indepen- II.3.2.2. Transition of the SnIa absolute mag- dent of redshift). nitude M at a redshift z ' 0.01: Recently, Ref. [66] A possible variation of the absolute magnitude M and has proposed that a rapid transition (abrupt deforma- equivalently of the absolute luminosity tion) at a transition redshift zt ' 0.01 in the value of the SnIa absolute magnitude M of the form L ∼ 10−2M/5 (2.73) > < M (z) = M + ∆M Θ(z − zt) (2.78)

chirality that might interact only through gravity [537, 538] (for a review, see Refs. [539–541]). They have been proposed to 20 Ref. [548] adopting a semi-analytical model which takes into resolve some anomalies in neutrino data. account the stretch of SnIa light curves but assumes ﬁxed mass 19 The KBC void [542] is a large local underdensity between 40 and of Ni, obtains SnIa light curves in the context of modiﬁed gravity, 300 Mpc (i.e. 0.01 . z . 0.07) around the Local Group. has claimed that L will increase as G increases. 30

FIG. 16. The Pantheon binned SnIa absolute magnitudes Eq. (2.80) Mi (blue points) [166] for a Planck/ΛCDM luminosity distance. The data are inconsistent with the SnIa absolute magnitude M < = −19.24 calibrated by Cepheids but the inconsistency disappears if there is a transition in the absolute magnitude with amplitude ∆M ' −0.2 at redshift zt ' 0.01 (from Ref. [66]).

(where Θ is the Heaviside step function) due to a rapid Assuming the power law dependence Eq. (2.74) and transition of the gravitational constant can address the using RSD and WL data Refs. [63, 76, 549] reported a > < > Hubble tension. best fit value ∆µG ≡ µG − µG = −0.19 ± 0.09 (µG cor- < In particular the analysis of Ref. [66] has shown that a responds to z > 0.01 and µG corresponds to z < 0.01) in 10% rapid transition in the value of the relative effective the context of a ΛCDM background H(z). The analysis gravitational constant µG at zt ' 0.01 is sufficient to of Ref. [66] showed that a rapid ∼ 10% increase of the induce the required reduction of M effective gravitational constant roughly 150 million years ago can also solve Ω -σ growth tension. ∆M ≡ M > − M < ' −0.2 (2.79) m 8 Recently, Ref. [381] has demonstrated that this model where M < is the SnIa absolute magnitude of Eq. (2.49) has an advantage over both early time and late time calibrated by Cepheids at z < 0.01 [146, 272] and M > deformations of H(z) to fully resolve the Hubble crisis is the SnIa absolute magnitude of Eq. (2.50) using the while at the same time improving the level of the Ωm-σ8 parametric-free inverse distance ladder of Ref. [273]. Fig. growth tension. In addition it has the potential to pro- 16 shows the Pantheon SnIa absolute magnitudes for a vide equally good fit to low z distance probes such as Planck/ΛCDM luminosity distance [166] obtained from BAO and SnIa as the Planck18/ΛCDM model. II.3.2.3. Late (low-redshift) w − M phantom dL(zi) Mi = mi − 5 log10 − 25 (2.80) transition: The late (low-redshift) w − M phantom Mpc transition [274] is a late time approach involving a com- where mi are the apparent magnitude datapoints. bination of the previous two classes: the transition of The data are in disagreement with the SnIa absolute the SnIa absolute luminosity and the deformation of the magnitude M < calibrated by Cepheids but they become Hubble expansion rate H(z). A rapid phantom transi- consistent if there is a transition in the absolute magni- tion of the dark energy equation of state parameter w at tude with amplitude ∆M ' −0.2 [66]. Thus, this class of a transition redshift zt < 0.1 of the form M-transition models avoids the M-problem of late time H(z) deformation models. w(z) = −1 + ∆w Θ(zt − z) (2.81) 31 with ∆w < 0 and a similar transition in the value of the Hubble constant crisis. Using the Eq. (2.19) in a EDE SnIa absolute magnitude M of the form model the radius of sound horizon at last scattering can be calculated by M(z) = MC + ∆M Θ(z − zt) (2.82) Z td c (a) with ∆M < 0 due to evolving fundamental constants can r = s dt = s a(t) address the Hubble tension [274]. Where Θ is the Heav- 0 Z ∞ c (z) iside step function, MC is the SnIa absolute magnitude = s dz = Eq. (2.49) calibrated by Cepheids [146, 272] at z < 0.01 zd H(z; ρb, ργ , ρc, ρDE) and ∆M, ∆w are parameters to be fit by the data. Ref. Z ad cs(a) [274] finds ∆M ' −0.1, ∆w ' −4 for zt = 0.02 which = 2 da (2.83) 0 a H(a; ρb, ργ , ρc, ρDE) imply a lower value of µG at z > 0.02 (about 6%) compared to the pure M-transition model. The baryon-to-photon ratio, and thus cs in Eq. (2.20), is The late (low-redshift) w − M phantom transition tightly constrained by CMB fluctuations and BBN [494]. (LwMPT) can lead to a resolution of the Hubble ten- As a consequence a EDE phase before and around the sion in a more consistent manner than smooth deforma- recombination epoch would increase H(z) and thus de- tions of the Hubble tension and other types of late time crease the scale of the sound horizon rs in Eq. (2.83). In transitions such as the Hubble expansion rate transition the context of the degeneracy H0rs shown in Eq. (2.21) [383, 522]. Its main advantages include the consistency this decrease of rs leads to an increased value of H0 for in the predicted value of the SnIa absolute magnitude a fixed measured value of θs. M and the potential for simultaneous resolution of the An EDE model can be implemented by several func- growth tension. tional forms of scalar field which contribute to the cos- Recently, using a robust dataset of 118 Tully-Fisher mic energy shortly before matter-radiation equality. Pos- datapoints Ref. [244] has demonstrated that evidence sible functional forms of scalar field are the axion-like for a transition in the evolution of BTFR appears at a potential (higher-order periodic potential) inspired by level of more than 3σ. Such effect could be interpreted as string axiverse scenarios for dark energy [60, 568–571], a transition of the effective Newton’s constant. The am- the power-law potential [62], the acoustic dark energy plitude and sign of the gravitational transition are consis- [561, 572, 573], the α-attractor-like potential [574] and tent with the mechanisms for the resolution of the Hubble others. and growth tension discussed above [66, 274] (for a talk of Ref. [61] considers two physical models. One that the tensions of the ΛCDM and a gravitational transition, involves an oscillating scalar field and another with a see Ref. [550]). slowly-rolling scalar field. In the case of the first model of the proposal of Ref. [61], the potential of the scalar field φ is a generalization of the axion potential of the II.3.3. Early time modifications form

2 2 n Modifying the scale of sound horizon rs (i.e. the scale V (φ) = m f (1 − cos(φ/f)) (2.84) of the standard ruler) by introducing new physics before recombination that deform H(z) at prerecombina- where m is the field mass (for ultralight scalar field m ∼ 10−28 eV ) and f is a decay constant. tion redshifts z & 1100 can increase the CMB inferred Consider the time evolution of the EDE scalar field value of H0 [553–555] and thus resolve the Hubble tension. Such deformation may be achieved by introducing which may be written as various types of additional to the standard model com- ¨ ˙ 0 ponents. These models have the problem of predicting φ + 3Hφ + V (φ) = 0 (2.85) stronger growth of perturbations than implied by dy- where the dot and the prime denote the derivatives with namical probes like redshift space distortion (RSD) and respect to cosmic time t and field φ respectively. weak lensing (WL) data and thus may worsen the Ωm-σ8 At early times, deep in the radiation era the field φ growth tension [189, 381]. A wide range of mechanisms is initially frozen in its potential due to Hubble friction has been proposed for the decrease of the the sound hori- (H m) and acts as a cosmological constant with equa- zon scale at recombination. These mechanisms include tion of state wφ = −1 (hence the name Early Dark En- the following: ergy), but when the Hubble parameter drops below some II.3.3.1. Early dark energy: In the early dark value (H ∼ m) at a critical redshift zc (for EDE this hap- energy (EDE) model [60–62, 552, 556–567] an additional −27 pens when zc ∼ zd for m ∼ 10 eV ) the field becomes dynamical scalar field behaves like a cosmological con- dynamical and begins to oscillate around its minimum stant at early times (near matter-radiation equality but which is locally V ∼ φ2n (Fig. 17). It thus begins to before recombination). This field decays rapidly after behave like a fluid with an equation of state [575] recombination thus leaving the rest of the expansion history practically unaffected up to a rescaling which mod- n − 1 wφ = (2.86) ifies H0. This rescaling allows for the resolution of the n + 1 32

10 10 EDE model(H>>m) EDE model(H~m)

8 V 8 V =[1-cos (ϕ/f )] n . =[1-cos (ϕ/f )] n V0 V0 6 6 0 0 V V V V 4 4

2 2 .

0 0

-4 -2 0 2 4 -4 -2 0 2 4 ϕ ϕ f f

2 2 FIG. 17. The potential V/V0 (with V0 = m f , n = 3 in Eq. (2.84)) as a function of φ/f at early times (H m) (left panel) when the ﬁeld φ is initially frozen in its potential due to Hubble friction and acts as a cosmological constant with equation of state wφ = −1, and at a critical redshift zc when the Hubble parameter drops below some value (H ∼ m) (right panel) and the ﬁeld becomes dynamical and begins to oscillate around its minimum which is locally V ∼ φ2n.

FIG. 18. Fractional contribution of EDE to the cosmic energy budget as a function of redshift (adapted from Ref. [551]).

−3(1+wφ) The energy density of the field dilutes as a and FIG. 19. CMB TT power spectrum. The black solid and thus when n = 1, n = 2 and n ≥ 3 dilutes as cold the red dashed lines correspond to ΛCDM model with H0 = −3 −4 −1 −1 dark matter (a , wφ = 0), as radiation (a , wφ = 68.07 km s Mpc and EDE model with H0 = 71.15 km −x −1 −1 1/3) and faster than radiation (a with x > 4, wφ > s Mpc respectively (from Ref. [551]). 1/3) respectively. Also when n → ∞ the energy density −6 dilutes as free scalar field (stiff matter [576]) (a , wφ = 1) i.e. the scalar field is fully dominated by its kinetic the peak EDE energy density fraction of the Universe energy. fEDE(zc) which is given by The EDE models are parameterized by the critical redshift zc , the dimensionless quantity θi = φi/f (with φi Ωφ(zc) ρEDE(zc) fEDE(zc) ≡ = 2 2 (2.87) the initial value of the scalar field and 0 < θi < π) and Ωtot(zc) 3MplH(zc) 33

EDE

ΛCDM

FIG. 20. Posterior 1D and 2D distributions of the cosmological ΛCDM parameters reconstructed from a run to all data (including Planck high l polarization) in EDE (red) and the ΛCDM (blue) scenario. The gray bands correspond to the SH0ES determination of H0 (adapted from Ref. [552]).

where Ωφ is the EDE energy density which evolves as tion or faster than radiation leaving the later evolution of [61, 571] the Universe relatively unchanged. By construction, the EDE models can nicely match the CMB TT power spec- 2Ωφ(zc) Ωφ(z) = (2.88) trum of ΛCDM and therefore of Planck as illustrated in 3(wn+1) [(1 + zc)/(1 + z)] + 1 Fig. 19. The black solid and the red dashed lines (almost identical) correspond to ΛCDM model with H0 = 68.07 The fractional contribution of EDE to the cosmic energy −1 −1 km s Mpc and EDE model with H0 = 71.15 km budget as a function of redshift, i.e. fEDE(z), is shown −1 −1 in Fig. 18 (from the analysis of Ref. [551]). Clearly, for s Mpc respectively [551]. z ' zc the EDE contributes the most to the total energy EDE models face the fine-tuning issues [557] and suffer density (∼ 10%), for z > zc the EDE is not dynami- from a coincidence problem [556]. Refs. [557, 577] pro- cally important while for z < zc decays away as radia- posed a natural explanation for this coincidence using the 34 idea of neutrino-assisted early dark energy. neutrino species. This model modifies the standard EDE modifies growth and H(z) at early times (around neutrino free-streaming in the early Universe. The onset recombination) and higher matter density is required to of neutrino free-streaming is delayed until close to the compensate for this effect in the CMB. Higher matter matter radiation equality epoch. This late-decoupling density contradicts the required low value of matter den- of the neutrinos shifts the CMB power spectra peaks sity at late times from weak lensing and growth data as towards smaller scales as compared to ΛCDM model. shown in Fig.20. In particular the analysis of Ref. [578] This shift modifies the scale of sound horizon rs that has shown that an EDE model can not practically resolve can resolve the Hubble constant H0 tension [613]. the Hubble tension because it results in higher value of Furthermore self-interactions between the neutrinos or the late-time density fluctuation amplitude σ8 and thus between other additional light relics was studied by Refs. the tension with LSS dynamical probes WL, RSD and [616–628]. The strong neutrino self-interactions models CC data can get worse. In addition Ref. [189] argued are basically excluded by various existing data or ex- that any model which attempts to reconcile the CMB in- perimental tests [622, 626, 629–631]. The analysis of ferred value of H0 by solely reducing the sound horizon Ref. [628] leads to conclusion that these models can results into tension with either the BAO or the galaxy not ease the Hubble tension more effectively than the weak lensing data. Thus, a compelling and full resolu- ΛCDM+Neff approach alone. tion of the Hubble tension may require multiple modifi- II.3.3.4. Large primordial non-Gaussianities: cations (more than just the size of the sound horizon) of The presence of large primordial non-Gaussianity in the the ΛCDM cosmology. CMB can affect the higher-order n-point correlation func- Recent studies by Refs. [190, 191] reexamining the tions statistics. A non-vanishing primordial trispectrum above issue and using combined data method show that (n = 4) which is the Fourier transform of the connected the EDE scenario remains a potential candidate solution four-point correlation function leads to the non-Gaussian to the Hubble crisis. Future observations will provide covariance of the angular power spectrum estimators data with improved quality and thus will enable more [632–634]. The trispectrum is nonzero when there is a detailed tests of the EDE model. strong coupling between long-wavelength (super-CMB) II.3.3.2. Dark radiation: Modifications in the modes and short-wavelength modes. The non-Gaussian light relic sector can relieve the tension by changing the covariance scenario (Super-ΛCDM model) has two extra early-time dynamics of the Universe [579, 580]. The dark free parameters relative to those in ΛCDM and provides radiation model assumes an increased number of light a larger value of H0 reducing tension with late Universe relics [388, 553, 581–589] which are weakly interacting measurements of the Hubble constant [635]. components of radiation (i.e. relativistic species). For II.3.3.5. Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle: example the addition of hidden photons, sterile neutri- The Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle [636, 637] and the nos [590–592], Goldstone bosons, thermal axions [593] generalized uncertainty Principle [638–662] (for a review, which are predicted in many extensions of the Standard see Ref. [663]) can provide constraints to the values for Model (SM) increases the value in the effective number of certain pairs of physical quantities of a particle and raise the possibility of the existence of observational signatures relativistic particles Neff beyond its canonical expecta- SM in cosmological data (e.g. [664, 665]). Ref. [666] has ar- tion value Neff ' 3.046 [594–596]. These extra particles modify the time of matter-radiation equality and would gued that the Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle can provide an explanation for the Hubble constant H0 tension. lead to a lower rs sound horizon. As a consequence a lower expansion rate of the Universe and a higher value In particular the authors equate the luminosity distance (expanded for low z as in Eqs. (2.7) and (2.11)) with the of H0 emerges from early-time physics [597] (see Eq. (2.21)). photon (assumed massive) Compton wavelength Another interesting approach was presented by Refs. λ = ~ (2.89) [492, 580, 598–610], in which dark matter (DM) interacts C m c with a new form of dark radiation (DR) aimed at solving and express the corresponding effective “rest mass” of H tension. Assuming the Effective Theory of Structure 0 the photon as a function of the cosmological redshift Formation (ETHOS) paradigm [611, 612] the interaction between the dark matter and dark radiation components H0 m = ~ (2.90) is a 2-to-2 scattering DM + DR ↔ DM + DR. 2 z zc 1 + 2 (1 − q0) II.3.3.3. Neutrino self-interactions: The Thus, choosing z = 1, fixing q0 = −1/2 and setting H0 = strong (massive) neutrino self-interactions cosmological −1 −1 −1 −1 74 km s Mpc and H0 = 67 km s Mpc in Eq. model can provide a larger value of H0 and smaller σ8, (2.90) find m = 1.61 × 10−69kg and m = 1.46 × 10−69kg hence can resolve the tensions between cosmological 21 datasets [613]. The strong neutrino self-interactions respectively . Thus using these results infer that the were proposed in Ref. [614] and further studied in Refs. [579, 615]. The introduction of strong self-interacting neutrinos increases the value in the effective number of 21 The current upper limit on the photon mass is m = 10−54kg [667]. relativistic particles Neff = 4.02 ± 0.29 without extra 35

tension on the H0 measurements can be the effect of the II.3.3.7. Other Approaches: Many other expla- uncertainty on the photon mass i.e. nations of the Hubble tension problem have been studied in the literature and a variety of solutions have been pro- ∆m ∆H = 0 ' 0.1 (2.91) posed and within different approaches (see Refs. [680– m H0 817]). For example in the case of the metastable dark energy [721], generalized Chaplygin gas [777], holographic Note that the non-zero photon mass could emerge dark energy [770], Galileon gravity [685] and phantom through the Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle and crossing [767] models the tension on H is significantly through the recent analysis of the Standard-Model Ex- 0 alleviated within 1σ. tension22 [670, 671]. II.3.3.6. Early modified gravity: A scalar tensor modified gravity model can be described by the following action III. OTHER TENSIONS - CURIOSITIES Z µν 4 √ F (σ) g In this section we provide a list of the non-standard S = d x −g R − ∂µσ∂ν σ − Λ − V (σ) 2 2 signals in cosmological data and the curiosities of the

+ Sm (2.92) ΛCDM cosmology beyond the Hubble crisis. In many cases the signals are controversial and there is currently where, R is the Ricci scalar, Λ is the cosmological con- debate in the literature on the possible physical or sys- stant, Sm is the action for matter fields, σ is a scalar tematic origin of these signals. For completeness we refer field non-minimally coupled to the Ricci scalar, F (σ) is to all signals we could identify in the literature referring the coupling to the Ricci scalar and V (σ) is the poten- also to references that dispute the physical origin of these tial for the scalar field. A variety of possible types of signals. the non-minimal coupling of the scalar field to the Ricci F (σ) and of the potential for the scalar field which can alleviate the H0 tension by reducing the sound horizon III.1. Growth tension scale through modified early cosmic expansion, has been considered in the literature [672–675]. The Planck/ΛCDM parameter values in the context In particular Ref. [676] introduces a model of early 23 of GR indicate stronger growth of cosmological pertur- modified gravity . This model has a non-minimal cou- bations than the one implied by observational data of pling of the form [676] dynamical probes. In this section we review the observational evidence for this tension also known as the Ω −σ F (σ) = M 2 + ξσ2 (2.93) 0m 8 pl tension or simply ’growth tension’. and a quartic potential

λσ4 III.1.1. Methods and data V (σ) = (2.94) 4 The value of the growth parameter combination S8 ≡ where λ and ξ are dimensionless parameters. For ξ = 0 0.5 this model reduces to the EDE model of Ref. [62]. In σ8(Ω0m/0.3) (where σ8 is discussed in more detail in the early modified gravity model, gravity changes with what follows) is found by weak lensing (WL) [70, 71, 818– 821], cluster counts (CC) [822–827] and redshift space redshift in such a way that the H0 estimate from CMB can have larger values. Ref. [676] has shown that this distortion (RSD) data [72–76, 157, 828–830] to be lower model can resolve the Hubble tension and at the same compared to the Planck CMB (TT,TE,EE+lowE) value time, in contrast to an EDE model, results in lower value S8 = 0.834 ± 0.016 [53] at a level of about 2 − 3σ as shown in TableIII and in Fig. 21 (for a recent overview of the late-time density fluctuation amplitude σ8 and thus the tension with LSS dynamical probes WL, RSD and of this tension, see Ref. [55]). This is also expressed by CC data can be at least partially resolved. In general the fact that dynamical cosmological probes (WL, RSD, early modified gravity model compared to the EDE can CC) favor lower value of the matter density parameter provide a better fit to LSS data and can imply better Ω0m ≈ 0.26 ± 0.04 [290] than geometric probes (CMB, predictions on LSS observables. BAO, SnIa). This could be a signal of weaker gravity than the predictions of General Relativity in the context of a ΛCDM background [73–76, 831] (for a recent study on a weak gravity in the context of a ΛCDM background, 22 For studies of the massive photons in the Standard-Model Ex- see Ref. [832]). tension, see Refs. [668, 669]. 23 It should not be confused with the previously introduced differed model with the same name ”Early Modified Gravity” [677–679]. In this model gravity is allowed to be modified after BBN, before The observational evidence for weaker growth indicated and during recombination. by the dynamical probes of the cosmic expansion and the 36

Dataset S8 Ω0m σ8 Year Refs.

Planck CMB TT,TE,EE+lowE 0.834 ± 0.016 0.3166 ± 0.0084 0.8120 ± 0.0073 2020 [53] Planck CMB TT,TE,EE+lowE+lensing 0.832 ± 0.013 0.3153 ± 0.0073 0.8111 ± 0.0060 2020 [53]

+0.024 WL KiDS-1000 0.759−0.021 - - 2021 [833] +0.019 WL KiDS + VIKING + DES-Y1 0.755−0.021 - - 2020 [818] +0.025 WL KiDS + VIKING + DES-Y1 0.762−0.024 - - 2020 [834] +0.043 WL KiDS+VIKING-450 0.716−0.038 - - 2020 [835] +0.040 WL KiDS+VIKING-450 0.737−0.036 - - 2020 [836] WL KiDS-450 0.651 ± 0.058 - - 2017 [819] WL KiDS-450 0.745 ± 0.039 - - 2017 [820] +0.026 +0.030 +0.045 WL DES Y1 3 × 2tpf 0.773−0.020 0.267−0.017 0.817−0.056 2018 [71] +0.027 WL DES Y1 0.782−0.027 - - 2018 [361] +0.032 +0.052 +0.110 WL HSC-TPCF 0.804−0.029 0.346−0.100 0.766−0.098 2020 [837] +0.030 WL HSC-pseudo-Cl 0.780−0.033 - - 2019 [838]

+0.05 +0.05 +0.11 CC SDSS-DR8 0.79−0.04 0.22−0.04 0.91−0.10 2019 [826] CC ROSAT (WtG) 0.77 ± 0.05 0.26 ± 0.03 0.83 ± 0.04 2015 [839] +0.04 +0.031 +0.04 CC DES Y1 0.65−0.04 0.179−0.038 0.85−0.06 2020 [821] CC Planck tSZ 0.785 ± 0.038 0.32 ± 0.02 0.76 ± 0.03 2018 [840] CC Planck tSZ 0.792 ± 0.056 0.31 ± 0.04 0.78 ± 0.04 2015 [825] CC SPT-tSZ 0.749 ± 0.055 0.276 ± 0.047 0.781 ± 0.037 2019 [841] CC XMM-XXL 0.83 ± 0.11 0.40 ± 0.09 0.72 ± 0.07 2018 [842]

+0.038 +0.036 +0.044 RSD 0.700−0.037 0.201−0.033 0.857−0.042 2021 [843] RSD 0.747 ± 0.0286 0.279 ± 0.028 0.775 ± 0.018 2018 [75]

0.5 TABLE III. The value of the structure growth parameter combination S8 ≡ σ8(Ω0m/0.3) , the matter density parameter Ω0m and the the power spectrum amplitude σ8 at 68% CL through direct and indirect measurements by different methods. gravitational law on cosmological scales may be reviewed from the shear catalogues by the lensing analysis of the as follows: Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope Lensing (CFHTLenS) III.1.1.1. Weak lensing: The weak gravitational [861–865] and the KiDS [819, 820] appear to be lower lensing from matter fluctuations along the line of sight compared to the Planck value at a level of about 3σ. slightly distorts the shapes (shear) and size (magnifica- The analysis of Ref. [820] adopting a spatially flat tion) of distant galaxies (for reviews see Refs. [844–846]). ΛCDM model and using the KiDS-450 data reports This distortion is a powerful and principal cosmological S8 = 0.745 ± 0.039 which results in 2.3σ tension with probe of the mass distribution which can be predicted the value estimated by Planck15. This KiDS-Planck dis- theoretically [847–850]. Using various statistical meth- cordance has also been investigated in Ref. [819] where ods shape distortions can be measured by analyzing the applying the quadratic estimator to KiDS-450 shear data angular shear correlation function, or its Fourier trans- reports S8 = 0.651 ± 0.058 which is in tension with the form, the shear power spectrum [833, 838]. A special Planck2015 results at the 3.2σ level. type of WL is the galaxy-galaxy lensing (GGL) [851, 852] which is the slight distortion of shapes of source galaxies in the background of a lens galaxy arising from the Using a combination of the measurements of KiDS- gravitational deflection of light due to the gravitational 450 and VISTA Kilo-Degree infrared Galaxy Survey potential of the lens galaxy along the line of sight. +0.040 (VIKING) [866], Ref. [836] finds S8 = 0.737−0.036 which The WL surveys, the Kilo Degree Survey (KiDS) [853– is discrepant with measurements from the Planck analy- 856], the Subaru Hyper Suprime-Cam lensing survey sis at the 2.3σ level. Ref. [835] for the KiDS+VIKING- (HSC) [857, 858]) and the Dark Energy Survey (DES) 450 (or KV450) reports an updated constraint of S8 = +0.043 [859, 860] provide data useful for cosmic shear stud- 0.716−0.038. Meanwhile in Ref. [361] using the DES first ies. In particular WL measurements of S8 obtained from year (DES-Y1) data assuming a ΛCDM model reports 37

+0.027 24 S8 = 0.782−0.027 which is in ∼ 2.3σ tension with the mass function (HMF). This formalism was originally in- Planck18 result. The constraint on S8 from the combined troduced by Press and Schechter [894]. A general mathe- tomographic weak lensing analysis of KiDS + VIKING matical form for the comoving number density expression + DES-Y1 adopting a flat ΛCDM model by Ref. [834] is of haloes is (e.g [895–898]) +0.025 S8 = 0.762−0.024 which is in 2.5σ tension with Planck18 −1 +0.019 dn ρ¯m d ln σ result and by Ref. [818] is S8 = 0.755−0.021 which is in = f(σ) (3.1) 3.2σ tension with Planck18 result. Analysing the most dM M dM recent KiDS cosmic shear data release (KiDS-1000 [868]) whereρ ¯ = ρ Ω is the mean matter density of alone and assuming a spatially flat ΛCDM model the m crit m the Universe, σ is the rms variance of the linear den- value S = 0.759+0.024 was estimated by Ref. [833]. 8 −0.021 sity field smoothed on a spherical volume containing Analysing the first-year data of HSC in the context of a mass M, and f(σ) is a model-dependent ‘universal’ the flat ΛCDM model and using the pseudo-C method l halo multiplicity function (for a publicly available cluster (for details of this method, see Ref. [869, 870]), Ref.[838] toolkit Python package, see [899]). There are numerous finds S = 0.780+0.030 and adopting the standard two- 8 −0.033 parametrizations of the multiplicity function f(σ) based point correlation functions (TPCF) estimators, ξ Ref. ± on numerical N-body simulations or theoretical models. [837] finds S = 0.804+0.032. The analysis of galaxy 8 −0.029 A popular parametrization provided by Ref. [898] is clustering and weak gravitational lensing of the DES Y1 data combining three two-point functions (the so-called σ −χ 2 3 × 2pt analysis) of gravitational lensing and galaxy po- f(σ) = A + 1 e−c/σ (3.2) sitions (the cosmic shear correlation function, the galaxy b clustering angular autocorrelation function, the galaxy- where A, χ, b, c are four free parameters that depend on galaxy lensing cross-correlation function) by Ref. [71] +0.026 +0.030 the halo definition and need to be calibrated. gives S8 = 0.773−0.020 and Ω0m = 0.267−0.017 in flat Measurements of the abundance of galaxy clusters ΛCDM model. This value is in ∼ 2.3σ tension with n(M, z) provide consistent constraints on the density of Planck18 result. matter Ω0m, the root mean square density fluctuation σ8, III.1.1.2. Cluster counts: Galaxy clusters which the parameter combination S (α) = σ (Ω /0.3)α (e.g. are related to peaks in the matter density field on large 8 8 0m [833, 838, 900]) (where α ∼ 0.2 − 0.6 and S8 ≡ S8(α = scales constitute a probe of the growth history of struc- 0.5)), the dark energy equation-of-state w and the sum of tures [871, 872] (for a review, see Refs. [873, 874]). Cur- P the neutrino masses mν (massive neutrinos can sup- rent analyses from the number counts of galaxy clus- press the matter power spectrum on small scales and this ters use catalogs from surveys at different wavelengths directly affect the growth of cosmic structure) [101]. of the electromagnetic spectrum. Such surveys include Using cluster abundance analysis in the SDSS DR8 for Planck [875], South Pole Telescope (SPT) [876] and Ata- a flat ΛCDM cosmological model with massive neutri- cama Cosmology Telescope (ACT) [283] in the microwave nos Ref. [826] finds S = 0.79+0.05. Ref. [839] using (millimeter) via the thermal Sunyaev-Zel’dovich (tSZ) 8 −0.04 25 Weighting the Giant (WtG) [901, 902] lensing analysis of effect [877–879] , extended Roentgen survey with an the X-ray ROentgen SATellite (ROSAT) cluster catalogs imaging telescope array (eROSITA) [883–887] in the X- [903] finds S8 = 0.77 ± 0.05. The analysis of the counts ray that finds extended sources and measures the X-ray and weak lensing signal of of the DES Y1 dataset by Ref. luminosity and temperature, Sloan Digital Sky Survey +0.030 [821] gives S8 = 0.65 ± 0.04 and Ω0m = 0.267−0.017 in (SDSS) [888] and Dark Energy Survey (DES) [889] in the flat ΛCDM. Using galaxy clusters observed in millime- optical/near-infrared (NIR). These surveys find peaks in ter wavelengths through the tSZ effect Ref. [840] reports the galaxy distribution and measure the richness of the S8 = 0.785±0.038 assuming ΛCDM model. The analysis corresponding clusters. The microwave/tSZ and X-ray of the Planck 2015 cluster counts via the tSZ signal by surveys detection techniques are based on the hot ICM Ref. [825] finds S8 = 0.792 ± 0.056. Recently, assuming [890, 891] and in some cases require auxiliary data to ob- a flat ΛCDM model, in which the total neutrino mass is tain useful constraints e.g. redshift estimates (for recent a free parameter, the analysis of SPT tSZ cluster counts methods, see Refs. [892, 893]). by Ref. [841] results in S8 = 0.749 ± 0.055. Using X-ray The CC method is based on the predicted halo abun- clusters detected from the XMM-XXL survey [904] for dance (number density) n(M, z) of halos with mass less a flat ΛCDM cosmological model the Ref. [842] reports than M at redshift z which is also known as the halo S8 = 0.83 ± 0.10. Also, constraints on structure growth parameter combination S8 from cluster abundance data have been obtained by Refs. [905–910]. III.1.1.3. Redshift space distortion: Peculiar 24 This tension was calculated by Ref. [867]. The authors have motions of galaxies falling towards overdense region gen- explored a number of different methods to quantify the tension relative to the best-fit Planck2018 cosmology. erate large scale galaxy clustering, anisotropic in redshift 25 The inverse Compton scattering between CMB photons and hot space. Measuring this illusory anisotropy that distorts electrons in the intracluster medium (ICM) (for a review, see the distribution of galaxies in redshift space (i.e. RSD) Refs. [880–882]) we can quantify the galaxy velocity field. This important 38

probe of LSS can be used to constrain the growth rate of and σ8 parameters in the context of a ΛCDM back- cosmic structures [911–913]. ground can be constrained. Thus, Ref. [75] using a In particular the RSD is sensitive to the cosmological compilation of 63 RSD datapoints finds the ΛCDM best growth rate of matter density perturbations f which de- fit value Ω0m = 0.279 ± 0.028 and σ8 = 0.775 ± 0.018. pends on the theory of gravity and is defined as [914–916] Ref. [843] using RSD selected data and assuming ΛCDM +0.038 +0.036 model reports S8 = 0.700−0.037,Ω0m = 0.201−0.033 and d ln δ(a) +0.044 γ(a) σ8 = 0.857 which are in 3σ tension with the Planck f(a) ≡ ' [Ωm(a)] (3.3) −0.042 d ln a 2018 results.

where a = 1 is the scale factor, δ ≡ δρm is the matter 1+z ρm overdensity field (with ρm is the matter density of the III.1.2. Theoretical models background) and γ is the growth index (e.g. [917]). The nearly constant and scale-independent value γ ' 6 ' 11 Non-gravitational mechanisms can address the S8 ten- 0.545 corresponds to General Relativity (GR) prediction sion (for a review, see Ref. [948]). Such mechanisms in the context of ΛCDM (e.g. [915]). include the following: The observable combination fσ8(a) ≡ f(a) · σ(a) is measured at various redshifts by different surveys as a • Dynamical dark energy models [949–970] and run- probe of the growth of matter density perturbations. The ning vacuum models [467–471, 971, 972], which theoretically predicted value of this product can be ob- modify the cosmological background H(z) to a form tained from the solution δ(a) of the equation [918] different from ΛCDM (see Subsection II.3.1). This modification may involve the presence of dynamical 0 00 3 H (a) 0 3 Ω0mGeff (a)/G dark energy dominant at late cosmological times or δ (a) + + δ (a) − 5 2 2 δ(a) = 0 a H(a) 2 a H(a) /H0 at times before recombination. (3.4) using the definition • Interacting dark energy models, which modify the equation for the evolution of linear matter fluctua- δ(a) tions as well as the H(z) cosmological background σ(a) ≡ σ (3.5) 8 δ(a = 1) [442–445] as discussed in Subsection II.3.1. This class of models can address the structure growth σ8 where G is Newton’s constant as measured by local exper- tension between the values inferred from the CMB iments, Geff is the effective gravitational coupling which and the WL measurements. is related to the growth of matter perturbation, σ(a) is the redshift dependent rms fluctuations of the linear den- • Effects of massive neutrinos [964, 973–979] which −1 sity field within spheres of radius R = 8h Mpc and σ8 are relativistic at early times and contribute to is its value today. radiation while at late times they become non- Hence, the more robust bias free quantity fσ8 is given relativistic but with significant velocities (hot dark by matter) (for a review, see Refs. [980–983]). The change of radiation to hot dark matter affects the σ8 0 Hubble expansion. Simultaneously the residual fσ8(a) = a δ (a) (3.6) δ(a = 1) streaming velocities are still large enough at late times to slow down the growth of structure [984]. 26 RSD growth data in the form of fσ8 have been This effect of massive neutrinos slows down the provided by wide variety of surveys including the 2- growth as required by the RSD data and relieves degree Field Galaxy Redshift Survey (2dFGRS) [922, the S8 tension coming from WL data [978]. 923], VIMOS-VLT Deep Survey (VVDS) [924], SDSS [286, 925–929], WiggleZ [930], 6dFGS [301, 931], Galaxy • Primordial magnetic fields [985] induce addi- and Mass Assembly (GAMA) [932], BOSS [353, 933– tional mildly non-linear, small-scale baryon inho- 935], Subaru Fiber Multi-Object Spectrograph (FMOS) mogeneities present in the plasma before recombi- galaxy redshift survey (FastSound) [936], VIMOS Pub- nation. The required field results in a reduction of lic Extra-galactic Redshift Survey (VIPERS) [937–939], the sound horizon scale at recombination and has eBOSS [290, 940–945], Dark Energy Spectroscopic In- the potential to resolve both the H0 and S8 tension strument (DESI) [946, 947]. Using such data the Ω0m [986]. In addition to the above non-gravitational mechanisms discussed above a possible interesting new fundamental 26 physics approach can also reduce the S tension. Such For an extensive compilation of RSD data points fσ8, see Ref. 8 [76] and for other compilations, see Refs. [74, 75, 828, 919, 920]. an approach is most likely to affect three basic observable Also for a publicly available RSD likelihood for MontePython see parameters: the Hubble parameter H(z, w) (with w the Refs. [830, 921]. dark energy equation of state parameter), as well as the 39

FlatΛCDM- Growth Tension

0.834 • Planck CMB TT,TE,EE+lowE Aghanim(2020) 0.832 • Planck CMB TT,TE,EE+lowE+lensing Aghanim(2020)

0.759 • WL KiDS-1000 Asgari(2021) 0.755 • WL KiDS+VIKING+DES-Y1 Asgari(2020) 0.762 • WL KiDS+VIKING+DES-Y1 Joudaki(2020) 0.716 • WL KiDS+VIKING-450 Wright(2020) 0.737 • WL KiDS+VIKING-450 Hildebrandt(2020) 0.651 • WL KiDS-450 Kohlinger(2017) 0.745 • WL KiDS-450 Hildebrandt(2017) 0.773 • WL DES Y1 3×2 tpf Abbott(2018) 0.782 • WL DES Y1 Troxel(2018) 0.804 • WL HSC-TPCF Hamana(2020) 0.78 • WL HSC-pseudo-Cl Hikage(2019)

0.79 • CC SDSS-DR8 Costanzi(2019) 0.77 • CC ROSAT Mantz(2015) 0.65 • CC DES Y1 Abbott(2020) 0.785 • CC Planck tSZ Salvati(2018) 0.792 • CC Planck tSZ Ade(2015) 0.749 • CC SPT-tSZ Bocquet(2019) 0.83 • CC XMM-XXL Pacaud(2018)

0.7 • RSD Benisty(2021) 0.747 • RSD Kazantzidis(2018)

0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2

S8≡σ8 Ωm / 0.3

FIG. 21. The value of S8 with the 68% CL constraints derived by recent measurements within a ΛCDM scenario. 40 eﬀective Newton constants for growth of perturbations tials deﬁning the functions µG(a, k) and Σ(a, k) on sub- horizon scales (i.e. k/aH 1)

G (z, k) 2 2 µ (z, k) ≡ eff (3.7) k (Ψ + Φ) = −8πGΣ(a, k)a ρ∆ (3.10) G G

2 2 and lensing k Ψ = −4πGµG(a, k)a ρ∆ (3.11)

where ρm is the matter density of the background, ∆ GL(z, k) the comoving matter density contrast defined as ∆ ≡ Σ(z, k) ≡ (3.8) G δ+3Ha(1+w)υ/k which is gauge-invariant [188], w = p/ρ is the equation-of-state parameter and υi = −∇iu is the where G is the locally measured value of the Newton’s irrotational component of the peculiar velocity u [379]. constant. According to ΛCDM H(z) = H(z, w = −1), Using the gravitational slip parameter η (or anisotropic stress parameter) which describes the possible inequality µG = 1, Σ = 1. [990, 991] of the two Bardeen potentials that may occur The Bardeen potentials [987] (the Newtonian potential in modified gravity theories Ψ and the spatial curvature potential Φ) appear in the scalar perturbed Friedmann-Lemaˆıtre-Robertson-Walker Φ(a, k) η(a, k) = (3.12) (FLRW) metric in the conformal Newtonian gauge [374, Ψ(a, k) 988, 989] the two LSS parameters µG and Σ are related via 1 Σ(a, k) = µ (a, k) [1 + η(a, k)] (3.13) ds2 = −(1 + 2Ψ)dt2 + a2(1 − 2Φ)d~x2 (3.9) 2 G The the Hubble parameter H(z) is usually parametrized The LSS probes are sensitive to the Bardeen poten- as wCDM tials Ψ and Φ. In particular the WL probe is sensitive to 1/2 2 h 3 3(1+w)i ∇ (Ψ + Φ). The galaxy clustering arises from the gravi- H(z) = H0 Ω0m(1 + z) + (1 − Ω0m)(1 + z) tational attraction of matter and is sensitive only to the (3.14) potential Ψ. The RSD probe is sensitive to the rate of while the two LSS parameters µG and Σ do not have a growth of matter density perturbations f (see Eq. (3.3)) commonly accepted parametrization. A model and scale and provides measurements of fσ8 (see Eq. (3.6)) that independent parametrization for µG and Σ which reduce depends on the potential Ψ. to the GR value at early times and at the present time At linear level, in modified gravity models, using the as indicated by solar system (ignoring possible screening 0 perturbed metric Eq. (3.9) and the gravitational field effects) and BBN constraints (µG = 1 and µG = 0 for equations the following phenomenological equations in a = 1 and µG = 1 for a 1) [992–994] is of the form Fourier space emerge for the scalar perturbation poten- [74–76, 995]

z z µ = 1 + g (1 − a)n − g (1 − a)2n = 1 + g ( )n − g ( )2n (3.15) G a a a 1 + z a 1 + z

z z Σ = 1 + g (1 − a)m − g (1 − a)2m = 1 + g ( )m − g ( )2m (3.16) b b b 1 + z b 1 + z

> > < where ga and gb are parameters to be fit and n and m redshift, µG and Σ correspond to z > zt and µG and < are integer parameters with n ≥ 2 and m ≥ 2. Σ correspond to z < zt. Alternatively, a rapid transition parametrization is of the form [66, 274] Various studies utilize modified gravity theories including telleparallel theories of gravity [996, 997], Horndeski > < µG(z) = µG + ∆µG Θ(z − zt) (3.17) theories [998, 999] or theories beyond Horndeski [1000] to reduce the effective Newton’s constant Geff at low > < redshifts and slow down growth at low redshifts. The Σ (z) = Σ + ∆Σ Θ(z − zt) (3.18) above parametrizations can be realized in the context of where Θ is the Heaviside step function, zt is a transition physical models based on the above theories. 41

III.2. CMB anisotropy anomalies of ΛCDM. In particular using these data from Planck18 the curvature density parameter was constrained to be There is a wide range of other less discussed no- −0.007 > ΩK > −0.095 at 99 % C.L. This anomaly standard signals and statistical anomalies of the large may be connected with other asymmetries of the CMB angle fluctuations in the CMB [1001] with a typical 2 anisotropy spectrum discussed below. to 3σ significance. As mentioned a main assumption However combining Planck18 data with recent BAO of the ΛCDM model is that the fluctuations are Gaus- measurements the curvature density parameter was es- sian and statistically homogeneous and isotropic. Diverse timated to be ΩK = 0.0008 ± 0.0019 [53, 1011–1014] in anomalies have been noticed in the CMB at large angu- agreement with a spatially flat Universe. Recently the lar scales by the space missions Cosmic Background Ex- study of Ref. [1015] revisiting this problem and using a plorer (COBE) [1002], Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy new statistical analysis has shown that the Planck tem- Probe (WMAP) [1003] and Planck satelite [1004], which perature and polarization spectra are consistent with a appear to violate this assumption (for a review, see Refs. spatially flat Universe. Making a stronger case than Ref. [77, 78]). Ref. [1005] presents possible explanations of [1015], the analysis by Ref. [1016] combining Planck18 the observed CMB anomalies and Ref. [1006] explores CMB temperature and polarization data with cosmic the kinetic and the polarized Sunyaev-Zel’dovich effects chronometer measurements found that the Universe is −2 as potential probes of physical models of these anomalies. consistent with spatial flatness to O(10 ) level. In what follows we discuss some of these signals. Note A positive curvature (closed Universe) may be a plau- that some of these may not be independent27. Some of sible source of the anomalous lensing amplitude [1011– these signals have been attributed to the look-elsewhere 1013] (see Subsection III.2.8). effect. Based on this effect any large dataset will have a small number of peculiar features when there is a careful search for such features. However, this argument may not III.2.2. Anomalously strong ISW effect be applicable when the considered statistics are simple and generic as are most of the signals discussed below The decay of cosmological large-scale gravitational po- (for a detailed discussion, see Refs. [1008–1010]). tential Ψ causes the integrated Sachs-Wolfe (ISW) effect [1017] which imprints tiny secondary anisotropies to the primary fluctuations of the CMB and is a comple- III.2.1. Hints for a closed Universe (CMB vs BAO) mentary probe of dark energy (e.g. [1018]). Using a stacking technique in the CMB data (for a detailed dis- The Universe under the assumption of the cosmolog- cussion, see Refs. [1019, 1020]) anomalously strong in- ical principle is described by the Friedmann-Lemaˆıtre- tegrated Sachs–Wolfe (ISW) signal (> 3σ) has been de- Roberson-Walker (FLRW) metric tected for supervoids and superclusters on scales larger than 100h−1Mpc [1021, 1022]. This stronger than ex- dr2 ds2 = dt2 − a(t)2 + r2(dθ2 + sin2θdφ2) pected within standard ΛCDM, signal of the ISW effect 1 − Kr2 has also been studied by Refs. [1023–1028]. (3.19) In particular the analysis of Ref. [1028] for DES where K characterizes the constant spatial curvature of data alone found an excess ISW imprinted profile with data theory the spatial slices with K = −1, 0, +1 corresponding to AISW ≡ ∆T /∆T ≈ 4.1 ± 2.0 amplitude (where open hyperbolic space (negative spatial curvature), flat AISW = 1 corresponds to the ΛCDM prediction). Also Euclidean space (zero spatial curvature), and closed hy- a combination with independent BOSS data leads to perspherical space (positive spatial curvature) respec- AISW = 5.2 ± 1.6. This is in 2.6σ tension with ΛCDM tively. The curvature density parameter is defined as cosmology. 2 ΩK ≡ −K/(Ha) so that a closed Universe corresponds The average expansion rate approximation (AvERA) to ΩK < 0 and an open Universe to ΩK > 0. This pa- inhomogeneous cosmological simulation [1029] uses the rameter plays a crucial role in determining the evolution separate Universe conjecture to calculates the spatial av- of the Universe, and is closely related with the early Uni- erage of the expansion rate of local mini-Universes pre- verse physics. dicts. It indicates under the inhomogeneity assumption, Refs. [1011–1013] showed that the Planck18 tem- about ∼ 2 − 5 times higher ISW effect than ΛCDM de- perature and polarization data [53] show a preference pending on the l index of the spherical power spectrum (∼ 3.4σ) for a closed Universe (ΩK < 0) in the context [1030]. Thus large scale spatial inhomogeneities could provide an explanation to this ISW excess signal. Ref. [1031] uses angular cross-correlation techniques and combines several tracer catalogues to report A ≈ 27 The covariance of CMB anomalies in the standard ΛCDM model ISW has been studied by Ref. [1007]. This study focusing on the cor- 1.38 ± 0.32. relation of observed anomalies (i.e. the relationship or connection In general the reported AISW amplitude varies in the between all of them) examines the independence of large-angle literature depending on the dataset and the assumptions CMB feature quantities. of the analysis. Further investigation of this issue is 42

needed. dipolar modulation andn ˆ · pˆ corresponds to the dipolar modulation between the line-of-sight (LOS) of the observer (with unit vectorn ˆ) and the preferred dipo- III.2.3. CMB cold spot lar direction (with unit vectorp ˆ). The amplitude of dipolar modulation Adm is large at large angular scales −1 The cold (blue) spot was first found in WMAP 1- 2 < l . 64 (k . 0.035Mpc ), small at small angu- year temperature data by Ref. [1032] and was confirmed lar scales l & 64 and vanishes by a multipole moment in Planck data [78, 1020, 1033] in the southern hemi- of ∼ 500 − 600 [78, 1020, 1033]. The scale dependence sphere at the galactic longitude and latitude (l, b) = of the hemispherical power asymmetry was suggested by (2090, −570). It is a statistical anomaly of the large- the Refs. [1060–1070] and was investigated by the Refs. angle fluctuations in the CMB indicating non-Gaussian [1071, 1072]. features. This inconsistency with Gaussian simulations According to the hemispherical asymmetry nearly has a p-value of ∼ 1%. aligned with the Ecliptic, the temperature fluctuations The cold spot is an unusually large region of low tem- are larger on one side of the CMB sky than on the other, perature with the mean temperature decrement ∆T ≈ resulting in an unexpected dipole configuration in the −100 µK and is not consistent with the prediction of CMB power spectrum with an anomalously lower value of gaussianity of the standard ΛCDM model [1034–1036]. the variance in the northern sky compared to the south- Refs. [1027, 1037, 1038] pointed out that the anoma- ern sky [1033]. The preferred direction for the asymmetry lous nature of the cold spot corresponds to a rather cold from the Planck18 data is (l, b) = (2210, −200) in galactic 0 0 area with an angular radius in the sky of about 5 − 10 coordinates and the amplitude is Adm ∼ 0.07 with statis- from the centre surrounded by a hot ring. tically significant at the ∼ 3σ level [78]. This amplitude Possible approaches for the explanation of the Cold is ∼ 2 times higher than expected asymmetry due to cos- Spot include: non-Gaussian feature due to a large sta- mic variance (Adm ∼ 0.03) and it is inconsistent with tistical fluctuation [1032], an artefact of inflation [1034], isotropy (Adm = 0) at the ∼ 3σ level. The hemispherical the foreground [1035, 1039], multiple voids [1040], the power asymmetry in CMB can be explained by assuming imprint of a supervoid (about 140 − 200Mpc radius com- a superhorizon perturbation [1058, 1073] or asymmetric pletely empty void at z ≤ 1) through the ISW effect initial states of the quantum perturbations [1069]. [1021, 1041–1043], the axis of rotation of the Universe [1044], cosmic texture [1034, 1045], adiabatic perturbation on the last scattering surface [1046] (for a review, III.2.5. Quadrupole-octopole alignment see Refs. [1047, 1048]). The fluctuations in the standard ΛCDM model are Gaussian and statistically isotopic. Thus in harmonic III.2.4. Cosmic hemispherical power asymmetry space the quadrupole (l = 2) and octopole (l = 3) harmonics are expected to have independent and random ori- The cosmic hemispherical power asymmetry (or dipo- entations and shapes. The quadrupole and octopole have lar asymmetry) is a directional dependency of the CMB been observed to be planar and unexpectedly aligned angular power spectrum [1049–1052]. The continu- with each other [1074–1079]. This implies a violation ous dipolar modulation of hemispherical power asym- of statistical isotropy. metry corresponds to a hemispherical temperature vari- In particular in this low multipole moment anomaly ance asymmetry (signal in the CMB temperature field) the quadrupole and octopole planes are found to be mu- [78, 1020, 1049, 1050, 1053–1057]. tually aligned with the direction of the cosmic dipole or The dipolar modulated/observed CMB temperature CMB dipole (see Subsection III.3 and TableIV) and per- ∆T fluctuation T |mod in the directionn ˆ which appears to pendicular to the Ecliptic [77]. extend to lmax ' 64 can be expressed as [1055, 1058, In order to study this large-angle anomaly one can use 1059]28 the maximum angular momentum dispersion [1074] ∆T ∆T | (ˆn) = [1 + A nˆ · pˆ] | (ˆn) (3.20) l mod dm iso 2 X 2 2 T T hψ|(nˆl · L) |ψi = m |alm(nˆl)| (3.21) ∆T m=−l where T |iso is a statistically unmodulated/isotropic temperature fluctuation, A denotes the amplitude of dm where the CMB map is represented by a wave function

∆T (nˆl) ≡ ψ(nˆl) (3.22) 28 Note that the hemispherical dipole is distinct from the usual T CMB dipole. In the former case the power spectrum is assumed modulated discontinuously across a circle on the sky and in the Here alm(nˆl) correspond to the spherical harmonic coef- second the actual temperature map has a component modulated ﬁcients of the CMB map in a coordinate system with its by a smooth cosine function across the sky [1059]. z-axis in the the nˆl-direction. 43

The preferred axis nˆl is the axis around which the an- The simplest and most useful statistic is S1/2 first in- gular momentum dispersion is maximized. The direc- troduced in the WMAP first-year release [345] in order to tions of the quadrupole nˆ2 and the octopole nˆ3 are [1074] measure the deviation of the angular correlation function from zero at angular scales 600 < θ < 1800. It is defined nˆ2 = (−0.1145, −0.5265, 0.8424) (3.23) as µ Z 1 2 S = CTT (θ) d(cos θ) (3.28) nˆ3 = (−0.2578, −0.4207, 0.8698) (3.24) 1/2 µ2 with 0 with µ1 ≡ cos θ1 = cos 60 = 1/2 and µ2 ≡ cos θ2 = |nˆ · nˆ | ' 0.9838 (3.25) cos 180 = −1. 2 3 A number of alternative statistics have been proposed

This unexpected alignment of the nˆ2 and nˆ3 directions in the literature [78, 1086–1088]. For example a gener- has only a 1/62 probability of happening. alization of the S1/2 statistic suggested by Ref. [1089]. An approach in the analysis of this large-angle anomaly This statistic known as STQ uses the two-point angular may also involve the use the multipole vectors [1080] (an correlation function between fluctuations in the temper- alternative to the spherical harmonics) where each mul- ature T and the Stokes parameter29 Q, CTQ(θ), which tipole order l is represented by l unit vectors i.e a dipole can be expressed in terms of the two-point angular power TE l = 1 can be constructed by a vector, a quadrupole by the spectrum, Cl (with E the gradient mode of polariza- product of two vectors/dipoles, an octopole from three tion). The significance of a test statistic can be quantified vectors/dipoles etc. by using the p-value30, suggested by Ref. [1033]. The alignment of low multipoles indicates the exis- No sufficient explanation has yet been suggested for tence of a preferred direction in the CMB temperature this large-angle anomaly. Ref. [1095] studies the ISW ef- anisotropy. Furthermore possible relation between the fect, Ref. [1096] explores a non-trivial spatial topology of quadrupole-octopole alignment and the dipolar asymme- the Universe and Ref. [1097] studies the topology of the try has been investigated by Refs. [1054, 1058]. A neg- Planck CMB temperature fluctuations in order to find ligible relation between these anomalies was reported. a possible explanation to the suppression of large-angle However the analysis of Ref. [1081] has shown that a CMB temperature correlations. Also the low observed particular dipolar modulation including the scale depen- power in the quadrupole is a potential explanation for dence may be connected with the quadrupole-octopole the lack of correlation in the temperature maps. Ref. alignment. [1084] argues that there is a cancellation between the combined contributions of Cl with multipoles l ≤ 5 and the contributions of Cl with multipoles l ≥ 6. III.2.6. Lack of large-angle CMB temperature correlations

There is a lack of large-angle CMB temperature cor- III.2.7. Anomaly on super-horizon scales relations as first was observed by COBE satellite [1082] and was confirmed by the WMAP [345, 1083] and Planck Ref. [1098] analysed the topological characteristics of [78, 1020] temperature maps in the range l = 2 to 32. the CMB temperature fluctuation. Using mathematical This is in tension with the ΛCDM prediction. investigations on persistent homology to describe the cos- This anomaly is directly connected to the temperature mic mass distribution and performing their experiments T two-point angular correlation function CTT (θ) of the on Planck 2020 data release 4 (DR4) [1099] they claimed 0 CMB at large angular scale (θ & 60 ) which is unexpect- a detection of an anomalous topological signature in the edly close to zero [1078, 1084, 1085]. In angular space Planck CMB maps indicating non-Gaussian fluctuations. the two-point angular correlation function is defined as In particular they report an anomaly in the behavior of the loops (a 4σ deviation in the number of loops) in the 1 X CTT (θ) ≡ hT (ˆn )T (ˆn )i = (2l + 1)C P (cos θ) 1 2 4π l l l (3.26) where the average is over all pairs of directionsn ˆ with 29 The Stokes parameters Q and U (for the Stokes parameters for- nˆ · nˆ = cos θ, P (cos θ) are the Legendre polynomials malism, see Ref. [1090]) are used to describe the state of CMB 1 2 l polarization (e.g. [102, 1091]). These parameters are directly and Cl is the angular power spectrum related to the E and B modes [1092–1094]. The polarization amplitude is given by P = pQ2 + U 2. l 1 X 30 The probability value or p-value is the probability of measuring C ≡ |a |2 (3.27) l 2l + 1 lm a test statistic equal to or more extreme as the observed one, m=−l considering that the null hypothesis is correct [1033]. It provides the lower value of significance at which the model would be ruled with alm the spherical harmonic coefficients of the tem- out. A low p-value means that there is strong indication of new perature fluctuations. physics beyond the null hypothesis. 44

observed sky compared to the analysis of the redshift parameter values derived by the high l part of the CMB evolution of structure on simulations when the ΛCDM anisotropy spectrum (l > 1000) are in 2 − 3σ tension model is considered. with the corresponding values of these parameters derived from the low l part of the spectrum (1 < 1000). For example the low l multipoles predict a lower value III.2.8. The lensing anomaly of the cold dark matter density parameter ωc than the high l multipoles, with discrepancy at 2.5σ [1107]. In The recent Planck18 release [53] has confirmed the addition it has been shown that the value of H0 pre- higher compared to that expected in the standard ΛCDM dicted by Planck from l > 1000, H0 = 64.1 ± 1.7 km model, anomalous, lensing contribution in the CMB s−1Mpc−1, disagrees with the value predicted by Planck −1 −1 power spectra which is quantified by the phenomenolog- from l < 1000, H0 = 69.7 ± 1.7 km s Mpc at the ical parameter, AL [1100, 1101]. This weak lensing pa- 2.3σ level. Thus it is found that the value of H0 depends rameter AL rescales the lensing potential power spectrum on the CMB l-range examined. as31 This anomaly is probably related to the lensing anomaly ie the fact that ΛCDM is more consistent Ψ Ψ Cl → ALCl (3.29) with the low l part of the spectrum that this not af- fected by the lensing anomaly (see discussion in Refs. where AL = 0 corresponds to unlensed while AL = 1 is [149, 1104, 1108]). the expected lensed result [1100] measuring the lensing effect in the CMB temperature power spectrum. Since the main impacts of lensing on the CMB temper- III.2.10. The preference for odd parity correlations ature power spectrum are to add power at small scales and to smooth the structure of the acoustic peaks and There is an anomalous power excess (deficit) of odd troughs (the peaks are reduced slightly, and the troughs (even) l multipoles in the CMB anisotropy spectrum on between them filled in) [1102, 1103] the adding of param- the largest angular scales (2 < l < 30), [78, 1109–1114]. eter A changes the amount of smoothing of the CMB L A map consisting of odd (even) multipoles possesses odd primary spectra peaks and troughs. A higher lensing am- (even) parity thus this effect may be considered as power plitude (A > 1) than predicted in the flat ΛCDM cos- L (spectrum) asymmetry between even and odd parity map mology (A = 1) by roughly 10% (at the level of 2.8σ) L which is known as parity asymmetry. has been found in the temperature power spectra by the In order to compare even and odd multipoles Ref. Planck team [53]. [1111] considers the parity asymmetry statistic defined It should be noted that the oscillatory residuals be- as the ratio P ≡ P +/P − of quantities P + and P − which tween the Planck temperature power spectra and the represent the mean power in even and odd only multi- best-fit ΛCDM model in the multipole range l ∈ poles respectively for the range 2 ≤ l ≤ l [900, 1700] are in opposite phase compared to the CMB max

and thus phenomenologically similar to the effects of lmax l X 1 ± (−1) l(l + 1)Cl gravitational lensing [1104, 1105]. P ± = (3.30) 4π A plausible explanation of the anomalous lensing am- 2 plitude is a positive curvature (closed Universe) which was investigated by Refs. [1011–1013]. Other possible A different statistic to quantify the parity asymmetry has sources which explain the lensing anomaly by mimicking been proposed by Ref. [1115]. a lensing effect are: a component of cold dark matter isocurvature (CDI) perturbation with a blue tilt (for a detailed discussion, see Ref. [1106]) and oscillations in III.3. Cosmic dipoles the primordial power spectrum which have the same frequency but opposite phase with the acoustic peaks [53]. There have been studies pointing out the presence of All these effects are degenerate with the smoothing effect signals which indicate the violation of the cosmological of lensing. principle. A physical mechanism producing such violation on Hubble scales is studied by Ref. [1116]. Various other possible mechanisms have been suggested to ex- III.2.9. High-low l consistency plain the observed violations of statistical isotropy e.g. superhorizon perturbations which introduce a preferred Ref. [1107] pointed out that there are internal incon- direction in our Universe [1073, 1117] (for a review, see sistencies in the Planck TT power spectrum. The ΛCDM Ref. [1005]). The dipole amplitudes and the directions (l, b) (galactic coordinates) from the different cosmological observations described below are shown in Fig. 22 and along with the corresponding references in TableIV. 31 Note that this is not the usual Cl but it is the additional contribution due to lensing. 45

• CMB Dipole(Planck) +900

+600

+300

0 0 0 0 0 00 60 120 180 240 300 3600

-300

-600

-900

• Velocity Dipole(NVSS) •α Dipole(VLT/UVES) • CMB Quadrupole(Planck) • CMB Hemispherical Asym.(Planck) • Max. Acceleration(Union2) • Velocity Dipole(TGSS) • Quasar Dipole • CMB Octopole(Planck) • CMB Hemispherical Asym.(WMAP) • Max. Acceleration(Pantheon)

FIG. 22. Mollweide-projection view of preferred directions in galactic coordinates for diﬀerent cosmological observations (see TableIV).

