1: % aa.dem
2: % AA vers. 5.3, LaTeX class for Astronomy & Astrophysics
3: % demonstration file
4: % (c) Springer-Verlag HD
5: % revised by EDP Sciences
6: %-----------------------------------------------------------------------
7: %
8: %\documentclass[referee]{aa} % for a referee version
9: \documentclass{aa}
10: %
11: %
12: %
13: %\documentclass[onecolumn]{aa}
14:
15: \usepackage{graphicx}
16: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
17: \usepackage{txfonts}
18: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
19: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
20: \def\lsim{\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$}}
21: \raise1pt\hbox{$<$}}}
22: \def\gsim{\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$}}
23: \raise1pt\hbox{$>$}}}
24: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
25: %
26: \topmargin=-9.0mm
27: %
28:
29: % Add here your preferred command definitions.
30: \newcommand{\beq}{\begin{equation}}
31: \newcommand{\eeq}{\end{equation}}
32: \newcommand{\lab}{\label}
33: \def\ba{\begin{eqnarray}}
34: \def\ea{\end{eqnarray}}
35:
36: \newcommand{\bfOm}{\mbox{\boldmath $\Omega$}}
37:
38: \def\bfr{{\bf r}}
39: \def\bfv{{\bf v}}
40: \def\bfx{{\bf x}}
41: \def\bfg{{\bf g}}
42:
43: \def\L{\Lambda}
44: \def\Om{\Omega}
45: \def\d{\delta}
46:
47: \def\gs{\mathrel{\lower0.6ex\hbox{$\buildrel {\textstyle >}\over{\scriptstyle \sim}$}}}
48: \def\ls{\mathrel{\lower0.6ex\hbox{$\buildrel {\textstyle <}\over{\scriptstyle \sim}$}}}
49:
50: \newcommand{\1}{\Omega_\mathrm{M}}
51: \newcommand{\2}{\Omega_\mathrm{r_c}}
52:
53:
54: \begin{document}
55:
56: \title{Testing the DGP model with gravitational lensing statistics}
57:
58: \author{Zong-Hong Zhu\inst{1,2}
59: \and
60: Mauro Sereno\inst{3}
61: }
62:
63: \offprints{Zong-Hong Zhu}
64:
65: \institute{Department of Astronomy, Beijing Normal
66: University, Beijing 100875, China\\
67: \email{zhuzh@bnu.edu.cn}
68: \and
69: Institut d'Astrophysique Spatiale (IAS),
70: CNRS \& Univ. Paris-Sud,
71: B\^atiment 121, F-91405 Orsay, France
72: \and
73: Institut f\"{u}r Theoretische Physik, Universit\"{a}t Z\"{u}rich,
74: Winterthurerstrasse 190, CH-8057 Z\"{u}rich, Switzerland\\
75: \email{sereno@physik.unizh.ch}
76: }
77:
78: \abstract
79: {}
80: {The self-accelerating braneworld model (DGP) seems to provide a simple
81: alternative to the the standard $\Lambda$CDM cosmology to explain the
82: current cosmic acceleration, which is strongly indicated by measurements
83: of Type Ia supernovae, as well as other concordant observations.}
84: {In this work, we investigate observational constraints on this scenario
85: from gravitational lensing statistics using the Cosmic Lens All-Sky Survey
86: (CLASS) lensing sample.}
87: {We show that a large parameter space of the DGP model is in good agreement
88: with this radio source gravitational lensing sample.}
89: {In the flat case, $\Omega_\mathrm{K}=0$, the likelihood is maximized,
90: ${\cal L}={\cal L_\mathrm{max}}$, for $\1 = 0.30_{-0.11}^{+0.19}$.
91: If we relax the prior on $\Omega_\mathrm{K}$, the likelihood peaks at
92: $\{ \1,\2 \} \simeq \{0.29, 0.12\}$, just slightly in the region of open
93: models.
94: However the confidence contours are pretty elongated so that we can not
95: discard either close or flat or open models.}
96:
97: \keywords{cosmological parameters ---
98: cosmology: theory ---
99: gravitational lensing ---
100: quasars: general
101: }
102:
103: \authorrunning{Zong-Hong Zhu and Mauro Sereno}
104: \titlerunning{Testing the DGP model with lensing statistics}
105: %\titlerunning{Testing the DGP model with gravitational lensing statistics}
106: \maketitle
107:
108: %
109: %________________________________________________________________
110:
111: \section{Introduction}
112:
113: The accelerating expansion of our universe was first discovered by the
114: measurements of distant Type Ia supernovae (SNe Ia; Riess et al. 1998;
115: Perlmutter et al. 1999), and was confirmed by the observations of the
116: cosmic microwave background anisotropies (WMAP: Bennett et al. 2003)
117: and the large scale structure in the distribution of galaxies (SDSS:
118: Tegmark et al. 2004a,b).
119: By assuming General Relativity, a dark energy component has been invoked as
120: the most feasible mechanism for the acceleration.
121: However, although fundamental for our understanding of the Universe, its
122: nature (as well as the nature of the dark matter) remains a completely open
123: question nowadays.
124:
125: Among several alternatives to dark energy, the models that make use of the
126: very ideas of branes and extra dimensions to obtain an accelerating universe
127: are particularly interesting (Randall and Sundrum 1999a,b).
128: The general principle behind such models is that our 4-dimensional universe
129: would be a brane embedded into a higher dimensional spacetime bulk on which
130: gravity can propagate.
131: One famous brane world model is proposed by Dvali, Gabadadze and Porrati (2000),
132: which is widely referred to as DGP model.
133: This scenario describes a self-accelerating 5-dimensional brane world model
134: with a noncompact, infinite-volume extra dimension in which the dynamics of
135: gravitational interaction is governed by a competition between a 4-dimensional
136: Ricci scalar term, induced on the brane, and an ordinary 5-dimensional
137: Einstein-Hilbert action.
138: For scales below a crossover radius $r_c$ (where the induced 4-dimensional
139: Ricci scalar dominates), the gravitational force experienced by two punctual
140: sources is the usual 4-dimensional $1/r^{2}$ force whereas for distance
141: scales larger than $r_c$ the gravitational force follows the 5-dimensional
142: $1/r^{3}$ behavior.
143: The Friedmann equation is modified as follows
144: %
145: \begin{equation}
146: \label{eq:ansatz}
147: H^2 = H_0^2 \left[
148: \Omega_\mathrm{K}(1+z)^2+\left(\sqrt{\2}+
149: \sqrt{\2+\1 (1+z)^3}\right)^2
150: \right]
151: \end{equation}
152: %
153: where $H$ is the Hubble parameter as a function of redshift $z$ ($H_0$ is its
154: value at the present), $\Omega_\mathrm{K}$, $\2$ and $\1$ represent
155: the fractional contribution of curvature, the bulk-induced term and the
156: matter (both baryonic and nonbaryonic), respectively.
157: $\2$ is defined as $\2 \equiv 1/4r_c^2H_0^2$.
158: From Eq.(1), the DGP model is a testable scenario with the same number
159: parameters as the standard $\Lambda$CDM model.
