Classical and Quantum Gravity

PAPER You may also like

- Contribute to knowledge about risks in
Late time cosmology in -gravity with implementing green building projects in
developing countries: a case of Vietnam
interacting fluids Hung D Nguyen, Quang N H Do and
Laura Macchion

- The interplay between grain boundary

To cite this article: B C Paul et al 2022 Class. Quantum Grav. 39 065006 structure and defect sink/annealing
behavior
J Han, V Vitek and D J Srolovitz

- An energetic and kinetic perspective of the

grain-boundary role in healing radiation
View the article online for updates and enhancements. damage in tungsten
Xiangyan Li, Wei Liu, Yichun Xu et al.

This content was downloaded from IP address 118.185.209.242 on 12/07/2022 at 08:37

 Classical and Quantum Gravity
Class. Quantum Grav. 39 (2022) 065006 (23pp) https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6382/ac4b97

Late time cosmology in f(R, G)-gravity with

interacting fluids
B C Paul1,∗ , A Chanda1 , A Beesham2 and
S D Maharaj3
1
Department of Physics, University of North Bengal, West Bengal 734014, India
2
Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Zululand, South Africa;
Faculty of Natural Sciences, Mangosuthu University of Technology, Umlazi, South
Africa
3
Astrophysics Research Centre, School of Mathematics, Statistics and Computer
Science, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Private Bag X54001, Durban 4000, South
Africa

E-mail: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

and [email protected]

Received 14 August 2021, revised 27 December 2021

Accepted for publication 14 January 2022
Published 3 March 2022

Abstract
Cosmological models are obtained in a f (R) modified gravity with a coupled
Gauss–Bonnet (GB) terms in the gravitational action. The dynamical role of
the GB terms is explored with a coupled dilaton field in two different cases
 δ
(I) f (R) = R + γR2 − λ 3mR 2 where γ, λ and δ are arbitrary constants and
s
(II) f (R) = R and estimate the constraints on the model parameters. In the first
case we choose GB terms coupled with a free scalar field in the presence of
interacting fluid and in the second case GB terms coupled with scalar field in a
self interacting potential to compare the observed Universe. The evolutionary
scenario of the Universe is obtained adopting a numerical technique as the field
equations are highly non-linear. Defining a new density parameter ΩH , a ratio of
the dark energy (DE) density to the present energy density of the non-relativistic
matter, we look for a late accelerating Universe. The state finder parameters ΩH ,
deceleration parameter (q), jerk parameter ( j) are plotted. It is noted that a non-
singular Universe with oscillating cosmological parameters for a given strength
of interactions is admitted in model-I. The gravitational coupling constant λ is
playing an important role. The Lagrangian density of f (R) is found to dominate
over the GB terms when oscillating phase of DE arises. In model-II, we do not
find oscillation of the cosmological parameters as the Universe evolves. In the
presence of interaction the energy from radiation sector of matter cannot flow

∗
Author to whom any correspondence should be addressed.

1361-6382/22/065006+23$33.00 © 2022 IOP Publishing Ltd Printed in the UK 1

Class. Quantum Grav. 39 (2022) 065006 B C Paul et al

to the other two sectors of fluid. The range of values of the strengths of inter-
action of the fluids are estimated for a stable Universe assuming the primordial
gravitational wave speed equal to unity.

Keywords: late time cosmology, statefinder analysis, modified gravity

(Some figures may appear in colour only in the online journal)

1. Introduction

Recent cosmological and astronomical observations predict that the present Universe is pass-
ing through an accelerated phase of expansion. The recent decade is witnessing a challenge
in theoretical cosmology from the observed data coming from various missions, namely,
supernovae (SN) Ia, baryon acoustic oscillations (BAO), the cosmic microwave background
(CMB), etc [1–4]. It was known in the standard model of cosmology that the late phase of
the Universe can be understood by introducing a cosmological constant (Λ) [5–8]. Although
the approach is fairly successful, this model suffers from the serious problem of fine tuning
[9]. The observational evidence of galactic and extra-galactic dynamics is not understood by
general relativity (GR). The present observations demand that the Universe consists mainly
of a non-gravitating type of matter, namely, dark energy (DE) having negative pressure, and
a substantial amount of gravitating non-baryonic dark matter (DM) [10–12]. Another alter-
native approach in this direction is to modify the gravitational sector of the Einstein field
equations to fit the missing matter energy of the observed Universe. Recently several authors
have considered modified theories of gravity to describe the evolution of the Universe. The
aim of the theories is to incorporate the description of the DE era [13–18] in the theoreti-
cal cosmology. It is also known that the present Universe emerged from a early inflationary
phase, the modified theories of gravity also provide an explanation of early inflation in addi-
tion to the late time Universe with different coupling parameters [19–24]. Most of the works in
modified gravity are focussed on curvature based formulations, i.e., a modification of the Ein-
stein–Hilbert action by adding higher order curvature terms to it. In f (R) theory of gravity, the
Lagrangian is considered to be a non-linear function of the Ricci scalar (R) [26]. The torsion
based f (T ) modification, with T being the torsion scalar, is also considered in the literature
[27–29]. In recent times, extension of GR like f (R, T ) gravity [16] with T being the trace of
the energy momentum tensor and f (G) theory [30] where G is the Gauss–Bonnet (GB) invari-
ant, f (T, T ) theory [31], f (Q) theory [32, 33] where Q is the non-metricity tensor has been
considered in cosmology and astrophysics.
The application of modified f (R)-gravity to describe the DE era of the Universe has attracted
considerable attention in recent times. In the case of f (R) gravity, modifications to GR appears
naturally in the low energy limit of the effective actions of the promising theories of quantum
gravity namely, superstring theory. The f (R) gravity models are conformally related to GR
with a self interacting scalar field [34], and both early inflation and the late time acceleration
of the Universe can be accommodated. In modern cosmology, early inflation is considered to
be an essential ingredient to construct viable model of the Universe. Starobinsky obtained an
inflationary solution in a higher derivative theory of gravity long before the advent of infla-
tion was actually realized [22]. In the Palatini approach of f (R) gravity models, R, Rab Rab
corrections are considered with second order field equations, and the analysis led to an accel-
erating Universe [35–38]. These models were further tested using observational data from SN,
CMB shift parameter, BAO and Big Bang nucleosynthesis [39–43]. It is known that in metric
f (R) gravity theories, the field equations become fourth order which is difficult to handle [44].
2
Class. Quantum Grav. 39 (2022) 065006 B C Paul et al

