Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 37 references

Minimal extension of the Standard Model with a mirror symmetry between fundamental fermions and a possible origin of dark matter

T0 review · 4 major / 4 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 Gauging the neutrino charge B-L-Q yields a stable dark Higgs with freeze-in relic abundance.

desk verdict The Ω = B−L−Q charge pattern is genuinely new and the model-building is coherent, but the freeze-in relic density calculation is built on a Boltzmann equation that assumes the mediator is in equilibrium, which fails for the couplings in the quoted range; the q range is not supported. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.13829 v2 pith:CCD4GYZ7 submitted 2024-12-18 hep-ph gr-qc

Jakub Rembieliński This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phgr-qc
keywords darkmatterfreeze-inU(1)extensionmirrorsymmetryHiggsneutrinochargeB-L-QBoltzmannequationslong-livedgaugeboson
topics Dark Matter
open problems Dark Matter
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 proposes a specific U(1) extension of the Standard Model and claims it produces a dark matter candidate. By gauging the conserved charge $\Omega$ = B - L - Q, the model adds a massive vector boson Omega_mu and a dark Higgs field chi; because m_chi < M_Omega, chi can only decay through off-shell $\Omega$ states, making it stable on cosmological timescales. Using freeze-in production, the paper argues that the coupled Boltzmann equations yield the observed dark matter relic abundance and pin the new coupling to q of order $10^{-8}$.5 g to $10^{-6}$ g. If right, the model also naturally incorporates the right-chiral neutrino, forbids neutrinoless double-$\beta$ decay, and modifies the W/Z mass ratio.

What carries the argument

The construction rests on the explicit C-charge assignments determined by the relations 2 c_1 = c_2 + c_3 and 2 c_1 = c_2 + c_3 for quarks, together with the Higgs-sector condition c_H = c_2 - c_1; these assign charges consistently and cancel anomalies. The dark matter mechanism is carried by the inverted mass hierarchy m_chi < M_Omega, which shuts off the on-shell decay chi -> $\Omega$ $\Omega$ and leaves only the off-shell channel, giving a lifetime longer than the age of the universe. The abundance calculation uses the Riccati-type Lee-Weinberg equation for Y_chi, a companion Boltzmann equation for Y_Omega, and a formula for the thermally averaged Møller cross section.

What would settle it

Solve the full two-population Boltzmann system for Y_chi(x) and Y_Omega(x) without substituting equilibrium densities, using the initial condition Y_chi(x0) = Y_Omega(x0) = $10^{-18}$, and find the coupling q that reproduces Y_chi(xp) = 8.36 x $10^{-10}$/m_chi GeV; if q falls well outside $10^{-8}$.5 g to $10^{-6}$ g, the central claim is refuted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the global charge $\Omega$ = B - L - Q can be gauged into an anomaly-free local U(1)_C symmetry, giving a new massive vector boson Omega_mu that couples to neutrinos and quarks but not to charged leptons. The charge pattern is a mirror image of electric charge: neutrinos carry $\Omega$ = -1, charged leptons 0, up quarks -1/3, and down quarks +2/3, so the model exhibits an emergent mirror symmetry between neutrinos and charged leptons and between up and down quarks. After spontaneous symmetry breaking, a dark Higgs chi interacts only with Omega_mu and with itself, and the inverted mass hierarchy m_chi < M_Omega makes chi cosmologically stable. Solving the Lee-Weinberg Boltzmann equations with freeze-in initial conditions and matching to the measured dark matter abundance yields a relation between the coupling constant and the mass ratio, ultimately giving q ~ $10^{-8}$.5 g to ~$10^{-6}$ g. The paper also shows that the model is anomaly-free and that it forbids neutrinoless double-$\beta$ decay.