Observations l [deg] b [deg] Amplitude Signiﬁcance Refs.

CMB Dipole (Planck) 264.021 ± 0.011 48.253 ± 0.005 ∼ 0.007 [544, 1118] Velocity Radio Dipole (TGSS) 243.00 ± 12.00 45.00 ± 3.00 0.070 ± 0.004 [80] Velocity Radio Dipole (NVSS) 253.12 ± 11.00 27.28 ± 3.00 0.023 ± 0.004 [80] Velocity Radio Dipole (NVSS) 253.00 ± 2.00 28.71 ± 12.00 0.019 ± 0.002 [1119] Velocity Radio Dipole (NVSS) 253.00 32.00 ± 12.00 0.012 ± 0.005 [1120] Quasar Dipole 238.20 28.80 0.01554 4.9σ [81] +0.22 −5 α Dipole (VLT/UVES) 330 ± 15 −13 ± 10 0.97−0.20 × 10 4.2σ [82] CMB Quadrupole (Planck SMICAa) 238.5 76.6 [1033] CMB Octopole (Planck SMICA) 239.0 64.3 [1033] CMB Hemispherical Asymmetry (Planck) 221 −22 0.07 ∼ 3σ [78] CMB Hemispherical Asymmetry (WMAP) 227 −27 0.07 3.4σ [1123] Maximum Acceleration (Pantheon) 286.93 ± 18.52 27.02 ± 6.50 0.0018 ± 0.0002 [158] +23 +11 Maximum Acceleration (Union2) 309−3 18−10 [1124]

a Spectral Matching Independent Component Analysis (SMICA) is a method to extract the CMB component [1121] described in [1122].

TABLE IV. The amplitudes and the directions (l, b) (galactic coordinates) from diﬀerent cosmological observations (Fig. 22) along with the corresponding references . The amplitude of CMB dipole has derived using the Eq. (3.33) (e.g. [81]).

The physical origin of these dipoles is described in the III.3.1. Velocity radio dipole following subsections.

A large scale velocity flow dipole was pointed out in Refs. [79, 80]. The dipole moment of the peculiar velocity field (dipole bulk flow) which is a sensitive probe of the amplitude and growth rate of fluctuations on large scales 46

[1125] was investigated by Refs. [1126–1134]. In many [79, 1141] that the dipole structure of the velocity field is cases the results are controversial and there is a debate in less in the reference frame of the Local Group of galaxies the literature on the consistency with the ΛCDM model. than in the CMB frame. This persistence of the dipole It is usually assumed that our local (solar system) pe- structure of the velocity flow in the CMB frame at large culiar motion with respect to the CMB rest frame pro- distances is not unexpected if we are located in an un- duces the CMB dipole anisotropy (l = 1) [1135, 1136] derdensity. (also known as solar dipole [1118, 1137]) . In the standard According to the standard model if the Universe is model, this implies that the LSS distribution should have isotropic our velocity with respect to the CMB rest frame a similar kinematic dipole known as the velocity dipole and our velocity relative to the LSS should be identical. or radio dipole which arises from the Doppler boosting However, as was first noted by Ref. [1142], while the of the CMB monopole and from special relativistic aber- direction of the radio dipole is consistent with that of ration effects [1138]. the CMB, the velocity of our local motion obtained from In order to describe the origin of this dipole, a pop- the radio dipole exceeds that obtained from the CMB ulation of sources with power-law spectra depending on dipole. Radio continuum surveys which sample the Uni- frequency ν is usually assumed verse at intermediate redshifts (z ∼ 1) have been used as

−α an excellent probe to large scale isotropy and a discrep- Sν ∝ ν (3.31) ancy between the predicted and measured amplitudes of the velocity have been revealed [80, 1119, 1120, 1143– where S is the flux density and α32 is an individual ν 1145]. In particular the analysis by Ref. [80] has shown spectral index with typically assumed value α ∼ 0.75 that the radio dipole using the sky distribution of ra- [1139]. The integral source counts per unit solid angle dio sources from the NRAO VLA Sky Survey (NVSS) above some limiting flux density S can be approximated ν dataset [1146] and TIFR GMRT Sky Survey (TGSS) by a power law dataset [80, 1147, 1148] is ∼ 2 and ∼ 5 times larger than dN predicted by the mock realisations within the context of (> S) ∝ S−x (3.32) ΛCDM cosmology respectively. The above observed dis- dΩ ν crepancy between the radio and CMB dipoles has been where x ∼ 1 and can be different for each survey. An confirmed by independent groups and could imply the observer moving with velocity υ c with respect to the existence of an anisotropic Universe. frame in which these sources are isotropically distributed Possible explanations of the violation of statistical sees a dipole anisotropy 1 + D cos θ over the sky with isotropy are: systematics due to the incomplete sky cov- amplitude [1140] erage of the radio continuum surveys [1120, 1143, 1149], υ intrinsic dipole in the local LSS [1150], nearby nonlinear D = [2 + x(1 + α)] (3.33) structures of voids and walls and filaments [79], remnant c of the pre-inflationary Universe [1151] and superhorizon According to the most recent measurements the in- perturbation [1152, 1153]. ferred velocity of the Sun relative to the CMB rest frame is [544, 1118]

υ III.3.2. Quasar dipole β ≡ = (1.23357 ± 0.00036) × 10−3 (3.34) c The distribution of quasars across the sky may provide or υ = 369.82 ± 0.11 km s−1 (3.35) independent probe of the cosmological principle [1154]. As previously discussed there is an expected anisotropy along the direction with galactic longitude and latitude related to the CMB dipole anisotropy (about 1 part in (l, b) = (264.0210 ± 0.0110, 48.2530 ± 0.0050) or RA ∼ 1000) due to our motion with respect to the CMB rest 1680, Dec ∼ −70 [544, 1118]. frame. The CMB rest frame is conventionally taken to cor- Ref. [81] used mid-infrared data from the Wide-field respond to the standard of cosmic rest frame and is as- Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE) [1155] to create reli- sumed to be statistically homogeneous and isotropic in able AGN/quasar catalogs and a custom quasar sam- the context of the FLRW model. In this rest frame the ple from the new CatWISE2020 data release [1156]. I Hubble flow should be most uniform (minimum Hubble was shown that there is a statistically significant dipole variation frame) and the comoving observers should not in the density of distant quasars with direction (l, b) = see a kinematic dipole. However it has been observed (238.20, 28.80) which is 27.80 away from the direction of the CMB dipole. Its amplitude was found to be 0.01554, ∼ 2 times larger than predicted, with statistical significance at the 4.9σ level (or with a p-value of 5 × 10−7) for 32 The individual spectral index α should not be confused with the a normal distribution. This result is in conflict with the fine-structure constant α. cosmological principle. 47

c III.3.3. Fine structure constant α dipole where DH (z) ≡ H(z) is the Hubble distance and DM (z) ≡ (1 + z)DA(z) = dA(z) is the comoving angular In the past 20 years there has been interest in the diameter distance. These values are in ∼ 2.3σ tension possibility of the variation of the fine structure constant with CMB predictions DH (z = 2.40)/rs = 8.586 ± 0.021 2 α ≡ e /(4π0~c) (where e, 0, ~, and c are the electron and DM (z = 2.40)/rs = 39.77 ± 0.09 by Planck 2015 flat charge, the vacuum permittivity, the reduced Planck’s ΛCDM cosmology [341]. constant, and the speed of light) [83, 1157–1165] (for re- The galaxy BAO peak position in the matter corre- view of varying fine structure constant, see Ref. [27]). lation function ξ(s) (see Eq. 2.17 and Fig.7) and the The analysis of Refs. [82, 83] uses the “many multi- measurements DH (z = 2.40)/rs and DM (z = 2.40)/rs plet” (MM) method [1166–1169] to analyze quasar ab- were found to be consistent with CMB predictions. This sorption line spectra obtained using the Ultraviolet and discrepancy between galaxy and Lyα BAO constitutes Visual Echelle Spectrograph (UVES) [1170] on the Very the BAO anomaly which has been investigated in Refs. Large Telescope (VLT). It indicates both the violation of [84–86]. the cosmological principle and the spatial variation of the Using new Lyα BAO measurements from the BOSS fine structure constant α which is approximated as a spa- survey and from its extended version eBOSS in the SDSS tial dipole with direction (l, b) = (3300 ±150, −130 ±100) DR14 the tension with CMB predictions was reduced to +0.22 −5 and amplitude 0.97−0.20 × 10 , preferred over a simple ∼ 1.7σ [303, 306] and from eBOSS in the SDSS DR16 to monopole model with significance at the 4.2σ (for possi- only ∼ 1.5σ [307]. ble systematics in this analysis, see Refs. [1171–1173]). Ref. [85] argues that this anomaly arises by cosmo- The variation of α across the sky was shown to be well logical effects at z < 2.34 and the tension is caused by fit by an angular dipole model of the form [82] evolution of dark energy equation of state w(z) for redshift range 0.57 < z < 2.34. ∆α α − α ≡ 0 = C cos θ + C (3.36) α α A B III.5. Parity violating rotation of CMB linear where α0 is the present local value, θ is the angle with re- polarization (Cosmic Birefringence) spect to the dipole direction, CA is the angular amplitude of the dipole term and CB is a monopole term. It is worth to note that the analysis of Ref. [1174] In the standard model of elementary particles and suggests that there are no robust indications of time or fields, parity violation is observed only in the weak inter- space variations of α. However recent measurements of action sector [1180, 1181]. A certain class of quintessence quasar absorption-line spectra indicate a spatially depen- models should generically generate such parity asymmet- dent value of fine structure constant α at a ∼ 4σ signifi- ric physics [1182, 1183]. In particular a parity violating cance level over a simple monopole (no-variation) model (nearly) massless axionlike scalar field φ (dark matter or [1175, 1176]. In addition, it is found that the fine struc- dark energy) would rotate CMB polarisation angles of ture constant α dipole is anomalously aligned with other CMB photons as they travel from the last scattering sur- dipoles and the preferred direction in ∆α/α is correlated face (z ≈ 1000) to the present by a non-zero angle βa with the one in the distribution of SNIa [1177, 1178]. (cosmic birefringence). A Chern–Simons coupling between a time-dependent axionlike field φ(t) and the electromagnetic tensor and III.4. BAO curiosities its dual in the Lagrangian density (e.g. [1182, 1184])

1 µν As mentioned above (see Subsection II.2.3) the BAO L = gφγ φFµν F˜ (3.39) measurements can be classiﬁed in two classes: galaxy 4 BAO and Lyα BAO (with Lyα auto-correlation function induces a cosmic isotropic birefringence angle (e.g.[1185, and Lyα-quasar cross-correlation function). A 2.5 − 3σ 1186]) discrepancy between the BAO peak position in the Lyα at an eﬀective redshift of z ∼ 2.34 and the CMB predic- 1 Z t0 tions from Planck/ΛCDM cosmological model has been β = g φdt˙ (3.40) a 2 φγ found [180, 305, 1179]. ts For example, Ref. [180] uses the Lyα auto-correlation and produces a non-zero observed EB spectrum [1187] function and the Lyα-quasar cross-correlation function to report the measurements of the BAO scale in the line- 1 CEB = sin (4β )(CEE − CBB) (3.41) of-sight direction l 2 a l l D (z = 2.40)/r = 8.94 ± 0.22 (3.37) H s where gφγ is a Chern-Simons coupling constant which has ˜µν and in the transverse direction mass-dimension −1, F is the dual of the electromagnetic tensor of Fµν , and t0 and ts are the times at present DM (z = 2.40)/rs = 36.6 ± 1.2 (3.38) and last scattering surface, respectively. 48

Using a novel method developed in Refs. [1188–1190], galaxies in the Local Group. In particular the ΛCDM a non-zero value of the isotropic cosmic birefringence model predicts orders of magnitude larger number of βa = 0.35 ± 0.14 deg (68% C.L) was recently detected satellites (∼ 1000) than the observed number of dwarf in the Planck18 polarization data at a 2.4σ statistical galaxies (∼ 50) [1234, 1236]. significance level by Ref. [1191]. This recent evidence of III.6.0.3. The Too Big To Fail (TBTF) problem the non zero value of birefringence poses a problem for [1237–1242]. This problem refers to an inconsistency be- standard ΛCDM cosmology and indicates a hint of a new tween the predicted mass of dark matter subhaloes in ingredient beyond this model. ΛCDM theory and the observed central mass of brightest An axion or an axion-like particle with a weak coupling satellite galaxies in the Local Group [1239, 1240] (also in to photon as a possible source of the cosmic birefringence the Milky Way [1237, 1238] or in the Andromeda (M31) was investigated by Ref. [1192]. Furthermore, birefrin- [1241]). gence inducing axion-like particles could be candidates In particular the ΛCDM predicted central densities of for an early dark energy resolution to the Hubble tension the most massive dark matter subhalos are systematically [1192]. Refs. [1193, 1194] study the anisotropic birefrin- larger than the inferred from kinematics of the brightest gence and constraints are derived. The axion field fluc- Local Group satellites [1238, 1239, 1243]. An observed tuations over space and time generate anisotropic bire- bright satellite is more likely to reside in subhalos with fringence. lower mass than is expected in a ΛCDM model. The simulated massive dark matter subhalos ”failed” to form a comparatively bright satellite galaxy. III.6. Small-scale curiosities This problem is possibly related to the missing satellites problem but it is a distinct problem which depen- On small scales (on scales of hundreds of kpc and dents on the internal structure of subhalos or the central below) the predictions of ΛCDM model are in many shapes of density profiles of satellite halos [1239]. cases inconsistent with observations [1195–1197]. In Alternative models that modify the nature of dark particular observations on galaxy scales indicate that matter have been investigated to solve this problem: non- the ΛCDM model faces several problems in describing trivial dark matter physics [1244, 1245], interaction be- structures at small scales (. 1Mpc) (for a review, see tween the dark matter and dark radiation components Refs.[87, 88, 1198–1200]). Alternative models that mod- [599, 612], self-interacting dark matter [1246, 1247] and ify the nature of dark matter have been used to solve fuzzy dark matter [1208] these problems e.g. warm [1201–1205], fuzzy [1206–1209], III.6.0.4. The problem of satellite planes self-interacting [1210–1213] and meta-cold dark matter [1248–1252]. In this problem several satellite galaxies of [1214] (for a review, see Ref. [1215]). Other models which the Milky Way, of neighboring Andromeda galaxy (M31), have the potential to provide a solution to these problems and of Centaurus A (CenA) are part of thin plane that is have been proposed by Refs. [599, 606, 612, 1216–1218]. approximately perpendicular to the Galactic disk. More- In particular Refs. [1216, 1217] argued that the existence over measurement of the motions of satellite galaxies has of a dissipative hidden dark matter sector (dark matter shown that their orbits appear to be correlated [1253– coupled to a massless dark photon) can solve some of 1255]. This flattened structure and coherent motions of these problems (core-cusp, missing satellites, and plane satellite galaxy systems is in inconsistency with the pre- of satellites problem). diction of the ΛCDM model as inferred from simulations These small scale signals include the following: [1252]. The simulations based on ΛCDM cosmology in- III.6.0.1. The core-cusp curiosity [1219, 1220]. dicate uncorrelated and close to isotropic satellite struc- This problem refers to a discrepancy between the den- tures [1256, 1257]. In these simulations the observed sity of a dark matter halo profile of low-mass galaxies structure formations with spatial and kinematic coher- −x ρ(r) ∝ r in N-body simulations (an important tool ence distribution are very rare with a probability ∼ 10−3 for evaluating the predictions of the ΛCDM model) with [1251, 1252]. 33 1 . x . 1.5 (cusp profile) [1222–1225] and the as- III.6.0.5. The angular momentum catastrophe tronomical observed profile with x ∼ 0 (core profile) [1258]. This problem concerns a catastrophic angular [1219, 1220, 1222, 1223, 1226–1230]. Ref. [1231] probes momentum loss of gas during disk galaxies formation this problem in low surface brightness galaxies. in Smooth Particle Hydrodynamics (SPH) [1259] simu- III.6.0.2. The missing satellites problem (or lations. The formed disks in simulations according to dwarf galaxy problem) [1232–1235]. This problem the predictions of ΛCDM have smaller scale lengths by a refers to an over-abundance of the predicted number of factor of 2 − 3 compared with observed ones [1260]. An halo substructures in detailed collisionless N-body sim- axion dark matter model may resolve this discrepancy ulations compared to the observed number of satellite between the observed and predicted angular momentum distributions of baryons (ordinary cold dark matter) in the dwarf galaxies [1261]. 33 The well know Navarro–Frenk–White profile [1221, 1222] is III.6.0.6. Baryonic Tully-Fisher Relation cusped with ρ(r → 0) ∼ r−1. (BTFR) [236, 1262]. As mentioned above, the well 49 known Tully-Fisher (TF) [230] empirical relation con- contains much fewer galaxies than expected from ΛCDM nects the velocity of rotation of a spiral galaxy with theory [1272]. its intrinsic luminosity while the Baryonic Tully-Fisher Relation (BTFR) [232–234] Eq. (2.39) is a scaling relation between the observed total baryonic mass Mb III.7. Age of the Universe (stars plus gas) of a spiral galaxy and its rotation velocity Vc (see Subsection II.1.6). The problem for A lower limit can be set on the age of the Universe ΛCDM model as inferred from simulations (e.g. [1263]) by the ages of the oldest stars (or oldest astrophys- is that the BTFR leads to existence of a higher intrinsic ical objects) because on cosmological timescales they scatter (∼ 0.15 dex) and a lower slope (s = 3) compared form shortly after the Big Bang. In the context of to the observed ( ∼ 0.10 dex and s ∼ 4) [236]. Ref. [238] ΛCDM cosmology, the standard theory [1273–1277] and suggests the Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND) cosmological numerical simulations [1278–1280] predict [536] as a possible solution to this problem. However that the first stars, the so-called population III (Pop some simulations or semi-analytic approaches of galaxy III), formed in dark matter minihaloes of typical mass 5 6 formation within a ΛCDM cosmological context can M ∼ 10 − 10 M at redshifts z ∼ 20 − 30 (about 100 reproduce a realistic BTFR slope but not its small million years after the Big Bang i.e. about around the scatter (e.g. [1264–1267]). end of the cosmic dark ages) (for models indicating late, z ∼ 2−7, Pop III star formation, see Refs. [1281, 1282]). III.6.0.7. The void phenomenon [1268]. This The age of the Universe t∗ as obtained from local mea- problem refers to the emptiness of voids (the number of surements using the ages of oldest observed stars (the so- small galaxies in the void). Cosmological N-body simu- called population II (Pop II)) in the Milky way appears lations in the context of ΛCDM have established a clear to be larger and in some tension with the corresponding prediction [1269] that many small dark matter haloes age of the Universe tU obtained using the CMB Planck should reside in voids [1270, 1271]. This is consistent data in the context of ΛCDM [89]. with observations on large scales but is inconsistent with The age of the Universe in the flat ΛCDM model is an observations on small scales. In particular the local void observable determined by the integral

Z zt dz0 1 Z zt dz0 t(z) = = (3.42) 0 0 0 0 3 0 4 1/2 0 (1 + z )H(z ) H0 0 (1 + z ) [Ω0m(1 + z ) + Ω0r(1 + z ) + (1 − Ω0m)]

where t is the cosmic time corresponding to redshift zt. cosmological model and plays an important role in the Thus the age of the Universe is tU = t(zt = ∞). studies of Hubble and spatial curvature tensions [1011, For example the age of the Milky Way Population II 1012, 1285]. halo, metal deficient, high velocity subgiant HD-140283 (also known as Methuselah star) is estimated to be t∗ = 14.46 ± 0.31 Gyr by Ref. [1283] and using new sets of III.8. The Lithium problem stellar models is estimated to be t∗ = 14.27 ± 0.80 Gyr by Ref. [1284]. These estimates of the age of this star It has long been known (since the early 80’s) that are slightly higher (∼ 2σ) than the age of Universe tU = absorption lines in the photospheres of old, metal-poor 13.800 ± 0.024 Gyr inferred by CMB Planck18 data [53] (Population II) halo stars in the Milky Way’s halo indi- but within the errors it does not conflict with this age. cate ∼ 3.5 times less primordial abundance of lithium 7 Despite of the above indications the analysis of Ref. isotope Li compared to the prediction of the standard BBN theory [1289–1291]. The observed value of [1285] using new parallaxes by the Gaia space mission 347 −10 [1286, 1287] in place of the older HST, reports a revision the lithium abundance Li/H = (1.6 ± 0.3) × 10 of the age of HD-140283 to t = 13.5 ± 0.7 Gyr which [1292] is smaller than the theoretically expected value ∗ 7Li/H = (5.62±0.25)×10−10 [1293] at a level ∼ 5σ. This is more compatible with the age tU inferred by Planck data. Also the analysis of Ref. [1288] using populations constitutes the lithium problem [90]. No such problem exists for the observed abundances of other light elements of stars in globular clusters (very-low-metallicity stars) 2 3 4 reports age of the Universe constrained to be larger than H (or D), He, and He that are in broad quantitative +0.16 t∗ = 13.5−0.14 Gyr. Clearly, Eq. (3.42) indicates that in a ΛCDM Universe the quantities H0, tU and Ω0m are related. Therefore 34 Usually in the literature the abundance of lithium is expressed 7 7 the determination of the age of older objects based on by A( Li) = 12 + log10[n( Li)/n(H)] where n is the number local Universe observations provides a test of the current density of atoms and 12 is the solar hydrogen abundance. 50 agreement with BBN predictions + WMAP/Planck cos- In recent years model independent derivation35 of the mic baryon density Ωb which is deduced by the CMB distance modulus–redshift relation using high-z quasars [42, 667]. (z . 7) as distance indicators (quasars Hubble diagram) A number of theoretical or experimental studies in the provides a new bright standard candle in the higher red- literature have attempted to address the lithium prob- shifts and earlier times beyond SnIa. The method used lem (e.g. [1294–1305]). For example the analysis of Ref. is based on a non-linear relation between the X-ray and [1306] shows that the variations in Nature’s fundamental the UV emissions at low redshift which is of the form [91] constants on primordial nucleosynthesis provide a pos- log L = γ log L + β (3.43) sible solution to the lithium problem. Specifically, they 10 X q 10 UV q determined that if the value of the fine-structure constant where LX and LUV are the rest-frame monochromatic α at the primordial nucleosynthesis epoch was larger than luminosities at 2 keV and at 2500 A˚, respectively [1331]. the present one by ten parts per million of relative vari- Also γq ∼ 0.6 [91] and βq are fitting parameters of the ation, the lithium problem could be resolved. luminosities. It was also proposed [1307] that decaying dark mat- Extending a Hubble diagram up to redshift z = 5.5 ter into dark radiation in the early Universe can solve shows hints for phantom dark energy [91–93]. In partic- the long-standing lithium problem, leaving completely ular the distance modulus-redshift relation for a sample unaffected the abundance of other light elements. This of 1598 quasars at higher redshift (0.5 < z < 5.5) is in mechanism was also proposed to alleviate the H0 tension disagreement with the concordance model at a ∼ 4σ sig- (see Subsection II.3.1) but is severely constrained by the nificance level36 [91]. Moreover, the analysis of Ref. [93] Planck data [495]. building a Hubble diagram by combining three samples Measurements of lithium (e.g. [1308, 1309]) may not of Pantheon, quasars, and gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) re- be representative of the cosmological production mech- ported tension at more than the ∼ 4σ statistical level anism [1310, 1311]. It is thus possible that the solu- with the flat ΛCDM model. Recently Ref. [1336] us- tion to the lithium problem lies in the effects of stars in ing an updated, larger QSO dataset [1337] containing the lithium abundance. Therefore a precise knowledge of 2421 QSO measurements with redshifts up to z ∼ 7.5 the stellar formation process and physics of stellar atmo- has demonstrated that the LX -LUV relation parameter sphere is necessary to provide a fully satisfactory solu- values depend on the cosmological model thus cannot be tion. Thus, possible solutions to this persistent problem used to constrain cosmological parameters. can be classified into four categories (for a review, see Refs. [42, 90, 1312]): III.10. Oscillating signals in short range gravity experiments • Cosmological solutions (e.g. new theory beyond the standard BBN including variations of fundamental constants) [1300, 1306, 1313–1319] The most constraining test of gravity at very short distance (sub-millimeter) scales looking for departures from • Nuclear Physics solutions (e.g. reactions destroy Newtonian gravity is implemented via torsion balance lithium during or after BBN) [1302–1304, 1320– experiments. A reanalysis of short range gravity exper- 1324] iments has indicated the presence of an oscillating force signal with sub-millimeter wavelength [94, 95]. In particular Ref. [94] has indicated the presence of a signal at 2σ • Astrophysical solutions (e.g. stars destroy lithium after BBN) [1325–1328] level of spatially oscillating new force residuals in the torsion balance data of the Washington experiment [1338]. As an extension of the previous analysis the study of Ref. Extensions of the standard model (e.g. simul- • [95] using Monte Carlo simulation and analysing the data taneous imposition of photon cooling after BBN, of the Stanford Optically Levitated Microsphere Exper- X-particle decay and a primordial magnetic field iment (SOLME) which involves force measurements an [1296, 1329]) optically levitated microsphere as a function of its distance z from a gold coated silicon cantilever [1339] reports a oscillating signal at about 2σ level. III.9. Quasars Hubble diagram

The quasar distances can be estimated from their X- 35 Ref. [1330] argued that even though the data used in this ap- ray (coronal) emission generated by a plasma of hot rela- proach are valid, their analysis involves significant uncertainties tivistic electrons around the accretion disk. The emission as it may lead to spurious artificial tensions. 36 The analyses of the high−z quasar data has lead to a wide range is induced through inverse-Compton scattering processes of conclusions [1330, 1332–1335]. For example Ref. [1330] con- and ultraviolet (UV) emission generated by the accre- cludes that the log polynomial expansion generically fails to re- tion disk where the gravitational energy of the infalling cover flat ΛCDM beyond z ∼ 2, thus implying that the previously material is partially converted to radiation [91, 93]. derived ∼ 4σ tension may be artificial. 51

The sub-millimeter scale of the quantum nature of dark • A signal for a short distance modification of GR energy may be written as (e.g. non-local modified theory of gravity). s c In the later case, it is important to identify modified theo- λ ≡ 4 ~ ≈ 0.085 mm (3.44) ries that are consistent with such an oscillating signal and de ρ de are not associated with instabilities (e.g. [1355, 1356]). −1 where it is assumed that Ω0m = 0.3 and H0 = 70 km s −1 Mpc . III.11. Anomalously low baryon temperature Thus, if the accelerating expansion of the Universe is connected with effects of modified gravity due to quantum gravity it would be natural to expect some modifi- The Experiment to Detect the Global Epoch of Reion- cation of Newton’s law at the submillimeter scale. ization Signature (EDGES) collaboration [96] reports The deviations from Newton’s law of gravitation is usu- anomalously low baryon temperature Tb ≈ 4K at z ≈ 17 ally described in the context of scalar-tensor [374, 994] (half of its expected value). This temperature was in- and flat extra dimension theories [1340–1346] by a short ferred from the detection of global (sky-averaged) 21-cm range Yukawa type potential of the form absorption signal which is centred at a frequency of ∼ 78 MHz. The absorption depth of cosmic CMB photons M at redshifts range 15 z 20 estimated by EDGES V = −G 1 + α e−mr (3.45) . . eff r Y is more than twice the maximal value expected in the ΛCDM model, at ∼ 3.8σ significance. where αY and m are parameters to be constrained by the Possible explanations of this discrepancy were inves- data. tigated and various models were proposed (e.g. [1357– Alternatively, a power law ansatz may also generalize 1360]). For example Ref. [1357] argues that EDE can the gravitational potential to the form explain this anomaly. " k−1# The EDGES observation has been used to constrain M ¯k 1 Veff = −G 1 + β (3.46) various cosmological models of dark matter and dark en- r mr ergy (e.g. [777, 1357, 1361, 1362]). This power law parametrization is motivated by some brane world models [1347–1350]. III.12. Colliding clusters with high velocity For m2 < 0 the Yukawa gravitational potential becomes oscillating and takes the form 15 Observed galaxy clusters like the massive (∼ 10 M ) M high-redshift (z = 0.87) interacting pair known as El V = −G [1 + α cos (mr + θ)] (3.47) eff r Y Gordo (ACT-CL J0102-4915) [1363] have a very high relative velocity. This implies that formation of large where θ is a parameter. structures may have taken place earlier than expected Recently a reanalysis of the data of the Washington in ΛCDM cosmology. Ref. [97] based on light cone to- experiment searching for modifications of Newton’s Law mography estimated that the too-early formation of El on sub-millimeter scales by Ref. [829] has indicated that Gordo rules out ΛCDM cosmology at 6.16σ confidence. a spatially oscillating signal is hidden in this dataset. In The early and rapid formation of clusters which consist addition it is shown that even though this signal cannot of two colliding massive galaxy clusters at a high redshift be explained in the context of standard modified grav- may constitute a problem of the ΛCDM model. Ref. [97] ity theories37 (viable scalar tensor and f(R) theories), it argues that MOND with light sterile neutrinos model as occurs naturally in nonlocal (infinite derivative) gravity suggested by Ref. [237] can resolve this issue. theories [1352–1354] that predict such spatial oscillations without the presence of ghosts (instabilities) and has a well-defined Newtonian limit. The origin of oscillating signals could be due to three possible effects: • A statistical fluctuation of the data.

• A periodic distance-dependent systematic feature IV. CONCLUSIONS-DISCUSSION-OUTLOOK in the data. In the present review, we discussed in a uniﬁed manner many existing curiosities in cosmological and astro- 37 For a free massive scalar Ref. [1351] investigates the physical physical data that appear to be in some tension (2σ or conditions that can eliminate the tachyonic instabilities or at larger) with the standard ΛCDM model as deﬁned by the least drastically change their lifetime. Planck18 parameter values. The Hubble crisis is the most 52

Experiments Type Probes Redshift Wavelengths Operator Duration Refs.

Euclid Space WL, BAO z . 6 550 nm − 2 µm ESA > 2022 [1364] Vera C. Rubin Observatory Ground WL, BAO z . 7.5 320 − 1060 nm LSST > 2022 [1365, 1366] Gaia Space Astrometry z ' 0 320 − 1000 nm ESA > 2013 [1286, 1287] James Webb Space Telescope Space WL z . 15 0.6 − 28.3 µm NASA-ESA-CSA > 2021 [1367, 1368] GAUSS Space WL 3 × 2pt z . 5 0.5 − 5 nm > 2035 [1369]

TABLE V. Some existing and upcoming large-scale structure missions/experiments.

Experiments Type Detectors Frequenciesa Resolutionb Sensitivityc Sky Cover Duration Refs. (GHz)(arcmin)(µK arcmin)

Planck Space 74 25 − 1000 5 − 33 ∼ 30 All 2009-2013 [544] CMB S4 Ground 500 · 103 30 − 270 0.8 − 11 ∼ 1 70% > 2027 [1370–1372] SO LAT Ground 30 · 103 27 − 280 0.1 ∼ 6 40% > 2021 [1373–1375] SO SATs Ground 30 · 103 90 − 280 0.5 ∼ 2 10% > 2021 [1373–1375] a The main CMB channels have frequensies 70 − 217 GHz with spectrum peak at a frequency of ∼ 160 GHz. b The angular resolution is a function of frequency, with lower frequencies having a worse angular resolution. c The sensitivity is a function of frequency and its estimates scaled to 10 assuming that the noise is white.

TABLE VI. Some existing and upcoming CMB missions/experiments. significant observational indication that the current stan- tion of non-standard signals. dard model ΛCDM may need to be modified after more than 20 years since its establishment. • Identify favored parametrizations of H(z, w(z), r), µ (z, r), Σ(z, r), α(z, r) assuming that at least In addition to the well known tensions (H0 tension, G some of the non-standard signals are physical. S8 tension and AL anomaly), we provided a list of the non-standard cosmological signals in cosmological data. We presented the current status of these signals and their • Identify theoretical models (field Lagrangians) that level of significance and also referred to recent resources are consistent with these parametrizations that can where more details can be found for each signal. These address simultaneously more than one of these ten- signals have a lower statistical significance level than the sions. Interestingly, for example only a small sub- set of modified gravity models is consistent with H0 tension but may also constitute hints towards new physics. We also briefly discussed possible theoretical the weak gravity + ΛCDM background [832, 1399– approaches that have been considered in order to explain 1401] suggested in the context of the S8 tension. the non-standard nature of these signals. In the next decades new observational data from exist- We also discussed the possible generic extensions of ing and upcoming missions/experiments (see TablesV, ΛCDM model. Generic extensions of ΛCDM may allow VI andVII) will improve measurements and open up a for a redshift dependence of the parameters w, µG,Σ wide range of new directions in the explanation of the cu- and α as well as a possible large scale spatial dependence riosities of ΛCDM cosmology and understanding of cos- of these parameters which could violate the cosmological mological physics. Here we provide an incomplete list of principle. Varying fundamental constants can potentially these missions: address the Hubble crisis, the fine structure constant α dipole, the lithium problem, the growth tension, the cu- • Euclid: The European Space Agency (ESA) Eu- rious SnIa M signals (variation of the SnIa absolute mag- clid mission [1364] is planned for launch in July- nitude M), quasar signals and the ISW CMB signal. December 2022. The goals of Euclid are to in- The strategic approach required for the identification vestigate the nature of dark matter, dark energy of new physics may include the following three steps: and gravity and thus to provide a better knowledge of the origin of the accelerated expansion of • Tune current missions towards verification or rejec- the Universe [1364, 1402–1405]. The optical and 53

Experiments Type Detectors Arms Frequenciesa Location Duration Refs. (Hz)

Advanced LIGO Ground Laser interferometer 2 × 4 km 10 − 103 Hanford, USA > 2015 [335] Advanced LIGO Ground Laser interferometer 2 × 4 km 10 − 103 Livingston, USA > 2015 [335] Advanced Virgo Ground Laser interferometer 2 × 3 km 10 − 103 Pisa, Italy > 2016 [336] KAGRA Undergr. Laser interferometer 2 × 3 km 10 − 103 Kamioka, Japan > 2020 [1385, 1386] CE Ground Laser interferometer 2 × 40 km 5 − 4 · 103 USA > 2030 [1387–1389] LISA Space Laser interferometer 3 × 2.5 Gm 10−4 − 10−1 Heliocentric orbit > 2034 [1390] Taiji Space Laser interferometer 3 × 2 Gm 10−4 − 10−1 Heliocentric orbit > 2033 [1391, 1392] TianQin Space Laser interferometer 3 × 0.1 Gm 10−4 − 1 Geocentric orbit > 2035 [1393, 1394] DECIGO Space Laser interferometer 4 clusters 3 × 1 Mm 1 − 10 Heliocentric orbit > 2027 [1395, 1396] ET Undergr. Laser interferometer 3 × 2 × 10 km 1 − 104 > 2035 [1397, 1398] a GW spectrum could span a wide range of frequencies, thus there are numerous proposed detectors, including pulsar timing arrays (PTAs) [1376–1378] (10−9 to 10−6 Hz) such as Square Kilometre Array (SKA) [1379] (with the three collaborations, North American Nanohertz Observatory for Gravitational-waves (NANOGrav) [1380], European Pulsar Timing Array (EPTA) [1381] and Parkes Pulsar Timing Array (PPTA) [1382] members of the International Pulsar Timing Array (IPTA) [1383]) and atom interferometery such as Atomic Experiments for Dark Matter and Gravity Exploration (AEDGE) [1384].

TABLE VII. Some existing and upcoming GW experiments/observatories

near-infrared (NIR) Euclid survey using the cos- ginning in 2022. The Vera C. Rubin Observatory mological WL and BAO probes will detect a high based in Chile with an 8.4 m (6.5 m effective) tele- number of galaxy clusters up to redshift z ∼ 2 scope in six bands, targeting at least 18, 000 deg2 (and possibly higher) in a redshift range that is of high galactic latitude sky, will provide databases sensitive to dark energy [1406] and will provide including 25 billion galaxies with & 0.2 arcsecond consistent growth rate data in both the low-z and pixel sampling [1408]. The main cosmological goals high-z regimes. Therefore, Euclid will improve sig- of the Vera C. Rubin Observatory ground-based nificantly the constraints on cosmological param- project are to investigate the nature of dark matter eters such as σ8 and the mass density parameter and the dynamical behavior of dark energy by mea- −3 Ω0m with a precision of ∼ 10 for ΛCDM [1404]. suring WL and BAO [1408]. Vera C. Rubin obser- The Euclid survey will also measure the equation vatory will detect enormous number of galaxies and of state parameter of dark energy wDE with higher in combination with the Euclid BAO survey will precision (∼ 1%) than precursor surveys. Stochas- probe an unprecedented range of redshifts. These tic inhomogeneities are expected to lead to an in- surveys can determine wDE(z) in bins of redshift trinsic uncertainty in the values of cosmological pa- and their dark energy constraining power could be rameters obtained with such high redshift surveys. orders of magnitude greater than that of precursor The corresponding cosmic variance in the context surveys [1409]. The provided improved constraints of Euclid for the measurement of H0 has been on cosmological parameters allow to address poten- shown to be limited to about 0.1% [1407]. Thus Eu- tial systematics and to ensure that any measured clid and other deep surveys (z & 0.15) will provide tension is robust. In addition, the Vera C. Rubin an estimation of the H0 which will be more pre- project would be a useful tool in testing the models cise than the low redshift surveys (z . 0.15). Such which have been used to explain these tensions. improved constraints from Euclid in combination 38 with contemporary surveys will allow the verifica- • CMB-S4: The fourth generation (Stage-4) tion or rejection of many of the non-standard sig- ground-based CMB experiment (CMB-S4) [1370– nals discussed in this review and will also help dis- 1372], is planned to start observations in 2027. It tinguish among the favored theoretical models that is anticipated to be the definitive CMB polariza- have been proposed for the explanation of these tion experiment. The goals of CMB-S4 are to de- signals. tect the signature of primordial gravitational waves in order to shed light on models of inflation, to • Vera C. Rubin Observatory Legacy Survey of Space and Time: The Large Synoptic Sur- vey Telescope (LSST), recently renamed the Vera C. Rubin Observatory LSST [1365, 1366] is a fu- 38 Planck was the third generation space mission which mapped the ture survey of the southern sky planned for the be- anisotropies of CMB. 54

search for previously undiscovered light relic par- 1368] is a joint NASA-ESA-CSA (National Aero- ticles in order to study the dark Universe, to map nautics and Space Administration -European Space normal and dark matter in the cosmos separately Agency-Canadian Space Agency) large, cold (under and to explore the time-variable millimeter-wave 50 K), infrared optimized (0.6 < λ < 28.3.0 µm), sky [1370]. The CMB-S4 survey in combination space telescope and its launch is currently planned with external cluster surveys which are sensitive to for 31 October 2021. JWST is a scientific succes- different redshift ranges such as the Vera C. Ru- sor to HST and will extend its discoveries to higher bin will provide detailed cluster data [1370]. These redshifts. It is nearly twice as big as HST with data will be used to study the growth of clus- 6.6 m gold-plated primary mirror much larger than ter scale perturbations, to improve constraints on 2.4 m of HST. cosmological parameters and to test the alterna- The two main goals of this upcoming, next- tive models or extensions of ΛCDM which can be generation telescope are to look much closer to the used to clarify the origin of many of the tensions Big Bang and to investigate the light from the first and non-standard signals referred in the present re- stars and galaxies that formed in the Universe (for view. The CMB-S4 will also contribute to neu- other goals, see Ref. [1368]). The observational trino cosmology providing compelling sensitivity in data of this mission will essentially enhance our the constraint of the effective number of relativis- understanding of the formation and evolution of tic species, N and of the sum of the neutrino eff galaxies, stars, and planetary systems. The JWST masses P m . This project has also the potential ν will detect galaxies out to a redshift of z ≥ 15. to constrain ∆N ≡ N − N SM ' 0.060 at eff eff eff It will probably be able to detect Pop III stars 95% confidence level [1371]. Planck has provided a (see Subsection III.7) in the high-redshift galax- constraint ∆Neff ' 0.126 at 95% confidence level ies [1413, 1414] in a mass range 140 − 260 M using temperature and polarization TT, TE, EE + as pair-instability supernovae [1415, 1416]. Vari- lowE data [53]. The improved constraints on Neff ous projects using the JWST observations will pro- will enable us to test the scenarios with modifica- vide stronger nucleosynthesis constraints inside the tions of ΛCDM model in the light relic sector. first supernova [1277] and constraints on the nature of dark matter [1417, 1418]. These constraints • Gaia: The Gaia satellite was launched at the end and other unprecedented information from JWST of 2013 [1286, 1287]. This European Space Agency could potentially help address the lithium prob- (ESA) mission Gaia provides data that allow us to lem, explain small-scale curiosities and improve determine with high accuracy positions, parallaxes constraints on the age of Universe. and proper motions for more than 1 billion sources. There have been two data releases GDR1 [1410] Simons Observatory: The Simons Observa- and GDR2 [279] of Gaia results. Using quasars • tory (SO) [1373–1375] is a next generation CMB Ref. [1411] found that the GDR2 suffer from the ground-based experiment. SO consists of one 6 m parallax zero point (ZP) error. Ref. [270] refers to Large Aperture Telescope (LAT) and three 0.42 m this additional error as parallax offset because it is Small Aperture Telescopes (SATs) at the Atacama not a single value but depends on the color or/and Desert, Chile. It will provide more accurate mea- magnitude of the source and its position on the surements of the primary CMB temperature and sky. Ref. [1412] found that the parallax offset can polarization signals. The main targets of SO as be measured directly from the Cepheids, but with a described by Ref. [1374] are: primordial perturba- reduced precision of the distance scale from GDR2. tions, effective number of relativistic species, neu- This reduction leads to a increased uncertainty of trino mass, deviations from ΛCDM, galaxy evolu- the determination of H value by a factor of 2.5. 0 tion (feedback efficiency and non-thermal pressure Recently the Gaia team presented the Gaia Early in massive halos) and reionization (measurement Data Release 3 (EDR3) (the full Gaia DR3 re- of duration). Also a goal of SO survey is to pro- lease is expected in 2022) [271] with improved par- vide a catalog of 16.000 galaxy clusters and more allaxes since GDR2. Using the EDR3 parallaxes than 20.000 extragalactic sources. The sky region and Cepheid PL relation the latest analysis of the from SO survey overlaps with many surveys such SH0ES Team [270] achieved a precision of 1.0% as LSST, DES, DESI and Euclid at different wave- in the geometric calibration of Cepheid luminosi- lengths [1374]. This overlap is extremely beneficial ties. The precision of the geometric calibration of as it will allow data cross correlation tests (for a de- Cepheids will approach 0.5% by Gaia DR4 [270]. tailed discussion, see Ref. [1419]). Like CMB-S4, This higher precision will be sufficient to confirm SO will provide improved constraints on the effec- the present H0 tension. tive number of relativistic species Neff , the sum P of the neutrino masses mν and the dark energy • James Webb Space Telescope: The James equation of state wDE (for the forecast constraints Webb Space Telescope (JWST or ”Webb”) [1367, on cosmological parameters, see Ref. [1374]). Also 55

the SO and CMB-S4 experiments will measure the ation of laser interferometers [1436, 1437] is simi- primordial tensor-to-scalar ratio r to a target sensi- lar to that of a simple interferometer, such as that tivity of σr ∼ 0.002 (for an r = 0 model). This will used by Michelson and Morley. Detection of GWs be an improvement by a factor of approximately with strain amplitude h ∼ 10−21 by a ground de- 5 compared to Planck sensitivity. In addition the tector with arms of length L = 4 km requires length uncertainty of the determinations of H0 from SO change measurement [1436] will be two and five times better than that inferred −18 from Planck and local direct measurement respec- ∆L = δLx − δLy ∼ hL ∼ 4 · 10 m (4.1) tively. Therefore, the SO data will enable us to For the period between 2002 and 2010, the two improve constraints on extensions of ΛCDM which LIGO observatories were unable to detect GWs. alleviate its tensions and curiosities. In addition The detectors were later replaced by much im- the improved quality of lensing data from SO as proved Advanced LIGO versions [335, 1438]. The well as CMB-S4 will improve our understanding of improved detectors that officially went into oper- the CMB anisotropy anomalies. ation in 2015 have about ten times the sensitiv- • GAUSS: This space mission concept combines the ity to detect GWs in the frequency range around WL and galaxy clustering probes using three two- ∼ 100 Hz compared to the initial LIGO interfer- point correlation functions (3 × 2pt analysis) of ometers [335]. In addition Advanced LIGO ex- gravitational lensing and galaxy positions: the cos- tends the low frequency end from 40 Hz down to mic shear, the galaxy clustering and galaxy-galaxy 10 Hz. Much of the research and development work lensing. GAUSS aims to fully map the cosmic for LIGO/Advanced LIGO projects was based on web up to redshift z ∼ 5 and to provide a cata- the groundbreaking work of the GEO 600 detec- log with the spectroscopic redshifts and the shapes tor [1439, 1440] which is a 600 m interferometer in of 10 billions of galaxies [1369] increased by a fac- Hanover, Germany. tor of approximately 103 compared to DESI which On February 11, 2016 the LIGO Scientific Collab- measures the spectra of 35 million galaxies and oration [1441] and the Virgo Collaboration [1442, quasars [946]. The very large sky coverage and 1443] announced the first directly observed GWs the high galaxy density provided by the GAUSS from a signal detected on September 14, 2015 by will facilitate the construction of the 3D matter the Advanced LIGO devices (the Virgo was not power spectrum of all scales (large and small) in working at the time due to an upgrade). The de- detail. The 3 × 2pt correlation functions in combi- tected signal was named GW150914 and its source nation with 3D matter power spectrum will provide was the merger of two stellar-mass BHs [1444]. stronger constraints and break parameter degenera- The Advanced Virgo [336] with 3 km arm length cies [1369]. The constraining power of the GAUSS interferometer contributes to the reliability of Ad- will be an order of magnitude larger than that of vanced LIGO experimental device detections al- any currently planned projects such as Euclid and lowing for greater accuracy in locating the source Vera C. Rubin Observatory. in the sky (triangulation i.e 3-detector localiza- • Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave tion) [1445] and more accurate reconstruction of Observatory: The Laser Interferometer the signal waveform (for the relevant method, see Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO) pro- Refs. [1446–1450]). For example, in the case of the posed by Ref. [1420] is a large-scale experiment event GW170814 the three detectors improved the that uses ground-based laser interferometers with sky localization of the source, reducing the area 2 L = L = L = 4 km long orthogonal arms to of the 90% credible region from 1160 deg using x y 2 detect GWs39. only the two LIGO detectors to 60 deg using all three LIGO/Virgo detectors and reduced the lumi- There are two identical LIGO instruments, one in nosity distance uncertainty from 570+300 Mpc to Hanford (LHO) and one in Livingston (LLO) sep- −230 540+130 Mpc [1451]. arated by roughly 3000 km. The principle of oper- −210 In 2019 the Advanced LIGO [335], the Ad- vanced Virgo [336] and the Japanese successor of the Tama300 [1452, 1453], Kamioka Gravitational 39 Another class of GW detectors are the resonant mass anten- (KAGRA) wave detector [1385, 1386, 1454] (pre- nas [1421–1424] in the frequency range from 15 Hz to few kHz. viously called LCGT [1455]) signed collaboration The principle of operation of mass resonance detectors is re- agreement to begin joint observation. The LIGO, lated to the periodic dimensional changes caused by the rip- Virgo and KAGRA collaboration will be proba- ple effect of GWs on solid bodies. The Weber bar [1425] is a first generation resonant mass detector, the ALLEGRO [1426], bly complemented by other interferometers like the NAUTILUS [1427–1429], EXPLORER [1430], AURIGA [1431], planned Indian LIGO by the Indian Initiative in NIOBE [1432, 1433] are the second generation and Mario Schen- Gravitational Wave Observations (IndIGO) consor- berg [1434], MiniGRAIL [1435] are the third generation. tium [1456]. In addition a future third-generation 56

−12 ground-based detector the Cosmic Explorer (CE) sources like primordial BHs (∼ 10 M ) which [1387–1389] is envisioned to begin operation in the correspond to the mHz frequency [1470–1472]. This 2030s in the USA. It will contribute to the GW As- possibility can help to test primordial BH dark tronomy beyond LIGO. CE with ten times longer matter scenario. Finally, LISA and the Big Bang arms (40 km) than Advanced LIGO’s will amplify Observer (BBO) [1473, 1474], which is a proposed the amplitude of the observed signals [1457, 1458] LISA’s successor will detect many other known or and will significantly increase the sensitivity of the currently unknown exotic sources. Thus it will en- observations [1388, 1389]. able us to explore alternative gravity theories and Many events (∼ 50 compact binary coalescences) to address the problems of the ΛCDM cosmology. were observed by the Advanced LIGO/Virgo inter- • Taiji: Taiji [1391, 1392] meaning ‘supreme ul- ferometers during three observing run periods (O1, 40 timate’ is a Chinese large-scale space mission, O2 and O3) . The full three-detector network pro- planned for launch in 2033. Like LISA, Taiji is a vided data which enabled the standard siren mea- laser interferometric GW detector which will con- surement of the Hubble constant H0 (see Subsec- sist of three spacecraft placed in an equilateral tri- tions II.1.4 and II.2.5). These data are not yet suffi- angle with arms 2 million kilometers long in or- ciently constraining the Hubble constant but in the bit around the Sun. Taiji will detect GWs in the future they are expected to improve significantly. frequency range from 0.1 mHz to 10−1 Hz. Like • Laser Interferometer Space Antenna: The LISA, Taiji can detect many possible GW sources Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA) [1390, such as a stochastic GW background generated in 1461] is a large-scale space mission proposed by the early Universe and the merger of two super mas- ESA, planned for launch in 2034. It will consist sive BHs. of three spacecrafts placed in an equilateral trian- A potential LISA-Taiji network was explored by gle with arms 2.5 million kilometers long which will Refs. [1475, 1476]. This network with a separation be placed near the Earth in a heliocentric orbit. In distance of about 0.7 AU can accurately localize the order to pave the way for the LISA mission ESA sky position of a GW source and may completely launched LISA Pathfinder in 2015 and it was oper- identify the host galaxy. ational from 2016 to 2017 [1462, 1463]. The results from scientific research show that LISA Pathfinder • TianQin : TianQin [1393, 1394] is is a Chinese works exactly five times better than required, with large-scale space mission. It aims to launch a laser a successful demonstration of the basic technologies interferometric GW detector around 2035. Like for a large gravitational wave observatory. other space-base observatories, TianQin observa- LISA is designed to detect GWs in the frequency tory consist of three spacecrafts placed in an equi- −1 lateral triangle with arms ∼ 0.1 Gm long but in geo- range from 0.1 mHz to 10 Hz [1464, 1465] target- 5 ing very different source populations from ground- centric orbit with an orbital radius of about 10 km [1393, 1394]. TianQin aims to detect GWs in the based detectors such as LIGO, Virgo and KAGRA −4 41 frequency range from 10 Hz to 1 Hz (overlapping which operate in the frequency range from 10 Hz −4 to 103 Hz [1466]. with that of LISA near 10 Hz and with that of DECIGO near 1 Hz). It will search for GW sig- There are many different sources of GWs (for a re- nals from various cosmological sources such as the view of GW physics, see Refs. [1467–1469]). LIGO inspiral of supermassive BBH [1477], stellar-mass and Virgo can detect the merger events of binaries BBH [1478], the merger of massive BBHs [1479] with masses . 100M while LISA will be able to and stochastic GW background originating from 5 7 detect the merger of massive BHs (10 − 10 M ) primordial BHs [1480] and/or cosmic strings [1481]. with higher signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and thus to As a precursor mission of TianQin, TianQin-1 ex- perform precision tests in the strong gravity regime perimental satellite has been launched on 20 De- of ΛCDM model. LISA will detect events lasting cember 2019. The results from scientific research weeks, months or years allowing us to observe a shows that TianQin-1 satellite has exceeded all of much larger volume of the Universe. It may im- its mission requirements. prove our understanding of the early Universe. In addition the LISA mission will be able to detect • Deci-hertz Interferometer Gravitational wave Observatory: The DECi-hertz In- terferometer Gravitational wave Observatory (DECIGO) is a Japanese large-scale space mission 40 For the first Gravitational Wave Transient Catalog (GWTC-1) [1395, 1396, 1482, 1483] which was proposed by during O1 and O2, see Ref. [1459] and for second Gravitational Wave Transient Catalog (GWTC-2) from the first part of the Ref. [1484] and is planned for launch in 2027. third observing run (O3a), see Ref. [1460]. DECIGO consists of four clusters (with two of 41 The frequency range from 0.1 mHz to 10−1 Hz is unobservable them at the same position) and each cluster con- by any proposed ground based detectors, due to seismic noise. sists of three spacecrafts placed in an equilateral 57

triangle with 1000 km arm lengths in heliocentric peratures as low as 10 K [1489]. It is planned to orbit [1485]. As a precursor mission of DECIGO, start observations in 2035 with two candidate sites: B-DECIGO (smaller version of DECIGO) will be north of Lula in Sardinia (Italy) and in Meuse- launched before 2030 with 100 km arm lengths Rhine Euroregion (the border area of Belgium, Ger- orbiting around the earth at 2000 km altitude many, and the Netherlands) [1490]. ET will de- above the surface of the earth [1485–1487]. tect GWs in the frequency range from ∼ 1 Hz to DECIGO is designed to detect GWs in the fre- ∼ 10 kHz. This will allow the detection of BNS up to a redshift of z ∼ 2, stellar-mass BBH at quency range from 0.1 Hz to 10 Hz which is lo- 2 4 cated in a gap between the frequency band of the z ∼ 15, and intermediate-mass BBH (10 −10 M ) LISA/Taiji and ground-based detectors such as ad- at z ∼ 5. The observations of these standard sirens vanced LIGO, advanced Virgo, and KAGRA. It will be useful to calibrate the cosmic distance lad- aims to observe the primordial gravitational waves der and will improve the estimation of the Hubble i.e. the beginning of the universe (10−36 −10−34 sec constant. right after the birth of the Universe), the formation Cosmology is entering an even more exciting era! The of giant black holes in the center of galaxies and combination of the existing puzzling observational sig- the compact binaries, such as white dwarf binaries nals discussed in this review, along with the upcoming [1488]. revolutionary improvement in the quality and quantity • Einstein Telescope: Einstein Telescope (ET) of data creates anticipation for exciting new effects and or Einstein Observatory is a European proposed new physics discoveries in the coming two decades. underground laser interferometric GW detector [1398]. It will be located underground at a depth ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS of about 100 − 300 m in order to reduce the seismic noises. ET will consist of three nested detec- We thank George Alestas, Thomas Buchert, Eoin O´ tors placed in an equilateral triangle, each in turn Colgáin, Giuseppe Fanizza, Pablo Fosalba, Lavrentios composed of two interferometers with arms 10 km Kazantzidis, Pavel Kroupa, Giovanni Marozzi, Robert long. Using two arms in each side of the trian- Piccioni, Shahin Sheikh-Jabbari and Sunny Vagnozzi for gle will enable the determination of the polarisa- useful comments. This research is co-financed by Greece tion of GWs. As a third-generation observatory is and the European Union (European Social Fund-ESF) targeting a sensitivity 10 times better than of cur- through the Operational Programme ”Human Resources rent second-generation laser-interferometric detec- Development, Education and Lifelong Learning 2014- tors such as advanced LIGO, advanced Virgo, and 2020” in the context of the project ”Scalar fields in KAGRA [1397]. ET will reduce thermal noise com- Curved Spacetimes: Soliton Solutions, Observational pared to the first and second generations of GW de- Results and Gravitational Waves” (MIS 5047648). tectors by operating the mirrors at cryogenic tem-

[1] P. J. E. Peebles and Bharat Ratra, “The Cosmologi- to UGC 2885 /R = 122 kpc/,” Astrophys. J. 238, 471 cal constant and dark energy,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 75, (1980). 559–606 (2003), [,592(2002)], arXiv:astro-ph/0207347 [9] A. Bosma, “21-cm line studies of spiral galaxies. 2. The [astro-ph]. distribution and kinematics of neutral hydrogen in spi- [2] Sean M. Carroll, “The Cosmological constant,” Living ral galaxies of various morphological types.” Astron. J. Rev. Rel. 4, 1 (2001), arXiv:astro-ph/0004075. 86, 1825 (1981). [3] Philip Bull et al., “Beyond ΛCDM: Problems, solu- [10] Gianfranco Bertone, Dan Hooper, and Joseph Silk, tions, and the road ahead,” Phys. Dark Univ. 12, 56– “Particle dark matter: Evidence, candidates and con- 99 (2016), arXiv:1512.05356 [astro-ph.CO]. straints,” Phys. Rept. 405, 279–390 (2005), arXiv:hep- [4] F. Zwicky, “Die Rotverschiebung von extragalaktis- ph/0404175 [hep-ph]. chen Nebeln,” Helv. Phys. Acta 6, 110–127 (1933). [11] T. Padmanabhan, “Cosmological constant: The [5] F. Zwicky, “On the Masses of Nebulae and of Clusters Weight of the vacuum,” Phys. Rept. 380, 235–320 of Nebulae,” Astrophys. J. 86, 217–246 (1937). (2003), arXiv:hep-th/0212290. [6] K.C. Freeman, “On the disks of spiral and SO Galax- [12] T. Padmanabhan, “Dark energy: The Cosmological ies,” Astrophys. J. 160, 811 (1970). challenge of the millennium,” Curr. Sci. 88, 1057 [7] Vera C. Rubin and W. Kent Ford, Jr., “Rotation of (2005), arXiv:astro-ph/0411044. the Andromeda Nebula from a Spectroscopic Survey of [13] Albert Einstein, “Cosmological Considerations in the Emission Regions,” Astrophys. J. 159, 379–403 (1970). General Theory of Relativity,” Sitzungsber. Preuss. [8] V.C. Rubin, N. Thonnard, and Jr. Ford, W.K., “Ro- Akad. Wiss. Berlin (Math. Phys. ) 1917, 142–152 tational properties of 21 SC galaxies with a large range (1917). of luminosities and radii, from NGC 4605 /R = 4kpc/ 58