In the literature several functional forms of f (R) have been considered. To test the viability
of such models, Solar System tests of the theory are implemented [45–50] and the results
appearing from these tests are important to choose an f (R)-theory that permits a realistic cos-
mological model explaining the current accelerating phase of the Universe satisfactorily. It is
also found that a cosmological model which fails to pass Solar System tests permits an acceler-
ating Universe satisfactorily [51]. Thus, one can bypass these local considerations and simply
study the cosmological behaviour to arrive at an independent test. The cosmological constraints
on f (R) gravity is relevant also because one can simply imagine that the baryons do not see
the modifications to GR [52] and evades the Solar System tests in a somewhat artificial way.
For a ready reference see [53–55]. In astrophysics it is reported that the issue of massive
neutron stars can be resolved considering higher order curvature terms that appears in f (R)
gravity [56–58].
Zweibach [59] has shown long ago that the string corrections due to the Einstein action up
to first order in the slope parameter and fourth power of the momenta should be proportional to
GB terms (where GB = Rabcd Rabcd − 4Rab Rab + R2 ). However later on, it was shown that the
field redefinition theorem of Hooft and Veltman [60] may apply in this case. GB terms arise
in the low energy effective action for heterotic strings [61–64] and also in the second order
of Lovelock gravity theory [65]. It is known that GB terms in higher dimensions leads to a
ghost free propagator. In the four-dimensional framework, the GB terms do not contribute to
the dynamics of the Universe. However, if the GB terms are coupled with a scalar field in the
gravitational action, then the combination plays an important role in the dynamics of evolution
of the Universe via the scalar field. The scalar field coupled with the GB terms also plays an
important role in avoiding the singularity in string induced gravity [66]. In the braneworld
scenario, it has been shown that naked singularities may not occur if a scalar field with a GB
term is considered [67]. Cosmological solutions admitting an emergent Universe scenario was
obtained in the framework of GB gravity coupled with a scalar field in four dimensions [68]. In
the literature, the evolution of cosmological perturbations and their corresponding parameters
for GB inflationary models were considered [69–74]. The observational constraints on the
values of the cosmological perturbation parameters are used to verify cosmological inflationary
models in the presence of a non-minimal coupling of a scalar field and the GB scalar [75, 76].
For further discussions of the cosmology in GB theory, please see references [77–81], and the
references therein.
Recently interacting fluid models in cosmology have attracted renewed attention because
of their interesting physical as well as mathematical properties. Many astrophysical situations
require interactions among fluids for a complete description of the Universe. In the literature,
it is shown that matter may possess multiple interacting components in the case of an infla-
tionary Universe [82], in M-theory [83] and also in some models of cosmic acceleration [84].
These fluids admit a covariant description [85], different scaling solutions [86], support the
theory of cosmological perturbations [87] and are also used in models with DM and DE [88].
Among the different motivations for such models, the analysis of interactions within the dark
sector are quite popular. The effect of interactions among cosmic fluids has been studied in
the emergent Universe framework [89]. In the literature late time evolution of the Universe is
studied in the framework of f (R, G) gravity with a scalar field [90]. It is likely that interac-
tion among the fluids originates as one sector of matter transforms to another sector leading to
excess contribution of DE in the present Universe. The motivation of the paper is to investi-
gate the effect of interaction that sets in among the cosmic fluids, (viz, non-relativistic matter,
radiation and DE) on the evolution of the Universe in the modified gravity. We consider linear
interaction among the cosmic fluids to study evolution of the Universe which are realistic and
accommodates the observed Universe.
3
Class. Quantum Grav. 39 (2022) 065006 B C Paul et al

The plan of the paper is as follows: in section 2, the field equation in f (R) gravity with
a GB term is obtained. The field equations are converted in terms of redshift parameter. The
cosmological parameters to probe the Universe are also obtained. A general form of the field
equations are obtained in terms of a new density parameter ΩH in the model. In section 3, we
consider interaction among the fluid components, and the conservation equation is rewritten
incorporating the interaction terms. In section 4, we obtain cosmological models in the frame-
work of two different modified theories of gravity and investigate the late time evolution of the
Universe. Finally, in section 5, we enumerate the results obtained with a brief discussion.

2. Field equations in f(R)-modified gravity with GB terms

The modified action in the case of f (R) gravity with the GB terms in (3 + 1) dimensions is
given by,
  
√ 1 1 μν
S= d4 x −g f (R) − g ∂μ φ∂ν φ − V(φ) − ξ(φ)G + Lm , (1)
2κ2 2

where R denotes the Ricci scalar, κ = M1P with M P is Planck mass, V(φ) is the potential
of the scalar field, and ξ(φ) is the GB coupling function with the dilaton field. The GB
invariant is given by G = R2 − 4Rμν Rμν + Rμνσρ Rμνσρ where Rμν and Rμνσρ are the Ricci
and Riemann curvature tensors respectively. Finally Lm denotes the matter Lagrangian cor-
responding to both relativistic and non-relativistic perfect fluids respectively. We consider
a flat Friedmann–Robertson–Walker (FRW) metric to describe the cosmological geometric
background in this study. The line element is given by,

ds2 = −dt2 + a(t)2 δi j dx i dx j (2)

with a(t) being the scale factor of the Universe. In a flat Universe background the Ricci scalar
and the GB terms are given by R = 6(2H 2 + Ḣ) and G = 24H 2 (H 2 + Ḣ) respectively, where
the overdot denotes differentiation with respect to cosmic time t and H = aȧ is the Hubble
parameter. We consider a homogeneous scalar field which depends only on the cosmic time.
The field equations for the gravitational action given by equation (1) is obtained by varying
with respect to the metric tensor gμν and the scalar field φ, which are,
  ˙ 3
κ2 1 2 f RR − f H f˙R 8κ2 ξH
H =2
ρ + φ̇ + V(φ) + − + , (3)
3 fR 2 6 fR fR fR

κ2   f¨ − H f˙
R R
˙ Ḣ
8κ2 ξH
Ḣ = − ρ + P + φ̇2 − + , (4)
2 fR 2 fR fR

Vφ + φ̈ + 3H φ̇ = ξφ G, (5)

where, ρ and P represent density and pressure respectively, the suffix φ represents the derivative
∂f
w.r.t. φ and f R = ∂R . We assume that the cosmic fluid is a composition of two different fluids
namely, non-relativistic matter and radiation. The total energy density and the pressure of the
cosmic fluids are taken as
4
Class. Quantum Grav. 39 (2022) 065006 B C Paul et al

ρ = ρ1 + ζρ2 (6)


P= wi ρi , (7)
i

where, ρ1 and ρ2 are the energy densities of the fluids, ζ = ρρ200 , and ρ20 is the present density
of the relativistic matter, ρ0 is the present value of energy density for non-relativistic matter
and wi is the equation of state (EoS) parameter for the ith fluid.
In an evolving Universe the redshift parameter can be determined for different cosmological
sources, thus we replace the scale factor from cosmic time representation to redshift parameter.
A late time evolution of the Universe corresponds to very low redshift parameter (z). Thus we
take the scale factor of the Universe, which is given by
1
a(t) = , (8)
1+z
where present size of the Universe (a0 ) = 1. Now we replace the time derivative by the
derivative of the redshift parameter (z) as,
d d
≡ −H(1 + z) . (9)
dt dz
The time derivatives can then be replaced by the derivative with respect to the redshift
parameter z accordingly. We get the following relations,

Ḣ = −H(1 + z)H  (10)

φ̇ = −H(1 + z)φ (11)

φ̈ = H 2 (1 + z)2 φ + H 2 (1 + z)φ + HH  (1 + z)2 φ (12)

f˙R = Ṙ f RR + φ̇ f Rφ (13)

 
  2 3HH 
Ṙ = 6H(1 + z) HH + (H ) −
2
(14)
1+z
which are used to rewrite the field equations.
Using equation (9), the field equations (3) and (5) can be rewritten as,
 
κ2 1 f RR − f 8κ2 (1 + z)ξ  H 4
H2 = ρ + H 2 (1 + z)2 φ2 + V(φ) + −
3 fR 2 6 fR fR
   
H 3HH 
− f RR 6H(1 + z)2 HH  + H 2 − − H f Rφ (1 + z)φ , (15)
fR 1+z

Vφ + H 2 (1 + z)2 φ − 2H 2 (1 + z)φ + HH  (1 + z)2 φ = ξφ G (16)

here prime ( ) represents the differentiation with respect to the redshift parameter (z).
5
Class. Quantum Grav. 39 (2022) 065006 B C Paul et al

Now we define a new density parameter [90–93] which we denote as,

ρDE
ΩH = , (17)
ρ0

where ρDE denotes the DE density. Instead of using Hubble rate and its derivatives to quantify
the cosmological evolution we use ΩH for investigating the evolution of the Universe. Using
the field equations we obtain the DE density which is given by,

1 2 f RR − f 3H f˙R 2
˙ 3 + 3H (1 − f R ).
ρDE = φ̇ + V + 2
− 2
+ 24ξH 2
(18)
2 2κ κ κ
The usual field equations as obtained in GR can be reproduced using equation (18) in
equations (3) and (4) which are given by,

κ2
H2 = (ρ + ρDE ), (19)
3

κ2
Ḣ = − (ρ + P + ρDE + PDE ), (20)
2
where PDE represents the pressure corresponding to the dark fluid. We now express the Hubble
parameter in terms of the density parameter ΩH as,

2 2 ρ
H = ms ΩH (z) + , (21)
ρ0

where m2s = κ2 ρ30 = 1.871 01 × 10−67.

