Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Searching for dark matter annihilating into light long-lived mediators from stars inside dwarf spheroidal galaxies

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Dwarf galaxy stars cap dark matter scattering at 10^-33 cm^2

desk verdict The no-SE capture limits from dSph stars are a legitimate new but weak result; the Sommerfeld-enhanced headline is unsupported because Eq. (20) forces nonperturbative dark couplings. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.04663 v2 pith:4AO6FQHQ submitted 2025-01-08 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.GAhep-ph

Aman Gupta , Pooja Bhattacharjee , Pratik Majumdar This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HEastro-ph.GAhep-ph
keywords darkmatterindirectdetectiondwarfspheroidalgalaxieslightlong-livedmediatorsFermi-LATgamma-rayastronomySommerfeldenhancementcapture
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 show that the stellar populations of dwarf spheroidal galaxies (dSphs) can act as dark matter capture targets, and that the ensuing annihilation signal, routed through light long-lived mediators that decay into gamma rays outside the galaxy, is testable with Fermi-LAT data. Using nearly sixteen years of observations of ten nearby dSphs, the authors find no gamma-ray excess and convert the stacked 95% upper limits into constraints on the dark matter-nucleon scattering cross section, reaching about $10^{-33}\,\mathrm{cm}^2$ in a generic scenario. When annihilation is Sommerfeld-enhanced in a scalar dark matter model, the same data reach about $10^{-36}\,\mathrm{cm}^2$ for dark matter masses near 100 GeV. The point is that this offers an independent, relatively background-clean probe of dark matter interactions that can be compared with direct detection experiments and with bounds from other celestial bodies. The conclusions stand or fall mainly on the assumption that capture and annihilation have reached equilibrium in these galaxies.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the capture-annihilation equilibrium equation for the number of captured dark matter particles, $dN/dt = C_C - C_E N - C_{\rm ann} N^2$ (Eq. 7), whose equilibrium solution yields $\Gamma_{\rm ann} = C_C/2$ (Eq. 10). The expected flux is then $\Gamma_{\rm ann}/(4\pi d^2)$ times the mediator-decay photon spectrum, taken as a box spectrum with edges $E_\pm = \frac{1}{2}(m_\chi \pm \sqrt{m_\chi^2 - m_\phi^2})$ (Eq. 14), where the light mediator $\phi$ decays outside the dSph so a pointlike Fermi-LAT source sees the decay products. For the model-dependent part, the same machinery is augmented by the thermally averaged s-wave Sommerfeld factor $\langle S_{\rm swave}\rangle$ (Eqs. 18-19), which enhances $\langle \sigma_{\rm ann} v\rangle$ at the low relative velocities inside dSphs. The capture rate itself is built from a Plummer stellar density profile and an NFW dark matter halo, with multiscatter corrections (Eq. 5) for heavy dark matter.

