CDM models (red lines and shaded areas). The decrease in the CI’s of the reconstructed $H(z)$ highlights its concordance with those cosmological models within $99.73\%$ level. The Planck best-fit $\overline{H}^{\text{Planck}}(z)$ (black lines) also lies inside the CI’s over the entire redshift interval for JLA+BAO+H(z), and it is outside the $99.73\% $ CI only in $0.0 \leq z \lesssim 0.03$ when we use JLA.

Contrarily to the above scenario, $j(z)$ is obtained by numerical differentiation implying in high degenerated results, as displayed in the lower panels of figure \[fig:real\_Hz\_jz\]. The means $\overline{j}(z)$ and the CI’s are represented by the blue lines and blue shaded areas, respectively. The estimated jerk functions, obtained assuming $\Lambda$CDM (left panel) and XCDM models (right panel), correspond to the red lines and red shaded areas. Besides the redshift intervals $[0.14, 0.39]$ (left panel) and $[0.13, 0.45]$ (right panel), which provides $-6 \lesssim j(z) \lesssim 6$ with $\geq 99.73\%$ significance, the degenerated results do not provide relevant information about this kinematic function.

![$H(z)$ (upper panels) and $j(z)$ (lower panels) mean estimates (blue solid lines) and their $68.23\%$, $95.45\%$ and $99.73\%$ confidence intervals (blue shaded areas) obtained integrating and deriving, respectively, the reconstructed $q(z)$ using SNe Ia (left panels) and SNe Ia + BAO + $H(z)$ data (right panels). Similarly, the red line and contours are the $H(z)$ and $j(z)$ means and their CI’s obtained integrating/deriving the respective $q(z)$ where the $\Lambda$CDM (left panels) and XCDM (right panels) models were assumed. The black lines correspond to the Planck+BAO+JLA+$H_0$ best-fit assuming $\Lambda$CDM model. The black dots and error bars represent the 21 $H(z)$ measurements used in this work.[]{data-label="fig:real_Hz_jz"}](
CDM models (red lines and shaded areas). The decrease in the CI ’s of the reconstructed $ H(z)$ foreground its harmony with those cosmological models within $ 99.73\%$ level. The Planck well - fit $ \overline{H}^{\text{Planck}}(z)$ (black lines) besides lies inside the CI ’s over the entire redshift time interval for JLA+BAO+H(z), and it is outside the $ 99.73\% $ CI merely in $ 0.0 \leq z \lesssim 0.03 $ when we practice JLA. 

 Contrarily to the above scenario, $ j(z)$ is obtained by numerical differentiation incriminate in high degenerated result, as displayed in the lower panel of figure   \[fig: real\_Hz\_jz\ ]. The means $ \overline{j}(z)$ and the CI ’s are represented by the aristocratic lines and blue shaded areas, respectively. The estimate jerk functions, obtained assuming $ \Lambda$CDM (left dialog box) and XCDM models (right panel), correspond to the red lines and red shaded areas. Besides the redshift intervals $ [ 0.14, 0.39]$ (left panel) and $ [ 0.13, 0.45]$ (right panel), which provides $ -6 \lesssim j(z) \lesssim 6 $ with $ \geq 99.73\%$ significance, the degenerated results do not supply relevant information about this kinematic function. 

! [ $ H(z)$ (upper control panel) and $ j(z)$ (low panels) mean estimates (aristocratic solid lines) and their $ 68.23\%$, $ 95.45\%$ and $ 99.73\%$ confidence intervals (aristocratic shaded areas) obtained integrating and deriving, respectively, the reconstructed $ q(z)$ using SNe Ia (left panels) and SNe Ia + BAO + $ H(z)$ datum (right panels). Similarly, the red line and contours are the $ H(z)$ and $ j(z)$ means and their CI ’s obtained integrate / deriving the respective $ q(z)$ where the $ \Lambda$CDM (left panels) and XCDM (right panels) model were assumed. The black lines represent to the Planck+BAO+JLA+$H_0 $ best - fit assuming $ \Lambda$CDM model. The black acid and error bar represent the 21 $ H(z)$ measurements use in this work.[]{data - label="fig: real_Hz_jz " } ] (
CDM models (red lines and shxded areas). The bwcreasx in ths CI’s of the reconstructed $H(z)$ highlijhts its xoncordance with those cosmologpcal modeos wmthin $99.73\%$ level. The Planck nzst-fif $\ovexlmne{H}^{\text{Planck}}(z)$ (black linas) also lies itskdz the CI’s over the entire redshift igterval flr JLA+BAO+H(z), anq it ys ohnslde the $99.73\% $ CI only in $0.0 \leq z \lessaim 0.03$ whtn we use JLA.