The derivatives of the above expression with respect to the redshift parameter yields,
 
m2 ρ
HH  = s ΩH (z) + . (22)
2 ρ0

However, once again derivative of the above equation w.r.t. z yields

 
2  m2s  ρ
H + HH = ΩH (z) + , (23)
2 ρ0

which will be used to determine the cosmological parameters. The field equations (15) and (16)
are highly nonlinear and we analyse the equations numerically to understand the cosmological
evolution of the Universe. We plot graphically the different cosmological parameters here for
two models. The variations of the cosmological parameters, namely, the density parameter ΩH ,
scalar field φ etc are plotted with redshift parameter z.
To distinguish the DE models qualitatively or quantitatively a new geometrical analysis
called statefinder diagnostic was proposed by Sahni et al [99]. In the paper we consider the
statefinder diagnostic to study the nature of DE by defining the EoS parameter w DE and the
density parameter ΩDE with respect to z and ΩH [90] which are given by,

1 d ln ΩH ΩH
wDE = −1 + (1 + z) , ΩDE = ρ . (24)
3 dz ΩH + ρ0

6
Class. Quantum Grav. 39 (2022) 065006 B C Paul et al

However, a complete scenario of the cosmological evolution can be obtained by determining

the following parameters [90]

 2
Ḣ Ḧ j−1
H
H0
−1
q = −1 − , j= − 3q − 2, s= , Om(z) = ,
H2 H3 3 q − 12 (1 + z)3 −1
(25)

where q is the deceleration parameter, j is the jerk parameter, s is the snap parameter and Om(z)
is the Om parameter. Here the transformation of matter from one sector to the other sector
begins at time t = ti when interaction originates among the fluids which will be considered in
the next section.

3. Conservation equations for interacting fluids

In this section, we consider an interacting DE model with non-relativistic matter and radiation
fluid. The interaction is assumed to originate at a later epoch (interactions arise due to a variety
of mechanisms during particular eras) [94–96]. The conservation equations with interactions
can be written as,

ρ˙1 + 3H(ρ1 + P1 ) = −Q (26)

ρ˙2 + 3H(ρ2 + P2 ) = Q (27)

˙ + 3H(ρDE + PDE ) = Q − Q’ ,
ρDE (28)

where, ρ1 , P1 and ρ2 , P2 are the energy densities and pressure corresponding to non-relativistic
matter and radiation, respectively, Q and Q represent the interaction strengths which may
assume arbitrary forms. The signs of the terms Q and Q are not restricted. When Q > 0,
energy transfer from the non-relativistic matter sector to the other two constituents takes place.
Q < 0 corresponds to energy loss from the radiation sector, and Q < Q corresponds to energy
transfer from the DE sector to the other two fluid sectors. In the case of Q = 0, DE interacts
only with the non-relativistic matter sector. From the conservation equations, it is evident that
although energy conservation is violated for individual fluids, the total energy density of the
fluid satisfies the conservation equation together. An equivalent uncoupled set of conservation
equations can be obtained from equations (26)–(28) as,

ρ˙1 + 3H(1 + w1eff )ρ1 = 0, (29)

ρ˙2 + 3H(1 + w2eff )ρ2 = 0, (30)

eff
ρDE
˙ + 3H(1 + wDE )ρDE = 0. (31)

i.e.,

3
[ρi + 3H(ρi + Pi )] = 0. (32)
i =1
7
Class. Quantum Grav. 39 (2022) 065006 B C Paul et al

The effective EoS parameters are given by

Q
w1eff = w1 + , (33)
3Hρ1

Q
w2eff = w2 − , (34)
3Hρ2

eff Q − Q
wDE = wDE + . (35)
3HρDE

We now consider the interactions as Q = −βHρ1 and Q = αHρ2 , where α and β are the
interaction strength of the fluids. Here the strength of interactions, α and β determines the
transformation of matters from one sector to another sector unless Q = Q . The effective EoS
parameters for non-relativistic matter and radiation are given by,

β
w1eff = w1 − , (36)
3

α
w2eff = w2 − . (37)
3
The behaviour of ρ1 and ρ2 in terms of z and weff is obtained by integrating equations (29) and
(30). The energy densities are given by:
eff
ρ1 = ρ0 (1 + z)3(1+w1 ) , (38)

eff
ρ2 = ρ20 (1 + z)3(1+w2 ) . (39)

Using equations (38) and (39) in equation (6) we get

eff eff )
ρ = ρ0 (1 + z)3(1+w1 ) + ζ(1 + z)3(1+w2 . (40)

Now the field equation (15) and (16) can be solved numerically using the above equations
for energy densities and we determine the new parameter ΩH and the scalar field φ.
The evolution of the Universe is studied plotting the state finding parameters in addition to
ΩH and the deceleration parameter q. The interaction strengths α, β, the function f (R), poten-
tial function V(φ) and the GB coupling term ξ(φ) act as free parameters in this case. To study
the effect of the interaction among the components of the cosmic fluid one has to consider
specific forms of the above functions. Changing the values of the coupling functions affect the
evolution of the cosmological parameters which will be discussed in the following sections for
two different models.

4. Cosmological models in the modified f(R) gravity with GB terms in the

presence of interacting cosmic fluids

We consider different forms of the coupling parameters of the GB terms with a scalar field in
the presence of interacting cosmic fluids to determine the evolutionary features of the Universe.
8
Class. Quantum Grav. 39 (2022) 065006 B C Paul et al

4.1. Model-I

In this case a scalar field coupled with GB terms is considered as in four dimensions GB term
does not play any role in the dynamics of the Universe. The primordial gravitational wave
(GW) speed depends on ξ(φ) and the scalar field potential (V(φ)). We consider here a finite
GW speed and a free scalar field. Thus the coupling parameter is to be considered in the absence
of a scalar field potential (i.e., V = 0) and we take the GB coupling term as [90],
φ
ξ(φ) = e MP . (41)

The modified f (R) gravity is chosen to be,

 δ
R
f (R) = R + γR2 − λ , (42)
3m2s

where γ = M −2 , λ (dimensions of mass squared ([Mass]2 )) and δ are constants. Here M

is approximately equal to M = 1.5 × 10−5 50 N MP , with N being the number of e-foldings
and the exponent δ is positive in the interval 0 < δ < 1 [93]. It is important to mention
here that f (R) modified gravity can unify the early Universe with a late time accelerating
Universe.
We have considered this functional form of f (R) as it can give a reasonable description of
the inflationary epoch as well as the late time era [90, 93]. The R2 term dominates in the early
epoch when R is large and controls the inflationary behaviour, whereas the Rδ term dominates
during the present epoch with R → 0 for δ < 1. The presence of scalar field further alters the
dynamics of the evolving Universe. It was shown that a GB topological invariant (G) in a f (R)
modified gravity cannot nullify the DE oscillations, although G alone permits an oscillation-
free DE [97]. In the paper a scalar field is considered with interacting cosmic fluids to examine
the role of interaction on the late time evolutionary features of the Universe. We consider a set
of values of the model parameters λ = 130.845 × 10−67 eV2 , δ = 10−2 and N = 60 e-folding
which lead to a physically consistent cosmology [90, 93]. The current value of the Hubble
parameter is taken from the Planck data [25] which is,

