ner_tags: O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O B-Dataset I-Dataset O O O O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O O O O O O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O B-Dataset I-Dataset O O O O O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O O O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O O O O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O B-Dataset I-Dataset O O O O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O O O O O O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O B-Dataset I-Dataset O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O B-Dataset I-Dataset O O O O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O O O O O O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O B-Dataset I-Dataset O O O O O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O O O O O O O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O B-Dataset I-Dataset O O O O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O O O O O O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O B-Dataset O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O O B-Model O O O O O O O O B-Model O B-Model O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Model O B-Model O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O O O O O O O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O O O O O B-Model O B-Model O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Model O B-Model O O O O O O O O O O O B-Model O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Model O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O O O O O O O O O B-Model O B-Model O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
tokens: between the data and the model. The four panels correspond to the four respective sub-samples: N = 6 BAO data, N = 30 DA data, the N = 35 combined BAO+DA sample with the H ( z = 2.34) data point excluded, and the full N = 36 combined BAO+DA data. Figure 8. Histograms of the Om ( z i , z j ) two-point diagnostic residuals R Om ( z i , z j ) calculated with different samples: N = 6 BAO data, N = 30 DA data, the N = 35 combined BAO+DA sample with the H ( z = 2.34) data point excluded, and the full N = 36 combined BAO+DA data. In each panel the results for three different cosmological models are shown. Figure 9. The Omh 2 ( z i , z j ) two-point diagnostic residuals displayed as the weighted mean (left panels) and as the median value (right panels) indicated by dashed lines surrounded by color bands denoting 68% confidence regions. In each panel the results for three different cosmological models are shown. The long solid line shows the level expected for perfect agreement between the data and the model. The four figures correspond to the four respective sub-samples: N = 6 BAO data, N = 30 DA data, the N = 35 combined BAO+DA sample with the H ( z = 2.34) data point excluded, and the full N = 36 combined BAO+DA data. Figure 10. Histograms of the Omh 2 ( z i , z j ) two-point diagnostic residuals calculated with different samples: N = 6 BAO data, N = 30 DA data, the N = 35 combined BAO+DA sample with the H ( z = 2.34) data point excluded, and the full N = 36 combined BAO+DA data. In each panel the results for three different cosmological models are shown. One can see from Figure 7 that the residuals R Om ( z i , z j ) for the ΛCDM model are closer to zero than for the wCDM or CPL models, irrespective of the sample. From Table 4 one can see that the residuals of the wCDM or CPL models summarized in the weighted mean scheme are more than 15 σ away from the expected value of zero (for the full sample). This deviation in terms of median statistics is even bigger. One can also see this clearly in Figure 8 where the histograms of R Om ( z i , z j ) are shown. In the case of the Omh 2 ( z i , z j ) diagnostics the performance of the ΛCDM and wCDM models is similar: using the full sample, the weighted mean of residuals is at 7 σ away from zero. As shown in Figure 10 , the bulk of the distributions for the ΛCDM or wCDM models contain zero in their tails, while the distribution for the CPL model is considerably away from zero (it corresponds to 26 σ for the weighted mean). It seems that despite the presence of some tension between the ΛCDM model and the two-point diagnostics evaluated on the most recent H ( z ) data, as noted, e.g., in Sahni et al. ( 2014 ) and Ding et al. ( 2015 ), this model still performs better than its immediate extensions, wCDM or CPL, in particular the latter. It should be stressed that the above mentioned performance of different models refers only to the two-point diagnostics considered. Therefore, this cannot be treated as a