What would settle it

Compute the capture-annihilation equilibrium timescale $t_{\rm eq} = (\sqrt{C_C C_{\rm ann}})^{-1}$ for Sagittarius using its measured stellar core density and temperature and a representative cross section near $10^{-36}\,\mathrm{cm}^2$; if $t_{\rm eq}$ exceeds the roughly 10 Gyr age of the system, the equilibrium-based limits would not apply and the bounds would need to be weakened by the factor $\tanh(t_{\rm age}/t_{\rm eq})$.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that, for a set of ten Milky Way dSphs within 50 kpc, the gamma-ray flux upper limits obtained from 16 years of Fermi-LAT data constrain the dark matter-nucleon scattering cross section under a two-step annihilation scenario. Dark matter particles are captured by the old stellar population of each dSph through single and multiple scatterings on nucleons; captured particles annihilate into light long-lived mediators (LLLMs) that escape the galaxy and decay into photons outside the stellar radius, producing a box-shaped gamma-ray spectrum. Assuming capture-annihilation equilibrium, the stacked limits give $\sigma_{\chi n} \lesssim 10^{-33}\,\mathrm{cm}^2$, with Sagittarius providing the strongest individual constraint. In a scalar dark matter model with a scalar mediator, the Sommerfeld enhancement boosts the annihilation rate at the low velocity dispersions of dSphs and tightens the stacked bound to $\sigma_{\chi n} \lesssim 10^{-36}\,\mathrm{cm}^2$ for $m_\chi$ near 100 GeV. The authors present these bounds as an alternative probe of dark matter interactions and compare them with direct detection experiments and with bounds from the Sun, Jupiter, brown dwarfs, white dwarfs, and Galactic-center stars.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that, in each dwarf spheroidal galaxy, the dark matter capture rate and annihilation rate have reached equilibrium, making the annihilation rate equal to half the capture rate (Eq. 10), even though the paper notes the equilibrium timescale is longer than the galaxies' ages.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If correct, the stellar populations of dSphs can be treated as dark matter capture targets, so gamma-ray telescopes can set scattering-cross-section limits even without assuming direct annihilation to standard-model states.
  • The strongest individual constraint comes from Sagittarius, whose large stellar mass and radius dominate the stacked limit; Carina II is roughly four to five times weaker.
  • Including the Sommerfeld enhancement improves the bounds by three to four orders of magnitude, to $\sigma_{\chi n}\sim 10^{-36}\,\mathrm{cm}^2$ near $m_\chi\sim 100$ GeV, with characteristic oscillatory features in mass.
  • The dSph bounds are weaker than direct detection limits above 10 GeV, but they are complementary because they come from a low-background, capture-based channel and from a different cosmic environment.
  • Future gamma-ray observatories with better sensitivity, such as CTA, should sharpen these limits, especially if the half-light radius $R_{1/2}$ of the dominant dSphs is measured more precisely.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial: The quoted limits assume every dSph has reached capture-annihilation equilibrium; the paper itself notes the equilibrium timescale is somewhat larger than the system age, so a relaxation of this assumption would weaken the bounds, and the size of the weakening is not quantified.
  • Editorial: Treating the whole stellar population as a single composite capture target with one escape velocity, rather than summing capture over individual stellar potentials, may overestimate the capture rate; a star-by-star treatment would be a natural test.
  • Editorial: The box-shaped photon spectrum assumes all mediators decay outside the galaxy; if a fraction decay inside, the signal would be reprocessed or absorbed and the derived cross-section limits would shift, providing a testable model-dependence.
  • Editorial: A targeted search for an extended or displaced gamma-ray signature, with photons arriving from beyond the stellar half-light radius, could distinguish the LLLM channel from direct annihilation and from astrophysical backgrounds.
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 / 6 minor

Summary. The paper searches for gamma-ray emission from dark matter (DM) annihilating through light, long-lived mediators (LLLMs) after being captured by the stellar component of ten nearby dwarf spheroidal galaxies (dSphs). The authors analyze nearly 16 years of Fermi-LAT data, find no significant excess, and convert 95% CL flux upper limits into upper limits on the DM-nucleon scattering cross section. In a model-independent (no Sommerfeld) treatment, they obtain stacked limits near 10^-33 cm^2, with Sagittarius providing the strongest individual constraint. In a scalar DM model with Sommerfeld enhancement (SE), they claim limits near 10^-36 cm^2 for DM masses around 100 GeV. The paper also presents an uncertainty analysis for Sagittarius and compares the final bounds with direct detection and other celestial-body searches.