160:
161: The advantages of the DGP model has triggered a wave of
162: interests aiming to constrain its model parameters using various cosmological
163: observations, such as
164: the magnitude-redshift relation of supernovae of type Ia
165: (Avelino and Martins 2002;
166: Deffayet et al. 2002;
167: Zhu and Alcaniz 2005;
168: Maartens and Majerotto 2006;
169: Barger et al. 2007;
170: Movahed et al. 2007),
171: the cosmic microwave background shift parameter from WMAP and the baryon
172: acoustic oscillation peak from SDSS
173: (Guo et al. 2006;
174: Lazkoz et al. 2006;
175: Rydbeck et al. 2007;
176: He et al. 2007),
177: the angular size - redshift data of compact radio sources
178: (Alcaniz 2002),
179: the age measurements of high-$z$ objects
180: (Alcaniz, Jain and Dev 2002),
181: the lookback time to galaxy clusters
182: (Pires, Zhu and Alcaniz 2006),
183: the optical gravitational lensing surveys
184: (Jain et al. 2002),
185: the observed Hubble parameter $H(z)$ data
186: (Wan, Yi and Zhang) and
187: the large scale structures
188: (Multam\"aki et al. 2003;
189: Lue et al. 2004;
190: Koyama and Maartens 2006;
191: Song et al. 2007)
192: (For a recent review on the DGP phenomenology, see Lue 2006).
193:
194: In this paper, we shall consider the observational constraints on the
195: parameters of the DGP model arising from the Cosmic Lens All-Sky Survey
196: (CLASS) lensing sample.
197: Our results are in agreement with other recent analyses, providing a
198: complementary test to the DGP model.
199:
200:
201: Gravitational lensing has been becoming a useful tool for modern astrophysics.
202: It provides cosmological tests in several ways, such as
203: gravitational lensing statistics
204: (Kochanek 1996; Zhu 1998; Cooray \& Huterer 1999;
205: Chiba and Yoshii 1999; Chae et al. 2002; Sereno 2005),
206: weak lensing surveys
207: (Benabed and Bernardeau 2001),
208: Einstein rings in galaxy-quasar systems
209: (Yamamoto \& Futamase 2001),
210: clusters of galaxies acting as lenses on background high redshift galaxies
211: (Sereno 2002; Sereno and Longo 2004; Sereno 2007),
212: and gravitational lens time delay measurements (Schechter 2004).
213: Results from techniques based on gravitational lensing are complementary to
214: other methods and can provide restrictive limits on the acceleration
215: mechanism.
216: The aim of the current paper is to check the validity of the DGP model with
217: radio-selected gravitational lensing statistics.
218: We adopt the Cosmic Lens All-Sky Survey (CLASS) statistical data which
219: consists of 8958 radio sources out of which 13 sources are multiply imaged
220: (Browne {\it et al.} 2003; Chae {\it et al.} 2002).
221: We work only with those multiply imaged sources whose image-splittings are
222: known to be caused by single early type galaxies, which reduces the total
223: number of lenses to 10.
224: We show that a large parameter space of the DGP model is in good agreement
225: with this radio source gravitational lensing sample.
226: The maximum likelihood happens at $\{ \1,\2 \} \simeq \{0.29, 0.12\}$, just
227: slightly in the region of open models.
228:
229: The paper is organized as follows.
230: In Section~2, the basics of gravitational lensing statistics is introduced.
231: Properties of the CLASS sample and its statistical analysis are illustrated
232: in Section~3.
233: Finally, we present our conclusions and discussion in Section~4.
234:
235:
236: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
237:
238: \section{Basics of gravitational lensing statistics}
239: \label{stat}
240:
241: A realistic statistics of gravitational lenses can be performed based on
242: simple assumptions (Kochanek 1996; Chae 2003; Sereno 2005;
243: and references therein).
244: The standard approach is based on the observed number count of galaxies and
245: on the simple singular isothermal sphere (SIS) model for lens galaxies.
246:
247: The differential probability of a background source to be lensed by a
248: background galaxy with velocity dispersion between $\sigma$ and
249: $\sigma + d\sigma$ and in the redshift interval from $z_\mathrm{d}$ to
250: $z_\mathrm{d}+ d z_\mathrm{d}$ is
251: \beq
252: \label{stat1}
253: \frac{d^2 \tau}{d z_\mathrm{d} d \sigma} = \frac{d n_\mathrm{G}}{d \sigma}(z_\mathrm{d},\sigma) s_\mathrm{cr}(\sigma) \frac{cd t}{d z_\mathrm{d}} ,
254: \eeq
255: where $s_\mathrm{cr}$ is the cross section for lensing event and
256: $\frac{d n_\mathrm{G}}{d \sigma}$ is the differential number density of the
257: lens population.
258: For a conserved comoving number density of lenses,
259: $n_\mathrm{G}(z) =n_0(1+z)^3$.
260:
261: The lens distribution can be modeled by a modified Schechter function of the
262: form (Sheth et al. 2003)
263: \beq
264: \label{stat2}
265: \frac{d n_0}{d \sigma}=n_* \left( \frac{\sigma}{\sigma_*}\right)^\alpha \exp \left[ -\left( \frac{\sigma}{\sigma_*}\right)^\beta\right] \frac{\beta}{\Gamma (\alpha/\beta)} \frac{1}{\sigma},
266: \eeq
267: where $\alpha$ is the faint-end slope, $\beta$ the high-velocity cut-off and
268: $n_*$ and $\sigma_*$ are the characteristic number density and velocity
269: dispersion, respectively.
270: Early-type or late-type populations contribute to the lensing statistics in
271: different ways and type-specific galaxy distributions are required.
272: As a conservative approach, we do not consider lensing by spiral galaxies.
273: In fact the description of the late-type galaxy population is plagued by large
274: uncertainties and they contribute no more than 20-30\% of the total lensing
275: optical depth.
276: A proper modeling of the distribution of the lensing galaxies is central in
277: lensing statistics.
278: In our analysis we will use the results of Choi et al. (2007) who analyzed data
279: from the the SDSS Data Release 5 to derive the velocity dispersion
280: distribution function of early-type galaxies.
281: They found $n_* = 8.0{\times} 10^{-3} h^3$~Mpc$^{-3}$, where $h$ is $H_0$ in
282: units of 100~km~s$^{-1}$~Mpc$^{-1}$, $\sigma_*=144 {\pm} 5$~km~s$^{-1}$,
283: $\alpha=2.49 \pm 0.10$, and $\beta = 2.29 \pm 0.07$.
284:
285: Early-type galaxies can be well approximated as singular isothermal spheres.
286: As shown in Maoz \& Rix (1993) and Kochanek (1996), radial mass distribution,
287: ellipticity and core radius of the lens galaxy are unimportant in altering
288: the cosmological limits.
289: Assuming a flat model of universe, a typical axial ratio of 0.5 in a mixed
290: population of oblate and prolate spheroids would induce a shift of
291: $\sim 0.04$ in the estimation of $\1$ (Mitchell et al. 2005), well below
292: statistical uncertainties.
293: Since departures from spherical symmetry induce a relatively small effect on
294: lens statistics and the distribution of mass ellipticities is highly
295: uncertain, spherically symmetric models supply a viable approximation.
296: The cross section of a SIS is
297: \beq
298: \label{stat3}
299: s_\mathrm{cr}=16\pi^3 \left( \frac{\sigma}{c}\right)^4 \left( \frac{ D_\mathrm{d} D_\mathrm{ds}}{D_\mathrm{s}} \right)^2,
300: \eeq
301: where $D_\mathrm{d}$, $D_\mathrm{ds}$ and $D_\mathrm{s}$ are the angular
302: diameter distances between the observer and the deflector, the deflector and
303: the source and the observer and the source, respectively.