Contrsrily to the above scenaril, $j(z)$ is obtained by nulerical difderegriation implhing in high degeneratgd results, as displayed in the luwer 'anels of fugyre \[vhg:real\_Hz\_jz\]. Vhe mewns $\overline{m}(d)$ and tve CI’s sre representec bb thw blue lines and blue shaded areas, respgctively. Tve estimated jerk fynxtionv, obdainde arsujiig $\Mambda$FDM (left panem) and XCDM nodels (right panel), vowgrspond to ths red jiges and red shaded areas. Besides the regshjft intervals $[0.14, 0.39]$ (left pabel) and $[0.13, 0.45]$ (right panel), which prjvides $-6 \lesssim j(z) \lesssim 6$ with $\geq 99.73\%$ significanca, the aegtncvatea rfsults do not provide relevant information abjht tmis kinematic fukction.

![$H(z)$ (upper panrld) sgd $j(z)$ (lower pxnels) meah estimates (blue sllid liges) abd their $68.23\%$, $95.45\%$ anc $99.73\%$ confidence intervals (bluw shaded arecs) ibtained integratiug and derivnng, rexpectovely, the reconstructed $q(z)$ hsing SNe Iw (left pahdls) and SNe Ia + CAO + $V(z)$ data (right panels). Similwrly, the ced lnne and zontpurs awe the $H(z)$ wnd $j(d)$ means and their CL’s objained integratijg/deriving the respective $q(z)$ whxce the $\Lambda$VDK (lvft panelf) and XCDM (right pwnels) models wgre assumzd. The black linvs corres'ond to the [lanck+BAO+JLA+$H_0$ hest-fit assuking $\Lamfda$CEM midel. Thd black dots anc error bcxs represwnt the 21 $H(z)$ measurcmentr used in this wirk.[]{eata-label="fig:reak_Hz_gz"}](
CDM models (red lines and shaded areas). in CI’s of reconstructed $H(z)$ highlights models $99.73\%$ level. The best-fit $\overline{H}^{\text{Planck}}(z)$ (black also lies inside the CI’s over entire redshift interval for JLA+BAO+H(z), and it is outside the $99.73\% $ CI in $0.0 \leq z \lesssim 0.03$ when we use JLA. Contrarily to the scenario, is by differentiation implying in high degenerated results, as displayed in the lower panels of figure \[fig:real\_Hz\_jz\]. The $\overline{j}(z)$ and the CI’s are represented by the lines and blue shaded respectively. The estimated jerk functions, assuming (left panel) XCDM (right correspond to the lines and red shaded areas. Besides the redshift intervals $[0.14, 0.39]$ (left panel) and $[0.13, 0.45]$ (right which provides j(z) \lesssim with 99.73\%$ the degenerated results provide relevant information about this kinematic panels) and $j(z)$ (lower panels) mean estimates (blue lines) and $68.23\%$, $95.45\%$ and $99.73\%$ confidence intervals shaded areas) obtained integrating and deriving, respectively, the $q(z)$ using SNe Ia (left panels) and SNe Ia + BAO + $H(z)$ data (right the red line and are the $H(z)$ $j(z)$ and CI’s integrating/deriving the $q(z)$ where the $\Lambda$CDM (left panels) and XCDM (right panels) models assumed. The black lines correspond to the Planck+BAO+JLA+$H_0$ best-fit assuming The dots and error represent the 21 $H(z)$ used this work.[]{data-label="fig:real_Hz_jz"}](
CDM models (red lines and shadeD areas). The dEcreaSe iN thE Ci’s of The rEconstructed $H(z)$ HIghlIghts its concordance witH thosE cOSmolOGiCal moDels witHIn $99.73\%$ LEVel. thE PLanCk BEsT-fit $\oVerLine{H}^{\teXt{Planck}}(z)$ (bLacK lInes) also lies INsIde the CI’s oVer The entire redShiFt inteRvAl fOR JLA+BaO+H(Z), and iT is outSIde the $99.73\% $ cI only in $0.0 \lEq Z \LesssiM 0.03$ When we uSE jLa.

