Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 5 minor 86 references

Dark photons and axion-like particles at the Electron-Ion Collider in China

T0 review · 5 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper projects that the Electron-Ion Collider in China could detect dark photons with masses from $2\,m_e$ to 3 GeV and couplings down to $10^{-6}$, and axion-like particles from 0.1 to 5 GeV with couplings down to…

desk verdict A useful sensitivity projection for dark photons and ALPs at EicC, worth engaging, but the displaced dark-photon reach needs a background model before the gap-filling claim is fully supported. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.06301 v1 pith:KXEESLHV submitted 2024-12-09 hep-ph

Qiyuan Gao , Dan Lin , Hongkai Liu , Teng Ma This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-ph
keywords darkphotonaxion-likeparticleElectron-IonColliderinChinacoherentscatteringdisplacedvertexsearchbremsstrahlungfusionbeyondStandardModel
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 projects the sensitivity of the proposed Electron-Ion Collider in China (EicC) to two kinds of feebly interacting particles: dark photons and axion-like particles (ALPs) coupled to photons. Its central claim is that the EicC's moderate 3.5 GeV electron beam is an asset: particles produced by coherent scattering off lead nuclei are less boosted than at higher-energy electron-ion colliders, so their decay products fall inside the detector acceptance, and displaced-vertex searches can cover dark photon masses from $2\,m_e$ to 3 GeV with kinetic-mixing couplings $\epsilon$ from $10^{-6}$ to $10^{-3}$. For ALPs, the paper argues that prompt diphoton and displaced-vertex searches together reach masses from 0.1 to 5 GeV and effective couplings $1/\Lambda$ down to about $10^{-6}\,\mathrm{GeV}^{-1}$, exceeding current bounds. If the projections hold, a relatively modest electron-ion collider could map a large slice of unexplored new-physics parameter space before or alongside higher-energy machines.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by two production mechanisms and one detection signature. Dark photons are produced via electron bremsstrahlung on a lead nucleus, and ALPs via photon fusion, both in the coherent regime where the momentum transfer to the nucleus is smaller than the inverse nuclear radius, giving a $Z^2$ enhancement and a nuclear form-factor suppression at larger transfer. The signal is a displaced vertex: for dark photons, a reconstructed lepton pair with decay probability $e^{-L_1/L_{A'}} - e^{-L_2/L_{A'}}$ between the vertex resolution $L_1\simeq 10\,\mu\mathrm{m}$ and the detector length scale $L_2$; for ALPs, a diphoton vertex between $L_R = 0.1$ m and the electromagnetic calorimeter distance $L_{\mathrm{EM}} = 1$ m. The efficiency map $f(E,\eta)\simeq 0.9$ from the EicC detector concept converts these geometric acceptances into event counts.

What would settle it

Measure the actual EicC vertex resolution, decay volume, and photon/lepton efficiency once the detector exists; for example, if the charged-vertex resolution is worse than 10 um or the electromagnetic calorimeter is farther than 1 m, the dark photon and ALP displaced-vertex sensitivities in the paper's figures move to larger couplings and may no longer exceed current bounds.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that the EicC is not simply a lower-energy copy of a larger electron-ion collider but a complementary probe: its lower electron-beam energy gives the produced dark photons and ALPs a smaller boost, making their displaced decay vertices detectable with a vertex resolution $L_1\simeq 10\,\mu\mathrm{m}$ and a decay volume of $L_2 = 1$ m (or 0.14 m for the inner barrel). The production rates come from $Z^2$-enhanced coherent scattering, with the dark photon produced by electron bremsstrahlung and the ALP by photon fusion; the paper computes cross sections using the nuclear elastic form factor and requires only 10--100 dark-photon events or $S/\sqrt{B}=2$ for the ALP prompt search. The result is a projected exclusion or discovery reach that spans the gap between meson-decay and beam-dump constraints for dark photons and exceeds current bounds for ALPs in the 0.1--5 GeV mass window.