Load-bearing premise

The freeze-in abundance calculation assumes that the $\Omega$ mediator population stays in thermal equilibrium with the Standard Model plasma, so that the production rate can be written in terms of chi's equilibrium density; if that equilibrium is not maintained, the quoted q range may no longer follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the paper is right, dark matter is a scalar, the dark Higgs chi, produced through freeze-in and never in thermal equilibrium with the Standard Model plasma.
  • The new gauge boson Omega_mu is the only portal between dark matter and ordinary matter, so direct detection is heavily suppressed and the first observable signature would likely be a collider-produced Omega_mu.
  • The model forbids neutrinoless double-beta decay and predicts that right-chiral neutrinos exist but decouple because the new coupling q is tiny.
  • The modified W/Z mass relation, M_W / M_Z = cos theta cos phi, gives a precise, testable deviation from the Standard Model that would be revealed by precise electroweak measurements.
  • Matching the relic abundance fixes the coupling q to a narrow range, 10^-8.5 g to 10^-6 g, making the scenario falsifiable by searches for a long-lived gauge boson in that coupling window.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A testable extension of the paper's logic would be to solve the two Boltzmann equations with the Omega population kept out of equilibrium, checking whether the extracted q range shifts once the equilibrium assumption is relaxed.
  • The mirror symmetry between electric charge and Omega charge suggests that analogous U(1) extensions could be built for other conserved combinations, with the same freeze-in mechanism transferring to those dark sectors.
  • The inverted mass hierarchy used here could stabilize dark Higgs scalars in other U(1) gauge extensions, offering a generic way to make a scalar dark matter candidate without imposing an additional discrete symmetry.
  • The paper's long-lived Omega boson gives a concrete displaced-vertex signature for future colliders: a narrow resonance decaying to fermion pairs at a displaced position, whose production rate is fixed by the derived q range.
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

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a U(1)_C extension of the Standard Model with an additional gauge boson Ω_μ that couples to neutrinos and quarks, and a dark Higgs scalar χ that interacts only with Ω_μ and itself. With m_χ < M_Ω, χ is argued to be cosmologically stable and to provide a dark matter candidate. The dark matter abundance is studied via freeze-in, and the paper claims that reproducing the observed relic abundance fixes the new coupling q to roughly 10^{-8.5} g to 10^{-6} g. The model-building sections (Secs. 4–8) develop the charge assignments and the mass spectrum, while Secs. 10–13 present the Boltzmann evolution, stability, and self-interaction analysis.