[14] Alexei A. Starobinsky, “A New Type of Isotropic Cos- [32] Rafael Ferraro and Franco Fiorini, “Modified telepar- mological Models Without Singularity,” Adv. Ser. As- allel gravity: Inflation without inflaton,” Phys. Rev. trophys. Cosmol. 3, 130–133 (1987). D75, 084031 (2007), arXiv:gr-qc/0610067 [gr-qc]. [15] Alan H. Guth, “The Inflationary Universe: A Possible [33] S. Nesseris, S. Basilakos, E. N. Saridakis, and Solution to the Horizon and Flatness Problems,” Phys. L. Perivolaropoulos, “Viable f(T ) models are practi- Rev. D23, 347–356 (1981). cally indistinguishable from ΛCDM,” Phys. Rev. D88, [16] Andrei D. Linde, “A New Inflationary Universe Sce- 103010 (2013), arXiv:1308.6142 [astro-ph.CO]. nario: A Possible Solution of the Horizon, Flat- [34] Yi-Fu Cai, Salvatore Capozziello, Mariafelicia De Lau- ness, Homogeneity, Isotropy and Primordial Monopole rentis, and Emmanuel N. Saridakis, “f(T) teleparallel Problems,” Second Seminar on Quantum Gravity gravity and cosmology,” Rept. Prog. Phys. 79, 106901 Moscow, USSR, October 13-15, 1981, Phys. Lett. (2016), arXiv:1511.07586 [gr-qc]. 108B, 389–393 (1982). [35] Adam G. Riess et al. (Supernova Search Team), “Ob- [17] Andreas Albrecht and Paul J. Steinhardt, “Cosmology servational evidence from supernovae for an acceler- for Grand Unified Theories with Radiatively Induced ating universe and a cosmological constant,” Astron.J. Symmetry Breaking,” Adv. Ser. Astrophys. Cosmol. 3, 116, 1009–1038 (1998), arXiv:astro-ph/9805201 [astro- 158–161 (1987). ph]. [18] Gregory Walter Horndeski, “Second-order scalar- [36] S. Perlmutter et al. (Supernova Cosmology Project), tensor field equations in a four-dimensional space,” Int. “Measurements of Omega and Lambda from 42 J. Theor. Phys. 10, 363–384 (1974). high redshift supernovae,” Astrophys.J. 517, 565–586 [19] C. Deffayet, Xian Gao, D. A. Steer, and G. Zahariade, (1999), arXiv:astro-ph/9812133 [astro-ph]. “From k-essence to generalised Galileons,” Phys. Rev. [37] L. Page et al. (WMAP), “First year Wilkinson Mi- D 84, 064039 (2011), arXiv:1103.3260 [hep-th]. crowave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) observations: In- [20] Ryotaro Kase and Shinji Tsujikawa, “Dark energy in terpretation of the TT and TE angular power spec- Horndeski theories after GW170817: A review,” Int. trum peaks,” Astrophys. J. Suppl. 148, 233 (2003), J. Mod. Phys. D 28, 1942005 (2019), arXiv:1809.08735 arXiv:astro-ph/0302220. [gr-qc]. [38] F. Bernardeau, S. Colombi, E. Gaztanaga, and [21] Tsutomu Kobayashi, “Horndeski theory and beyond: R. Scoccimarro, “Large scale structure of the universe a review,” Rept. Prog. Phys. 82, 086901 (2019), and cosmological perturbation theory,” Phys. Rept. arXiv:1901.07183 [gr-qc]. 367, 1–248 (2002), arXiv:astro-ph/0112551. [22] J. D. Bekenstein, “Fine Structure Constant: Is It Re- [39] David N. Schramm and Michael S. Turner, “Big Bang ally a Constant?” Phys. Rev. D 25, 1527–1539 (1982). Nucleosynthesis Enters the Precision Era,” Rev. Mod. [23] Havard Bunes Sandvik, John D. Barrow, and Joao Phys. 70, 303–318 (1998), arXiv:astro-ph/9706069. Magueijo, “A simple cosmology with a varying fine [40] Gary Steigman, “Primordial Nucleosynthesis in the structure constant,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 031302 Precision Cosmology Era,” Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. (2002), arXiv:astro-ph/0107512. 57, 463–491 (2007), arXiv:0712.1100 [astro-ph]. [24] John D. Barrow, Havard Bunes Sandvik, and Joao [41] Fabio Iocco, Gianpiero Mangano, Gennaro Miele, Ofe- Magueijo, “The behavior of varying alpha cosmolo- lia Pisanti, and Pasquale D. Serpico, “Primordial gies,” Phys. Rev. D 65, 063504 (2002), arXiv:astro- Nucleosynthesis: from precision cosmology to fun- ph/0109414. damental physics,” Phys. Rept. 472, 1–76 (2009), [25] John D. Barrow and Sean Z. W. Lip, “A Generalized arXiv:0809.0631 [astro-ph]. Theory of Varying Alpha,” Phys. Rev. D 85, 023514 [42] Richard H. Cyburt, Brian D. Fields, Keith A. (2012), arXiv:1110.3120 [gr-qc]. Olive, and Tsung-Han Yeh, “Big Bang Nucleosyn- [26] John D. Barrow and Alexander A. H. Graham, “Gen- thesis: 2015,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 88, 015004 (2016), eral Dynamics of Varying-Alpha Universes,” Phys. arXiv:1505.01076 [astro-ph.CO]. Rev. D 88, 103513 (2013), arXiv:1307.6816 [gr-qc]. [43] Thomas Buchert, Alan A. Coley, Hagen Kleinert, [27] C. J. A. P. Martins, “The status of varying constants: Boudewijn F. Roukema, and David L. Wiltshire, a review of the physics, searches and implications,” “Observational Challenges for the Standard FLRW (2017), 10.1088/1361-6633/aa860e, arXiv:1709.02923 Model,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 25, 1630007 (2016), [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:1512.03313 [astro-ph.CO]. [28] Shin’ichi Nojiri and Sergei D. Odintsov, “Introduction [44] Steven Weinberg, “The Cosmological Constant Prob- to modified gravity and gravitational alternative for lem,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 61, 1–23 (1989). dark energy,” eConf C0602061, 06 (2006), arXiv:hep- [45] Jerome Martin, “Everything You Always Wanted To th/0601213. Know About The Cosmological Constant Problem [29] Shin’ichi Nojiri and Sergei D. Odintsov, “Unified cos- (But Were Afraid To Ask),” Comptes Rendus Physique mic history in modified gravity: from F(R) theory to 13, 566–665 (2012), arXiv:1205.3365 [astro-ph.CO]. Lorentz non-invariant models,” Phys. Rept. 505, 59– [46] C.P. Burgess, “The Cosmological Constant Problem: 144 (2011), arXiv:1011.0544 [gr-qc]. Why it’s hard to get Dark Energy from Micro-physics,” [30] Antonio De Felice and Shinji Tsujikawa, “f(R) theo- in 100e Ecole d’Ete de Physique: Post-Planck Cosmol- ries,” Living Rev. Rel. 13, 3 (2010), arXiv:1002.4928 ogy (2015) pp. 149–197, arXiv:1309.4133 [hep-th]. [gr-qc]. [47] P. J. Steinhardt, “Cosmological Challenges for the 21st [31] Thomas P. Sotiriou and Valerio Faraoni, “f(R) Theo- Century,” in Critical Problems in Physics, edited by ries Of Gravity,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 451–497 (2010), V. L. Fitch, D. R. Marlow, and M. A. E. Dementi arXiv:0805.1726 [gr-qc]. (1997) p. 123. 59

[48] H.E.S. Velten, R.F. vom Marttens, and W. Zimdahl, [66] Valerio Marra and Leandros Perivolaropoulos, “A “Aspects of the cosmological “coincidence problem”,” rapid transition of Geff at zt ' 0.01 as a solu- Eur. Phys. J. C 74, 3160 (2014), arXiv:1410.2509 tion of the Hubble and growth tensions,” (2021), [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:2102.06012 [astro-ph.CO]. [49] Edmund J. Copeland, M. Sami, and Shinji Tsujikawa, [67] L. Verde, T. Treu, and A. G. Riess, “Tensions between “Dynamics of dark energy,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. D15, the Early and the Late Universe,” Nature Astron. 3, 1753–1936 (2006), arXiv:hep-th/0603057 [hep-th]. 891 (2019), arXiv:1907.10625 [astro-ph.CO]. [50] Joan Sola, “Cosmological constant and vacuum energy: [68] Eleonora Di Valentino, Olga Mena, Supriya Pan, old and new ideas,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 453, 012015 Luca Visinelli, Weiqiang Yang, Alessandro Melchiorri, (2013), arXiv:1306.1527 [gr-qc]. David F. Mota, Adam G. Riess, and Joseph Silk, “In [51] Leonard Susskind, “The Anthropic landscape of string the Realm of the Hubble tension − a Review of Solu- theory,” (2003), arXiv:hep-th/0302219. tions,” (2021), arXiv:2103.01183 [astro-ph.CO]. [52] Steven Weinberg, “Anthropic Bound on the Cosmolog- [69] Leandros Perivolaropoulos, “H0 Crisis: Systematics of ical Constant,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 59, 2607 (1987). distance calibrators or The End of ΛCDM?” (), https: [53] N. Aghanim et al. (Planck), “Planck 2018 results. VI. //www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQ0DU88A2ik&t=15s. Cosmological parameters,” Astron. Astrophys. 641, [70] Shahab Joudaki et al., “KiDS-450 + 2dFLenS: Cos- A6 (2020), arXiv:1807.06209 [astro-ph.CO]. mological parameter constraints from weak gravita- [54] Eleonora Di Valentino et al., “Cosmology Inter- tional lensing tomography and overlapping redshift- twined II: The Hubble Constant Tension,” (2020), space galaxy clustering,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. arXiv:2008.11284 [astro-ph.CO]. Soc. 474, 4894–4924 (2018), arXiv:1707.06627 [astro- [55] Eleonora Di Valentino et al., “Cosmology Intertwined ph.CO]. III: fσ8 and S8,” (2020), arXiv:2008.11285 [astro- [71] T. M. C. Abbott et al. (DES), “Dark Energy Survey ph.CO]. year 1 results: Cosmological constraints from galaxy [56] https://cosmology.physics.uoi.gr. clustering and weak lensing,” Phys. Rev. D98, 043526 [57] Adam G. Riess, Stefano Casertano, Wenlong Yuan, (2018), arXiv:1708.01530 [astro-ph.CO]. Lucas M. Macri, and Dan Scolnic, “Large Magel- [72] Spyros Basilakos and Savvas Nesseris, “Conjoined con- lanic Cloud Cepheid Standards Provide a 1% Foun- straints on modified gravity from the expansion history dation for the Determination of the Hubble Constant and cosmic growth,” Phys. Rev. D 96, 063517 (2017), and Stronger Evidence for Physics beyond ΛCDM,” arXiv:1705.08797 [astro-ph.CO]. Astrophys. J. 876, 85 (2019), arXiv:1903.07603 [astro- [73] Edward Macaulay, Ingunn Kathrine Wehus, and ph.CO]. Hans Kristian Eriksen, “Lower Growth Rate from Re- [58] Kenneth C. Wong et al., “H0LiCOW – XIII. A 2.4 cent Redshift Space Distortion Measurements than Ex- per cent measurement of H0 from lensed quasars: pected from Planck,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 161301 5.3σ tension between early- and late-Universe probes,” (2013), arXiv:1303.6583 [astro-ph.CO]. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 498, 1420–1439 (2020), [74] Savvas Nesseris, George Pantazis, and Leandros arXiv:1907.04869 [astro-ph.CO]. Perivolaropoulos, “Tension and constraints on modi- [59] Adam G. Riess, “The Expansion of the Universe is fied gravity parametrizations of Geff(z) from growth Faster than Expected,” Nature Rev. Phys. 2, 10–12 rate and Planck data,” Phys. Rev. D 96, 023542 (2019), arXiv:2001.03624 [astro-ph.CO]. (2017), arXiv:1703.10538 [astro-ph.CO]. [60] Tanvi Karwal and Marc Kamionkowski, “Dark en- [75] Lavrentios Kazantzidis and Leandros Perivolaropou- ergy at early times, the Hubble parameter, and the los, “Evolution of the fσ8 tension with the string axiverse,” Phys. Rev. D 94, 103523 (2016), Planck15/ΛCDM determination and implications for arXiv:1608.01309 [astro-ph.CO]. modified gravity theories,” Phys. Rev. D 97, 103503 [61] Vivian Poulin, Tristan L. Smith, Tanvi Karwal, and (2018), arXiv:1803.01337 [astro-ph.CO]. Marc Kamionkowski, “Early Dark Energy Can Resolve [76] F. Skara and L. Perivolaropoulos, “Tension of the EG The Hubble Tension,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 221301 statistic and redshift space distortion data with the (2019), arXiv:1811.04083 [astro-ph.CO]. Planck - ΛCDM model and implications for weak- [62] Prateek Agrawal, Francis-Yan Cyr-Racine, David Pin- ening gravity,” Phys. Rev. D 101, 063521 (2020), ner, and Lisa Randall, “Rock ’n’ Roll Solutions to arXiv:1911.10609 [astro-ph.CO]. the Hubble Tension,” (2019), arXiv:1904.01016 [astro- [77] Dominik J. Schwarz, Craig J. Copi, Dragan Huterer, ph.CO]. and Glenn D. Starkman, “CMB Anomalies after [63] G. Alestas, L. Kazantzidis, and L. Perivolaropoulos, Planck,” Class. Quant. Grav. 33, 184001 (2016), “H0 Tension, Phantom Dark Energy and Cosmological arXiv:1510.07929 [astro-ph.CO]. Parameter Degeneracies,” Phys. Rev. D 101, 123516 [78] Y. Akrami et al. (Planck), “Planck 2018 results. VII. (2020), arXiv:2004.08363 [astro-ph.CO]. Isotropy and Statistics of the CMB,” Astron. Astro- [64] Eleonora Di Valentino, Alessandro Melchiorri, and phys. 641, A7 (2020), arXiv:1906.02552 [astro-ph.CO]. Joseph Silk, “Reconciling Planck with the local value [79] David L. Wiltshire, Peter R. Smale, Teppo Mattsson, of H0 in extended parameter space,” Phys. Lett. B761, and Richard Watkins, “Hubble flow variance and the 242–246 (2016), arXiv:1606.00634 [astro-ph.CO]. cosmic rest frame,” Phys. Rev. D 88, 083529 (2013), [65] G. Alestas, G. V. Kraniotis, and L. Perivolaropoulos, arXiv:1201.5371 [astro-ph.CO]. “Existence and stability of static spherical fluid shells [80] C.A.P. Bengaly, R. Maartens, and M.G. Santos, in a Schwarzschild-Rindler–anti–de Sitter metric,” “Probing the Cosmological Principle in the counts of Phys. Rev. D 102, 104015 (2020), arXiv:2005.11702 radio galaxies at different frequencies,” JCAP 04, 031 [gr-qc]. (2018), arXiv:1710.08804 [astro-ph.CO]. 60

[81] Nathan J. Secrest, Sebastian von Hausegger, Mo- from the Stanford Optically Levitated Microsphere hamed Rameez, Roya Mohayaee, Subir Sarkar, and Experiment data,” Phys. Rev. D 96, 104002 (2017), Jacques Colin, “A Test of the Cosmological Principle arXiv:1708.02117 [gr-qc]. with Quasars,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 908, L51 (2021), [96] Judd D. Bowman, Alan E. E. Rogers, Raul A. Mon- arXiv:2009.14826 [astro-ph.CO]. salve, Thomas J. Mozdzen, and Nivedita Mahesh, [82] Julian A. King, John K. Webb, Michael T. Murphy, “An absorption profile centred at 78 megahertz in the Victor V. Flambaum, Robert F. Carswell, Matthew B. sky-averaged spectrum,” Nature 555, 67–70 (2018), Bainbridge, Michael R. Wilczynska, and F. Elliot arXiv:1810.05912 [astro-ph.CO]. Koch, “Spatial variation in the fine-structure con- [97] E. Asencio, I. Banik, and P. Kroupa, “A massive blow stant – new results from VLT/UVES,” Mon. Not. Roy. for ΛCDM − the high redshift, mass, and collision ve- Astron. Soc. 422, 3370–3413 (2012), arXiv:1202.4758 locity of the interacting galaxy cluster El Gordo contra- [astro-ph.CO]. dicts concordance cosmology,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. [83] J.K. Webb, J.A. King, M.T. Murphy, V.V. Flambaum, Soc. 500, 5249–5267 (2020), arXiv:2012.03950 [astro- R.F. Carswell, and M.B. Bainbridge, “Indications of a ph.CO]. spatial variation of the fine structure constant,” Phys. [98] Dragan Huterer and Daniel L Shafer, “Dark energy two Rev. Lett. 107, 191101 (2011), arXiv:1008.3907 [astro- decades after: Observables, probes, consistency tests,” ph.CO]. Rept. Prog. Phys. 81, 016901 (2018), arXiv:1709.01091 [84] Andrei Cuceu, James Farr, Pablo Lemos, and Andreu [astro-ph.CO]. Font-Ribera, “Baryon Acoustic Oscillations and the [99] L. Perivolaropoulos, “Six Puzzles for LCDM Cosmol- Hubble Constant: Past, Present and Future,” JCAP ogy,” (2008), arXiv:0811.4684 [astro-ph]. 1910, 044 (2019), arXiv:1906.11628 [astro-ph.CO]. [100] L. Perivolaropoulos, “LCDM: Triumphs, Puzzles [85] Jarah Evslin, “Isolating the Lyman Alpha Forest BAO and Remedies,” J. Cosmol. 15, 6054 (2011), Anomaly,” JCAP 04, 024 (2017), arXiv:1604.02809 arXiv:1104.0539 [astro-ph.CO]. [astro-ph.CO]. [101] David H. Weinberg, Michael J. Mortonson, Daniel J. [86] G.E. Addison, D.J. Watts, C.L. Bennett, M. Halpern, Eisenstein, Christopher Hirata, Adam G. Riess, G. Hinshaw, and J.L. Weiland, “Elucidating ΛCDM: and Eduardo Rozo, “Observational Probes of Cos- Impact of Baryon Acoustic Oscillation Measurements mic Acceleration,” Phys. Rept. 530, 87–255 (2013), on the Hubble Constant Discrepancy,” Astrophys. J. arXiv:1201.2434 [astro-ph.CO]. 853, 119 (2018), arXiv:1707.06547 [astro-ph.CO]. [102] Scott Dodelson, Modern Cosmology (Academic Press, [87] Antonino Del Popolo and Morgan Le Delliou, “Small Amsterdam, 2003). scale problems of the ΛCDM model: a short review,” [103] Leandros Perivolaropoulos, “Accelerating universe: Galaxies 5, 17 (2017), arXiv:1606.07790 [astro-ph.CO]. observational status and theoretical implications,” [88] James S. Bullock and Michael Boylan-Kolchin, AIP Conf. Proc. 848, 698–712 (2006), arXiv:astro- “Small-Scale Challenges to the ΛCDM Paradigm,” ph/0601014. Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 55, 343–387 (2017), [104] M. P. Hobson, G. P. Efstathiou, and A. N. Lasenby, arXiv:1707.04256 [astro-ph.CO]. General relativity: An introduction for physicists [89] Licia Verde, Pavlos Protopapas, and Raul Jimenez, (2006). “Planck and the local Universe: Quantifying the [105] A. Sandage, G.A. Tammann, A. Saha, B. Reindl, tension,” Phys. Dark Univ. 2, 166–175 (2013), F.D. Macchetto, and N. Panagia, “The Hubble Con- arXiv:1306.6766 [astro-ph.CO]. stant: A Summary of the HST Program for the Lumi- [90] Brian D. Fields, “The primordial lithium prob- nosity Calibration of Type Ia Supernovae by Means lem,” Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 61, 47–68 (2011), of Cepheids,” Astrophys. J. 653, 843–860 (2006), arXiv:1203.3551 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:astro-ph/0603647. [91] Guido Risaliti and Elisabeta Lusso, “Cosmological [106] Henrietta S. Leavitt, “1777 variables in the Magellanic constraints from the Hubble diagram of quasars at Clouds,” Harvard Obs. Annals 60, 87–108 (1908). high redshifts,” Nature Astron. 3, 272–277 (2019), [107] Henrietta S. Leavitt and Edward C. Pickering, “Pe- arXiv:1811.02590 [astro-ph.CO]. riods of 25 Variable Stars in the Small Magellanic [92] Aritra Banerjee, Eoin O.´ Colgáin,Misao Sasaki, Mo- Cloud,” Harvard Obs. Circ. 173, 1–3 (1912). hammad M. Sheikh-Jabbari, and Tao Yang, “On cos- [108] Rachael L. Beaton et al., “The Carnegie-Chicago Hub- mography in the cosmic dark ages: are we still in the ble Program. I. An Independent Approach to the Ex- dark?” (2020), arXiv:2009.04109 [astro-ph.CO]. tragalactic Distance Scale Using only Population II [93] E. Lusso, E. Piedipalumbo, G. Risaliti, M. Paolillo, Distance Indicators,” Astrophys. J. 832, 210 (2016), S. Bisogni, E. Nardini, and L. Amati, “Tension with arXiv:1604.01788 [astro-ph.CO]. the flat ΛCDM model from a high-redshift Hubble dia- [109] Wendy L. Freedman, Barry F. Madore, Taylor Hoyt, gram of supernovae, quasars, and gamma-ray bursts,” In Sung Jang, Rachael Beaton, Myung Gyoon Lee, An- Astron. Astrophys. 628, L4 (2019), arXiv:1907.07692 drew Monson, Jill Neeley, and Jeffrey Rich, “Calibra- [astro-ph.CO]. tion of the Tip of the Red Giant Branch (TRGB),” [94] Leandros Perivolaropoulos, “Submillimeter spatial os- (2020), arXiv:2002.01550 [astro-ph.GA]. cillations of Newton’s constant: Theoretical models [110] Caroline D. Huang et al., “A Near-infrared Pe- and laboratory tests,” Phys. Rev. D 95, 084050 (2017), riod–Luminosity Relation for Miras in NGC 4258, an arXiv:1611.07293 [gr-qc]. Anchor for a New Distance Ladder,” Astrophys. J. [95] Ioannis Antoniou and Leandros Perivolaropoulos, 857, 67 (2018), arXiv:1801.02711 [astro-ph.CO]. “Constraints on spatially oscillating sub-mm forces [111] Caroline D. Huang, Adam G. Riess, Wenlong Yuan, Lucas M. Macri, Nadia L. Zakamska, Stefano Caser- 61

tano, Patricia A. Whitelock, Samantha L. Hoffmann, Astrophys. J. 694, 556–572 (2009), arXiv:0901.1138 Alexei V. Filippenko, and Daniel Scolnic, “Hubble [astro-ph.CO]. Space Telescope Observations of Mira Variables in the [124] John Blakeslee, “Surface Brightness Fluctuations as Type Ia Supernova Host NGC 1559: An Alternative Primary and Secondary Distance Indicators,” Astro- Candle to Measure the Hubble Constant,” (2019), phys. Space Sci. 341, 179–186 (2012), arXiv:1202.0581 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5dbd, arXiv:1908.10883 [astro- [astro-ph.CO]. ph.CO]. [125] T. de Jaeger, B.E. Stahl, W. Zheng, A.V. Filip- [112] Bo˙zena Czerny et al., “Astronomical Distance De- penko, A.G. Riess, and L. Galbany, “A measurement termination in the Space Age. Secondary dis- of the Hubble constant from Type II supernovae,” tance indicators,” Space Sci. Rev. 214, 32 (2018), (2020), 10.1093/mnras/staa1801, arXiv:2006.03412 arXiv:1801.00598 [astro-ph.GA]. [astro-ph.CO]. [113] I. Iben and A. Renzini, “Asymptotic giant branch evo- [126] Weidong Li et al., “Nearby Supernova Rates from the lution and beyond,” Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 21, Lick Observatory Supernova Search. II. The Observed 271–342 (1983). Luminosity Functions and Fractions of Supernovae in a [114] Joseph B. Jensen, John L. Tonry, Rodger I. Thompson, Complete Sample,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 412, Edward A. Ajhar, Tod R. Lauer, Marcia J. Rieke, Marc 1441 (2011), arXiv:1006.4612 [astro-ph.SR]. Postman, and Michael C. Liu, “The infrared surface [127] Or Graur, Federica B. Bianco, Maryam Modjaz, Isaac brightness fluctuation hubble constant,” Astrophys. J. Shivvers, Alexei V. Filippenko, Weidong Li, and 550, 503 (2001), arXiv:astro-ph/0011288. Nathan Smith, “LOSS Revisited - II: The relative rates [115] Michele Cantiello et al., “A Precise Distance to the of different types of supernovae vary between low- and Host Galaxy of the Binary Neutron Star Merger high-mass galaxies,” Astrophys. J. 837, 121 (2017), GW170817 Using Surface Brightness Fluctuations,” arXiv:1609.02923 [astro-ph.HE]. Astrophys. J. Lett. 854, L31 (2018), arXiv:1801.06080 [128] Dean Richardson, Robert L. Jenkins, John Wright, [astro-ph.GA]. and Larry Maddox, “Absolute-Magnitude Distribu- [116] Nandita Khetan et al., “A new measurement of the tions of Supernovae,” Astron. J. 147, 118 (2014), Hubble constant using Type Ia supernovae calibrated arXiv:1403.5755 [astro-ph.SR]. with surface brightness fluctuations,” Astron. As- [129] R. P. Kirshner and J. Kwan, “Distances to extragalac- trophys. 647, A72 (2021), arXiv:2008.07754 [astro- tic supernovae.” Astroph. J. 193, 27–36 (1974). ph.CO]. [130] Ronald G. Eastman, Brian P. Schmidt, and Robert [117] John P. Blakeslee, Joseph B. Jensen, Chung-Pei Ma, Kirshner, “The Atmospheres of Type II Supernovae Peter A. Milne, and Jenny E. Greene, “The Hub- and the Expanding Photosphere Method,” Astroph. J. ble Constant from Infrared Surface Brightness Fluc- 466, 911 (1996). tuation Distances,” Astrophys. J. 911, 65 (2021), [131] Luc Dessart and D. John Hillier, “Distance determi- arXiv:2101.02221 [astro-ph.CO]. nations using Type II supernovae and the expanding [118] John Tonry and Donald P. Schneider, “A New Tech- photosphere method,” Astron. Astrophys. 439, 671 nique for Measuring Extragalactic Distances,” Astron. (2005), arXiv:astro-ph/0505465. J. 96, 807 (1988). [132] Edward A. Baron, Peter E. Nugent, David Branch, [119] John L. Tonry, John P. Blakeslee, Edward A. Ajhar, and Peter H. Hauschildt, “Type IIP supernovae as cos- and Alan Dressler, “The sbf survey of galaxy distances. mological probes: A SEAM distance to SN 1999em,” I. sample selection, photometric calibration, and the Astrophys. J. Lett. 616, L91–L94 (2004), arXiv:astro- hubble constant,” Astrophys. J. 475, 399–413 (1997), ph/0410153. arXiv:astro-ph/9609113. [133] Luc Dessart et al., “Using Quantitative Spectroscopic [120] John P. Blakeslee, Edward A. Ajhar, and John L. Analysis to Determine the Properties and Distances of Tonry, “Distances from surface brightness fluctua- Type II-Plateau Supernovae: SNe 2005cs and 2006bp,” tions,” Astrophys. Space Sci. Libr. 237, 181 (1999), Astrophys. J. 675, 644 (2008), arXiv:0711.1815 [astro- arXiv:astro-ph/9807124. ph]. [121] Simona Mei, John P. Blakeslee, John L. Tonry, Andres [134] Mario Hamuy and Philip A. Pinto, “Type II super- Jordan, Eric W. Peng, Patrick Cote, Laura Ferrarese, novae as standardized candles,” Astrophys. J. Lett. David Merritt, Milos Milosavljevic, and Michael J. 566, L63–L65 (2002), arXiv:astro-ph/0201279. West, “The ACS Virgo Cluster Survey. 4. Data reduc- [135] Osmar´ Rodr´ıguez,Alejandro Clocchiatti, and Mario tion procedures for surface brightness fluctuation mea- Hamuy, “Photospheric Magnitude Diagrams for Type surements with the Advanced Camera for Surveys,” II Supernovae: A Promising Tool to Compute Dis- Astrophys. J. Suppl. 156, 113 (2005), arXiv:astro- tances,” Astron. J. 148, 107 (2014), arXiv:1409.3198 ph/0501325. [astro-ph.CO]. [122] I. Biscardi, G. Raimondo, M. Cantiello, and E. Bro- [136] de Jaeger T. et al., “A Hubble diagram from Type cato, “Optical Surface Brightness Fluctuations of shell II Supernovae based solely on photometry: the galaxies towards 100 Mpc,” Astrophys. J. 678, 168 Photometric-Colour Method,” Astrophys. J. 815, 121 (2008), arXiv:0802.2509 [astro-ph]. (2015), arXiv:1511.05145 [astro-ph.HE]. [123] John P. Blakeslee, Andres Jordan, Simona Mei, Patrick [137] Felipe Olivares E. et al., “The Standardized Can- Cote, Laura Ferrarese, Leopoldo Infante, Eric W. dle Method for Type II Plateau Supernovae,” Astro- Peng, John L. Tonry, and Michael J. West, “The phys. J. 715, 833–853 (2010), arXiv:1004.2534 [astro- ACS Fornax Cluster Survey. V. Measurement and Re- ph.CO]. calibration of Surface Brightness Fluctuations and a Precise Value of the Fornax–Virgo Relative Distance,” 62

[138] T. de Jaeger et al., “SN 2016jhj at redshift 0.34: ex- [154] M. Rigault et al. (Nearby Supernova Factory), “Strong tending the Type II supernova Hubble diagram using Dependence of Type Ia Supernova Standardization on the standard candle method,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. the Local Specific Star Formation Rate,” Astron. As- Soc. 472, 4233–4243 (2017), arXiv:1709.01513 [astro- trophys. 644, A176 (2020), arXiv:1806.03849 [astro- ph.HE]. ph.CO]. [139] T. de Jaeger et al. (DES), “Studying Type II super- [155] Young-Lo Kim, Mathew Smith, Mark Sullivan, and novae as cosmological standard candles using the Dark Young-Wook Lee, “Environmental Dependence of Energy Survey,” (2020), 10.1093/mnras/staa1402, Type Ia Supernova Luminosities from a Sample with- arXiv:2005.09757 [astro-ph.HE]. out a Local-Global Difference in Host Star Formation,” [140] Donald Q. Lamb and Daniel E. Reichart, “Gamma- Astroph. J. 854, 24 (2018), arXiv:1801.01192 [astro- ray bursts as a probe of the very high redshift uni- ph.GA]. verse,” Astrophys. J. 536, 1–18 (2000), arXiv:astro- [156] Eoin O.´ Colgáin,“A hint of matter underdensity at ph/9909002. low z?” JCAP 09, 006 (2019), arXiv:1903.11743 [astro- [141] Spyros Basilakos and L. Perivolaropoulos, “Testing ph.CO]. GRBs as Standard Candles,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. [157] Lavrentios Kazantzidis and Leandros Perivolaropou- Soc. 391, 411–419 (2008), arXiv:0805.0875 [astro-ph]. los, “Is gravity getting weaker at low z? Observa- [142] F. Y. Wang, Z. G. Dai, and E. W. Liang, “Gamma-ray tional evidence and theoretical implications,” (2019), Burst Cosmology,” New Astron. Rev. 67, 1–17 (2015), arXiv:1907.03176 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:1504.00735 [astro-ph.HE]. [158] L. Kazantzidis and L. Perivolaropoulos, “Hints of a [143] Jing Liu and Hao Wei, “Cosmological models and Local Matter Underdensity or Modified Gravity in the gamma-ray bursts calibrated by using Padémethod,” Low z Pantheon data,” Phys. Rev. D 102, 023520 Gen. Rel. Grav. 47, 141 (2015), arXiv:1410.3960 [astro- (2020), arXiv:2004.02155 [astro-ph.CO]. ph.CO]. [159] Domenico Sapone, Savvas Nesseris, and Carlos A. P. [144] L. Amati et al., “Intrinsic spectra and energetics of Bengaly, “Is there any measurable redshift dependence BeppoSAX gamma-ray bursts with known redshifts,” on the SN Ia absolute magnitude?” Phys. Dark Univ. Astron. Astrophys. 390, 81 (2002), arXiv:astro- 32, 100814 (2021), arXiv:2006.05461 [astro-ph.CO]. ph/0205230. [160] Hanwool Koo, Arman Shafieloo, Ryan E. Keeley, [145] G. Ghirlanda, G. Ghisellini, and D. Lazzati, “The and Benjamin L’Huillier, “Model-independent Con- Collimation-corrected GRB energies correlate with the straints on Type Ia Supernova Light-curve Hyperpa- peak energy of their nu f nu spectrum,” Astrophys. J. rameters and Reconstructions of the Expansion His- 616, 331–338 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0405602. tory of the Universe,” Astrophys. J. 899, 9 (2020), [146] David Camarena and Valerio Marra, “Local deter- arXiv:2001.10887 [astro-ph.CO]. mination of the Hubble constant and the decelera- [161] L. Kazantzidis, H. Koo, S. Nesseris, L. Perivolaropou- tion parameter,” Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 013028 (2020), los, and A. Shafieloo, “Hints for possible low redshift arXiv:1906.11814 [astro-ph.CO]. oscillation around the best-fitting ΛCDM model in the [147] Steven Weinberg, Cosmology (2008). expansion history of the Universe,” Mon. Not. Roy. [148] Adam G. Riess, Lucas Macri, Stefano Casertano, Hu- Astron. Soc. 501, 3421–3426 (2021), arXiv:2010.03491 bert Lampeitl, Henry C. Ferguson, Alexei V. Filip- [astro-ph.CO]. penko, Saurabh W. Jha, Weidong Li, and Ryan [162] Vladimir V. Luković,Balakrishna S. Haridasu, and Chornock, “A 3% Solution: Determination of the Nicola Vittorio, “Exploring the evidence for a large Hubble Constant with the Hubble Space Telescope local void with supernovae Ia data,” Mon. Not. Roy. and Wide Field Camera 3,” Astrophys. J. 730, 119 Astron. Soc. 491, 2075–2087 (2020), arXiv:1907.11219 (2011), [Erratum: Astrophys.J. 732, 129 (2011)], [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:1103.2976 [astro-ph.CO]. [163] Isaac Tutusaus, Brahim Lamine, and Alain Blanchard, [149] Adam G. Riess et al., “A 2.4% Determination of the “Model-independent cosmic acceleration and redshift- Local Value of the Hubble Constant,” Astrophys. J. dependent intrinsic luminosity in type-Ia supernovae,” 826, 56 (2016), arXiv:1604.01424 [astro-ph.CO]. Astron. Astrophys. 625, A15 (2019), arXiv:1803.06197 [150] Beatrice M. Tinsley, “Evolution of the Stars and Gas [astro-ph.CO]. in Galaxies,” Astroph. J. 151, 547 (1968). [164] Isaac Tutusaus, Brahim Lamine, Arnaud Dupays, and [151] Yijung Kang, Young-Wook Lee, Young-Lo Kim, Chul Alain Blanchard, “Is cosmic acceleration proven by lo- Chung, and Chang Hee Ree, “Early-type Host Galax- cal cosmological probes?” Astron. Astrophys. 602, A73 ies of Type Ia Supernovae. II. Evidence for Luminos- (2017), arXiv:1706.05036 [astro-ph.CO]. ity Evolution in Supernova Cosmology,” Astrophys. J. [165] Persis S. Drell, Thomas J. Loredo, and Ira Wasserman, 889, 8 (2020), arXiv:1912.04903 [astro-ph.GA]. “Type Ia supernovae, evolution, and the cosmological [152] B. M. Rose, P. M. Garnavich, and M. A. Berg, “Think constant,” Astrophys. J. 530, 593 (2000), arXiv:astro- Global, Act Local: The Influence of Environment Age ph/9905027. and Host Mass on Type Ia Supernova Light Curves,” [166] D. M. Scolnic et al., “The Complete Light-curve Sam- Astrophys. J. 874, 32 (2019), arXiv:1902.01433 [astro- ple of Spectroscopically Confirmed SNe Ia from Pan- ph.CO]. STARRS1 and Cosmological Constraints from the [153] D. O. Jones et al., “Should Type Ia Supernova Dis- Combined Pantheon Sample,” Astrophys. J. 859, 101 tances be Corrected for their Local Environments?” (2018), arXiv:1710.00845 [astro-ph.CO]. Astrophys. J. 867, 108 (2018), arXiv:1805.05911 [167] J. Grande and L. Perivolaropoulos, “Generalized LTB [astro-ph.CO]. model with Inhomogeneous Isotropic Dark Energy: 63

Observational Constraints,” Phys. Rev. D 84, 023514 (2013), arXiv:1304.6984 [astro-ph.CO]. (2011), arXiv:1103.4143 [astro-ph.CO]. [185] Pauline Zarrouk et al., “The clustering of the SDSS- [168] M. Gasperini, G. Marozzi, F. Nugier, and IV extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey G. Veneziano, “Light-cone averaging in cosmology: DR14 quasar sample: measurement of the growth rate Formalism and applications,” JCAP 07, 008 (2011), of structure from the anisotropic correlation function arXiv:1104.1167 [astro-ph.CO]. between redshift 0.8 and 2.2,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. [169] Giuseppe Fanizza, Maurizio Gasperini, Giovanni Soc. 477, 1639–1663 (2018), arXiv:1801.03062 [astro- Marozzi, and Gabriele Veneziano, “Generalized covari- ph.CO]. ant prescriptions for averaging cosmological observ- [186] Antonio J. Cuesta, Licia Verde, Adam Riess, and Raul ables,” JCAP 02, 017 (2020), arXiv:1911.09469 [gr-qc]. Jimenez, “Calibrating the cosmic distance scale lad- [170] Daniel J. Eisenstein, Hee-jong Seo, and Martin J. der: the role of the sound horizon scale and the local White, “On the Robustness of the Acoustic Scale in expansion rate as distance anchors,” Mon. Not. Roy. the Low-Redshift Clustering of Matter,” Astrophys. J. Astron. Soc. 448, 3463–3471 (2015), arXiv:1411.1094 664, 660–674 (2007), arXiv:astro-ph/0604361. [astro-ph.CO]. [171] Daniel J. Eisenstein et al. (SDSS), “Detection of the [187] Nils Schöneberg, Julien Lesgourgues, and Deanna C. Baryon Acoustic Peak in the Large-Scale Correlation Hooper, “The BAO+BBN take on the Hubble ten- Function of SDSS Luminous Red Galaxies,” Astro- sion,” JCAP 1910, 029 (2019), arXiv:1907.11594 phys. J. 633, 560–574 (2005), arXiv:astro-ph/0501171 [astro-ph.CO]. [astro-ph]. [188] Levon Pogosian, Alessandra Silvestri, Kazuya [172] P.J.E. Peebles, “Recombination of the Primeval Koyama, and Gong-Bo Zhao, “How to optimally Plasma,” Astrophys. J. 153, 1 (1968). parametrize deviations from General Relativity in the [173] Shaun Cole et al. (2dFGRS), “The 2dF Galaxy Red- evolution of cosmological perturbations?” Phys. Rev. shift Survey: Power-spectrum analysis of the final D 81, 104023 (2010), arXiv:1002.2382 [astro-ph.CO]. dataset and cosmological implications,” Mon. Not. [189] Karsten Jedamzik, Levon Pogosian, and Gong- Roy. Astron. Soc. 362, 505–534 (2005), arXiv:astro- Bo Zhao, “Why reducing the cosmic sound horizon ph/0501174. can not fully resolve the Hubble tension,” (2020), [174] Stephen D. Landy and Alexander S. Szalay, “Bias and arXiv:2010.04158 [astro-ph.CO]. variance of angular correlation functions,” Astrophys. [190] Tristan L. Smith, Vivian Poulin, JoséLuis Bernal, J. 412, 64 (1993). Kimberly K. Boddy, Marc Kamionkowski, and [175] Daniel J. Eisenstein and Wayne Hu, “Baryonic features Riccardo Murgia, “Early dark energy is not ex- in the matter transfer function,” Astrophys. J. 496, cluded by current large-scale structure data,” (2020), 605 (1998), arXiv:astro-ph/9709112. arXiv:2009.10740 [astro-ph.CO]. [176] A. Meiksin, Martin J. White, and J. A. Pea- [191] Anton Chudaykin, Dmitry Gorbunov, and Nikita cock, “Baryonic signatures in large scale structure,” Nedelko, “Exploring an early dark energy solution to Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 304, 851–864 (1999), the Hubble tension with Planck and SPTPol data,” arXiv:astro-ph/9812214. Phys. Rev. D 103, 043529 (2021), arXiv:2011.04682 [177] Takahiko Matsubara, “Correlation function in deep [astro-ph.CO]. redshift space as a cosmological probe,” Astrophys. J. [192] S. Refsdal, “On the possibility of determining Hubble’s 615, 573–585 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0408349. parameter and the masses of galaxies from the gravi- [178] P. J. E. Peebles, The large-scale structure of the uni- tational lens effect,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 128, verse (1980). 307 (1964). [179] Luca Amendola and Shinji Tsujikawa, Dark En- [193] A.J. Shajib et al. (DES), “STRIDES: a 3.9 per cent ergy: Theory and Observations (Cambridge University measurement of the Hubble constant from the strong Press, 2015). lens system DES J0408-5354,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. [180] Eric´ Aubourg et al., “Cosmological implications of Soc. 494, 6072–6102 (2020), arXiv:1910.06306 [astro- baryon acoustic oscillation measurements,” Phys. Rev. ph.CO]. D 92, 123516 (2015), arXiv:1411.1074 [astro-ph.CO]. [194] S. Birrer et al., “TDCOSMO - IV. Hierarchical time- [181] G. Efstathiou and J. R. Bond, “Cosmic confu- delay cosmography – joint inference of the Hubble con- sion: Degeneracies among cosmological parameters de- stant and galaxy density profiles,” Astron. Astrophys. rived from measurements of microwave background 643, A165 (2020), arXiv:2007.02941 [astro-ph.CO]. anisotropies,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 304, 75– [195] Tommaso Treu and Philip J. Marshall, “Time Delay 97 (1999), arXiv:astro-ph/9807103. Cosmography,” Astron. Astrophys. Rev. 24, 11 (2016), [182] E. Komatsu et al. (WMAP), “Five-Year Wilkinson arXiv:1605.05333 [astro-ph.CO]. Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: [196] Sherry H. Suyu, Tzu-Ching Chang, Frédéric Cosmological Interpretation,” Astrophys. J. Suppl. Courbin, and Teppei Okumura, “Cosmological 180, 330–376 (2009), arXiv:0803.0547 [astro-ph]. distance indicators,” Space Sci. Rev. 214, 91 (2018), [183] Wayne Hu and Scott Dodelson, “Cosmic Microwave arXiv:1801.07262 [astro-ph.CO]. Background Anisotropies,” Ann. Rev. Astron. Astro- [197] Masamune Oguri, “Strong gravitational lensing of ex- phys. 40, 171–216 (2002), arXiv:astro-ph/0110414. plosive transients,” Rept. Prog. Phys. 82, 126901 [184] Graeme E. Addison, Gary Hinshaw, and Mark (2019), arXiv:1907.06830 [astro-ph.CO]. Halpern, “Cosmological constraints from baryon [198] S. H. Suyu, P. J. Marshall, M. W. Auger, S. Hilbert, acoustic oscillations and clustering of large-scale struc- R. D. Blandford, L. V. E. Koopmans, C. D. Fass- ture,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 436, 1674–1683 nacht, and T. Treu, “Dissecting the Gravitational Lens B1608+656. II. Precision Measurements of the Hub- 64

ble Constant, Spatial Curvature, and the Dark Energy arXiv:1907.03746 [astro-ph.HE]. Equation of State,” Astrophys. J. 711, 201–221 (2010), [213] Eric C. Bellm et al., “The zwicky transient facility: arXiv:0910.2773 [astro-ph.CO]. System overview, performance, and first results,” Pub- [199] S. H. Suyu et al., “H0LiCOW – I. H0 Lenses in lications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific COSMOGRAIL’s Wellspring: program overview,” 131, 018002 (2018). Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 468, 2590–2604 (2017), [214] Matthew J. Graham et al., “The Zwicky Transient Fa- arXiv:1607.00017 [astro-ph.CO]. cility: Science Objectives,” Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. [200] V. Bonvin et al., “H0LiCOW – V. New COSMO- 131, 078001 (2019), arXiv:1902.01945 [astro-ph.IM]. GRAIL time delays of HE 0435−1223: H0 to 3.8 per [215] C. Messenger and J. Read, “Measuring a cosmological cent precision from strong lensing in a flat ΛCDM distance-redshift relationship using only gravitational model,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 465, 4914–4930 wave observations of binary neutron star coalescences,” (2017), arXiv:1607.01790 [astro-ph.CO]. Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 091101 (2012), arXiv:1107.5725 [201] Bernard F. Schutz, “Determining the Hubble Constant [gr-qc]. from Gravitational Wave Observations,” Nature 323, [216] Stephen R. Taylor and Jonathan R. Gair, “Cosmol- 310–311 (1986). ogy with the lights off: standard sirens in the Ein- [202] Daniel E. Holz and Scott A. Hughes, “Using stein Telescope era,” Phys. Rev. D 86, 023502 (2012), gravitational-wave standard sirens,” Astrophys. J. arXiv:1204.6739 [astro-ph.CO]. 629, 15–22 (2005), arXiv:astro-ph/0504616. [217] Will M. Farr, Maya Fishbach, Jiani Ye, and [203] Neal Dalal, Daniel E. Holz, Scott A. Hughes, and Bhu- Daniel Holz, “A Future Percent-Level Measurement vnesh Jain, “Short grb and binary black hole standard of the Hubble Expansion at Redshift 0.8 With Ad- sirens as a probe of dark energy,” Phys. Rev. D 74, vanced LIGO,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 883, L42 (2019), 063006 (2006), arXiv:astro-ph/0601275. arXiv:1908.09084 [astro-ph.CO]. [204] Samaya Nissanke, Daniel E. Holz, Scott A. Hughes, [218] B.P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo, 1M2H, Neal Dalal, and Jonathan L. Sievers, “Exploring Dark Energy Camera GW-E, DES, DLT40, Las short gamma-ray bursts as gravitational-wave stan- Cumbres Observatory, VINROUGE, MASTER), “A dard sirens,” Astrophys. J. 725, 496–514 (2010), gravitational-wave standard siren measurement of arXiv:0904.1017 [astro-ph.CO]. the hubble constant,” Nature 551, 85–88 (2017), [205] Samaya Nissanke, Daniel E. Holz, Neal Dalal, Scott A. arXiv:1710.05835 [astro-ph.CO]. Hughes, Jonathan L. Sievers, and Christopher M. Hi- [219] M. Fishbach et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), “A rata, “Determining the Hubble constant from gravita- Standard Siren Measurement of the Hubble Con- tional wave observations of merging compact binaries,” stant from GW170817 without the Electromagnetic (2013), arXiv:1307.2638 [astro-ph.CO]. Counterpart,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 871, L13 (2019), [206] David Eichler, Mario Livio, Tsvi Piran, and David N. arXiv:1807.05667 [astro-ph.CO]. Schramm, “Nucleosynthesis, Neutrino Bursts and [220] Nils Andersson and Kostas D. Kokkotas, “Gravita- Gamma-Rays from Coalescing Neutron Stars,” Nature tional waves and pulsating stars: What can we learn 340, 126–128 (1989). from future observations?” Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 4134– [207] D.A. Coulter et al., “Swope Supernova Survey 2017a 4137 (1996), arXiv:gr-qc/9610035. (SSS17a), the Optical Counterpart to a Gravita- [221] P. Jaranowski, A. Krolak, K. D. Kokkotas, and tional Wave Source,” Science 358, 1556 (2017), G. Tsegas, “On the estimation of parameters of the arXiv:1710.05452 [astro-ph.HE]. gravitational-wave signal from a coalescing binary by [208] M. Soares-Santos et al. (DES, Dark Energy Camera a network of detectors,” Class. Quant. Grav. 13, 1279– GW-EM), “The Electromagnetic Counterpart of the 1307 (1996). Binary Neutron Star Merger LIGO/Virgo GW170817. [222] Kostas D. Kokkotas and Nikolaos Stergioulas, “Grav- I. Discovery of the Optical Counterpart Using the Dark itational waves from compact sources,” in 5th Inter- Energy Camera,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 848, L16 (2017), national Workshop on New Worlds in Astroparticle arXiv:1710.05459 [astro-ph.HE]. Physics (2005) arXiv:gr-qc/0506083. [209] Hsin-Yu Chen, Maya Fishbach, and Daniel E. Holz, [223] Kostas D. Kokkotas, “Gravitational Wave As- “A two per cent Hubble constant measurement from tronomy,” Rev. Mod. Astron. 20, 140 (2008), standard sirens within five years,” Nature 562, 545– arXiv:0809.1602 [astro-ph]. 547 (2018), arXiv:1712.06531 [astro-ph.CO]. [224] Bonnie R. Zhang, Michael J. Childress, Tamara M. [210] M.J. Graham et al., “Candidate Electromagnetic Davis, Natallia V. Karpenka, Chris Lidman, Brian P. Counterpart to the Binary Black Hole Merger Gravi- Schmidt, and Mathew Smith, “A blinded determina- tational Wave Event S190521g,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, tion of H0 from low-redshift Type Ia supernovae, cali- 251102 (2020), arXiv:2006.14122 [astro-ph.HE]. brated by Cepheid variables,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. [211] R. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), “Properties Soc. 471, 2254–2285 (2017), arXiv:1706.07573 [astro- and Astrophysical Implications of the 150 M Binary ph.CO]. Black Hole Merger GW190521,” Astrophys. J. Lett. [225] M. J. Reid, J. A. Braatz, J. J. Condon, K. Y. Lo, 900, L13 (2020), arXiv:2009.01190 [astro-ph.HE]. C. Y. Kuo, C. M. V. Impellizzeri, and C. Henkel, “The [212] B. McKernan, K.E.S. Ford, I. Bartos, M.J. Graham, Megamaser Cosmology Project: IV. A Direct Mea- W. Lyra, S. Marka, Z. Marka, N.P. Ross, D. Stern, surement of the Hubble Constant from UGC 3789,” and Y. Yang, “Ram-pressure stripping of a kicked Astrophys. J. 767, 154 (2013), arXiv:1207.7292 [astro- Hill sphere: Prompt electromagnetic emission from ph.CO]. the merger of stellar mass black holes in an AGN ac- [226] M. J. Reid, J. A. Braatz, J. J. Condon, L. J. Greenhill, cretion disk,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 884, L50 (2019), C. Henkel, and K. Y. Lo, “The Megamaser Cosmology 65

Project: I. VLBI observations of UGC 3789,” Astro- [astro-ph.CO]. phys. J. 695, 287–291 (2009), arXiv:0811.4345 [astro- [242] M. Aaronson, J. Huchra, and J. Mould, “The infrared ph]. luminosity/H I velocity-width relation and its appli- [227] D.W. Pesce et al., “The Megamaser Cosmology cation to the distance scale.” Astroph. J. 229, 1–13 Project. XIII. Combined Hubble constant constraints,” (1979). Astrophys. J. Lett. 891, L1 (2020), arXiv:2001.09213 [243] K. C. Freeman, “On the Disks of Spiral and S0 Galax- [astro-ph.CO]. ies,” Astroph. J. 160, 811 (1970). [228] S. M. Faber and R. E. Jackson, “Velocity dispersions [244] George Alestas, Ioannis Antoniou, and Leandros and mass to light ratios for elliptical galaxies,” Astro- Perivolaropoulos, “Hints for a gravitational con- phys. J. 204, 668 (1976). stant transition in Tully-Fisher data,” (2021), [229] S. Djorgovski and Marc Davis, “Fundamental proper- arXiv:2104.14481 [astro-ph.CO]. ties of elliptical galaxies,” Astrophys. J. 313, 59 (1987). [245] Michael G. Hauser and Eli Dwek, “The cosmic in- [230] R. B. Tully and J. R. Fisher, “A New method of deter- frared background: measurements and implications,” mining distances to galaxies,” Astron. Astrophys. 54, Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 39, 249–307 (2001), 661–673 (1977). arXiv:astro-ph/0105539. [231] Shoko Sakai et al., “The Hubble Space Telescope Key [246] Robert Gould and Gerald Schréder,“Opacity of the Project on the Extragalactic Distance Scale. 24. The Universe to High-Energy Photons,” Phys. Rev. Lett. Calibration of Tully-Fisher relations and the value of 16, 252–254 (1966). the Hubble Constant,” Astrophys. J. 529, 698 (2000), [247] Alberto Dom´ınguez,Radoslaw Wojtak, Justin Finke, arXiv:astro-ph/9909269. Marco Ajello, Kari Helgason, Francisco Prada, Ab- [232] Stacy S. McGaugh, Jim M. Schombert, Greg D. hishek Desai, Vaidehi Paliya, Lea Marcotulli, and Bothun, and W. J. G. de Blok, “The Baryonic Tully- Dieter Hartmann, “A new measurement of the Hub- Fisher relation,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 533, L99–L102 ble constant and matter content of the Universe us- (2000), arXiv:astro-ph/0003001. ing extragalactic background light γ-ray attenuation,” [233] M. A. W. Verheijen, “The Ursa Major Cluster of (2019), 10.3847/1538-4357/ab4a0e, arXiv:1903.12097 Galaxies. 5. H I Rotation Curve Shapes and the Tully- [astro-ph.CO]. Fisher Relations,” Astrophys. J. 563, 694–715 (2001), [248] Houdun Zeng and Dahai Yan, “Using the Extragalac- arXiv:astro-ph/0108225. tic Gamma-Ray Background to Constrain the Hub- [234] Sebastian Gurovich, Stacy S. McGaugh, Ken C. Free- ble Constant and Matter Density of the Universe,” man, Helmut Jerjen, Lister Staveley-Smith, and (2019), 10.3847/1538-4357/ab35e3, arXiv:1907.10965 W. J. G. De Blok, “The Baryonic Tully Fisher re- [astro-ph.HE]. lation,” Publ. Astron. Soc. Austral. 21, 412 (2004), [249] A. Dom´ınguez and F. Prada, “Measurement of the arXiv:astro-ph/0411521. Expansion Rate of the Universe from γ-Ray At- [235] Stacy S. McGaugh, “The Baryonic Tully-Fisher rela- tenuation,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 771, L34 (2013), tion of galaxies with extended rotation curves and the arXiv:1305.2163 [astro-ph.CO]. stellar mass of rotating galaxies,” Astrophys. J. 632, [250] Raul Jimenez and Abraham Loeb, “Constraining 859–871 (2005), arXiv:astro-ph/0506750. cosmological parameters based on relative galaxy [236] Federico Lelli, Stacy S. McGaugh, and James M. ages,” Astrophys. J. 573, 37–42 (2002), arXiv:astro- Schombert, “The Small Scatter of the Baryonic ph/0106145. Tully–fisher Relation,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 816, L14 [251] M. Moresco et al., “Improved constraints on the expan- (2016), arXiv:1512.04543 [astro-ph.GA]. sion rate of the Universe up to z˜1.1 from the spectro- [237] Moritz Haslbauer, Indranil Banik, and Pavel Kroupa, scopic evolution of cosmic chronometers,” JCAP 08, “The KBC void and Hubble tension contradict ΛCDM 006 (2012), arXiv:1201.3609 [astro-ph.CO]. on a Gpc scale − Milgromian dynamics as a possible [252] Michele Moresco, Lucia Pozzetti, Andrea Cimatti, solution,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 499, 2845–2883 Raul Jimenez, Claudia Maraston, Licia Verde, Daniel (2020), arXiv:2009.11292 [astro-ph.CO]. Thomas, Annalisa Citro, Rita Tojeiro, and David [238] Stacy McGaugh, “The Baryonic Tully-Fisher Rela- Wilkinson, “A 6% measurement of the Hubble pa- tion of Gas Rich Galaxies as a Test of LCDM and rameter at z ∼ 0.45: direct evidence of the epoch MOND,” Astron. J. 143, 40 (2012), arXiv:1107.2934 of cosmic re-acceleration,” JCAP 05, 014 (2016), [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:1601.01701 [astro-ph.CO]. [239] G. Iorio, F. Fraternali, C. Nipoti, E. Di Teodoro, J. I. [253] Yun Chen, Suresh Kumar, and Bharat Ratra, “De- Read, and G. Battaglia, “Little things in 3d: robust termining the Hubble constant from Hubble param- determination of the circular velocity of dwarf irregular eter measurements,” Astrophys. J. 835, 86 (2017), galaxies.” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical arXiv:1606.07316 [astro-ph.CO]. Society , stw3285 (2016). [254] Omer Farooq, Foram Ranjeet Madiyar, Sara Cran- [240] Federico Lelli, Stacy S. McGaugh, James M. dall, and Bharat Ratra, “Hubble Parameter Mea- Schombert, Harry Desmond, and Harley Katz, “The surement Constraints on the Redshift of the Decelera- baryonic Tully–Fisher relation for different velocity tion–acceleration Transition, Dynamical Dark Energy, definitions and implications for galaxy angular momen- and Space Curvature,” Astrophys. J. 835, 26 (2017), tum,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 484, 3267–3278 arXiv:1607.03537 [astro-ph.CO]. (2019), arXiv:1901.05966 [astro-ph.GA]. [255] Hai Yu, Bharat Ratra, and Fa-Yin Wang, “Hubble [241] James Schombert, Stacy McGaugh, and Federico Lelli, Parameter and Baryon Acoustic Oscillation Measure- “Using The Baryonic Tully-Fisher Relation to Mea- ment Constraints on the Hubble Constant, the De- sure Ho,” Astron. J. 160, 71 (2020), arXiv:2006.08615 viation from the Spatially Flat ΛCDM Model, the 66