Load-bearing premise

The projections assume the EicC detector will achieve the vertex resolution (L1 ~ 10 um), decay volumes (L2 = 1 m or 0.14 m; LR = 0.1 m; LEM = 1 m), and average single-particle efficiency f(E, eta) ~ 0.9 quoted from the unpublished EicC Conceptual Design Report; if the real detector performs worse, the reach shrinks and the claimed gap-filling coverage disappears.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A 10 fb$^{-1}$ run with $L_2=1$ m would exclude or discover dark photon couplings down to $\epsilon\sim10^{-6}$ across $2\,m_e \lesssim m_{A'} \lesssim 3$ GeV, closing the gap between meson-decay and beam-dump limits.
  • The same machine would reach ALP couplings $1/\Lambda$ down to roughly $2\times10^{-5}$ GeV$^{-1}$ in the prompt search at 100 fb$^{-1}$ for $0.1 \lesssim m_a \lesssim 5$ GeV, surpassing current bounds in that mass window.
  • Because the EicC's lower boost lengthens lab-frame lifetimes, its displaced-vertex ALP search is more sensitive to long-lived ALPs than a higher-energy electron-ion collider search with the same detector concept.
  • A future upgrade to 100 fb$^{-1}$ and a required signal of 3 events would push the dark photon reach to smaller couplings, covering more of the so-far unexplored region.
  • The projected sensitivities complement, rather than duplicate, planned beam-dump and high-energy collider searches, since each experiment covers a different coupling-lifetime slice.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same lower-boost argument extends to other light weakly coupled states, such as heavy neutral leptons or millicharged particles, where displaced-vertex detectability would also improve at the EicC.
  • If the real detector achieves worse than the quoted 10 $\mu$m vertex resolution or lower than 0.9 single-particle efficiency, all sensitivity curves shift to larger couplings; measuring those parameters is the fastest test of the paper's central claim.
  • The complementarity argument suggests an ordering principle: for displaced-vertex searches, lower beam energy trades production rate for detectability, so the optimal energy depends on the target coupling window, and the EicC's 3.5 GeV is tuned to the $10^{-6}$ to $10^{-3}$ coupling range.
  • The ALP prompt-search reach could be checked with a fast simulation of the actual calorimeter resolution before the collider is built, since the invariant-mass resolution table drives how strongly the light-by-light, pion-pair, and omega backgrounds are suppressed.
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

5 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper presents projected sensitivities for the proposed Electron-Ion Collider in China (EicC) to two BSM particles: dark photons produced by electron bremsstrahlung in coherent e-Pb scattering, and photon-coupled ALPs produced by photon fusion. For dark photons, the displaced-vertex search uses Eq. (2.7) with vertex resolution L1 = 10 micrometres and decay lengths L2 = 0.14 m or 1 m, requiring 10 or 100 signal events at 10 fb^-1 (plus 3 events at 100 fb^-1) and considering only leptonic decays. For ALPs, the paper considers a prompt diphoton bump hunt with EPA-based estimates of light-by-light, pi0-pair, and omega backgrounds and S/sqrt(B) = 2, and a displaced diphoton search treated as background-free with 3 signal events. The claimed reach covers dark photon masses from about 2 me to 3 GeV and couplings epsilon of order 1e-6 to 1e-3, and ALP masses 0.1 to 5 GeV with 1/Lambda down to about 1e-6 GeV^-1.

Significance. If validated, this would be a useful and timely set of projections for a proposed facility and would strengthen the case for a BSM physics program at the EicC. The production cross-section formulas are standard and explicitly documented in Appendix A, and the prompt ALP analysis makes a concrete attempt to model the dominant backgrounds, which is a genuine strength. The paper also credits previous EIC work and clearly separates the two detector-length scenarios. The main quantitative claims, however, rest on two assumptions that are not yet supported: background-free (or unquantified-background) displaced searches and detector performance parameters taken from an unpublished CDR. For these reasons the paper is a promising feasibility study rather than a demonstrated sensitivity projection.