304: The two multiple images will form at an angular separation
305: \beq
306: \label{stat4}
307: \Delta \theta = 8 \pi \left( \frac{\sigma}{c}\right)^2 \frac{D_\mathrm{ds}}{D_\mathrm{s}} ,
308: \eeq
309: which relates the image separation to the velocity dispersion of the lens
310: galaxy.
311: The total optical depth for multiple imaging of a compact source, $\tau$, the
312: probability that a SIS forms multiple images of a background source with
313: angular separation $\Delta \theta$, $d \tau /d\Delta \theta$, and the
314: probability of lensing by a deflector at
315: $z_\mathrm{d}$, $d \tau/ d z_\mathrm{d}$, can be obtained by integrating
316: the differential probability in Eq.~(\ref{stat1}).
317:
318: Lensing probabilities must be corrected for the magnification bias $B$, i.e.
319: the tendency of gravitationally lensed sources to be preferentially included
320: in flux-limited samples due to their increased apparent brightness
321: (Turner 1990; Fukugita \& Turner 1991; Fukugita et al. 1992; Kochanek 1993).
322: {\bf
323: The bias factor for a source at
324: redshift $z_{\rm s}$ with apparent magnitude $m$ is given by
325: \begin{eqnarray}
326: {\bf B}(m,z, M_0) & =& \left(
327: \frac{dN_{\rm s}}{dm}\right)^{-1} \\
328: & {\times} & \int_{M_0}^{+\infty} \frac{dN_{\rm s}}{dm}(m+2.5\log M,z)P(M)dM , \nonumber
329: \end{eqnarray}
330: $M_0$ being the minimum magnification of a multiply imaged source,
331: with value $M_0 =2$; $P(M)dM =2 M_0^2M^{-3}dM$ is the probability that
332: a multiple image-lensing event causes a total flux increase by a
333: factor $M$ (Kochanek 1993). The function $dN_{\rm s}/d m$ is the
334: differential source number count in magnitude bins $dm$.
335: }
336: Furthermore, since observations have finite resolution and dynamic range,
337: lens discovery rates are affected by the ability to resolve multiple source
338: images (Kochanek 1993).
339: Lensing probabilities must then account for the resolution limit of the survey.
340: {\bf
341: For the SIS model,
342: selection effects can be characterized by the maximum magnitude
343: difference that can be detected for two images separated by $\Delta
344: \theta$, $\Delta m(\Delta \theta)$, which determines a minimum total
345: magnification $M_{\rm f} =M_0(f+1)/(f-1)$, where $2.5 \log f \equiv
346: \Delta m$ (Kochanek 1993).
347: }
348:
349: Finally, the likelihood function can be written as (Kochanek 1993;
350: Chae et al. 2002)
351: \beq
352: {\cal L}= \prod_{i=1}^{N_{\rm U}}(1-p_i)\prod_{j=1}^{N_{\rm
353: L}}p_{l,j},
354: \eeq
355: where $N_{\rm L}$ is the number of multiple-imaged sources and $N_{\rm U}$ is
356: the number of unlensed sources.
357: $p_l$ is the suitable probability accounting for the whole of the data
358: available for each lens system, i.e. the lens redshift and/or the
359: image separation (Chae et al. 2002; Mitchell et al. 2005).
360: Probabilities are corrected for bias and selection effects.
361:
362: Since $\tau \ll 1$ the likelihood can be approximated as
363: (Mitchell et al. 2004)
364: \beq
365: {\cal L} \simeq \exp \left[ -\int N_z(z_\mathrm{s})p (z_\mathrm{s})d
366: z_\mathrm{s}
367: \right]
368: \prod_{j=1}^{N_{\rm L}}p_{l,j},
369: \eeq
370: where $N_z(z_\mathrm{s})$ is the redshift distribution of the sources.
371: We use a uniform distribution for the priors on the cosmological parameters,
372: so that, apart from an overall normalization factor, the likelihood can be
373: identified with the posterior probability.
374:
375:
376: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
377:
378: \section{Data analysis}
379:
380:
381: In this section, we discuss the radio-survey used for our lensing statistics
382: and present the constraints on the parameters of the DGP model.
383:
384:
385: \subsection{Data set}
386:
387: The most reliable data set suitable for statistical analysis is provided by
388: a sample of 8958 flat-spectrum radio sources with 13 lenses by the Cosmic
389: Lens All-Sky Survey (CLASS; Browne et al. 2003; Myers et al. 2003).
390: Data of interest are listed in table~1 of (Chae 2005).
391: We limit our analysis to the early-type lens galaxies.
392: Ten systems in the CLASS sample (0445+123, 0631+519, 0712+472, 1152+199,
393: 1359+154, 1422+231, 1608+656, 1933+503, 2114+022 and 2319+051) can be
394: assumed to be early-type lenses (Chae 2005).
395: We do not consider the information on the image separation in
396: 1359+154, 1608+656 and 2114+022
397: whose splittings are strongly affected by galaxy companions very close to
398: the main lens.
399:
400: The final CLASS statistical sample has been selected such that, for doubly
401: imaged systems, the flux ratio is $\leq 10$ and it is independent of the
402: angular separation.
403: According to the selection criteria, the compact radio-core images have
404: separations greater than $ \Delta \theta_{\rm min}=0.3$~arcseconds.
405: The probabilities that enter the likelihood must be then considered as the
406: probabilities of producing image systems with separations $\geq \Delta
407: \theta_{\rm min}$.
408: Taking into account the CLASS observational selection function,
409: Chae (2007) found a magnification bias of $B \simeq 3.36$ for the SIS.
410:
411: Redshift measurements are only available for a restricted CLASS subsample.
412: Following Sereno (2005), we model the redshift distribution
413: $N_z(z_\mathrm{s})$ of the sources with a kernel empirical estimator.
414: For the unmeasured lensed source redshifts, we set $z_\mathrm{s}$ to the
415: mean redshift of the sources lensed by early-type galaxies with measured
416: redshift, $\langle z_\mathrm{s} \rangle_{\rm lensed}=2.2$.
417:
418: \subsection{Statistical analysis}
419:
420:
421: Let us now perform a statistical analysis of the data sample.
422: As a first step, we fix the nuisance galactic parameters to their central
423: values.
424: We will consider the related uncertainty later.
425: In the flat case, $\Omega_\mathrm{K}=0$, the likelihood is maximized,
426: ${\cal L}={\cal L_\mathrm{max}}$, for $\1 = 0.30_{-0.11}^{+0.19}$,
427: see Fig.~\ref{Like_1Par}.
428: Uncertainties denote the statistical 68.3\% confidence limit for one
429: parameter, determined by ${\cal L}/{\cal L_\mathrm{max}}=\exp (-1/2)$.
430:
431: \begin{figure}
432: \centering
433: \includegraphics[width=8.9cm]{Like_1Par.eps}
434: \caption{Normalized likelihood, ${\cal L}/{\cal L}_\mathrm{max}$, as a
435: function of $\1$ for a flat geometry, $\Omega_\mathrm{K}=0$.}
436: \label{Like_1Par}
437: \end{figure}
438:
439: Even if we relax the prior on $\Omega_\mathrm{K}$, the likelihood peaks for
440: nearly flat models.
441: In fact, the likelihood is maximum for $\{ \1,\2 \} \simeq \{0.29, 0.12\}$,
442: just slightly in the region of open models, see Fig.~\ref{Like_OM_Orc}.
443: The three contours in the figure correspond to the $68.3\%$, $95.4\%$
444: and $99.7\%$ confidence limits for two parameters,
445: namely ${\cal L}/{\cal L_\mathrm{max}}=\exp (-2.30/2)$ , $\exp (-6.17/2)$
446: and $\exp (-11.8/2)$, respectively.
