Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Constraints on primordial black holes from the observed number of Icarus-like ultrahigh magnification events

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A single magnified star, Icarus, sets a 95 percent exclusion on primordial black holes above 20 percent of dark matter in the 0.1–10 solar-mass range.

desk verdict A clean, useful extension of the authors' analytic microlensing model that yields a plausible but conditional PBH exclusion from the single Icarus event; the boundary rests on the exponential-suppression branch of the PDF, so treat f_PBH > 0.2 as provisional pending a targeted simulation or sensitivity analysis. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.13816 v1 pith:Z43XQQ66 submitted 2024-11-21 astro-ph.CO

Hiroki Kawai , Masamune Oguri This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.CO
keywords primordialblackholesgravitationalmicrolensingIcaruseventMACSJ1149ultrahighmagnificationdarkmattermicrolensmassfunctiongalaxyclusterlensing
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper tries to turn a single extreme observation into a dark-matter constraint. In two years of space-based monitoring of the galaxy cluster MACS J1149, exactly one star—Icarus—was seen magnified by a factor of thousands by microlenses near the cluster's critical curve, the line where cluster lensing magnification formally diverges. The authors calculate how many such events should have appeared if the microlenses are randomly distributed equal-mass compact objects, using an analytic probability distribution for the ultrahigh-magnification tail. They find that ordinary stars in the cluster's intracluster light naturally account for the one event, while primordial black holes with masses from $0.1\,M_{\odot}$ to $10\,M_{\odot}$ and a dark-matter fraction above roughly $f_{\rm PBH}\simeq 0.2$ cannot explain the observed number and are excluded at 95% confidence.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the analytic high-magnification tail of the microlensing magnification probability distribution: the probability that a point source near a cluster macro-critical curve is magnified above a threshold by a random field of equal-mass microlenses, given by Eqs. (2)–(5). It has three parts: a power-law tail in magnification, an exponential suppression that sets in when the dimensionless lens density parameter $f_\star\kappa_{\rm tot}\mu_{\rm av}$ exceeds unity and micro-critical curves merge, and a maximum-magnification cap set by the finite source size. The authors integrate this PDF over the source-star radius distribution, the apparent-magnitude threshold, and the distance from the critical curve to obtain an expected event number, then compare it with the single observed Icarus event through Poisson statistics.

What would settle it

Recover a second Icarus-like event—a star magnified by thousands with a peak lasting under two weeks—from the same two-year monitoring campaign of MACS J1149, which would break the single-event Poisson assumption (mean count $\bar{N}\le 0.051$ at 95% CI) that drives the $f_{\rm PBH}\gtrsim 0.2$ exclusion. Alternatively, measure Icarus's source radius independently from its full light curve and check whether the finite-source maximum-magnification cutoff reproduces the observed peak brightness.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that the occurrence rate of Icarus-like events—ultrahigh-magnification transients lasting less than about two weeks near a galaxy cluster's macro-critical curve—is a counting experiment sensitive to the mass and abundance of microlenses. The authors use their analytic high-magnification tail of the microlensing magnification probability distribution (Eqs. 2–5), augmented with a source-size-dependent maximum magnification and an apparent-magnitude threshold tied to the Stefan–Boltzmann radius–luminosity relation, to predict how many such events should appear in 52 independent snapshots of the two-year campaign. Comparing with the single observed event gives a 95% Poisson upper limit on the mean event count, and the excluded microlens parameter space is one where there are either too few lenses or so many that high magnifications are exponentially suppressed. For primordial black holes added to the intracluster-light stars, this excludes $f_{\rm PBH}\gtrsim 0.2$ for PBH masses between $0.1\,M_{\odot}$ and $10\,M_{\odot}$ at 95% confidence. The authors note that the constraint is limited to this mass window because the model assumes a monochromatic microlens mass function.