major comments (5)
  1. [Section 2.1, Fig. 5] Equations (2.6)-(2.7) define the displaced dark-photon reach by requiring N_A' = 10 or 100 signal events, but no SM background estimate is given. In coherent e-Pb collisions at 10 fb^-1, pi0/eta photoproduction with Dalitz decays and photon conversions inside the 14 cm to 1 m decay volume can produce e+e- pairs with non-prompt vertices, and the paper specifies no invariant-mass window, vertex-quality cut, or conversion veto. The statement that the N_A' = 100 bound would still cover unexplored parameter space even with backgrounds is not a substitute for a background estimate, and it does not justify the N_A' = 10 curve that sets the lower edge of the claimed reach. Please provide a background estimate with the relevant rejection cuts, or relabel the curves as raw signal-yield contours.
  2. [Section 2.1, Eq. (2.5), Fig. 5] The signal yield for mA' above the two-pion threshold is not defined carefully. The text says only lepton pairs are used as the signal and quotes Eq. (2.5) for the leptonic partial width, but the sensitivity curves in Fig. 5 extend to about 3 GeV, where hadronic decay modes dominate the total width and reduce Br(A' -> l+l-). The manuscript never states whether N_A' includes this branching ratio and uses the total width in Eq. (2.7). If Eq. (2.5) is used as a total width, the high-mass lifetimes are overestimated and the reach is optimistic. Please write the explicit formula for N_A' in terms of the production cross section, branching ratio, detection efficiencies, and the decay probability, and recompute Fig. 5 accordingly.
  3. [Section 3.2, Fig. 11] The displaced ALP search is declared background-free and normalized to N_a = 3, with no estimate of how many e-Pb events produce a reconstructed diphoton vertex in the 0.1 to 1 m window. Prompt pi0/omega backgrounds are not shown to be rejected by the vertex resolution or by the cuts in Eqs. (3.4)-(3.7), and photon conversions inside the decay volume are not discussed. In addition, the single-photon detection efficiency is assumed to be the same as the lepton efficiency f(E,eta) about 0.9 from Fig. 4 without an independent justification for photons. Without these inputs, Fig. 11 cannot support the statement that the EicC has enhanced sensitivity for long-lived ALPs compared with upcoming experiments.
  4. [Sections 2.1 and 3.2, Appendix B] The central numerical results depend on detector parameters from the unpublished EicC CDR, Ref. [41]: L1 = 10 micrometres, L2 = 0.14 m or 1 m, LR = 0.1 m, LEM = 1 m, the resolution parameters in Table 2, and the efficiency map f(E,eta) about 0.9. The paper gives no variation of these parameters, so the reader cannot tell how much the reach would shrink if, for example, the vertex resolution or decay volume differ from the CDR assumptions. Please add a scan over the most critical parameters (at least L1 and L2 for dark photons, and LR and LEM for ALPs) and state explicitly that the projections are contingent on these values.
  5. [Section 3.1, Fig. 10] The prompt ALP limits are derived from S/sqrt(B) = 2 with background cross sections estimated via the EPA for light-by-light, pi0-pair, and omega production, but no theoretical uncertainties are assigned to these estimates. The pi0-pair rate uses the handbag model in the high-mass region and the omega rate relies on 1973 photoproduction data; an O(1) uncertainty in B translates into a tens-of-per-cent shift in the 1/Lambda boundary. Please provide an uncertainty band or at least a concise discussion of the model dependence of the quoted reach.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Figure 4] Figure 4 contains a Mathematica output artifact, 'Out[ ] = 0.', in the left panel; it should be removed.
  2. [Figure 11] The Figure 11 caption contains a typo, 'banchmark luminosity', which should read 'benchmark luminosity'.
  3. [Eq. (3.2)] Equation (3.2) is written as a proportionality with ambiguous placement of the factors in the denominator; since the normalization is essential for the sensitivity, please define t_e and t_N and give the explicit expression or a precise reference.
  4. [References] Reference [50] is incomplete: it lacks a publication date and an arXiv identifier; please update it.
  5. [Table 2] In Table 2, the entry c2 = -1.5 x 10^-6 at eta = 2.7 has a qualitatively different magnitude from the other entries; please confirm that this is not a typographical error.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the projected reaches follow from parameter-free cross sections and fixed event-count thresholds; the only shared-author citation is not load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained against external inputs. The dark photon production cross section is computed from standard QED and a nuclear form factor in Appendix A, with the decay width taken from Ref. [43]; the sensitivity curves are then obtained by fixed signal-event thresholds (N_A' = 10, 100, 3) and assumed integrated luminosities, not by fitting to the exclusion contours being 'predicted'. The ALP matrix element and LBL background calculation are cited to Ref. [36], which shares two authors with the present paper, but that reference is an independent published calculation and is not fitted to the EicC result or used as a uniqueness theorem; it therefore does not make the argument circular. Detector resolutions, efficiencies, and decay-volume lengths are quoted from the external EicC Conceptual Design Report, Ref. [41], rather than being derived from the claimed sensitivity. The displaced-vertex searches are explicitly background-free assumptions (e.g., 'We consider a background-free search' for ALPs, and the dark photon section acknowledges that 'the sensitivity ... depends on assumptions about the background'), which is a projection robustness caveat rather than a circular reduction. No equation defines its output in terms of its input, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The central claims are therefore not circular, though their practical validity depends on detector performance and background assumptions that are not part of the derivation itself.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard BSM model assumptions, coherent-scattering form-factor treatment, background estimates, and a set of detector-performance inputs from the unpublished EicC CDR. No new free parameters are fitted by the authors; the numbers listed are analysis choices and externally supplied detector parameters.

free parameters (5)
  • Signal event thresholds = N_A' = 10, 100; N_a = 3; S/sqrt(B) = 2
    Chosen by hand to define sensitivity curves for dark-photon displaced, ALP displaced, and ALP prompt searches respectively; changing them shifts the projected reach.
  • Benchmark integrated luminosity = 10 and 100 fb^-1
    Assumed luminosities for the proposed EicC; not based on a published operations plan.
  • Vertex and decay-volume geometry = L1 = 10 um; L2 = 1 m or 0.14 m; LR = 0.1 m; LEM = 1 m
    Detector geometry inputs from the unpublished EicC CDR that set the decay-probability windows in Eqs. (2.7) and (3.8).
  • Detector resolution parameters = c_i, d_j, f_i in Table 2
    Empirical resolution functions fitted to EicC calibration data by the collaboration and supplied in Appendix B; they set the di-photon mass resolution used in Eq. (3.5).
  • Single-particle detection efficiency = f(E, eta) about 0.9 average, Eq. (2.6) cuts
    Detector efficiency map from Ref. [41] (Fig. 4); applied to leptons and photons, it multiplies every signal and background estimate.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Dark photons interact with SM only through kinetic mixing with the photon (Eq. 2.1-2.2).
    Defines the signal model; other possible couplings are neglected.
  • domain assumption ALPs couple only to photons via a F Ftilde / Lambda (Eq. 3.1).
    Defines the ALP signal and its decay to photon pairs; couplings to fermions are ignored.
  • domain assumption The coherent elastic nuclear form factor F(t) = Z / (1 + t / d_pb208) (Eq. A.3) describes the lead target.
    Used for all coherent production cross sections; an incorrect form factor would change the mass reach.
  • domain assumption The equivalent photon approximation is valid for signal and background estimates (Sections 3.1, A).
    Used for LBL, pion-pair, and omega backgrounds; its accuracy is not quantified with uncertainties.
  • domain assumption Displaced-vertex searches are background-free (Sections 2.1, 3.2).
    The dark-photon sensitivity is quoted for N_A' = 10 or 100 events and the ALP displaced search for N_a = 3, with no background model.
  • standard math Published cross-section formulas for eN -> eN A' and eN -> eN a (Refs. [36,86]) are correct.
    The paper builds its central calculation on these external results, including one prior paper by two of the same authors.
  • domain assumption EicC beam energies and detector acceptances in Refs. [40,41] are representative.
    The detector response is taken from an unpublished CDR, so the projection is conditional on that design.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dark photons and axion-like particles at the Electron-Ion Collider in China." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KXEESLHV