447: However, contours are pretty elongated so that we can not discard either
448: close or flat or open models.
449:
450: \begin{figure}
451: \centering
452: \includegraphics[width=8.9cm]{Like_OM_Orc.eps}
453: \caption{Normalized likelihood, ${\cal L}/{\cal L}_\mathrm{max}$, in
454: the $\1$-$\2$ plane. The dot shows the best fit model and the
455: contours denote the $68.3\%$, $95.4\%$ and $99.7$ confidence limits
456: for two parameters. The dashed line represents the locus of flat
457: models of universe ($\Omega_\mathrm{K}=0$); bouncing models in the
458: upper-left shaded region do not have big bang.}
459: \label{Like_OM_Orc}
460: \end{figure}
461:
462: Uncertainties in the redshift distribution of the sources can induce
463: additional errors in the estimates of the cosmological parameters.
464: A source of error is the finite sample size of the sample of measured
465: source redshifts (only 27 source redshifts are known), which induces an
466: error in the estimated redshift distribution.
467: From a bootstrap resampling procedure, it can be created a set of simulated
468: distributions which is then used to create a new kernel estimator for the
469: redshift distribution.
470: It can be shown that the finite size induces a dispersion of $\sim 0.08$
471: on $\1$ (Sereno 2005).
472: On the other hand, the cosmological constraints are nearly insensitive of
473: the functional form used when modeling the redshift distribution.
474: Conclusions are really unaffected if a Gaussian distribution is used
475: instead of the kernel estimator.
476: Finally, results change in a very negligible way if we use different values
477: of $z_\mathrm{s}$ for the lensed sources with unknown redshift.
478:
479:
480: The main uncertainty in the estimation of cosmological parameters comes
481: from errors in the assumed parameters of the velocity dispersion
482: distribution function which describes the lens population.
483: In order to estimate such source of error, we simulated a sample of 100
484: sets of galactic parameters by extraction from normal distributions
485: centered on the best estimates of each parameter and with standard
486: deviation given by the associated uncertainty.
487: The likelihood analysis was then repeated for each set of galactic parameters.
488: Assuming flat cosmological models, the resulting distribution of the maximum
489: likelihood estimates has a scatter of $\sim 0.09$, which gives a similar
490: uncertainty in the determination of $\1$.
491:
492: Finally a theoretically important systematic uncertainty is due to the the
493: effect of small-scale inhomogeneities on large-scale observations.
494: Matter distribution is locally inhomogeneous and affects light propagation
495: and the related cosmological distances
496: (Sereno et al. 2001; Sereno, Piedipalumbo and Sazhin 2002;
497: and references therein).
498: However, being the universe globally homogeneous, the effect on the total
499: lensing statistics is small (Covone et al. 2005).
500:
501:
502: \section{Conclusion and discussion}
503:
504: Since the discovery of the accelerating expansion of the universe,
505: in addition to the standard $\Lambda$CDM cosmological model, a huge
506: number of scenarios have been proposed to be the acceleration mechanism
507: (for a recent review, see: Sahni and Starobinsky 2000; Padmanabhan 2003;
508: Lima 2004; Copeland, Sami and Tsujikawa 2006; Alcaniz 2006).
509: Examples include
510: %%%
511: the so-called ``X-matter"
512: (Turner and White 1997;
513: Zhu, Fujimoto and Tatsumi 2001;
514: Alcaniz, Lima and Cunha 2003;
515: Dai, Liang and Xu 2004;
516: Rupetti et al. 2007;
517: Wang, Dai and Zhu 2007),
518: %%%
519: a decaying vacuum energy density or a time varying $\Lambda$-term
520: (Ozer and Taha 1987; Vishwakarma 2001),
521: %%%
522: an evolving scalar field, dubbed quintessence
523: (Ratra and Peebles 1988;
524: Caldwell et al. 1998;
525: Wang and Lovelace 2001;
526: Gong 2002;
527: Chen and Ratra 2004;
528: Choudhury and Padmanabhan 2005;
529: Ichikawa et al. 2006),
530: %%%
531: the phantom energy, in which the sum of the pressure and energy
532: density is negative
533: (Caldwell 2002;
534: Dabrowski et al. 2003;
535: Wang, Gong and Su 2004;
536: Wu and Yu 2005, 2006;
537: Chang et al. 2007),
538: %%%
539: the Chaplygin gas
540: (Kamenshchik et al. 2001;
541: Bento et al. 2002;
542: Alam et al. 2003;
543: Alcaniz, Jain and Dev 2003;
544: Dev, Alcaniz and Jain 2003;
545: Silva and Bertolami 2003;
546: Makler et al. 2003;
547: Zhu 2004;
548: Zhang and Zhu 2006),
549: %%%
550: the quintom model
551: (Feng, Wang and Zhang 2005;
552: Guo et al. 2005;
553: Zhao et al. 2005; Xia et al. 2006;
554: Wei and Zhang 2007),
555: %%%
556: the holographic dark energy
557: (Li 2004; Zhang and Wu 2005; Chang, Wu and Zhang 2006),
558: %%%
559: the Cardassion model
560: (Freese and Lewis 2002;
561: Zhu and Fujimoto 2002, 2003;
562: Sen and Sen 2003;
563: Wang et al. 2003;
564: Gong and Duan 2004a,b;
565: Wang 2005;
566: Bento et al. 2006;
567: Reboul and Cordoni 2006;
568: Yi and Zhang 2007)
569: %%%
570: and the Casimir force (Szydlowski and Godlowski 2007; Godlowski et al. 2007).
571: All these acceleration mechanisms should be tested with various astronomical
572: observations.
573:
574: In this paper, we have focused our attention on the DGP model.
575: We have analyzed this scenario by using the Cosmic Lens All-Sky Survey
576: sample (Browne et al. 2003; Myers et al. 2003) to obtain the 68.3\%, 95.4\%
577: and 99.7\% confidence regions on its parameters.
578: It is shown that a large parameter space of the DGP model is consistent with
579: this radio source gravitational lensing sample.
580: In the flat case, $\Omega_\mathrm{K}=0$, the likelihood is maximized,
581: ${\cal L}={\cal L_\mathrm{max}}$, for $\1 = 0.30_{-0.11}^{+0.19}$.
582: If we relax the prior on $\Omega_\mathrm{K}$, the likelihood peaks at
583: $\{ \1,\2 \} \simeq \{0.29, 0.12\}$, just slightly in the region of open
584: models.
585: The obtained confidence regions of Figure~2 are also in good agreement with
586: the results from analyzing data of type Ia supernovae (Zhu and Alcaniz 2005),
587: which implies that gravitational lensing statistics provides an
588: independent and complementary constraint on the DGP model.
589: However, similar to the case of type Ia supernovae,
590: the confidence contours are pretty elongated so that we can not
591: discard either close or flat or open models by only using the CLASS sample.
592: {\bf
593: Using the \emph{gold} sample of type Ia supernovae (SNeIa), the first year
594: data from the Supernova Legacy Survey (SNLS) and the baryon acoustic
595: oscillation (BAO) peak found in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS),
596: Guo et al (2006) obtained, at 99.73\% confidence level,
597: $\Omega_m=0.270^{+0.018}_{-0.017}$ and $\Omega_{r_c}=0.216^{+0.012}_{-0.013}$
598: (hence a spatially closed universe with $\Omega_k=-0.350^{+0.080}_{-0.083}$),
599: which seems to be in contradiction with the most recent WMAP results
600: indicating a flat universe.