Load-bearing premise

The result stands on the assumption that the analytic formula for how often microlensing near the MACS J1149 critical curve produces magnifications of thousands is accurate; if that formula is wrong, especially when microlenses are abundant or the source star has a finite size, the expected event count and the excluded PBH region would move.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the model is correct, primordial black holes that make up more than about 20 percent of dark matter at masses $0.1$–$10\,M_{\odot}$ are excluded at 95% confidence as the explanation for Icarus-like events.
  • Intracluster-light stars with mass near $0.3\,M_{\odot}$ and a microlens fraction near 0.5–0.9 percent fit the observed single event without needing any exotic component.
  • The predicted event rate peaks close to the macro-critical curve, matching the observed position of Icarus and supporting the high-magnification tail rather than the near-average magnification region.
  • The method converts future event counts into significantly stronger PBH limits: for this system, two observed events would exclude $f_{\rm PBH}\gtrsim 0.08$ and three would exclude $f_{\rm PBH}\gtrsim 0.01$ at 95% confidence.
  • Because adding just one or two more events tightens the bound by roughly an order of magnitude, ongoing surveys of highly magnified stars should rapidly improve the constraint.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial inference: the result leans heavily on the finite-source cutoff in Eq. (5), so an independent measurement of Icarus's stellar radius from its full light curve or spectral energy distribution would directly test whether the excluded PBH region is real or an artifact of that cutoff.
  • Editorial inference: the $0.1$–$10\,M_{\odot}$ mass window is set by matching the masses of intracluster-light stars under a monochromatic mass function; extending the analytic PDF to a bimodal mass function could close or widen the gap in PBH constraints.
  • Editorial inference: applying the same event-count logic to many arcs and clusters would turn a single-sightline exclusion into a statistical measurement of the microlens mass function along cluster lines of sight.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper computes the expected number of Icarus-like ultrahigh magnification events in the MACS J1149 cluster using the analytic high-magnification tail of the microlensing PDF developed in Kawai & Oguri [18], augmented with a source radius–luminosity relation and an apparent magnitude threshold. For a single monochromatic microlens population, the predicted event count is consistent with the single Icarus detection in two years of HST data for parameters matching intracluster light (ICL) stars. The authors then add a population of primordial black holes (PBHs) with masses 0.1–10 M_sun and, after marginalizing over the cluster peculiar velocity, find that f_PBH ≳ 0.2 is excluded at 95% confidence because the predicted number of events falls below the Poisson lower limit N̄ = 0.051.

Significance. The approach is novel: unlike earlier estimates [12], it includes the relation between source size and luminosity and the magnification threshold set by the observed apparent magnitude. The Poisson comparison is straightforward and correctly applied. If the analytic model is accurate in the nonlinear regime, the resulting constraint is a useful new probe of PBHs in the stellar-mass window, consistent with existing limits and with a clear path to improvement as more lensed stars are found. The paper is clearly written and explicitly identifies several limitations, but it does not validate the central analytic model under the conditions used for the PBH exclusion.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. III, Eqs. (4) and (5)] The exclusion of f_PBH ≳ 0.2 is driven by the nonlinear regime X = f⋆κ_tot µ_av ≳ 1, where the point-source probability is suppressed by exp(−B0 X) and the maximum magnification by (C0 X)^{−3/4}. The coefficients A0, B0, C0 are fitted from the authors' previous work [18], but the paper does not show that this model is accurate for the Icarus sightline (κ_tot = 0.83, µ_av ≈ 300) or for the two-component ICL+PBH mass function. Since the boundary would shift if the true finite-source tail decays less steeply or if mixing masses changes the effective µ_max, a targeted finite-source simulation or a sensitivity analysis over the fitted parameters is required.
  2. [Sec. IV, paragraph 1, and Eq. (14)] The claimed 95% constraint does not propagate the source temperature uncertainty T = 11000–14000 K. The authors state that a lower temperature would expand the excluded region, but they do not quantify the effect on the excluded boundary for T = 14000 K, which would increase the expected count and could weaken the exclusion. The confidence statement should be recomputed with the full temperature range included.
  3. [Sec. III, first paragraph] The treatment of the combined ICL+PBH population assumes that the single-mass analytic model remains valid when f_PBH ≫ f_ICL, asserting that the nonlinear suppression is unaffected by ICL stars. This is not demonstrated; the two populations have different Einstein radii (Eq. (10)), which can alter the merging of micro-critical curves and the effective source size in Eq. (5). A quantitative justification, or a simulation with a bimodal mass function, is needed before the PBH constraint can be considered robust.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Eq. (2)] The multiplicative factor is ambiguous as typeset; it should be written as (1+e^{-1})/[1+exp((µ−µ_max)/µ_max)] times (µ/µ_th)^{-2}.
  2. [Sec. II B 2 and Sec. III] The log-normal distribution used to marginalize the peculiar velocity is not fully specified; the mean and dispersion of the log-normal should be given explicitly.
  3. [Sec. II C] The meaning of '52 independent snapshots' should be clarified: what is the cadence and how is independence defined given the roughly two-week event duration?
  4. [Eq. (20)] The differential dR R_⊙^2/R^3 is confusing; it should be written as dR (R_⊙/R)^3 or with explicit parentheses and the R_⊙^2 placement clarified.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the Icarus event count is used as data against a simulation-calibrated analytic model, not as a fitted input.