@misc{pith2026241206301,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dark photons and axion-like particles at the Electron-Ion Collider in China},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KXEESLHV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.06301}
}
abstract

The Electron-Ion Collider in China (EicC), a proposed high-luminosity facility with advanced charged particle and photon detection capabilities, provides unique opportunities to uncover new physics beyond the Standard Model. We analyze its sensitivity to dark photons produced through electron bremsstrahlung in coherent scattering. Thanks to its beam energy settings, it has the potential to comprehensively probe the previously unexplored parameter space between the constraints from meson decays and beam dumps below $\mathcal{O}(1)$ GeV with displaced-vertex search. Additionally, the EicC has the potential to probe axion-like particles (ALPs) in the mass range $ 0.1 \, \text{GeV} \lesssim m_a \lesssim 5 \, \text{GeV} $, with a coupling reach of $ \Lambda \lesssim 10^6 \, \text{GeV} $ , by combining the prompt-decay and displaced-vertex searches. The projected sensitivities to ALPs exceed the current bounds.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

86 extracted references · 10 canonical work pages

  1. [36]

    Balkin, O

    R. Balkin, O. Hen, W. Li, H. Liu, T. Ma, Y. Soreq, and M. Williams, Probing axion-like particles at the Electron-Ion Collider , JHEP 02 (2024) 123, [ arXiv:2310.08827]

    arXiv 2024

  2. [41]

    EicC Collaboration, D. P. A. Luis Albino et al., EicC Conceptual Design Report Volume II - Physics & Detector , to be published soon

    work page

  3. [1]

    Aad et al., Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC , Phys

    A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al., Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC , Phys. Lett. B 716 (2012) 1–29, [ arXiv:1207.7214]. – 15 –

    arXiv 2012

  4. [2]

    Chatrchyan et al., Observation of a New Boson at a Mass of 125 GeV with the CMS Experiment at the LHC , Phys

    CMS Collaboration, S. Chatrchyan et al., Observation of a New Boson at a Mass of 125 GeV with the CMS Experiment at the LHC , Phys. Lett. B 716 (2012) 30–61, [arXiv:1207.7235]

    arXiv 2012

  5. [3]

    ’t Hooft, Naturalness, chiral symmetry, and spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking , NATO Sci

    G. ’t Hooft, Naturalness, chiral symmetry, and spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking , NATO Sci. Ser. B 59 (1980) 135–157

    1980

  6. [4]

    Zwicky, Die Rotverschiebung von extragalaktischen Nebeln , Helv

    F. Zwicky, Die Rotverschiebung von extragalaktischen Nebeln , Helv. Phys. Acta 6 (1933) 110–127

    1933

  7. [5]

    Jackiw and C

    R. Jackiw and C. Rebbi, Solitons with Fermion Number 1/2 , Phys. Rev. D 13 (1976) 3398–3409

    1976

  8. [6]

    R. D. Peccei and H. R. Quinn, CP Conservation in the Presence of Instantons , Phys. Rev. Lett. 38 (1977) 1440–1443

    1977

Show all 86 references
  1. [7]

    Chacko, H.-S

    Z. Chacko, H.-S. Goh, and R. Harnik, The Twin Higgs: Natural electroweak breaking from mirror symmetry, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96 (2006) 231802, [ hep-ph/0506256]

    2006 arXiv

  2. [8]

    Burdman, Z

    G. Burdman, Z. Chacko, H.-S. Goh, and R. Harnik, Folded supersymmetry and the LEP paradox, JHEP 02 (2007) 009, [ hep-ph/0609152]

    2007 arXiv

  3. [9]

    Craig, S

    N. Craig, S. Knapen, and P. Longhi, Neutral Naturalness from Orbifold Higgs Models , Phys. Rev. Lett. 114 (2015), no. 6 061803, [ arXiv:1410.6808]

    2015 arXiv

  4. [10]