601: Based on this result, the authors also estimated the transition redshift
602: (at which the universe switches from deceleration
603: to acceleration) to be $0.70 < z_{q=0} < 1.01$, at $2\sigma$ confidence level.
604: Therefore, the method of combining observational data provides much more
605: stringent constraint on the DGP model than any single data.
606: }
607: It is naturally hopeful that, with either future larger gravitational lensing
608: samples or a joint investigation with other astronomical observations, one
609: could obtain a more stringent constraint on the DGP model parameters.
610:
611:
612:
613:
614: %__________________________________________________________________
615: \begin{acknowledgements}
616: This work was supported by
617: the National Natural Science Foundation of China, under Grant No. 10533010,
618: 973 Program No. 2007CB815401, Program for New Century Excellent Talents in
619: University (NCET) of China
620: and the Project-sponsored by SRF for ROCS, SEM of China.
621: %
622: Z.-H. Z. also acknowledges support from CNRS,
623: and is grateful to all members of cosmology group at IAS for their
624: hospitality and help during his stay.
625: %
626: M.S. thanks the Department of Astronomy, Beijing Normal University, for the
627: warm hospitality and the financial support during its visit in Beijing.
628: M.S. is supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation and by the Tomalla
629: Foundation.
630: %
631: \end{acknowledgements}
632:
633: \begin{thebibliography}{}
634: \bibitem[Alam et al. 2003]{ala03}
635: Alam, U., Sahni, V., Saini, T. D. and Starobinsky, A. A.
636: 2003, \mnras, 334, 1057
637:
638: \bibitem[]{}
639: Alcaniz, J. S., 2002, \prd, 65, 123514 (astro-ph/0202492). %brane world
640:
641: \bibitem[]{}
642: Alcaniz, J. S., 2006, Braz. J. Phys. , 36, 1109
643:
644: \bibitem[Alcaniz et al. 2002]{ajd02}
645: Alcaniz, J. S., Jain, D. and Dev, A. 2002, \prd, 66, 067301 %brane world
646:
647: \bibitem[]{}
648: Alcaniz, J. S., Jain, D. and Dev, A. 2003, \prd, 67, 043514
649: (astro-ph/0210476). %Chaplygin
650:
651: \bibitem[Alcaniz et al. 2003]{alc03a}
652: Alcaniz, J. S., Lima, J. A. S. and Cunha, J. V. 2003, \mnras, 340, L39
653: %x-matter
654:
655: %\bibitem[]{}
656: % Alcaniz, J. S. and Zhu, Z. -H. 2005, \prd, 71, 083513
657: % (astro-ph/0411604). %brane world
658:
659: %\bibitem[]{}
660: % Allen, S. W., Schmidt, R. W., Ebeling, H., Fabian, A. C. \& van
661: % Speybroeck, L. 2004, \mnras, 353, 457
662:
663: %\bibitem[]{}
664: % Allen, S. W., Schmidt, R. W. \& Fabian, A. C. 2002, \mnras, 334, L11
665:
666: %\bibitem[]{}
667: % Allen, S. W., Schmidt, R. W., Fabian, A. C. \& Ebeling, H. 2003,
668: \mnras, 342, 287
669:
670: %\bibitem[]{}
671: % Amendola, L., Quercellini, C., Tocchini-Valentini, C. and Pasqui, A.
672: % 2003, \apj, 583, L53
673: %``Constraints on the interaction and self-interaction of dark energy from
674: %cosmic microwave background,''
675:
676: %\bibitem[]{}
677: % Astier, P. et al. 2006, \aap, 447, 31
678:
679: \bibitem[Avelino and Martins 2002]{ave02}
680: Avelino, P. P. and Martins, C. J. A. P. 2002, \apj, 565, 661
681:
682: \bibitem[]{}
683: Barger, V., Gao, Y. and Marfatia, D. 2007, Phys.Lett. B648, 127
684:
685: %\bibitem[]{inter}
686: % Bartolo, N. and Pietroni, M., \prd, 61, 023518 (2000)
687:
688: \bibitem[]{}
689: Benabed, K., Bernardeau, F., 2001, \prd, 64, 083501
690:
691: \bibitem[Bennett et al. 2003]{ben03}
692: Bennett, C. L. et al. 2003 \apjs, 148, 1
693:
694: \bibitem[]{}
695: Bento, M. C., Bertolami, O., Reboucas, M. J. and Santos, N. M. C. 2006,
696: \prd, 73, 103521
697:
698: \bibitem[]{}
699: Bento, M. C., Bertolami, O and Sen, A. A. 2002, \prd, 66, 043507 %Chap
700:
701: %\bibitem[]{bi}
702: % Bento, M.C., Bertolami, O. and Sen, A.A. 2003a, Phys.Lett.B, 575, 172
703:
704: %\bibitem[]{cmb}
705: % Bento, M.C., Bertolami, O. and Sen, A.A. 2003b, \prd, 67, 063003
706:
707: %\bibitem[]{}
708: % Bertolami, O. and Silva, P. 2005, astro-ph/0507192;
709:
710: %\bibitem[]{}
711: % Bertolami, O. 2005, astro-ph/0504275;
712:
713: %\bibitem[]{}
714: % Bialek, J. J., Evrard, A. E. and Mohr, J. J. 2001, \apj, 555, 597
715:
716: %\bibitem[]{}
717: % Biesiada, M., Godlowski, W. and Szydlowski, M. 2005, \apj, 622, 28
718:
719: %\bibitem[]{}
720: % Bili\'c, N., Tupper, G. B.,
721: \& Viollier, R. D. 2002, Phys.Lett.B, 535, 17
722:
723: %\bibitem[]{}
724: % Bili\'c, N., Tupper, G. and Viollier, R. 2005, astro-ph/0503428
725:
726: %\bibitem[]{sdss}
727: % Blake, C., Collister, A., Bridle, S. \& Lahav, O. 2006,
728: % astro-ph/0605303
729:
730: %\bibitem[]{}
731: % Bouhmadi-Lopez, M.and Moniz, P. 2005, \prd, 71, 063521
732:
733: \bibitem[]{}
734: Browne, I.W.A., et al., 2003, MNRAS, 341, 13
735:
736: %\bibitem[]{} Carroll S. M., Duvvuri V., Trodden M., and Turner M. S., 2004, Phys. Rev. D 70, 043528;
737:
738: \bibitem[Caldwell 2002]{cal02}
739: Caldwell, R. 2002, Phys.Lett.B, 545, 23 %phantom
740:
741: \bibitem[Caldwell et al. 1988]{cal98}
742: Caldwell, R., Dave, R., and Steinhardt, P. J. 1998, \prl, 80, 1582
743: %quintessence
744:
745: \bibitem[]{}
746: Chae, K.-H., 2003, MNRAS, 346, 746.
747:
748: \bibitem[]{}
749: Chae, K.-H., 2005, \apj, 630, 764
750:
751: \bibitem[]{}
752: Chae, K.-H., 2007, \apjl, 658, L71
753:
754: \bibitem[]{}
755: Chae, K.-H., Biggs, A. D., Blandford, R.D., Browne, I.W., de Bruyn,
756: A.G., Fassnacht, C.D., Helbig, P., Jackson, N.J., et al., 2002,
757: Phys. Rev. Lett., 89, 151301.
