which indicates that there exist (at least) two turning points of w$_{de}$ in z ∈ (0 , 1 . 8) and the best-fitted values z$_{1}$ = 0 . 44 and z$_{2}$ = 1 . 07. Here χ 2 total,min = 467 . 409 for the best-fitted parameters, roughly speaking it is a good improvement, compared with the corresponding χ 2 total,min = 478 . 406 for the best-fitted CPL model and χ 2 total,min = 479 . 093 for the ΛCDM model. As shown in Table I, this improvement of χ 2 total,min is mainly due to the decrease of ˜ χ 2 sn,min and χ 2 $_{H,min}$. It is not surprising, as redshifts of the two data sets are distributed in whole range of z ∈ (0 , 1 . 8), while the BAO data are in the region z ≤ 0 . 35 and the CMB data are in the region z ∈ (0 , z$_{∗}$ ∼ 1090). The result implies that these two data sets are quite favor of turnings of w$_{de}$ around z = 0 . 44 and z = 1 . 07 respectively. This result is consistent with recent UBE of w$_{de}$ [27]. While in CPL and ΛCDM models it is impossible to have such turnings of w$_{de}$ , which leads to the big differences between χ 2 total,min of Model I and that of ΛCDM and CPL models. This result also implies that there exists the possibility with an oscillating EoS. Note that the error bar of w$_{de}$ in the third bin is larger than those in the first two bins because there are much less data points. We have also divided the region of z ∈ (0 , 1 . 8) into 4 bins, and found that there is almost FIG. 1: The best-fitted w$_{de}$ for Model I (blue, solid), Model II (red, dashed) and the CPL model (green, dotted), the black line is for w = − 1. 9 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 GLYPH<Minus> 2 GLYPH<Minus> 1 0 1 2 z w de