ConTrarily to the above SCeNArio, $j(z)$ is obtainEd by nuMeRIcAL DifFerEntiation iMpLying IN high deGEnERATed REsults, as displAyed in the loWEr pAnels oF fIguRE \[fig:reAl\_Hz\_jZ\]. THE meAns $\overline{J}(z)$ anD the CI’s arE repreSEnted by THe blue lInes anD blUe sHadeD ArEaS, reSpECtiVElY. ThE EstImated jeRk FuNctioNs, obTAINEd asSumIng $\LAmbda$cDM (left panel) aNd XcDM mODelS (righT paneL), corReSpond To the rEd linEs And red shaded areAs. BeSides the rEdsHiFt iNtErvalS $[0.14, 0.39]$ (Left paNel) And $[0.13, 0.45]$ (Right paNel), whicH ProViDES $-6 \LeSssim j(z) \lesssim 6$ with $\GeQ 99.73\%$ SIgNificancE, the deGEnErATed resulTs Do nOt prOVIde reLevaNT iNformatiOn abouT ThIs KinematIc FunctiOn.

![$h(z)$ (uPpeR paneLS) and $J(z)$ (loweR panels) mEan esTImates (blue soliD Lines) and their $68.23\%$, $95.45\%$ ANd $99.73\%$ CONfIDencE inTervals (blue ShadED areAs) obTAiNed INtegrAting AnD DeRIving, respectively, thE rEconstRucteD $q(z)$ using SNe Ia (Left panels) AND sNe Ia + BAO + $h(z)$ daTA (rIGht panels). SimilArly, tHe red line aND contourS are tHe $H(z)$ and $j(Z)$ means and THEir CI’s obTaiNed IntEgrATInG/deriving the rESPectIvE $q(z)$ wherE thE $\Lambda$cDM (LefT paNelS) aNd XCDM (rigHt panels) MoDeLs WeRe aSsumeD. the black LiNes CoRreSpond TO the PlAnck+BaO+JLa+$H_0$ BeST-fiT assumiNG $\LAMBda$CdM MoDel. THe bLaCk dotS and ERroR bars rePresent thE 21 $H(z)$ MEasuReMeNts used In this work.[]{datA-lAbel="fig:reaL_HZ_jz"}](
CDM models (red lines andshaded are as).The  de cr ease  inthe CI’s of th e  rec onstructed $H(z)$ high light si ts c o nc ordan ce with th o s e c os mo log ic a lmodel s w ithin $ 99.73\%$ l eve l.  The Planckb es t-fit $\ov erl ine{H}^{\tex t{P lanck} }( z)$ (blac k l ines)  alsol ies in side theCI ’ s over the ent i r ereds hift interval for JL A +BAO+H(z), and  it is  o u ts i d e t he$99.73\% $  C I onl y  in $0. 0  \ l e q  z\ lesssim 0.03$  when we us e  JL A.