758:
759: \bibitem[]{}
760: Chang, B., Liu, H., Xu, L., Zhang, C. and Ping, Y. 2007, JCAP, 0701, 016
761:
762: \bibitem[]{}
763: Chang, Z., Wu, F.-Q. and Zhang, X. 2006, Phys. Lett.B633, 14
764:
765: %\bibitem[Chen and Ratra 2003]{che03}
766: % Chen, G. and Ratra, B. 2003, \apj, 582, 586
767:
768: \bibitem[]{}
769: Chen, G. and Ratra, B. 2004, \apj, 612, L1
770:
771: \bibitem[]{}
772: Chiba, M. and Yoshii, Y. 1999, \apj, 510, 42
773:
774: %\bibitem[]{}
775: % Chimento, L. \& Lazkoz, R. 2005, Phys.Lett.B, 615, 146
776: % (astro-ph/0411068)
777:
778: \bibitem[]{}
779: Choi, Y.-Y., Park, C., \& Vogeley, M.~S. 2007, \apj, 658, 884
780:
781: \bibitem[]{}
782: Choudhury, T. R. and Padmanabhan, T. 2005, \aap, 429, 807
783:
784: %\bibitem[]{}
785: % Colistete Jr., R. and Fabris, J. 2005, Class.Quant.Grav., 22, 2813
786: % (astro-ph/0501519)
787:
788: %\bibitem[]{}
789: % Colistete Jr., R., Fabris, J. C. and Goncalves, S.V.B. 2005,
790: % Int.J.Mod.Phys.D, 14, 775
791:
792: \bibitem[]{}
793: Cooray, A.R., Huterer, D., 1999, ApJ, 513, L95
794:
795: \bibitem[]{}
796: Copeland, E.J., Sami, M. and Tsujikawa, S. 2006, Int. J. Mod. Phys.
797: D15, 1753 %hep-th/0603057
798:
799: \bibitem[]{}
800: Covone, G., Sereno, M., \& de Ritis, R. 2005, MNRAS, 357, 773
801:
802: %\bibitem[]{}
803: % Cunha, J.V., Alcaniz, J.S. and Lima, J.A.S. 2004, \prd, 69, 083501.
804:
805: %\bibitem[]{st}
806: % Curbelo, R., Gonzalez, T. and Quiros, I. 2005, astro-ph/0502141
807: %``Interacting phantom energy and avoidance of the big rip singularity,''
808:
809: \bibitem[Dabrowski et al. 2003]{dab03}
810: Dabrowski, M. P., Stochowiak, T., and Szydlowski, M. 2003,
811: \prd, 68, 103519 %phantom
812:
813: \bibitem[]{}
814: Dai, Z., Liang, E. W. and Xu, D. 2004, \apj, in press,
815: astro-ph/0407497 %x-matter
816:
817: %\bibitem[]{}
818: % Daly, R. A. and Djorgovski, S. G. 2005, astro-ph/0512576
819:
820: %\bibitem[]{}
821: % Damour, T., Gibbons, G. W. and Gundlach, C. 1990, \prl, 64, 123
822:
823: %\bibitem[]{}
824: % Debnath, U., Banerjee, A. and Chakraborty, S. 2004,
825: % Class.Quant.Grav., 21, 5609 (gr-qc/0411015)
826:
827: %\bibitem[]{}
828: % Deffayet, C., Dvali, G. and Gabadadze, G. 2002, \prd, 65, 044023
829:
830: \bibitem[]{}
831: Deffayet, C., Landau, S. J., Raux, J., Zaldarriaga, M. and Astier, P.
832: 2002, \prd, 66, 024019
833:
834: \bibitem[Dev et al. 2003a]{dev03a}
835: Dev, A., Jain, D. and Alcaniz, J. S. 2003, \prd, 67, 023515 %Chaplygin
836:
837: \bibitem[Dvali et al. 2000]{dva00}
838: Dvali, G., Gabadadze, G. and Porrati, M. 2000, Phys.Lett.B, 485, 208
839:
840: %\bibitem[]{}
841: % Eke, V. R., Navarro, J. F. and Frenk, C. S. 1998, \apj, 503, 569
842:
843: %\bibitem[]{}
844: % Fabris, J.C., Goncalves, S.V.B. and dos Santos, M.S. 2004,
845: % Gen.Rel.Grav., 36, 2559
846:
847: %\bibitem[]{}
848: % Fabris, J.C., Goncalves, S.V.B. and de Souza, P.E. 2002,
849: % astro-ph/0207430;
850:
851: %\bibitem[]{}
852: % Fabris, J., Goncalves, S. and Ribeiro, R. 2004, Gen.Rel.Grav., 36, 211
853:
854: \bibitem[]{}
855: Feng, B., Wang, X. and Zhang, X. 2005, Phys. Lett. B607, 35
856: %astro-ph/0404224
857:
858: %\bibitem[]{}
859: % Freedman W. et al., 2001, ApJ, 553, 47
860:
861: \bibitem[]{}
862: Freese, K. and Lewis, M. 2002, Phys. Lett. B540, 1
863:
864: %\bibitem[]{}
865: % Frith, W. J. 2004, \mnras, 348, 916
866:
867: \bibitem[]{}
868: Fukugita, M., Futamase, T., Kasai, M., Turner, E.L., 1992, ApJ, 393, 3
869:
870: \bibitem[]{}
871: Fukugita, M., Turner, E.L., 1991, MNRAS, 253, 99
872:
873: \bibitem[]{}
874: Gong, Y. 2002, Class.Quan.Grav. 19, 4537
875:
876: %\bibitem[]{}
877: % Gong, Y. 2005, JCAP, 0503, 007
878:
879: \bibitem[]{}
880: Gong, Y. and Duan, C.K. 2004a, Class. Quant. Grav., 21, 3655
881:
882: \bibitem[]{}
883: Gong, Y. and Duan, C.K. 2004b, \mnras, 352, 847
884:
885: %\bibitem[]{}
886: %Gorini, V., Kamenshchik, A., Moschella, U., Pasquier,V. and Starobinsky, A.,
887: %``Stability properties of some perfect fluid cosmological models,''
888: % Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 72}, 103518 (2005)
889: % astro-ph/0504576;
890:
891: \bibitem[]{}
892: Guo, Z.-K., Piao, Y.-S., Zhang, X. and Zhang, Y.-Z. 2005, Phys.Lett.
893: B608, 177
894:
895: %\bibitem[]{many}
896: %Guo, Z. and Zhang, Y., astro-ph/0509790;
897:
898: %\bibitem[]{}
899: %Guo, Z. and Zhang, Y., astro-ph/0506091;
900:
901: \bibitem[]{}
902: Guo, Z.-K., Zhu, Z.-H., Alcaniz, J. S. and Zhang, Y.-Z. 2006, \apj,
903: 646, 1 % astro-ph/0603632
904:
905: \bibitem[]{}
906: He, J.-H., Wang, B. and Papantonopoulos, E. 2007, gr-qc/07071180
907:
908: \bibitem[]{}
909: Ichikawa, K., Kawasaki, M., Sekiguchi, and Takahashi, T. 2006, JCAP,
910: 0612, 005
911:
912: %\bibitem[]{}
913: %Kaloper, N. and Olive, K. A.,
914: %Phys.Rev.D 57, 811 (1998).
915:
916: \bibitem[Jain et al. 2002]{jai02}
917: Jain, D., Dev, A. and Alcaniz, J. S. 2002, \prd, 66, 083511 %brane world
918:
919: \bibitem[]{cp}
920: Kamenshchik, A., Moschella, U. and Pasquier, V. 2001, Phys. Lett.B,
921: 511, 265 %Chaplygin
922:
923: \bibitem[]{}
924: Kochanek, C.S., 1993, ApJ 419, 12.