Significance. If the calculation were correct, the paper would provide a minimal, phenomenologically interesting dark matter candidate with an explicit mass hierarchy guaranteeing cosmological stability and a concrete freeze-in parameter range. The structural observation of a mirror symmetry between neutrinos and charged leptons and between up and down quarks is appealing, and the analytic cross sections and decay widths in the appendices are a useful resource. However, the central dark matter calculation is not sound: the Boltzmann equation used for χ production assumes the mediator Ω is in equilibrium, which is not true in the freeze-in regime for the quoted parameters. The subsequent numerical results and the q range are therefore not supported by the calculation as written.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 10, Eq. (10.7)] The Lee-Weinberg equation is applied with the production term s(x)<σv>(Y_χ^eq^2 − Y_χ^2) for the process ΩΩ ↔ χχ. This collision term follows from detailed balance only when the annihilation products Ω are in thermal equilibrium with the bath at the same temperature. That condition is never verified. For the lower end of the claimed q range, q ≈ 10^{-9} and M_Ω ≈ 174 GeV, the decay rate (E.1) gives Γ_Ω/H(M_Ω) ~ (q^2 M_Ω/12π)/H(M_Ω) ~ 10^{-4}, so Ω is far from chemical equilibrium. The actual χ production rate should be proportional to Y_Ω^2, not to Y_χ^eq^2. Thus the numerical solutions of Eq. (10.7) and the fit (11.1) do not describe freeze-in production of χ in this model.
  2. [Sec. 11, Eq. (11.4)] The evolution equation for Y_Ω contains no term involving Y_χ. The ΩΩ↔χχ contribution is written as (Y_Ω^eq^2 − Y_Ω^2), which would be correct only if χ were in equilibrium with the plasma. Conversely, Eq. (10.7) contains no dependence on Y_Ω. The two equations are therefore not the 'interconnected' system claimed in Sec. 11; a correct coupled system would include a term ∝ Y_χ^2 in Eq. (11.4) and a term ∝ Y_Ω^2 in Eq. (10.7). As written, the simultaneous evolution displayed in Fig. 6 is not the solution of a consistent coupled Boltzmann system.
  3. [Secs. 10–11, Eqs. (10.14), (11.1)–(11.3)] The central quantitative result, the q range in Eq. (11.3), is obtained by imposing the observed dark matter relic abundance through Eq. (10.14) and fitting the relation (11.1) to it. With x0 and Y_χ(x0) treated as free initial data, this procedure selects q for each choice of m_χ, M_Ω, and x0; it is a constraint, not an independent prediction of the abundance. The statements in Secs. 12 and 13 about cosmological stability and self-interaction are checks performed within this fitted q range, so they do not independently confirm the dark matter production mechanism. The paper should clearly state that q is fixed by the relic abundance condition and that the abundance itself is input.
  4. [Sec. 9] The anomaly-free property is asserted rather than demonstrated. The text says 'This can be easily done' and 'We can immediately check' the equivalence of Eq. (9.3) with earlier charge relations, but no explicit verification of the SU(3)^2 U(1)_C, SU(2)^2 U(1)_C, U(1)_Y^2 U(1)_C, U(1)_Y U(1)_C^2, U(1)_C^3, and U(1)_C-gravitational conditions is provided. Since the paper emphasizes in Sec. 1 that the model is constructed without assuming anomaly cancellation, a concrete check or a table of charges and anomaly coefficients should be included.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Eqs. (10.10), (10.14)] The numerical value is written as '8.36/m_χ · 10^{-10} GeV'; the units should be presented as 8.36 × 10^{-10} GeV / m_χ so that Y remains dimensionless.
  2. [Appendix D, Eq. (D.1)] The argument of the logarithm is not clearly parenthesized; please rewrite the expression so that the log's argument is explicit.
  3. [Acknowledgments] The acknowledgment contains the stray text '/suppress' in the name; this appears to be a LaTeX artifact and should be removed.
  4. [Sec. 4, after Eq. (4.7)] When defining q = g cosθ sinφ, it would help to state explicitly that q is taken positive and that the smallness of φ follows from Eq. (7.10) and the measured W/Z mass ratio.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the q range is an honest abundance-matching constraint, and the stability check is a separate lifetime calculation.

full rationale

The paper's central numerical claim is Eq. (11.1) and the q range (11.3), obtained by integrating the Boltzmann equation (10.7) and imposing Eq. (10.14), where Yχ(xp) is set equal to the measured DM density. This is a standard parameter constraint: the paper explicitly says it 'select[s] masses and the coupling constant to match the observed dark matter relic abundance' (Sec. 14), and the abstract says 'we estimate' q, not that q is predicted independently of the abundance. Imposing an observed abundance to constrain a coupling is not circular under the rubric; a circular 'prediction' would require the paper to claim the abundance was derived while silently inputting it. Likewise, the stability check in Sec. 12 (τχ > τU) is a separate physical requirement, not the same equation as Eq. (10.14); it uses the same q, but the lifetime integral is distinct from the abundance integral, so the agreement noted on p. 22 is a genuine consistency check rather than a reduction. The paper contains no load-bearing self-citations: the anomaly-cancellation conditions are taken from external Refs. [1,3], and no reference is by the present author. The main substantive weakness—Eq. (10.7) uses Yχeq^2 as the production source, which is valid by detailed balance only if Ω is in chemical equilibrium, while Eq. (11.4) is not actually coupled to Yχ—is a correctness/validity concern about the freeze-in calculation, not a circularity of the derivation chain. Accordingly no circular step is exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 3 invented entities