full rationale

The central expected-number calculation is a forward application of the analytic high-magnification PDF from Kawai & Oguri [18], with the fitted parameters A0, B0, and C0 coming from numerical microlensing simulations in that prior work rather than from the Icarus event analyzed here. The current paper adds physical ingredients—source radius-luminosity relation, apparent-magnitude threshold, and source-star luminosity normalization from the observed arc surface brightness—none of which are tuned to force the observed single-event count. The Poisson bound Nbar >= 0.051 is a likelihood threshold derived from the fact that one event was seen, and the PBH exclusion fPBH >= 0.2 follows by evaluating the model for large fPBH, where the exponential suppression in Eq. (4) and the reduced maximum magnification in Eq. (5) push the expected count below that threshold. Although [18] is a self-citation and is load-bearing, it is not circular: the model was calibrated to simulations and is not defined in terms of the Icarus detection. No equation in the paper reduces the predicted event count to the observed count by construction, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. Uncertainties in the suppression branch of the PDF would be a correctness concern, not a circularity concern.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on the calibrated analytic model of the authors' earlier paper, on the assumed source luminosity function, and on the uniform temperature approximation. No new physical entities are introduced. The main free parameters are the simulation-fitting constants A0, B0, C0 and the source population parameters Lmin, Lmax, T.

free parameters (6)
  • A0 = 0.058
    Fitting parameter in the high-magnification tail PDF (Eq. 4), calibrated to numerical simulations in Kawai & Oguri [18].
  • B0 = 0.402
    Fitting parameter in the exponential suppression term of the integrated PDF (Eq. 4).
  • C0 = 2.0
    Fitting parameter controlling the nonlinear suppression of the maximum magnification (Eq. 5).
  • Lmin = 0.1 L_sun
    Lower boundary of the assumed source luminosity function (Eq. 18), chosen by hand; affects the normalization n0.
  • Lmax = 10^7 L_sun
    Upper boundary of the assumed source luminosity function (Eq. 18), chosen by hand; sets the maximum source radius Rmax = 730 R_sun.
  • T = 12000 K
    Assumed uniform effective temperature of source stars (Sec. II B 2), estimated from SED but with an admitted range of 11000-14000 K. Used in the Stefan-Boltzmann relation for luminosity and radius.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The high-magnification tail PDF of Kawai & Oguri [18] (Eqs. 2-5) accurately describes the probability of observing Icarus-like events.
    This is the central modeling premise, used in Eq. (20) to compute the event count. It assumes uniformly and randomly distributed equal-mass microlenses and uses simulation-calibrated fitting parameters.
  • domain assumption The galaxy cluster MACS J1149 can be approximated with gamma_tot = kappa_tot (spherical isothermal profile).
    Invoked at the start of Sec. II A to justify Eq. (1) and the average magnification formula. A different density profile would change the macro-magnification.
  • domain assumption Source stars in the arc follow a power-law luminosity function dN/dL ∝ L^{-2}.
    Used to derive the source radius distribution (Eq. 19). The slope and boundaries are not observationally pinned down and are a source of systematic uncertainty.
  • domain assumption The Icarus event belongs to the high-magnification tail of the PDF, not the log-normal region of the total PDF.
    The authors discard the log-normal contribution (Sec. II C) because the event duration is short. If the event instead came from the log-normal part, the constraint would change.
  • standard math Event occurrences follow a Poisson distribution.
    Used in Eq. (21) to convert the observed single event into a 95% confidence lower bound on the mean event rate.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Constraints on primordial black holes from the observed number of Icarus-like ultrahigh magnification events." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/Z43XQQ66

@misc{pith2026241113816,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Constraints on primordial black holes from the observed number of Icarus-like ultrahigh magnification events},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/Z43XQQ66}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.13816}
}
abstract