925:
926: \bibitem[]{}
927: Kochanek, C.S., 1996, ApJ 473, 595
928:
929: \bibitem[]{}
930: Koyama, K. and Maartens, R. 2006, JCAP, 0601, 016
931:
932: \bibitem[]{}
933: Lazkoz, R., Maartens, R. and Majerotto, E. 2006, \prd, 74, 083510
934:
935: %\bibitem[Li et al. 2002a]{li02a}
936: % Li, M., Lin, W., Zhang, X. and Brandenberger, R. 2002a, \prd, 65,
937: % 023519
938: 5A
939:
940: %\bibitem[Li et al. 2002b]{li02b}
941: % Li, M., Wang, X., Feng, B. and Zhang, X. 2002b, \prd, 65, 103511
942:
943: \bibitem[]{}
944: Lima, J.A.S. 2004, Braz. J. Phys., 34, 194
945:
946: %\bibitem[Lima et al. 2003]{lim03}
947: % Lima, J. A. S., Cunha, J. V. and Alcaniz, J. S. 2003, \prd, 68, 023510
948:
949: %\bibitem[]{}
950: %Lima, J.A.S., Cunha, J.V., and Alcaniz, J.S., astro-ph/0608469 (2006a)
951:
952: %\bibitem[]{}
953: %Lima, J.A.S., Cunha, J.V., and Alcaniz, J.S., astro-ph/0611007 (2006b)
954:
955:
956: %\bibitem[]{}
957: % Liu, D. and Li, X., Chin.Phys.Lett. 22 (2005) 1600,
958: % astro-ph/0501115;
959:
960: \bibitem[]{}
961: Lue, A. 2006, Phys.Rept., 423, 1
962:
963: \bibitem[]{}
964: Lue, A., Scoccimarro, R. and Starkman, G. D. 2004, \prd, 69, 124015
965:
966: %\bibitem[]{maia}
967: %Maia, J.M.F. and Lima, J.A.S.,
968: %Phys. Rev. D60, 101301(1999).
969:
970: \bibitem[]{}
971: Maartens, R. and Majerotto, E. 2006, \prd, 74, 023004
972:
973: %\bibitem[]{}
974: % Mak, M. and Harko, T. 2005, \prd, 71, 104022 (gr-qc/0505034)
975:
976: %\bibitem[]{}
977: %Makler, M., Mota, B. and Reboucas, M. 2005, astro-ph/0507116
978:
979: %\bibitem[]{sn}
980: % Makler, M., de Oliveira, S.Q. and Waga, I. 2003, Phys. Lett.B, 555, 1
981:
982: \bibitem[Makler et al. 2003b]{mak03}
983: Makler, M., Oliveira, S. Q., \& Waga, I. 2003, \prd, 68, 123521
984: % astro-ph/0306507 %gCg
985:
986: \bibitem[]{}
987: Maoz, D., Rix, H.-W., 1993, ApJ 416, 425
988:
989: \bibitem[]{}
990: Mitchell, J.L., Keeton, C.R., Frieman, J.A., Sheth, R.K., 2005, \apj,
991: 622, 81 %astro-ph/0401138
992:
993: %\bibitem[]{}
994: %Mota, B., Makler, M. and Reboucas, M. 2005, astro-ph/0506499
995:
996: \bibitem[]{}
997: Movahed, M. S., Farhang, M. and Rahvar, S. 2007, astro-ph/0701339
998:
999: %\bibitem[Mukherjee et al. 2003]{muk03}
1000: % Mukherjee, P., Banday, A. J., Riazuelo, A., Gorski, K. M., Ratra, B.
1001: % 2003, ApJ, 598, 767
1002: % accepted (astro-ph/0306147)
1003:
1004: \bibitem[Multamaki et al. 2003]{mul03}
1005: Multam\"aki, T., Gaztanaga, E. and Manera, M. 2003, \mnras, 344, 761
1006: %(astro-ph/0303526)
1007:
1008: %\bibitem[]{}
1009: % Multamaki, T., Manera, M. and Gaztanaga, E. 2004, \prd, 69, 023004
1010:
1011: \bibitem[]{}
1012: Myers, S.T., et al., 2003, MNRAS, 341, 1
1013:
1014: %\bibitem[]{}
1015: %Olivares, G.~, ~Atrio-Barandela, F. and Pavon, D.~,
1016: % ``Observational constraints on interacting quintessence models,''
1017: %Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 71}, 063523 (2005);
1018:
1019: %\bibitem[]{}
1020: %Olivares, G., ~Atrio-Barandela, F. and ~Pavon, D.,
1021: %``Constraining dark energy interacting models with WMAP,''
1022: %
1023: % ,astro-ph/0511474;
1024:
1025: \bibitem[Ozer and Taha 1987]{oze87}
1026: Ozer, M. and Taha, O. 1987, Nucl. Phys. {\bf{B287}}, 776
1027:
1028: \bibitem[]{review}
1029: Padmanabhan, T., Phys. Rept. 380, 235 (2003), hep-th/0212290;
1030:
1031: %\bibitem{}{}
1032: % Pavon, D., Sen, S. and Zimdahl, W.,
1033: %``CMB constraints on interacting cosmological models,''
1034: %
1035: % JCAP {\bf 0405}, 009 (2004);
1036:
1037: %\bibitem[]{}
1038: % Peebles, P. J. E. and Ratra, B.,
1039: % Rev. Mod. Phys. 75, 559 (2003), astro-ph/0207347;
1040:
1041: \bibitem[]{}
1042: Perlmutter, S. et al. 1999, \apj, 517, 565 (astro-ph/9812133)
1043:
1044: %\bibitem[]{}
1045: % Perrotta, F., Matarrese, S. and Torki, M. 2004, \prd, 70, 121304
1046:
1047: \bibitem[]{}
1048: Pires, N., Zhu, Z.-H. and Alcaniz, J.S. 2006, \prd, 73, 123530
1049: %astro-ph/0606689
1050:
1051: %\bibitem[]{}
1052: % Podariu, S. and Ratra, B. 2001, \apj, 563, 28
1053:
1054: %\bibitem[Randall 2002]{ran02}
1055: % Randall, L. 2002, Science, 296, 1422.
1056:
1057: \bibitem[Randall 1999]{}
1058: Randall, L. and Sundrum, R. 1999a, \prl, 83, 3370
1059:
1060: \bibitem[Randall 1999]{}
1061: Randall, L. and Sundrum, R. 1999b, \prl, 83, 4690
1062:
1063: \bibitem[Ratra and Peebles 1988]{rat88}
1064: Ratra, B. and P.J.E. Peebles, P. J. E. 1988, \prd, 37, 3406
1065:
1066: %\bibitem[]{} Reis R.R.R., Waga I., Calvao M.O. and Joras S.E. 2003, Phys. Rev. D68, 061302.
1067:
1068: \bibitem[]{}
1069: Reboul, H. and Cordoni, J.-P. 2006, astro-ph/0601703
1070:
1071: \bibitem[]{acce}
1072: Riess, A. G. et al. 1998, \aj, 116, 1009 (astro-ph/9805201)
1073:
1074: \bibitem[]{}
1075: Rupetti, D., Allen, S. W., Amin, M. A. and Blandford, R. D. 2007,
1076: \mnras, 375, 1510
1077:
1078: \bibitem[]{}
1079: Rydbeck, S., Fairbain, M. and Goobar, A. 2007, JCAP, 0705, 003
1080:
1081: %\bibitem[]{}
1082: % Sahni, V., astro-ph/0403324.