The model adds a new U(1) gauge symmetry, a new gauge boson, a dark Higgs, and right-handed neutrinos. The C-charges are determined by the requirement that the new gauge boson couples only to neutrinos in the lepton sector and by anomaly cancellation conditions taken from Refs. [1,3]. The dark matter calculation depends on several free parameters (q, m_chi, M_Omega, x0) and on the ad hoc absence of an H-chi quartic coupling and of B-C kinetic mixing. The Boltzmann equations assume single-species equilibrium relaxation, which is not valid in the freeze-in regime for the low-q part of the parameter space.

free parameters (5)
  • q = ~10^-8.5 g to 10^-6 g
    Coupling of the new U(1) gauge field to fermions; determined by imposing the observed dark matter relic abundance (Eq. 10.10) and the freeze-in relation (Eq. 11.1).
  • m_chi = not fixed; scan range ~1 GeV to 1 PeV, examples 100 GeV
    Dark Higgs mass; a free parameter of the dark sector, constrained by relic abundance and stability.
  • M_Omega = not fixed; scan range with m_chi < M_Omega, example 174.5 GeV
    New gauge boson mass; free parameter, only the ratio omega = (m_chi/M_Omega)^2 enters the fit.
  • x0 = range 10^-10 to 1
    Initial value of x = m_chi/T for the Boltzmann integration; the q range is derived by varying x0 over this assumed range, corresponding to reheating temperatures between m_chi and ~10^12 GeV.
  • Y_chi(x0) = 10^-18
    Initial abundance of chi, chosen as 'very small' without a physical production mechanism.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Omega = B - L - Q is a conserved global charge that can be promoted to a local U(1) symmetry
    Used in Sec. 1 to motivate the new U(1); requires generation-independent fermion charges and anomaly-free assignments with the chosen scalar content.
  • ad hoc to paper The new gauge field Omega_mu in the lepton sector couples solely to neutrinos
    Central assumption in Sec. 4 that determines the C-charges and mixing angles.
  • ad hoc to paper The SM Higgs doublet and the dark Higgs chi carry U(1)_C charges such that c_H = 1, and no renormalizable H-chi quartic coupling is present
    Secs. 7-8; the vanishing quartic is not protected by any symmetry and is required for the dark matter and freeze-in results.
  • ad hoc to paper No kinetic mixing between U(1)_Y and U(1)_C gauge fields
    Not discussed in the paper; a B_mu nu C^mu nu term would be radiatively generated by the fermion content.
  • domain assumption Anomaly cancellation conditions of Refs. [1,3] are applicable and sufficient
    Sec. 9 asserts cancellation by citing conditions from the literature without a full derivation.
  • ad hoc to paper The Lee-Weinberg Boltzmann equation (10.2) applies to chi with equilibrium density Y_chi^eq for the process chi chi <-> Omega Omega
    This assumes Omega is in thermal equilibrium with the SM bath, which fails in the low-q freeze-in regime.
  • ad hoc to paper The universe is radiation-dominated with the SM g_*(T) from Fig. 2, and new dark-sector degrees of freedom do not affect H(x)
    Sec. 10; if Omega equilibrates at T ~ M_Omega, it contributes to g_*, altering the expansion rate and the freeze-in calculation.
invented entities (3)
  • Omega_mu gauge boson (Z'-like mediator)
    purpose: Mediates the new U(1) force, couples to neutrinos and quarks with coupling q times Omega_f, and connects the dark sector to the SM.
    Its mass M_Omega and coupling q are free parameters, not predicted. The paper does not provide a sharp collider or astroparticle signature.
  • chi dark Higgs scalar
    purpose: Breaks the new U(1) symmetry, acquires mass m_chi < M_Omega, and serves as the dark matter candidate.
    Interacts only with Omega_mu and itself; no direct detection handle is provided because the coupling is tiny.
  • Right-chiral neutrinos (Dirac partners)
    purpose: Complete the Dirac neutrino mass terms and account for both chiral components.
    Their Z couplings are suppressed by O(phi^2), so they are effectively sterile and may contribute to Neff via freeze-in, which the paper does not analyze.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Minimal extension of the Standard Model with a mirror symmetry between fundamental fermions and a possible origin of dark matter." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CCD4GYZ7

