What experimental evidence currently supports dark energy over alternative cosmological models?

I appreciate the question, but I need to be direct: the preprints provided are theoretical reviews of dark energy models, not experimental evidence comparing dark energy to alternatives.

Here's what the archive *does* contain:

The clearest observational constraint comes from supernova and baryon acoustic oscillation data. Type Ia supernovae at cosmological distances showed the universe's expansion is accelerating, not decelerating as expected [AG-2025.02-011]. This discovery rules out matter-dominated models but doesn't uniquely favor dark energy over all alternatives—multiple models fit the same data [AG-2025.04-187].

Before the 1998 supernova discovery, tension already existed: measurements of the universe's mass density, the Hubble constant, the age of the oldest stars, and the cosmic microwave background anisotropy were inconsistent with a zero cosmological constant [AG-2024.08-1217]. A non-zero cosmological constant resolved this tension by the mid-1990s.

Recent work using supernovae and BAO data suggests dark energy may be *evolving* (decreasing) rather than constant [AG-2024.06-076], though the data quality for distinguishing this from a static cosmological constant isn't discussed in detail here.

One alternative—a model where black holes drive acceleration—fits supernova data poorly [AG-2024.04-1345].

What's missing: Direct head-to-head comparisons of dark energy versus specific modified-gravity theories using the same modern dataset, or discussion of which observables best discriminate between them.