Deceleration–Acceleration Transition Redshift, and [astro-ph.CO]. Spatial Curvature,” Astrophys. J. 856, 3 (2018), [268] Cheng-Zong Ruan, Fulvio Melia, Yu Chen, and Tong- arXiv:1711.03437 [astro-ph.CO]. Jie Zhang, “Using spatial curvature with HII galax- [256] AdriàGómez-Valent and Luca Amendola, “H0 from ies and cosmic chronometers to explore the tension in cosmic chronometers and Type Ia supernovae, with H0,” Astrophys. J. 881, 137 (2019), arXiv:1901.06626 Gaussian Processes and the novel Weighted Poly- [astro-ph.CO]. nomial Regression method,” JCAP 04, 051 (2018), [269] M. Betoule et al. (SDSS), “Improved cosmological arXiv:1802.01505 [astro-ph.CO]. constraints from a joint analysis of the SDSS-II and [257] Jorge Melnick, Roberto Terlevich, and Elena Ter- SNLS supernova samples,” Astron. Astrophys. 568, levich, “Hii galaxies as deep cosmological probes,” A22 (2014), arXiv:1401.4064 [astro-ph.CO]. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 311, 629 (2000), [270] Adam G. Riess, Stefano Casertano, Wenlong Yuan, arXiv:astro-ph/9908346. J. Bradley Bowers, Lucas Macri, Joel C. Zinn, and [258] Ethan R. Siegel, R. Guzman, Jorge P. Gallego, M. Or- Dan Scolnic, “Cosmic Distances Calibrated to 1% Pre- duna Lopez, and P. Rodriguez Hidalgo, “Towards a cision with Gaia EDR3 Parallaxes and Hubble Space precision cosmology from starburst galaxies at z > 2,” Telescope Photometry of 75 Milky Way Cepheids Con- Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 356, 1117–1122 (2005), firm Tension with ΛCDM,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 908, L6 arXiv:astro-ph/0410612. (2021), arXiv:2012.08534 [astro-ph.CO]. [259] M. Plionis, R. Terlevich, S. Basilakos, F. Bresolin, [271] Gaia Collaboration, A. G. A. Brown, A. Vallenari, E. Terlevich, J. Melnick, and R. Chavez, “A Strategy T. Prusti, J. H. J. de Bruijne, C. Babusiaux, and to Measure the Dark Energy Equation of State using M. Biermann, “Gaia early data release 3: Sum- the HII galaxy Hubble Relation \& X-ray AGN Clus- mary of the contents and survey properties,” (2020), tering: Preliminary Results,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. arXiv:2012.01533 [astro-ph.GA]. Soc. 416, 2981 (2011), arXiv:1106.4558 [astro-ph.CO]. [272] David Camarena and Valerio Marra, “On the use of the [260] Ricardo Chávez, Elena Terlevich, Roberto Terlevich, local prior on the absolute magnitude of Type Ia super- Manolis Plionis, Fabio Bresolin, Spyros Basilakos, and novae in cosmological inference,” (2021), 10.1093/mn- Jorge Melnick, “Determining the Hubble constant us- ras/stab1200, arXiv:2101.08641 [astro-ph.CO]. ing Giant extragalactic HII regions and HII galax- [273] David Camarena and Valerio Marra, “A new method ies,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 425, 56 (2012), to build the (inverse) distance ladder,” Mon. Not. Roy. arXiv:1203.6222 [astro-ph.CO]. Astron. Soc. 495, 2630–2644 (2020), arXiv:1910.14125 [261] Ricardo Chávez, Roberto Terlevich, Elena Terlevich, [astro-ph.CO]. Fabio Bresolin, Jorge Melnick, Manolis Plionis, and [274] George Alestas, Lavrentios Kazantzidis, and Lean- Spyros Basilakos, “The L–σ relation for massive bursts dros Perivolaropoulos, “w − M phantom transition at of star formation,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 442, zt <0.1 as a resolution of the Hubble tension,” Phys. 3565–3597 (2014), arXiv:1405.4010 [astro-ph.GA]. Rev. D 103, 083517 (2021), arXiv:2012.13932 [astro- [262] Roberto Terlevich, Elena Terlevich, Jorge Melnick, Ri- ph.CO]. cardo Chávez, Manolis Plionis, Fabio Bresolin, and [275] Brent Follin and Lloyd Knox, “Insensitivity of Spyros Basilakos, “On the road to precision cosmol- the distance ladder Hubble constant determination ogy with high-redshift H II galaxies,” Mon. Not. Roy. to Cepheid calibration modelling choices,” Mon. Astron. Soc. 451, 3001–3010 (2015), arXiv:1505.04376 Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 477, 4534–4542 (2018), [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:1707.01175 [astro-ph.CO]. [263] Jun-Jie Wei, Xue-Feng Wu, and Fulvio Melia, “The [276] Anton Chudaykin, Dmitry Gorbunov, and Nikita HII Galaxy Hubble Diagram Strongly Favors Rh = ct Nedelko, “Combined analysis of Planck and SPTPol over ΛCDM,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 463, 1144– data favors the early dark energy models,” JCAP 08, 1152 (2016), arXiv:1608.02070 [astro-ph.CO]. 013 (2020), arXiv:2004.13046 [astro-ph.CO]. [264] Ricardo Chávez, Manolis Plionis, Spyros Basilakos, [277] Adam G. Riess et al., “New Parallaxes of Galactic Roberto Terlevich, Elena Terlevich, Jorge Melnick, Cepheids from Spatially Scanning the Hubble Space Fabio Bresolin, and Ana Luisa González-Morán, Telescope: Implications for the Hubble Constant,” As- “Constraining the dark energy equation of state with H trophys. J. 855, 136 (2018), arXiv:1801.01120 [astro- II galaxies,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 462, 2431– ph.SR]. 2439 (2016), arXiv:1607.06458 [astro-ph.CO]. [278] Louise Breuval et al., “The Milky Way Cepheid Leavitt [265] Manoj K. Yennapureddy and Fulvio Melia, “Re- law based on Gaia DR2 parallaxes of companion stars construction of the HII Galaxy Hubble Diagram and host open cluster populations,” Astron. Astrophys. using Gaussian Processes,” JCAP 11, 029 (2017), 643, A115 (2020), arXiv:2006.08763 [astro-ph.SR]. arXiv:1711.03454 [astro-ph.CO]. [279] A.G.A. Brown et al. (Gaia), “Gaia Data Release 2: [266] Ana Luisa González-Morán,Ricardo Chávez, Roberto Summary of the contents and survey properties,” As- Terlevich, Elena Terlevich, Fabio Bresolin, David tron. Astrophys. 616, A1 (2018), arXiv:1804.09365 Fernández-Arenas,Manolis Plionis, Spyros Basilakos, [astro-ph.GA]. Jorge Melnick, and Eduardo Telles, “Independent [280] Wendy L. Freedman et al., “The Carnegie-Chicago cosmological constraints from high-z H ii galaxies,” Hubble Program. VIII. An Independent Determination Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 487, 4669–4694 (2019), of the Hubble Constant Based on the Tip of the Red arXiv:1906.02195 [astro-ph.GA]. Giant Branch,” (2019), 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2f73, [267] Kyle Leaf and Fulvio Melia, “A two-point diagnostic arXiv:1907.05922 [astro-ph.CO]. for the H ii galaxy Hubble diagram,” Mon. Not. Roy. [281] Wenlong Yuan, Adam G. Riess, Lucas M. Macri, Ste- Astron. Soc. 474, 4507–4513 (2018), arXiv:1711.10793 fano Casertano, and Dan Scolnic, “Consistent Cal- 67

ibration of the Tip of the Red Giant Branch in the Soc. 500, 1201–1221 (2020), arXiv:2007.08998 [astro- Large Magellanic Cloud on the Hubble Space Tele- ph.CO]. scope Photometric System and a Re-determination of [295] Michael J. Drinkwater et al., “The WiggleZ Dark En- the Hubble Constant,” Astrophys. J. 886, 61 (2019), ergy Survey: Survey Design and First Data Release,” arXiv:1908.00993 [astro-ph.GA]. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 401, 1429–1452 (2010), [282] John Soltis, Stefano Casertano, and Adam G. Riess, arXiv:0911.4246 [astro-ph.CO]. “The Parallax of ω Centauri Measured from Gaia [296] Chris Blake et al., “The WiggleZ Dark Energy Sur- EDR3 and a Direct, Geometric Calibration of the Tip vey: mapping the distance-redshift relation with of the Red Giant Branch and the Hubble Constant,” baryon acoustic oscillations,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Astrophys. J. Lett. 908, L5 (2021), arXiv:2012.09196 Soc. 418, 1707–1724 (2011), arXiv:1108.2635 [astro- [astro-ph.GA]. ph.CO]. [283] https://act.princeton.edu/. [297] Chris Blake et al., “The WiggleZ Dark Energy Sur- [284] Simone Aiola et al. (ACT), “The Atacama Cosmology vey: Joint measurements of the expansion and growth Telescope: DR4 Maps and Cosmological Parameters,” history at z < 1,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 425, JCAP 12, 047 (2020), arXiv:2007.07288 [astro-ph.CO]. 405–414 (2012), arXiv:1204.3674 [astro-ph.CO]. [285] Donald G. York et al. (SDSS), “The Sloan Digital Sky [298] Matthew Colless et al. (2DFGRS), “The 2dF Galaxy Survey: Technical Summary,” Astron. J. 120, 1579– Redshift Survey: Spectra and redshifts,” Mon. Not. 1587 (2000), arXiv:astro-ph/0006396. Roy. Astron. Soc. 328, 1039 (2001), arXiv:astro- [286] Max Tegmark et al. (SDSS), “Cosmological Con- ph/0106498. straints from the SDSS Luminous Red Galaxies,” Phys. [299] D. Heath Jones et al., “The 6dF Galaxy Survey: Fi- Rev. D74, 123507 (2006), arXiv:astro-ph/0608632 nal Redshift Release (DR3) and Southern Large-Scale [astro-ph]. Structures,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 399, 683 [287] Kyle S. Dawson et al. (BOSS), “The Baryon Oscil- (2009), arXiv:0903.5451 [astro-ph.CO]. lation Spectroscopic Survey of SDSS-III,” Astron. J. [300] Florian Beutler, Chris Blake, Matthew Colless, 145, 10 (2013), arXiv:1208.0022 [astro-ph.CO]. D. Heath Jones, Lister Staveley-Smith, Lachlan Camp- [288] Michael R. Blanton et al. (SDSS), “Sloan Digital Sky bell, Quentin Parker, Will Saunders, and Fred Survey IV: Mapping the Milky Way, Nearby Galaxies Watson, “The 6dF Galaxy Survey: Baryon Acous- and the Distant Universe,” Astron. J. 154, 28 (2017), tic Oscillations and the Local Hubble Constant,” arXiv:1703.00052 [astro-ph.GA]. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 416, 3017–3032 (2011), [289] Kyle S. Dawson et al., “The SDSS-IV extended Baryon arXiv:1106.3366 [astro-ph.CO]. Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: Overview and Early [301] Florian Beutler, Chris Blake, Matthew Colless, Data,” Astron. J. 151, 44 (2016), arXiv:1508.04473 D. Heath Jones, Lister Staveley-Smith, Gregory B. [astro-ph.CO]. Poole, Lachlan Campbell, Quentin Parker, Will Saun- [290] Shadab Alam et al. (eBOSS), “Completed SDSS-IV ex- ders, and Fred Watson, “The 6dF Galaxy Survey: tended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: Cos- z ≈ 0 measurement of the growth rate and σ8,” mological implications from two decades of spectro- Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 423, 3430–3444 (2012), scopic surveys at the Apache Point Observatory,” arXiv:1204.4725 [astro-ph.CO]. Phys. Rev. D 103, 083533 (2021), arXiv:2007.08991 [302] Timoth´eeDelubac et al. (BOSS), “Baryon acoustic os- [astro-ph.CO]. cillations in the Lyα forest of BOSS DR11 quasars,” [291] Hector Gil-Marin et al., “The Completed SDSS-IV Astron. Astrophys. 574, A59 (2015), arXiv:1404.1801 extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: [astro-ph.CO]. measurement of the BAO and growth rate of struc- [303] Victoria de Sainte Agathe et al., “Baryon acoustic os- ture of the luminous red galaxy sample from the cillations at z = 2.34 from the correlations of Lyα ab- anisotropic power spectrum between redshifts 0.6 and sorption in eBOSS DR14,” Astron. Astrophys. 629, 1.0,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 498, 2492–2531 A85 (2019), arXiv:1904.03400 [astro-ph.CO]. (2020), arXiv:2007.08994 [astro-ph.CO]. [304] Julian E. Bautista et al., “Measurement of baryon [292] Richard Neveux et al., “The completed SDSS-IV ex- acoustic oscillation correlations at z = 2.3 with SDSS tended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: BAO DR12 Lyα-Forests,” Astron. Astrophys. 603, A12 and RSD measurements from the anisotropic power (2017), arXiv:1702.00176 [astro-ph.CO]. spectrum of the quasar sample between redshift 0.8 [305] Andreu Font-Ribera et al. (BOSS), “Quasar-Lyman and 2.2,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 499, 210–229 α Forest Cross-Correlation from BOSS DR11 : (2020), arXiv:2007.08999 [astro-ph.CO]. Baryon Acoustic Oscillations,” JCAP 05, 027 (2014), [293] Anand Raichoor et al., “The completed SDSS-IV arXiv:1311.1767 [astro-ph.CO]. extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: [306] Michael Blomqvist et al., “Baryon acoustic oscilla- Large-scale Structure Catalogues and Measurement of tions from the cross-correlation of Lyα absorption and the isotropic BAO between redshift 0.6 and 1.1 for quasars in eBOSS DR14,” Astron. Astrophys. 629, the Emission Line Galaxy Sample,” Mon. Not. Roy. A86 (2019), arXiv:1904.03430 [astro-ph.CO]. Astron. Soc. 500, 3254–3274 (2020), arXiv:2007.09007 [307] Helion du Mas des Bourboux et al., “The Com- [astro-ph.CO]. pleted SDSS-IV Extended Baryon Oscillation Spec- [294] Jiamin Hou et al., “The Completed SDSS-IV extended troscopic Survey: Baryon Acoustic Oscillations Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: BAO and with Lyα Forests,” Astrophys. J. 901, 153 (2020), RSD measurements from anisotropic clustering anal- arXiv:2007.08995 [astro-ph.CO]. ysis of the Quasar Sample in conﬁguration space be- [308] Romina Ahumada et al. (SDSS-IV), “The 16th Data tween redshift 0.8 and 2.2,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Release of the Sloan Digital Sky Surveys: First Re- 68

lease from the APOGEE-2 Southern Survey and Full in GW170817,” Nature Astron. 3, 940–944 (2019), Release of eBOSS Spectra,” Astrophys. J. Suppl. 249, arXiv:1806.10596 [astro-ph.CO]. 3 (2020), arXiv:1912.02905 [astro-ph.GA]. [321] M.J. Reid, D.W. Pesce, and A.G. Riess, “An Im- [309] Yuting Wang, Lixin Xu, and Gong-Bo Zhao, “A proved Distance to NGC 4258 and its Implications for measurement of the Hubble constant using galaxy the Hubble Constant,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 886, L27 redshift surveys,” Astrophys. J. 849, 84 (2017), (2019), arXiv:1908.05625 [astro-ph.GA]. arXiv:1706.09149 [astro-ph.CO]. [322] F. Gao, J. A. Braatz, M. J. Reid, K. Y. Lo, J. J. [310] Ashley J. Ross, Lado Samushia, Cullan Howlett, Condon, C. Henkel, C. Y. Kuo, C. M. V. Impel- Will J. Percival, Angela Burden, and Marc Manera, lizzeri, D. W. Pesce, and W. Zhao, “The Mega- “The clustering of the SDSS DR7 main Galaxy sam- maser Cosmology Project VIII. A Geometric Dis- ple – I. A 4 per cent distance measure at z = 0.15,” tance to NGC 5765b,” Astrophys. J. 817, 128 (2016), Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 449, 835–847 (2015), arXiv:1511.08311 [astro-ph.GA]. arXiv:1409.3242 [astro-ph.CO]. [323] C. Y. Kuo, J. A. Braatz, K. Y. Lo, M. J. Reid, S. H. [311] Xue Zhang and Qing-Guo Huang, “Constraints on Suyu, D. W. Pesce, J. J. Condon, C. Henkel, and H0 from WMAP and BAO Measurements,” Commun. C. M. V. Impellizzeri, “The Megamaser Cosmology Theor. Phys. 71, 826–830 (2019), arXiv:1812.01877 Project. VI. Observations of NGC 6323,” Astrophys. [astro-ph.CO]. J. 800, 26 (2015), arXiv:1411.5106 [astro-ph.GA]. [312] Philipp Denzel, Jonathan P. Coles, Prasenjit Saha, [324] Chengyu Kuo, James A. Braatz, Mark J. Reid, Fred and Liliya L. R. Williams, “The Hubble constant K. Y. Lo, James J. Condon, Caterina M. V. Impel- from eight time-delay galaxy lenses,” Mon. Not. Roy. lizzeri, and Christian Henkel, “The Megamaser Cos- Astron. Soc. 501, 784–801 (2021), arXiv:2007.14398 mology Project. V. An Angular Diameter Distance to [astro-ph.CO]. NGC 6264 at 140 Mpc,” Astrophys. J. 767, 155 (2013), [313] Kai Liao, Arman Shafieloo, Ryan E. Keeley, and arXiv:1207.7273 [astro-ph.CO]. Eric V. Linder, “Determining Model-independent H 0 [325] Ehsan Kourkchi, R. Brent Tully, Gagandeep S. Anand, and Consistency Tests,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 895, L29 Helene M. Courtois, Alexandra Dupuy, James D. Neill, (2020), arXiv:2002.10605 [astro-ph.CO]. Luca Rizzi, and Mark Seibert, “Cosmicflows-4: The [314] Geoff C. F. Chen et al., “A SHARP view of H0LiCOW: Calibration of Optical and Infrared Tully–Fisher Rela- H0 from three time-delay gravitational lens systems tions,” Astrophys. J. 896, 3 (2020), arXiv:2004.14499 with adaptive optics imaging,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. [astro-ph.GA]. Soc. 490, 1743–1773 (2019), arXiv:1907.02533 [astro- [326] David Fernández Arenas, Elena Terlevich, Roberto ph.CO]. Terlevich, Jorge Melnick, Ricardo Chávez, Fabio [315] R. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), “GW190814: Bresolin, Eduardo Telles, Manolis Plionis, and Spyros Gravitational Waves from the Coalescence of a 23 Basilakos, “An independent determination of the local Solar Mass Black Hole with a 2.6 Solar Mass Com- Hubble constant,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 474, pact Object,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 896, L44 (2020), 1250–1276 (2018), arXiv:1710.05951 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:2006.12611 [astro-ph.HE]. [327] Deng Wang and Xin-He Meng, “Determining H0 with [316] Suvodip Mukherjee, Archisman Ghosh, Matthew J. the latest HII galaxy measurements,” Astrophys. J. Graham, Christos Karathanasis, Mansi M. Kasliwal, 843, 100 (2017), arXiv:1612.09023 [astro-ph.CO]. Ignacio Magaña Hernandez, Samaya M. Nissanke, [328] Eric J. Baxter and Blake D. Sherwin, “Determining Alessandra Silvestri, and Benjamin D. Wandelt, “First the Hubble Constant without the Sound Horizon Scale: measurement of the Hubble parameter from bright bi- Measurements from CMB Lensing,” Mon. Not. Roy. nary black hole GW190521,” (2020), arXiv:2009.14199 Astron. Soc. 501, 1823–1835 (2021), arXiv:2007.04007 [astro-ph.CO]. [astro-ph.CO]. [317] Hsin-Yu Chen, Carl-Johan Haster, Salvatore Vi- [329] Koushik Dutta, Anirban Roy, Ruchika, Anjan A. tale, Will M. Farr, and Maximiliano Isi, “A Sen, and M.M. Sheikh-Jabbari, “Cosmology with Standard Siren Cosmological Measurement from the low-redshift observations: No signal for new physics,” Potential GW190521 Electromagnetic Counterpart Phys. Rev. D 100, 103501 (2019), arXiv:1908.07267 ZTF19abanrhr,” (2020), arXiv:2009.14057 [astro- [astro-ph.CO]. ph.CO]. [330] T.M.C. Abbott et al. (DES), “Dark Energy Survey [318] B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), “A Year 1 Results: A Precise H0 Estimate from DES Gravitational-wave Measurement of the Hubble Con- Y1, BAO, and D/H Data,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. stant Following the Second Observing Run of Ad- Soc. 480, 3879–3888 (2018), arXiv:1711.00403 [astro- vanced LIGO and Virgo,” Astrophys. J. 909, 218 ph.CO]. (2021), arXiv:1908.06060 [astro-ph.CO]. [331] Balakrishna S. Haridasu, Vladimir V. Luković,Michele [319] M. Soares-Santos et al. (DES, LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Moresco, and Nicola Vittorio, “An improved model- “First Measurement of the Hubble Constant from a independent assessment of the late-time cosmic expan- Dark Standard Siren using the Dark Energy Sur- sion,” JCAP 10, 015 (2018), arXiv:1805.03595 [astro- vey Galaxies and the LIGO/Virgo Binary–Black-hole ph.CO]. Merger GW170814,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 876, L7 [332] Kai Liao, Arman Shafieloo, Ryan E. Keeley, and (2019), arXiv:1901.01540 [astro-ph.CO]. Eric V. Linder, “A model-independent determination [320] Kenta Hotokezaka, Ehud Nakar, Ore Gottlieb, Samaya of the Hubble constant from lensed quasars and super- Nissanke, Kento Masuda, Gregg Hallinan, Kunal P. novae using Gaussian process regression,” Astrophys. Mooley, and Adam. T. Deller, “A Hubble constant J. Lett. 886, L23 (2019), arXiv:1908.04967 [astro- measurement from superluminal motion of the jet ph.CO]. 69

[333] http://www.tdcosmo.org/. [350] P. A. R. Ade et al. (Planck), “Planck 2013 results. [334] Adam S. Bolton, Scott Burles, Leon V. E. Koop- XVI. Cosmological parameters,” Astron. Astrophys. mans, Tommaso Treu, and Leonidas A. Moustakas, 571, A16 (2014), arXiv:1303.5076 [astro-ph.CO]. “The sloan lens acs survey. 1. a large spectroscopi- [351] Federico Lelli, Stacy S. McGaugh, and James M. cally selected sample of massive early-type lens galax- Schombert, “SPARC: Mass Models for 175 Disk Galax- ies,” Astrophys. J. 638, 703–724 (2006), arXiv:astro- ies with Spitzer Photometry and Accurate Rotation ph/0511453. Curves,” Astron. J. 152, 157 (2016), arXiv:1606.09251 [335] J. Aasi et al. (LIGO Scientific), “Advanced [astro-ph.GA]. LIGO,” Class. Quant. Grav. 32, 074001 (2015), [352] http://astroweb.cwru.edu/SPARC/. arXiv:1411.4547 [gr-qc]. [353] Shadab Alam et al. (BOSS), “The clustering of galaxies [336] F. Acernese et al. (VIRGO), “Advanced Virgo: a in the completed SDSS-III Baryon Oscillation Spec- second-generation interferometric gravitational wave troscopic Survey: cosmological analysis of the DR12 detector,” Class. Quant. Grav. 32, 024001 (2015), galaxy sample,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 470, arXiv:1408.3978 [gr-qc]. 2617–2652 (2017), arXiv:1607.03155 [astro-ph.CO]. [337] T.M.C. Abbott et al. (DES, NOAO Data Lab), “The [354] Marina Seikel, Chris Clarkson, and Mathew Smith, Dark Energy Survey Data Release 1,” Astrophys. J. “Reconstruction of dark energy and expansion dynam- Suppl. 239, 18 (2018), arXiv:1801.03181 [astro-ph.IM]. ics using Gaussian processes,” JCAP 06, 036 (2012), [338] Vijay Varma, Scott E. Field, Mark A. Scheel, Jonathan arXiv:1204.2832 [astro-ph.CO]. Blackman, Davide Gerosa, Leo C. Stein, Lawrence E. [355] Arman Shafieloo, Alex G. Kim, and Eric V. Linder, Kidder, and Harald P. Pfeiffer, “Surrogate models “Gaussian Process Cosmography,” Phys. Rev. D 85, for precessing binary black hole simulations with un- 123530 (2012), arXiv:1204.2272 [astro-ph.CO]. equal masses,” Phys. Rev. Research. 1, 033015 (2019), [356] Sahba Yahya, Marina Seikel, Chris Clarkson, Roy arXiv:1905.09300 [gr-qc]. Maartens, and Mathew Smith, “Null tests of the cos- [339] https://pypi.org/project/gwsurrogate/. mological constant using supernovae,” Phys. Rev. D [340] https://pypi.org/project/surfinBH/. 89, 023503 (2014), arXiv:1308.4099 [astro-ph.CO]. [341] P.A.R. Ade et al. (Planck), “Planck 2015 results. [357] Shahab Joudaki, Manoj Kaplinghat, Ryan Keeley, xiii. cosmological parameters,” Astron.Astrophys. 594, and David Kirkby, “Model independent inference A13 (2016), arXiv:1502.01589 [astro-ph.CO]. of the expansion history and implications for the [342] W. L. Freedman et al. (HST), “Final results from the growth of structure,” Phys. Rev. D 97, 123501 (2018), Hubble Space Telescope key project to measure the arXiv:1710.04236 [astro-ph.CO]. Hubble constant,” Astrophys. J. 553, 47–72 (2001), [358] EoinóColgáinand M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, “Elucidat- arXiv:astro-ph/0012376. ing cosmological model dependence with H0,” (2021), [343] Adam G. Riess et al., “A Redetermination of the Hub- arXiv:2101.08565 [astro-ph.CO]. ble Constant with the Hubble Space Telescope from a [359] S. H. Suyu et al., “The Hubble constant and new dis- Differential Distance Ladder,” Astrophys. J. 699, 539– coveries in cosmology,” (2012), arXiv:1202.4459 [astro- 563 (2009), arXiv:0905.0695 [astro-ph.CO]. ph.CO]. [344] Wendy L. Freedman, Barry F. Madore, Victoria [360] Gang Chen and Bharat Ratra, “Median statistics and Scowcroft, Chris Burns, Andy Monson, S. Eric Pers- the Hubble constant,” Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 123, son, Mark Seibert, and Jane Rigby, “Carnegie Hub- 1127–1132 (2011), arXiv:1105.5206 [astro-ph.CO]. ble Program: A Mid-Infrared Calibration of the [361] M. A. Troxel et al. (DES), “Dark Energy Survey Year 1 Hubble Constant,” Astrophys. J. 758, 24 (2012), results: Cosmological constraints from cosmic shear,” arXiv:1208.3281 [astro-ph.CO]. Phys. Rev. D98, 043528 (2018), arXiv:1708.01538 [345] D. N. Spergel et al. (WMAP), “First year Wilkin- [astro-ph.CO]. son Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) observa- [362] E. Krause et al. (DES), “Dark Energy Survey Year tions: Determination of cosmological parameters,” As- 1 Results: Multi-Probe Methodology and Simu- trophys. J. Suppl. 148, 175–194 (2003), arXiv:astro- lated Likelihood Analyses,” (2017), arXiv:1706.09359 ph/0302209. [astro-ph.CO]. [346] D. N. Spergel et al. (WMAP), “Wilkinson Microwave [363] Yasunori Fujii, “Origin of the Gravitational Constant Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) three year results: impli- and Particle Masses in Scale Invariant Scalar - Tensor cations for cosmology,” Astrophys. J. Suppl. 170, 377 Theory,” Phys. Rev. D 26, 2580 (1982). (2007), arXiv:astro-ph/0603449. [364] L.H. Ford, “COSMOLOGICAL CONSTANT DAMP- [347] J. Dunkley et al. (WMAP), “Five-Year Wilkin- ING BY UNSTABLE SCALAR FIELDS,” Phys. Rev. son Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observa- D 35, 2339 (1987). tions: Likelihoods and Parameters from the WMAP [365] C. Wetterich, “Cosmology and the Fate of Dilata- data,” Astrophys. J. Suppl. 180, 306–329 (2009), tion Symmetry,” Nucl. Phys. B 302, 668–696 (1988), arXiv:0803.0586 [astro-ph]. arXiv:1711.03844 [hep-th]. [348] E. Komatsu et al. (WMAP), “Seven-Year Wilkin- [366] Bharat Ratra and P.J.E. Peebles, “Cosmological Con- son Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Obser- sequences of a Rolling Homogeneous Scalar Field,” vations: Cosmological Interpretation,” Astrophys. J. Phys. Rev. D 37, 3406 (1988). Suppl. 192, 18 (2011), arXiv:1001.4538 [astro-ph.CO]. [367] Takeshi Chiba, Naoshi Sugiyama, and Takashi Naka- [349] C. L. Bennett et al. (WMAP), “Nine-Year Wilkinson mura, “Cosmology with x matter,” Mon. Not. Roy. As- Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: tron. Soc. 289, L5–L9 (1997), arXiv:astro-ph/9704199. Final Maps and Results,” Astrophys. J. Suppl. 208, 20 [368] Pedro G. Ferreira and Michael Joyce, “Structure for- (2013), arXiv:1212.5225 [astro-ph.CO]. mation with a selftuning scalar field,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 70

79, 4740–4743 (1997), arXiv:astro-ph/9707286. [385] Nikki Arendse et al., “Cosmic dissonance: new physics [369] Pedro G. Ferreira and Michael Joyce, “Cosmology with or systematics behind a short sound horizon?” Astron. a primordial scaling field,” Phys. Rev. D 58, 023503 Astrophys. 639, A57 (2020), arXiv:1909.07986 [astro- (1998), arXiv:astro-ph/9711102. ph.CO]. [370] Edmund J. Copeland, Andrew R Liddle, and David [386] Eleonora Di Valentino, Alessandro Melchiorri, Eric V. Wands, “Exponential potentials and cosmological scal- Linder, and Joseph Silk, “Constraining Dark Energy ing solutions,” Phys. Rev. D 57, 4686–4690 (1998), Dynamics in Extended Parameter Space,” Phys. Rev. arXiv:gr-qc/9711068. D96, 023523 (2017), arXiv:1704.00762 [astro-ph.CO]. [371] R.R. Caldwell, Rahul Dave, and Paul J. Steinhardt, [387] Eleonora Di Valentino, Alessandro Melchiorri, and “Cosmological imprint of an energy component with Joseph Silk, “Cosmological constraints in extended pa- general equation of state,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 1582– rameter space from the Planck 2018 Legacy release,” 1585 (1998), arXiv:astro-ph/9708069. JCAP 01, 013 (2020), arXiv:1908.01391 [astro-ph.CO]. [372] Ivaylo Zlatev, Li-Min Wang, and Paul J. Steinhardt, [388] Sunny Vagnozzi, “New physics in light of the H0 ten- “Quintessence, cosmic coincidence, and the cosmolog- sion: an alternative view,” Phys. Rev. D 102, 023518 ical constant,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 896–899 (1999), (2020), arXiv:1907.07569 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:astro-ph/9807002. [389] Luca Amendola, “Coupled quintessence,” Phys. Rev. [373] Shinji Tsujikawa, “Quintessence: A Review,” Class. D 62, 043511 (2000), arXiv:astro-ph/9908023. Quant. Grav. 30, 214003 (2013), arXiv:1304.1961 [gr- [390] Peng Wang and Xin-He Meng, “Can vacuum decay in qc]. our universe?” Class. Quant. Grav. 22, 283–294 (2005), [374] Gilles Esposito-Farese and D. Polarski, “Scalar tensor arXiv:astro-ph/0408495. gravity in an accelerating universe,” Phys. Rev. D 63, [391] Valentina Salvatelli, Andrea Marchini, Laura Lopez- 063504 (2001), arXiv:gr-qc/0009034. Honorez, and Olga Mena, “New constraints on [375] Luca Amendola, Radouane Gannouji, David Polarski, Coupled Dark Energy from the Planck satellite and Shinji Tsujikawa, “Conditions for the cosmological experiment,” Phys. Rev. D 88, 023531 (2013), viability of f(R) dark energy models,” Phys. Rev. D 75, arXiv:1304.7119 [astro-ph.CO]. 083504 (2007), arXiv:gr-qc/0612180. [392] André A. Costa, Xiao-Dong Xu, Bin Wang, Elisa [376] S. Fay, S. Nesseris, and L. Perivolaropoulos, “Can G. M. Ferreira, and E. Abdalla, “Testing the In- f(R) Modified Gravity Theories Mimic a LCDM Cos- teraction between Dark Energy and Dark Matter mology?” Phys. Rev. D 76, 063504 (2007), arXiv:gr- with Planck Data,” Phys. Rev. D 89, 103531 (2014), qc/0703006. arXiv:1311.7380 [astro-ph.CO]. [377] Shin’ichi Nojiri and Sergei D. Odintsov, “Modified [393] A. Pourtsidou, C. Skordis, and E.J. Copeland, “Mod- gravity as an alternative for Lambda-CDM cosmol- els of dark matter coupled to dark energy,” Phys. Rev. ogy,” J. Phys. A 40, 6725–6732 (2007), arXiv:hep- D 88, 083505 (2013), arXiv:1307.0458 [astro-ph.CO]. th/0610164. [394] Valeria Pettorino, “Testing modified gravity with [378] Leandros Perivolaropoulos, “Crossing the phantom di- Planck: the case of coupled dark energy,” Phys. Rev. vide barrier with scalar tensor theories,” JCAP 10, 001 D 88, 063519 (2013), arXiv:1305.7457 [astro-ph.CO]. (2005), arXiv:astro-ph/0504582. [395] Valentina Salvatelli, Najla Said, Marco Bruni, Alessan- [379] B. Boisseau, Gilles Esposito-Farese, D. Polarski, and dro Melchiorri, and David Wands, “Indications of Alexei A. Starobinsky, “Reconstruction of a scalar ten- a late-time interaction in the dark sector,” Phys. sor theory of gravity in an accelerating universe,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 181301 (2014), arXiv:1406.7297 [astro- Rev. Lett. 85, 2236 (2000), arXiv:gr-qc/0001066. ph.CO]. [380] Aritra Banerjee, Haiying Cai, Lavinia Heisenberg, [396] Suresh Kumar and Rafael C. Nunes, “Probing the Eoin O.´ Colgáin, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, and Tao interaction between dark matter and dark energy in Yang, “Hubble sinks in the low-redshift swampland,” the presence of massive neutrinos,” Phys. Rev. D94, Phys. Rev. D 103, L081305 (2021), arXiv:2006.00244 123511 (2016), arXiv:1608.02454 [astro-ph.CO]. [astro-ph.CO]. [397] Dong-Mei Xia and Sai Wang, “Constraining interact- [381] G. Alestas and L. Perivolaropoulos, “Late time ap- ing dark energy models with latest cosmological obser- proaches to the Hubble tension deforming H(z), vations,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 463, 952–956 worsen the growth tension,” Mon. Not. Roy. As- (2016), arXiv:1608.04545 [astro-ph.CO]. tron. Soc. 504, 3956 (2021), arXiv:2103.04045 [astro- [398] Suresh Kumar and Rafael C. Nunes, “Echo of inter- ph.CO]. actions in the dark sector,” Phys. Rev. D96, 103511 [382] Weiqiang Yang, Eleonora Di Valentino, Supriya Pan, (2017), arXiv:1702.02143 [astro-ph.CO]. Yabo Wu, and Jianbo Lu, “Dynamical dark en- [399] Carsten Van De Bruck and Jurgen Mifsud, “Search- ergy after Planck CMB final release and H0 tension,” ing for dark matter - dark energy interactions: going Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 501, 5845–5858 (2021), beyond the conformal case,” Phys. Rev. D 97, 023506 arXiv:2101.02168 [astro-ph.CO]. (2018), arXiv:1709.04882 [astro-ph.CO]. [383] Giampaolo Benevento, Wayne Hu, and Marco Raveri, [400] Eleonora Di Valentino, Alessandro Melchiorri, and “Can Late Dark Energy Transitions Raise the Hub- Olga Mena, “Can interacting dark energy solve ble constant?” Phys. Rev. D 101, 103517 (2020), the H0 tension?” Phys. Rev. D96, 043503 (2017), arXiv:2002.11707 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:1704.08342 [astro-ph.CO]. [384] George Efstathiou, “To H0 or not to H0?” (2021), [401] Weiqiang Yang, Supriya Pan, and David F. Mota, arXiv:2103.08723 [astro-ph.CO]. “Novel approach toward the large-scale stable interacting dark-energy models and their astronomical bounds,” Phys. Rev. D 96, 123508 (2017), 71

arXiv:1709.00006 [astro-ph.CO]. the dark sector in presence of neutrino properties af- [402] Weiqiang Yang, Supriya Pan, Lixin Xu, and David F. ter Planck CMB final release,” JCAP 04, 008 (2020), Mota, “Effects of anisotropic stress in interacting dark arXiv:1910.08821 [astro-ph.CO]. matter – dark energy scenarios,” Mon. Not. Roy. As- [416] Eleonora Di Valentino, Alessandro Melchiorri, Olga tron. Soc. 482, 1858–1871 (2019), arXiv:1804.08455 Mena, and Sunny Vagnozzi, “Nonminimal dark sec- [astro-ph.CO]. tor physics and cosmological tensions,” Phys. Rev. D [403] Weiqiang Yang, Supriya Pan, RamónHerrera, and 101, 063502 (2020), arXiv:1910.09853 [astro-ph.CO]. Subenoy Chakraborty, “Large-scale (in) stability anal- [417] Adrià Gómez-Valent, Valeria Pettorino, and Luca ysis of an exactly solved coupled dark-energy model,” Amendola, “Update on coupled dark energy and Phys. Rev. D 98, 043517 (2018), arXiv:1808.01669 [gr- the H0 tension,” Phys. Rev. D 101, 123513 (2020), qc]. arXiv:2004.00610 [astro-ph.CO]. [404] Weiqiang Yang, Ankan Mukherjee, Eleonora [418] Muhsin Aljaf, Daniele Gregoris, and Martiros Khur- Di Valentino, and Supriya Pan, “Interacting shudyan, “Constraints on interacting dark energy mod- dark energy with time varying equation of state and els through cosmic chronometers and Gaussian pro- the H0 tension,” Phys. Rev. D98, 123527 (2018), cess,” (2020), arXiv:2005.01891 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:1809.06883 [astro-ph.CO]. [419] Eleonora Di Valentino, Alessandro Melchiorri, Olga [405] Weiqiang Yang, Supriya Pan, Eleonora Di Valentino, Mena, and Sunny Vagnozzi, “Interacting dark energy Rafael C. Nunes, Sunny Vagnozzi, and David F. Mota, in the early 2020s: A promising solution to the H0 and “Tale of stable interacting dark energy, observational cosmic shear tensions,” Phys. Dark Univ. 30, 100666 signatures, and the H0 tension,” JCAP 1809, 019 (2020), arXiv:1908.04281 [astro-ph.CO]. (2018), arXiv:1805.08252 [astro-ph.CO]. [420] Matteo Martinelli, Natalie B. Hogg, Simone Peirone, [406] Hai-Li Li, Lu Feng, Jing-Fei Zhang, and Xin Marco Bruni, and David Wands, “Constraints Zhang, “Models of vacuum energy interacting with on the interacting vacuum–geodesic CDM scenario,” cold dark matter: Constraints and comparison,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 488, 3423–3438 (2019), Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron. 62, 120411 (2019), arXiv:1902.10694 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:1812.00319 [astro-ph.CO]. [421] Eleonora Di Valentino, Alessandro Melchiorri, Olga [407] Rui An, AndréA. Costa, Linfeng Xiao, Jiajun Zhang, Mena, Supriya Pan, and Weiqiang Yang, “Interact- and Bin Wang, “Testing a quintessence model with ing Dark Energy in a closed universe,” Mon. Not. Roy. Yukawa interaction from cosmological observations Astron. Soc. 502, L23–L28 (2021), arXiv:2011.00283 and N-body simulations,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. [astro-ph.CO]. 489, 297–309 (2019), arXiv:1809.03224 [astro-ph.CO]. [422] Yan-Hong Yao and Xin-He Meng, “A new coupled [408] J. E. Gonzalez, H. H. B. Silva, R. Silva, and J. S. three-form dark energy model and implications for the Alcaniz, “Physical constraints on interacting dark H0 tension,” Phys. Dark Univ. 30, 100729 (2020). energy models,” Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 730 (2018), [423] Yanhong Yao and Xinhe Meng, “Relieve the H0 tension arXiv:1809.00439 [astro-ph.CO]. with a new coupled generalized three-form dark energy [409] Suresh Kumar, Rafael C. Nunes, and Santosh Kumar model,” (2020), arXiv:2011.09160 [astro-ph.CO]. Yadav, “Dark sector interaction: a remedy of the ten- [424] Supriya Pan, Weiqiang Yang, and Andronikos sions between CMB and LSS data,” Eur. Phys. J. C79, Paliathanasis, “Nonlinear interacting cosmologi- 576 (2019), arXiv:1903.04865 [astro-ph.CO]. cal models after Planck 2018 legacy release and [410] Supriya Pan, Weiqiang Yang, Chiranjeeb Singha, and the H0 tension,” (2020), 10.1093/mnras/staa213, Emmanuel N. Saridakis, “Observational constraints on arXiv:2002.03408 [astro-ph.CO]. sign-changeable interaction models and alleviation of [425] Matteo Lucca and Deanna C. Hooper, “Shedding the H0 tension,” Phys. Rev. D100, 083539 (2019), light on dark matter-dark energy interactions,” Phys. arXiv:1903.10969 [astro-ph.CO]. Rev. D 102, 123502 (2020), arXiv:2002.06127 [astro- [411] Weiqiang Yang, Olga Mena, Supriya Pan, and ph.CO]. Eleonora Di Valentino, “Dark sectors with dynam- [426] Weiqiang Yang, Eleonora Di Valentino, Olga Mena, ical coupling,” Phys. Rev. D100, 083509 (2019), Supriya Pan, and Rafael C. Nunes, “All-inclusive in- arXiv:1906.11697 [astro-ph.CO]. teracting dark sector cosmologies,” Phys. Rev. D 101, [412] Prateek Agrawal, Georges Obied, and Cumrun Vafa, 083509 (2020), arXiv:2001.10852 [astro-ph.CO]. “H0 tension, swampland conjectures, and the epoch of [427] Weiqiang Yang, Eleonora Di Valentino, Olga Mena, fading dark matter,” Phys. Rev. D 103, 043523 (2021), and Supriya Pan, “Dynamical Dark sectors and Neu- arXiv:1906.08261 [astro-ph.CO]. trino masses and abundances,” Phys. Rev. D 102, [413] Luis A. Anchordoqui, Ignatios Antoniadis, Dieter Lüst, 023535 (2020), arXiv:2003.12552 [astro-ph.CO]. Jorge F. Soriano, and Tomasz R. Taylor, “H0 tension [428] Hassan Amirhashchi and Anil Kumar Yadav, “Inter- and the String Swampland,” Phys. Rev. D 101, 083532 acting Dark Sectors in Anisotropic Universe: Ob- (2020), arXiv:1912.00242 [hep-th]. servational Constraints and H0 Tension,” (2020), [414] Supriya Pan, Weiqiang Yang, Eleonora Di Valentino, arXiv:2001.03775 [astro-ph.CO]. Emmanuel N. Saridakis, and Subenoy Chakraborty, [429] Joseph P. Johnson, Archana Sangwan, and “Interacting scenarios with dynamical dark energy: S. Shankaranarayanan, “Cosmological perturbations in Observational constraints and alleviation of the the interacting dark sector: Observational constraints H0 tension,” Phys. Rev. D100, 103520 (2019), and predictions,” (2021), arXiv:2102.12367 [astro- arXiv:1907.07540 [astro-ph.CO]. ph.CO]. [415] Weiqiang Yang, Supriya Pan, Rafael C. Nunes, and [430] B. Wang, E. Abdalla, F. Atrio-Barandela, and David F. Mota, “Dark calling Dark: Interaction in D. Pavon, “Dark Matter and Dark Energy Interac- 72

tions: Theoretical Challenges, Cosmological Implica- 07, 034 (2009), [Erratum: JCAP 05, E01 (2010)], tions and Observational Signatures,” Rept. Prog. Phys. arXiv:0901.1611 [astro-ph.CO]. 79, 096901 (2016), arXiv:1603.08299 [astro-ph.CO]. [447] Supriya Pan, German S. Sharov, and Weiqiang Yang, [431] Yu. L. Bolotin, A. Kostenko, O. A. Lemets, and D. A. “Field theoretic interpretations of interacting dark en- Yerokhin, “Cosmological Evolution With Interaction ergy scenarios and recent observations,” Phys. Rev. D Between Dark Energy And Dark Matter,” Int. J. Mod. 101, 103533 (2020), arXiv:2001.03120 [astro-ph.CO]. Phys. D 24, 1530007 (2014), arXiv:1310.0085 [astro- [448] Jian-Hua He, Bin Wang, and Elcio Abdalla, “Stabil- ph.CO]. ity of the curvature perturbation in dark sectors’ mu- [432] D. Comelli, M. Pietroni, and A. Riotto, “Dark energy tual interacting models,” Phys. Lett. B 671, 139–145 and dark matter,” Phys. Lett. B 571, 115–120 (2003), (2009), arXiv:0807.3471 [gr-qc]. arXiv:hep-ph/0302080. [449] Joan Sola and Hrvoje Stefancic, “Dynamical dark en- [433] Greg Huey and Benjamin D. Wandelt, “Interact- ergy or variable cosmological parameters?” Mod. Phys. ing quintessence. The Coincidence problem and cos- Lett. A 21, 479–494 (2006), arXiv:astro-ph/0507110. mic acceleration,” Phys. Rev. D 74, 023519 (2006), [450] Joan Sola and Hrvoje Stefancic, “Effective equation arXiv:astro-ph/0407196. of state for dark energy: Mimicking quintessence and [434] Rong-Gen Cai and Anzhong Wang, “Cosmology with phantom energy through a variable lambda,” Phys. interaction between phantom dark energy and dark Lett. B 624, 147–157 (2005), arXiv:astro-ph/0505133. matter and the coincidence problem,” JCAP 03, 002 [451] Ilya L. Shapiro, Joan Sola, and Hrvoje Stefan- (2005), arXiv:hep-th/0411025. cic, “Running G and Lambda at low energies from [435] Diego Pavon and Winfried Zimdahl, “Holographic dark physics at M(X): Possible cosmological and astrophys- energy and cosmic coincidence,” Phys. Lett. B 628, ical implications,” JCAP 01, 012 (2005), arXiv:hep- 206–210 (2005), arXiv:gr-qc/0505020. ph/0410095. [436] Xin Zhang, “Coupled quintessence in a power-law case [452] Ilya L. Shapiro and Joan Sola, “Can the cosmological and the cosmic coincidence problem,” Mod. Phys. Lett. ’constant’ run? - It may run,” (2008), arXiv:0808.0315 A 20, 2575 (2005), arXiv:astro-ph/0503072. [hep-th]. [437] Sergio del Campo, Ramon Herrera, German Olivares, [453] Ilya L. Shapiro and Joan Sola, “On the possible run- and Diego Pavon, “Interacting models of soft coinci- ning of the cosmological ’constant’,” Phys. Lett. B 682, dence,” Phys. Rev. D 74, 023501 (2006), arXiv:astro- 105–113 (2009), arXiv:0910.4925 [hep-th]. ph/0606520. [454] Spyros Basilakos, David Polarski, and Joan Sola, [438] Micheal S. Berger and Hamed Shojaei, “Interacting “Generalizing the running vacuum energy model and dark energy and the cosmic coincidence problem,” comparing with the entropic-force models,” Phys. Rev. Phys. Rev. D 73, 083528 (2006), arXiv:gr-qc/0601086. D 86, 043010 (2012), arXiv:1204.4806 [gr-qc]. [439] Sergio del Campo, Ramon Herrera, and Diego Pavon, [455] E. L. D. Perico, J. A. S. Lima, Spyros Basilakos, and “Interacting models may be key to solve the cos- Joan Sola, “Complete Cosmic History with a dynami- mic coincidence problem,” JCAP 01, 020 (2009), cal Λ = Λ(H) term,” Phys. Rev. D 88, 063531 (2013), arXiv:0812.2210 [gr-qc]. arXiv:1306.0591 [astro-ph.CO]. [440] Jian-Hua He and Bin Wang, “Effects of the interaction [456] Spyros Basilakos, Nick E. Mavromatos, and Joan between dark energy and dark matter on cosmological Solà,“Starobinsky-like inflation and running vacuum parameters,” JCAP 06, 010 (2008), arXiv:0801.4233 in the context of Supergravity,” Universe 2, 14 (2016), [astro-ph]. arXiv:1505.04434 [gr-qc]. [441] Ling-Feng Wang, Dong-Ze He, Jing-Fei Zhang, and [457] Pavlina Tsiapi and Spyros Basilakos, “Testing dynam- Xin Zhang, “Constraints on interacting dark energy ical vacuum models with CMB power spectrum from model from lensed quasars: Relieving the H0 tension Planck,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 485, 2505–2510 from 5.3σ to 1.7σ,” (2021), arXiv:2102.09331 [astro- (2019), arXiv:1810.12902 [astro-ph.CO]. ph.CO]. [458] S. Banerjee, D. Benisty, and E. I. Guendelman, “Run- [442] Alkistis Pourtsidou and Thomas Tram, “Reconciling ning Dark Energy and Dark Matter from Dynami- CMB and structure growth measurements with dark cal Spacetime,” Bulg. J. Phys. 48, 117–137 (2021), energy interactions,” Phys. Rev. D 94, 043518 (2016), arXiv:1910.03933 [gr-qc]. arXiv:1604.04222 [astro-ph.CO]. [459] Christine R. Farrugia, Joseph Sultana, and Jurgen [443] Rui An, Chang Feng, and Bin Wang, “Relieving Mifsud, “Endowing Λ with a dynamic nature: Con- the Tension between Weak Lensing and Cosmic Mi- straints in a spatially curved universe,” Phys. Rev. D crowave Background with Interacting Dark Matter 102, 024013 (2020), arXiv:1812.02790 [astro-ph.CO]. and Dark Energy Models,” JCAP 02, 038 (2018), [460] Spyros Basilakos, Nick E. Mavromatos, and Joan arXiv:1711.06799 [astro-ph.CO]. Solà Peracaula, “Gravitational and Chiral Anoma- [444] Bruno J. Barros, Luca Amendola, Tiago Barreiro, and lies in the Running Vacuum Universe and Matter- Nelson J. Nunes, “Coupled quintessence with a ΛCDM Antimatter Asymmetry,” Phys. Rev. D 101, 045001 background: removing the σ8 tension,” JCAP 01, 007 (2020), arXiv:1907.04890 [hep-ph]. (2019), arXiv:1802.09216 [astro-ph.CO]. [461] Spyros Basilakos, Nick E. Mavromatos, and [445] Stefano Camera, Matteo Martinelli, and Daniele Joan Solà Peracaula, “Quantum Anomalies, Run- Bertacca, “Does quartessence ease cosmic tensions?” ning Vacuum and Leptogenesis: an Interplay,” PoS Phys. Dark Univ. 23, 100247 (2019), arXiv:1704.06277 CORFU2018, 044 (2019), arXiv:1905.05685 [hep-ph]. [astro-ph.CO]. [462] Joan Sola, “Cosmologies with a time dependent [446] M.B. Gavela, D. Hernandez, L. Lopez Honorez, vacuum,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 283, 012033 (2011), O. Mena, and S. Rigolin, “Dark coupling,” JCAP arXiv:1102.1815 [astro-ph.CO]. 73

[463] Joan Solàand AdriàGómez-Valent, “The ΛCDM¯ cos- [479] A. Chudaykin, D. Gorbunov, and I. Tkachev, “Dark mology: From inflation to dark energy through run- matter component decaying after recombination: Sen- ning Λ,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 24, 1541003 (2015), sitivity to baryon acoustic oscillation and redshift arXiv:1501.03832 [gr-qc]. space distortion probes,” Phys. Rev. D 97, 083508 [464] Joan Sola, “Vacuum energy and cosmological evo- (2018), arXiv:1711.06738 [astro-ph.CO]. lution,” AIP Conf. Proc. 1606, 19–37 (2015), [480] Ole Eggers Bjaelde, Subinoy Das, and Adam Moss, arXiv:1402.7049 [gr-qc]. “Origin of Delta N eff as a Result of an Interaction [465] Joan Solà,“Cosmological constant vis-a-vis dynamical between Dark Radiation and Dark Matter,” JCAP 10, vacuum: bold challenging the ΛCDM,” Int. J. Mod. 017 (2012), arXiv:1205.0553 [astro-ph.CO]. Phys. A 31, 1630035 (2016), arXiv:1612.02449 [astro- [481] Mei-Yu Wang, Annika H. G. Peter, Louis E. Stri- ph.CO]. gari, Andrew R. Zentner, Bryan Arant, Shea Garrison- [466] Joan Solà, Adrià Gómez-Valent, and Javier Kimmel, and Miguel Rocha, “Cosmological simula- de Cruz Pérez,“The H0 tension in light of vacuum dy- tions of decaying dark matter: implications for small- namics in the Universe,” Phys. Lett. B774, 317–324 scale structure of dark matter haloes,” Mon. Not. Roy. (2017), arXiv:1705.06723 [astro-ph.CO]. Astron. Soc. 445, 614–629 (2014), arXiv:1406.0527 [467] Joan Solà, Adria Gómez-Valent, and Javier [astro-ph.CO]. de Cruz Pérez,“Hints of dynamical vacuum energy [482] Luis A. Anchordoqui, Vernon Barger, Haim Goldberg, in the expanding Universe,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 811, Xing Huang, Danny Marfatia, Luiz H. M. da Silva, L14 (2015), arXiv:1506.05793 [gr-qc]. and Thomas J. Weiler, “IceCube neutrinos, decaying [468] Joan Solà, Adria Gómez-Valent, and Javier dark matter, and the Hubble constant,” Phys. Rev. D de Cruz Pérez, “First evidence of running cosmic vac- 92, 061301 (2015), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 94, 069901 uum: challenging the concordance model,” Astrophys. (2016)], arXiv:1506.08788 [hep-ph]. J. 836, 43 (2017), arXiv:1602.02103 [astro-ph.CO]. [483] Linfeng Xiao, Le Zhang, Rui An, Chang Feng, and Bin [469] Adria Gómez-Valent and Joan Solà, “Relaxing the Wang, “Fractional Dark Matter decay: cosmological σ8-tension through running vacuum in the Universe,” imprints and observational constraints,” JCAP 01, 045 EPL 120, 39001 (2017), arXiv:1711.00692 [astro- (2020), arXiv:1908.02668 [astro-ph.CO]. ph.CO]. [484] Andreas Nygaard, Thomas Tram, and Steen Hannes- [470] AdriàGómez-Valent and Joan SolàPeracaula, “Den- tad, “Updated constraints on decaying cold dark mat- sity perturbations for running vacuum: a successful ap- ter,” JCAP 05, 017 (2021), arXiv:2011.01632 [astro- proach to structure formation and to the σ8-tension,” ph.CO]. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 478, 126–145 (2018), [485] Z. Berezhiani, A.D. Dolgov, and I.I. Tkachev, “Rec- arXiv:1801.08501 [astro-ph.CO]. onciling Planck results with low redshift astronomi- [471] Joan Sola, Adria Gomez-Valent, Javier de Cruz cal measurements,” Phys. Rev. D 92, 061303 (2015), Perez, and Cristian Moreno-Pulido, “Running vac- arXiv:1505.03644 [astro-ph.CO]. uum against the H0 and σ8 tensions,” (2021), [486] Kari Enqvist, Seshadri Nadathur, Toyokazu Sekiguchi, arXiv:2102.12758 [astro-ph.CO]. and Tomo Takahashi, “Decaying dark matter and [472] Joan Sola, “Dark energy: A Quantum fossil from the the tension in σ8,” JCAP 1509, 067 (2015), inflationary Universe?” J. Phys. A 41, 164066 (2008), arXiv:1505.05511 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:0710.4151 [hep-th]. [487] Guillermo F. Abellan, Riccardo Murgia, Vivian Poulin, [473] Ilya L. Shapiro and Joan Sola, “On the scaling behavior and Julien Lavalle, “Hints for decaying dark mat- of the cosmological constant and the possible existence ter from S8 measurements,” (2020), arXiv:2008.09615 of new forces and new light degrees of freedom,” Phys. [astro-ph.CO]. Lett. B 475, 236–246 (2000), arXiv:hep-ph/9910462. [488] Kanhaiya L. Pandey, Tanvi Karwal, and Subinoy [474] Ilya L. Shapiro and Joan Sola, “Scaling behavior of Das, “Alleviating the H0 and σ8 anomalies with a the cosmological constant: Interface between quantum decaying dark matter model,” JCAP 07, 026 (2020), field theory and cosmology,” JHEP 02, 006 (2002), arXiv:1902.10636 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:hep-th/0012227. [489] Vivian Poulin, Pasquale D. Serpico, and Julien Les- [475] AdriàGómez-Valent, Joan Solà, and Spyros Basi- gourgues, “A fresh look at linear cosmological con- lakos, “Dynamical vacuum energy in the expanding straints on a decaying dark matter component,” JCAP Universe confronted with observations: a dedicated 1608, 036 (2016), arXiv:1606.02073 [astro-ph.CO]. study,” JCAP 01, 004 (2015), arXiv:1409.7048 [astro- [490] A. Chudaykin, D. Gorbunov, and I. Tkachev, ph.CO]. “Dark matter component decaying after recombina- [476] Joan SolàPeracaula, Javier de Cruz Pérez, and Adria tion: Lensing constraints with Planck data,” Phys. Gómez-Valent, “Possible signals of vacuum dynamics Rev. D 94, 023528 (2016), arXiv:1602.08121 [astro- in the Universe,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 478, ph.CO]. 4357–4373 (2018), arXiv:1703.08218 [astro-ph.CO]. [491] Torsten Bringmann, Felix Kahlhoefer, Kai Schmidt- [477] Kiyotomo Ichiki, Masamune Oguri, and Keitaro Taka- Hoberg, and Parampreet Walia, “Converting nonrel- hashi, “WMAP constraints on decaying cold dark mat- ativistic dark matter to radiation,” Phys. Rev. D 98, ter,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 071302 (2004), arXiv:astro- 023543 (2018), arXiv:1803.03644 [astro-ph.CO]. ph/0403164. [492] Julien Lesgourgues, Gustavo Marques-Tavares, and [478] A. Chen et al. (DES), “Constraints on dark matter Martin Schmaltz, “Evidence for dark matter interac- to dark radiation conversion in the late universe with tions in cosmological precision data?” JCAP 02, 037 DES-Y1 and external data,” (2020), arXiv:2011.04606 (2016), arXiv:1507.04351 [astro-ph.CO]. [astro-ph.CO]. 74