@misc{pith2026241213829,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Minimal extension of the Standard Model with a mirror symmetry between fundamental fermions and a possible origin of dark matter},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CCD4GYZ7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.13829}
}
abstract

In this paper, we propose a specific, nontrivial extension of the Standard Model of weak interactions based on the ${SU(2)}_L\times{U(1)}_Y\times{U(1)}_C$ group. Our motivation follows from the identification of the globally conserved charge $\Omega=\mathrm{B}-\mathrm{L}-\mathrm{Q}$ as a neutrino charge. An intriguing feature of the model is the emergence of a mirror symmetry between neutrinos and electrically charged leptons, as well as between up and down quarks. Following the spontaneous breaking of the weak gauge symmetry with the use of the Goldstone-Higgs iso-doublet, all elementary fermions acquire Dirac masses from Yukawa interaction. The $W^\pm$ and $Z$ bosons also acquire masses, although with a modified relationship between their respective masses, as compared to the Standard Model. Our model accounts for both chiral components of the neutrino and offers an explanation for the non-observability of the right-chiral neutrino. Additionally, it forbids neutrinoless double-beta decay. Spontaneous breaking of the local $U(1)$ symmetry leads to the new gauge boson $ \mathit{\Omega}_\mu$ mass $M_\mathit{\Omega}$, which we assume to be greater than the mass $m_\chi$ of a new scalar, Higgs-like field $\chi$. The cosmological stability of $\chi$, predicted under this condition, allows for its interpretation as dark matter, interacting exclusively with $\mathit{\Omega}_\mu$ and gravity. From this perspective, we solve and analyze a system of Boltzmann equations that describe the thermal evolution of the number density of $\chi$ dark matter and the $\mathit{\Omega}_\mu$ mediator field within the context of the $\mathrm{\Lambda CDM}$ cosmological model. Specifically, we estimate the coupling constant $q$ to be in the range of $\sim 10^{-8.5}\ g$ to $\sim 10^{-6}\ g$ which ensures cosmological stability of the $\chi$ particles.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 9 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Appelquist, B

    T. Appelquist, B. A. Dobrescu, and A. R. Hopper, Nonexotic neu tral gauge bosons, Physical Review D 68, 035012 (2003), arXiv:hep-ph/0212073

    arXiv 2003

  2. [2]

    Langacker, The Physics of Heavy Z0 Gauge Bosons, Reviews of Modern Physics 81, 1199 (2009), arXiv:0801.1345

    P. Langacker, The Physics of Heavy Z0 Gauge Bosons, Reviews of Modern Physics 81, 1199 (2009), arXiv:0801.1345

    arXiv 2009

  3. [3]

    Minimal anomalous $\mathrm{U}(1)$ theories and collider phenomenology

    A. Ekstedt, R. Enberg, G. Ingelman, J. L¨ ofgren, and T. Mandal, Minimal anomalous U(1) theories and collider phenomenology, Journal of High Energy Physics 2018, 152 (2018), arXiv:1712.03410 . – 30 –

    work page Pith review arXiv 2018

  4. [4]

    Arcadi, M

    G. Arcadi, M. Dutra, P. Ghosh, M. Lindner, Y. Mambrini, M. Pierre , S. Profumo, and F. S. Queiroz, The waning of the WIMP? A review of models, searches, and constraints, The European Physical Journal C 78, 203 (2018), arXiv:1703.07364

    arXiv 2018

  5. [5]

    K¨ ors and P

    B. K¨ ors and P. Nath, A Stueckelberg extension of the Standard Model, Physics Letters B 586, 366 (2004), arXiv:hep-ph/0402047

    arXiv 2004

  6. [6]