    Cs´ aki, T

    C. Cs´ aki, T. Ma, and J. Shu, Trigonometric Parity for Composite Higgs Models , Phys. Rev. Lett. 121 (2018), no. 23 231801, [ arXiv:1709.08636]

    2018 arXiv

  5. [11]

    Geller and O

    M. Geller and O. Telem, Holographic Twin Higgs Model , Phys. Rev. Lett. 114 (2015) 191801, [arXiv:1411.2974]

    2015 arXiv

  6. [12]

    M. Low, A. Tesi, and L.-T. Wang, Twin Higgs mechanism and a composite Higgs boson , Phys. Rev. D 91 (2015) 095012, [ arXiv:1501.07890]

    2015 arXiv

  7. [13]

    Barbieri, D

    R. Barbieri, D. Greco, R. Rattazzi, and A. Wulzer, The Composite Twin Higgs scenario , JHEP 08 (2015) 161, [ arXiv:1501.07803]

    2015 arXiv

  8. [14]

    Cs´ aki, C.-S

    C. Cs´ aki, C.-S. Guan, T. Ma, and J. Shu, Twin Higgs with exact Z 2, JHEP 12 (2020) 005, [arXiv:1910.14085]

    2020 arXiv

  9. [15]

    Arias, D

    P. Arias, D. Cadamuro, M. Goodsell, J. Jaeckel, J. Redondo, and A. Ringwald, WISPy Cold Dark Matter , JCAP 06 (2012) 013, [ arXiv:1201.5902]

    2012 arXiv

  10. [16]

    Delaunay, T

    C. Delaunay, T. Ma, and Y. Soreq, Stealth decaying spin-1 dark matter , JHEP 02 (2021) 010, [arXiv:2009.03060]

    2021 arXiv

  11. [17]

    Holdom, Two U(1)’s and Epsilon Charge Shifts , Phys

    B. Holdom, Two U(1)’s and Epsilon Charge Shifts , Phys. Lett. B 166 (1986) 196–198

    1986

  12. [18]

    Galison and A

    P. Galison and A. Manohar, TWO Z’s OR NOT TWO Z’s? , Phys. Lett. B 136 (1984) 279–283

    1984

  13. [19]

    Pospelov and A

    M. Pospelov and A. Ritz, Astrophysical Signatures of Secluded Dark Matter , Phys. Lett. B 671 (2009) 391–397, [ arXiv:0810.1502]. – 16 –

    2009 arXiv

  14. [20]

    Arkani-Hamed, D

    N. Arkani-Hamed, D. P. Finkbeiner, T. R. Slatyer, and N. Weiner, A Theory of Dark Matter, Phys. Rev. D 79 (2009) 015014, [ arXiv:0810.0713]

    2009 arXiv

  15. [21]

    R. D. Peccei and H. R. Quinn, Constraints Imposed by CP Conservation in the Presence of Instantons, Phys. Rev. D 16 (1977) 1791–1797

    1977

  16. [22]

    Preskill, M

    J. Preskill, M. B. Wise, and F. Wilczek, Cosmology of the Invisible Axion , Phys. Lett. B 120 (1983) 127–132

    1983

  17. [23]

    L. F. Abbott and P. Sikivie, A Cosmological Bound on the Invisible Axion , Phys. Lett. B 120 (1983) 133–136

    1983

  18. [24]

    Dine and W

    M. Dine and W. Fischler, The Not So Harmless Axion , Phys. Lett. B 120 (1983) 137–141

    1983

  19. [25]

    R. D. Peccei, The Strong CP problem and axions , Lect. Notes Phys. 741 (2008) 3–17, [hep-ph/0607268]

    2008 arXiv

  20. [26]

    D. J. E. Marsh, Axion Cosmology, Phys. Rept. 643 (2016) 1–79, [ arXiv:1510.07633]

    2016 arXiv

  21. [27]

    Gonderinger and M

    M. Gonderinger and M. J. Ramsey-Musolf, Electron-to-Tau Lepton Flavor Violation at the Electron-Ion Collider, JHEP 11 (2010) 045, [ arXiv:1006.5063]. [Erratum: JHEP 05, 047 (2012)]

    2010 arXiv

  22. [28]

    Cirigliano, K

    V. Cirigliano, K. Fuyuto, C. Lee, E. Mereghetti, and B. Yan, Charged Lepton Flavor Violation at the EIC , JHEP 03 (2021) 256, [ arXiv:2102.06176]

    2021 arXiv

  23. [29]

    Davoudiasl, R

    H. Davoudiasl, R. Marcarelli, and E. T. Neil, Lepton-flavor-violating ALPs at the Electron-Ion Collider: a golden opportunity , JHEP 02 (2023) 071, [ arXiv:2112.04513]

    2023 arXiv

  24. [30]

    J. L. Zhang et al., Search for e →τ charged lepton flavor violation at the EIC with the ECCE detector, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 1053 (2023) 168276, [ arXiv:2207.10261]

    2023

  25. [31]

    Batell, T

    B. Batell, T. Ghosh, T. Han, and K. Xie, Heavy neutral leptons at the Electron-Ion Collider, JHEP 03 (2023) 020, [ arXiv:2210.09287]