H0 = 67.4 ± 0.5 km s−1 Mpc−1 . (43)

We consider H 0 = 67.4 km s−1 Mpc−1 which when converted in the unit of eV becomes
H 0 = 1.37187 × 10−33 eV.
Equations (15) and (16) are analysed numerically considering suitable initial conditions for
a range of redshifts that describe the last stage of matter domination epoch and the late time
era up to the present time, i.e., [zi , z f ] = [0, 10]. The initial conditions are considered to be,
   
 λ dΩH  λ
ΩH  = 1 + γ̃(1 + z ) , = γ̃ ,
dz (z=10)
f
(z=10) 33m2s 33m2s
 
 dφ 
φ = 10−16MP , = −10−17MP . (44)
(z=10) dz (z=10)

which gives a viable description of the present observed Universe. In the above we put γ̃ to
get various initial conditions for the parameter ΩH . The initial conditions assumed above are
found to play an important role in the higher redshift values only, it is independent at the
low z values (namely, zi ). The nature of evolution of the cosmological parameters depend on
the initial conditions through γ̃ which will be discussed in the following [93]. We consider
γ̃ = 10−3 for the rest of the manuscript as it yields a reasonable phenomenological behaviour
9
Class. Quantum Grav. 39 (2022) 065006 B C Paul et al

of the cosmological parameters, however it can assume higher values also in principle.
The accurate forms for the initial conditions may however be obtained considering some cos-
mographic approach (reference [100]) which is beyond the scope of the present paper and
will be tackled elsewhere. Now assuming interactions among the different components of the
cosmic fluid we obtain cosmological models in the following cases:
Case I. For α > 0 and β < 0 (i.e., Q > 0):
For Q > 0, energy transfers from the non-relativistic matter sector to the other two flu-
ids, the system of equation (15), (16) and (40) are analysed numerically. The different
state finder parameters are plotted in figure 1. From figure 1(a), it is evident that for a
given interaction α > 0 and β < 0, one cannot negate the DE oscillations for z  4 in the
f (R) + f (G) model. The variation of the scalar field with redshift (z) is plotted in figure 1(b).
The scalar field increases as the Universe evolves but at the present epoch it attained a maxi-
mum value. This behaviour of the scalar field is in contradiction with pure f (R) gravity. In
figures 1(c)–(f ), the deceleration parameter (q), the jerk parameter ( j), snap parameter (s)
and the Om(z) parameter are plotted with redshift. For the interaction strength considered in
this case i.e., α = 2 and β = −0.01, we found oscillating nature in the high redshift domain
which however reduces at the present epoch. The deceleration parameter q shows a transition
from positive value to negative value at a certain redshift which indicates a transition from
decelerated phase to the accelerated phase. The statefinder parameters j and s approaches their
respective ΛCDM values (i.e., j = 1 and s = 0) at the present epoch. The present values of the
cosmological parameters are tabulated in table 1 for z = 0 and compared with cosmological
observations. We note from table 1 that the deceleration parameter (q) and the Om(z) parame-
ter are different from that of the corresponding ΛCDM model. In figure 1( f ) we plot the Om(z)
parameter for the present model (blue) and that of the ΛCDM (red, dashed). It is observed that
at very low redshifts the f (R) gravity model coupled with GB terms in presence of interacting
fluids differs significantly from the ΛCDM which is found prominent in the case of Om(z) diag-
eff
nostics plot. The evolution of the effective DE EoS parameter (ωDE ) and the density parameter
DE
(Ω ) are plotted in figure 2. Both of them show oscillating behaviour for higher redshifts. This
behaviour originates because of the dominance of the f (R) gravity part over the GB term and it
is decided by the choice of α and β. In the case of interacting cosmic fluids, the effective EoS
eff
parameter (ωDE ) for the DE depends on the scalar field (φ) explicitly, which is an interesting
observations. It is noted that as the strength of interaction is increased up to a certain point
(decreasing β keeping α fixed), then the oscillating behaviour of the density parameter ΩH
vanishes. However, for α = 2, the oscillation smooths out for β  −0.95. and it is found that
the state finder parameters exhibit discontinuity at some redshift (shown in figure 3), which
is not desirable for a stable cosmological model. Thus the range of the strength of interac-
tion can be estimated which leads to stable cosmological models. We consider three different
α values and determined the range of β numerically for a realistic cosmological model. It is
found that as α increases the allowed range of β decreases. From figure 2(b) it is observed that
for high redshifts (z ∼ 10) wDE eff
was oscillating, indicating transfer of energy from one sector
of matter to the others, however, at the present epoch, the oscillation dies out reaching a stable
configuration attaining a negative EoS parameter indicating existence of exotic matter obtained
from transformation mechanism in a modified gravity beyond Einstein gravity and interacting
fluids.
Finally, in figure 4 we consider two different γ̃ values viz, γ̃ = 10−3 and γ̃ = 1 to study
the dependence of initial conditions on the DE oscillations. As the field equations are highly
nonlinear we analyse numerically as plotted. From the plots it is clear that for a given range
of values of the initial conditions the DE is found to show oscillation behaviour for higher
redshifts. However the present value of the DE is independent of γ̃. It is found that as γ̃ is
10
Class. Quantum Grav. 39 (2022) 065006 B C Paul et al

Figure 1. The density parameter ΩH and scalar field φ over reduced Planck mass for
the f (R) gravity with interaction considering α = 2 and β = −0.01. Cosmological
parameters are also plotted as functions of redshift parameter z.

Table 1. Cosmological parameter values at the present epoch for Q > 0, with α = 2 and
β = −0.01.
Parameter f (R) ΛCDM
q(z = 0) −0.877817 −0.535
j(z = 0) 0.952455 1
s(z = 0) 0.0115025 0
Om(z = 0) 0.333331 0.3153 ± 0.07
ΩDE (0) 0.923451 0.6847 ± 0.0073
eff
wDE (0) −0.939691 −1.018 ± 0.031

eff
Figure 2. Variation of DE variables, the effective EoS parameter wDE (Right) and
density parameter ΩDE (Left) with interaction considering α = 2 and β = −0.01.

gradually increased the DE oscillations become more prominent. The transition redshift, i.e.
the z value for which the Universe transits from a decelerated phase to an accelerated phase
also get changed with change of γ̃.
(II) For α < 0 and β > 0 (i.e., Q < 0)
11
Class. Quantum Grav. 39 (2022) 065006 B C Paul et al

Figure 3. Solutions for the density parameter ΩH and scalar field φ over reduced
Planck mass for the f (R) gravity with interaction considering α = 2 and β = −0.95.
Cosmological parameters are also plotted as functions of redshift parameter z.

Figure 4. Solutions for the density parameter ΩH and the deceleration parameter q for
the f (R) gravity with interaction considering α = 2 and β = −0.95. The red curves
correspond to γ̃ = 10−3 and the blue curves correspond to γ̃ = 1.