[493] Shin’ichiro Ando and Koji Ishiwata, “Constraints eralized Emergent Dark Energy: observational on decaying dark matter from the extragalactic Hubble data constraints and stability analysis,” gamma-ray background,” JCAP 05, 024 (2015), (2020), 10.1093/mnras/staa2052, arXiv:2002.12881 arXiv:1502.02007 [astro-ph.CO]. [astro-ph.CO]. [494] P. A. R. Ade et al. (Planck), “Planck 2015 results. XIV. [510] Eleonora Di Valentino, Eric V. Linder, and Alessan- Dark energy and modified gravity,” Astron. Astrophys. dro Melchiorri, “Vacuum phase transition solves 594, A14 (2016), arXiv:1502.01590 [astro-ph.CO]. the H0 tension,” Phys. Rev. D97, 043528 (2018), [495] Luis A. Anchordoqui, “Decaying dark matter, the H0 arXiv:1710.02153 [astro-ph.CO]. tension, and the lithium problem,” Phys. Rev. D 103, [511] Eleonora Di Valentino, Eric V. Linder, and Alessandro 035025 (2021), arXiv:2010.09715 [hep-ph]. Melchiorri, “H0 ex machina: Vacuum metamorphosis [496] Gordon Blackadder and Savvas M. Koushiappas, and beyond H0,” Phys. Dark Univ. 30, 100733 (2020), “Dark matter with two- and many-body decays and arXiv:2006.16291 [astro-ph.CO]. supernovae type Ia,” Phys. Rev. D90, 103527 (2014), [512] Eleonora Di Valentino, Supriya Pan, Weiqiang Yang, arXiv:1410.0683 [astro-ph.CO]. and Luis A. Anchordoqui, “The touch of Neutrinos [497] Nikita Blinov, Celeste Keith, and Dan Hooper, “Warm on the Vacuum Metamorphosis: is the H0 Solution Decaying Dark Matter and the Hubble Tension,” Back?” (2021), arXiv:2102.05641 [astro-ph.CO]. JCAP 06, 005 (2020), arXiv:2004.06114 [astro-ph.CO]. [513] Leonard Parker and Alpan Raval, “New quantum as- [498] Kyriakos Vattis, Savvas M. Koushiappas, and Abra- pects of a vacuum dominated universe,” Phys. Rev. D ham Loeb, “Dark matter decaying in the late Universe 62, 083503 (2000), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 67, 029903 can relieve the H0 tension,” Phys. Rev. D99, 121302 (2003)], arXiv:gr-qc/0003103. (2019), arXiv:1903.06220 [astro-ph.CO]. [514] Leonard Parker and Daniel A. T. Vanzella, “Accelera- [499] Steven J. Clark, Kyriakos Vattis, and Savvas M. tion of the universe, vacuum metamorphosis, and the Koushiappas, “CMB constraints on late-universe de- large time asymptotic form of the heat kernel,” Phys. caying dark matter as a solution to the H0 tension,” Rev. D 69, 104009 (2004), arXiv:gr-qc/0312108. (2020), arXiv:2006.03678 [astro-ph.CO]. [515] Robert R. Caldwell, William Komp, Leonard Parker, [500] Balakrishna S. Haridasu and Matteo Viel, “Late-time and Daniel A. T. Vanzella, “A Sudden gravita- decaying dark matter: constraints and implications for tional transition,” Phys. Rev. D 73, 023513 (2006), the H0-tension,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 497, arXiv:astro-ph/0507622. 1757–1764 (2020), arXiv:2004.07709 [astro-ph.CO]. [516] A. D. Sakharov, “Vacuum quantum fluctuations in [501] Guillermo F. Abellán,Riccardo Murgia, and Vivian curved space and the theory of gravitation,” Usp. Fiz. Poulin, “Linear cosmological constraints on 2-body de- Nauk 161, 64–66 (1991). caying dark matter scenarios and robustness of the res- [517] Nima Khosravi, Shant Baghram, Niayesh Afshordi, olution to the S8 tension,” (2021), arXiv:2102.12498 and Natacha Altamirano, “H0 tension as a hint for [astro-ph.CO]. a transition in gravitational theory,” Phys. Rev. D99, [502] Xiaolei Li and Arman Shafieloo, “A Simple Phe- 103526 (2019), arXiv:1710.09366 [astro-ph.CO]. nomenological Emergent Dark Energy Model can Re- [518] Abdolali Banihashemi, Nima Khosravi, and Amir H. solve the Hubble Tension,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 883, L3 Shirazi, “Ginzburg-Landau Theory of Dark Energy: A (2019), arXiv:1906.08275 [astro-ph.CO]. Framework to Study Both Temporal and Spatial Cos- [503] Supriya Pan, Weiqiang Yang, Eleonora Di Valentino, mological Tensions Simultaneously,” Phys. Rev. D99, Arman Shafieloo, and Subenoy Chakraborty, “Recon- 083509 (2019), arXiv:1810.11007 [astro-ph.CO]. ciling H0 tension in a six parameter space?” JCAP 06, [519] Abdolali Banihashemi, Nima Khosravi, and Amir H. 062 (2020), arXiv:1907.12551 [astro-ph.CO]. Shirazi, “Phase transition in the dark sector as a pro- [504] Weiqiang Yang, Eleonora Di Valentino, Supriya Pan, posal to lessen cosmological tensions,” Phys. Rev. D and Olga Mena, “Emergent Dark Energy, neutrinos 101, 123521 (2020), arXiv:1808.02472 [astro-ph.CO]. and cosmological tensions,” Phys. Dark Univ. 31, [520] Marzieh Farhang and Nima Khosravi, “Phenomeno- 100762 (2021), arXiv:2007.02927 [astro-ph.CO]. logical Gravitational Phase Transition: Reconciliation [505] Zhenjie Liu and Haitao Miao, “Update constraints on between the Late and Early Universe,” Phys. Rev. D neutrino mass and mass hierarchy in light of dark en- 103, 083523 (2021), arXiv:2011.08050 [astro-ph.CO]. ergy models,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 29, 2050088 (2020), [521] Michael J. Mortonson, Wayne Hu, and Dra- arXiv:2002.05563 [astro-ph.CO]. gan Huterer, “Hiding dark energy transitions at [506] M. Rezaei, T. Naderi, M. Malekjani, and A. Mehrabi, low redshift,” Phys. Rev. D 80, 067301 (2009), “A Bayesian comparison between ΛCDM and phe- arXiv:0908.1408 [astro-ph.CO]. nomenologically emergent dark energy models,” Eur. [522] S. Dhawan, D. Brout, D. Scolnic, A. Goobar, A. G. Phys. J. C 80, 374 (2020), arXiv:2004.08168 [astro- Riess, and V. Miranda, “Cosmological Model Insensi- ph.CO]. tivity of Local H0 from the Cepheid Distance Ladder,” [507] Xiaolei Li and Arman Shafieloo, “Evidence for Emer- Astrophys. J. 894, 54 (2020), arXiv:2001.09260 [astro- gent Dark Energy,” Astrophys. J. 902, 58 (2020), ph.CO]. arXiv:2001.05103 [astro-ph.CO]. [523] Justin Khoury and Amanda Weltman, “Chameleon [508] Weiqiang Yang, Eleonora Di Valentino, Supriya Pan, fields: Awaiting surprises for tests of gravity in space,” Arman Shafieloo, and Xiaolei Li, “Generalized Emer- Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 171104 (2004), arXiv:astro- gent Dark Energy Model and the Hubble Constant ph/0309300. Tension,” (2021), arXiv:2103.03815 [astro-ph.CO]. [524] Justin Khoury and Amanda Weltman, “Chameleon [509] A. Hernández-Almada, Genly Leon, Juan Magaña, cosmology,” Phys. Rev. D 69, 044026 (2004), Miguel A. Garc´ıa-Aspeitia, and V. Motta, “Gen- arXiv:astro-ph/0309411. 75

[525] Philippe Brax, Carsten van de Bruck, Anne-Christine density in the Local Galaxy Distribution,” Astrophys. Davis, David Fonseca Mota, and Douglas J. J. 775, 62 (2013), arXiv:1304.2884 [astro-ph.CO]. Shaw, “Detecting chameleons through Casimir force [543] Pablo Fosalba and Enrique Gaztañaga,“Explaining measurements,” Phys. Rev. D 76, 124034 (2007), Cosmological Anisotropy: Evidence for Causal Hori- arXiv:0709.2075 [hep-ph]. zons from CMB data,” (2020), arXiv:2011.00910 [526] Narayan Banerjee, Sudipta Das, and Koyel Gan- [astro-ph.CO]. guly, “Chameleon field and the late time accelera- [544] N. Aghanim et al. (Planck), “Planck 2018 results. tion of the universe,” Pramana 74, L481–L489 (2010), I. Overview and the cosmological legacy of Planck,” arXiv:0801.1204 [gr-qc]. Astron. Astrophys. 641, A1 (2020), arXiv:1807.06205 [527] Sudipta Das and Narayan Banerjee, “Brans-Dicke [astro-ph.CO]. Scalar Field as a Chameleon,” Phys. Rev. D 78, 043512 [545] Enrique Gaztanaga, “The size of our causal Universe,” (2008), arXiv:0803.3936 [gr-qc]. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 494, 2766–2772 (2020), [528] Philippe Brax, Carsten van de Bruck, David F. Mota, arXiv:2003.11544 [physics.gen-ph]. Nelson J. Nunes, and Hans A. Winther, “Chameleons [546] E. Garcia-Berro, E. Gaztanaga, J. Isern, O. Benvenuto, with Field Dependent Couplings,” Phys. Rev. D 82, and L. Althaus, “On the evolution of cosmological type 083503 (2010), arXiv:1006.2796 [astro-ph.CO]. ia supernovae and the gravitational constant,” (1999), [529] Junpu Wang, Lam Hui, and Justin Khoury, “No-Go arXiv:astro-ph/9907440. Theorems for Generalized Chameleon Field Theories,” [547] E. Gaztanaga, E. Garcia-Berro, J. Isern, E. Bravo, and Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 241301 (2012), arXiv:1208.4612 I. Dominguez, “Bounds on the possible evolution of the [astro-ph.CO]. gravitational constant from cosmological type Ia super- [530] Amol Upadhye, Wayne Hu, and Justin Khoury, novae,” Phys. Rev. D 65, 023506 (2002), arXiv:astro- “Quantum Stability of Chameleon Field Theories,” ph/0109299. Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 041301 (2012), arXiv:1204.3906 [548] Bill S. Wright and Baojiu Li, “Type Ia supernovae, [hep-ph]. standardizable candles, and gravity,” Phys. Rev. D 97, [531] Justin Khoury, “Chameleon Field Theories,” Class. 083505 (2018), arXiv:1710.07018 [astro-ph.CO]. Quant. Grav. 30, 214004 (2013), arXiv:1306.4326 [549] T. M. C. Abbott et al. (DES), “Dark Energy Survey [astro-ph.CO]. Year 1 Results: Measurement of the Baryon Acoustic [532] Rong-Gen Cai, Zong-Kuan Guo, Li Li, Shao-Jiang Oscillation scale in the distribution of galaxies to red- Wang, and Wang-Wei Yu, “Chameleon dark en- shift 1,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 483, 4866–4883 ergy can resolve the Hubble tension,” (2021), (2019), arXiv:1712.06209 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:2102.02020 [astro-ph.CO]. [550] Leandros Perivolaropoulos, “The tensions of the [533] Lucas Lombriser, “Consistency of the local Hubble ΛCDM and a gravitational transition,” (), https: constant with the cosmic microwave background,” //www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKubKmPXDM8. Phys. Lett. B 803, 135303 (2020), arXiv:1906.12347 [551] Mikhail M. Ivanov, Evan McDonough, J. Colin Hill, [astro-ph.CO]. Marko Simonović, Michael W. Toomey, Stephon [534] Hao-Yi Wu and Dragan Huterer, “Sample variance Alexander, and Matias Zaldarriaga, “Constraining in the local measurements of the Hubble constant,” Early Dark Energy with Large-Scale Structure,” Phys. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 471, 4946–4955 (2017), Rev. D 102, 103502 (2020), arXiv:2006.11235 [astro- arXiv:1706.09723 [astro-ph.CO]. ph.CO]. [535] W. D’Arcy Kenworthy, Dan Scolnic, and Adam Riess, [552] Tristan L. Smith, Vivian Poulin, and Mustafa A. “The Local Perspective on the Hubble Tension: Lo- Amin, “Oscillating scalar fields and the Hubble ten- cal Structure Does Not Impact Measurement of the sion: a resolution with novel signatures,” Phys. Rev. D Hubble Constant,” Astrophys. J. 875, 145 (2019), 101, 063523 (2020), arXiv:1908.06995 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:1901.08681 [astro-ph.CO]. [553] Jose Luis Bernal, Licia Verde, and Adam G. Riess, [536] M. Milgrom, “A Modification of the Newtonian dy- “The trouble with H0,” JCAP 1610, 019 (2016), namics: Implications for galaxies,” Astrophys. J. 270, arXiv:1607.05617 [astro-ph.CO]. 371–383 (1983). [554] Kevin Aylor, MacKenzie Joy, Lloyd Knox, Marius [537] Scott Dodelson and Lawrence M. Widrow, “Sterile- Millea, Srinivasan Raghunathan, and W. L. Kimmy neutrinos as dark matter,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 17–20 Wu, “Sounds Discordant: Classical Distance Ladder (1994), arXiv:hep-ph/9303287. \& ΛCDM -based Determinations of the Cosmolog- [538] Alexey Boyarsky, Oleg Ruchayskiy, and Mikhail Sha- ical Sound Horizon,” Astrophys. J. 874, 4 (2019), poshnikov, “The Role of sterile neutrinos in cosmology arXiv:1811.00537 [astro-ph.CO]. and astrophysics,” Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 59, 191– [555] Lloyd Knox and Marius Millea, “The Hubble Hunter’s 214 (2009), arXiv:0901.0011 [hep-ph]. Guide,” (2019), arXiv:1908.03663 [astro-ph.CO]. [539] Alexander Kusenko, “Sterile neutrinos: The Dark side [556] Valeria Pettorino, Luca Amendola, and Christof Wet- of the light fermions,” Phys. Rept. 481, 1–28 (2009), terich, “How early is early dark energy?” Phys. Rev. arXiv:0906.2968 [hep-ph]. D 87, 083009 (2013), arXiv:1301.5279 [astro-ph.CO]. [540] K. N. Abazajian et al., “Light Sterile Neutrinos: A [557] Jeremy Sakstein and Mark Trodden, “Early Dark En- White Paper,” (2012), arXiv:1204.5379 [hep-ph]. ergy from Massive Neutrinos as a Natural Resolution [541] Marco Drewes, “The Phenomenology of Right Handed of the Hubble Tension,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 161301 Neutrinos,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 22, 1330019 (2013), (2020), arXiv:1911.11760 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:1303.6912 [hep-ph]. [558] Florian Niedermann and Martin S. Sloth, “New early [542] Ryan C. Keenan, Amy J. Barger, and Lennox L. dark energy,” Phys. Rev. D 103, L041303 (2021), Cowie, “Evidence for a ˜300 Megaparsec Scale Under- arXiv:1910.10739 [astro-ph.CO]. 76

[559] Gen Ye and Yun-Song Piao, “Is the Hubble tension [576] Pierre-Henri Chavanis, “Cosmology with a stiff matter a hint of AdS phase around recombination?” Phys. era,” Phys. Rev. D 92, 103004 (2015), arXiv:1412.0743 Rev. D 101, 083507 (2020), arXiv:2001.02451 [astro- [gr-qc]. ph.CO]. [577] Mariana Carrillo González, Qiuyue Liang, Jeremy [560] Gen Ye and Yun-Song Piao, “T0 censorship of early Sakstein, and Mark Trodden, “Neutrino-Assisted dark energy and AdS vacua,” Phys. Rev. D 102, Early Dark Energy: Theory and Cosmology,” (2020), 083523 (2020), arXiv:2008.10832 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:2011.09895 [astro-ph.CO]. [561] Meng-Xiang Lin, Giampaolo Benevento, Wayne Hu, [578] J. Colin Hill, Evan McDonough, Michael W. Toomey, and Marco Raveri, “Acoustic Dark Energy: Potential and Stephon Alexander, “Early Dark Energy Does Conversion of the Hubble Tension,” Phys. Rev. D 100, Not Restore Cosmological Concordance,” (2020), 063542 (2019), arXiv:1905.12618 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:2003.07355 [astro-ph.CO]. [562] Kim V. Berghaus and Tanvi Karwal, “Thermal Fric- [579] Lachlan Lancaster, Francis-Yan Cyr-Racine, Lloyd tion as a Solution to the Hubble Tension,” Phys. Knox, and Zhen Pan, “A tale of two modes: Neutrino Rev. D 101, 083537 (2020), arXiv:1911.06281 [astro- free-streaming in the early universe,” JCAP 1707, 033 ph.CO]. (2017), arXiv:1704.06657 [astro-ph.CO]. [563] Matteo Lucca, “The role of CMB spectral distortions [580] Manuel A. Buen-Abad, Martin Schmaltz, Julien Les- in the Hubble tension: a proof of principle,” Phys. gourgues, and Thejs Brinckmann, “Interacting Dark Lett. B 810, 135791 (2020), arXiv:2008.01115 [astro- Sector and Precision Cosmology,” JCAP 01, 008 ph.CO]. (2018), arXiv:1708.09406 [astro-ph.CO]. [564] Stephon Alexander and Evan McDonough, “Axion- [581] Mark Wyman, Douglas H. Rudd, R.Ali Vanderveld, Dilaton Destabilization and the Hubble Tension,” and Wayne Hu, “Neutrinos Help Reconcile Planck Phys. Lett. B797, 134830 (2019), arXiv:1904.08912 Measurements with the Local Universe,” Phys. Rev. [astro-ph.CO]. Lett. 112, 051302 (2014), arXiv:1307.7715 [astro- [565] Edvard Mörtselland Suhail Dhawan, “Does the Hub- ph.CO]. ble constant tension call for new physics?” JCAP [582] Maria Archidiacono, Elena Giusarma, Steen Hannes- 1809, 025 (2018), arXiv:1801.07260 [astro-ph.CO]. tad, and Olga Mena, “Cosmic dark radiation and neu- [566] Nemanja Kaloper, “Dark energy, H0 and weak gravity trinos,” Adv. High Energy Phys. 2013, 191047 (2013), conjecture,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 28, 1944017 (2019), arXiv:1307.0637 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:1903.11676 [hep-th]. [583] Lotty Ackerman, Matthew R. Buckley, Sean M. Car- [567] Riccardo Murgia, Guillermo F. Abellán, and Vivian roll, and Marc Kamionkowski, “Dark Matter and Poulin, “Early dark energy resolution to the Hub- Dark Radiation,” Phys. Rev. D 79, 023519 (2009), ble tension in light of weak lensing surveys and lens- arXiv:0810.5126 [hep-ph]. ing anomalies,” Phys. Rev. D 103, 063502 (2021), [584] Mattias Blennow, Enrique Fernandez-Martinez, Olga arXiv:2009.10733 [astro-ph.CO]. Mena, Javier Redondo, and Paolo Serra, “Asymmet- [568] David J. E. Marsh, “The Axiverse Extended: Vac- ric Dark Matter and Dark Radiation,” JCAP 07, 022 uum Destabilisation, Early Dark Energy and Cosmo- (2012), arXiv:1203.5803 [hep-ph]. logical Collapse,” Phys. Rev. D 83, 123526 (2011), [585] Joseph P. Conlon and M. C. David Marsh, “The Cos- arXiv:1102.4851 [astro-ph.CO]. mophenomenology of Axionic Dark Radiation,” JHEP [569] David J. E. Marsh, “Axion Cosmology,” Phys. Rept. 10, 214 (2013), arXiv:1304.1804 [hep-ph]. 643, 1–79 (2016), arXiv:1510.07633 [astro-ph.CO]. [586] Hendrik Vogel and Javier Redondo, “Dark Radia- [570] Marc Kamionkowski, Josef Pradler, and Devin G. E. tion constraints on minicharged particles in mod- Walker, “Dark energy from the string axiverse,” Phys. els with a hidden photon,” JCAP 02, 029 (2014), Rev. Lett. 113, 251302 (2014), arXiv:1409.0549 [hep- arXiv:1311.2600 [hep-ph]. ph]. [587] Cora Dvorkin, Mark Wyman, Douglas H. Rudd, and [571] Vivian Poulin, Tristan L. Smith, Daniel Grin, Tanvi Wayne Hu, “Neutrinos help reconcile Planck measure- Karwal, and Marc Kamionkowski, “Cosmological im- ments with both the early and local Universe,” Phys. plications of ultralight axionlike fields,” Phys. Rev. D Rev. D 90, 083503 (2014), arXiv:1403.8049 [astro- 98, 083525 (2018), arXiv:1806.10608 [astro-ph.CO]. ph.CO]. [572] Meng-Xiang Lin, Wayne Hu, and Marco Raveri, “Test- [588] Boris Leistedt, Hiranya V. Peiris, and Licia Verde, ing H0 in Acoustic Dark Energy with Planck and “No new cosmological concordance with massive ster- ACT Polarization,” Phys. Rev. D 102, 123523 (2020), ile neutrinos,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 041301 (2014), arXiv:2009.08974 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:1404.5950 [astro-ph.CO]. [573] Lu Yin, “Reducing the H0 Tension with Exponen- [589] Lu Feng, Jing-Fei Zhang, and Xin Zhang, “A tial Acoustic Dark Energy,” (2020), arXiv:2012.13917 search for sterile neutrinos with the latest cosmolog- [astro-ph.CO]. ical observations,” Eur. Phys. J. C 77, 418 (2017), [574] Matteo Braglia, William T. Emond, Fabio Finelli, arXiv:1703.04884 [astro-ph.CO]. A. Emir Gumrukcuoglu, and Kazuya Koyama, [590] S. Carneiro, P. C. de Holanda, C. Pigozzo, and F. So- “Unified framework for early dark energy from breira, “Is the H0 tension suggesting a fourth neu- α-attractors,” Phys. Rev. D 102, 083513 (2020), trino generation?” Phys. Rev. D100, 023505 (2019), arXiv:2005.14053 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:1812.06064 [astro-ph.CO]. [575] Michael S. Turner, “Coherent Scalar Field Oscillations [591] Graciela B. Gelmini, Alexander Kusenko, and in an Expanding Universe,” Phys. Rev. D 28, 1243 Volodymyr Takhistov, “Hints of Sterile Neutrinos (1983). in Recent Measurements of the Hubble Parameter,” (2019), arXiv:1906.10136 [astro-ph.CO]. 77

[592] Graciela B. Gelmini, Masahiro Kawasaki, Alexander [607] Maria Archidiacono, Deanna C. Hooper, Riccardo Kusenko, Kai Murai, and Volodymyr Takhistov, “Big Murgia, Sebastian Bohr, Julien Lesgourgues, and Mat- Bang Nucleosynthesis constraints on sterile neutrino teo Viel, “Constraining Dark Matter-Dark Radiation and lepton asymmetry of the Universe,” JCAP 09, 051 interactions with CMB, BAO, and Lyman-α,” JCAP (2020), arXiv:2005.06721 [hep-ph]. 10, 055 (2019), arXiv:1907.01496 [astro-ph.CO]. [593] Francesco D’Eramo, Ricardo Z. Ferreira, Alessio No- [608] P. Ko, Natsumi Nagata, and Yong Tang, “Hidden tari, and JoséLuis Bernal, “Hot Axions and the H0 Charged Dark Matter and Chiral Dark Radiation,” tension,” JCAP 1811, 014 (2018), arXiv:1808.07430 Phys. Lett. B 773, 513–520 (2017), arXiv:1706.05605 [hep-ph]. [hep-ph]. [594] Gianpiero Mangano, Gennaro Miele, Sergio Pastor, [609] Niklas Becker, Deanna C. Hooper, Felix Kahlhoefer, Teguayco Pinto, Ofelia Pisanti, and Pasquale D. Julien Lesgourgues, and Nils Schöneberg, “Cosmo- Serpico, “Relic neutrino decoupling including fla- logical constraints on multi-interacting dark matter,” vor oscillations,” Nucl. Phys. B729, 221–234 (2005), JCAP 02, 019 (2021), arXiv:2010.04074 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:hep-ph/0506164 [hep-ph]. [610] Gongjun Choi, Tsutomu T. Yanagida, and Norimi [595] Pablo F. de Salas and Sergio Pastor, “Relic neutrino Yokozaki, “A model of interacting dark matter and decoupling with flavour oscillations revisited,” JCAP dark radiation for H0 and σ8 tensions,” JHEP 01, 127 1607, 051 (2016), arXiv:1606.06986 [hep-ph]. (2021), arXiv:2010.06892 [hep-ph]. [596] Kensuke Akita and Masahide Yamaguchi, “A preci- [611] Francis-Yan Cyr-Racine, Kris Sigurdson, Jesus Zavala, sion calculation of relic neutrino decoupling,” JCAP Torsten Bringmann, Mark Vogelsberger, and 08, 012 (2020), arXiv:2005.07047 [hep-ph]. Christoph Pfrommer, “ETHOS—an effective theory of [597] Daniel Green et al., “Messengers from the Early Uni- structure formation: From dark particle physics to the verse: Cosmic Neutrinos and Other Light Relics,” Bull. matter distribution of the Universe,” Phys. Rev. D 93, Am. Astron. Soc. 51, 159 (2019), arXiv:1903.04763 123527 (2016), arXiv:1512.05344 [astro-ph.CO]. [astro-ph.CO]. [612] Mark Vogelsberger, Jesus Zavala, Francis-Yan Cyr- [598] Francis-Yan Cyr-Racine, Roland de Putter, Alvise Racine, Christoph Pfrommer, Torsten Bringmann, Raccanelli, and Kris Sigurdson, “Constraints on and Kris Sigurdson, “ETHOS – an effective theory of Large-Scale Dark Acoustic Oscillations from Cosmol- structure formation: dark matter physics as a pos- ogy,” Phys. Rev. D 89, 063517 (2014), arXiv:1310.3278 sible explanation of the small-scale CDM problems,” [astro-ph.CO]. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 460, 1399–1416 (2016), [599] J. A. Schewtschenko, C. M. Baugh, R. J. Wilkinson, arXiv:1512.05349 [astro-ph.CO]. C. Bœhm, S. Pascoli, and T. Sawala, “Dark mat- [613] Christina D. Kreisch, Francis-Yan Cyr-Racine, and ter–radiation interactions: the structure of Milky Way Olivier Doré,“Neutrino puzzle: Anomalies, interac- satellite galaxies,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 461, tions, and cosmological tensions,” Phys. Rev. D 101, 2282–2287 (2016), arXiv:1512.06774 [astro-ph.CO]. 123505 (2020), arXiv:1902.00534 [astro-ph.CO]. [600] Manuel A. Buen-Abad, Gustavo Marques-Tavares, [614] Francis-Yan Cyr-Racine and Kris Sigurdson, “Lim- and Martin Schmaltz, “Non-Abelian dark matter and its on Neutrino-Neutrino Scattering in the Early dark radiation,” Phys. Rev. D 92, 023531 (2015), Universe,” Phys. Rev. D 90, 123533 (2014), arXiv:1505.03542 [hep-ph]. arXiv:1306.1536 [astro-ph.CO]. [601] Zackaria Chacko, Yanou Cui, Sungwoo Hong, [615] Isabel M. Oldengott, Thomas Tram, Cornelius Rampf, Takemichi Okui, and Yuhsin Tsai, “Partially Acous- and Yvonne Y. Y. Wong, “Interacting neutrinos in cos- tic Dark Matter, Interacting Dark Radiation, and mology: exact description and constraints,” JCAP 11, Large Scale Structure,” JHEP 12, 108 (2016), 027 (2017), arXiv:1706.02123 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:1609.03569 [astro-ph.CO]. [616] Anirban Das and Subhajit Ghosh, “Flavor-specific [602] P. Ko and Yong Tang, “Light dark photon and Interaction Favours Strong Neutrino Self-coupling,” fermionic dark radiation for the Hubble constant and (2020), arXiv:2011.12315 [hep-ph]. the structure formation,” Phys. Lett. B 762, 462–466 [617] Shouvik Roy Choudhury, Steen Hannestad, and (2016), arXiv:1608.01083 [hep-ph]. Thomas Tram, “Updated constraints on massive neu- [603] P. Ko and Yong Tang, “Residual Non-Abelian Dark trino self-interactions from cosmology in light of the Matter and Dark Radiation,” Phys. Lett. B 768, 12– H0 tension,” JCAP 03, 084 (2021), arXiv:2012.07519 17 (2017), arXiv:1609.02307 [hep-ph]. [astro-ph.CO]. [604] Yong Tang, “Interacting Scalar Radiation and Dark [618] Arindam Mazumdar, Subhendra Mohanty, and Matter in Cosmology,” Phys. Lett. B 757, 387–392 Priyank Parashari, “Flavour specific neutrino self- (2016), arXiv:1603.00165 [astro-ph.CO]. interaction: H0 tension and IceCube,” (2020), [605] Rebecca Krall, Francis-Yan Cyr-Racine, and Cora arXiv:2011.13685 [hep-ph]. Dvorkin, “Wandering in the Lyman-alpha Forest: A [619] Francesco Forastieri, Massimiliano Lattanzi, and Study of Dark Matter-Dark Radiation Interactions,” Paolo Natoli, “Cosmological constraints on neutrino JCAP 09, 003 (2017), arXiv:1705.08894 [astro-ph.CO]. self-interactions with a light mediator,” Phys. Rev. D [606] Maria Archidiacono, Sebastian Bohr, Steen Hannes- 100, 103526 (2019), arXiv:1904.07810 [astro-ph.CO]. tad, Jonas Helboe Jørgensen, and Julien Lesgour- [620] Hong-Jian He, Yin-Zhe Ma, and Jiaming Zheng, gues, “Linear scale bounds on dark matter–dark radi- “Resolving Hubble Tension by Self-Interacting Neu- ation interactions and connection with the small scale trinos with Dirac Seesaw,” JCAP 11, 003 (2020), crisis of cold dark matter,” JCAP 11, 010 (2017), arXiv:2003.12057 [hep-ph]. arXiv:1706.06870 [astro-ph.CO]. [621] Maximilian Berbig, Sudip Jana, and Andreas Traut- ner, “The Hubble tension and a renormalizable model 78

of gauged neutrino self-interactions,” Phys. Rev. D [639] Michele Maggiore, “The Algebraic structure of the gen- 102, 115008 (2020), arXiv:2004.13039 [hep-ph]. eralized uncertainty principle,” Phys. Lett. B319, 83– [622] Kun-Feng Lyu, Emmanuel Stamou, and Lian-Tao 86 (1993), arXiv:hep-th/9309034 [hep-th]. Wang, “Self-interacting neutrinos: Solution to Hubble [640] Michele Maggiore, “A Generalized uncertainty prin- tension versus experimental constraints,” Phys. Rev. ciple in quantum gravity,” Phys. Lett. B304, 65–69 D 103, 015004 (2021), arXiv:2004.10868 [hep-ph]. (1993), arXiv:hep-th/9301067 [hep-th]. [623] Steen Hannestad, Rasmus Sloth Hansen, and Thomas [641] Michele Maggiore, “Quantum groups, gravity and the Tram, “How Self-Interactions can Reconcile Sterile generalized uncertainty principle,” Phys. Rev. D49, Neutrinos with Cosmology,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 5182–5187 (1994), arXiv:hep-th/9305163 [hep-th]. 031802 (2014), arXiv:1310.5926 [astro-ph.CO]. [642] Achim Kempf, Gianpiero Mangano, and Robert B. [624] Maria Archidiacono, Steen Hannestad, Rasmus Sloth Mann, “Hilbert space representation of the minimal Hansen, and Thomas Tram, “Cosmology with self- length uncertainty relation,” Phys. Rev. D52, 1108– interacting sterile neutrinos and dark matter - A pseu- 1118 (1995), arXiv:hep-th/9412167 [hep-th]. doscalar model,” Phys. Rev. D 91, 065021 (2015), [643] Haye Hinrichsen and Achim Kempf, “Maximal local- arXiv:1404.5915 [astro-ph.CO]. ization in the presence of minimal uncertainties in po- [625] Xiaoyong Chu, Basudeb Dasgupta, and Joachim sitions and momenta,” J. Math. Phys. 37, 2121–2137 Kopp, “Sterile neutrinos with secret interac- (1996), arXiv:hep-th/9510144 [hep-th]. tions—lasting friendship with cosmology,” JCAP [644] Achim Kempf, “On quantum field theory with nonzero 10, 011 (2015), arXiv:1505.02795 [hep-ph]. minimal uncertainties in positions and momenta,” [626] Nikita Blinov, Kevin James Kelly, Gordan Z Krn- J. Math. Phys. 38, 1347–1372 (1997), arXiv:hep- jaic, and Samuel D McDermott, “Constraining the th/9602085 [hep-th]. Self-Interacting Neutrino Interpretation of the Hub- [645] Achim Kempf, “String / quantum gravity motivated ble Tension,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 191102 (2019), uncertainty relations and regularization in field the- arXiv:1905.02727 [astro-ph.CO]. ory,” in 21st International Colloquium on Group [627] Subhajit Ghosh, Rishi Khatri, and Tuhin S. Roy, Theoretical Methods in Physics (1996) arXiv:hep- “Can dark neutrino interactions phase out the Hub- th/9612082. ble tension?” Phys. Rev. D 102, 123544 (2020), [646] Hartland S. Snyder, “Quantized space-time,” Phys. arXiv:1908.09843 [hep-ph]. Rev. 71, 38–41 (1947). [628] Thejs Brinckmann, Jae Hyeok Chang, and Marilena [647] C. N. Yang, “On quantized space-time,” Phys. Rev. LoVerde, “Self-interacting neutrinos, the Hubble pa- 72, 874 (1947), [,7(1947)]. rameter tension, and the Cosmic Microwave Back- [648] F. Karolyhazy, “Gravitation and quantum mechanics ground,” (2020), arXiv:2012.11830 [astro-ph.CO]. of macroscopic objects,” Nuovo Cim. A42, 390–402 [629] Tim Brune and Heinrich Päs,“Massive Majorons and (1966). constraints on the Majoron-neutrino coupling,” Phys. [649] Ronald J. Adler, Pisin Chen, and David I. Santi- Rev. D 99, 096005 (2019), arXiv:1808.08158 [hep-ph]. ago, “The Generalized uncertainty principle and black [630] Frank F. Deppisch, Lukas Graf, Werner Rodejohann, hole remnants,” Gen. Rel. Grav. 33, 2101–2108 (2001), and Xun-Jie Xu, “Neutrino Self-Interactions and Dou- arXiv:gr-qc/0106080 [gr-qc]. ble Beta Decay,” Phys. Rev. D 102, 051701 (2020), [650] A. Ashoorioon, Achim Kempf, and Robert B. Mann, arXiv:2004.11919 [hep-ph]. “Minimum length cutoff in inflation and unique- [631] Vedran Brdar, Manfred Lindner, Stefan Vogl, and ness of the action,” Phys. Rev. D71, 023503 (2005), Xun-Jie Xu, “Revisiting neutrino self-interaction con- arXiv:astro-ph/0410139 [astro-ph]. straints from Z and τ decays,” Phys. Rev. D 101, [651] Amjad Ashoorioon and Robert B. Mann, “Genera- 115001 (2020), arXiv:2003.05339 [hep-ph]. tion of cosmological seed magnetic fields from inflation [632] Wayne Hu, “Angular trispectrum of the CMB,” Phys. with cutoff,” Phys. Rev. D71, 103509 (2005), arXiv:gr- Rev. D 64, 083005 (2001), arXiv:astro-ph/0105117. qc/0410053 [gr-qc]. [633] Kendrick M. Smith, Leonardo Senatore, and Matias [652] A. Ashoorioon and Robert B. Mann, “On the ten- Zaldarriaga, “Optimal analysis of the CMB trispec- sor/scalar ratio in inflation with UV cut off,” Nucl. trum,” (2015), arXiv:1502.00635 [astro-ph.CO]. Phys. B716, 261–279 (2005), arXiv:gr-qc/0411056 [gr- [634] Saroj Adhikari, Anne-Sylvie Deutsch, and Sarah qc]. Shandera, “Statistical anisotropies in temperature [653] A. Ashoorioon, J. L. Hovdebo, and Robert B. Mann, and polarization fluctuations from a scale-dependent “Running of the spectral index and violation of the trispectrum,” Phys. Rev. D 98, 023520 (2018), consistency relation between tensor and scalar spectra arXiv:1805.00037 [astro-ph.CO]. from trans-Planckian physics,” Nucl. Phys. B727, 63– [635] Saroj Adhikari and Dragan Huterer, “Super-CMB fluc- 76 (2005), arXiv:gr-qc/0504135 [gr-qc]. tuations and the Hubble tension,” Phys. Dark Univ. [654] Kourosh Nozari, Pouria Pedram, and M. Molkara, 28, 100539 (2020), arXiv:1905.02278 [astro-ph.CO]. “Minimal length, maximal momentum and the en- [636] W. a Heisenberg, “Uber den anschaulichen Inhalt der tropic force law,” Int. J. Theor. Phys. 51, 1268–1275 quantentheoretischen Kinematik und Mechanik,”Z. (2012), arXiv:1111.2204 [gr-qc]. Phys. 43, 172–198 (1927). [655] Mir Faizal, Mohammed M. Khalil, and Saurya Das, [637] H. P. Robertson, “The Uncertainty Principle,” Phys. “Time Crystals from Minimum Time Uncertainty,” Rev. 34, 163–164 (1929). Eur. Phys. J. C76, 30 (2016), arXiv:1501.03111 [638] C. Alden Mead, “Possible Connection Between Grav- [physics.gen-ph]. itation and Fundamental Length,” Phys. Rev. 135, [656] Ahmed Farag Ali, Mir Faizal, and Mohammed M. B849–B862 (1964). Khalil, “Short Distance Physics of the Inflation- 79

ary de Sitter Universe,” JCAP 1509, 025 (2015), [672] Mario Ballardini, Matteo Braglia, Fabio Finelli, arXiv:1505.06963 [gr-qc]. Daniela Paoletti, Alexei A. Starobinsky, and Cate- [657] A. Mohammadi, Ahmed Farag Ali, T. Golanbari, rina Umiltà,“Scalar-tensor theories of gravity, neu- A. Aghamohammadi, Kh. Saaidi, and Mir Faizal, “In- trino physics, and the H0 tension,” JCAP 10, 044 flationary universe in the presence of a minimal mea- (2020), arXiv:2004.14349 [astro-ph.CO]. surable length,” Annals Phys. 385, 214–224 (2017), [673] Matteo Braglia, Mario Ballardini, William T. Emond, arXiv:1505.04392 [gr-qc]. Fabio Finelli, A. Emir Gumrukcuoglu, Kazuya [658] Mir Faizal, “Supersymmetry breaking as a new source Koyama, and Daniela Paoletti, “Larger value for H0 for the generalized uncertainty principle,” Phys. Lett. by an evolving gravitational constant,” Phys. Rev. D B757, 244–246 (2016), arXiv:1605.00925 [hep-th]. 102, 023529 (2020), arXiv:2004.11161 [astro-ph.CO]. [659] Matthew J. Lake, “Minimum length uncertainty rela- [674] Massimo Rossi, Mario Ballardini, Matteo Braglia, tions in the presence of dark energy,” Galaxies 7, 11 Fabio Finelli, Daniela Paoletti, Alexei A. Starobin- (2019), arXiv:1712.00271 [gr-qc]. sky, and Caterina Umiltà,“Cosmological constraints [660] Qin Zhao, Mir Faizal, and Zaid Zaz, “Short distance on post-Newtonian parameters in effectively massless modification of the quantum virial theorem,” Phys. scalar-tensor theories of gravity,” Phys. Rev. D 100, Lett. B770, 564–568 (2017), arXiv:1707.00636 [hep- 103524 (2019), arXiv:1906.10218 [astro-ph.CO]. th]. [675] Guillermo Ballesteros, Alessio Notari, and Fabrizio [661] Elias C. Vagenas, Lina Alasfar, Salwa M. Alsaleh, Rompineve, “The H0 tension: ∆GN vs. ∆Neff ,” JCAP and Ahmed Farag Ali, “The GUP and quantum Ray- 11, 024 (2020), arXiv:2004.05049 [astro-ph.CO]. chaudhuri equation,” Nucl. Phys. B931, 72–78 (2018), [676] Matteo Braglia, Mario Ballardini, Fabio Finelli, and arXiv:1706.06502 [hep-th]. Kazuya Koyama, “Early modified gravity in light of the [662] Matthew J. Lake, “A New Approach to Generalised H0 tension and LSS data,” Phys. Rev. D 103, 043528 Uncertainty Relations,” (2020), arXiv:2008.13183 [gr- (2021), arXiv:2011.12934 [astro-ph.CO]. qc]. [677] Philippe Brax, Carsten van de Bruck, Sebastien Clesse, [663] Abdel Nasser Tawfik and Abdel Magied Diab, “Re- Anne-Christine Davis, and Gregory Sculthorpe, view on Generalized Uncertainty Principle,” Rept. “Early Modified Gravity: Implications for Cosmol- Prog. Phys. 78, 126001 (2015), arXiv:1509.02436 ogy,” Phys. Rev. D 89, 123507 (2014), arXiv:1312.3361 [physics.gen-ph]. [astro-ph.CO]. [664] L. Perivolaropoulos, “Cosmological Horizons, Un- [678] Valeria Pettorino and Luca Amendola, “Friction in certainty Principle and Maximum Length Quan- Gravitational Waves: a test for early-time modi- tum Mechanics,” Phys. Rev. D 95, 103523 (2017), fied gravity,” Phys. Lett. B 742, 353–357 (2015), arXiv:1704.05681 [gr-qc]. arXiv:1408.2224 [astro-ph.CO]. [665] F. Skara and L. Perivolaropoulos, “Primordial Power [679] Nelson A. Lima, Vanessa Smer-Barreto, and Lucas Spectra of Cosmological Fluctuations with Generalized Lombriser, “Constraints on decaying early modified Uncertainty Principle and Maximum Length Quan- gravity from cosmological observations,” Phys. Rev. D tum Mechanics,” Phys. Rev. D 100, 123527 (2019), 94, 083507 (2016), arXiv:1603.05239 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:1907.12594 [gr-qc]. [680] Ryan J. Wilkinson, Celine Boehm, and Julien Les- [666] Salvatore Capozziello, Micol Benetti, and Alessandro gourgues, “Constraining Dark Matter-Neutrino Inter- D. A. M. Spallicci, “Addressing the cosmological H0 actions using the CMB and Large-Scale Structure,” tension by the Heisenberg uncertainty,” Found. Phys. JCAP 05, 011 (2014), arXiv:1401.7597 [astro-ph.CO]. 50, 893–899 (2020), arXiv:2007.00462 [gr-qc]. [681] Eleonora Di Valentino and Francois R. Bouchet, “A [667] M. Tanabashi et al. (Particle Data Group), “Review of comment on power-law inflation with a dark radiation Particle Physics,” Phys. Rev. D 98, 030001 (2018). component,” JCAP 10, 011 (2016), arXiv:1609.00328 [668] JoséA. Helayël-Netoand Alessandro D. A. M. Spal- [astro-ph.CO]. licci, “Frequency variation for in vacuo photon propa- [682] Eleonora Di Valentino and Laura Mersini-Houghton, gation in the Standard-Model Extension,” Eur. Phys. “Testing Predictions of the Quantum Landscape Mul- J. C 79, 590 (2019), arXiv:1904.11035 [hep-ph]. tiverse 2: The Exponential Inflationary Potential,” [669] Alessandro D. A. M. Spallicci, JoséA. Helayël-Neto, JCAP 03, 020 (2017), arXiv:1612.08334 [astro-ph.CO]. Mart´ınLópez-Corredoira, and Salvatore Capozziello, [683] Ujjaini Alam, Satadru Bag, and Varun Sahni, “Con- “Cosmology and the massive photon frequency shift in straining the Cosmology of the Phantom Brane using the Standard-Model Extension,” Eur. Phys. J. C 81, Distance Measures,” Phys. Rev. D 95, 023524 (2017), 4 (2021), arXiv:2011.12608 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:1605.04707 [astro-ph.CO]. [670] Luca Bonetti, Lu´ıs R. dos Santos Filho, José A. [684] Thomas Tram, Robert Vallance, and Vincent Ven- Helayël-Neto, and Alessandro D. A. M. Spallicci, “Ef- nin, “Inflation Model Selection meets Dark Radiation,” fective photon mass by Super and Lorentz symme- JCAP 01, 046 (2017), arXiv:1606.09199 [astro-ph.CO]. try breaking,” Phys. Lett. B 764, 203–206 (2017), [685] Janina Renk, Miguel Zumalacárregui,Francesco Mon- arXiv:1607.08786 [hep-ph]. tanari, and Alexandre Barreira, “Galileon gravity in [671] Luca Bonetti, Lu´ıs R. dos Santos Filho, José A. light of ISW, CMB, BAO and H0 data,” JCAP 1710, Helayël-Neto, and Alessandro D. A. M. Spallicci, 020 (2017), arXiv:1707.02263 [astro-ph.CO]. “Photon sector analysis of Super and Lorentz sym- [686] Luke Hart and Jens Chluba, “New constraints on time- metry breaking: effective photon mass, bi-refringence dependent variations of fundamental constants using and dissipation,” Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 811 (2018), Planck data,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 474, 1850– arXiv:1709.04995 [hep-th]. 1861 (2018), arXiv:1705.03925 [astro-ph.CO]. 80

[687] Eleonora Di Valentino, Céline Bøehm, Eric Hivon, and [702] Eoin O´ Colgáin,Maurice H. P. M. van Putten, and Fran¸coisR. Bouchet, “Reducing the H0 and σ8 ten- Hossein Yavartanoo, “de Sitter Swampland, H0 tension sions with Dark Matter-neutrino interactions,” Phys. & observation,” Phys. Lett. B793, 126–129 (2019), Rev. D97, 043513 (2018), arXiv:1710.02559 [astro- arXiv:1807.07451 [hep-th]. ph.CO]. [703] Rafael C. Nunes, “Structure formation in f(T ) gravity [688] Rui-Yun Guo and Xin Zhang, “Constraints on infla- and a solution for H0 tension,” JCAP 05, 052 (2018), tion revisited: An analysis including the latest local arXiv:1802.02281 [gr-qc]. measurement of the Hubble constant,” Eur. Phys. J. [704] Manuel A. Buen-Abad, Razieh Emami, and Mar- C 77, 882 (2017), arXiv:1704.04784 [astro-ph.CO]. tin Schmaltz, “Cannibal Dark Matter and Large [689] Tobias Binder, Michael Gustafsson, Ayuki Kamada, Scale Structure,” Phys. Rev. D 98, 083517 (2018), Stefan Marinus Rodrigues Sandner, and Max Wiesner, arXiv:1803.08062 [hep-ph]. “Reannihilation of self-interacting dark matter,” Phys. [705] Sirachak Panpanich, Piyabut Burikham, Supakchai Rev. D97, 123004 (2018), arXiv:1712.01246 [astro- Ponglertsakul, and Lunchakorn Tannukij, “Resolving ph.CO]. Hubble Tension with Quintom Dark Energy Model,” [690] Weiqiang Yang, Supriya Pan, Eleonora Di Valentino, Chin. Phys. C 45, 015108 (2021), arXiv:1908.03324 [gr- and Emmanuel N. Saridakis, “Observational con- qc]. straints on dynamical dark energy with pivoting red- [706] Alexander Bonilla, Suresh Kumar, and Rafael C. shift,” Universe 5, 219 (2019), arXiv:1811.06932 [astro- Nunes, “Measurements of H0 and reconstruction of ph.CO]. the dark energy properties from a model-independent [691] Dhiraj Kumar Hazra, Arman Shafieloo, and Tarun joint analysis,” Eur. Phys. J. C 81, 127 (2021), Souradeep, “Parameter discordance in Planck CMB arXiv:2011.07140 [astro-ph.CO]. and low-redshift measurements: projection in the [707] Toyokazu Sekiguchi and Tomo Takahashi, “Early re- primordial power spectrum,” JCAP 04, 036 (2019), combination as a solution to the H0 tension,” Phys. arXiv:1810.08101 [astro-ph.CO]. Rev. D 103, 083507 (2021), arXiv:2007.03381 [astro- [692] Enis Belgacem, Yves Dirian, Stefano Foffa, and ph.CO]. Michele Maggiore, “Nonlocal gravity. Conceptual as- [708] Florian Niedermann and Martin S. Sloth, “Resolving pects and cosmological predictions,” JCAP 1803, 002 the Hubble tension with new early dark energy,” Phys. (2018), arXiv:1712.07066 [hep-th]. Rev. D 102, 063527 (2020), arXiv:2006.06686 [astro- [693] Rui-Yun Guo, Jing-Fei Zhang, and Xin Zhang, “Can ph.CO]. the H0 tension be resolved in extensions to ΛCDM cos- [709] Florian Niedermann and Martin S. Sloth, “New Early mology?” JCAP 1902, 054 (2019), arXiv:1809.02340 Dark Energy is compatible with current LSS data,” [astro-ph.CO]. (2020), arXiv:2009.00006 [astro-ph.CO]. [694] Chi-Ting Chiang and AnˇzeSlosar, “Inferences of H0 [710] OzgürAkarsu,¨ John D. Barrow, Luis A. Escamilla, in presence of a non-standard recombination,” (2018), and J. Alberto Vazquez, “Graduated dark energy: Ob- arXiv:1811.03624 [astro-ph.CO]. servational hints of a spontaneous sign switch in the [695] Haitao Miao and Zhiqi Huang, “The H0 Tension in cosmological constant,” Phys. Rev. D 101, 063528 Non-flat QCDM Cosmology,” Astrophys. J. 868, 20 (2020), arXiv:1912.08751 [astro-ph.CO]. (2018), arXiv:1803.07320 [astro-ph.CO]. [711] Masumi Kasai and Toshifumi Futamase, “A possible [696] Suresh Kumar, Rafael C. Nunes, and Santosh Ku- solution to the Hubble constant discrepancy – Cosmol- mar Yadav, “Cosmological bounds on dark matter- ogy where the local volume expansion is driven by the photon coupling,” Phys. Rev. D 98, 043521 (2018), domain average density,” PTEP 2019, 073E01 (2019), arXiv:1803.10229 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:1904.09689 [gr-qc]. [697] Eoin O´ Colgáinand Hossein Yavartanoo, “Testing the [712] Xiaolei Li, Arman Shafieloo, Varun Sahni, and Swampland: H0 tension,” Phys. Lett. B 797, 134907 Alexei A. Starobinsky, “Revisiting Metastable Dark (2019), arXiv:1905.02555 [astro-ph.CO]. Energy and Tensions in the Estimation of Cosmo- [698] Eleonora Di Valentino, “A combined analysis of the H0 logical Parameters,” Astrophys. J. 887, 153 (2019), late time direct measurements and the impact on the arXiv:1904.03790 [astro-ph.CO]. Dark Energy sector,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 502, [713] MiaoXin Liu and Zhiqi Huang, “Band-limited Features 2065–2073 (2021), arXiv:2011.00246 [astro-ph.CO]. in the Primordial Power Spectrum Do Not Resolve [699] Qing-Guo Huang and Ke Wang, “How the dark en- the Hubble Tension,” Astrophys. J. 897, 166 (2020), ergy can reconcile Planck with local determination of arXiv:1910.05670 [astro-ph.CO]. the Hubble constant,” Eur. Phys. J. C 76, 506 (2016), [714] Luke Hart and Jens Chluba, “Updated fundamental arXiv:1606.05965 [astro-ph.CO]. constant constraints from Planck 2018 data and pos- [700] Koushik Dutta, Ruchika, Anirban Roy, Anjan A. Sen, sible relations to the Hubble tension,” Mon. Not. Roy. and M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, “Beyond ΛCDM with low Astron. Soc. 493, 3255–3263 (2020), arXiv:1912.03986 and high redshift data: implications for dark energy,” [astro-ph.CO]. Gen. Rel. Grav. 52, 15 (2020), arXiv:1808.06623 [astro- [715] Noemi Frusciante, Simone Peirone, Luis Atayde, and ph.CO]. Antonio De Felice, “Phenomenology of the gener- [701] Eleonora Di Valentino, Alessandro Melchiorri, Yabebal alized cubic covariant Galileon model and cosmo- Fantaye, and Alan Heavens, “Bayesian evidence logical bounds,” Phys. Rev. D 101, 064001 (2020), against the Harrison-Zel’dovich spectrum in tensions arXiv:1912.07586 [astro-ph.CO]. with cosmological data sets,” Phys. Rev. D 98, 063508 [716] Miguel Zumalacarregui, “Gravity in the Era of Equal- (2018), arXiv:1808.09201 [astro-ph.CO]. ity: Towards solutions to the Hubble problem with- 81

out fine-tuned initial conditions,” Phys. Rev. D 102, [732] Savvas Nesseris, Domenico Sapone, and Spyros Syp- 023523 (2020), arXiv:2003.06396 [astro-ph.CO]. sas, “Evaporating primordial black holes as varying [717] Guido D’Amico, Leonardo Senatore, Pierre Zhang, dark energy,” Phys. Dark Univ. 27, 100413 (2020), and Henry Zheng, “The Hubble Tension in Light of the arXiv:1907.05608 [astro-ph.CO]. Full-Shape Analysis of Large-Scale Structure Data,” [733] Miguel Escudero and Samuel J. Witte, “A CMB search (2020), arXiv:2006.12420 [astro-ph.CO]. for the neutrino mass mechanism and its relation to [718] Noriaki Kitazawa, “Polarizations of CMB and the the Hubble tension,” Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 294 (2020), Hubble tension,” (2020), arXiv:2010.12164 [astro- arXiv:1909.04044 [astro-ph.CO]. ph.CO]. [734] Gongjun Choi, Motoo Suzuki, and Tsutomu T. [719] Katherine Freese and Martin Wolfgang Winkler, Yanagida, “Quintessence Axion Dark Energy and a “Chain Early Dark Energy: Solving the Hubble Ten- Solution to the Hubble Tension,” Phys. Lett. B 805, sion and Explaining Today’s Dark Energy,” (2021), 135408 (2020), arXiv:1910.00459 [hep-ph]. arXiv:2102.13655 [astro-ph.CO]. [735] Yi-Fu Cai, Martiros Khurshudyan, and Emmanuel N. [720] Balakrishna S. Haridasu, Matteo Viel, and Nicola Vit- Saridakis, “Model-independent reconstruction of f(T ) torio, “Sources of H0-tension in dark energy scenarios,” gravity from Gaussian Processes,” Astrophys. J. 888, Phys. Rev. D 103, 063539 (2021), arXiv:2012.10324 62 (2020), arXiv:1907.10813 [astro-ph.CO]. [astro-ph.CO]. [736] Weiqiang Yang, Supriya Pan, Eleonora Di Valentino, [721] Weiqiang Yang, Eleonora Di Valentino, Supriya Pan, Andronikos Paliathanasis, and Jianbo Lu, “Chal- Spyros Basilakos, and Andronikos Paliathanasis, lenging bulk viscous unified scenarios with cosmolog- “Metastable dark energy models in light of P lanck ical observations,” Phys. Rev. D100, 103518 (2019), 2018 data: Alleviating the H0 tension,” Phys. Rev. D arXiv:1906.04162 [astro-ph.CO]. 102, 063503 (2020), arXiv:2001.04307 [astro-ph.CO]. [737] Joan Solà Peracaula, Adria Gómez-Valent, Javier [722] Stephen L. Adler, “Implications of a frame dependent de Cruz Pérez, and Cristian Moreno-Pulido, “Brans– dark energy for the spacetime metric, cosmography, Dicke Gravity with a Cosmological Constant Smoothes and effective Hubble constant,” Phys. Rev. D 100, Out ΛCDM Tensions,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 886, L6 123503 (2019), arXiv:1905.08228 [astro-ph.CO]. (2019), arXiv:1909.02554 [astro-ph.CO]. [723] Celia Escamilla-Rivera and Jackson Levi Said, “Cos- [738] Joan Solà Peracaula, Adrià Gómez-Valent, Javier mological viable models in f(T,B) theory as solutions de Cruz Pérez, and Cristian Moreno-Pulido, to the H0 tension,” Class. Quant. Grav. 37, 165002 “Brans–Dicke cosmology with a Λ-term: a possible so- (2020), arXiv:1909.10328 [gr-qc]. lution to ΛCDM tensions,” Class. Quant. Grav. 37, [724] Sanjay Mandal, Deng Wang, and P. K. Sahoo, “Cos- 245003 (2020), arXiv:2006.04273 [astro-ph.CO]. mography in f(Q) gravity,” Phys. Rev. D 102, 124029 [739] V. G. Gurzadyan and A. Stepanian, “H 0 tension: clue (2020), arXiv:2011.00420 [gr-qc]. to common nature of dark sector?” Eur. Phys. J. C 79, [725] Santosh Kumar Yadav, “Constraints on Dark Matter- 568 (2019), arXiv:1905.03442 [astro-ph.CO]. Photon Coupling in the Presence of Time-Varying [740] Eleonora Di Valentino, Ricardo Z. Ferreira, Luca Dark Energy,” Mod. Phys. Lett. A33, 1950358 (2019), Visinelli, and Ulf Danielsson, “Late time transi- arXiv:1907.05886 [astro-ph.CO]. tions in the quintessence field and the H0 tension,” [726] Miaoxin Liu, Zhiqi Huang, Xiaolin Luo, Haitao Phys. Dark Univ. 26, 100385 (2019), arXiv:1906.11255 Miao, Naveen K. Singh, and Lu Huang, “Can Non- [astro-ph.CO]. standard Recombination Resolve the Hubble Ten- [741] Deng Wang and David Mota, “Can f(T ) gravity re- sion?” Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron. 63, 290405 solve the H0 tension?” Phys. Rev. D 102, 063530 (2020), arXiv:1912.00190 [astro-ph.CO]. (2020), arXiv:2003.10095 [astro-ph.CO]. [727] Jailson Alcaniz, NicolásBernal, Antonio Masiero, and [742] Benjamin Bose and Lucas Lombriser, “Easing cosmic Farinaldo S. Queiroz, “Light dark matter: A com- tensions with an open and hotter universe,” Phys. mon solution to the lithium and H 0 problems,” Phys. Rev. D 103, L081304 (2021), arXiv:2006.16149 [astro- Lett. B 812, 136008 (2021), arXiv:1912.05563 [astro- ph.CO]. ph.CO]. [743] Alejandro Perez, Daniel Sudarsky, and Edward [728] Matteo Martinelli and Isaac Tutusaus, “CMB tensions Wilson-Ewing, “Resolving the H0 tension with diffu- with low-redshift H0 and S8 measurements: impact of sion,” Gen. Rel. Grav. 53, 7 (2021), arXiv:2001.07536 a redshift-dependent type-Ia supernovae intrinsic lumi- [astro-ph.CO]. nosity,” Symmetry 11, 986 (2019), arXiv:1906.09189 [744] Ulf Leonhardt and Dror Berechya, “Observed Hubble [astro-ph.CO]. constant is consistent with physics of the quantum vac- [729] V. V. Flambaum and I. B. Samsonov, “Ultralight dark uum,” (2020), arXiv:2008.04789 [gr-qc]. photon as a model for early universe dark matter,” [745] Enis Belgacem, Yves Dirian, Andreas Finke, Stefano Phys. Rev. D 100, 063541 (2019), arXiv:1908.09432 Foffa, and Michele Maggiore, “Gravity in the infrared [astro-ph.CO]. and effective nonlocal models,” JCAP 04, 010 (2020), [730] Luis A. Anchordoqui and Santiago E. Perez Bergliaffa, arXiv:2001.07619 [astro-ph.CO]. “Hot thermal universe endowed with massive dark vec- [746] Antonio De Felice, Shinji Mukohyama, and Mas- tor fields and the Hubble tension,” Phys. Rev. D 100, roor C. Pookkillath, “Addressing H0 tension by 123525 (2019), arXiv:1910.05860 [astro-ph.CO]. means of VCDM,” Phys. Lett. B 816, 136201 (2021), [731] Simone Peirone, Giampaolo Benevento, Noemi Frus- arXiv:2009.08718 [astro-ph.CO]. ciante, and Shinji Tsujikawa, “Cosmological data favor [747] Francisco X. Linares Cedeñoand Ulises Nucamendi, Galileon ghost condensate over ΛCDM,” Phys. Rev. D “Revisiting cosmological diffusion models in Unimod- 100, 063540 (2019), arXiv:1905.05166 [astro-ph.CO]. ular Gravity and the H0 tension,” Phys. Dark Univ. 82