    2023 arXiv

  26. [32]

    Yan, Probing the dark photon via polarized DIS scattering at the HERA and EIC , Phys

    B. Yan, Probing the dark photon via polarized DIS scattering at the HERA and EIC , Phys. Lett. B 833 (2022) 137384, [ arXiv:2203.01510]

    2022 arXiv

  27. [33]

    Davoudiasl, R

    H. Davoudiasl, R. Marcarelli, and E. T. Neil, Displaced signals of hidden vectors at the Electron-Ion Collider, Phys. Rev. D 108 (2023), no. 7 075017, [ arXiv:2307.00102]

    2023 arXiv

  28. [34]

    Boughezal, A

    R. Boughezal, A. Emmert, T. Kutz, S. Mantry, M. Nycz, F. Petriello, K. S ¸im¸ sek, D. Wiegand, and X. Zheng, Neutral-current electroweak physics and SMEFT studies at the EIC, Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022), no. 1 016006, [ arXiv:2204.07557]

    2022 arXiv

  29. [35]

    Liu and B

    Y. Liu and B. Yan, Searching for the axion-like particle at the EIC* , Chin. Phys. C 47 (2023), no. 4 043113, [ arXiv:2112.02477]

    2023 arXiv

  30. [37]

    Wang, X.-K

    H.-L. Wang, X.-K. Wen, H. Xing, and B. Yan, Probing the four-fermion operators via the transverse double spin asymmetry at the Electron-Ion Collider , Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024), no. 9 095025, [ arXiv:2401.08419]. – 17 –

    2024 arXiv

  31. [38]

    Davoudiasl, R

    H. Davoudiasl, R. Marcarelli, and E. T. Neil, Flavor-violating ALPs, electron g-2, and the Electron-Ion Collider, Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024), no. 11 115013, [ arXiv:2402.17821]

    2024 arXiv

  32. [39]

    X.-K. Wen, B. Yan, Z. Yu, and C. P. Yuan, Dihadron azimuthal asymmetry and light-quark dipole moments at the Electron-Ion Collider , arXiv:2408.07255

    arXiv

  33. [40]

    D. P. Anderle et al., Electron-ion collider in China , Front. Phys. (Beijing) 16 (2021), no. 6 64701, [arXiv:2102.09222]

    2021 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Abdul Khalek et al., Science Requirements and Detector Concepts for the Electron-Ion Collider: EIC Yellow Report , Nucl

    R. Abdul Khalek et al., Science Requirements and Detector Concepts for the Electron-Ion Collider: EIC Yellow Report , Nucl. Phys. A 1026 (2022) 122447, [ arXiv:2103.05419]

    2022 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Ilten, Y

    P. Ilten, Y. Soreq, J. Thaler, M. Williams, and W. Xue, Proposed Inclusive Dark Photon Search at LHCb , Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016), no. 25 251803, [ arXiv:1603.08926]

    2016 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Ariga et al., F ASER’s physics reach for long-lived particles, Phys

    F ASERCollaboration, A. Ariga et al., F ASER’s physics reach for long-lived particles, Phys. Rev. D 99 (2019), no. 9 095011, [ arXiv:1811.12522]

    2019 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Araki, K

    T. Araki, K. Asai, H. Otono, T. Shimomura, and Y. Takubo, Dark photon from light scalar boson decays at F ASER, JHEP 03 (2021) 072, [ arXiv:2008.12765]. [Erratum: JHEP 06, 087 (2021)]

    2021 arXiv

  38. [46]

    NA48/2 Collaboration, J. R. Batley et al., Search for the dark photon in π0 decays, Phys. Lett. B 746 (2015) 178–185, [ arXiv:1504.00607]

    2015 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Merkel et al., Search at the Mainz Microtron for Light Massive Gauge Bosons Relevant for the Muon g-2 Anomaly , Phys

    H. Merkel et al., Search at the Mainz Microtron for Light Massive Gauge Bosons Relevant for the Muon g-2 Anomaly , Phys. Rev. Lett. 112 (2014), no. 22 221802, [arXiv:1404.5502]

    2014 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Aaij et al., Search for A′ → µ+µ− Decays, Phys

    LHCb Collaboration, R. Aaij et al., Search for A′ → µ+µ− Decays, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124 (2020), no. 4 041801, [ arXiv:1910.06926]

    2020

  41. [49]

    BaBar Collaboration, J. P. Lees et al., Search for a Dark Photon in e+e− Collisions at BaBar, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113 (2014), no. 20 201801, [ arXiv:1406.2980]

    2014 arXiv

  42. [50]

    CMS Collaboration, Search for a narrow resonance decaying to a pair of muons in proton-proton collisions at 13 TeV ,

  43. [51]

    Batell, R

    B. Batell, R. Essig, and Z. Surujon, Strong Constraints on Sub-GeV Dark Sectors from SLAC Beam Dump E137 , Phys. Rev. Lett. 113 (2014), no. 17 171802, [ arXiv:1406.2698]