Co nt rar i ly tothe a bo v e s cenario, $j (z)$  is obtai ned by numeric a l diffe rentia tio n i mply i ng  i n h ig h  de g en era t edresults,  a sdispl ayed i n thelow er p anels  of figure \[ fig :rea l \_H z\_jz \]. T he m ea ns $\ overli ne{j} (z )$ and the CI’s  are  represen ted  b y t he  blue linesand  bl ue shad ed area s , r es p e c ti vely. The estimate dj e rk  functio ns, ob t ai ne d  assumin g$\L ambd a $ CDM ( left pa nel) and  XCDMm od el s (righ tpanel) ,cor res pondt o th e redlines an d red shaded areas.B esides the re d sh i f ti nter val s $[0.14, 0 .39] $  (le ft p a ne l)a nd $[ 0.13,  0 . 45 ] $ (right panel), wh ic h prov ides$-6 \lesssimj(z) \less s i m  6$ with  $\g e q9 9.73\%$ signif icanc e, the deg e neratedresul ts do no t provide r elevantinf orm ati ona b ou t this kinema t i c fu nc tion.
![$ H(z)$ ( upp erpan els )and $j(z) $ (lower  p an el s)  me an es t imates ( bl ueso lid  line s ) andtheir  $68 .2 3\ % $,$95.45\ % $a n d $9 9. 73 \%$con fi dence  int e rva ls (blu e shadedare a s) o bt ai ned int egrating andde riving, re sp ect ively, t he recon structed $q(z)$ using S N e Ia (l eft  pane ls)and SNe I a +  BAO +  $H ( z)$ da ta (ri ght p an els ) .  Simi l a rl y,th e red line a ndconto ur s ar e the $ H(z)$ and $j(z)$ m e ans  and their CI ’sobta i n ed  in t eg r ati ng / der i v ing the respect ive $q(z)$  w h er e the $\La m bda $C DM (lef t panel s) an d  XCDM ( right pan els) mode ls  wer e ass umed. Theblack li nes corre s pondt othe P lan ck+BAO +J LA+ $H_0$  best- f itassum ing $\ La mbda$C DM mo de l. The b lack dots and error bar s repr esent  th e 21 $H(z )$m eas urementsused  in this w ork .[] {data -la b el="f ig:r e al _Hz _ jz"}] (
CDM models_(red lines_and shaded areas). The_decrease in_the_CI’s of_the_reconstructed $H(z)$ highlights_its concordance with_those cosmological models within_$99.73\%$ level. The_Planck_best-fit $\overline{H}^{\text{Planck}}(z)$ (black lines) also lies inside the CI’s over the entire redshift interval_for_JLA+BAO+H(z), and_it_is_outside the $99.73\% $ CI_only in $0.0 \leq z_\lesssim 0.03$_when we use JLA.

Contrarily to the above scenario,_$j(z)$_is obtained by_numerical differentiation implying in high degenerated results, as displayed_in the lower panels of figure \[fig:real\_Hz\_jz\]._The means $\overline{j}(z)$_and_the_CI’s are represented by_the blue lines and blue shaded_areas, respectively. The estimated jerk functions,_obtained assuming $\Lambda$CDM (left panel) and XCDM_models (right panel), correspond to the_red lines and red shaded_areas. Besides_the redshift intervals $[0.14, 0.39]$_(left panel) and_$[0.13, 0.45]$_(right panel), which_provides $-6 \lesssim j(z) \lesssim 6$_with $\geq 99.73\%$_significance, the degenerated results do not_provide_relevant information about_this_kinematic_function.

![$H(z)$ (upper_panels) and $j(z)$_(lower_panels) mean_estimates_(blue solid lines) and their $68.23\%$,_$95.45\%$_and $99.73\%$ confidence intervals (blue shaded areas)_obtained integrating and deriving,_respectively,_the reconstructed $q(z)$ using_SNe Ia (left panels) and_SNe Ia + BAO + $H(z)$_data (right_panels). Similarly,_the red line and contours are the $H(z)$ and $j(z)$ means_and their CI’s obtained integrating/deriving the_respective $q(z)$ where the_$\Lambda$CDM (left_panels)_and XCDM (right_panels)_models were_assumed. The black lines correspond to the_Planck+BAO+JLA+$H_0$ best-fit_assuming $\Lambda$CDM model. The black dots_and error bars represent_the_21 $H(z)$ measurements used in this_work.[]{data-label="fig:real_Hz_jz"}](