32, 100807 (2021), arXiv:2009.10268 [astro-ph.CO]. [764] Luca Visinelli, Sunny Vagnozzi, and Ulf Daniels- [748] Ryan E. Keeley, Arman Shafieloo, Dhiraj Kumar son, “Revisiting a negative cosmological constant Hazra, and Tarun Souradeep, “Inflation Wars: A New from low-redshift data,” Symmetry 11, 1035 (2019), Hope,” JCAP 09, 055 (2020), arXiv:2006.12710 [astro- arXiv:1907.07953 [astro-ph.CO]. ph.CO]. [765] Maurice H P M van Putten, “Alleviating tension in [749] Carlos A. P. Bengaly, Javier E. Gonzalez, and ΛCDM and the local distance ladder from first prin- Jailson S. Alcaniz, “Is there evidence for a hot- ciples with no free parameters,” Monthly Notices of ter Universe?” Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 936 (2020), the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters 491, L6–L10 arXiv:2007.13789 [astro-ph.CO]. (2019). [750] Mahmoud Hashim, Waleed El Hanafy, Alexey [766] Maurice H. P. M. van Putten, “Evidence for galaxy Golovnev, and Amr El-Zant, “Toward a concor- dynamics tracing background cosmology below the de dance teleparallel Cosmology I: Background Dynam- sitter scale of acceleration,” The Astrophysical Journal ics,” (2020), arXiv:2010.14964 [astro-ph.CO]. 848, 28 (2017). [751] C. Ortiz, “Surface Tension: Accelerated Expansion, [767] Eleonora Di Valentino, Ankan Mukherjee, and An- Coincidence Problem & Hubble Tension,” Int. J. Mod. jan A. Sen, “Dark Energy with Phantom Cross- Phys. D 29, 2050115 (2020), arXiv:2011.02317 [gr-qc]. ing and the H0 Tension,” Entropy 23, 404 (2021), [752] Mikhail M. Ivanov, Yacine Ali-Ha¨ımoud, and Julien arXiv:2005.12587 [astro-ph.CO]. Lesgourgues, “H0 tension or T0 tension?” Phys. Rev. D [768] Emilio Elizalde, Martiros Khurshudyan, Sergei D. 102, 063515 (2020), arXiv:2005.10656 [astro-ph.CO]. Odintsov, and Ratbay Myrzakulov, “Analysis of [753] Chethan Krishnan, Eoin O.´ Colgáin,M. M. Sheikh- the H0 tension problem in the Universe with vis- Jabbari, and Tao Yang, “Running Hubble Tension and cous dark fluid,” Phys. Rev. D 102, 123501 (2020), a H0 Diagnostic,” Phys. Rev. D 103, 103509 (2021), arXiv:2006.01879 [gr-qc]. arXiv:2011.02858 [astro-ph.CO]. [769] W. J. C. da Silva and R. Silva, “Growth of matter per- [754] Maria Giovanna Dainotti, Biagio De Simone, Tiziano turbations in the extended viscous dark energy mod- Schiavone, Giovanni Montani, Enrico Rinaldi, and els,” Eur. Phys. J. C 81, 403 (2021), arXiv:2011.09516 Gaetano Lambiase, “On the Hubble constant tension [astro-ph.CO]. in the SNe Ia Pantheon sample,” Astrophys. J. 912, [770] Wei-Ming Dai, Yin-Zhe Ma, and Hong-Jian He, 150 (2021), arXiv:2103.02117 [astro-ph.CO]. “Reconciling Hubble Constant Discrepancy from Holo- [755] Marcos M. Flores and Alexander Kusenko, “Primordial graphic Dark Energy,” Phys. Rev. D 102, 121302 Black Holes from Long-Range Scalar Forces and Scalar (2020), arXiv:2003.03602 [astro-ph.CO]. Radiative Cooling,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 041101 [771] Aditi Desai, Keith R. Dienes, and Brooks Thomas, (2021), arXiv:2008.12456 [astro-ph.CO]. “Constraining Dark-Matter Ensembles with Super- [756] Michal Artymowski, Ido Ben-Dayan, and Utkarsh nova Data,” Phys. Rev. D 101, 035031 (2020), Kumar, “Emergent dark energy from unparticles,” arXiv:1909.07981 [astro-ph.CO]. (2020), arXiv:2010.02998 [hep-ph]. [772] Micol Benetti, Welber Miranda, Humberto A. Borges, [757] Ram Gopal Vishwakarma, “Resolving Hubble tension Cassio Pigozzo, Saulo Carneiro, and Jailson S. Al- with the Milne model,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 29, caniz, “Looking for interactions in the cosmological 2043025 (2020), arXiv:2011.12146 [physics.gen-ph]. dark sector,” JCAP 12, 023 (2019), arXiv:1908.07213 [758] Asta Heinesen and Thomas Buchert, “Solving the cur- [astro-ph.CO]. vature and Hubble parameter inconsistencies through [773] OzgürAkarsu,¨ Suresh Kumar, Shivani Sharma, and structure formation-induced curvature,” Class. Quant. Luigi Tedesco, “Constraints on a Bianchi type I space- Grav. 37, 164001 (2020), [Erratum: Class.Quant.Grav. time extension of the standard ΛCDM model,” Phys. 37, 229601 (2020)], arXiv:2002.10831 [gr-qc]. Rev. D 100, 023532 (2019), arXiv:1905.06949 [astro- [759] Pedro D. Alvarez, Benjamin Koch, Cristobal Laporte, ph.CO]. and Angel Rincon, “Can scale–dependent cosmology [774] Weiqiang Yang, Supriya Pan, Andronikos Paliathana- alleviate the H0 tension?” (2020), arXiv:2009.02311 sis, Subir Ghosh, and Yabo Wu, “Observational con- [gr-qc]. straints of a new unified dark fluid and the H0 tension,” [760] Lavinia Heisenberg and Hector Villarrubia-Rojo, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 490, 2071–2085 (2019), “Proca in the sky,” JCAP 03, 032 (2021), arXiv:1904.10436 [gr-qc]. arXiv:2010.00513 [astro-ph.CO]. [775] Harry Desmond, Bhuvnesh Jain, and Jeremy Sakstein, [761] Rebecca Briffa, Salvatore Capozziello, Jackson “Local resolution of the Hubble tension: The impact Levi Said, Jurgen Mifsud, and Emmanuel N. of screened fifth forces on the cosmic distance ladder,” Saridakis, “Constraining teleparallel gravity through Phys. Rev. D100, 043537 (2019), arXiv:1907.03778 Gaussian processes,” Class. Quant. Grav. 38, 055007 [astro-ph.CO]. (2020), arXiv:2009.14582 [gr-qc]. [776] Ryan E. Keeley, Shahab Joudaki, Manoj Kaplinghat, [762] Mark Gonzalez, Mark P. Hertzberg, and Fabrizio and David Kirkby, “Implications of a transition in the Rompineve, “Ultralight Scalar Decay and the Hub- dark energy equation of state for the H0 and σ8 ten- ble Tension,” JCAP 10, 028 (2020), arXiv:2006.13959 sions,” JCAP 12, 035 (2019), arXiv:1905.10198 [astro- [astro-ph.CO]. ph.CO]. [763] Rodrigo Calderón, Radouane Gannouji, Benjamin [777] Weiqiang Yang, Supriya Pan, Sunny Vagnozzi, L’Huillier, and David Polarski, “Negative cosmolog- Eleonora Di Valentino, David F. Mota, and Salvatore ical constant in the dark sector?” Phys. Rev. D 103, Capozziello, “Dawn of the dark: unified dark sectors 023526 (2021), arXiv:2008.10237 [astro-ph.CO]. and the EDGES Cosmic Dawn 21-cm signal,” JCAP 83

1911, 044 (2019), arXiv:1907.05344 [astro-ph.CO]. [793] Jose BeltránJiménez,Dario Bettoni, and Philippe [778] Andrzej Hryczuk and Krzysztof Jodlowski, “Self- Brax, “Charged dark matter and the H0 tension,” interacting dark matter from late decays and the Phys. Rev. D 103, 103505 (2021), arXiv:2004.13677 H0 tension,” Phys. Rev. D 102, 043024 (2020), [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:2006.16139 [hep-ph]. [794] Deng Wang, “Can f(R) gravity relieve H0 and σ8 ten- [779] Nikita Blinov and Gustavo Marques-Tavares, “Inter- sions?” (2020), arXiv:2008.03966 [astro-ph.CO]. acting radiation after Planck and its implications [795] Luis A. Anchordoqui, “Hubble Hullabaloo and String for the Hubble Tension,” JCAP 09, 029 (2020), Cosmology,” (2020) arXiv:2005.01217 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:2003.08387 [astro-ph.CO]. [796] Li-Yang Gao, She-Sheng Xue, and Xin Zhang, “Re- [780] Markus R. Mosbech, Celine Boehm, Steen Hannes- lieving the H0 tension with a new interacting dark en- tad, Olga Mena, Julia Stadler, and Yvonne Y. Y. ergy model,” (2021), arXiv:2101.10714 [astro-ph.CO]. Wong, “The full Boltzmann hierarchy for dark matter- [797] Jose Beltran Jimenez, Dario Bettoni, and Philippe massive neutrino interactions,” JCAP 03, 066 (2021), Brax, “Screening away the H0 tension,” Int. J. Mod. arXiv:2011.04206 [astro-ph.CO]. Phys. D 29, 2043010 (2020), arXiv:2007.11029 [gr-qc]. [781] Jose BeltránJiménez,Dario Bettoni, David Figueru- [798] Eoin O´ Colgáin and M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, “A elo, and Florencia A. Teppa Pannia, “On cosmological Holographic Dark Energy Catch-22,” (2021), signatures of baryons-dark energy elastic couplings,” arXiv:2102.09816 [gr-qc]. JCAP 08, 020 (2020), arXiv:2004.14661 [astro-ph.CO]. [799] Osamu Seto and Yo Toda, “Comparing early dark [782] Fernando Arias-Aragon, Enrique Fernandez-Martinez, energy and extra radiation solutions to the Hubble Manuel Gonzalez-Lopez, and Luca Merlo, “Neutrino tension with BBN,” (2021), arXiv:2101.03740 [astro- Masses and Hubble Tension via a Majoron in MFV,” ph.CO]. Eur. Phys. J. C 81, 28 (2021), arXiv:2009.01848 [hep- [800] Miguel Escudero and Samuel J. Witte, “The Hubble ph]. Tension as a Hint of Leptogenesis and Neutrino Mass [783] Gongjun Choi, Motoo Suzuki, and Tsutomu T. Generation,” (2021), arXiv:2103.03249 [hep-ph]. Yanagida, “Degenerate Sub-keV Fermion Dark Matter [801] Micol Benetti, Humberto Borges, Cassio Pigozzo, from a Solution to the Hubble Tension,” Phys. Rev. D Saulo Carneiro, and Jailson Alcaniz, “Dark sector in- 101, 075031 (2020), arXiv:2002.00036 [hep-ph]. teractions and the curvature of the Universe in light of [784] Rocco D’Agostino and Rafael C. Nunes, “Measure- Planck’s 2018 data,” (2021), arXiv:2102.10123 [astro- ments of H0 in modified gravity theories: The role of ph.CO]. lensed quasars in the late-time Universe,” Phys. Rev. D [802] Alexey Boyarsky, Maksym Ovchynnikov, Nashwan 101, 103505 (2020), arXiv:2002.06381 [astro-ph.CO]. Sabti, and Vsevolod Syvolap, “When FIMPs De- [785] W. J. C. da Silva and R. Silva, “Cosmological Pertur- cay into Neutrinos: The Neff Story,” (2021), bations in the Tsallis Holographic Dark Energy Sce- arXiv:2103.09831 [hep-ph]. narios,” (2020), arXiv:2011.09520 [astro-ph.CO]. [803] Emilio Elizalde, Janusz Gluza, and Martiros Khur- [786] Harry Desmond and Jeremy Sakstein, “Screened shudyan, “An approach to cold dark matter deviation fifth forces lower the TRGB-calibrated Hubble con- and the H0 tension problem by using machine learn- stant too,” Phys. Rev. D 102, 023007 (2020), ing,” (2021), arXiv:2104.01077 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:2003.12876 [astro-ph.CO]. [804] Guo-yuan Huang and Werner Rodejohann, “Solving [787] Maria Archidiacono, Stefano Gariazzo, Carlo Giunti, the Hubble tension without spoiling Big Bang Nucle- Steen Hannestad, and Thomas Tram, “Sterile neu- osynthesis,” (2021), arXiv:2102.04280 [hep-ph]. trino self-interactions: H0 tension and short-baseline [805] Xin Ren, Thomas Hong Tsun Wong, Yi-Fu Cai, anomalies,” JCAP 12, 029 (2020), arXiv:2006.12885 and Emmanuel N. Saridakis, “Data-driven Recon- [astro-ph.CO]. struction of the Late-time Cosmic Acceleration with [788] Tal Abadi and Ely D. Kovetz, “Can conformally cou- f(T) Gravity,” Phys. Dark Univ. 32, 100812 (2021), pled modified gravity solve the Hubble tension?” Phys. arXiv:2103.01260 [astro-ph.CO]. Rev. D 103, 023530 (2021), arXiv:2011.13853 [astro- [806] Leo Wh Fung, Lingfeng Li, Tao Liu, Hoang Nhan Luu, ph.CO]. Yu-Cheng Qiu, and S. H Henry Tye, “Axi-Higgs Cos- [789] H. B. Benaoum, Weiqiang Yang, Supriya Pan, and mology,” (2021), arXiv:2102.11257 [hep-ph]. Eleonora Di Valentino, “Modified Emergent Dark [807] Llibert ArestéSaló,David Benisty, Eduardo I. Guen- Energy and its Astronomical Constraints,” (2020), delman, and Jaime d. Haro, “Quintessential Inflation arXiv:2008.09098 [gr-qc]. and Cosmological See-Saw Mechanism: Reheating and [790] N. M. Jiménez Cruz and Celia Escamilla-Rivera, Observational Constraints,” (2021), arXiv:2102.09514 “Late-time and Big Bang Nucleosynthesis constraints [astro-ph.CO]. for generic modified gravity surveys,” Eur. Phys. J. [808] V. G. Gurzadyan and A. Stepanian, “Hubble tension Plus 136, 51 (2021), arXiv:2011.09623 [gr-qc]. vs two flows,” Eur. Phys. J. Plus 136, 235 (2021), [791] Abdolali Banihashemi, Nima Khosravi, and Ar- arXiv:2102.10100 [gr-qc]. man Shafieloo, “Dark Energy as a Critical Phe- [809] Vivian I. Sabla and Robert R. Caldwell, “No H0 assis- nomenon: a Resolution for Hubble Tension,” (2020), tance from assisted quintessence,” Phys. Rev. D 103, arXiv:2012.01407 [astro-ph.CO]. 103506 (2021), arXiv:2103.04999 [astro-ph.CO]. [792] Sergei D. Odintsov, Diego Sáez-ChillónGómez, and [810] Gen Ye, Bin Hu, and Yun-Song Piao, “Implication of German S. Sharov, “Analyzing the H0 tension in F (R) the Hubble tension for primordial Universe in light of gravity models,” Nucl. Phys. B 966, 115377 (2021), recent cosmological data,” (2021), arXiv:2103.09729 arXiv:2011.03957 [gr-qc]. [astro-ph.CO]. 84

[811] Deng Wang and David Mota, “4D Gauss–Bonnet grav- [827] M. Costanzi et al. (DES, SPT), “Cosmological con- ity: Cosmological constraints, H0 tension and large straints from DES Y1 cluster abundances and SPT scale structure,” Phys. Dark Univ. 32, 100813 (2021), multiwavelength data,” Phys. Rev. D 103, 043522 arXiv:2103.12358 [astro-ph.CO]. (2021), arXiv:2010.13800 [astro-ph.CO]. [812] Francesca Gerardi, Stephen M. Feeney, and Justin [828] Bryan Sagredo, Savvas Nesseris, and Domenico Alsing, “Unbiased likelihood-free inference of the Hub- Sapone, “Internal Robustness of Growth Rate data,” ble constant from light standard sirens,” (2021), Phys. Rev. D 98, 083543 (2018), arXiv:1806.10822 arXiv:2104.02728 [astro-ph.CO]. [astro-ph.CO]. [813] Osamu Seto and Yo Toda, “Hubble tension in lep- [829] Leandros Perivolaropoulos and Lavrentios ton asymmetric cosmology with an extra radiation,” Kazantzidis, “Hints of modified gravity in cos- (2021), arXiv:2104.04381 [astro-ph.CO]. mos and in the lab?” Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 28, [814] Hermano Velten, Ingrid Costa, and Winfried Zim- 1942001 (2019), arXiv:1904.09462 [gr-qc]. dahl, “Early-time thermalization of cosmic compo- [830] Rubén Arjona, Juan Garc´ıa-Bellido, and Savvas nents? A hint for solving cosmic tensions,” (2021), Nesseris, “Cosmological constraints on nonadiabatic arXiv:2104.05352 [astro-ph.CO]. dark energy perturbations,” Phys. Rev. D 102, 103526 [815] Itamar J. Allali, Mark P. Hertzberg, and Fabrizio (2020), arXiv:2006.01762 [astro-ph.CO]. Rompineve, “A Dark Sector to Restore Cosmologi- [831] Shinji Tsujikawa, “Possibility of realizing weak gravity cal Concordance,” (2021), arXiv:2104.12798 [astro- in redshift space distortion measurements,” Phys. Rev. ph.CO]. D 92, 044029 (2015), arXiv:1505.02459 [astro-ph.CO]. [816] Alex Hall, “Cosmology from weak lensing alone [832] Radouane Gannouji, Leandros Perivolaropoulos, and implications for the Hubble tension,” (2021), David Polarski, and Foteini Skara, “Weak gravity arXiv:2104.12880 [astro-ph.CO]. on a ΛCDM background,” Phys. Rev. D 103, 063509 [817] Zhihuan Zhou, Gang Liu, and Lixin Xu, “Can late (2021), arXiv:2011.01517 [gr-qc]. dark energy restore the Cosmic concordance?” (2021), [833] Marika Asgari et al. (KiDS), “KiDS-1000 Cosmology: arXiv:2105.04258 [astro-ph.CO]. Cosmic shear constraints and comparison between two [818] Marika Asgari et al., “KiDS+VIKING-450 and DES- point statistics,” Astron. Astrophys. 645, A104 (2021), Y1 combined: Mitigating baryon feedback uncertainty arXiv:2007.15633 [astro-ph.CO]. with COSEBIs,” Astron. Astrophys. 634, A127 (2020), [834] S. Joudaki et al., “KiDS+VIKING-450 and DES-Y1 arXiv:1910.05336 [astro-ph.CO]. combined: Cosmology with cosmic shear,” Astron. [819] F. Köhlinger et al., “KiDS-450: The tomographic weak Astrophys. 638, L1 (2020), arXiv:1906.09262 [astro- lensing power spectrum and constraints on cosmolog- ph.CO]. ical parameters,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 471, [835] Angus H. Wright, Hendrik Hildebrandt, Jan Luca 4412–4435 (2017), arXiv:1706.02892 [astro-ph.CO]. van den Busch, Catherine Heymans, Benjamin [820] H. Hildebrandt et al., “KiDS-450: Cosmological pa- Joachimi, Arun Kannawadi, and Konrad Kuijken, rameter constraints from tomographic weak gravita- “KiDS+VIKING-450: Improved cosmological param- tional lensing,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 465, 1454 eter constraints from redshift calibration with self- (2017), arXiv:1606.05338 [astro-ph.CO]. organising maps,” Astron. Astrophys. 640, L14 (2020), [821] T.M.C. Abbott et al. (DES), “Dark Energy Survey arXiv:2005.04207 [astro-ph.CO]. Year 1 Results: Cosmological constraints from clus- [836] H. Hildebrandt et al., “KiDS+VIKING-450: Cosmic ter abundances and weak lensing,” Phys. Rev. D 102, shear tomography with optical and infrared data,” As- 023509 (2020), arXiv:2002.11124 [astro-ph.CO]. tron. Astrophys. 633, A69 (2020), arXiv:1812.06076 [822] David Rapetti, Steven W. Allen, Adam Mantz, and [astro-ph.CO]. Harald Ebeling, “Constraints on modified gravity from [837] T. Hamana et al., “Cosmological constraints from the observed X-ray luminosity function of galaxy clus- cosmic shear two-point correlation functions with ters,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 400, 699 (2009), HSC survey first-year data,” Publ. Astron. Soc. arXiv:0812.2259 [astro-ph]. Jap. 72, Publications of the Astronomical Society [823] Eduardo Rozo et al. (DSDD), “Cosmological Con- of Japan, Volume 72, Issue 1, February 2020, 16, straints from the SDSS maxBCG Cluster Catalog,” arXiv:1906.06041 [astro-ph.CO]. Astrophys. J. 708, 645–660 (2010), arXiv:0902.3702 [838] Chiaki Hikage et al. (HSC), “Cosmology from cosmic [astro-ph.CO]. shear power spectra with Subaru Hyper Suprime-Cam [824] Adam Mantz, Steven W. Allen, David Rapetti, and first-year data,” Publ. Astron. Soc. Jap. 71, Publica- Harald Ebeling, “The Observed Growth of Massive tions of the Astronomical Society of Japan, Volume Galaxy Clusters I: Statistical Methods and Cosmolog- 71, Issue 2, April 2019, 43, arXiv:1809.09148 [astro- ical Constraints,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 406, ph.CO]. 1759–1772 (2010), arXiv:0909.3098 [astro-ph.CO]. [839] Adam B. Mantz et al., “Weighing the giants – IV. Cos- [825] P.A.R. Ade et al. (Planck), “Planck 2015 re- mology and neutrino mass,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. sults. XXIV. Cosmology from Sunyaev-Zeldovich clus- Soc. 446, 2205–2225 (2015), arXiv:1407.4516 [astro- ter counts,” Astron. Astrophys. 594, A24 (2016), ph.CO]. arXiv:1502.01597 [astro-ph.CO]. [840] Laura Salvati, Marian Douspis, and Nabila Aghanim, [826] M. Costanzi et al. (DES), “Methods for cluster cos- “Constraints from thermal Sunyaev-Zel’dovich cluster mology and application to the SDSS in preparation for counts and power spectrum combined with CMB,” As- DES Year 1 release,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 488, tron. Astrophys. 614, A13 (2018), arXiv:1708.00697 4779–4800 (2019), arXiv:1810.09456 [astro-ph.CO]. [astro-ph.CO]. 85

[841] S. Bocquet et al. (SPT), “Cluster Cosmology Con- Field,” Astrophys. J. 807, 22 (2015), arXiv:1504.06974 straints from the 2500 deg2 SPT-SZ Survey: Inclu- [astro-ph.CO]. sion of Weak Gravitational Lensing Data from Mag- [858] Hiroaki Aihara et al., “First Data Release of the Hyper ellan and the Hubble Space Telescope,” Astrophys. J. Suprime-Cam Subaru Strategic Program,” Publ. As- 878, 55 (2019), arXiv:1812.01679 [astro-ph.CO]. tron. Soc. Jap. 70, S8 (2018), arXiv:1702.08449 [astro- [842] F. Pacaud et al. (XXL), “The XXL Survey: XXV. Cos- ph.IM]. mological analysis of the C1 cluster number counts,” [859] T. Abbott et al. (DES), “The dark energy survey,” Astron. Astrophys. 620, A10 (2018), arXiv:1810.01624 (2005), arXiv:astro-ph/0510346. [astro-ph.CO]. [860] M. Jarvis et al. (DES), “The DES Science Verifica- [843] David Benisty, “Quantifying the S8 tension with the tion Weak Lensing Shear Catalogues,” Mon. Not. Roy. Redshift Space Distortion data set,” Phys. Dark Univ. Astron. Soc. 460, 2245–2281 (2016), arXiv:1507.05603 31, 100766 (2021), arXiv:2005.03751 [astro-ph.CO]. [astro-ph.IM]. [844] Matthias Bartelmann and Peter Schneider, “Weak [861] Catherine Heymans et al., “CFHTLenS: The Canada- gravitational lensing,” Phys. Rept. 340, 291–472 France-Hawaii Telescope Lensing Survey,” Mon. Not. (2001), arXiv:astro-ph/9912508 [astro-ph]. Roy. Astron. Soc. 427, 146 (2012), arXiv:1210.0032 [845] Martin Kilbinger, “Cosmology with cosmic shear ob- [astro-ph.CO]. servations: a review,” Rept. Prog. Phys. 78, 086901 [862] H. Hildebrandt et al., “CFHTLenS: Improving the (2015), arXiv:1411.0115 [astro-ph.CO]. quality of photometric redshifts with precision pho- [846] Rachel Mandelbaum, “Weak lensing for precision cos- tometry,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 421, 2355 mology,” Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 56, 393–433 (2012), arXiv:1111.4434 [astro-ph.CO]. (2018), arXiv:1710.03235 [astro-ph.CO]. [863] T. Erben et al., “CFHTLenS: The Canada-France- [847] David J. Bacon, Alexandre R. Refregier, and Hawaii Telescope Lensing Survey - Imaging Data and Richard S. Ellis, “Detection of weak gravitational lens- Catalogue Products,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. ing by large-scale structure,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. 433, 2545 (2013), arXiv:1210.8156 [astro-ph.CO]. Soc. 318, 625 (2000), arXiv:astro-ph/0003008. [864] Catherine Heymans et al., “CFHTLenS tomographic [848] Nick Kaiser, Gillian Wilson, and Gerard A. Luppino, weak lensing cosmological parameter constraints: Mit- “Large scale cosmic shear measurements,” (2000), igating the impact of intrinsic galaxy alignments,” arXiv:astro-ph/0003338. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 432, 2433 (2013), [849] David M. Wittman, J. Anthony Tyson, David Kirk- arXiv:1303.1808 [astro-ph.CO]. man, Ian Dell’Antonio, and Gary Bernstein, “Detec- [865] L. Miller et al., “Bayesian Galaxy Shape Measure- tion of weak gravitational lensing distortions of distant ment for Weak Lensing Surveys - III. Application to galaxies by cosmic dark matter at large scales,” Nature the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope Lensing Survey,” 405, 143–149 (2000), arXiv:astro-ph/0003014. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 429, 2858–2880 (2013), [850] Ludovic van Waerbeke et al., “Detection of corre- arXiv:1210.8201 [astro-ph.CO]. lated galaxy ellipticities on CFHT data: First evidence [866] M. Arnaboldi, M. J. Neeser, L. C. Parker, P. Rosati, for gravitational lensing by large scale structures,” M. Lombardi, J. P. Dietrich, and W. Hummel, “ESO Astron. Astrophys. 358, 30–44 (2000), arXiv:astro- Public Surveys with the VST and VISTA,” The Mes- ph/0002500. senger 127, 28 (2007). [851] Tereasa G. Brainerd, Roger D. Blandford, and Ian [867] P. Lemos et al. (DES), “Assessing tension metrics Smail, “Measuring galaxy masses using galaxy - galaxy with Dark Energy Survey and Planck data,” (2020), gravitational lensing,” Astrophys. J. 466, 623 (1996), arXiv:2012.09554 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:astro-ph/9503073. [868] K. Kuijken et al., “The fourth data release of the Kilo- [852] Michael J. Hudson, Stephen D. J. Gwyn, Haakon Degree Survey: ugri imaging and nine-band optical-IR Dahle, and Nick Kaiser, “Galaxy-galaxy lensing in the photometry over 1000 square degrees,” Astron. Astro- Hubble Deep Field: The Halo Tully-Fisher relation at phys. 625, A2 (2019), arXiv:1902.11265 [astro-ph.GA]. intermediate redshift,” Astrophys. J. 503, 531 (1998), [869] E. Hivon, K. M. Gorski, C. B. Netterfield, B. P. Crill, arXiv:astro-ph/9711341. S. Prunet, and F. Hansen, “Master of the cosmic mi- [853] Jelte T. A. de Jong, Gijs A. Verdoes Kleijn, Kon- crowave background anisotropy power spectrum: a fast rad H. Kuijken, and Edwin A. Valentijn (Astro-WISE, method for statistical analysis of large and complex KiDS), “The Kilo-Degree Survey,” Exper. Astron. 35, cosmic microwave background data sets,” Astrophys. 25–44 (2013), arXiv:1206.1254 [astro-ph.CO]. J. 567, 2 (2002), arXiv:astro-ph/0105302. [854] Jelte T. A. de Jong et al., “The first and second data re- [870] David Alonso, Javier Sanchez, and AnˇzeSlosar (LSST leases of the Kilo-Degree Survey,” Astron. Astrophys. Dark Energy Science), “A unified pseudo-C` frame- 582, A62 (2015), arXiv:1507.00742 [astro-ph.CO]. work,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 484, 4127–4151 [855] J. T. A. de Jong et al., “The third data release of the (2019), arXiv:1809.09603 [astro-ph.CO]. Kilo-Degree Survey and associated data products,” As- [871] August E. Evrard, “Biased Cold Dark Matter Theory: tron. Astrophys. 604, A134 (2017), arXiv:1703.02991 Trouble from Rich Clusters?” Astroph. J. 341, L71 [astro-ph.GA]. (1989). [856] Konrad Kuijken et al., “Gravitational Lensing Analysis [872] P. J. E. Peebles, R. A. Daly, and R. Juszkiewicz, “The of the Kilo Degree Survey,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Masses of Rich Clusters of Galaxies as a Test of the Soc. 454, 3500–3532 (2015), arXiv:1507.00738 [astro- Biased Cold Dark Matter Theory,” Astroph. J. 347, ph.CO]. 563 (1989). [857] Satoshi Miyazaki et al., “Properties of Weak Lensing [873] Steven W. Allen, August E. Evrard, and Adam B. Clusters Detected on Hyper Suprime-Cam’s 2.3 deg2 Mantz, “Cosmological Parameters from Observations 86

of Galaxy Clusters,” Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 49, [893] L.E. Bleem et al. (SPT, DES), “The SPTpol Extended 409–470 (2011), arXiv:1103.4829 [astro-ph.CO]. Cluster Survey,” Astrophys. J. Suppl. 247, 25 (2020), [874] Andrey Kravtsov and Stefano Borgani, “Formation of arXiv:1910.04121 [astro-ph.CO]. Galaxy Clusters,” Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 50, [894] William H. Press and Paul Schechter, “Formation of 353–409 (2012), arXiv:1205.5556 [astro-ph.CO]. galaxies and clusters of galaxies by selfsimilar grav- [875] https://www.cosmos.esa.int/web/planck. itational condensation,” Astrophys. J. 187, 425–438 [876] https://pole.uchicago.edu. (1974). [877] R.A. Sunyaev and Ya.B. Zeldovich, “The Interaction of [895] A. Jenkins, C.S. Frenk, Simon D.M. White, J.M. Col- matter and radiation in the hot model of the universe,” berg, S. Cole, August E. Evrard, H.M.P. Couchman, Astrophys. Space Sci. 7, 20–30 (1970). and N. Yoshida, “The Mass function of dark matter [878] R.A. Sunyaev and Ya.B. Zeldovich, “The Observations halos,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 321, 372 (2001), of relic radiation as a test of the nature of X-Ray radi- arXiv:astro-ph/0005260. ation from the clusters of galaxies,” Comments Astro- [896] Martin J. White, “The Mass function,” Astrophys. J. phys. Space Phys. 4, 173–178 (1972). Suppl. 143, 241 (2002), arXiv:astro-ph/0207185. [879] R. A. Sunyaev and Ya. B. Zeldovich, “Microwave back- [897] Michael S. Warren, Kevork Abazajian, Daniel E. Holz, ground radiation as a probe of the contemporary struc- and Luis Teodoro, “Precision determination of the ture and history of the universe,” Ann. Rev. Astron. mass function of dark matter halos,” Astrophys. J. Astrophys. 18, 537–560 (1980). 646, 881–885 (2006), arXiv:astro-ph/0506395. [880] Mark Birkinshaw, “The Sunyaev-Zel’dovich ef- [898] Jeremy L. Tinker, Andrey V. Kravtsov, Anatoly fect,” Phys. Rept. 310, 97–195 (1999), arXiv:astro- Klypin, Kevork Abazajian, Michael S. Warren, Gus- ph/9808050. tavo Yepes, Stefan Gottlober, and Daniel E. Holz, [881] John E. Carlstrom, Gilbert P. Holder, and Erik D. “Toward a halo mass function for precision cosmology: Reese, “Cosmology with the Sunyaev-Zel’dovich ef- The Limits of universality,” Astrophys. J. 688, 709– fect,” Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 40, 643–680 728 (2008), arXiv:0803.2706 [astro-ph]. (2002), arXiv:astro-ph/0208192. [899] https://cluster-toolkit.readthedocs.io/en/ [882] Tony Mroczkowski et al., “Astrophysics with the Spa- latest/source/massfunction.html. tially and Spectrally Resolved Sunyaev-Zeldovich Ef- [900] Martin Kilbinger et al., “CFHTLenS: Combined probe fects: A Millimetre/Submillimetre Probe of the Warm cosmological model comparison using 2D weak gravi- and Hot Universe,” Space Sci. Rev. 215, 17 (2019), tational lensing,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 430, arXiv:1811.02310 [astro-ph.CO]. 2200–2220 (2013), arXiv:1212.3338 [astro-ph.CO]. [883] https://www.mpe.mpg.de/eROSITA. [901] Anja von der Linden et al., “Weighing the Giants – [884] Peter Predehl et al., “eROSITA on SRG,” Proc. I. Weak-lensing masses for 51 massive galaxy clus- SPIE Int. Soc. Opt. Eng. 7732, 77320U (2010), ters: project overview, data analysis methods and clus- arXiv:1001.2502 [astro-ph.CO]. ter images,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 439, 2–27 [885] A. Merloni et al. (eROSITA), “eROSITA Science Book: (2014), arXiv:1208.0597 [astro-ph.CO]. Mapping the Structure of the Energetic Universe,” [902] Douglas E. Applegate, Anja von der Linden, Patrick L. (2012), arXiv:1209.3114 [astro-ph.HE]. Kelly, Mark T. Allen, Steven W. Allen, Patricia R. [886] Annalisa Pillepich, Cristiano Porciani, and Thomas H. Burchat, David L. Burke, Harald Ebeling, Adam Reiprich, “The X-ray cluster survey with eROSITA: Mantz, and R. Glenn Morris, “Weighing the Giants forecasts for cosmology, cluster physics, and primordial – III. Methods and measurements of accurate galaxy non-Gaussianity,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 422, cluster weak-lensing masses,” Mon. Not. Roy. As- 44–69 (2012), arXiv:1111.6587 [astro-ph.CO]. tron. Soc. 439, 48–72 (2014), arXiv:1208.0605 [astro- [887] F. Hofmann, J. S. Sanders, N. Clerc, K. Nandra, ph.CO]. J. Ridl, K. Dennerl, M. Ramos-Ceja, A. Finoguenov, [903] Joachim Truemper, “ROSAT-A New Look at the X- and T. H. Reiprich, “eROSITA cluster cosmology fore- ray Sky,” Science 260, 1769–1771 (1993). casts: cluster temperature substructure bias,” Astron. [904] M. Pierre et al., “The XXL Survey - I. Scientific mo- Astrophys. 606, A118 (2017), arXiv:1708.05205 [astro- tivations − XMM-Newton observing plan − Follow- ph.CO]. up observations and simulation programme,” Astron. [888] https://www.sdss.org/. Astrophys. 592, A1 (2016), arXiv:1512.04317 [astro- [889] https://www.darkenergysurvey.org. ph.CO]. [890] Matthew Hasselfield et al., “The Atacama Cosmology [905] T. de Haan et al. (SPT), “Cosmological Constraints Telescope: Sunyaev-Zel’dovich selected galaxyclusters from Galaxy Clusters in the 2500 square-degree at 148 GHz from three seasons of data,” JCAP 07, 008 SPT-SZ Survey,” Astrophys. J. 832, 95 (2016), (2013), arXiv:1301.0816 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:1603.06522 [astro-ph.CO]. [891] L. E. Bleem et al. (SPT), “Galaxy Clusters Discovered [906] Mohamed H. Abdullah, Anatoly Klypin, and Gillian via the Sunyaev-Zel’dovich Effect in the 2500-square- Wilson, “Cosmological Constraints on Ωm and σ8 from degree SPT-SZ survey,” Astrophys. J. Suppl. 216, 27 Cluster Abundances Using the GalWCat19 Optical- (2015), arXiv:1409.0850 [astro-ph.CO]. spectroscopic SDSS Catalog,” Astrophys. J. 901, 90 [892] M. Klein et al. (DES), “A multicomponent matched (2020), arXiv:2002.11907 [astro-ph.CO]. filter cluster confirmation tool for eROSITA: initial [907] Matthew Kirby, Eduardo Rozo, R. Glenn Morris, application to the RASS and DES-SV data sets,” Steven W. Allen, Matteo Costanzi, Tesla E. Jeltema, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 474, 3324–3343 (2018), Adam B. Mantz, A. Kathy Romer, E. S. Rykoff, arXiv:1706.06577 [astro-ph.CO]. and Anja von der Linden, “Improved Cosmological Constraints from SDSS redMaPPer Clusters via X- 87

ray Follow-up of a Complete Subsample of Systems,” [924] L. Guzzo et al., “A test of the nature of cosmic accel- (2019), arXiv:1910.13548 [astro-ph.CO]. eration using galaxy redshift distortions,” Nature 451, [908] G. Schellenberger and T. H. Reiprich, “HICOSMO: 541–545 (2008), arXiv:0802.1944 [astro-ph]. cosmology with a complete sample of galaxy clusters [925] Lado Samushia, Will J. Percival, and Alvise Rac- – II. Cosmological results,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. canelli, “Interpreting large-scale redshift-space distor- Soc. 471, 1370–1389 (2017), arXiv:1705.05843 [astro- tion measurements,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 420, ph.CO]. 2102–2119 (2012), arXiv:1102.1014 [astro-ph.CO]. [909] Michelle Ntampaka, Ken Rines, and Hy Trac, “Cluster [926] Beth A. Reid et al., “The clustering of galaxies in Cosmology with the Velocity Distribution Function of the SDSS-III Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Sur- the HeCS-SZ Sample,” Astrophys. J. 880, 154 (2019), vey: measurements of the growth of structure and arXiv:1906.07729 [astro-ph.CO]. expansion rate at z=0.57 from anisotropic cluster- [910] ÍñigoZubeldia and Anthony Challinor, “Cosmologi- ing,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 426, 2719 (2012), cal constraints from Planck galaxy clusters with CMB arXiv:1203.6641 [astro-ph.CO]. lensing mass bias calibration,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. [927] Rita Tojeiro et al., “The clustering of galaxies in Soc. 489, 401–419 (2019), arXiv:1904.07887 [astro- the SDSS-III Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Sur- ph.CO]. vey: measuring structure growth using passive galax- [911] N. Kaiser, “Clustering in real space and in redshift ies,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 424, 2339 (2012), space,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 227, 1–27 (1987). arXiv:1203.6565 [astro-ph.CO]. [912] A. J. S. Hamilton, “Measuring Omega and the real [928] Chia-Hsun Chuang et al., “The clustering of galaxies correlation function from the redshift correlation func- in the SDSS-III Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Sur- tion,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 385, L5–L8 (1992). vey: single-probe measurements and the strong power [913] A. J. S. Hamilton, “Linear redshift distortions: A Re- of normalized growth rate on constraining dark en- view,” in Ringberg Workshop on Large Scale Structure ergy,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 433, 3559 (2013), (1997) arXiv:astro-ph/9708102. arXiv:1303.4486 [astro-ph.CO]. [914] Li-Min Wang and Paul J. Steinhardt, “Cluster abun- [929] Cullan Howlett, Ashley Ross, Lado Samushia, Will dance constraints on quintessence models,” Astrophys. Percival, and Marc Manera, “The clustering of the J. 508, 483–490 (1998), arXiv:astro-ph/9804015. SDSS main galaxy sample – II. Mock galaxy catalogues [915] Eric V. Linder, “Cosmic growth history and expansion and a measurement of the growth of structure from history,” Phys. Rev. D 72, 043529 (2005), arXiv:astro- redshift space distortions at z = 0.15,” Mon. Not. Roy. ph/0507263. Astron. Soc. 449, 848–866 (2015), arXiv:1409.3238 [916] David Polarski and Radouane Gannouji, “On the [astro-ph.CO]. growth of linear perturbations,” Phys. Lett. B 660, [930] Chris Blake et al., “The WiggleZ Dark Energy Sur- 439–443 (2008), arXiv:0710.1510 [astro-ph]. vey: the growth rate of cosmic structure since redshift [917] Ofer Lahav, Per B. Lilje, Joel R. Primack, and Mar- z=0.9,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 415, 2876 (2011), tin J. Rees, “Dynamical effects of the cosmological arXiv:1104.2948 [astro-ph.CO]. constant,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 251, 128–136 [931] Andrew Johnson et al., “The 6dF Galaxy Survey: cos- (1991). mological constraints from the velocity power spec- [918] Savvas Nesseris and Domenico Sapone, “Accuracy trum,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 444, 3926–3947 of the growth index in the presence of dark en- (2014), arXiv:1404.3799 [astro-ph.CO]. ergy perturbations,” Phys. Rev. D 92, 023013 (2015), [932] Fergus Simpson, Chris Blake, John A. Peacock, Ivan arXiv:1505.06601 [astro-ph.CO]. Baldry, Joss Bland-Hawthorn, Alan Heavens, Cather- [919] Spyros Basilakos and Savvas Nesseris, “Testing Ein- ine Heymans, Jon Loveday, and Peder Norberg, stein’s gravity and dark energy with growth of mat- “Galaxy and mass assembly: Redshift space distor- ter perturbations: Indications for new physics?” Phys. tions from the clipped galaxy field,” Phys. Rev. D 93, Rev. D 94, 123525 (2016), arXiv:1610.00160 [astro- 023525 (2016), arXiv:1505.03865 [astro-ph.CO]. ph.CO]. [933] Martin White, Beth Reid, Chia-Hsun Chuang, [920] L. Kazantzidis, L. Perivolaropoulos, and F. Skara, Jeremy L. Tinker, Cameron K. McBride, Francisco “Constraining power of cosmological observables: Prada, and Lado Samushia, “Tests of redshift-space blind redshift spots and optimal ranges,” Phys. Rev. distortions models in configuration space for the analy- D 99, 063537 (2019), arXiv:1812.05356 [astro-ph.CO]. sis of the BOSS final data release,” Mon. Not. Roy. As- [921] Wilmar Cardona, RubénArjona, Alejandro Estrada, tron. Soc. 447, 234–245 (2015), arXiv:1408.5435 [astro- and Savvas Nesseris, “Cosmological constraints with ph.CO]. the Effective Fluid approach for Modified Gravity,” [934] Zhigang Li, Y.P. Jing, Pengjie Zhang, and Da- (2020), arXiv:2012.05282 [astro-ph.CO]. long Cheng, “Measurement of Redshift-Space Power [922] John A. Peacock et al., “A Measurement of the cos- Spectrum for BOSS galaxies and the Growth Rate mological mass density from clustering in the 2dF at redshift 0.57,” Astrophys. J. 833, 287 (2016), Galaxy Redshift Survey,” Nature 410, 169–173 (2001), arXiv:1609.03697 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:astro-ph/0103143. [935] HéctorGil-Mar´ın,Will J. Percival, Licia Verde, Joel R. [923] Ed Hawkins et al., “The 2dF Galaxy Redshift Survey: Brownstein, Chia-Hsun Chuang, Francisco-Shu Ki- Correlation functions, peculiar velocities and the mat- taura, Sergio A. Rodr´ıguez-Torres, and Matthew D. ter density of the universe,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Olmstead, “The clustering of galaxies in the SDSS-III Soc. 346, 78 (2003), arXiv:astro-ph/0212375. Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: RSD measurement from the power spectrum and bispectrum of the DR12 BOSS galaxies,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. 88

Soc. 465, 1757–1788 (2017), arXiv:1606.00439 [astro- [946] Amir Aghamousa et al. (DESI), “The DESI Experi- ph.CO]. ment Part I: Science,Targeting, and Survey Design,” [936] Teppei Okumura et al., “The Subaru FMOS galaxy (2016), arXiv:1611.00036 [astro-ph.IM]. redshift survey (FastSound). IV. New constraint on [947] Amir Aghamousa et al. (DESI), “The DESI Ex- gravity theory from redshift space distortions at periment Part II: Instrument Design,” (2016), z ∼ 1.4,” Publ. Astron. Soc. Jap. 68, 38 (2016), arXiv:1611.00037 [astro-ph.IM]. arXiv:1511.08083 [astro-ph.CO]. [948] Mustapha Ishak, “Testing General Relativity [937] S. de la Torre et al., “The VIMOS Public Extra- in Cosmology,” Living Rev. Rel. 22, 1 (2019), galactic Redshift Survey (VIPERS). Galaxy cluster- arXiv:1806.10122 [astro-ph.CO]. ing and redshift-space distortions at z=0.8 in the first [949] Eric V. Linder, “Exploring the expansion history of data release,” Astron. Astrophys. 557, A54 (2013), the universe,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 091301 (2003), arXiv:1303.2622 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:astro-ph/0208512 [astro-ph]. [938] A. Pezzotta et al., “The VIMOS Public Extragalac- [950] Asantha R. Cooray and Dragan Huterer, “Gravita- tic Redshift Survey (VIPERS): The growth of struc- tional lensing as a probe of quintessence,” Astrophys. ture at 0.5 < z < 1.2 from redshift-space distortions J. Lett. 513, L95–L98 (1999), arXiv:astro-ph/9901097. in the clustering of the PDR-2 final sample,” Astron. [951] G. Efstathiou, “Constraining the equation of state of Astrophys. 604, A33 (2017), arXiv:1612.05645 [astro- the universe from distant type Ia supernovae and cos- ph.CO]. mic microwave background anisotropies,” Mon. Not. [939] F. G. Mohammad et al., “The VIMOS Public Extra- Roy. Astron. Soc. 310, 842–850 (1999), arXiv:astro- galactic Redshift Survey (VIPERS): Unbiased cluster- ph/9904356. ing estimate with VIPERS slit assignment,” Astron. [952] Pierre Astier, “Can luminosity distance measurements Astrophys. 619, A17 (2018), arXiv:1807.05999 [astro- probe the equation of state of dark energy,” Phys. Lett. ph.CO]. B 500, 8–15 (2001), arXiv:astro-ph/0008306. [940] Gong-Bo Zhao et al., “The clustering of the SDSS- [953] Michel Chevallier and David Polarski, “Accelerating IV extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey universes with scaling dark matter,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. DR14 quasar sample: a tomographic measurement D10, 213–224 (2001), arXiv:gr-qc/0009008 [gr-qc]. of cosmic structure growth and expansion rate based [954] Jochen Weller and Andreas Albrecht, “Future super- on optimal redshift weights,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. novae observations as a probe of dark energy,” Phys. Soc. 482, 3497–3513 (2019), arXiv:1801.03043 [astro- Rev. D 65, 103512 (2002), arXiv:astro-ph/0106079. ph.CO]. [955] Bo Feng, Mingzhe Li, Yun-Song Piao, and Xinmin [941] Amélie Tamone et al., “The Completed SDSS- Zhang, “Oscillating quintom and the recurrent uni- IV extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Sur- verse,” Phys. Lett. B 634, 101–105 (2006), arXiv:astro- vey: Growth rate of structure measurement from ph/0407432. anisotropic clustering analysis in configuration space [956] S. Nesseris and Leandros Perivolaropoulos, “Compari- between redshift 0.6 and 1.1 for the Emission Line son of the legacy and gold snia dataset constraints on Galaxy sample,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 499, dark energy models,” Phys. Rev. D 72, 123519 (2005), 5527–5546 (2020), arXiv:2007.09009 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:astro-ph/0511040. [942] Cheng Zhao et al., “The Completed SDSS-IV extended [957] Harvinder Kaur Jassal, J. S. Bagla, and T. Padmanab- Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: one thou- han, “Observational constraints on low redshift evolu- sand multi-tracer mock catalogues with redshift evo- tion of dark energy: How consistent are different obser- lution and systematics for galaxies and quasars of the vations?” Phys. Rev. D 72, 103503 (2005), arXiv:astro- final data release,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 503, ph/0506748. 1149–1173 (2021), arXiv:2007.08997 [astro-ph.CO]. [958] E. M. Barboza, Jr. and J. S. Alcaniz, “A parametric [943] Julian E. Bautista et al., “The Completed SDSS- model for dark energy,” Phys. Lett. B 666, 415–419 IV extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Sur- (2008), arXiv:0805.1713 [astro-ph]. vey: measurement of the BAO and growth rate of [959] Weiqiang Yang, Rafael C. Nunes, Supriya Pan, and structure of the luminous red galaxy sample from the David F. Mota, “Effects of neutrino mass hierarchies anisotropic correlation function between redshifts 0.6 on dynamical dark energy models,” Phys. Rev. D 95, and 1,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 500, 736–762 103522 (2017), arXiv:1703.02556 [astro-ph.CO]. (2020), arXiv:2007.08993 [astro-ph.CO]. [960] Fulvio Melia, “The Linear Growth of Structure in the [944] Gong-Bo Zhao et al., “The Completed SDSS-IV ex- R h=ct Universe,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 464, tended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: a 1966–1976 (2017), arXiv:1609.08576 [astro-ph.CO]. multi-tracer analysis in Fourier space for measuring [961] Weiqiang Yang, Supriya Pan, and Andronikos the cosmic structure growth and expansion rate,” Paliathanasis, “Latest astronomical constraints on (2020), 10.1093/mnras/stab849, arXiv:2007.09011 some non-linear parametric dark energy models,” [astro-ph.CO]. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 475, 2605–2613 (2018), [945] Arnaud de Mattia et al., “The Completed SDSS- arXiv:1708.01717 [gr-qc]. IV extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Sur- [962] Supriya Pan, Emmanuel N. Saridakis, and Weiqiang vey: measurement of the BAO and growth rate of Yang, “Observational Constraints on Oscillating Dark- structure of the emission line galaxy sample from the Energy Parametrizations,” Phys. Rev. D 98, 063510 anisotropic power spectrum between redshift 0.6 and (2018), arXiv:1712.05746 [astro-ph.CO]. 1.1,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 501, 5616–5645 [963] Mehdi Rezaei, Mohammad Malekjani, Spyros Basi- (2021), arXiv:2007.09008 [astro-ph.CO]. lakos, Ahmad Mehrabi, and David F. Mota, “Con- straints to Dark Energy Using PADE Parameteriza- 89

tions,” Astrophys. J. 843, 65 (2017), arXiv:1706.02537 [978] Ana Diaz Rivero, V. Miranda, and Cora Dvorkin, [astro-ph.CO]. “Observable Predictions for Massive-Neutrino Cos- [964] Shahab Joudaki et al., “KiDS-450: Testing extensions mologies with Model-Independent Dark Energy,” to the standard cosmological model,” Mon. Not. Roy. Phys. Rev. D 100, 063504 (2019), arXiv:1903.03125 Astron. Soc. 471, 1259–1279 (2017), arXiv:1610.04606 [astro-ph.CO]. [astro-ph.CO]. [979] Rahul Biswas, Katrin Heitmann, Salman Habib, Amol [965] Minghui Du, Weiqiang Yang, Lixin Xu, Supriya Pan, Upadhye, Adrian Pope, and Nicholas Frontiere, and David F. Mota, “Future constraints on dynamical “Effects of Massive Neutrinos and Dynamical Dark dark-energy using gravitational-wave standard sirens,” Energy on the Cluster Mass Function,” (2019), Phys. Rev. D 100, 043535 (2019), arXiv:1812.01440 arXiv:1901.10690 [astro-ph.CO]. [astro-ph.CO]. [980] Julien Lesgourgues and Sergio Pastor, “Massive neutri- [966] Sunny Vagnozzi, Suhail Dhawan, Martina Gerbino, nos and cosmology,” Phys. Rept. 429, 307–379 (2006), Katherine Freese, Ariel Goobar, and Olga Mena, arXiv:astro-ph/0603494. “Constraints on the sum of the neutrino masses in [981] Yvonne Y. Y. Wong, “Neutrino mass in cosmology: dynamical dark energy models with w(z) ≥ −1 are status and prospects,” Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 61, tighter than those obtained in ΛCDM,” Phys. Rev. D 69–98 (2011), arXiv:1111.1436 [astro-ph.CO]. 98, 083501 (2018), arXiv:1801.08553 [astro-ph.CO]. [982] Julien Lesgourgues and Sergio Pastor, “Neutrino mass [967] Gong-Bo Zhao et al., “Dynamical dark energy in light from Cosmology,” Adv. High Energy Phys. 2012, of the latest observations,” Nature Astron. 1, 627–632 608515 (2012), arXiv:1212.6154 [hep-ph]. (2017), arXiv:1701.08165 [astro-ph.CO]. [983] Julien Lesgourgues and Sergio Pastor, “Neutrino cos- [968] Gaetano Lambiase, Subhendra Mohanty, Ashish mology and Planck,” New J. Phys. 16, 065002 (2014), Narang, and Priyank Parashari, “Testing dark energy arXiv:1404.1740 [hep-ph]. models in the light of σ8 tension,” Eur. Phys. J. C 79, [984] J. R. Bond, G. Efstathiou, and J. Silk, “Massive Neu- 141 (2019), arXiv:1804.07154 [astro-ph.CO]. trinos and the Large Scale Structure of the Universe,” [969] Junpei Ooba, Bharat Ratra, and Naoshi Sugiyama, Phys. Rev. Lett. 45, 1980–1984 (1980). “Planck 2015 constraints on spatially-flat dynamical [985] Karsten Jedamzik and Andrey Saveliev, “Stringent dark energy models,” Astrophys. Space Sci. 364, 176 Limit on Primordial Magnetic Fields from the Cosmic (2019), arXiv:1802.05571 [astro-ph.CO]. Microwave Background Radiation,” Phys. Rev. Lett. [970] Weiqiang Yang, Supriya Pan, Eleonora Di Valentino, 123, 021301 (2019), arXiv:1804.06115 [astro-ph.CO]. Emmanuel N. Saridakis, and Subenoy Chakraborty, [986] Karsten Jedamzik and Levon Pogosian, “Relieving “Observational constraints on one-parameter dynami- the Hubble tension with primordial magnetic fields,” cal dark-energy parametrizations and the H0 tension,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 181302 (2020), arXiv:2004.09487 Phys. Rev. D99, 043543 (2019), arXiv:1810.05141 [astro-ph.CO]. [astro-ph.CO]. [987] James M. Bardeen, “Gauge Invariant Cosmological [971] Yuting Wang, Levon Pogosian, Gong-Bo Zhao, and Perturbations,” Phys. Rev. D 22, 1882–1905 (1980). Alex Zucca, “Evolution of dark energy reconstructed [988] Viatcheslav F. Mukhanov, H. A. Feldman, and from the latest observations,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 869, Robert H. Brandenberger, “Theory of cosmological L8 (2018), arXiv:1807.03772 [astro-ph.CO]. perturbations. Part 1. Classical perturbations. Part 2. [972] Eoinó Colgáin, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, and Quantum theory of perturbations. Part 3. Extensions,” Lu Yin, “Can dark energy be dynamical?” (2021), Phys. Rept. 215, 203–333 (1992). arXiv:2104.01930 [astro-ph.CO]. [989] Chung-Pei Ma and Edmund Bertschinger, “Cosmolog- [973] Federico Marulli, Carmelita Carbone, Matteo Viel, ical perturbation theory in the synchronous and con- Lauro Moscardini, and Andrea Cimatti, “Effects of formal Newtonian gauges,” Astrophys. J. 455, 7–25 Massive Neutrinos on the Large-Scale Structure of (1995), arXiv:astro-ph/9506072. the Universe,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 418, 346 [990] Levon Pogosian and Alessandra Silvestri, “The pattern (2011), arXiv:1103.0278 [astro-ph.CO]. of growth in viable f(R) cosmologies,” Phys. Rev. D [974] Richard A. Battye and Adam Moss, “Evidence for 77, 023503 (2008), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 81, 049901 Massive Neutrinos from Cosmic Microwave Back- (2010)], arXiv:0709.0296 [astro-ph]. ground and Lensing Observations,” Phys. Rev. Lett. [991] Bhuvnesh Jain and Justin Khoury, “Cosmological 112, 051303 (2014), arXiv:1308.5870 [astro-ph.CO]. Tests of Gravity,” Annals Phys. 325, 1479–1516 [975] Matteo Costanzi, Barbara Sartoris, Matteo Viel, and (2010), arXiv:1004.3294 [astro-ph.CO]. Stefano Borgani, “Neutrino constraints: what large- [992] Jurgen Muller, James G. Williams, and Slava G. Tury- scale structure and CMB data are telling us?” JCAP shev, “Lunar laser ranging contributions to relativity 10, 081 (2014), arXiv:1407.8338 [astro-ph.CO]. and geodesy,” Astrophys. Space Sci. Libr. 349, 457– [976] M. Zennaro, J. Bel, J. Dossett, C. Carbone, and 472 (2008), arXiv:gr-qc/0509114. L. Guzzo, “Cosmological constraints from galaxy [993] E. V. Pitjeva and N. P. Pitjev, “Relativistic effects and clustering in the presence of massive neutrinos,” dark matter in the Solar system from observations of Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 477, 491–506 (2018), planets and spacecraft,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. arXiv:1712.02886 [astro-ph.CO]. 432, 3431 (2013), arXiv:1306.3043 [astro-ph.EP]. [977] Vivian Poulin, Kimberly K. Boddy, Simeon Bird, and [994] Radouane Gannouji, David Polarski, Andre Ranquet, Marc Kamionkowski, “Implications of an extended and Alexei A. Starobinsky, “Scalar-Tensor Models of dark energy cosmology with massive neutrinos for cos- Normal and Phantom Dark Energy,” JCAP 09, 016 mological tensions,” Phys. Rev. D 97, 123504 (2018), (2006), arXiv:astro-ph/0606287. arXiv:1803.02474 [astro-ph.CO]. 90