    2014 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Bl¨ umlein and J

    J. Bl¨ umlein and J. Brunner,New Exclusion Limits on Dark Gauge Forces from Proton Bremsstrahlung in Beam-Dump Data , Phys. Lett. B 731 (2014) 320–326, [arXiv:1311.3870]

    2014 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Blumlein and J

    J. Blumlein and J. Brunner, New Exclusion Limits for Dark Gauge Forces from Beam-Dump Data, Phys. Lett. B 701 (2011) 155–159, [ arXiv:1104.2747]

    2011 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Y.-D. Tsai, P. deNiverville, and M. X. Liu, Dark Photon and Muon g − 2 Inspired Inelastic Dark Matter Models at the High-Energy Intensity Frontier , Phys. Rev. Lett. 126 (2021), no. 18 181801, [ arXiv:1908.07525]. – 18 –

    2021 arXiv

  47. [55]

    S. N. Gninenko, Constraints on sub-GeV hidden sector gauge bosons from a search for heavy neutrino decays, Phys. Lett. B 713 (2012) 244–248, [ arXiv:1204.3583]

    2012 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Cortina Gil et al., Search for Leptonic Decays of Dark Photons at NA62, Phys

    NA62 Collaboration, E. Cortina Gil et al., Search for Leptonic Decays of Dark Photons at NA62, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133 (2024), no. 11 111802, [ arXiv:2312.12055]

    2024 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Magill, R

    G. Magill, R. Plestid, M. Pospelov, and Y.-D. Tsai, Millicharged particles in neutrino experiments, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 (2019), no. 7 071801, [ arXiv:1806.03310]

    2019 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Hardy and R

    E. Hardy and R. Lasenby, Stellar cooling bounds on new light particles: plasma mixing effects, JHEP 02 (2017) 033, [ arXiv:1611.05852]

    2017 arXiv

  51. [59]

    J. H. Chang, R. Essig, and S. D. McDermott, Revisiting Supernova 1987A Constraints on Dark Photons , JHEP 01 (2017) 107, [ arXiv:1611.03864]

    2017 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Ahdida et al., Sensitivity of the SHiP experiment to dark photons decaying to a pair of charged particles , Eur

    SHiP Collaboration, C. Ahdida et al., Sensitivity of the SHiP experiment to dark photons decaying to a pair of charged particles , Eur. Phys. J. C 81 (2021), no. 5 451, [arXiv:2011.05115]

    2021 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Karliner, M

    M. Karliner, M. Low, J. L. Rosner, and L.-T. Wang, Radiative return capabilities of a high-energy, high-luminosity e+e− collider, Phys. Rev. D 92 (2015), no. 3 035010, [arXiv:1503.07209]

    2015 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Ferber, C

    T. Ferber, C. Garcia-Cely, and K. Schmidt-Hoberg, BelleII sensitivity to long–lived dark photons, Phys. Lett. B 833 (2022) 137373, [ arXiv:2202.03452]

    2022 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Echenard, R

    B. Echenard, R. Essig, and Y.-M. Zhong, Projections for Dark Photon Searches at Mu3e , JHEP 01 (2015) 113, [ arXiv:1411.1770]

    2015 arXiv

  56. [64]

    D’Onofrio, O

    M. D’Onofrio, O. Fischer, and Z. S. Wang, Searching for Dark Photons at the LHeC and FCC-he, Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020), no. 1 015020, [ arXiv:1909.02312]

    2020 arXiv

  57. [65]

    V. M. Budnev, I. F. Ginzburg, G. V. Meledin, and V. G. Serbo, The Two photon particle production mechanism. Physical problems. Applications. Equivalent photon approximation , Phys. Rept. 15 (1975) 181–281

    1975

  58. [66]

    Knapen, T

    S. Knapen, T. Lin, H. K. Lou, and T. Melia, Searching for Axionlike Particles with Ultraperipheral Heavy-Ion Collisions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118 (2017), no. 17 171801, [arXiv:1607.06083]

    2017 arXiv

  59. [67]

    Z. Bern, A. De Freitas, L. J. Dixon, A. Ghinculov, and H. L. Wong, QCD and QED corrections to light by light scattering , JHEP 11 (2001) 031, [ hep-ph/0109079]

    2001 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Klusek-Gawenda and A

    M. Klusek-Gawenda and A. Szczurek, π+π− and π0π0 pair production in photon-photon and in ultraperipheral ultrarelativistic heavy ion collisions , Phys. Rev. C 87 (2013), no. 5 054908, [arXiv:1302.4204]

    2013 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Diehl and P

    M. Diehl and P. Kroll, Two-photon annihilation into octet meson pairs: Symmetry relations in the handbag approach , Phys. Lett. B 683 (2010) 165–171, [ arXiv:0911.3317]

    2010 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Ballam et al., Vector Meson Production by Polarized Photons at 2.8-GeV, 4.7-GeV, and 9.3-GeV, Phys

