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 and model comparisons, not reports of experimental evidence.

Here's what the archive actually contains on this topic:

The strongest experimental claim comes from [AG-2024.08-1217], which reviews *historical* evidence: measurements in the early 1990s—mass density, the Hubble constant, star ages, large-scale structure, and cosmic microwave background anisotropy—created tension with a zero cosmological constant, with statistical analysis showing less than a few percent probability it was actually zero. The canonical experimental discovery itself came from distant supernovae in 1998 [AG-2024.08-1217].

More recent observational work is mentioned in [AG-2024.06-076]: supernova and baryon acoustic oscillation (BAO) data are analyzed, and the analysis suggests *evolving* dark energy (a scalar field descending its potential) may be preferred over a constant model, with the potential fractionally changing ~36% over redshift z ≲ 2.

[AG-2025.04-187] compares dark energy models using late-universe data (BAO, Type Ia supernovae, cosmic chronometers, strong lensing time delays) and finds that—depending on the statistical criterion used—some models outperform the standard ΛCDM model, though the picture is mixed.

What's missing: These preprints don't directly discuss *what experimental evidence rules out* alternative models (modified gravity, black-hole driven expansion, etc.). To answer your question comprehensively, you'd want observations that directly constrain scalar fields via fifth-force searches or gravitational wave polarization—topics touched in [AG-2024.03-211] but not detailed in experimental results.