Icarus is an individual star observed near the macro-critical curve of the MACS J1149 cluster, with the magnification factor estimated to be an order of thousands. Since microlenses near the macro-critical curve influence the number of such high-magnification events, the observed occurrence of Icarus-like events is expected to provide a useful constraint on the properties of microlenses. We first study the mass and mass fraction of microlenses consistent with the observed number of events assuming a single microlens component with a monochromatic mass function, finding that stars that contribute to the intracluster light (ICL) are consistent at the 95% confidence level. We then consider the contribution of primordial black holes (PBHs), which are one of the alternatives to the standard cold dark matter, as microlenses in addition to ICL stars. The derived parameter space indicates that a large abundance of PBHs with a mass around $1\ M_{\odot}$ and a fraction of PBHs to the total dark matter of $f_{\rm PBH} \gtrsim 0.2$ cannot explain the observed number of Icarus-like events and therefore is excluded. The methodology developed in this paper can be used to place tighter constraints on the fraction of PBHs from ongoing and future observations of ultrahigh magnification events.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.13816 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. The expected number of the observed Icarus-like ultrahigh magnification events as a function of distance from the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Constraints on the microlens parameters derived from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Probing Primordial Black Hole Mergers in Clusters with Pulsar Timing Data

    astro-ph.CO 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Bayesian analysis of IPTA DR2 shows scalar-induced gravitational waves dominate and PBH merger backgrounds are strongly disfavored relative to an astrophysical SMBHB explanation.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 19 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [18]

    calculate the number of events whose magnification exceeds a few thousands, they ignore the correlation be- tween the source size and the intrinsic luminosity of a source star, which is considered in this paper. A. High-magnification tail of the PDF We consider a lens plane, where the total convergence and shear are represented by κtot and γtot, respectiv...

    work page

  2. [12]

    Oguri, J

    M. Oguri, J. M. Diego, N. Kaiser, P. L. Kelly, and T. Broadhurst, Understanding caustic crossings in giant arcs: Characteristic scales, event rates, and constraints on compact dark matter, Phys. Rev. D97, 023518 (2018), arXiv:1710.00148 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv 2018

  3. [1]

    Average magnification Icarus is a highly magnified individual star at redshift z = 1 .49 observed in the MACS J1149 galaxy cluster located at redshift z = 0.544. The average magnification µav in the vicinity of Icarus can be expressed as a function of the distance β from the macro-caustic of the galaxy 3 cluster as µav(β) = µhµr 1p 2π(σ2 ml + σ2 W) × Z ∞ ...

    work page

  4. [2]

    For this pur- pose, we first need to specify the relation between the source size and its luminosity

    Constraint on the radius of Icarus The radius of Icarus can be constrained by the peak magnitude and the source crossing time. For this pur- pose, we first need to specify the relation between the source size and its luminosity. Assuming the blackbody with temperature T , this relation can be expressed using the Stefan–Boltzmann law L L⊙ = R R⊙ 2 T T⊙ 4 ....

    work page

  5. [3]

    The apparent magnitude of the arc is 25 magarcsec −2 in the F125W band, which corresponds to the luminosity den- sity 6.5×109 L⊙arcsec−2

    Star population in the arc The width of the arc along the macro-critical curve, in which Icarus is located, is warc = 0 .2 arcsec. The apparent magnitude of the arc is 25 magarcsec −2 in the F125W band, which corresponds to the luminosity den- sity 6.5×109 L⊙arcsec−2. We can convert the luminosity density into the number density of source stars that are s...

    work page

  6. [4]

    Fudamoto, F

    Y. Fudamoto, F. Sun, J. M. Diego, L. Dai, M. Oguri, A. Zitrin, E. Zackrisson, M. Jauzac, D. J. Lagattuta, E. Egami, E. Iani, R. A. Windhorst, K. T. Abe, F. E. Bauer, F. Bian, R. Bhatawdekar, T. J. Broadhurst, Z. Cai, C.-C. Chen, W. Chen, S. H. Cohen, C. J. Con- selice, D. Espada, N. Foo, B. L. Frye, S. Fujimoto, L. J. Furtak, M. Golubchik, T. Y.-Y. Hsiao,...

    arXiv 2024

  7. [5]

    K. T. Abe, H. Kawai, and M. Oguri, Analytic ap- proach to astrometric perturbations of critical curves by substructures, Phys. Rev. D 109, 083517 (2024), arXiv:2311.18211 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

  8. [6]

    L. Dai, T. Venumadhav, A. A. Kaurov, and J. Miralda- Escud, Probing Dark Matter Subhalos in Galaxy Clus- ters Using Highly Magnified Stars, ApJ 867, 24 (2018), arXiv:1804.03149 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2018

Show all 50 references
  1. [7]

    P. L. Kelly, J. M. Diego, S. Rodney, N. Kaiser, T. Broad- hurst, A. Zitrin, T. Treu, P. G. P´ erez-Gonz´ alez, T. Mor- ishita, M. Jauzac, J. Selsing, M. Oguri, L. Pueyo, T. W. Ross, A. V. Filippenko, N. Smith, J. Hjorth, S. B. Cenko, X. Wang, D. A. Howell, J. Richard, B. L. Fr...

