We make a comparison for ten typical, popular dark energy models according to theirs capabilities of fitting the current observational data. The observational data we use in this work include the JLA sample of type Ia supernovae observation, the Planck 2015 distance priors of cosmic microwave background observation, the baryon acoustic oscillations measurements, and the direct measurement of the Hubble constant. Since the models have different numbers of parameters, in order to make a fair comparison, we employ the Akaike and Bayesian information criteria to assess the worth of the models. The analysis results show that, according to the capability of explaining observations, the cosmological constant model is still the best one among all the dark energy models. The generalized Chaplygin gas model, the constant $w$ model, and the $\alpha$ dark energy model are worse than the cosmological constant model, but still are good models compared to others. The holographic dark energy model, the new generalized Chaplygin gas model, and the Chevalliear-Polarski-Linder model can still fit the current observations well, but from an economically feasible perspective, they are not so good. The new agegraphic dark energy model, the Dvali-Gabadadze-Porrati model, and the Ricci dark energy model are excluded by the current observations.
Short-range experiments testing the gravitational inverse-square law at the submillimeter scale offer uniquely sensitive probes of Lorentz invariance. A combined analysis of results from the short-range gravity experiments HUST-2015, HUST-2011, IU-2012, and IU-2002 permits the first independent measurements of the 14 nonrelativistic coefficients for Lorentz violation in the pure-gravity sector at the level of $10^{-9}$ m$^2$, improving by an order of magnitude the sensitivity to numerous types of Lorentz violation involving quadratic curvature derivatives and curvature couplings.