For Q < 0, i.e., energy loss from the radiation sector, we analyse the system of equations
numerically. We plot different cosmological parameters in figure 5. In this case, the new den-
sity parameter ΩH is found to oscillate and thereafter at the present epoch it attains a constant
value. The present value of ΩH is constant in both the cases. The scalar field increases as the
Universe evolves similar to the previous cases. We conclude that the evolution of the scalar
field is independent of the interactions. Variation of the cosmological parameters with red-
shift (z) are drawn in figure 5(c)–(f ). The state finder parameters exhibit oscillating behaviour
for high redshifts (z  4). The figures are plotted for α = −0.1 and β = 0.02 in figure 5.
We found that as α attains large negative values for a given β, the oscillating behaviour of
the parameters vanishes (when β = 0.01 oscillation dies down for α  −2.063). However,
the cosmological parameters are found to be entangled with singularities at a given z as shown
in the figure 3(e).
The EoS parameter for the DE and the density parameter are plotted in figure 6. Here both
ΩDE and ωDE eff eff
are increasing, but the oscillation in the ωDE which shows oscillation for z  4 is
found without oscillatory behaviour at the present epoch (z = 0) but remains negative staying
12
Class. Quantum Grav. 39 (2022) 065006 B C Paul et al

Figure 5. Evolution of the density parameter ΩH and scalar field φ for the f (R) grav-
ity with GB terms and interacting fluids taking α = −0.1 and β = 0.02. Cosmological
parameters are also plotted as functions of redshift z.

eff
Figure 6. Variation of DE variables, the effective EoS parameter wDE (Right) and
Density parameter ΩDE (Left) with interaction considering α = −0.1 and β = 0.02.

Table 2. Cosmological parameter values at the present epoch for Q < 0, with α = −0.1
and β = 0.02.
Parameter f (R) ΛCDM
q(z = 0) −0.878431 −0.535
j(z = 0) 0.983532 1
s(z = 0) 0.003982 0
Om(z = 0) 0.331631 0.3153 ± 0.07
ΩDE (0) 0.923445 0.6847 ± 0.0073
eff
wDE (0) −0.996815 −1.018 ± 0.031

in the phantom region for most of the time with the chosen α and β values. The present value
eff
of ωDE however indicates a transition from phantom to quintessence region as noted in table 2.
It is noted that for Q < 0 the effective EoS parameter always remains negative whereas for
Q > 0 it oscillates between positive and negative values in the past, however, in the recent past
eff
the parameter attains a negative value. In this case it admits an accelerating Universe with wDE
indicating a transition from phantom to quintessence matter at present. It is also noted that
13
Class. Quantum Grav. 39 (2022) 065006 B C Paul et al

Table 3. Constraints on the interaction parameters α and β for different fluid interac-
tions.
Types of interaction α β
Q>0 α=2 0  β  −0.92
α=5 0  β  −0.90
α = 10 0  β  −0.88
Q < 0 0  α  −2.063 β = 0.01
0  α  −2.057 β = 0.02
0  α  −2.052 β = 0.03

cosmological and state finder parameters show strong oscillation if a small λ is considered.
The values of the cosmological parameters calculated using the model at the present epoch are
displayed in table 2. For Q > 0, as α increases, the limiting range of interaction for β decreases.
Similarly, for Q < 0, as beta is increased the range of allowed α decreases. The range of the
coupling parameters α and β are estimated for three different cases as displayed in table 3.
It is noted that in the modified gravity f (R) term dominates over the GB terms as we observe
oscillation of DE in the late time Universe in the presence of interaction between the fluids.
The interacting cosmic fluids play an important role in determining the evolutionary pattern of
the Universe. The existence of oscillation in the density parameter ΩH for z  4 imposes an
upper bound on the strength of interaction α for a given β. It is new and interesting to note
that beyond the strength of interaction considered above the oscillation in DE vanishes and
also discontinuity appears in the cosmological parameters at a given redshift in the late time
Universe. In figure 7 we plot the variations of ΩH and the deceleration parameter q with z in the
presence of interaction and in the absence of interaction. The interacting scenario is analysed
for Q < 0 with α = −0.1 and β = 0.02. It is observed in figure 7 that as interaction between
cosmic fluid sets in, the amplitude of oscillation for ΩH is found to jump up significantly com-
pared to a Universe without interaction. It is also found that the present value of ΩH (0) is more
in a Universe in the presence of interactions. The deceleration parameter q in figure 7 drawn
in the right panel shows that a Universe transits into an accelerated phase early compared to
the case when the cosmic fluids are non-interacting. In both the cases q < 0 which admits an
accelerating Universe in the late time. In an interacting Universe the oscillatory behaviour of
the q value found during its positive phase is however, absent in a Universe without interact-
ing fluid. This is a new scenario noted by us in the EGB cosmology which differentiates a
non-interacting fluid Universe.

4.2. Model-II

We consider Einstein gravity (i.e. f (R) = R) with GB terms coupled with a scalar field. The
scalar field is not free now, a self interacting potential is operative. The scalar field potential is
 4
φ
V(φ) = , (45)
MP
and the scalar coupling function has the following form,
 
φ
ξ(φ) = . (46)
MP
It is known that the theories which involve GB terms coupled with an arbitrary scalar field
produce gravitational waves which propagate with a velocity deviating from the speed of
14
Class. Quantum Grav. 39 (2022) 065006 B C Paul et al

Figure 7. Variation of ΩH (Left) and deceleration parameter q (Right) with (Red) and
without interaction (Blue).

light. The recent GW170817 event implies that the primordial GW speed must be equal to
the speed of light [101]. This leads to an instability in the theoretical framework. If the the-
ory considered is described by massless gravitons throughout the evolution of the Universe,
then this problem can be removed [90]. This implies that the scalar coupling function should
satisfy the differential equation ξ¨ = H ξ, ˙ where H is the Hubble parameter. The Hubble param-
eter is obtained from the Friedmann equations which in turn connects the two scalar functions
V(φ) and ξ(φ) in such a way that the differential equation is satisfied. In this paper we start from
arbitrary forms of the scalar field coupling functions. Power law models for the scalar fields
have been used in the inflationary era where the slow roll conditions are assumed to satisfy. The
‘slow-roll’ approximation neglects the most slowly changing terms in the equations of motion.
However, during the late time era one can take fields which do not obey the slow-roll condi-
tions. Thus the Einstein gravity f (R) = R, with GB terms we consider scalar field to study late
era evolution. Now we do not have Ṙ in the field equation, the second derivative of the density
parameter ΩH is zero. However, the second derivative of the scalar field φ is proportional to
ΩH as seen from the continuity equation.  So we need only one initial condition for ΩH . We
1 +z f
assume that ΩH |(z=0) = 3m2 1 + 1000 and the initial values for the scalar field are taken as
Λ
 s
φ|(z=0) = 10−10MP = dφ  . We have considered two types of interaction among the fluids
dz (z=0)
as before, and summarised the results below.
I. For α > 0 and β < 0 (i.e., Q > 0)
For α > 0, energy transfer from non-relativistic matter sector to other two fluids sectors. In
this case the field equations are solved numerically. The interaction parameters α and β play
an important role in determining the stability of the model. We note that for a given value of α,
say α = 2, the cosmological parameters are entangled with discontinuity for lower values of
β < −0.004. Thus the state finder parameters are plotted in figure 8 for α = 2 and β = −0.001.
In this case we do not find any oscillatory behaviour in the parameters. The scalar field now
decreases from a large value. The deceleration parameter flips sign from positive to negative
value admitting acceleration at the present epoch. The density parameter ΩH remains constant,
the snap parameter vanishes but the jerk parameter is close to one for the present epoch. The
eff
Om parameter stays constant at 0.3. The plot in figure 9 shows that ΩDE increases and ωDE
increases but it remains negative throughout the evolution of the Universe.
Thus we conclude that the presence of the scalar potential smooths out the DE oscillations.
The scalar field in this case shows a transition from positive to negative value at a redshift
≈9. The present values of the different parameters are listed in table 4. The values of the DE
density parameter, ΩDE (0) and the DE EoS parameter, wDE (0) are compared with the latest
15
Class. Quantum Grav. 39 (2022) 065006 B C Paul et al

Figure 8. Solutions for the statefinder parameter ΩH and scalar field φ over reduced
Planck mass with interaction considering α = 2 and β = −0.001 in presence of a scalar
field V(φ). Cosmological parameters are also plotted as functions of redshift z.

eff
Figure 9. Variation of DE variables, the effective EoS parameter wDE (Right) and
Density parameter ΩDE (Left) with interaction considering α = 2 and β = −0.001.

data from the PLANCK 2018 collaboration for estimating cosmological parameters. From the
table we note that the cosmological parameters and the state finder quantities indicates that the
cosmology with the modified gravity permits a Universe that resembles a ΛCDM model at the
present epoch. In the absence of interaction among the fluids, the DE EoS parameter assumes a
constant value −1. In this case DE lies in the quintessence region and throughout the evolution
never crosses the phantom divide (wDE eff
< −1).

II. For α < 0 and β > 0 (i.e., Q < 0)
In this case with Q < 0, α < 0, β is changed to study the cosmological model. Here we do
not find a Universe without a singularity. In figure 10, the density parameter ΩH , scalar field
(φ) and different cosmological parameters are plotted for α = −1 and β = 0.01. The snap
parameter in this case shows a singularity near z ≈ 5. We do not find oscillating state finder
parameters in the presence of scalar potential.
Finally the velocity of the primordial gravitational waves can be calculated for both the
model [90, 98], which is given by:

Qf
c2T = 1 − , (47)
2Qt
16
Class. Quantum Grav. 39 (2022) 065006 B C Paul et al

Table 4. Cosmological parameter values at the present epoch for Q > 0, with α = 2 and
β = −0.004.
Parameter R + V(φ) ΛCDM
q(z = 0) −0.521764 −0.535
j(z = 0) 1.00134 1
s(z = 0) −0.000435749 0
Om(z = 0) 0.313534 0.3153 ± 0.07
ΩDE (0) 0.681461 0.6847 ± 0.0073
w DE (0) −0.477714 −1.018 ± 0.031

Figure 10. Behaviour of the density parameter ΩH and scalar field φ over reduced Planck
mass with interaction considering α = −1 and β = 0.01 in presence of a scalar field
V(φ). Cosmological parameters are also plotted as functions of redshift z.

where, Q f = 16(ξ¨ − H ξ) ˙ and Qt = M 2 − 8ξ̇H. The GW speed can assume arbitrary values
P
depending on the scalar field coupling function ξ(φ). However, despite being arbitrary its value
is close to unity as Q f Qt . The variation of of the GW speed with the redshift parameter is
plotted in figure 11 for a given interaction strength considering the first model. For α = 2 and
β = −0.01, the value of Q f is of the order Q f ∼ 10−89 whereas Qt ∼ 10−29 and it admits that
the ratio is very close to zero. This leads to a GW speed close to unity which is consistent with
the GW170817 event. From the expression of Q f , one can see that as Q f → 0, ξ¨ = H ξ. ˙ Thus
the GB coupling parameter is important and the choice of the scalar coupling function to the
GB terms is not arbitrary.

5. Results and discussions

We present cosmological models in f (R) modified gravity with coupled GB terms and inter-
acting fluids. The strength of interactions between the different fluid components are probed in
the modified gravity with scalar field (φ) coupled to GB terms and the evolutionary features of
the late time Universe are obtained. A Universe consisting of DE and other fluids are taken up
here with interaction that permits energy flow between the different components. We consider
 δ
two different actions of gravity: (I) f (R) = R + γR2 − λ 3mR 2 with GB terms coupled in the
s
presence of a free scalar field and (II) Einstein gravity f (R) = R with GB terms coupled with a
17
Class. Quantum Grav. 39 (2022) 065006 B C Paul et al

Figure 11. Variation of the GW speed with redshift parameter z for model I with α = 2
and β = −0.01.

scalar field in a self interacting potential. We probe cosmological models that accommodate the
present accelerating Universe naturally. The different functional forms of f (R) are considered
here to find out the importance of interaction that changes the dynamics of the Universe.
We note the following:
Model-I. The f (R) modified gravity contains additional R2 term and Rδ term where δ < 1, is
a small perturbative term. The inclusion of the R2 term is to accommodate the early inflationary
phase and the Rδ term is added to get a late time behaviour of the Universe. The dynamics of
the early Universe is controlled by the R2 term. In the absence of a scalar potential function
(V(φ)), we study the evolution of the Universe considering two different interactions. In the
case of pure GB gravity, an arbitrary choice of scalar coupling function may lead to primordial
GW speeds that deviates considerably from the speed of light. To overcome the problem, we
took the scalar coupling functions which satisfy the differential equation ξ̈ = H ξ.˙
We determine the interaction strengths α and β for a realistic late time cosmology and plot
the variation of the density parameter ΩH with z for Q > 0 in figures 1(a) and 3(a) which
2
show that ΩH ∼ 12 in the unit of Hms at the present epoch and dominates the present energy
density for non-relativistic matter. It is found that the evolutionary behaviour of the cosmo-
logical parameters depend on the choice of the initial conditions and therefore we chose the
initial conditions so that the analysis carried out here for the given cosmological model is sup-
ported by the PLANCK 2018 results. It is to be noted that the parameter γ̃ introduced in the
theory acts as a free parameter to find the effect of γ̃ on the evolution of ΩH . It is observed
that as γ̃ is increased the DE oscillations become more pronounced. We would like to point
out here that the initial conditions strongly affect the large redshift behaviour of ΩH and the
corresponding statefinder parameters however their effect at the present epoch is insignifi-
cant. For a given strength of interaction say, α = 2, if one probes with smaller β < 0, the
oscillatory behaviour of the scale free ΩH that dominates in the high redshift domain (z  4)
vanishes, showing an interesting feature, where initially it was small then increases there-
after attains a maximum and then decreases to a constant value. The present value is however
independent of the strength of interactions. For Q < 0 i.e., α < 0 and β > 0, the figure 5(a)
18
Class. Quantum Grav. 39 (2022) 065006 B C Paul et al

shows similar behaviour as evident with Q > 0 but in the left panel of figure 7, we draw ΩH
with and without interacting fluid, which shows that a large DE density is permissible in the
presence of interaction compared to that without interaction. The variation of decelerating
parameter in the right panel show that the deceleration parameter shows a sign flip which is
evident at a redshift z 2. In the presence of interaction it is oscillatory which is not observed
in a Universe without interaction. An interaction among the cosmic fluids indicates that the
Universe transits to accelerating phase from decelerating phase earlier compared to a Uni-
verse without interacting fluids. The other cosmological parameters are oscillatory in nature
for z  4 and the oscillations are significant in case of statefinder parameters containing higher
derivatives of the Hubble rate. However, for the present Universe, the oscillation smooth out
considerably. The scalar field evolves monotonically and for Q > 0, the variation of the deceler-
ation parameter corresponds to a Universe passing through an accelerating phase at the present
epoch. When Q < 0, q remains positive in the past and then transits, indicating an accelerating
Universe at z 2. The variation of the statefinder pair j and s with z indicate that although these
are oscillatory in the past, at the present epoch the parameters closely correspond to that for
the ΛCDM model. The present values (z = 0) for the cosmological variables are tabulated in
tables 1 and 2 along with their ΛCDM values making use of the observed data. The f (R) + f (G)
model with interacting fluids can be distinguished from the ΛCDM model if one considers the
Om(z) diagnostics which is shown in figures 1(f ) and 5(f ). The Om(z) parameter clearly differs
from its ΛCDM value at the present epoch. In the presence of interactions, the effective EoS
parameter for the DE in figures 2(b) and 6(b), show that the present value is negative in both the
cases supporting the predictions from observations. For both Q > 0 and Q < 0, the effective
EoS parameter for the DE lies in the quintessence region.
Finally we computed the range of allowed interaction strengths for which the model remains
singularity free in table 3 making use of the results obtained from the numerical solutions of the
field equations. Beyond the range of the parameters determined here, ΩH becomes singularity
free as shown in figure 3, but the model is unstable at a given redshift depending on the model
parameters. The evolution of the Universe depends strongly on λ, the coupling parameter in
the f (R) gravity, we determine λ which permits the present observed Universe.
Model-II. In this case, we consider Einstein gravity with GB terms coupled with a scalar
field in a potential (V(φ)) to obtain cosmological model in the presence of interactions. The
scalar coupling function ξ(φ) is assumed so that the differential equation ξ¨ = H ξ˙ is satis-
fied and impose an acceptable limit on the primordial GW which propagates with velocity
unity (velocity of light). The Hubble parameter is determined from the field equations con-
taining the potential energy of the scalar field V(φ). Thus, the two functional behaviour of the
scalar fields are interconnected which is employed here in determining the physical features of
the cosmological model. As before, two types of interaction are assumed here (i) Q > 0 and
(ii) Q < 0. It is evident from the analysis that the oscillatory behaviour of the density param-
eter ΩH is however absent. In this case when the energy flows from non-relativistic matter
sector to the other two sectors of the fluids one can accommodate a stable singularity free cos-
mological model. The strength of interactions determined by α and β play an important role
in determining the stability of the model. For α = 2, the cosmological parameters are deter-
mined and a discontinuity in the snap parameter s is found for β < −0.004. The state finder
parameters plotted in figure 8 for α = 2 and β = −0.001 show that the deceleration parame-
ter flips sign from positive to negative value which is required for transition of a decelerating
Universe to a accelerating Universe at the present epoch. The density parameter defined by ΩH
is found be a constant, the snap parameter vanishes at the present time and the jerk parameter
attains j → 1. The Om(z) parameter remains constant at 0.3 during the evolution of the Uni-
eff
verse. In this case we note that both ΩDE and ωDE increase with the increase in z but the later
19
Class. Quantum Grav. 39 (2022) 065006 B C Paul et al

one remains negative always signalling the quintessence regime that never cross the phantom
divide (w < −1) (figure 9). When Q < 0, it admits accelerating Universe as observed from
figure 10. The snap parameter is singular at z ∼ 5 but as the Universe evolves it admits ΛCDM
model since j = 1 and s = 0 at the present epoch satisfying c2T = 1.
 δ
Lastly, we conclude that in f (R) = R + γR2 − λ 3mR 2 modified gravity with GB term
s
coupled with a free scalar field admits oscillating state parameters in the late time Universe
but at the present epoch oscillation die out and attains a constant value accommodating a late
accelerating phase. For a given β = 0.01 an upper limit on α is found when the statefinder
parameters are found free from oscillation, a new result. The oscillatory features of the
parameters signals the onset of interaction that sets in the fluids at an epoch t = ti in the Uni-
verse. The present values of the model parameters are determined numerically and displayed in
table 4. The values of the DE density parameter, ΩDE (0), the DE EoS parameter and wDE (0) are
estimated which is compared with the recent data from the PLANCK 2018 collaboration. The
cosmological parameters and the state finder quantities indicate that the cosmological models
obtained here resembles a ΛCDM cosmology at the present epoch. In the absence of inter-
action among the fluids, the DE EoS parameter assumes a constant value −1 in the Einstein
gravity. The DE lies in the quintessence region and throughout the evolution it never crosses
the phantom divide (wDE eff
< −1). In the case of Einstein gravity with GB terms, where GB
term is coupled with a scalar field coupled to an interacting potential admits a new cosmolog-
ical scenario where the density parameter is always constant. In the cosmological model, we
found that Om(z) parameter is constant during accelerating phasr even in the presence of inter-
action. The DE in the Universe is found to increase and the effective value of EoS parameter
also increases but it remains negative. The calculated value of the GW speed is close to unity
which agrees with observation [90]. Thus the coupled GB terms in the Einstein gravity has rich
structure important for constructing a viable cosmological model.

Acknowledgments

AC would like to thank University of North Bengal for awarding Senior Research Fellowship.
The authors would like to thank IUCAA Centre for Astronomy Research and Development
(ICARD), NBU for extending research facilities. AB acknowledges that this work is based on
the research supported wholly/in part by the National Research Foundation of South Africa
(Grant No. 118511). The authors would like to thank the anonymous referees for constructive
suggestions to present the paper in its current form.

Data availability statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available upon reasonable request from the
authors.

ORCID iDs

B C Paul https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5675-5857
A Chanda https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0536-7720
S D Maharaj https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1967-2849

20
Class. Quantum Grav. 39 (2022) 065006 B C Paul et al

References

[1] Riess A G et al 1998 The Astron. J. 116 1009

[2] Perlmutter S et al 1999 Astrophys. J. 517 565
[3] Eisenstein et al 2005 Astrophys. J. 633 560
[4] Bennett C L et al 1997 Astrophys. J. 483 565
Spergel D N et al 2003 Astrophys. J. Suppl. 148 175
Spergel D N et al 2007 Astrophys. J. Suppl. 170 377
[5] Sahni V and Starobinsky A A 2000 Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 9 4
[6] Padmanabhan P 2003 Phys. Rep. 380 5–6
[7] Peebles P J E and Ratra B 2003 Rev. Mod. Phys. 75 559
[8] Komatsu E et al 2009 Astrophys. J. Suppl. 180 330–76
[9] Carroll S M 2001 Living Rev. Relativ. 4 1
[10] Dunkley J et al (WMAP) 2009 ApJS 180 306
[11] Tegmark M et al (SDSS) 2006 Phys. Rev. D 74 123507
[12] Percival W J et al 2007 Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 381 1053
[13] Nojiri S, Odintsov S D and Oikonomou V K 2017 Phys. Rep. 692 1
[14] Nojiri S, Odinstov S D and Saez-Gomez D 2009 Phys. Lett. B 681 74
[15] Capozziello S and De Laurentis M 2011 Phys. Rep. 509 167
[16] Harko T et al 2011 Phys. Rev. D 84 024020
[17] Nojiri S i and Odintsov S D 2011 Phys. Rep. 505 59
[18] Olmo G J 2011 Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 20 413
[19] Nojiri S i and Odintsov S D 2003 Phys. Rev. D 68 123512
[20] Nojiri S and Odinstov S D 2007 Phys. Lett. B 657 238
[21] Nojiri S and Odinstov S D 2008 Phys. Rev. D 77 026007
[22] Starobinsky A A 1980 Phys. Lett. B 99 24
[23] Appleby S A and Battye R A 2007 Phys. Lett. B 654 7
[24] Elizalde E et al 2011 Phys. Rev. D 83 086006
[25] Aghanim N et al (Planck Collaboration) 2018 arXiv:1807.06209 [astro-ph.CO]
[26] Sotiriou T P and Faraoni V 2010 Rev. Mod. Phys. 82 451
[27] Ferraro R and Fiorini F 2007 Phys. Rev. D 75 084031
[28] Ferraro R and Fiorini F 2008 Phys. Rev. D 78 124019
[29] Bengochea G R and Ferraro R 2009 Phys. Rev. D 79 124019
[30] Silva M V d S and Rodrigues M E 2018 Eur. Phys. J. C 78 638
[31] Ghosh S, Kanfon A D, Das A, Houndjo M J S, Salako I G and Ray S 2020 Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 35
2050017
[32] Ayuso I et al 2021 Phys. Rev. D 103 063505
[33] Jimenéz et al 2020 Phys. Rev. D 101 103507
[34] Barrow J D and Cotsakis S 1988 Phys. Lett. B 214 515
Maeda K-i 1989 Phys. Rev. D 39 3159
[35] Vollick D N 2003 Phys. Rev. D 68 063510
[36] Allemandi G et al 2004 Phys. Rev. D 70 043524
[37] Allemandi G, Borowiec A and Francaviglia M 2004 Phys. Rev. D 70 103503
[38] Allemandi G et al 2005 Phys. Rev. D 72 063505
[39] Capozziello S, Cardone V F and Francaviglia M 2006 Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 38 711
[40] Amarzguioui M, Elgarøy Ø, Mota D F and Multamäki T 2006 Astron. Astrophys. 454 707
[41] Sotiriou T P 2006 Class. Quantum Grav. 23 1253
[42] Fay S et al 2007 Phys. Rev. D 75 063509
[43] Borowiec A et al 2006 Phys. Rev. D 74 043502
[44] Barrow J D and Ottewill A C 1983 J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 16 2757
[45] Chiba T 2003 Phys. Lett. B 575 1
[46] Erickcek A L, Smith T L and Kamionkowski M 2006 Phys. Rev. D 74 121501
[47] Navarro I and Acoleyen K V 2007 J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. JCAP02(2007)022
[48] Olmo G J 2005 Phys. Rev. Lett. 95 261102
[49] Olmo G J 2005 Phys. Rev. D 72 083505
[50] Olmo G J 2006 Phys. Rev. D 75 023511
[51] Zhang P 2007 Phys. Rev. D 76 024007

21
Class. Quantum Grav. 39 (2022) 065006 B C Paul et al

[52] Amendola L, Polarski D and Tsujikawa S 2007 Phys. Rev. Lett. 98 131302
[53] Nojiri S I and Odintsov S D 2007 Int. J. Geom. Methods Mod. Phys. 04 115–45
Nojiri S and Odinstov S D 2006 Phys. Rev. D 74 086005
[54] Mena O et al 2006 Phys. Rev. Lett. 96 041103
[55] Fay S et al 2007 Phys. Rev. D 76 063504
[56] Astashenok A V et al 2013 Phys. Rev. D 89 103509
[57] Astashenok A V, Capozziello S and Odintsov S D 2013 J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys.
JCAP12(2013)040
[58] Astashenok A V, Odintsov S D and de la Cruz-Dombriz Á 2017 Class. Quantum Grav. 34 205008
[59] Zwiebach B 1985 Phys. Lett. B 156 315 1985 Anomalies, Geometry and Topology, Proceedings
of the Symposium, Argonne, Illinois, ed Bardeen W A and White A
[60] Hooft G t and Veltman M 1974 Ann. Inst. Henri. Poincare 20 69
Hooft G t 1975 Functional and Probabilistic Methods in Quantum Field Theory, Proceedings of
the XII Winter School on Theoretical Physics, Karpacz, Poland, ed B Jancewicz (Wroclaw:
Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Wroclawskiego)
[61] Zumino B 1986 Phys. Rep. 137 109
[62] Boulware D G and Deser S 1985 Phys. Rev. Lett. 55 2656
[63] Boulware D G and Deser S 1986 Phys. Lett. B 175 409
[64] Gasperini M, Maggiore M and Veneziano G 1997 Nucl. Phys. B 494 315
[65] Lovelock D 1971 J. Math. Phys. 12 498
[66] Antoniadis I, Rizos J and Tamvakis K 1994 Nucl. Phys. B 415 497
[67] Binetruy P et al 2002 Phys. Lett. B 544 183
[68] Paul B C and Ghose S 2010 Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 42 795–812
[69] Satoh M and Soda J 2008 J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. JCAP09(2008)019
[70] Odinstov S D and Oikonomou V K 2018 Phys. Rev. D 98 044039
[71] Wu Q, Zhu T and Wang A 2018 Phys. Rev. D 97 103502
[72] Bhattacharjee S et al 2017 Phys. Rev. D 95 023514
[73] Koh S, Lee B-H and Tumurtushaa G 2017 Phys. Rev. D 95 123509
[74] De Felice A et al 2011 J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. JCAP08(2011)21
[75] Ade P A R et al (PLANCK) 2016 Astron. Astrophys. 594 A13
[76] Akrami Y et al (PLANCK) 2018 Astron. Astrophys. 641 A10
[77] Cognola G et al 2006 Phys. Rev. D 73 084007
[78] Santos da Costa S, Roig F V, Alcaniz J S, Capozziello S, De Laurentis M and Benetti M 2018
Class. Quantum Grav. 35 075013
[79] Benetti M, Santos da Costa S, Capozziello S, Alcaniz J S and De Laurentis M 2018 Int. J. Mod.
Phys. D 27 1850084
[80] De Laurentis M and Lopez-Revelles A J 2014 Int. J. Geom. Methods Mod. Phys. 11 1450082
[81] Odinstov S D et al 2018 Nucl. Phys. B 938 935–56
[82] Starobinsky A A 1979 JETP Lett. 30 682–5
Guth A H 1981 Phys. Rev. D 23 347
Linde A D 1990 Inflation and Quantum Cosmology (New York: Academic)
[83] Banks T and Fischler W 2001 arXiv:hep-th/0102077
Banks T and Fischler W 2001 arXiv:hep-th/0111142
[84] Sahni V and Starobinsky A 2000 Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 09 373
[85] Uzan J-P 1998 Class. Quantum Grav. 15 1063
[86] Nunes A et al 2001 Phys. Rev. D 63 083506
[87] Malik K A et al 2003 Phys. Rev. D 67 063516
Langlois D and Vernizzi F 2006 J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. JCAP02(2006)014
Koshelev N A 2011 Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 43 1309
[88] Gromov N A et al 2004 Astron. Astrophys. Trans. 415 813
Pinto-Neto N and Fraga B M O 2008 Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 40 1653
Valiviita J et al 2008 J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. JCAP07(2008)020
Fabris J C, Fraga B, Pinto-Neto N and Zimdahl W 2010 J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys.
JCAP04(2010)008
Lip S Z W 2011 Phys. Rev. D 83 023528
Chen X-m, Gong Y and Saridakis E N 2009 J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. JCAP04(2009)001
Jamil M et al 2010 Phys. Rev. D 81 023007
Caldera-Cabral G et al 2009 Phys. Rev. D 79 063518

22
Class. Quantum Grav. 39 (2022) 065006 B C Paul et al

[89] Paul B C and Majumdar A 2015 Class. Quantum Grav. 32 115001

[90] Odinstov S D et al 2021 Class. Quantum Grav. 38 075009
[91] Hu W and Sawicki I 2007 Phys. Rev. D 76 064004
[92] Bamba K, Lopez-Revelles A, Myrzakulov R, Odintsov S D and Sebastiani L 2013 Class. Quantum
Grav. 30 015008
[93] Odinstov S D et al 2020 Phys. Dark. Univ. 29 100563
Odinstov S D and Oikonomou V K 2020 Annals Phys. 418 168186
Odinstov S D and Oikonomou V K 2020 Phys. Rev. D 101 044009
[94] Barrow J D and Clifton T 2006 Phys. Rev. D 73 103520
[95] Cimento L P 2010 Phys. Rev. D 81 043525
[96] Jamil M et al 2010 Phys. Rev. D 81 023007
Lip S Z W 2011 Phys. Rev. D 83 023528
Costa F E M, Alcaniz J S and Jain D 2012 Phys. Rev. D 85 107302
[97] Odinstov S D et al 2020 Phys. Rev. D 102 104042
[98] Hwang J C and Noh H 2005 Phys. Rev. D 71 063536
Oikonomou V K and Fronimos F P 2020 arXiv:2007.11915
Odinstov S D and Oikonomou V K 2020 Phys. Lett. B 805 135437
[99] Sahni V, Saini T D, Starobinsky A A and Alam U 2003 Jetp Lett. 77 201
[100] Benetti M and Capozziello S 2019 J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. JCAP12(2019)008
[101] Abbott B P et al 2017 Multi-messenger observations of a binary neutron star merger Astrophys. J.
848 L12

23