[995] S. Nesseris and Leandros Perivolaropoulos, “The Lim- [1012] Eleonora Di Valentino, Alessandro Melchiorri, and its of Extended Quintessence,” Phys. Rev. D 75, Joseph Silk, “Planck evidence for a closed Universe 023517 (2007), arXiv:astro-ph/0611238. and a possible crisis for cosmology,” Nature Astron. 4, [996] Rocco D’Agostino and Orlando Luongo, “Growth 196–203 (2019), arXiv:1911.02087 [astro-ph.CO]. of matter perturbations in nonminimal teleparal- [1013] Will Handley, “Curvature tension: evidence for a lel dark energy,” Phys. Rev. D 98, 124013 (2018), closed universe,” (2019), arXiv:1908.09139 [astro- arXiv:1807.10167 [gr-qc]. ph.CO]. [997] Manuel Gonzalez-Espinoza, Giovanni Otalora, Joel [1014] Sunny Vagnozzi, Eleonora Di Valentino, Stefano Gari- Saavedra, and Nelson Videla, “Growth of matter over- azzo, Alessandro Melchiorri, Olga Mena, and Joseph densities in non-minimal torsion-matter coupling theo- Silk, “Listening to the BOSS: the galaxy power spec- ries,” Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 799 (2018), arXiv:1808.01941 trum take on spatial curvature and cosmic concor- [gr-qc]. dance,” (2020), arXiv:2010.02230 [astro-ph.CO]. [998] Joe Kennedy, Lucas Lombriser, and Andy Taylor, [1015] George Efstathiou and Steven Gratton, “The evidence “Reconstructing Horndeski theories from phenomeno- for a spatially flat Universe,” (2020), 10.1093/mn- logical modified gravity and dark energy models on rasl/slaa093, arXiv:2002.06892 [astro-ph.CO]. cosmological scales,” Phys. Rev. D 98, 044051 (2018), [1016] Sunny Vagnozzi, Abraham Loeb, and Michele arXiv:1804.04582 [astro-ph.CO]. Moresco, “Eppur èpiatto? The Cosmic Chronometers [999] Eric V. Linder, “No Slip Gravity,” JCAP 03, 005 Take on Spatial Curvature and Cosmic Concordance,” (2018), arXiv:1801.01503 [astro-ph.CO]. Astrophys. J. 908, 84 (2021), arXiv:2011.11645 [astro- [1000] Guido D’Amico, Zhiqi Huang, Michele Mancarella, ph.CO]. and Filippo Vernizzi, “Weakening Gravity on Redshift- [1017] R. K. Sachs and A. M. Wolfe, “Perturbations of Survey Scales with Kinetic Matter Mixing,” JCAP 02, a cosmological model and angular variations of the 014 (2017), arXiv:1609.01272 [astro-ph.CO]. microwave background,” Astrophys. J. 147, 73–90 [1001] A. Rassat, J.-L. Starck, P. Paykari, F. Sureau, and (1967). J. Bobin, “Planck CMB Anomalies: Astrophysical [1018] Pablo Fosalba and Enrique Gaztanaga, “Measurement and Cosmological Secondary Effects and the Curse of the gravitational potential evolution from the cross- of Masking,” JCAP 08, 006 (2014), arXiv:1405.1844 correlation between wmap and the apm galaxy survey,” [astro-ph.CO]. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 350, L37–L41 (2004), [1002] John C. Mather et al., “A Preliminary measurement of arXiv:astro-ph/0305468. the Cosmic Microwave Background spectrum by the [1019] A. Marcos-Caballero, R. Fernández-Cobos, Cosmic Background Explorer (COBE) satellite,” As- E. Mart´ınez-González, and P. Vielva, “The shape trophys. J. Lett. 354, L37–L40 (1990). of CMB temperature and polarization peaks on the [1003] C.L. Bennett et al. (WMAP), “The Microwave sphere,” JCAP 04, 058 (2016), arXiv:1512.07412 Anisotropy Probe (MAP) mission,” Astrophys. J. 583, [astro-ph.CO]. 1–23 (2003), arXiv:astro-ph/0301158. [1020] P.A.R. Ade et al. (Planck), “Planck 2015 results. [1004] R. Adam et al. (Planck), “Planck 2015 results. I. XVI. Isotropy and statistics of the CMB,” Astron. Overview of products and scientific results,” Astron. Astrophys. 594, A16 (2016), arXiv:1506.07135 [astro- Astrophys. 594, A1 (2016), arXiv:1502.01582 [astro- ph.CO]. ph.CO]. [1021] Benjamin R. Granett, Mark C. Neyrinck, and Istvan [1005] Leandros Perivolaropoulos, “Large Scale Cosmological Szapudi, “An Imprint of Super-Structures on the Mi- Anomalies and Inhomogeneous Dark Energy,” Galax- crowave Background due to the Integrated Sachs-Wolfe ies 2, 22–61 (2014), arXiv:1401.5044 [astro-ph.CO]. Effect,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 683, L99–L102 (2008), [1006] Juan I. Cayuso and Matthew C. Johnson, “Towards arXiv:0805.3695 [astro-ph]. testing CMB anomalies using the kinetic and polarized [1022] Benjamin R. Granett, Mark C. Neyrinck, and Istvan Sunyaev-Zel’dovich effects,” Phys. Rev. D 101, 123508 Szapudi, “Dark Energy Detected with Supervoids and (2020), arXiv:1904.10981 [astro-ph.CO]. Superclusters,” (2008), arXiv:0805.2974 [astro-ph]. [1007] Jessica Muir, Saroj Adhikari, and Dragan Huterer, [1023] Seshadri Nadathur, Shaun Hotchkiss, and Subir “Covariance of CMB anomalies,” Phys. Rev. D 98, Sarkar, “The integrated Sachs-Wolfe imprints of cos- 023521 (2018), arXiv:1806.02354 [astro-ph.CO]. mic superstructures: a problem for ΛCDM,” JCAP [1008] Adrian E. Bayer and Uros Seljak, “The look-elsewhere 06, 042 (2012), arXiv:1109.4126 [astro-ph.CO]. effect from a unified Bayesian and frequentist per- [1024] Samuel Flender, Shaun Hotchkiss, and Seshadri spective,” JCAP 10, 009 (2020), arXiv:2007.13821 Nadathur, “The stacked ISW signal of rare su- [physics.data-an]. perstructures in Λ CDM,” JCAP 02, 013 (2013), [1009] Hiranya V. Peiris, “Considerations in the Interpre- arXiv:1212.0776 [astro-ph.CO]. tation of Cosmological Anomalies,” IAU Symp. 306, [1025] S. Ilic, M. Langer, and M. Douspis, “On the 124–130 (2014), arXiv:1410.3837 [astro-ph.CO]. detection of the integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect with [1010] Eilam Gross and Ofer Vitells, “Trial factors for the look stacked voids,” Astron. Astrophys. 556, A51 (2013), elsewhere effect in high energy physics,” Eur. Phys. J. arXiv:1301.5849 [astro-ph.CO]. C 70, 525–530 (2010), arXiv:1005.1891 [physics.data- [1026] Yan-Chuan Cai, Mark Neyrinck, Qingqing Mao, an]. John A. Peacock, Istvan Szapudi, and Andreas A. [1011] Eleonora Di Valentino et al., “Cosmology Intertwined Berlind, “The lensing and temperature imprints of IV: The Age of the Universe and its Curvature,” voids on the Cosmic Microwave Background,” Mon. (2020), arXiv:2008.11286 [astro-ph.CO]. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 466, 3364–3375 (2017), arXiv:1609.00301 [astro-ph.CO]. 91

[1027] AndrásKovács,“The part and the whole: voids, super- ground anomalies I,” Astrophys. J. 648, 23–30 (2006), voids, and their ISW imprint,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. arXiv:astro-ph/0602478. Soc. 475, 1777–1790 (2018), arXiv:1701.08583 [astro- [1042] Kaiki Taro Inoue and Joseph Silk, “Local Voids as ph.CO]. the Origin of Large-angle Cosmic Microwave Back- [1028] A. Kovács et al. (DES), “More out of less: an excess ground Anomalies: The Effect of a Cosmological Con- integrated Sachs-Wolfe signal from supervoids mapped stant,” Astrophys. J. 664, 650–659 (2007), arXiv:astro- out by the Dark Energy Survey,” Mon. Not. Roy. As- ph/0612347. tron. Soc. 484, 5267–5277 (2019), arXiv:1811.07812 [1043] Lawrence Rudnick, Shea Brown, and Liliya R. [astro-ph.CO]. Williams, “Extragalactic Radio Sources and the [1029] Gábor Rácz,LászlóDobos, Róbert Beck, IstvánSza- WMAP Cold Spot,” Astrophys. J. 671, 40–44 (2007), pudi, and IstvánCsabai, “Concordance cosmology arXiv:0704.0908 [astro-ph]. without dark energy,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. [1044] T. R. Jaffe, A. J. Banday, H. K. Eriksen, K. M. Gorski, 469, L1–L5 (2017), arXiv:1607.08797 [astro-ph.CO]. and F. K. Hansen, “Evidence of vorticity and shear at [1030] Róbert Beck, IstvánCsabai, Gábor Rácz, and István large angular scales in the WMAP data: A Violation of Szapudi, “The integrated Sachs–Wolfe effect in the Av- cosmological isotropy?” Astrophys. J. Lett. 629, L1– ERA cosmology,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 479, L4 (2005), arXiv:astro-ph/0503213. 3582–3591 (2018), arXiv:1801.08566 [astro-ph.CO]. [1045] Wen Zhao, “Local properties of WMAP Cold Spot,” [1031] Tommaso Giannantonio, Robert Crittenden, Robert Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 433, 3498–3505 (2013), Nichol, and Ashley J. Ross, “The significance of the in- arXiv:1209.1174 [astro-ph.CO]. tegrated Sachs-Wolfe effect revisited,” Mon. Not. Roy. [1046] Wessel Valkenburg, “Perceiving the equation of state Astron. Soc. 426, 2581–2599 (2012), arXiv:1209.2125 of Dark Energy while living in a Cold Spot,” JCAP [astro-ph.CO]. 01, 047 (2012), arXiv:1106.6042 [astro-ph.CO]. [1032] Patricio Vielva, E. Martinez-Gonzalez, R.B. Bar- [1047] M. Cruz, E. Martinez-Gonzalez, and P. Vielva, “The reiro, J.L. Sanz, and L. Cayon, “Detection of non- WMAP cold spot,” (2009), 10.1007/978-3-642-11250- Gaussianity in the WMAP 1 - year data using 8-37, arXiv:0901.1986 [astro-ph.CO]. spherical wavelets,” Astrophys. J. 609, 22–34 (2004), [1048] Patricio Vielva, “A Comprehensive overview of the arXiv:astro-ph/0310273. Cold Spot,” Adv. Astron. 2010, 592094 (2010), [1033] P. A. R. Ade et al. (Planck), “Planck 2013 results. arXiv:1008.3051 [astro-ph.CO]. XXIII. Isotropy and statistics of the CMB,” Astron. [1049] H.K. Eriksen, F.K. Hansen, A.J. Banday, K.M. Gorski, Astrophys. 571, A23 (2014), arXiv:1303.5083 [astro- and P.B. Lilje, “Asymmetries in the Cosmic Microwave ph.CO]. Background anisotropy field,” Astrophys. J. 605, 14– [1034] M. Cruz, E. Martinez-Gonzalez, P. Vielva, and 20 (2004), [Erratum: Astrophys.J. 609, 1198 (2004)], L. Cayon, “Detection of a non-gaussian spot in wmap,” arXiv:astro-ph/0307507. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 356, 29–40 (2005), [1050] Frode K. Hansen, A.J. Banday, and K.M. Gorski, arXiv:astro-ph/0405341. “Testing the cosmological principle of isotropy: Lo- [1035] M. Cruz, M. Tucci, E. Martinez-Gonzalez, and cal power spectrum estimates of the WMAP data,” P. Vielva, “The non-gaussian cold spot in wmap: sig- Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 354, 641–665 (2004), nificance, morphology and foreground contribution,” arXiv:astro-ph/0404206. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 369, 57–67 (2006), [1051] Hans K. Eriksen, A. J. Banday, K. M. Gorski, F. K. arXiv:astro-ph/0601427. Hansen, and P. B. Lilje, “Hemispherical power [1036] Marcos Cruz, L. Cayon, E. Martinez-Gonzalez, asymmetry in the three-year Wilkinson Microwave P. Vielva, and J. Jin, “The non-gaussian cold spot Anisotropy Probe sky maps,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 660, in the 3-year wmap data,” Astrophys. J. 655, 11–20 L81–L84 (2007), arXiv:astro-ph/0701089. (2007), arXiv:astro-ph/0603859. [1052] F. Paci, A. Gruppuso, F. Finelli, P. Cabella, [1037] Ray Zhang and Dragan Huterer, “Disks in the Sky: A. De Rosa, N. Mandolesi, and P. Natoli, A Reassessment of the WMAP ’Cold Spot’,” As- “Power Asymmetries in the Cosmic Microwave Back- tropart. Phys. 33, 69–74 (2010), arXiv:0908.3988 ground Temperature and Polarization patterns,” [astro-ph.CO]. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 407, 399–404 (2010), [1038] Seshadri Nadathur, Mikko Lavinto, Shaun Hotchkiss, arXiv:1002.4745 [astro-ph.CO]. and Syksy Räsänen, “Can a supervoid explain the [1053] C. Monteserin, R.B.Belen Barreiro, P. Vielva, Cold Spot?” Phys. Rev. D 90, 103510 (2014), E. Martinez-Gonzalez, M.P. Hobson, and A.N. arXiv:1408.4720 [astro-ph.CO]. Lasenby, “A low CMB variance in the WMAP data,” [1039] M. Hansen, W. Zhao, A. M. Frejsel, P. D. Naselsky, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 387, 209–219 (2008), J. Kim, and O. V. Verkhodanov, “Faraday Rotation arXiv:0706.4289 [astro-ph]. as a diagnostic of Galactic foreground contamination of [1054] J. Hoftuft, H.K. Eriksen, A.J. Banday, K.M. Gorski, CMB maps,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 426, 57–69 F.K. Hansen, and P.B. Lilje, “Increasing evidence (2012), arXiv:1202.1711 [astro-ph.CO]. for hemispherical power asymmetry in the five-year [1040] Krishna Naidoo, Aurélien Benoit-Lévy, and Ofer WMAP data,” Astrophys. J. 699, 985–989 (2009), Lahav, “Could multiple voids explain the Cos- arXiv:0903.1229 [astro-ph.CO]. mic Microwave Background Cold Spot anomaly?” [1055] Y. Akrami, Y. Fantaye, A. Shafieloo, H. K. Eriksen, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 459, L71–L75 (2016), F. K. Hansen, A. J. Banday, and K. M. Górski, arXiv:1512.02694 [astro-ph.CO]. “Power asymmetry in WMAP and Planck temperature [1041] Kaiki Taro Inoue and Joseph Silk, “Local voids as sky maps as measured by a local variance estimator,” the origin of large-angle cosmic microwave back- Astrophys. J. Lett. 784, L42 (2014), arXiv:1402.0870 92

[astro-ph.CO]. [1071] Maresuke Shiraishi, Julian B. Muñoz, Marc [1056] A. Bernui, A. F. Oliveira, and T. S. Pereira, “North- Kamionkowski, and Alvise Raccanelli, “Viola- South non-Gaussian asymmetry in PLANCK CMB tion of statistical isotropy and homogeneity in the maps,” JCAP 10, 041 (2014), arXiv:1404.2936 [astro- 21-cm power spectrum,” Phys. Rev. D 93, 103506 ph.CO]. (2016), arXiv:1603.01206 [astro-ph.CO]. [1057] Marcio O’Dwyer, Craig J. Copi, Johanna M. Nagy, [1072] Botao Li, Zhaoting Chen, Yi-Fu Cai, and Yi Mao, C. Barth Netterfield, John Ruhl, and Glenn D. “Testing the scale-dependent hemispherical asymme- Starkman, “Hemispherical Variance Anomaly and try with the 21-cm power spectrum from the epoch of Reionization Optical Depth,” (2019), 10.1093/mn- reionization,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 487, 5564– ras/staa3049, arXiv:1912.02376 [astro-ph.CO]. 5571 (2019), arXiv:1904.04683 [astro-ph.CO]. [1058] Christopher Gordon, “Broken Isotropy from a Linear [1073] Christopher Gordon, Wayne Hu, Dragan Huterer, Modulation of the Primordial Perturbations,” Astro- and Thomas M. Crawford, “Spontaneous isotropy phys. J. 656, 636–640 (2007), arXiv:astro-ph/0607423. breaking: a mechanism for cmb multipole align- [1059] C. L. Bennett et al., “Seven-Year Wilkinson Microwave ments,” Phys. Rev. D 72, 103002 (2005), arXiv:astro- Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Are There ph/0509301. Cosmic Microwave Background Anomalies?” Astro- [1074] Angelica de Oliveira-Costa, Max Tegmark, Matias Zal- phys. J. Suppl. 192, 17 (2011), arXiv:1001.4758 [astro- darriaga, and Andrew Hamilton, “The Significance of ph.CO]. the largest scale CMB fluctuations in WMAP,” Phys. [1060] Adrienne L. Erickcek, Marc Kamionkowski, and Rev. D 69, 063516 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0307282. Sean M. Carroll, “A Hemispherical Power Asymme- [1075] Dominik J. Schwarz, Glenn D. Starkman, Dragan try from Inflation,” Phys. Rev. D 78, 123520 (2008), Huterer, and Craig J. Copi, “Is the low-l microwave arXiv:0806.0377 [astro-ph]. background cosmic?” Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 221301 [1061] Andrew R. Liddle and Marina Cortês,“Cosmic mi- (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0403353. crowave background anomalies in an open universe,” [1076] Craig J. Copi, D. Huterer, D.J. Schwarz, and G.D. Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 111302 (2013), arXiv:1306.5698 Starkman, “On the large-angle anomalies of the mi- [astro-ph.CO]. crowave sky,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 367, 79– [1062] David H. Lyth, “Generating fNL at ` . 60,” JCAP 04, 102 (2006), arXiv:astro-ph/0508047. 039 (2015), arXiv:1405.3562 [astro-ph.CO]. [1077] Craig Copi, Dragan Huterer, Dominik Schwarz, and [1063] Dong-Gang Wang, Wen Zhao, Yang Zhang, and Yi- Glenn Starkman, “The Uncorrelated Universe: Statis- Fu Cai, “Scale-dependent CMB power asymmetry from tical Anisotropy and the Vanishing Angular Correla- primordial speed of sound and a generalized δN formal- tion Function in WMAP Years 1-3,” Phys. Rev. D 75, ism,” JCAP 02, 019 (2016), arXiv:1509.02541 [astro- 023507 (2007), arXiv:astro-ph/0605135. ph.CO]. [1078] Craig J. Copi, Dragan Huterer, Dominik J. Schwarz, [1064] Suvodip Mukherjee and Tarun Souradeep, “Litmus and Glenn D. Starkman, “Large angle anomalies Test for Cosmic Hemispherical Asymmetry in the in the CMB,” Adv. Astron. 2010, 847541 (2010), Cosmic Microwave Background B-mode polarization,” arXiv:1004.5602 [astro-ph.CO]. Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 221301 (2016), arXiv:1509.06736 [1079] Craig J. Copi, Dragan Huterer, Dominik J. Schwarz, [astro-ph.CO]. and Glenn D. Starkman, “Large-scale alignments [1065] Qiaoli Yang, Yunqi Liu, and Haoran Di, “Hemi- from WMAP and Planck,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. spherical Power Asymmetry of the Cosmic Microwave Soc. 449, 3458–3470 (2015), arXiv:1311.4562 [astro- Background from a Remnant of a pre-Inflationary ph.CO]. Topological Defect,” Phys. Rev. D 96, 083516 (2017), [1080] Craig J. Copi, Dragan Huterer, and Glenn D. Stark- arXiv:1612.03708 [astro-ph.CO]. man, “Multipole vectors - A New representation of [1066] Christian T. Byrnes, Donough Regan, David Seery, the CMB sky and evidence for statistical anisotropy and Ewan R. M. Tarrant, “Implications of the cos- or non-Gaussianity at 2 <= l <= 8,” Phys. Rev. D mic microwave background power asymmetry for the 70, 043515 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0310511. early universe,” Phys. Rev. D 93, 123003 (2016), [1081] A. Marcos-Caballero and E. Mart´ınez-González, arXiv:1601.01970 [astro-ph.CO]. “Scale-dependent dipolar modulation and the [1067] Christian T. Byrnes, Donough Regan, David Seery, quadrupole-octopole alignment in the CMB tem- and Ewan R. M. Tarrant, “The hemispherical asymme- perature,” JCAP 10, 053 (2019), arXiv:1909.06093 try from a scale-dependent inflationary bispectrum,” [astro-ph.CO]. JCAP 06, 025 (2016), arXiv:1511.03129 [astro-ph.CO]. [1082] G. Hinshaw, A. J. Banday, C. L. Bennett, K. M. [1068] Christian Byrnes, Guillem Domènech, Misao Sasaki, Gorski, Alan Kogut, C. H. Lineweaver, George F. and Tomo Takahashi, “Strongly scale-dependent CMB Smoot, and E. L. Wright, “2-point correlations in the dipolar asymmetry from super-curvature fluctuations,” COBE DMR 4-year anisotropy maps,” Astrophys. J. JCAP 12, 020 (2016), arXiv:1610.02650 [astro-ph.CO]. Lett. 464, L25–L28 (1996), arXiv:astro-ph/9601061. [1069] Amjad Ashoorioon and Tomi Koivisto, “Hemispherical [1083] C.L. Bennett et al. (WMAP), “First year Wilkinson Anomaly from Asymmetric Initial States,” Phys. Rev. Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) observations: D 94, 043009 (2016), arXiv:1507.03514 [astro-ph.CO]. Preliminary maps and basic results,” Astrophys. J. [1070] Sadra Jazayeri, Alireza Vafaei Sadr, and Has- Suppl. 148, 1–27 (2003), arXiv:astro-ph/0302207. san Firouzjahi, “Primordial anisotropies from cosmic [1084] Craig J. Copi, Dragan Huterer, Dominik J. Schwarz, strings during inflation,” Phys. Rev. D 96, 023512 and Glenn D. Starkman, “No large-angle correlations (2017), arXiv:1703.05714 [astro-ph.CO]. on the non-Galactic microwave sky,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 399, 295–303 (2009), arXiv:0808.3767 93

[astro-ph]. mic Microwave Weak lensing data as a test for [1085] Craig J. Copi, Dragan Huterer, Dominik J. Schwarz, the dark universe,” Phys. Rev. D77, 123531 (2008), and Glenn D. Starkman, “Lack of large-angle TT arXiv:0803.2309 [astro-ph]. correlations persists in WMAP and Planck,” Mon. [1101] Matias Zaldarriaga and Uros Seljak, “Gravitational Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 451, 2978–2985 (2015), lensing effect on cosmic microwave background polar- arXiv:1310.3831 [astro-ph.CO]. ization,” Phys. Rev. D 58, 023003 (1998), arXiv:astro- [1086] Amir Hajian, “Analysis of the apparent lack of power ph/9803150. in the cosmic microwave background anisotropy at [1102] Antony Lewis and Anthony Challinor, “Weak gravi- large angular scales,” (2007), arXiv:astro-ph/0702723. tational lensing of the CMB,” Phys. Rept. 429, 1–65 [1087] George Efstathiou, Yin-Zhe Ma, and Duncan Hanson, (2006), arXiv:astro-ph/0601594 [astro-ph]. “Large-Angle Correlations in the Cosmic Microwave [1103] P.A.R. Ade et al. (Planck), “Planck 2015 results. XV. Background,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 407, 2530 Gravitational lensing,” Astron. Astrophys. 594, A15 (2010), arXiv:0911.5399 [astro-ph.CO]. (2016), arXiv:1502.01591 [astro-ph.CO]. [1088] A. Gruppuso, “Two-point correlation function of [1104] N. Aghanim et al. (Planck), “Planck intermediate re- Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe 9-yr data,” sults. LI. Features in the cosmic microwave background Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 437, 2076–2082 (2014), temperature power spectrum and shifts in cosmologi- arXiv:1310.2822 [astro-ph.CO]. cal parameters,” Astron. Astrophys. 607, A95 (2017), [1089] C. J. Copi, D. Huterer, D. J. Schwarz, and G. D. arXiv:1608.02487 [astro-ph.CO]. Starkman, “Large-Angle CMB Suppression and Polar- [1105] Pavel Motloch and Wayne Hu, “Lensinglike tensions in ization Predictions,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 434, the P lanck legacy release,” Phys. Rev. D 101, 083515 3590–3596 (2013), arXiv:1303.4786 [astro-ph.CO]. (2020), arXiv:1912.06601 [astro-ph.CO]. [1090] John David Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics (Wiley, [1106] Y. Akrami et al. (Planck), “Planck 2018 results. X. 1998). Constraints on inflation,” Astron. Astrophys. 641, A10 [1091] Matias Zaldarriaga and Uros Seljak, “An all sky anal- (2020), arXiv:1807.06211 [astro-ph.CO]. ysis of polarization in the microwave background,” [1107] G.E. Addison, Y. Huang, D.J. Watts, C.L. Ben- Phys. Rev. D 55, 1830–1840 (1997), arXiv:astro- nett, M. Halpern, G. Hinshaw, and J.L. Wei- ph/9609170. land, “Quantifying discordance in the 2015 Planck [1092] Marc Kamionkowski, Arthur Kosowsky, and Albert CMB spectrum,” Astrophys. J. 818, 132 (2016), Stebbins, “Statistics of cosmic microwave background arXiv:1511.00055 [astro-ph.CO]. polarization,” Phys. Rev. D 55, 7368–7388 (1997), [1108] N. Aghanim et al. (Planck), “Planck 2018 results. arXiv:astro-ph/9611125. V. CMB power spectra and likelihoods,” (2019), [1093] Antony Lewis, Anthony Challinor, and Neil Turok, arXiv:1907.12875 [astro-ph.CO]. “Analysis of CMB polarization on an incomplete [1109] Kate Land and Joao Magueijo, “Is the Universe sky,” Phys. Rev. D 65, 023505 (2002), arXiv:astro- odd?” Phys. Rev. D 72, 101302 (2005), arXiv:astro- ph/0106536. ph/0507289. [1094] Emory F. Bunn, Matias Zaldarriaga, Max Tegmark, [1110] Jaiseung Kim and Pavel Naselsky, “Anomalous par- and Angelica de Oliveira-Costa, “E/B decomposition ity asymmetry of WMAP power spectrum data at low of finite pixelized CMB maps,” Phys. Rev. D 67, multpoles: is it cosmological or systematics?” Phys. 023501 (2003), arXiv:astro-ph/0207338. Rev. D 82, 063002 (2010), arXiv:1002.0148 [astro- [1095] Craig J. Copi, MárcioO’Dwyer, and Glenn D. Stark- ph.CO]. man, “The ISW effect and the lack of large-angle [1111] Jaiseung Kim and Pavel Naselsky, “Anomalous par- CMB temperature correlations,” Mon. Not. Roy. As- ity asymmetry of the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy tron. Soc. 463, 3305–3310 (2016), arXiv:1605.09732 Probe power spectrum data at low multipoles,” Astro- [astro-ph.CO]. phys. J. Lett. 714, L265–L267 (2010), arXiv:1001.4613 [1096] Armando Bernui, Camila P. Novaes, Thiago S. Pereira, [astro-ph.CO]. and Glenn D. Starkman, “Topology and the sup- [1112] Jaiseung Kim and Pavel Naselsky, “Lack of angular pression of CMB large-angle correlations,” (2018), correlation and odd-parity preference in cosmic mi- arXiv:1809.05924 [astro-ph.CO]. crowave background data,” The Astrophysical Journal [1097] Pratyush Pranav, Robert J. Adler, Thomas Buchert, 739, 79 (2011). Herbert Edelsbrunner, Bernard J. T. Jones, Armin [1113] A. Gruppuso, F. Finelli, P. Natoli, F. Paci, P. Cabella, Schwartzman, Hubert Wagner, and Rien van de Wey- A. De Rosa, and N. Mandolesi, “New constraints on gaert, “Unexpected Topology of the Temperature Fluc- Parity Symmetry from a re-analysis of the WMAP-7 tuations in the Cosmic Microwave Background,” As- low resolution power spectra,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. tron. Astrophys. 627, A163 (2019), arXiv:1812.07678 Soc. 411, 1445–1452 (2011), arXiv:1006.1979 [astro- [astro-ph.CO]. ph.CO]. [1098] Pratyush Pranav, “Loops abound in the cosmic mi- [1114] A. Gruppuso, N. Kitazawa, M. Lattanzi, N. Mandolesi, crowave background: A 4σ anomaly on super-horizon P. Natoli, and A. Sagnotti, “The Evens and Odds of scales,” (2021), arXiv:2101.02237 [astro-ph.CO]. CMB Anomalies,” Phys. Dark Univ. 20, 49–64 (2018), [1099] Y. Akrami et al. (Planck), “P lanck intermediate arXiv:1712.03288 [astro-ph.CO]. results. LVII. Joint Planck LFI and HFI data [1115] Pavan K. Aluri and Pankaj Jain, “Parity Asymme- processing,” Astron. Astrophys. 643, A42 (2020), try in the CMBR Temperature Power Spectrum,” arXiv:2007.04997 [astro-ph.CO]. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 419, 3378 (2012), [1100] Erminia Calabrese, Anze Slosar, Alessandro Mel- arXiv:1108.5894 [astro-ph.CO]. chiorri, George F. Smoot, and Oliver Zahn, “Cos- 94

[1116] Juan C. Bueno Sanchez and Leandros Perivolaropou- straints on σ8 and γ,” Astrophys. J. 736, 93 (2011), los, “Topological Quintessence,” Phys. Rev. D 84, arXiv:1101.1650 [astro-ph.CO]. 123516 (2011), arXiv:1110.2587 [astro-ph.CO]. [1131] Yin-Zhe Ma and Douglas Scott, “Cosmic bulk [1117] Adrienne L. Erickcek, Sean M. Carroll, and Marc flows on 50 h−1Mpc scales: A Bayesian hyper- Kamionkowski, “Superhorizon Perturbations and the parameter method and multi-shells likelihood analy- Cosmic Microwave Background,” Phys. Rev. D 78, sis,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 428, 2017 (2013), 083012 (2008), arXiv:0808.1570 [astro-ph]. arXiv:1208.2028 [astro-ph.CO]. [1118] N. Aghanim et al. (Planck), “Planck 2018 results. III. [1132] Stephen J. Turnbull, Michael J. Hudson, Hume A. High Frequency Instrument data processing and fre- Feldman, Malcolm Hicken, Robert P. Kirshner, and quency maps,” Astron. Astrophys. 641, A3 (2020), Richard Watkins, “Cosmic flows in the nearby uni- arXiv:1807.06207 [astro-ph.CO]. verse from Type Ia Supernovae,” Mon. Not. Roy. As- [1119] J. Colin, R. Mohayaee, M. Rameez, and S. Sarkar, tron. Soc. 420, 447–454 (2012), arXiv:1111.0631 [astro- “High redshift radio galaxies and divergence from the ph.CO]. CMB dipole,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 471, 1045– [1133] A. Kashlinsky, F. Atrio-Barandela, and H. Ebel- 1055 (2017), arXiv:1703.09376 [astro-ph.CO]. ing, “Measuring bulk motion of X-ray clusters via the [1120] Prabhakar Tiwari and Adi Nusser, “Revisiting the kinematic Sunyaev-Zeldovich effect: summarizing the NVSS number count dipole,” JCAP 03, 062 (2016), ’dark flow’ evidence and its implications,” (2012), arXiv:1509.02532 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:1202.0717 [astro-ph.CO]. [1121] Y. Akrami et al. (Planck), “Planck 2018 results. IV. [1134] Tao Hong, Christopher M. Springob, Lister Staveley- Diffuse component separation,” Astron. Astrophys. Smith, Morag I. Scrimgeour, Karen L. Masters, Lu- 641, A4 (2020), arXiv:1807.06208 [astro-ph.CO]. cas M. Macri, Bärbel S. Koribalski, D. Heath Jones, [1122] J. Cardoso, M. Le Jeune, J. Delabrouille, M. Betoule, and Tom H. Jarrett, “2MTF – IV. A bulk flow mea- and G. Patanchon, “Component separation with flexi- surement of the local Universe,” Mon. Not. Roy. As- ble models—application to multichannel astrophysical tron. Soc. 445, 402–413 (2014), arXiv:1409.0287 [astro- observations,” IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Sig- ph.CO]. nal Processing 2, 735–746 (2008). [1135] A. Kogut et al., “Dipole anisotropy in the COBE DMR [1123] M. Axelsson, Y. Fantaye, F. K. Hansen, A. J. Banday, first year sky maps,” Astrophys. J. 419, 1 (1993), H. K. Eriksen, and K. M. Gorski, “Directional de- arXiv:astro-ph/9312056. pendence of ΛCDM cosmological parameters,” Astro- [1136] D. J. Fixsen, E. S. Cheng, J. M. Gales, John C. Mather, phys. J. Lett. 773, L3 (2013), arXiv:1303.5371 [astro- R. A. Shafer, and E. L. Wright, “The Cosmic Mi- ph.CO]. crowave Background spectrum from the full COBE [1124] I. Antoniou and L. Perivolaropoulos, “Searching for a FIRAS data set,” Astrophys. J. 473, 576 (1996), Cosmological Preferred Axis: Union2 Data Analysis arXiv:astro-ph/9605054. and Comparison with Other Probes,” JCAP 12, 012 [1137] N. Aghanim et al. (Planck), “Planck intermediate re- (2010), arXiv:1007.4347 [astro-ph.CO]. sults. XLVI. Reduction of large-scale systematic effects [1125] Jun Koda, Chris Blake, Tamara Davis, Christina in HFI polarization maps and estimation of the reion- Magoulas, Christopher M. Springob, Morag Scrim- ization optical depth,” Astron. Astrophys. 596, A107 geour, Andrew Johnson, Gregory B. Poole, and Lister (2016), arXiv:1605.02985 [astro-ph.CO]. Staveley-Smith, “Are peculiar velocity surveys compet- [1138] Yousuke Itoh, Kazuhiro Yahata, and Masahiro itive as a cosmological probe?” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Takada, “A dipole anisotropy of galaxy distribution: Soc. 445, 4267–4286 (2014), arXiv:1312.1022 [astro- Does the CMB rest-frame exist in the local universe?” ph.CO]. Phys. Rev. D 82, 043530 (2010), arXiv:0912.1460 [1126] Richard Watkins, Hume A. Feldman, and Michael J. [astro-ph.CO]. Hudson, “Consistently Large Cosmic Flows on Scales [1139] David J. Bacon et al. (SKA), “Cosmology with of 100 Mpc/h: a Challenge for the Standard LCDM Phase 1 of the Square Kilometre Array: Red Book Cosmology,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 392, 743– 2018: Technical specifications and performance fore- 756 (2009), arXiv:0809.4041 [astro-ph]. casts,” Publ. Astron. Soc. Austral. 37, e007 (2020), [1127] Hume A. Feldman, Richard Watkins, and Michael J. arXiv:1811.02743 [astro-ph.CO]. Hudson, “Cosmic Flows on 100 Mpc/h Scales: Stan- [1140] G. F. R. Ellis and J. E. Baldwin, “On the ex- dardized Minimum Variance Bulk Flow, Shear and Oc- pected anisotropy of radio source counts,” Monthly tupole Moments,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 407, Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 206, 377– 2328–2338 (2010), arXiv:0911.5516 [astro-ph.CO]. 381 (1984), https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article- [1128] A. Kashlinsky, F. Atrio-Barandela, D. Kocevski, and pdf/206/2/377/18187025/mnras206-0377.pdf. H. Ebeling, “A measurement of large-scale peculiar ve- [1141] James H. McKay and David L. Wiltshire, “Defining locities of clusters of galaxies: results and cosmologi- the frame of minimum non-linear Hubble expansion cal implications,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 686, L49–L52 variation,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 457, 3285– (2009), arXiv:0809.3734 [astro-ph]. 3305 (2016), [Erratum: Mon.Not.Roy.Astron.Soc. 463, [1129] A. Kashlinsky, F. Atrio-Barandela, H. Ebeling, 3113 (2016)], arXiv:1503.04192 [astro-ph.CO]. A. Edge, and D. Kocevski, “A new measure- [1142] Ashok K. Singal, “Large peculiar motion of the solar ment of the bulk flow of X-ray luminous clusters of system from the dipole anisotropy in sky brightness galaxies,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 712, L81–L85 (2010), due to distant radio sources,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 742, arXiv:0910.4958 [astro-ph.CO]. L23 (2011), arXiv:1110.6260 [astro-ph.CO]. [1130] Adi Nusser and Marc Davis, “The cosmological bulk [1143] Cameron Gibelyou and Dragan Huterer, “Dipoles in flow: consistency with ΛCDM and z ≈ 0 con- the Sky,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 427, 1994–2021 95

(2012), arXiv:1205.6476 [astro-ph.CO]. [1157] Michael T. Murphy, J. K. Webb, and V. V. Flambaum, [1144] Matthias Rubart and Dominik J. Schwarz, “Cosmic “Further evidence for a variable fine-structure constant radio dipole from NVSS and WENSS,” Astron. As- from Keck/HIRES QSO absorption spectra,” Mon. trophys. 555, A117 (2013), arXiv:1301.5559 [astro- Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 345, 609 (2003), arXiv:astro- ph.CO]. ph/0306483. [1145] Prabhakar Tiwari, Rahul Kothari, Abhishek Naskar, [1158] P. Molaro et al., “The UVES Large Program for Test- Sharvari Nadkarni-Ghosh, and Pankaj Jain, “Dipole ing Fundamental Physics: I Bounds on a change in anisotropy in sky brightness and source count distribu- alpha towards quasar HE 2217-2818,” Astron. Astro- tion in radio NVSS data,” Astropart. Phys. 61, 1–11 phys. 555, A68 (2013), arXiv:1305.1884 [astro-ph.CO]. (2014), arXiv:1307.1947 [astro-ph.CO]. [1159] J. C. Berengut, V. V. Flambaum, A. Ong, J. K. [1146] James J. Condon, W. D. Cotton, E. W. Greisen, Q. F. Webb, John D. Barrow, M. A. Barstow, S. P. Preval, Yin, R. A. Perley, G. B. Taylor, and J. J. Broderick, and J. B. Holberg, “Limits on the dependence of the “The NRAO VLA Sky survey,” Astron. J. 115, 1693– fine-structure constant on gravitational potential from 1716 (1998). white-dwarf spectra,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 010801 [1147] H. T. Intema, P. Jagannathan, K. P. Mooley, and (2013), arXiv:1305.1337 [astro-ph.CO]. D. A. Frail, “The GMRT 150 MHz All-sky Radio Sur- [1160] J. K. Webb, A. Wright, F. E. Koch, and M. T. Mur- vey: First Alternative Data Release TGSS ADR1,” phy, “Enhanced heavy magnesium isotopes in quasar Astron. Astrophys. 598, A78 (2017), arXiv:1603.04368 absorption systems and varying alpha,” Mem. Soc. [astro-ph.CO]. Ast. It. 85, 57–62 (2014). [1148] Ashok K. Singal, “Large disparity in cosmic reference [1161] T. M. Evans et al., “The UVES Large Program frames determined from the sky distributions of ra- for testing fundamental physics – III. Constraints dio sources and the microwave background radiation,” on the fine-structure constant from three telescopes,” Phys. Rev. D 100, 063501 (2019), arXiv:1904.11362 Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 445, 128–150 (2014), [physics.gen-ph]. arXiv:1409.1923 [astro-ph.CO]. [1149] Chris Blake and Jasper Wall, “Detection of the velocity [1162] Matthew B. Bainbridge et al., “Probing the Gravi- dipole in the radio galaxies of the nrao vla sky survey,” tational Dependence of the Fine-Structure Constant Nature 416, 150–152 (2002), arXiv:astro-ph/0203385. from Observations of White Dwarf Stars,” Universe 3, [1150] R. Fernández-Cobos, P. Vielva, D. Pietrobon, A. Balbi, 32 (2017), arXiv:1702.01757 [astro-ph.CO]. E. Mart´ınez-González, and R. B. Barreiro, “Searching [1163] J. Hu et al., “Constraining the magnetic field on white for a dipole modulation in the large-scale structure of dwarf surfaces; Zeeman effects and fine structure con- the Universe,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 441, 2392– stant variation,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 485, 2397 (2014), arXiv:1312.0275 [astro-ph.CO]. 5050–5058 (2019), arXiv:1812.11480 [astro-ph.SR]. [1151] Michael S. Turner, “A Tilted Universe (and Other [1164] Dinko Milaković,Chung-Chi Lee, Robert F. Carswell, Remnants of the Preinflationary Universe),” Phys. John K. Webb, Paolo Molaro, and Luca Pasquini, “A Rev. D 44, 3737–3748 (1991). new era of fine structure constant measurements at [1152] Shamik Ghosh, “Generating Intrinsic Dipole high redshift,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 500, 1–21 Anisotropy in the Large Scale Structures,” Phys. (2020), arXiv:2008.10619 [astro-ph.CO]. Rev. D 89, 063518 (2014), arXiv:1309.6547 [astro- [1165] Chung-Chi Lee, John K. Webb, Dinko Milaković, and ph.CO]. Robert F. Carswell, “Non-uniqueness in quasar ab- [1153] Kaustav K. Das, Kishan Sankharva, and Pankaj Jain, sorption models and implications for measurements of “Explaining Excess Dipole in NVSS Data Using Su- the fine structure constant,” (2021), arXiv:2102.11648 perhorizon Perturbation,” (2021), arXiv:2101.11016 [astro-ph.CO]. [astro-ph.CO]. [1166] John K. Webb, Victor V. Flambaum, Christopher W. [1154] Ashok K. Singal, “Peculiar motion of the solar system Churchill, Michael J. Drinkwater, and John D. Bar- derived from a dipole anisotropy in the redshift dis- row, “Evidence for time variation of the fine struc- tribution of distant quasars,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. ture constant,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 884–887 (1999), Soc. 488, L104–L108 (2019), arXiv:1405.4796 [astro- arXiv:astro-ph/9803165. ph.CO]. [1167] V. A. Dzuba, V. V. Flambaum, and J. K. Webb, [1155] Edward L. Wright et al., “The Wide-field Infrared Sur- “Space-Time Variation of Physical Constants and Rel- vey Explorer (WISE): Mission Description and Initial ativistic Corrections in Atoms,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, On-orbit Performance,” Astron. J. 140, 1868 (2010), 888–891 (1999), arXiv:physics/9802029. arXiv:1008.0031 [astro-ph.IM]. [1168] J. K. Webb, M. T. Murphy, V. V. Flambaum, V. A. [1156] Peter R. M. Eisenhardt, Federico Marocco, John W. Dzuba, John D. Barrow, C. W. Churchill, J. X. Fowler, Aaron M. Meisner, J. Davy Kirkpatrick, Nel- Prochaska, and A. M. Wolfe, “Further evidence for son Garcia, Thomas H. Jarrett, Renata Koontz, Eli- cosmological evolution of the fine structure constant,” jah J. Marchese, S. Adam Stanford, Dan Caselden, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 091301 (2001), arXiv:astro- Michael C. Cushing, Roc M. Cutri, Jacqueline K. ph/0012539. Faherty, Christopher R. Gelino, Anthony H. Gonza- [1169] M. T. Murphy, J. K. Webb, V. V. Flambaum, V. A. lez, Amanda Mainzer, Bahram Mobasher, David J. Dzuba, C. W. Churchill, J. X. Prochaska, John D. Bar- Schlegel, Daniel Stern, Harry I. Teplitz, and Ed- row, and A. M. Wolfe, “Possible evidence for a vari- ward L. Wright, “The CatWISE preliminary catalog: able fine structure constant from QSO absorption lines: Motions from WISE and NEOWISE data,” The As- Motivations, analysis and results,” Mon. Not. Roy. As- trophysical Journal Supplement Series 247, 69 (2020). tron. Soc. 327, 1208 (2001), arXiv:astro-ph/0012419. 96

[1170] Hans Dekker, Sandro D’Odorico, Andreas Kaufer, [1185] Diego Harari and Pierre Sikivie, “Effects of a Nambu- Bernard Delabre, and Heinz Kotzlowski, “Design, Goldstone boson on the polarization of radio galaxies construction, and performance of UVES, the echelle and the cosmic microwave background,” Phys. Lett. B spectrograph for the UT2 Kueyen Telescope at the 289, 67–72 (1992). ESO Paranal Observatory,” in Optical and IR Tele- [1186] Tomohiro Fujita, Yuto Minami, Kai Murai, and Hi- scope Instrumentation and Detectors, Vol. 4008, edited romasa Nakatsuka, “Probing Axion-like Particles via by Masanori Iye and Alan F. M. Moorwood, Interna- CMB Polarization,” (2020), arXiv:2008.02473 [astro- tional Society for Optics and Photonics (SPIE, 2000) ph.CO]. pp. 534 – 545. [1187] Arthur Lue, Li-Min Wang, and Marc Kamionkowski, [1171] Ewan Cameron and Tony Pettitt, “On the Evidence “Cosmological signature of new parity violating in- for Cosmic Variation of the Fine Structure Constant: teractions,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 1506–1509 (1999), A Bayesian Reanalysis of the Quasar Dataset,” (2012), arXiv:astro-ph/9812088. arXiv:1207.6223 [astro-ph.CO]. [1188] Yuto Minami, Hiroki Ochi, Kiyotomo Ichiki, Nobuhiko [1172] N. Kanekar, G. I. Langston, J. T. Stocke, C. L. Carilli, Katayama, Eiichiro Komatsu, and Tomotake Mat- and K. M. Menten, “Constraining fundamental con- sumura, “Simultaneous determination of the cosmic stant evolution with HI and OH lines,” Astrophys. J. birefringence and miscalibrated polarization angles Lett. 746, L16 (2012), arXiv:1201.3372 [astro-ph.CO]. from CMB experiments,” PTEP 2019, 083E02 (2019), [1173] S. A. Levshakov, F. Combes, F. Boone, I. I. Aga- arXiv:1904.12440 [astro-ph.CO]. fonova, D. Reimers, and M. G. Kozlov, “An upper [1189] Yuto Minami, “Determination of miscalibrated polar- limit to the variation in the fundamental constants at ization angles from observed cosmic microwave back- redshift z = 5.2,” Astron. Astrophys. 540, L9 (2012), ground and foreground EB power spectra: Applica- arXiv:1203.3649 [astro-ph.CO]. tion to partial-sky observation,” PTEP 2020, 063E01 [1174] C. J. A. P. Martins and A. M. M. Pinho, “Stability of (2020), arXiv:2002.03572 [astro-ph.CO]. fundamental couplings: a global analysis,” Phys. Rev. [1190] Yuto Minami and Eiichiro Komatsu, “Simultane- D 95, 023008 (2017), arXiv:1701.08724 [astro-ph.CO]. ous determination of the cosmic birefringence and [1175] Vincent Dumont and John K. Webb, “Modelling long- miscalibrated polarization angles II: Including cross range wavelength distortions in quasar absorption frequency spectra,” PTEP 2020, 103E02 (2020), echelle spectra,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 468, arXiv:2006.15982 [astro-ph.CO]. 1568–1574 (2017), arXiv:1701.03176 [astro-ph.CO]. [1191] Yuto Minami and Eiichiro Komatsu, “New Extraction [1176] Michael R. Wilczynska et al., “Four direct measure- of the Cosmic Birefringence from the Planck 2018 Po- ments of the fine-structure constant 13 billion years larization Data,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 221301 (2020), ago,” Sci. Adv. 6, eaay9672 (2020), arXiv:2003.07627 arXiv:2011.11254 [astro-ph.CO]. [astro-ph.CO]. [1192] Tomohiro Fujita, Kai Murai, Hiromasa Nakatsuka, [1177] Antonio Mariano and Leandros Perivolaropoulos, “Is and Shinji Tsujikawa, “Detection of isotropic cosmic there correlation between Fine Structure and Dark birefringence and its implications for axion-like parti- Energy Cosmic Dipoles?” Phys. Rev. D 86, 083517 cles including dark energy,” Phys. Rev. D 103, 043509 (2012), arXiv:1206.4055 [astro-ph.CO]. (2021), arXiv:2011.11894 [astro-ph.CO]. [1178] Antonio Mariano and Leandros Perivolaropoulos, [1193] F. Bianchini et al. (SPT), “Searching for Anisotropic “CMB Maximum temperature asymmetry Axis: Cosmic Birefringence with Polarization Data from Alignment with other cosmic asymmetries,” Phys. SPTpol,” Phys. Rev. D 102, 083504 (2020), Rev. D 87, 043511 (2013), arXiv:1211.5915 [astro- arXiv:2006.08061 [astro-ph.CO]. ph.CO]. [1194] Toshiya Namikawa et al., “Atacama Cosmology Tele- [1179] Héliondu Mas des Bourboux et al., “Baryon acous- scope: Constraints on cosmic birefringence,” Phys. tic oscillations from the complete SDSS-III Lyα-quasar Rev. D 101, 083527 (2020), arXiv:2001.10465 [astro- cross-correlation function at z = 2.4,” Astron. As- ph.CO]. trophys. 608, A130 (2017), arXiv:1708.02225 [astro- [1195] P. Kroupa, B. Famaey, K. S. de Boer, J. Dabring- ph.CO]. hausen, M. S. Pawlowski, C. M. Boily, H. Jerjen, [1180] T. D. Lee and Chen-Ning Yang, “Question of Parity D. Forbes, G. Hensler, and M. Metz, “Local-Group Conservation in Weak Interactions,” Phys. Rev. 104, tests of dark-matter Concordance Cosmology: To- 254–258 (1956). wards a new paradigm for structure formation?” As- [1181] C. S. Wu, E. Ambler, R. W. Hayward, D. D. Hoppes, tron. Astrophys. 523, A32 (2010), arXiv:1006.1647 and R. P. Hudson, “Experimental Test of Parity Con- [astro-ph.CO]. servation in β Decay,” Phys. Rev. 105, 1413–1414 [1196] David H. Weinberg, James S. Bullock, Fabio Gov- (1957). ernato, Rachel Kuzio de Naray, and Annika H. G. [1182] Sean M. Carroll, George B. Field, and Roman Jackiw, Peter, “Cold dark matter: controversies on small “Limits on a Lorentz and Parity Violating Modification scales,” Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 112, 12249–12255 of Electrodynamics,” Phys. Rev. D 41, 1231 (1990). (2015), arXiv:1306.0913 [astro-ph.CO]. [1183] Sean M. Carroll, “Quintessence and the rest of [1197] Tomohiro Nakama, Jens Chluba, and Marc the world,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 3067–3070 (1998), Kamionkowski, “Shedding light on the small-scale cri- arXiv:astro-ph/9806099. sis with CMB spectral distortions,” Phys. Rev. D 95, [1184] Michael S. Turner and Lawrence M. Widrow, “Inflation 121302 (2017), arXiv:1703.10559 [astro-ph.CO]. Produced, Large Scale Magnetic Fields,” Phys. Rev. D [1198] Pavel Kroupa, “The dark matter crisis: falsifica- 37, 2743 (1988). tion of the current standard model of cosmology,” Publ. Astron. Soc. Austral. 29, 395–433 (2012), 97

arXiv:1204.2546 [astro-ph.CO]. (2007), arXiv:astro-ph/0606281. [1199] Pavel Kroupa, “Galaxies as simple dynamical systems: [1215] Ivan de Martino, Sankha S. Chakrabarty, Valentina observational data disfavor dark matter and stochas- Cesare, Arianna Gallo, Luisa Ostorero, and Antonaldo tic star formation,” Can. J. Phys. 93, 169–202 (2015), Diaferio, “Dark matters on the scale of galaxies,” Uni- arXiv:1406.4860 [astro-ph.GA]. verse 6, 107 (2020), arXiv:2007.15539 [astro-ph.CO]. [1200] Paolo Salucci, “The distribution of dark matter in [1216] R. Foot and S. Vagnozzi, “Dissipative hidden sec- galaxies,” Astron. Astrophys. Rev. 27, 2 (2019), tor dark matter,” Phys. Rev. D 91, 023512 (2015), arXiv:1811.08843 [astro-ph.GA]. arXiv:1409.7174 [hep-ph]. [1201] Paul Bode, Jeremiah P. Ostriker, and Neil Turok, [1217] Robert Foot and Sunny Vagnozzi, “Solving the small- “Halo formation in warm dark matter models,” Astro- scale structure puzzles with dissipative dark matter,” phys. J. 556, 93–107 (2001), arXiv:astro-ph/0010389. JCAP 07, 013 (2016), arXiv:1602.02467 [astro-ph.CO]. [1202] Kevork Abazajian, “Linear cosmological structure lim- [1218] Till Sawala et al., “The APOSTLE simulations: its on warm dark matter,” Phys. Rev. D 73, 063513 solutions to the Local Group’s cosmic puzzles,” (2006), arXiv:astro-ph/0512631. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 457, 1931–1943 (2016), [1203] Matteo Viel, Julien Lesgourgues, Martin G. Haehnelt, arXiv:1511.01098 [astro-ph.GA]. Sabino Matarrese, and Antonio Riotto, “Constrain- [1219] B. Moore, “Evidence against dissipationless dark mat- ing warm dark matter candidates including sterile ter from observations of galaxy haloes,” Nature 370, neutrinos and light gravitinos with WMAP and the 629 (1994). Lyman-alpha forest,” Phys. Rev. D 71, 063534 (2005), [1220] Ricardo A. Flores and Joel R. Primack, “Observational arXiv:astro-ph/0501562. and theoretical constraints on singular dark matter ha- [1204] Aurel Schneider, Donnino Anderhalden, Andrea Mac- los,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 427, L1–4 (1994), arXiv:astro- cio, and Juerg Diemand, “Warm dark matter does not ph/9402004. do better than cold dark matter in solving small-scale [1221] Julio F. Navarro, Carlos S. Frenk, and Simon inconsistencies,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 441, 6 D. M. White, “The Structure of cold dark matter ha- (2014), arXiv:1309.5960 [astro-ph.CO]. los,” Astrophys. J. 462, 563–575 (1996), arXiv:astro- [1205] Matteo Viel, George D. Becker, James S. Bolton, and ph/9508025. Martin G. Haehnelt, “Warm dark matter as a solution [1222] Julio F. Navarro, Carlos S. Frenk, and Simon D. M. to the small scale crisis: New constraints from high red- White, “A Universal density profile from hierarchi- shift Lyman-α forest data,” Phys. Rev. D 88, 043502 cal clustering,” Astrophys. J. 490, 493–508 (1997), (2013), arXiv:1306.2314 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:astro-ph/9611107. [1206] Wayne Hu, Rennan Barkana, and Andrei Gruzinov, [1223] Julio F. Navarro, Vincent R. Eke, and Carlos S. “Cold and fuzzy dark matter,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, Frenk, “The cores of dwarf galaxy halos,” Mon. Not. 1158–1161 (2000), arXiv:astro-ph/0003365. Roy. Astron. Soc. 283, L72–L78 (1996), arXiv:astro- [1207] Lam Hui, Jeremiah P. Ostriker, Scott Tremaine, ph/9610187. and Edward Witten, “Ultralight scalars as cosmolog- [1224] Ben Moore, Thomas R. Quinn, Fabio Governato, ical dark matter,” Phys. Rev. D 95, 043541 (2017), Joachim Stadel, and George Lake, “Cold collapse and arXiv:1610.08297 [astro-ph.CO]. the core catastrophe,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. [1208] Hsi-Yu Schive, Tzihong Chiueh, and Tom Broad- 310, 1147–1152 (1999), arXiv:astro-ph/9903164. hurst, “Cosmic Structure as the Quantum Interference [1225] Ismael Ferrero, Mario G. Abadi, Julio F. Navarro, of a Coherent Dark Wave,” Nature Phys. 10, 496–499 Laura V. Sales, and Sebastian Gurovich, “The dark (2014), arXiv:1406.6586 [astro-ph.GA]. matter halos of dwarf galaxies: a challenge for the [1209] Vid Irˇsiˇc,Matteo Viel, Martin G. Haehnelt, James S. LCDM paradigm?” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 425, Bolton, and George D. Becker, “First constraints 2817–2823 (2012), arXiv:1111.6609 [astro-ph.CO]. on fuzzy dark matter from Lyman-α forest data and [1226] Marc Davis, George Efstathiou, Carlos S. Frenk, and hydrodynamical simulations,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, Simon D. M. White, “The Evolution of Large Scale 031302 (2017), arXiv:1703.04683 [astro-ph.CO]. Structure in a Universe Dominated by Cold Dark Mat- [1210] Eric D. Carlson, Marie E. Machacek, and Lawrence J. ter,” Astrophys. J. 292, 371–394 (1985). Hall, “Self-interacting dark matter,” Astrophys. J. [1227] G. Battaglia, A. Helmi, E. Tolstoy, M. Irwin, V. Hill, 398, 43–52 (1992). and P. Jablonka, “The kinematic status and mass con- [1211] Mattias Blennow, Stefan Clementz, and Juan Herrero- tent of the Sculptor dwarf spheroidal galaxy,” Astro- Garcia, “Self-interacting inelastic dark matter: A vi- phys. J. Lett. 681, L13 (2008), arXiv:0802.4220 [astro- able solution to the small scale structure problems,” ph]. JCAP 03, 048 (2017), arXiv:1612.06681 [hep-ph]. [1228] Matthew G. Walker and Jorge Penarrubia, “A Method [1212] Camilo Garcia-Cely and Xiaoyong Chu, “Self- for Measuring (Slopes of) the Mass Profiles of Dwarf interacting dark matter as a solution to the problems in Spheroidal Galaxies,” Astrophys. J. 742, 20 (2011), small-scale structures,” in 52nd Rencontres de Moriond arXiv:1108.2404 [astro-ph.CO]. on EW Interactions and Unified Theories (2017) pp. [1229] N. C. Amorisco and N. W. Evans, “Dark Matter Cores 307–314, arXiv:1705.06221 [hep-ph]. and Cusps: The Case of Multiple Stellar Populations [1213] Sean Tulin and Hai-Bo Yu, “Dark Matter Self- in Dwarf Spheroidals,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. interactions and Small Scale Structure,” Phys. Rept. 419, 184–196 (2012), arXiv:1106.1062 [astro-ph.CO]. 730, 1–57 (2018), arXiv:1705.02358 [hep-ph]. [1230] Anna Genina, Alejandro Ben´ıtez-Llambay, Carlos S. [1214] Louis E. Strigari, Manoj Kaplinghat, and James S. Frenk, Shaun Cole, Azadeh Fattahi, Julio F. Navarro, Bullock, “Dark Matter Halos with Cores from Hierar- Kyle A. Oman, Till Sawala, and Tom Theuns, chical Structure Formation,” Phys. Rev. D 75, 061303 “The core–cusp problem: a matter of perspective,” 98

Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 4099 (2019), arXiv:1803.05424 [astro-ph.GA]. 474, 1398–1411 (2017). [1246] Jesus Zavala, Mark Vogelsberger, and Matthew G. [1231] Stacy S. McGaugh and W. J. G. de Blok, “Testing Walker, “Constraining Self-Interacting Dark Mat- the dark matter hypothesis with low surface brightness ter with the Milky Way’s dwarf spheroidals,” galaxies and other evidence,” Astrophys. J. 499, 41 Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 431, L20–L24 (2013), (1998), arXiv:astro-ph/9801123. arXiv:1211.6426 [astro-ph.CO]. [1232] G Kauffmann, Simon D. M. White, and B. Guider- [1247] Mark Vogelsberger, Jesus Zavala, and Abraham Loeb, doni, “The Formation and Evolution of Galaxies “Subhaloes in Self-Interacting Galactic Dark Mat- Within Merging Dark Matter Haloes,” Mon. Not. Roy. ter Haloes,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 423, 3740 Astron. Soc. 264, 201 (1993). (2012), arXiv:1201.5892 [astro-ph.CO]. [1233] Anatoly A. Klypin, Andrey V. Kravtsov, Octavio [1248] Pavel Kroupa, Christian Theis, and Christian M. Valenzuela, and Francisco Prada, “Where are the Boily, “The Great disk of Milky Way satellites and missing Galactic satellites?” Astrophys. J. 522, 82–92 cosmological sub-structures,” Astron. Astrophys. 431, (1999), arXiv:astro-ph/9901240. 517–521 (2005), arXiv:astro-ph/0410421. [1234] B. Moore, S. Ghigna, F. Governato, G. Lake, [1249] Neil G. Ibata, Rodrigo A. Ibata, Benoit Famaey, and Thomas R. Quinn, J. Stadel, and P. Tozzi, “Dark mat- Geraint F. Lewis, “Velocity anti-correlation of diamet- ter substructure within galactic halos,” Astrophys. J. rically opposed galaxy satellites in the low redshift Lett. 524, L19–L22 (1999), arXiv:astro-ph/9907411. universe,” Nature 511, 563 (2014), arXiv:1407.8178 [1235] James S. Bullock, “Notes on the Missing Satellites [astro-ph.GA]. Problem,” (2010), arXiv:1009.4505 [astro-ph.CO]. [1250] Anthony R. Conn et al., “The Three-Dimensional [1236] Mario Mateo, “Dwarf galaxies of the Local Group,” Structure of the M31 Satellite System: Strong Evi- Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 36, 435–506 (1998), dence for an Inhomogeneous Distribution of Satellites,” arXiv:astro-ph/9810070. Astrophys. J. 766, 120 (2013), arXiv:1301.7131 [astro- [1237] Michael Boylan-Kolchin, James S. Bullock, and Manoj ph.CO]. Kaplinghat, “Too big to fail? The puzzling darkness [1251] Marcel S. Pawlowski et al., “Co-orbiting satellite of massive Milky Way subhaloes,” Mon. Not. Roy. As- galaxy structures are still in conflict with the distri- tron. Soc. 415, L40 (2011), arXiv:1103.0007 [astro- bution of primordial dwarf galaxies,” Mon. Not. Roy. ph.CO]. Astron. Soc. 442, 2362–2380 (2014), arXiv:1406.1799 [1238] Michael Boylan-Kolchin, James S. Bullock, and Manoj [astro-ph.GA]. Kaplinghat, “The Milky Way’s bright satellites as an [1252] Marcel S. Pawlowski, “The Planes of Satellite Galax- apparent failure of LCDM,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. ies Problem, Suggested Solutions, and Open Ques- Soc. 422, 1203–1218 (2012), arXiv:1111.2048 [astro- tions,” Mod. Phys. Lett. A 33, 1830004 (2018), ph.CO]. arXiv:1802.02579 [astro-ph.GA]. [1239] Shea Garrison-Kimmel, Michael Boylan-Kolchin, [1253] M. S. Pawlowski, J. Pflamm-Altenburg, and James S. Bullock, and Evan N. Kirby, “Too Big to P. Kroupa, “The VPOS: a vast polar structure of satel- Fail in the Local Group,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. lite galaxies, globular clusters and streams around the 444, 222–236 (2014), arXiv:1404.5313 [astro-ph.GA]. Milky Way,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 423, 1109 [1240] Emmanouil Papastergis, Riccardo Giovanelli, (2012), arXiv:1204.5176 [astro-ph.GA]. Martha P. Haynes, and Francesco Shankar, “Is [1254] Rodrigo A. Ibata et al., “A Vast Thin Plane of there a “too big to fail” problem in the field?” As- Co-rotating Dwarf Galaxies Orbiting the Andromeda tron. Astrophys. 574, A113 (2015), arXiv:1407.4665 Galaxy,” Nature 493, 62–65 (2013), arXiv:1301.0446 [astro-ph.GA]. [astro-ph.CO]. [1241] Erik J. Tollerud, Michael Boylan-Kolchin, and [1255] Sangmo Tony Sohn, Ekta Patel, Mark A. Fardal, James S. Bullock, “M31 Satellite Masses Compared to Gurtina Besla, Roeland P. van der Marel, Marla Geha, LCDM Subhaloes,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 440, and Puragra Guhathakurta, “Hst proper motions of 3511–3519 (2014), arXiv:1403.6469 [astro-ph.GA]. ngc 147 and ngc 185: Orbital histories and tests of a [1242] Manoj Kaplinghat, Mauro Valli, and Hai-Bo Yu, “Too dynamically coherent andromeda satellite plane,” The Big To Fail in Light of Gaia,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Astrophysical Journal 901, 43 (2020). Soc. 490, 231–242 (2019), arXiv:1904.04939 [astro- [1256] Noam I. Libeskind, Carlos S. Frenk, Shaun Cole, ph.GA]. John C. Helly, Adrian Jenkins, Julio F. Navarro, and [1243] Justin I. Read, M. I. Wilkinson, N. Wyn Evans, Chris Power, “The Distribution of satellite galaxies: G. Gilmore, and Jan T. Kleyna, “The importance of The Great pancake,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 363, tides for the local group dwarf spheroidals,” Mon. Not. 146–152 (2005), arXiv:astro-ph/0503400. Roy. Astron. Soc. 367, 387–399 (2006), arXiv:astro- [1257] Andrew R. Zentner, Andrey V. Kravtsov, Oleg Y. ph/0511759. Gnedin, and Anatoly A. Klypin, “The Anisotropic [1244] Mark R. Lovell, Violeta Gonzalez-Perez, Sownak Bose, distribution of Galactic satellites,” Astrophys. J. 629, Alexey Boyarsky, Shaun Cole, Carlos S. Frenk, and 219 (2005), arXiv:astro-ph/0502496. Oleg Ruchayskiy, “Addressing the too big to fail prob- [1258] Frank C. van den Bosch, Andreas Burkert, and Rob A. lem with baryon physics and sterile neutrino dark mat- Swaters, “The angular momentum content of dwarf ter,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 468, 2836–2849 galaxies: new challenges for the theory of galaxy (2017), arXiv:1611.00005 [astro-ph.GA]. formation,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 326, 1205 [1245] Brandon Bozek et al., “Warm FIRE: Simulating (2001), arXiv:astro-ph/0105082. Galaxy Formation with Resonant Sterile Neutrino [1259] J. J. Monaghan, “Smoothed particle hydrodynamics,” Dark Matter,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 483, 4086– Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 30, 543–574 (1992). 99

[1260] James S. Bullock, Avishai Dekel, Tsafrir S. Kolatt, An- [1277] Volker Bromm, “Formation of the First Stars,” Rept. drey V. Kravtsov, Anatoly A. Klypin, Cristiano Por- Prog. Phys. 76, 112901 (2013), arXiv:1305.5178 [astro- ciani, and Joel R. Primack, “A Universal angular mo- ph.CO]. mentum profile for galactic halos,” Astrophys. J. 555, [1278] Naoki Yoshida, Tom Abel, Lars Hernquist, and Naoshi 240–257 (2001), arXiv:astro-ph/0011001. Sugiyama, “Simulations of early structure formation: [1261] N. Banik and P. Sikivie, “Axions and the Galactic Primordial gas clouds,” Astrophys. J. 592, 645–663 Angular Momentum Distribution,” Phys. Rev. D 88, (2003), arXiv:astro-ph/0301645. 123517 (2013), arXiv:1307.3547 [astro-ph.GA]. [1279] Shingo Hirano, Takashi Hosokawa, Naoki Yoshida, [1262] Stacy S. McGaugh, “A Novel Test of the Mod- Kazuyuki Omukai, and Harold W. Yorke, “Primor- ified Newtonian Dynamics with Gas Rich Galax- dial star formation under the influence of far ultravio- ies,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 121303 (2011), [Erratum: let radiation: 1540 cosmological haloes and the stellar Phys.Rev.Lett. 107, 229901 (2011)], arXiv:1102.3913 mass distribution,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 448, [astro-ph.CO]. 568–587 (2015), arXiv:1501.01630 [astro-ph.GA]. [1263] Aaron A. Dutton, “The baryonic Tully-Fisher relation [1280] Hao Xu, Kyungjin Ahn, Michael L. Norman, John H. and galactic outflows,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. Wise, and Brian W. O’Shea, “X-ray Background 424, 3123 (2012), arXiv:1206.1855 [astro-ph.CO]. at High Redshifts from Pop III Remnants: Results [1264] Laura V. Sales et al., “The low-mass end of the bary- from Pop III star formation rates in the Renais- onic Tully-Fisher relation,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. sance Simulations,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 832, L5 (2016), Soc. 464, 2419–2428 (2017), arXiv:1602.02155 [astro- arXiv:1607.02664 [astro-ph.GA]. ph.GA]. [1281] L. Tornatore, A. Ferrara, and R. Schneider, “Popula- [1265] Arianna Di Cintio and Federico Lelli, “The mass dis- tion III stars: hidden or disappeared ?” Mon. Not. Roy. crepancy acceleration relation in a ΛCDM context,” Astron. Soc. 382, 945 (2007), arXiv:0707.1433 [astro- Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 456, L127–L131 (2016), ph]. arXiv:1511.06616 [astro-ph.GA]. [1282] Jarrett L. Johnson, “Population III Star Clusters in [1266] Marla Geha, M. R. Blanton, M. Masjedi, and A. A. the Reionized Universe,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. West, “The Baryon Content of Extremely Low Mass 404, 1425 (2010), arXiv:0911.1294 [astro-ph.CO]. Dwarf Galaxies,” Astrophys. J. 653, 240–254 (2006), [1283] Howard E. Bond, Edmund P. Nelan, Don A. Vanden- arXiv:astro-ph/0608295. Berg, Gail H. Schaefer, and Dianne Harmer, “HD [1267] Isabel M. Santos-Santos, Chris B. Brook, Greg Stinson, 140283: A Star in the Solar Neighborhood that Formed Arianna Di Cintio, James Wadsley, Rosa Dom´ınguez- Shortly After the Big Bang,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 765, Tenreiro, Stefan Gottlöber, and Gustavo Yepes, “The L12 (2013), arXiv:1302.3180 [astro-ph.SR]. distribution of mass components in simulated disc [1284] Don A. VandenBerg, Howard E. Bond, Edmund P. galaxies,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 455, 476–483 Nelan, P. E. Nissen, Gail H. Schaefer, and Dianne (2016), arXiv:1510.02474 [astro-ph.GA]. Harmer, “THREE ANCIENT HALO SUBGIANTS: [1268] P. J. E. Peebles, “The void phenomenon,” Astrophys. PRECISE PARALLAXES, COMPOSITIONS, AGES, J. 557, 495–504 (2001), arXiv:astro-ph/0101127 [astro- AND IMPLICATIONS FOR GLOBULAR CLUS- ph]. TERS, ,,” The Astrophysical Journal 792, 110 (2014). [1269] Stefan Gottloeber, Ewa L. Lokas, Anatoly Klypin, [1285] Raul Jimenez, Andrea Cimatti, Licia Verde, Michele and Yehuda Hoffman, “The Structure of voids,” Mon. Moresco, and Benjamin Wandelt, “The local and dis- Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 344, 715 (2003), arXiv:astro- tant Universe: stellar ages and H0,” JCAP 03, 043 ph/0305393. (2019), arXiv:1902.07081 [astro-ph.CO]. [1270] P. James E. Peebles, “Open problems in cosmol- [1286] M. A. C. Perryman, Klaas S. de Boer, G. Gilmore, ogy,” Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl. 138, 5–9 (2005), E. Hog, M. G. Lattanzi, L. Lindegren, X. Luri, arXiv:astro-ph/0311435. F. Mignard, O. Pace, and P. T. de Zeeuw, “GAIA: [1271] P.J.E. Peebles, “Galaxies as a cosmological test,” Composition, formation and evolution of the Galaxy,” Nuovo Cim. B 122, 1035–1042 (2007), arXiv:0712.2757 Astron. Astrophys. 369, 339–363 (2001), arXiv:astro- [astro-ph]. ph/0101235. [1272] A. Tikhonov and A. Klypin, “The emptiness of voids: [1287] T. Prusti et al. (Gaia), “The Gaia Mission,” Astron. yet another over-abundance problem for the LCDM Astrophys. 595, A1 (2016), arXiv:1609.04153 [astro- model,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 395, 1915 (2009), ph.IM]. arXiv:0807.0924 [astro-ph]. [1288] David Valcin, José Luis Bernal, Raul Jimenez, Li- [1273] Zoltan Haiman, Anne A. Thoul, and Abraham Loeb, cia Verde, and Benjamin D. Wandelt, “Inferring the “Cosmological formation of low mass objects,” Astro- Age of the Universe with Globular Clusters,” (2020), phys. J. 464, 523 (1996), arXiv:astro-ph/9507111. arXiv:2007.06594 [astro-ph.CO]. [1274] Volker Bromm, Paolo S. Coppi, and Richard B. Lar- [1289] Richard H. Cyburt, Brian D. Fields, and Keith A. son, “The formation of the first stars. I. The Primordial Olive, “Primordial nucleosynthesis in light of WMAP,” star forming cloud,” Astrophys. J. 564, 23–51 (2002), Phys. Lett. B 567, 227–234 (2003), arXiv:astro- arXiv:astro-ph/0102503. ph/0302431. [1275] Tom Abel, Greg L. Bryan, and Michael L. Norman, [1290] Martin Asplund, David L. Lambert, Poul Erik Nissen, “The formation of the first star in the Universe,” Sci- Francesca Primas, and Verne V. Smith, “Lithium iso- ence 295, 93 (2002), arXiv:astro-ph/0112088. topic abundances in metal-poor halo stars,” Astrophys. [1276] Volker Bromm and Richard B. Larson, “The First J. 644, 229–259 (2006), arXiv:astro-ph/0510636. stars,” Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 42, 79–118 [1291] Richard H. Cyburt, Brian D. Fields, and Keith A. (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0311019. Olive, “An Update on the big bang nucleosynthesis 100

prediction for Li-7: The problem worsens,” JCAP 11, proved constraints and a possible solution to the 012 (2008), arXiv:0808.2818 [astro-ph]. Lithium problem,” Astron. Astrophys. 633, L11 [1292] P. A. Zyla et al. (Particle Data Group), “Review of (2020), arXiv:2001.01787 [astro-ph.CO]. Particle Physics,” PTEP 2020, 083C01 (2020). [1307] Pasquale Di Bari, Stephen F. King, and Alexander [1293] Cyril Pitrou, Alain Coc, Jean-Philippe Uzan, and Merle, “Dark Radiation or Warm Dark Matter from Elisabeth Vangioni, “Precision big bang nucleosynthe- long lived particle decays in the light of Planck,” Phys. sis with improved Helium-4 predictions,” Phys. Rept. Lett. B 724, 77–83 (2013), arXiv:1303.6267 [hep-ph]. 754, 1–66 (2018), arXiv:1801.08023 [astro-ph.CO]. [1308] L. Sbordone et al., “The metal-poor end of the [1294] F. Hammache et al., “Search for new resonant states Spite plateau. 1: Stellar parameters, metallicities and in 10C and 11C and their impact on the cosmological lithium abundances,” Astron. Astrophys. 522, A26 lithium problem,” Phys. Rev. C 88, 062802 (2013), (2010), arXiv:1003.4510 [astro-ph.GA]. arXiv:1312.0894 [nucl-ex]. [1309] Jorge Melendez, Luca Casagrande, Ivan Ramirez, Mar- [1295] R. G. Pizzone, R. Sparta, C. A. Bertulani, C. Spi- tin Asplund, and William Schuster, “Observational taleri, M. La Cognata, J. Lalmansingh, L. Lamia, evidence for a broken Li Spite plateau and mass- A. Mukhamedzhanov, and A. Tumino, “Big Bang dependent Li depletion,” Astron. Astrophys. 515, L3 nucleosynthesis revisited via Trojan Horse Method (2010), arXiv:1005.2944 [astro-ph.SR]. measurements,” Astrophys. J. 786, 112 (2014), [1310] M. Spite, F. Spite, and P. Bonifacio, “The cosmic arXiv:1403.4909 [nucl-ex]. lithium problem: an observer’s perspective,” Mem. [1296] Dai G. Yamazaki, Motohiko Kusakabe, Toshitaka Ka- Soc. Astron. Ital. Suppl. 22, 9 (2012), arXiv:1208.1190 jino, Grant J. Mathews, and Myung-Ki Cheoun, “Cos- [astro-ph.CO]. mological solutions to the Lithium problem: Big-bang [1311] Fabio Iocco, “The lithium problem, a phenomenolo- nucleosynthesis with photon cooling, X-particle decay gist’s perspective,” Mem. Soc. Astron. Ital. Suppl. 22, and a primordial magnetic ﬁeld,” Phys. Rev. D 90, 19 (2012), arXiv:1206.2396 [astro-ph.GA]. 023001 (2014), arXiv:1407.0021 [astro-ph.CO]. [1312] G. J. Mathews, A. Kedia, N. Sasankan, M. Kusak- [1297] Motohiko Kusakabe, K. S. Kim, Myung-Ki Cheoun, abe, Y. Luo, T. Kajino, D. Yamazaki, T. Makki, Toshitaka Kajino, Yasushi Kino, and Grant J. Math- and M. El Eid, “Cosmological Solutions to the ews, “Revised Big Bang Nucleosynthesis with long- Lithium Problem,” JPS Conf. Proc. 31, 011033 (2020), lived negatively charged massive particles: updated arXiv:1909.01245 [astro-ph.CO]. recombination rates, primordial 9Be nucleosynthesis, [1313] Julien Larena, Jean-Michel Alimi, and Arturo Serna, and impact of new 6Li limits,” Astrophys. J. Suppl. “Big Bang nucleosynthesis in scalar tensor grav- 214, 5 (2014), arXiv:1403.4156 [astro-ph.CO]. ity: The key problem of the primordial Li-7 abun- [1298] Joe Sato, Takashi Shimomura, and Masato Ya- dance,” Astrophys. J. 658, 1–10 (2007), arXiv:astro- manaka, “A Solution to Lithium Problem by Long- ph/0511693. Lived Stau,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 26, 1741005 (2017), [1314] Kazunori Kohri and Fumihiro Takayama, “Big bang arXiv:1604.04769 [hep-ph]. nucleosynthesis with long lived charged massive par- [1299] Andreas Goudelis, Maxim Pospelov, and Josef ticles,” Phys. Rev. D 76, 063507 (2007), arXiv:hep- Pradler, “Light Particle Solution to the Cosmic ph/0605243. Lithium Problem,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 211303 [1315] J. C. Berengut, V. V. Flambaum, and V. F. Dmitriev, (2016), arXiv:1510.08858 [hep-ph]. “Eﬀect of quark-mass variation on big bang nu- [1300] S. Q. Hou, J. J. He, A. Parikh, D. Kahl, C. A. Bertu- cleosynthesis,” Phys. Lett. B 683, 114–118 (2010), lani, T. Kajino, G. J. Mathews, and G. Zhao, “Non- arXiv:0907.2288 [nucl-th]. extensive Statistics to the Cosmological Lithium Prob- [1316] Masahiro Kawasaki and Motohiko Kusakabe, “De- lem,” Astrophys. J. 834, 165 (2017), arXiv:1701.04149 struction of 7Be in big bang nucleosynthesis via long- [astro-ph.CO]. lived sub-strongly interacting massive particles as a so- [1301] Alain Coc and Elisabeth Vangioni, “Primordial nucle- lution to the Li problem,” Phys. Rev. D 83, 055011 osynthesis,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 26, 1741002 (2017), (2011), arXiv:1012.0435 [hep-ph]. arXiv:1707.01004 [astro-ph.CO]. [1317] Myung-Ki Cheoun, Toshitaka Kajino, Motohiko [1302] Kanji Mori and Motohiko Kusakabe, “Roles of Kusakabe, and Grant J. Mathews, “Time Depen- 7Be(n, p)7Li resonances in big bang nucleosynthesis dent Quark Masses and Big Bang Nucleosynthe- with time-dependent quark mass and Li reduction by sis Revisited,” Phys. Rev. D 84, 043001 (2011), a heavy quark mass,” Phys. Rev. D 99, 083013 (2019), arXiv:1104.5547 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:1901.03943 [astro-ph.CO]. [1318] Alain Coc, Nelson J. Nunes, Keith A. Olive, Jean- [1303] S. Hayakawa et al., “Experimental Study on the Philippe Uzan, and Elisabeth Vangioni, “Coupled 7Be(n, p)7Li and the 7Be(n, α)4He Reactions for Cos- Variations of Fundamental Couplings and Primordial mological Lithium Problem,” JPS Conf. Proc. 31, Nucleosynthesis,” Phys. Rev. D 76, 023511 (2007), 011036 (2020). arXiv:astro-ph/0610733. [1304] Shunki Ishikawa et al., “Experimental Study of the [1319] Yudong Luo, Toshitaka Kajino, Motohiko Kusak- 7 7 ∗ Be(n,p1) Li Reaction for the Cosmological Lithium abe, and Grant J. Mathews, “Big Bang Nucle- Problem,” JPS Conf. Proc. 31, 011037 (2020). osynthesis with an Inhomogeneous Primordial Mag- [1305] Christian Iliadis and Alain Coc, “Thermonuclear reac- netic Field Strength,” Astrophys. J. 872, 172 (2019), tion rates and primordial nucleosynthesis,” Astrophys. arXiv:1810.08803 [astro-ph.CO]. J. 901, 127 (2020), arXiv:2008.12200 [astro-ph.CO]. [1320] Richard H. Cyburt, Brian D. Fields, and Keith A. [1306] M.T. Clara and C.J.A.P. Martins, “Primordial nucle- Olive, “Solar neutrino constraints on the BBN pro- osynthesis with varying fundamental constants: Im- duction of Li,” Phys. Rev. D 69, 123519 (2004), 101

arXiv:astro-ph/0312629. [1335] Hermano Velten and Syrios Gomes, “Is the Hub- [1321] Richard N. Boyd, Carl R. Brune, George M. Fuller, ble diagram of quasars in tension with concor- and Christel J. Smith, “New Nuclear Physics for dance cosmology?” Phys. Rev. D 101, 043502 (2020), Big Bang Nucleosynthesis,” Phys. Rev. D 82, 105005 arXiv:1911.11848 [astro-ph.CO]. (2010), arXiv:1008.0848 [astro-ph.CO]. [1336] Narayan Khadka and Bharat Ratra, “Determining the [1322] Nachiketa Chakraborty, Brian D. Fields, and Keith A. range of validity of quasar X-ray and UV flux mea- Olive, “Resonant Destruction as a Possible Solution to surements for constraining cosmological model param- the Cosmological Lithium Problem,” Phys. Rev. D 83, eters,” (2020), arXiv:2012.09291 [astro-ph.CO]. 063006 (2011), arXiv:1011.0722 [astro-ph.CO]. [1337] E. Lusso et al., “Quasars as standard candles III. Val- [1323] Alain Coc, Stephane Goriely, Yi Xu, Matthias Saim- idation of a new sample for cosmological studies,” As- pert, and Elisabeth Vangioni, “Standard Big-Bang tron. Astrophys. 642, A150 (2020), arXiv:2008.08586 Nucleosynthesis up to CNO with an improved ex- [astro-ph.GA]. tended nuclear network,” Astrophys. J. 744, 158 [1338] D. J. Kapner, T. S. Cook, E. G. Adelberger, J. H. (2012), arXiv:1107.1117 [astro-ph.CO]. Gundlach, Blayne R. Heckel, C. D. Hoyle, and H. E. [1324] C. Broggini, L. Canton, G. Fiorentini, and F. L. Swanson, “Tests of the gravitational inverse-square law Villante, “The cosmological 7Li problem from a nu- below the dark-energy length scale,” Phys. Rev. Lett. clear physics perspective,” JCAP 06, 030 (2012), 98, 021101 (2007), arXiv:hep-ph/0611184. arXiv:1202.5232 [astro-ph.CO]. [1339] Alexander D. Rider, David C. Moore, Charles P. [1325] M. H. Pinsonneault, G. Steigman, T. P. Walker, and Blakemore, Maxime Louis, Marie Lu, and Giorgio V. K. Narayanans, “Stellar mixing and the primor- Gratta, “Search for Screened Interactions Associated dial lithium abundance,” Astrophys. J. 574, 398–411 with Dark Energy Below the 100 µm Length Scale,” (2002), arXiv:astro-ph/0105439. Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 101101 (2016), arXiv:1604.04908 [1326] Olivier Richard, Georges Michaud, and Jacques [hep-ex]. Richer, “Implications of WMAP observations on Li [1340] Nima Arkani-Hamed, Savas Dimopoulos, and G. R. abundance and stellar evolution models,” Astrophys. Dvali, “The Hierarchy problem and new dimensions J. 619, 538–548 (2005), arXiv:astro-ph/0409672. at a millimeter,” Phys. Lett. B 429, 263–272 (1998), [1327] Andreas J. Korn, F. Grundahl, O. Richard, P. S. arXiv:hep-ph/9803315. Barklem, L. Mashonkina, R. Collet, N. Piskunov, and [1341] Nima Arkani-Hamed, Savas Dimopoulos, and G. R. B. Gustafsson, “A probable stellar solution to the cos- Dvali, “Phenomenology, astrophysics and cosmology of mological lithium discrepancy,” Nature 442, 657–659 theories with submillimeter dimensions and TeV scale (2006), arXiv:astro-ph/0608201. quantum gravity,” Phys. Rev. D 59, 086004 (1999), [1328] Xiaoting Fu, Alessandro Bressan, Paolo Mo- arXiv:hep-ph/9807344. laro, and Paola Marigo, “Lithium evolution [1342] Ignatios Antoniadis, Nima Arkani-Hamed, Savas Di- in metal-poor stars: from pre-main sequence mopoulos, and G. R. Dvali, “New dimensions at a mil- to the Spite plateau,” Monthly Notices of the limeter to a Fermi and superstrings at a TeV,” Phys. Royal Astronomical Society 452, 3256–3265 Lett. B 436, 257–263 (1998), arXiv:hep-ph/9804398. (2015), https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article- [1343] L. Perivolaropoulos and C. Sourdis, “Cosmological ef- pdf/452/3/3256/4901646/stv1384.pdf. fects of radion oscillations,” Phys. Rev. D 66, 084018 [1329] Dai G. Yamazaki, Motohiko Kusakabe, Toshitaka Ka- (2002), arXiv:hep-ph/0204155. jino, Grant J. Mathews, and Myung-Ki Cheoun, “The [1344] L. Perivolaropoulos, “Equation of state of oscillating new hybrid BBN model with the photon cooling, X Brans-Dicke scalar and extra dimensions,” Phys. Rev. particle, and the primordial magnetic field,” Int. J. D 67, 123516 (2003), arXiv:hep-ph/0301237. Mod. Phys. E 26, 1741006 (2017). [1345] E. G. Floratos and G. K. Leontaris, “Low scale unifica- [1330] Tao Yang, Aritra Banerjee, and Eoin O.´ Colgáin, tion, Newton’s law and extra dimensions,” Phys. Lett. “Cosmography and flat ΛCDM tensions at high B 465, 95–100 (1999), arXiv:hep-ph/9906238. redshift,” Phys. Rev. D 102, 123532 (2020), [1346] A. Kehagias and K. Sfetsos, “Deviations from the arXiv:1911.01681 [astro-ph.CO]. 1/r**2 Newton law due to extra dimensions,” Phys. [1331] Y. Avni and H. Tananbaum, “X-Ray Properties of Op- Lett. B 472, 39–44 (2000), arXiv:hep-ph/9905417. tically Selected QSOs,” Astroph. J. 305, 83 (1986). [1347] A. Donini and S. G. Marimón, “Micro-orbits in a [1332] Fulvio Melia, “Cosmological test using the Hubble di- many-brane model and deviations from Newton’s 1/r2 agram of high-z quasars,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. law,” Eur. Phys. J. C 76, 696 (2016), arXiv:1609.05654 489, 517–523 (2019), arXiv:1907.13127 [astro-ph.CO]. [hep-ph]. [1333] Narayan Khadka and Bharat Ratra, “Quasar X-ray [1348] Raphael Benichou and John Estes, “The Fate of New- and UV flux, baryon acoustic oscillation, and Hubble ton’s Law in Brane-World Scenarios,” Phys. Lett. B parameter measurement constraints on cosmological 712, 456–459 (2012), arXiv:1112.0565 [hep-th]. model parameters,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 492, [1349] K. A. Bronnikov, S. A. Kononogov, and V. N. Mel- 4456–4468 (2020), arXiv:1909.01400 [astro-ph.CO]. nikov, “Brane world corrections to Newton’s law,” [1334] Xiaolei Li, Ryan E. Keeley, Arman Shafieloo, Xi- Gen. Rel. Grav. 38, 1215–1232 (2006), arXiv:gr- aogang Zheng, Shuo Cao, Marek Biesiada, and qc/0601114. Zong-Hong Zhu, “Hubble diagram at higher redshifts: [1350] Shin’ichi Nojiri and Sergei D. Odintsov, “Newton po- Model independent calibration of quasars,” (2021), tential in deSitter brane world,” Phys. Lett. B 548, arXiv:2103.16032 [astro-ph.CO]. 215–223 (2002), arXiv:hep-th/0209066. [1351] L. Perivolaropoulos and F. Skara, “Scalar tachyonic instabilities in gravitational backgrounds: Existence 102

and growth rate,” Phys. Rev. D 102, 104034 (2020), (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 5487, edited by John C. arXiv:2009.05640 [gr-qc]. Mather (2004) pp. 550–563. [1352] James Edholm, Alexey S. Koshelev, and Anupam [1368] Jonathan P. Gardner et al., “The James Webb Mazumdar, “Behavior of the Newtonian potential for Space Telescope,” Space Sci. Rev. 123, 485 (2006), ghost-free gravity and singularity-free gravity,” Phys. arXiv:astro-ph/0606175. Rev. D 94, 104033 (2016), arXiv:1604.01989 [gr-qc]. [1369] Alain Blanchard et al., “Gravitation And the Universe [1353] Alex Kehagias and Michele Maggiore, “Spherically from large Scale-Structures: The GAUSS mission con- symmetric static solutions in a nonlocal infrared mod- cept,” (2021), arXiv:2102.03931 [astro-ph.CO]. ification of General Relativity,” JHEP 08, 029 (2014), [1370] Kevork N. Abazajian et al. (CMB-S4), “CMB-S4 Sci- arXiv:1401.8289 [hep-th]. ence Book, First Edition,” (2016), arXiv:1610.02743 [1354] Valeri P. Frolov and Andrei Zelnikov, “Head-on col- [astro-ph.CO]. lision of ultrarelativistic particles in ghost-free the- [1371] Kevork Abazajian et al., “CMB-S4 Science Case, ories of gravity,” Phys. Rev. D 93, 064048 (2016), Reference Design, and Project Plan,” (2019), arXiv:1509.03336 [hep-th]. arXiv:1907.04473 [astro-ph.IM]. [1355] E. T. Tomboulis, “Superrenormalizable gauge and [1372] Kevork Abazajian et al. (CMB-S4), “CMB-S4: gravitational theories,” (1997), arXiv:hep-th/9702146. Forecasting Constraints on Primordial Gravitational [1356] Tirthabir Biswas, AindriúConroy, Alexey S. Koshelev, Waves,” (2020), arXiv:2008.12619 [astro-ph.CO]. and Anupam Mazumdar, “Generalized ghost-free [1373] Nicholas Galitzki et al., “The Simons Observatory: quadratic curvature gravity,” Class. Quant. Grav. Instrument Overview,” Proc. SPIE Int. Soc. Opt. 31, 015022 (2014), [Erratum: Class.Quant.Grav. 31, Eng. 10708, 1070804 (2018), arXiv:1808.04493 [astro- 159501 (2014)], arXiv:1308.2319 [hep-th]. ph.IM]. [1357] J. Colin Hill and Eric J. Baxter, “Can Early Dark [1374] Peter Ade et al. (Simons Observatory), “The Simons Energy Explain EDGES?” JCAP 08, 037 (2018), Observatory: Science goals and forecasts,” JCAP 02, arXiv:1803.07555 [astro-ph.CO]. 056 (2019), arXiv:1808.07445 [astro-ph.CO]. [1358] Sean Fraser et al., “The EDGES 21 cm Anomaly and [1375] Maximilian H. Abitbol et al. (Simons Observatory), Properties of Dark Matter,” Phys. Lett. B 785, 159– “The Simons Observatory: Astro2020 Decadal Project 164 (2018), arXiv:1803.03245 [hep-ph]. Whitepaper,” Bull. Am. Astron. Soc. 51, 147 (2019), [1359] Julian B. Muñozand Abraham Loeb, “A small amount arXiv:1907.08284 [astro-ph.IM]. of mini-charged dark matter could cool the baryons [1376] Steven L. Detweiler, “Pulsar timing measurements and in the early Universe,” Nature 557, 684 (2018), the search for gravitational waves,” Astrophys. J. 234, arXiv:1802.10094 [astro-ph.CO]. 1100–1104 (1979). [1360] Alexey Boyarsky, Dmytro Iakubovskyi, Oleg [1377] R. S. Foster and D. C. Backer, “Constructing a Pulsar Ruchayskiy, Anton Rudakovskyi, and Wessel Timing Array,” Astroph. J. 361, 300 (1990). Valkenburg, “21-cm observations and warm dark [1378] R. w. Hellings and G. s. Downs, “UPPER LIMITS ON matter models,” Phys. Rev. D 100, 123005 (2019), THE ISOTROPIC GRAVITATIONAL RADIATION arXiv:1904.03097 [astro-ph.CO]. BACKGROUND FROM PULSAR TIMING ANALY- [1361] Rennan Barkana, Nadav Joseph Outmezguine, Diego SIS,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 265, L39–L42 (1983). Redigolo, and Tomer Volansky, “Strong constraints on [1379] Gemma Janssen et al., “Gravitational wave astron- light dark matter interpretation of the EDGES signal,” omy with the SKA,” PoS AASKA14, 037 (2015), Phys. Rev. D 98, 103005 (2018), arXiv:1803.03091 arXiv:1501.00127 [astro-ph.IM]. [hep-ph]. [1380] Maura A. McLaughlin, “The North Ameri- [1362] Ely D. Kovetz, Vivian Poulin, Vera Gluscevic, Kim- can Nanohertz Observatory for Gravitational berly K. Boddy, Rennan Barkana, and Marc Waves,” Class. Quant. Grav. 30, 224008 (2013), Kamionkowski, “Tighter limits on dark matter expla- arXiv:1310.0758 [astro-ph.IM]. nations of the anomalous EDGES 21 cm signal,” Phys. [1381] G. Desvignes et al., “High-precision timing of 42 mil- Rev. D 98, 103529 (2018), arXiv:1807.11482 [astro- lisecond pulsars with the European Pulsar Timing Ar- ph.CO]. ray,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 458, 3341–3380 [1363] Felipe Menanteau et al., “The Atacama Cosmology (2016), arXiv:1602.08511 [astro-ph.HE]. Telescope: ACT-CL J0102-4215 ’El Gordo,’ a Massive [1382] G. Hobbs, “The Parkes Pulsar Timing Array,” Class. Merging Cluster at Redshift 0.87,” Astrophys. J. 748, Quant. Grav. 30, 224007 (2013), arXiv:1307.2629 7 (2012), arXiv:1109.0953 [astro-ph.CO]. [astro-ph.IM]. [1364] R. Laureijs et al. (Euclid), “Euclid Definition Study [1383] J. P. W. Verbiest et al., “The International Pulsar Report,” (2011), arXiv:1110.3193 [astro-ph.CO]. Timing Array: First Data Release,” Mon. Not. Roy. [1365] ˇ Zeljko Ivezić et al. (LSST), “LSST: from Sci- Astron. Soc. 458, 1267–1288 (2016), arXiv:1602.03640 ence Drivers to Reference Design and Anticipated [astro-ph.IM]. Data Products,” Astrophys. J. 873, 111 (2019), [1384] Yousef Abou El-Neaj et al. (AEDGE), “AEDGE: arXiv:0805.2366 [astro-ph]. Atomic Experiment for Dark Matter and Gravity Ex- [1366] Paul A. Abell et al. (LSST Science, LSST Project), ploration in Space,” EPJ Quant. Technol. 7, 6 (2020), “LSST Science Book, Version 2.0,” (2009), arXiv:1908.00802 [gr-qc]. arXiv:0912.0201 [astro-ph.IM]. [1385] Yoichi Aso, Yuta Michimura, Kentaro Somiya, Masaki [1367] Phillip A. Sabelhaus and John E. Decker, “An overview Ando, Osamu Miyakawa, Takanori Sekiguchi, Daisuke of the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) project,” Tatsumi, and Hiroaki Yamamoto (KAGRA), “In- in Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Space Telescopes, terferometer design of the KAGRA gravitational Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers wave detector,” Phys. Rev. D 88, 043007 (2013), 103

arXiv:1306.6747 [gr-qc]. Exper. Astron. 23, 17–37 (2009), arXiv:0802.2522 [1386] Kentaro Somiya (KAGRA), “Detector configuration of [astro-ph]. KAGRA: The Japanese cryogenic gravitational-wave [1403] A. Cimatti, R. Laureijs, B. Leibundgut, S. Lilly, detector,” Class. Quant. Grav. 29, 124007 (2012), R. Nichol, A. Refregier, P. Rosati, M. Steinmetz, arXiv:1111.7185 [gr-qc]. N. Thatte, and E. Valentijn, “Euclid Assessment [1387] Benjamin P Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific), “Explor- Study Report for the ESA Cosmic Visions,” (2009), ing the Sensitivity of Next Generation Gravitational arXiv:0912.0914 [astro-ph.CO]. Wave Detectors,” Class. Quant. Grav. 34, 044001 [1404] B. Sartoris et al., “Next Generation Cosmology: Con- (2017), arXiv:1607.08697 [astro-ph.IM]. straints from the Euclid Galaxy Cluster Survey,” [1388] David Reitze et al., “The US Program in Ground- Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 459, 1764–1780 (2016), Based Gravitational Wave Science: Contribution from arXiv:1505.02165 [astro-ph.CO]. the LIGO Laboratory,” Bull. Am. Astron. Soc. 51, 141 [1405] Luca Amendola et al. (Euclid Theory Working (2019), arXiv:1903.04615 [astro-ph.IM]. Group), “Cosmology and fundamental physics with [1389] David Reitze et al., “Cosmic Explorer: The U.S. the Euclid satellite,” Living Rev. Rel. 16, 6 (2013), Contribution to Gravitational-Wave Astronomy be- arXiv:1206.1225 [astro-ph.CO]. yond LIGO,” Bull. Am. Astron. Soc. 51, 035 (2019), [1406] R. Adam et al. (Euclid), “Euclid preparation III. arXiv:1907.04833 [astro-ph.IM]. Galaxy cluster detection in the wide photometric sur- [1390] Pau Amaro-Seoane et al. (LISA), “Laser Interferome- vey, performance and algorithm selection,” Astron. ter Space Antenna,” (2017), arXiv:1702.00786 [astro- Astrophys. 627, A23 (2019), arXiv:1906.04707 [astro- ph.IM]. ph.CO]. [1391] Wen-Hong Ruan, Zong-Kuan Guo, Rong-Gen [1407] Giuseppe Fanizza, Bartolomeo Fiorini, and Giovanni Cai, and Yuan-Zhong Zhang, “Taiji program: Marozzi, “Cosmic variance of H0 in light of forthcom- Gravitational-wave sources,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 35, ing high-redshift surveys,” (2021), arXiv:2102.12419 2050075 (2020), arXiv:1807.09495 [gr-qc]. [astro-ph.CO]. [1392] Wen-Rui Hu and Yue-Liang Wu, “The Taiji Program [1408] Phil Marshall et al. (LSST), “Science-Driven Op- in Space for gravitational wave physics and the nature timization of the LSST Observing Strategy,” of gravity,” Natl. Sci. Rev. 4, 685–686 (2017). (2017), 10.5281/zenodo.842713, arXiv:1708.04058 [1393] Jun Luo et al. (TianQin), “TianQin: a space-borne [astro-ph.IM]. gravitational wave detector,” Class. Quant. Grav. 33, [1409] Alexandra Abate et al. (LSST Dark Energy Science), 035010 (2016), arXiv:1512.02076 [astro-ph.IM]. “Large Synoptic Survey Telescope: Dark Energy Sci- [1394] Jianwei Mei et al. (TianQin), “The TianQin project: ence Collaboration,” (2012), arXiv:1211.0310 [astro- current progress on science and technology,” (2020), ph.CO]. 10.1093/ptep/ptaa114, arXiv:2008.10332 [gr-qc]. [1410] A. G. A. Brown et al. (Gaia), “Gaia Data Release 1: [1395] Seiji Kawamura et al., “The Japanese space gravita- Summary of the astrometric, photometric, and sur- tional wave antenna: DECIGO,” Class. Quant. Grav. vey properties,” Astron. Astrophys. 595, A2 (2016), 28, 094011 (2011). arXiv:1609.04172 [astro-ph.IM]. [1396] S. Kawamura et al., “The Japanese space gravita- [1411] L. Lindegren et al., “Gaia Data Release 2: The astro- tional wave antenna DECIGO,” Class. Quant. Grav. metric solution,” Astron. Astrophys. 616, A2 (2018), 23, S125–S132 (2006). arXiv:1804.09366 [astro-ph.IM]. [1397] Stefan Hild, Simon Chelkowski, Andreas Freise, Janyce [1412] Adam G. Riess et al., “Milky Way Cepheid Standards Franc, Nazario Morgado, Raffaele Flaminio, and Ric- for Measuring Cosmic Distances and Application to cardo DeSalvo, “A Xylophone Configuration for a Gaia DR2: Implications for the Hubble Constant,” As- third Generation Gravitational Wave Detector,” Class. trophys. J. 861, 126 (2018), arXiv:1804.10655 [astro- Quant. Grav. 27, 015003 (2010), arXiv:0906.2655 [gr- ph.CO]. qc]. [1413] E. Zackrisson, C. E. Rydberg, D. Schaerer, G. Ostlin, [1398] M. Punturo et al., “The Einstein Telescope: A third- and M. Tuli, “The spectral evolution of the first galax- generation gravitational wave observatory,” Class. ies. I. James Webb Space Telescope detection limits Quant. Grav. 27, 194002 (2010). and color criteria for population III galaxies,” As- [1399] Manuel Wittner, Giorgio Laverda, Oliver F. Piat- trophys. J. 740, 13 (2011), arXiv:1105.0921 [astro- tella, and Luca Amendola, “Transient weak grav- ph.CO]. ity in scalar-tensor theories,” JCAP 07, 019 (2020), [1414] Claes-Erik Rydberg, Erik Zackrisson, Peter Lundqvist, arXiv:2003.08950 [gr-qc]. and Pat Scott, “Detection of isolated population [1400] Lorenzo Pizzuti, Ippocratis D. Saltas, Santiago Casas, III stars with the James Webb Space Telescope,” Luca Amendola, and Andrea Biviano, “Future con- Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 429, 3658–3664 (2013), straints on the gravitational slip with the mass profiles arXiv:1206.0007 [astro-ph.CO]. of galaxy clusters,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 486, [1415] Daniel J. Whalen, Chris L. Fryer, Daniel E. Holz, 596–607 (2019), arXiv:1901.01961 [astro-ph.CO]. Alexander Heger, S. E. Woosley, Massimo Stiavelli, [1401] Radouane Gannouji, Lavrentios Kazantzidis, Leandros Wesley Even, and Lucille L. Frey, “Seeing the First Perivolaropoulos, and David Polarski, “Consistency Supernovae at the Edge of the Universe with JWST,” of modified gravity with a decreasing Geff (z) in a Astrophys. J. Lett. 762, L6 (2013), arXiv:1209.3457 ΛCDM background,” Phys. Rev. D 98, 104044 (2018), [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:1809.07034 [gr-qc]. [1416] Tilman Hartwig, Volker Bromm, and Abraham Loeb, [1402] Alexandre Refregier (EUCLID), “The Dark UNiverse “Detection strategies for the first supernovae with Explorer (DUNE): Proposal to ESA’s Cosmic Vision,” JWST,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 479, 2202–2213 104

(2018), arXiv:1711.05742 [astro-ph.GA]. [1434] O. D. Aguiar et al., “The status of the Brazilian [1417] Christian Schultz, Jose Oñorbe, Kevork N. Abazajian, spherical detector,” Class. Quant. Grav. 19, 1949–1953 and James S. Bullock, “The High-z Universe Confronts (2002). Warm Dark Matter: Galaxy Counts, Reionization and [1435] A. de Waard, L. Gottardi, J. van Houwelingen, A. Shu- the Nature of Dark Matter,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. mack, and G. Frossati, “MiniGRAIL, the first spher- Soc. 442, 1597–1609 (2014), arXiv:1401.3769 [astro- ical detector,” Class. Quant. Grav. 20, S143–S151 ph.CO]. (2003). [1418] Umberto Maio and Matteo Viel, “The First Bil- [1436] M. E. Gertsenshtein and V. I. Pustovoit, “On the De- lion Years of a Warm Dark Matter Universe,” tection of Low Frequency Gravitational Waves,” Sov. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 446, 2760–2775 (2015), Phys. JETP 16, 433 (1962). arXiv:1409.6718 [astro-ph.CO]. [1437] G. E. Moss, L. R. Miller, and R. L. Forward, “Photon- [1419] Scott Dodelson, Katrin Heitmann, Chris Hirata, Klaus noise-limited laser transducer for gravitational an- Honscheid, Aaron Roodman, UroˇsSeljak, AnˇzeSlosar, tenna,” Appl. Opt. 10, 2495–2498 (1971). and Mark Trodden, “Cosmic Visions Dark Energy: [1438] Gregory M. Harry (LIGO Scientific), “Advanced Science,” (2016), arXiv:1604.07626 [astro-ph.CO]. LIGO: The next generation of gravitational wave de- [1420] Alex Abramovici et al., “LIGO: The Laser interferome- tectors,” Class. Quant. Grav. 27, 084006 (2010). ter gravitational wave observatory,” Science 256, 325– [1439] B. Willke et al., “The GEO 600 gravitational wave de- 333 (1992). tector,” Class. Quant. Grav. 19, 1377–1387 (2002). [1421] G. Pizzella, “Resonant detectors for the search for [1440] C. Affeldt et al., “Advanced techniques in GEO 600,” gravitational waves,” Class. Quant. Grav. 14, 1481– Class. Quant. Grav. 31, 224002 (2014). 1485 (1997). [1441] B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific), “LIGO: The [1422] Michele Maggiore, “Gravitational wave experiments Laser interferometer gravitational-wave observatory,” and early universe cosmology,” Phys. Rept. 331, 283– Rept. Prog. Phys. 72, 076901 (2009), arXiv:0711.3041 367 (2000), arXiv:gr-qc/9909001. [gr-qc]. [1423] Odylio Denys Aguiar, “The Past, Present and Fu- [1442] A. Giazotto, “The Virgo Project: A Wide Band An- ture of the Resonant-Mass Gravitational Wave De- tenna for Gravitational Wave Detection,” Nucl. In- tectors,” Res. Astron. Astrophys. 11, 1–42 (2011), strum. Meth. A 289, 518–525 (1990). arXiv:1009.1138 [astro-ph.IM]. [1443] F. Acernese et al., “Status of Virgo,” Class. Quant. [1424] P. Astone et al., “IGEC2: A 17-month search for grav- Grav. 25, 114045 (2008). itational wave bursts in 2005-2007,” Phys. Rev. D 82, [1444] B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), “Obser- 022003 (2010), arXiv:1002.3515 [gr-qc]. vation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black [1425] J. Weber, “Detection and Generation of Gravitational Hole Merger,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 061102 (2016), Waves,” Phys. Rev. 117, 306–313 (1960). arXiv:1602.03837 [gr-qc]. [1426] E. Mauceli, Z. K. Geng, W. O. Hamilton, W. W. [1445] Leo P. Singer and Larry R. Price, “Rapid Bayesian Johnson, S. Merkowitz, A. Morse, B. Price, and position reconstruction for gravitational-wave N. Solomonson, “The ALLEGRO gravitational wave transients,” Phys. Rev. D 93, 024013 (2016), detector: Data acquisition and analysis,” Phys. Rev. arXiv:1508.03634 [gr-qc]. D 54, 1264–1275 (1996), arXiv:gr-qc/9609058. [1446] Neil J. Cornish and Tyson B. Littenberg, “BayesWave: [1427] E. Amaldi et al., “Sensitivity of the Rome gravitational Bayesian Inference for Gravitational Wave Bursts and wave experiment with the Explorer cryogenic resonant Instrument Glitches,” Class. Quant. Grav. 32, 135012 antenna operating at 2-K,” Europhys. Lett. 12, 5–11 (2015), arXiv:1410.3835 [gr-qc]. (1990). [1447] Tyson B. Littenberg and Neil J. Cornish, “Bayesian [1428] P. Astone et al., “Upper limit for a gravitational inference for spectral estimation of gravitational wave wave stochastic background with the EXPLORER and detector noise,” Phys. Rev. D 91, 084034 (2015), NAUTILUS resonant detectors,” Phys. Lett. B 385, arXiv:1410.3852 [gr-qc]. 421–424 (1996). [1448] Neil J. Cornish, Tyson B. Littenberg, Bence Bécsy, [1429] P. Astone et al., “The Gravitational wave detector Katerina Chatziioannou, James A. Clark, Sudar- NAUTILUS operating at T = 0.1-K,” Astropart. Phys. shan Ghonge, and Margaret Millhouse, “BayesWave 7, 231–243 (1997). analysis pipeline in the era of gravitational wave [1430] Ignazio Ciufolini and Francesco Fidecaro, “GRAVITA- observations,” Phys. Rev. D 103, 044006 (2021), TIONAL WAVES: Sources and Detectors, booktitle = arXiv:2011.09494 [gr-qc]. Gravitational Waves,” pp. 1–382. [1449] Gergely Dálya, Peter Raffai, and Bence Bécsy, [1431] M. Cerdonio et al., “The Ultracryogenic gravitational “Bayesian Reconstruction of Gravitational-wave Sig- wave detector AURIGA,” Class. Quant. Grav. 14, nals from Binary Black Holes with Nonzero Eccen- 1491–1494 (1997). tricities,” Class. Quant. Grav. 38, 065002 (2021), [1432] D. G. Blair, E. N. Ivanov, M. E. Tobar, P. J. Turner, arXiv:2006.06256 [astro-ph.HE]. F. van Kann, and I. S. Heng, “High sensitivity gravita- [1450] Sudarshan Ghonge, Katerina Chatziioannou, James A. tional wave antenna with parametric transducer read- Clark, Tyson Littenberg, Margaret Millhouse, Laura out,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 1908–1911 (1995). Cadonati, and Neil Cornish, “Reconstructing gravi- [1433] I. S. Heng, D. G. Blair, E. N. Ivanov, and M. E. Tobar, tational wave signals from binary black hole mergers “Long term operation of a niobium resonant bar grav- with minimal assumptions,” Phys. Rev. D 102, 064056 itational wave antenna,” Phys. Lett. A 218, 190–196 (2020), arXiv:2003.09456 [gr-qc]. (1996). [1451] B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), “GW170814: A Three-Detector Observation of Gravi- 105

tational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Coalescence,” [1468] M. C. Guzzetti, N. Bartolo, M. Liguori, and S. Matar- Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 141101 (2017), arXiv:1709.09660 rese, “Gravitational waves from inflation,” Riv. Nuovo [gr-qc]. Cim. 39, 399–495 (2016), arXiv:1605.01615 [astro- [1452] Masaki Ando et al. (TAMA), “Stable operation of ph.CO]. a 300-m laser interferometer with sufficient sensitiv- [1469] Rong-Gen Cai, Zhoujian Cao, Zong-Kuan Guo, Shao- ity to detect gravitational wave events within our Jiang Wang, and Tao Yang, “The Gravitational- galaxy,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 3950 (2001), arXiv:astro- Wave Physics,” Natl. Sci. Rev. 4, 687–706 (2017), ph/0105473. arXiv:1703.00187 [gr-qc]. [1453] Koji Arai (TAMA), “Recent progress of TAMA300,” [1470] N. Bartolo, V. De Luca, G. Franciolini, A. Lewis, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 120, 032010 (2008). M. Peloso, and A. Riotto, “Primordial Black Hole [1454] T. Akutsu et al. (KAGRA), “Overview of KAGRA : Dark Matter: LISA Serendipity,” Phys. Rev. Lett. KAGRA science,” (2020), arXiv:2008.02921 [gr-qc]. 122, 211301 (2019), arXiv:1810.12218 [astro-ph.CO]. [1455] K. Kuroda (LCGT), “Status of LCGT,” Class. Quant. [1471] N. Bartolo, V. De Luca, G. Franciolini, M. Peloso, Grav. 27, 084004 (2010). D. Racco, and A. Riotto, “Testing primordial black [1456] C. S. Unnikrishnan, “IndIGO and LIGO-India: Scope holes as dark matter with LISA,” Phys. Rev. D 99, and plans for gravitational wave research and precision 103521 (2019), arXiv:1810.12224 [astro-ph.CO]. metrology in India,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 22, 1341010 [1472] Rong-gen Cai, Shi Pi, and Misao Sasaki, “Gravi- (2013), arXiv:1510.06059 [physics.ins-det]. tational Waves Induced by non-Gaussian Scalar Per- [1457] Reed Essick, Salvatore Vitale, and Matthew Evans, turbations,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 201101 (2019), “Frequency-dependent responses in third generation arXiv:1810.11000 [astro-ph.CO]. gravitational-wave detectors,” Phys. Rev. D 96, [1473] Jeff Crowder and Neil J. Cornish, “Beyond LISA: Ex- 084004 (2017), arXiv:1708.06843 [gr-qc]. ploring future gravitational wave missions,” Phys. Rev. [1458] Katie Chamberlain and Nicolas Yunes, “Theoretical D 72, 083005 (2005), arXiv:gr-qc/0506015. Physics Implications of Gravitational Wave Observa- [1474] G. M. Harry, P. Fritschel, D. A. Shaddock, W. Folkner, tion with Future Detectors,” Phys. Rev. D 96, 084039 and E. S. Phinney, “Laser interferometry for the big (2017), arXiv:1704.08268 [gr-qc]. bang observer,” Class. Quant. Grav. 23, 4887–4894 [1459] B.P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), “GWTC-1: (2006), [Erratum: Class.Quant.Grav. 23, 7361 (2006)]. A Gravitational-Wave Transient Catalog of Compact [1475] Wen-Hong Ruan, Chang Liu, Zong-Kuan Guo, Binary Mergers Observed by LIGO and Virgo during Yue-Liang Wu, and Rong-Gen Cai, “The LISA- the First and Second Observing Runs,” Phys. Rev. X Taiji network: precision localization of massive 9, 031040 (2019), arXiv:1811.12907 [astro-ph.HE]. black hole binaries,” (2019), 10.34133/2021/6014164, [1460] R. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), “GWTC-2: arXiv:1909.07104 [gr-qc]. Compact Binary Coalescences Observed by LIGO and [1476] Wen-Hong Ruan, Chang Liu, Zong-Kuan Guo, Virgo During the First Half of the Third Observing Yue-Liang Wu, and Rong-Gen Cai, “The LISA- Run,” (2020), arXiv:2010.14527 [gr-qc]. Taiji network,” Nature Astron. 4, 108–109 (2020), [1461] Chiara Caprini et al., “Science with the space-based in- arXiv:2002.03603 [gr-qc]. terferometer eLISA. II: Gravitational waves from cos- [1477] Wen-Fan Feng, Hai-Tian Wang, Xin-Chun Hu, Yi- mological phase transitions,” JCAP 04, 001 (2016), Ming Hu, and Yan Wang, “Preliminary study on arXiv:1512.06239 [astro-ph.CO]. parameter estimation accuracy of supermassive black [1462] M. Armano et al., “Sub-Femto- g Free Fall for hole binary inspirals for TianQin,” Phys. Rev. D 99, Space-Based Gravitational Wave Observatories: LISA 123002 (2019), arXiv:1901.02159 [astro-ph.IM]. Pathfinder Results,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 231101 [1478] Shuai Liu, Yi-Ming Hu, Jian-dong Zhang, and Jianwei (2016). Mei, “Science with the TianQin observatory: Prelimi- [1463] M. Armano et al., “Measuring the Galactic Cos- nary results on stellar-mass binary black holes,” Phys. mic Ray Flux with the LISA Pathfinder Radia- Rev. D 101, 103027 (2020), arXiv:2004.14242 [astro- tion Monitor,” Astropart. Phys. 98, 28–37 (2018), ph.HE]. arXiv:1711.07427 [astro-ph.IM]. [1479] Hai-Tian Wang et al., “Science with the TianQin [1464] Pau Amaro-Seoane et al., “eLISA/NGO: Astrophysics observatory: Preliminary results on massive black and cosmology in the gravitational-wave millihertz hole binaries,” Phys. Rev. D 100, 043003 (2019), regime,” GW Notes 6, 4–110 (2013), arXiv:1201.3621 arXiv:1902.04423 [astro-ph.HE]. [astro-ph.CO]. [1480] Haoran Di and Yungui Gong, “Primordial black holes [1465] Pau Amaro-Seoane et al., “Low-frequency and second order gravitational waves from ultra-slow- gravitational-wave science with eLISA/NGO,” Class. roll inflation,” JCAP 07, 007 (2018), arXiv:1707.09578 Quant. Grav. 29, 124016 (2012), arXiv:1202.0839 [astro-ph.CO]. [gr-qc]. [1481] S. Olmez, V. Mandic, and X. Siemens, “Gravitational- [1466] B. P. Abbott et al. (KAGRA, LIGO Scientific, Wave Stochastic Background from Kinks and Cusps VIRGO), “Prospects for Observing and Localizing on Cosmic Strings,” Phys. Rev. D 81, 104028 (2010), Gravitational-Wave Transients with Advanced LIGO, arXiv:1004.0890 [astro-ph.CO]. Advanced Virgo and KAGRA,” Living Rev. Rel. 21, 3 [1482] Seiji Kawamura et al., “The Japanese space gravita- (2018), arXiv:1304.0670 [gr-qc]. tional wave antenna - DECIGO,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser. [1467] B. S. Sathyaprakash and B. F. Schutz, “Physics, As- 122, 012006 (2008). trophysics and Cosmology with Gravitational Waves,” [1483] Seiji Kawamura et al., “The Japanese space gravita- Living Rev. Rel. 12, 2 (2009), arXiv:0903.0338 [gr-qc]. tional wave antenna: DECIGO,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 120, 032004 (2008). 106

[1484] Naoki Seto, Seiji Kawamura, and Takashi Nakamura, D 28, 1845001 (2019). “Possibility of direct measurement of the acceleration [1488] Alison J. Farmer and E. Sterl Phinney, “The gravita- of the universe using 0.1-Hz band laser interferometer tional wave background from cosmological compact bi- gravitational wave antenna in space,” Phys. Rev. Lett. naries,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 346, 1197 (2003), 87, 221103 (2001), arXiv:astro-ph/0108011. arXiv:astro-ph/0304393. [1485] Seiji Kawamura et al., “Current status of space grav- [1489] S. Hild et al., “Sensitivity Studies for Third-Generation itational wave antenna DECIGO and B-DECIGO,” Gravitational Wave Observatories,” Class. Quant. (2020), arXiv:2006.13545 [gr-qc]. Grav. 28, 094013 (2011), arXiv:1012.0908 [gr-qc]. [1486] Shuichi Sato et al., “The status of DECIGO,” J. Phys. [1490] Florian Amann et al., “Site-selection criteria for the Conf. Ser. 840, 012010 (2017). Einstein Telescope,” Rev. Sci. Instrum. 91, 9 (2020), [1487] Seiji Kawamura et al., “Space gravitational-wave an- arXiv:2003.03434 [physics.ins-det]. tennas DECIGO and B-DECIGO,” Int. J. Mod. Phys.