    Burgess, M

    C. Burgess, M. Pospelov, and T. ter Veldhuis, The Minimal Model o f nonbaryonic dark matter: a singlet scalar, Nuclear Physics B 619, 709 (2001), arXiv:hep-ph/0011335

    arXiv 2001

  7. [7]

    B. A. Dobrescu, Massless gauge bosons other than the photon , Physical Review Letters 94, 151802 (2005), arXiv:hep-ph/0411004

    arXiv 2005

  8. [8]

    B. A. Dobrescu and I. Mocioiu, Spin-dependent macroscopic for ces from new particle exchange, Journal of High Energy Physics 2006, 005 (2006), arXiv:hep-ph/0605342

    arXiv 2006

Show all 37 references
  1. [9]

    Fabbrichesi, E

    M. Fabbrichesi, E. Gabrielli, and G. Lanfranchi, The Dark Photon, SpringerBriefs in Physics 2020 , 235 (2020) , arXiv:2005.01515

    2020 arXiv

  2. [10]

    H. An, M. Pospelov, J. Pradler, and A. Ritz, Direct detection co nstraints on dark photon dark matter, Physics Letters B 747, 331 (2015), arXiv:1412.8378

    2015 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Y. Kahn, G. Krnjaic, S. Mishra-Sharma, and T. M. P. Tait, Light weakly coupled axial forces: models, constraints, and projections, Journal of High Energy Physics 2017, 2 (2017), arXiv:1609.09072

    2017 arXiv

  4. [12]

    K. R. Dienes and B. Thomas, Dynamical dark matter. I. Theore tical overview, Physical Review D 85, 083523 (2012), arXiv:1106.4546

    2012 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Heeck, Unbroken B–L symmetry, Physics Letters B 739, 256 (2014), arXiv:1408.6845

    J. Heeck, Unbroken B–L symmetry, Physics Letters B 739, 256 (2014), arXiv:1408.6845

    2014 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Peskin, Michael and V

    E. Peskin, Michael and V. Shroeder, Daniel, An Introduction to Quantum Field Theory (Perseus Books, Reading, MA, 1995)

    1995

  7. [15]

    Clowe, M

    D. Clowe, M. Bradaˇ c, A. H. Gonzalez, M. Markevitch, S. W. Randall, C. Jones, and D. Zaritsky, A Direct Empirical Proof of the Existence of Dark Matt er*, The Astrophysical Journal 648, L109 (2006), arXiv:astro-ph/0608407

    2006 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Roszkowski, E

    L. Roszkowski, E. M. Sessolo, and S. Trojanowski, WIMP dark m atter candidates and searches—current status and future prospects, Reports on Progress in Physics 81, 66201 (2018), arXiv:1707.06277

    2018 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Navas, Review of Particle Physics, Physical Review D 110, 030001 (2024)

    S. Navas, Review of Particle Physics, Physical Review D 110, 030001 (2024)

    2024

  10. [18]

    E. W. Kolb and M. S. Turner, The Early Universe (CRC Press, 2018) pp. 1–547

    2018

  11. [19]

    Gondolo and G

    P. Gondolo and G. Gelmini, Cosmic abundances of stable particles: Improved analysis, Nuclear Physics B 360, 145 (1991)

    1991

  12. [20]

    B. W. Lee and S. Weinberg, Cosmological Lower Bound on Heavy- Neutrino Masses, Physical Review Letters 39, 165 (1977)

    1977

  13. [21]

    Steigman, B

    G. Steigman, B. Dasgupta, and J. F. Beacom, Precise relic WIMP abundance and its impact on searches for dark matter annihilation, Physical Review D 86, 023506 (2012), arXiv:1204.3622

    2012 arXiv

  14. [22]

    H. Baer, K. Y. Choi, J. E. Kim, and L. Roszkowski, Dark matter p roduction in the early Universe: Beyond the thermal WIMP paradigm, Physics Reports 555, 1 (2015), arXiv:1407.0017 . – 31 –