    2018 arXiv

  2. [8]

    Welch, D

    B. Welch, D. Coe, J. M. Diego, A. Zitrin, E. Zackris- son, P. Dimauro, Y. Jim´ enez-Teja, P. Kelly, G. Mahler, M. Oguri, F. X. Timmes, R. Windhorst, M. Florian, S. E. de Mink, R. J. Avila, J. Anderson, L. Bradley, K. Sharon, A. Vikaeus, S. McCandliss, M. Bradaˇ c, J. Rigby, B....

    2022 arXiv

  3. [9]

    J. M. Diego, B. Sun, H. Yan, L. J. Furtak, E. Za- ckrisson, L. Dai, P. Kelly, M. Nonino, N. Adams, A. K. Meena, S. P. Willner, A. Zitrin, S. H. Cohen, J. C. J. D’Silva, R. A. Jansen, J. Summers, R. A. Wind- horst, D. Coe, C. J. Conselice, S. P. Driver, B. Frye, N. A. Grogin, A...

    2023 arXiv

  4. [10]

    Venumadhav, L

    T. Venumadhav, L. Dai, and J. Miralda-Escud´ e, Mi- crolensing of Extremely Magnified Stars near Caustics of Galaxy Clusters, ApJ 850, 49 (2017), arXiv:1707.00003 [astro-ph.CO]

    2017 arXiv

  5. [11]

    J. M. Diego, N. Kaiser, T. Broadhurst, P. L. Kelly, S. Rodney, T. Morishita, M. Oguri, T. W. Ross, A. Zitrin, M. Jauzac, J. Richard, L. Williams, J. Vega-Ferrero, B. Frye, and A. V. Filippenko, Dark Matter under the Microscope: Constraining Compact Dark Matter with Caustic Cro...

    2018 arXiv

  6. [13]

    L. L. R. Williams, P. L. Kelly, T. Treu, A. Amruth, J. M. Diego, S. K. Li, A. K. Meena, A. Zitrin, T. J. Broadhurst, and A. V. Filippenko, Flashlights: Properties of Highly Magnified Images Near Cluster Critical Curves in the Presence of Dark Matter Subhalos, ApJ 961, 200 (202...

    2024 arXiv

  7. [14]

    N. Katz, S. Balbus, and B. Paczynski, Random Scatter- ing Approach to Gravitational Microlensing, ApJ 306, 2 (1986)

    1986

  8. [15]

    Vernardos, C

    G. Vernardos, C. J. Fluke, N. F. Bate, and D. Croton, GERLUMPH Data Release 1: High-resolution Cosmo- logical Microlensing Magnification Maps and eResearch Tools, ApJS 211, 16 (2014), arXiv:1401.7711 [astro- ph.CO]

    2014 arXiv

  9. [16]

    Vall M¨ uller and J

    C. Vall M¨ uller and J. Miralda-Escud´ e, Limits on Dark Matter Compact Objects implied by Super- magnified Stars in Lensing Clusters, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2403.16989 (2024), arXiv:2403.16989 [astro- ph.CO]

    2024 arXiv

  10. [17]

    Weisenbach, T

    L. Weisenbach, T. Anguita, J. Miralda-Escud´ e, M. Oguri, P. Saha, and P. L. Schechter, Microlensing near macro- caustics, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2404.08094 (2024), arXiv:2404.08094 [astro-ph.GA]

    2024 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Dai and J

    L. Dai and J. Miralda-Escud´ e, Gravitational Lensing Sig- natures of Axion Dark Matter Minihalos in Highly Mag- nified Stars, AJ 159, 49 (2020), arXiv:1908.01773 [astro- ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Dai and M

    L. Dai and M. Pascale, New Approximation of Magni- fication Statistics for Random Microlensing of Magni- fied Sources, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2104.12009 (2021), arXiv:2104.12009 [astro-ph.GA]

    2021 arXiv

  13. [21]