1083:
1084: \bibitem[]{}
1085: Sahni, V. and Starobinsky, A. 2000, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D9, 373
1086: %astro-ph/9904398
1087:
1088: %\bibitem[]{}
1089: % Schechter, P., 1976, ApJ, 203, 297
1090:
1091: \bibitem[]{}
1092: Schechter, P., 2004, astro-ph/0408338
1093:
1094: %\bibitem[]{}
1095: % Sen, A. and Scherrer, R. 2005, astro-ph/0507717;
1096:
1097: \bibitem[Sen and Sen 2003]{sen03}
1098: Sen, A. A. and Sen, S. 2003, \apj, 588, 1
1099: % ``Observational Constraints on Cardassian Expansion''
1100:
1101: \bibitem[]{}
1102: Sereno, M., 2002, \aap, 393, 757; astro-ph/0209210.
1103:
1104: \bibitem[]{}
1105: Sereno, M., 2005, MNRAS, 356, 937.
1106:
1107: \bibitem[]{}
1108: Sereno, M., 2007, \mnras, 377, 229
1109:
1110: \bibitem[]{}
1111: Sereno, M., Covone, G., Piedipalumbo, E., de Ritis, R., 2001, MNRAS,
1112: 327, 517.
1113:
1114: \bibitem[]{}
1115: Sereno, M., Longo, G., 2004, MNRAS, 354, 1255 % astro-ph/0409119.
1116:
1117: \bibitem[]{}
1118: Sereno, M., Piedipalumbo, E., Sazhin, M.V., 2002, MNRAS, 335, 1061;
1119: astro-ph/0209181.
1120:
1121: \bibitem[]{}
1122: Sheth, R.~K., et al. 2003, \apj, 594, 225
1123:
1124: \bibitem[]{}
1125: Silva, P.T. and Bertolami O., 2003, Astrophys. J. 599, 829.
1126:
1127: \bibitem[]{}
1128: Song, Y.-S., Sawicki, I. and Hu, W. 2007, \prd, 75, 064003
1129:
1130: %\bibitem[]{}
1131: % Szydlowski, M. and Czaja, W. 2004, \prd, 69, 023506
1132:
1133: \bibitem[]{}
1134: Tegmark, M. et al. 2004a, \prd, 69, 103501 % astro-ph/0310723
1135:
1136: \bibitem[]{}
1137: Tegmark, M. et al. 2004b, \apj, 606, 702 %astro-ph/0310725
1138:
1139: \bibitem[]{}
1140: Turner, E.L., 1990, \apj, 365, L43
1141:
1142: \bibitem[]{}
1143: Turner, M. S. and White, M. 1997, \prd, 56, R4439 %x-matter
1144:
1145: \bibitem[Vishwakarma 2001]{vis01}
1146: Vishwakarma, R. G. 2001, Class.Quan.Grav. 18, 1159 %decay lambda
1147:
1148: \bibitem[]{}
1149: Wan, H.-Y., Yi, Z.-L. and Zhang, T.-J. 2007, Phys.Lett.B, in press
1150: astro-ph/07062737
1151:
1152: \bibitem[]{}
1153: Wang, B., Gong, Y. and Su, R.-K. 2004, hep-th/0408032
1154:
1155: \bibitem[]{}
1156: Wang, P. 2005, \prd, 72, 024030
1157:
1158: \bibitem[]{}
1159: Wang, F. Y., Dai, Z. G. and Zhu, Z.-H. 2007, \apj, in press
1160: astro-ph/07060938
1161:
1162: \bibitem[Wang and Lovelace]{wan01b}
1163: Wang, Y. and Lovelace, G. 2001, \apj, 562, L115
1164:
1165: \bibitem[]{}
1166: Wei, H. and Zhang, S. N. 2007, \prd, in press, astro-ph/07054002
1167:
1168: %\bibitem[]{}
1169: % Weller, J. and Albrecht, A. 2002, \prd, 65, 103512
1170:
1171: \bibitem[]{}
1172: Wu, P. and Yu, H. 2005, Nucl. Phys. B727, 355
1173:
1174: \bibitem[]{}
1175: Wu, P. and Yu, H. 2006, Phys.Lett.B643, 315
1176:
1177: \bibitem[]{}
1178: Xia, J.-Q., Zhao, G.-B., Feng, B. and Zhang, X. 2006, \prd, 73, 063521
1179:
1180: \bibitem[]{}
1181: Yamamoto, K., Futamase, T., 2001, Prog. Theor. Phys., 105, 707
1182:
1183: \bibitem[]{}
1184: Yi, Z.-L. and Zhang, T.-J. 2007, \prd, 75, 083515
1185:
1186: \bibitem[]{self}
1187: Zhang, H and Zhu, Z.-H. 2006, \prd, 73, 043518
1188:
1189: %\bibitem[]{}
1190: % Zhang,H. and Zhu, Z-H, astro-ph/
1191:
1192: \bibitem[]{}
1193: Zhang, X. and Wu, F.-Q. 2005, \prd, 72, 043524
1194:
1195: \bibitem[]{}
1196: Zhao, G.-B., Xia, J.-Q., Li, H., Tao, C., Virey, J.-M., Zhu, Z.-H.
1197: and Zhang, X. 2007, Phys.Lett.B, in press, astro-ph/0612728
1198:
1199:
1200: \bibitem[]{}
1201: Zhao, G.-B., Xia, J.-Q., Li, M., Feng, B. and Zhang, X. \prd,
1202: 72, 123515
1203:
1204: \bibitem[]{}
1205: Zhu, Z. -H. 1998, \aap, 338, 777
1206:
1207: %\bibitem[]{}
1208: % Zhu, Z. -H. 2000a, Mod. Phys. Lett., A15, 1023
1209:
1210: %\bibitem[]{}
1211: % Zhu, Z. -H. 2000b, Int. J. Mod. Phys., D9, 591
1212:
1213: \bibitem[]{zhzh}
1214: Zhu, Z.-H. 2004, \aap, 423, 421 (astro-ph/0411039)
1215:
1216: \bibitem[]{}
1217: Zhu, Z. -H. and Alcaniz, J. S. 2005, \apj, 620, 7
1218:
1219: %\bibitem[]{}
1220: % Zhu, Z. -H. and Cao, L. 1999
1221:
1222: \bibitem[]{}
1223: Zhu, Z. -H. and Fujimoto, M. -K. 2002, \apj, 581, 1
1224:
1225: \bibitem[Zhu and Fujimoto 2003]{zhu03}
1226: Zhu, Z. -H. and Fujimoto, M. -K. 2003, \apj, 585, 52
1227:
1228: %\bibitem[Zhu and Fujimoto 2004]{zhu04}
1229: % Zhu, Z. -H. and Fujimoto, M. -K. 2004, \apj,
1230:
1231: \bibitem[]{}
1232: Zhu, Z. -H., Fujimoto, M. -K. and Tatsumi, D. 2001, \aap, 372, 377
1233:
1234: %\bibitem[]{}
1235: % Zhu, Z. -H., Fujimoto, M. -K. and He, X. -T. 2004, \apj, 603, 365
1236:
1237: %\bibitem[]{}
1238: % Zimdahl, W. and Fabris, J. 2005, gr-qc/0504088
1239:
1240: \end{thebibliography}
1241:
1242:
1243:
1244: \end{document}
1245: