标题： 约束$Λ$CDM、$ω$CDM 和$ω_0ω_a$CDM 模型与 DESI DR2 BAO：红移解析诊断及$r_d$的作用 显示英文标题

标题： Constraining $Λ$CDM, $ω$CDM, and $ω_0ω_a$CDM models with DESI DR2 BAO: Redshift-Resolved Diagnostics and the Role of $r_d$

摘要： 我们使用DESI DR2最新的红移分辨BAO测量数据，对$\Lambda$CDM、$\omega$CDM和$\omega_0\omega_a$CDM宇宙学模型进行了详细比较。通过分离与$r_d$相关的和与$r_d$无关的可观测量，并应用固定和模型推导出的声学视差值，我们在红移0.2到2.3范围内测试了每个模型在24个可观测量上的一致性。 我们的结果表明，$\omega$CDM 模型在统计上优于$\Lambda$CDM，具有更低的$\chi^2$、AIC 和 BIC 值以及减少的残差，尤其是在$z = 0.706$和 0.934 处。 相反，$\omega_0\omega_a$CDM 模型则被强烈排除，即使使用模型特定的$r_d$，也是由于由不物理的高红移行为引起的较大残差。 显示英文摘要

摘要： We present a detailed comparison of $\Lambda$CDM, $\omega$CDM, and $\omega_0\omega_a$CDM cosmologies using the latest redshift-resolved BAO measurements from DESI DR2. By separating $r_d$-dependent and $r_d$-independent observables and applying both fixed and model-derived sound horizon values, we test the consistency of each model across 24 observables spanning redshift 0.2 to 2.3. Our results show that the $\omega$CDM model is statistically favored over $\Lambda$CDM, with lower $\chi^2$, AIC, and BIC values and reduced residuals, especially at $z = 0.706$ and 0.934. In contrast, the $\omega_0\omega_a$CDM model is strongly disfavored, even when using model-specific $r_d$, due to large residuals caused by the unphysical high-redshift behavior.