    J. M. Palencia, J. M. Diego, B. J. Kavanagh, and J. Mart ´ ınez-Arrizabalaga, Statistics of magnification for extremely lensed high redshift stars, A&A 687, A81 (2024), arXiv:2307.09505 [astro-ph.CO]

    2024 arXiv

  14. [22]

    B. J. Carr, The primordial black hole mass spectrum., ApJ 201, 1 (1975)

    1975

  15. [23]

    B. J. Carr, K. Kohri, Y. Sendouda, and J. Yokoyama, New cosmological constraints on primordial black holes, Phys. Rev. D 81, 104019 (2010), arXiv:0912.5297 [astro- ph.CO]

    2010 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Kawai and M

    H. Kawai and M. Oguri, Analytic model for the statis- tics of ultrahigh magnification events, Phys. Rev. D 110, 083514 (2024), arXiv:2407.16749 [astro-ph.CO]

    2024 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Carr and F

    B. Carr and F. K¨ uhnel, Primordial Black Holes as Dark Matter: Recent Developments, Annual Re- view of Nuclear and Particle Science 70, 355 (2020), arXiv:2006.02838 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  18. [26]

    B. Carr, K. Kohri, Y. Sendouda, and J. Yokoyama, Con- straints on primordial black holes, Reports on Progress in Physics 84, 116902 (2021), arXiv:2002.12778 [astro- ph.CO]

    2021 arXiv

  19. [27]

    B. J. Carr and S. W. Hawking, Black holes in the early Universe, MNRAS 168, 399 (1974)

    1974

  20. [28]

    Niikura, M

    H. Niikura, M. Takada, S. Yokoyama, T. Sumi, and S. Masaki, Constraints on Earth-mass primordial 9 black holes from OGLE 5-year microlensing events, Phys. Rev. D 99, 083503 (2019), arXiv:1901.07120 [astro- ph.CO]

    2019 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Mr´ oz, A

    P. Mr´ oz, A. Udalski, M. K. Szyma´ nski, I. Soszy´ nski, L. Wyrzykowski, P. Pietrukowicz, S. Koz lowski, R. Poleski, J. Skowron, D. Skowron, K. Ulaczyk, M. Gro- madzki, K. Rybicki, P. Iwanek, M. Wrona, and M. Rata- jczak, No massive black holes in the Milky Way halo, Nature 6...

    2024 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Niikura, M

    H. Niikura, M. Takada, N. Yasuda, R. H. Lup- ton, T. Sumi, S. More, T. Kurita, S. Sugiyama, A. More, M. Oguri, and M. Chiba, Microlensing con- straints on primordial black holes with Subaru/HSC An- dromeda observations, Nature Astronomy 3, 524 (2019), arXiv:1701.02151 [astro-ph.CO]

    2019 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Smyth, S

    N. Smyth, S. Profumo, S. English, T. Jeltema, K. McK- innon, and P. Guhathakurta, Updated constraints on asteroid-mass primordial black holes as dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 101, 063005 (2020), arXiv:1910.01285 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Tisserand, L

    P. Tisserand, L. Le Guillou, C. Afonso, J. N. Al- bert, J. Andersen, R. Ansari, ´E. Aubourg, P. Bareyre, J. P. Beaulieu, X. Charlot, C. Coutures, R. Ferlet, P. Fouqu´ e, J. F. Glicenstein, B. Goldman, A. Gould, D. Graff, M. Gros, J. Haissinski, C. Hamadache, J. de Kat, T. Lass...

    2007 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Alcock, R

    C. Alcock, R. A. Allsman, D. R. Alves, T. S. Axelrod, A. C. Becker, D. P. Bennett, K. H. Cook, N. Dalal, A. J. Drake, K. C. Freeman, M. Geha, K. Griest, M. J. Lehner, S. L. Marshall, D. Minniti, C. A. Nelson, B. A. Peterson, P. Popowski, M. R. Pratt, P. J. Quinn, C. W. Stubbs,...