    2015 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Heikinheimo, T

    M. Heikinheimo, T. Tenkanen, and K. Tuominen, WIMP miracle of th e second kind, Physical Review D 96, 023001 (2017), arXiv:1704.05359

    2017 arXiv

  16. [24]

    L. J. Hall, K. Jedamzik, J. March-Russell, and S. M. West, Freez e-in production of FIMP dark matter, Journal of High Energy Physics 2010, 1 (2010), arXiv:0911.1120

    2010 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Bernal, M

    N. Bernal, M. Heikinheimo, T. Tenkanen, K. Tuominen, and V. Vas konen, The dawn of FIMP Dark Matter: A review of models and constraints, Internatio nal Journal of Modern Physics A 32, 10.1142/S0217751X1730023X (2017), arXiv:1706.07442

    2017 arXiv

  18. [26]

    B´ elanger, C

    G. B´ elanger, C. Delaunay, A. Pukhov, and B. Zaldivar, Dark matter abundance from the sequential freeze-in mechanism, Physical Review D 102, 035017 (2020), arXiv:2005.06294

    2020 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Y. Du, F. Huang, H. L. Li, Y. Z. Li, and J. H. Yu, Revisiting dark ma tter freeze-in and freeze-out through phase-space distribution, JCAP 2022 (04), 012, arXiv:2111.01267

    2022 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Laine and Y

    M. Laine and Y. Schr¨ oder, Quark mass thresholds in QCD thermodynamics, Physical Review D 73, 085009 (2006), arXiv:hep-ph/0603048

    2006 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Frumkin, Y

    R. Frumkin, Y. Hochberg, E. Kuflik, and H. Murayama, Thermal Dark Matter from Freeze-Out of Inverse Decays, Physical Review Letters 130, 121001 (2023), arXiv:2111.14857

    2023 arXiv

  22. [30]

    R. N. Cahn, The Higgs boson, Reports on Progress in Physics 52, 389 (1989)

    1989

  23. [31]

    A. Grau, G. Pancheri, and R. J. Philips, Contributions of off-she ll top quarks to decay processes, Physics Letters B 251, 293 (1990)

    1990

  24. [32]

    J. C. Rom˜ ao and S. Andringa, Vector boson decays of the Higgs boson, European Physical Journal C 7, 631 (1999), arXiv:hep-ph/9807536

    1999 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Djouadi, The anatomy of electroweak symmetry breaking: T ome I: The Higgs boson in the Standard Model, Physics Reports 457, 1 (2008), arXiv:hep-ph/0503172

    A. Djouadi, The anatomy of electroweak symmetry breaking: T ome I: The Higgs boson in the Standard Model, Physics Reports 457, 1 (2008), arXiv:hep-ph/0503172

    2008 arXiv

  26. [34]

    S. Y. Choi, J. S. Lee, and J. Park, Decays of Higgs bosons in the Standard Model and beyond, PPNP 120, 103880 (2021), arXiv:2101.12435

    2021 arXiv

  27. [35]

    S. W. Randall, M. Markevitch, D. Clowe, A. H. Gonzalez, and M. Br adaˇ c, Constraints on the Self-Interaction Cross Section of Dark Matter from Numerical Sim ulations of the Merging Galaxy Cluster 1E 0657-56, The Astrophysical Journal 679, 1173 (2008), arXiv:0704.0261

    2008 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Tulin and H

    S. Tulin and H. B. Yu, Dark matter self-interactions and small sc ale structure, Physics Reports 730, 1 (2018), arXiv:1705.02358

    2018 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Harvey, R

    D. Harvey, R. Massey, T. Kitching, A. Taylor, and E. Tittley, Th e nongravitational interactions of dark matter in colliding galaxy clusters, Science 347, 1462 (2015), arXiv:1503.07675 . – 32 –

    2015 arXiv

Pith tools

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