    J. Ballam et al., Vector Meson Production by Polarized Photons at 2.8-GeV, 4.7-GeV, and 9.3-GeV, Phys. Rev. D 7 (1973) 3150. – 19 –

    1973

  63. [71]

    A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al., Measurement of light-by-light scattering and search for axion-like particles with 2.2 nb −1 of Pb+Pb data with the ATLAS detector , JHEP 03 (2021) 243, [ arXiv:2008.05355]. [Erratum: JHEP 11, 050 (2021)]

    2021 arXiv

  64. [72]

    Bauer, M

    M. Bauer, M. Neubert, and A. Thamm, Collider Probes of Axion-Like Particles , JHEP 12 (2017) 044, [ arXiv:1708.00443]

    2017 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Abbiendi et al., Multiphoton production in e+ e- collisions at s**(1/2) = 181-GeV to 209-GeV , Eur

    OP ALCollaboration, G. Abbiendi et al., Multiphoton production in e+ e- collisions at s**(1/2) = 181-GeV to 209-GeV , Eur. Phys. J. C 26 (2003) 331–344, [ hep-ex/0210016]

    2003 arXiv

  66. [74]

    Ablikim et al., Search for an axion-like particle in radiative J/ ψ decays, Phys

    BESIII Collaboration, M. Ablikim et al., Search for an axion-like particle in radiative J/ ψ decays, Phys. Lett. B 838 (2023) 137698, [ arXiv:2211.12699]

    2023

  67. [75]

    Abudin´ en et al.,Search for Axion-Like Particles produced in e+e− collisions at Belle II , Phys

    Belle-II Collaboration, F. Abudin´ en et al.,Search for Axion-Like Particles produced in e+e− collisions at Belle II , Phys. Rev. Lett. 125 (2020), no. 16 161806, [arXiv:2007.13071]

    2020 arXiv

  68. [76]

    Jaeckel and M

    J. Jaeckel and M. Spannowsky, Probing MeV to 90 GeV axion-like particles with LEP and LHC, Phys. Lett. B 753 (2016) 482–487, [ arXiv:1509.00476]

    2016 arXiv

  69. [77]

    D¨ obrich, J

    B. D¨ obrich, J. Jaeckel, F. Kahlhoefer, A. Ringwald, and K. Schmidt-Hoberg, Alptraum: Alp production in proton beam dump experiments , Journal of High Energy Physics 2016 (Feb., 2016)

    2016

  70. [78]

    J. D. Bjorken, S. Ecklund, W. R. Nelson, A. Abashian, C. Church, B. Lu, L. W. Mo, T. A. Nunamaker, and P. Rassmann, Search for Neutral Metastable Penetrating Particles Produced in the SLAC Beam Dump , Phys. Rev. D 38 (1988) 3375

    1988

  71. [79]

    Aloni, C

    D. Aloni, C. Fanelli, Y. Soreq, and M. Williams, Photoproduction of Axionlike Particles , Phys. Rev. Lett. 123 (2019), no. 7 071801, [ arXiv:1903.03586]

    2019 arXiv

  72. [80]

    d’Enterria et al., Opportunities for new physics searches with heavy ions at colliders , J

    D. d’Enterria et al., Opportunities for new physics searches with heavy ions at colliders , J. Phys. G 50 (2023), no. 5 050501, [ arXiv:2203.05939]

    2023 arXiv

  73. [81]

    D¨ obrich, J

    B. D¨ obrich, J. Jaeckel, and T. Spadaro,Light in the beam dump - ALP production from decay photons in proton beam-dumps , JHEP 05 (2019) 213, [ arXiv:1904.02091]. [Erratum: JHEP 10, 046 (2020)]

    2019 arXiv

  74. [82]

    J. L. Feng, I. Galon, F. Kling, and S. Trojanowski, Axionlike particles at F ASER: The LHC as a photon beam dump , Phys. Rev. D 98 (2018), no. 5 055021, [ arXiv:1806.02348]

    2018 arXiv

  75. [83]

    Berlin, S

    A. Berlin, S. Gori, P. Schuster, and N. Toro, Dark Sectors at the Fermilab SeaQuest Experiment, Phys. Rev. D 98 (2018), no. 3 035011, [ arXiv:1804.00661]

    2018 arXiv

  76. [84]

    Bai et al., New physics searches with an optical dump at LUXE , Phys

    Z. Bai et al., New physics searches with an optical dump at LUXE , Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022), no. 11 115034, [ arXiv:2107.13554]

    2022 arXiv

  77. [85]

    J. D. Bjorken, R. Essig, P. Schuster, and N. Toro, New Fixed-Target Experiments to Search for Dark Gauge Forces , Phys. Rev. D 80 (2009) 075018, [ arXiv:0906.0580]

    2009 arXiv

  78. [86]

    Liu and G

    Y.-S. Liu and G. A. Miller, Validity of the Weizs¨ acker-Williams approximation and the analysis of beam dump experiments: Production of an axion, a dark photon, or a new axial-vector boson, Phys. Rev. D 96 (2017), no. 1 016004, [ arXiv:1705.01633]. – 20 –

    2017 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.