    2001 arXiv

  26. [34]

    S. M. Koushiappas and A. Loeb, Dynamics of Dwarf Galaxies Disfavor Stellar-Mass Black Holes as Dark Matter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 041102 (2017), arXiv:1704.01668 [astro-ph.GA]

    2017 arXiv

  27. [35]

    T. D. Brandt, Constraints on MACHO Dark Matter from Compact Stellar Systems in Ultra-faint Dwarf Galaxies, ApJ 824, L31 (2016), arXiv:1605.03665 [astro-ph.GA]

    2016 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Griest, A

    K. Griest, A. M. Cieplak, and M. J. Lehner, New Limits on Primordial Black Hole Dark Matter from an Analy- sis of Kepler Source Microlensing Data, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 181302 (2013)

    2013

  29. [37]

    Griest, A

    K. Griest, A. M. Cieplak, and M. J. Lehner, Experi- mental Limits on Primordial Black Hole Dark Matter from the First 2 yr of Kepler Data, ApJ 786, 158 (2014), arXiv:1307.5798 [astro-ph.CO]

    2014 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Zumalac´ arregui and U

    M. Zumalac´ arregui and U. Seljak, Limits on Stellar-Mass Compact Objects as Dark Matter from Gravitational Lensing of Type Ia Supernovae, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 141101 (2018), arXiv:1712.02240 [astro-ph.CO]

    2018 arXiv

  31. [39]

    All the constraints are shown at the 95% CI

    (red). All the constraints are shown at the 95% CI. constraint takes account of the uncertainty of the peculiar velocity, while in Oguri et al.[12] the peculiar velocity is fixed to vpec = 500 km/s. 7 IV. SUMMAR Y AND DISCUSSIONS Using the analytic model for the high-magnifica...

  32. [40]

    (yellow), EROS/MACHO [26, 27] (magenta), and Planck

  33. [41]

    P. N. Wilkinson, D. R. Henstock, I. W. Browne, A. G. Polatidis, P. Augusto, A. C. Readhead, T. J. Pearson, W. Xu, G. B. Taylor, and R. C. Vermeulen, Limits on the Cosmological Abundance of Supermassive Compact Ob- jects from a Search for Multiple Imaging in Compact Ra- dio Sou...

    2001

  34. [42]

    S. L. Zoutendijk, J. Brinchmann, L. A. Boogaard, M. L. P. Gunawardhana, T.-O. Husser, S. Kamann, A. F. Ramos Padilla, M. M. Roth, R. Bacon, M. den Brok, S. Dreizler, and D. Krajnovi´ c, The MUSE-Faint survey. I. Spectroscopic evidence for a star cluster in Eridanus 2 and const...

    2020

  35. [43]

    M. A. Monroy-Rodr ´ ıguez and C. Allen, The End of the MACHO Era, Revisited: New Limits on MACHO Masses from Halo Wide Binaries, ApJ 790, 159 (2014), arXiv:1406.5169 [astro-ph.GA]

    2014 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Carr and J

    B. Carr and J. Silk, Primordial black holes as gener- ators of cosmic structures, MNRAS 478, 3756 (2018), arXiv:1801.00672 [astro-ph.CO]

    2018 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Ali-Ha ¨ ımoud and M

    Y. Ali-Ha ¨ ımoud and M. Kamionkowski, Cosmic mi- crowave background limits on accreting primordial black holes, Phys. Rev. D 95, 043534 (2017), arXiv:1612.05644 [astro-ph.CO]

    2017 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Vaskonen and H

    V. Vaskonen and H. Veerm¨ ae, Lower bound on the pri- mordial black hole merger rate, Phys. Rev. D101, 043015 (2020), arXiv:1908.09752 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  39. [47]

    D. C. Morton and T. F. Adams, Effective Temperatures and Bolometric Corrections of Early-Type Stars, ApJ 151, 611 (1968)

    1968

  40. [48]

    M. J. Pecaut and E. E. Mamajek, Intrinsic Colors, Temperatures, and Bolometric Corrections of Pre-main- sequence Stars, ApJS 208, 9 (2013), arXiv:1307.2657 [astro-ph.SR]

    2013 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Golovich, W

    N. Golovich, W. A. Dawson, D. Wittman, G. Ogrean, R. van Weeren, and A. Bonafede, MC2: Dynamical Anal- ysis of the Merging Galaxy Cluster MACS J1149.5+2223, ApJ 831, 110 (2016), arXiv:1608.01329 [astro-ph.CO]

    2016 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Castelli and R

    F. Castelli and R. L. Kurucz, New Grids of AT- LAS9 Model Atmospheres, in Modelling of Stellar Atmospheres, IAU Symposium, Vol. 210, edited by N. Piskunov, W. W. Weiss, and D. F. Gray (2003) p. A20, arXiv:astro-ph/0405087 [astro-ph]

    2003 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.