Significance. If the central claims were robust, the paper would offer a new indirect probe of DM-nucleon interactions that complements direct detection and other celestial-body capture searches. The Fermi-LAT likelihood analysis follows standard practice, and the no-SE stacked limits provide a useful, if modest, constraint. The paper also honestly acknowledges the equilibrium assumption and the model dependence of the SE part. However, the headline SE-based limit is not supported because it relies on non-perturbative dark couplings while using perturbative formulas, and the no-SE limits are weakened by an unquantified equilibrium-timescale issue. With those caveats, the paper's main value lies in the model-independent analysis and in laying out a framework for future, more precise studies.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. IV B and Sec. IX, Eq. (10)] The central limits depend on the assumption that capture-annihilation equilibrium is reached, so that Γ_ann = C_C/2. The authors state in Sec. IX that the equilibrium timescale is 'somewhat larger' than the age of the dSphs and that bounds would weaken if equilibrium is not reached, but they provide no quantitative estimate. Since the gamma-ray flux is proportional to Γ_ann, and for t << t_eq the annihilation rate is suppressed by roughly (t/t_eq)^2 relative to equilibrium, the quoted ~10^-33 cm^2 limit could be considerably weaker if t_eq exceeds the dSph age by a factor of a few. Please compute t_eq for the adopted model (including a definition of the annihilation volume V0, which is never given) and present limits for the actual dSph ages, or justify that equilibrium is a conservative choice with explicit numbers.
  2. [Sec. VIII, Eqs. (17), (19), (20), and Fig. 7] The Sommerfeld-enhanced limits are derived with dark fine-structure constants that are far outside the perturbative regime. For m_φ = 5 MeV and m_χ = 100 GeV, Eq. (20) gives α_χ ≈ 3.9e6; for m_φ = 100 MeV it gives α_χ ≈ 9.7e3. Both are much larger than 4π. Equation (17) is a tree-level Born cross section proportional to α_χ^2, and Eq. (19) assumes a weakly coupled Yukawa potential; at these couplings, higher-order corrections, mediator self-interactions, and radiative corrections to m_φ are uncontrolled. The claimed 3-4 order-of-magnitude improvement and the abstract's ~10^-36 cm^2 limit rest entirely on this invalid perturbative treatment. The authors should either restrict to α_χ < 1 (which would remove the dramatic enhancement) or provide a genuinely non-perturbative treatment, and they should not quote the current SE limits as supported results.
  3. [Sec. IV A and Sec. IV B, Eqs. (2), (5), (7), (18)] There is an internal inconsistency in the physical picture. The capture formulas in Sec. IV A use the dSph stellar radius R_* and the dSph escape velocity, treating the entire stellar population as a single extended object whose gravitational potential is that of the dSph. However, the subsequent annihilation treatment (Eq. (7) and Sec. VIII) uses the stellar core temperature T_*c for the DM velocity and describes annihilation as taking place inside stars. These two pictures are incompatible: DM captured by the dSph potential would be distributed throughout the dSph halo, not concentrated in stellar cores. The annihilation volume V0 in Eq. (7) is never defined, and its value is essential for computing t_eq and for interpreting the SE velocity. Please clarify the geometry: if annihilation occurs in stars, the capture calculation must be done per star; if it occurs in the dSph halo, the use of T_*c is unjustified.
  4. [Sec. V, right panel of Fig. 2 and accompanying text] The text states that the gamma-ray flux decreases with increasing DM-nucleon scattering cross section, because 'higher scattering cross sections result in more efficient capture... reducing the available annihilation rate.' This is opposite to the expected behavior under equilibrium: more capture leads to more annihilation, so the flux should increase with σ_χn until capture saturates at C_max. The figure appears to show the opposite ordering from what the text describes. This contradiction needs to be resolved, as it directly affects the interpretation of the expected-flux curves and the resulting limits.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Table I and Fig. 1] Table I lists Bootes II, but the caption of Fig. 1 labels the corresponding panel 'Bootes I'. Please correct the label.
  2. [Sec. IV A, Eq. (2)] Equation (2) is the standard capture formula for a single star with radius R_* and escape velocity v_esc, but here it is applied with the dSph's stellar radius and escape velocity. This should be explicitly stated as an assumption, and its limitations (e.g., neglect of individual stellar potentials) should be discussed.
  3. [Sec. IV B, Eq. (7)] The annihilation volume V0 is defined only verbally as the 'volume over which annihilation occurs.' A precise definition or formula is needed for reproducibility and for computing t_eq.
  4. [Sec. V and Sec. VII] The statement that the 'flux decreases with σ_χn' in Sec. V and the uncertainty band quoted as 'O(1)' in Sec. VII are both ambiguous; the former is likely a typo (should be 'increases'), and the latter should specify whether it means a factor of order one or an order of magnitude.
  5. [Fig. 4(b)] The axis label in Fig. 4(b) reads 'd = 26.3 pc' but should be 'd = 26.3 kpc'.
  6. [Throughout] The paper uses the phrase 'model independent' for the no-SE limits, but the analysis still assumes a scalar mediator with a specific decay and a box-shaped spectrum; the term 'model independent' should be qualified.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the Fermi-LAT bounds are a direct translation of observed flux upper limits through an independent capture-annihilation model, with no signal parameter fitted to the gamma-ray data.

full rationale

The central limits (Fig. 3) are obtained by computing the LLLM box-spectrum flux from the stellar capture rate (Eqs. 2-11) and comparing it, via Eq. (12), with the Fermi-LAT 95% CL flux upper limits derived in Sec. III. No parameter of the DM model is fitted to the gamma-ray data; the upper limits are observational inputs and the sigma_chi-n constraints are the one-to-one translation of those limits through the capture-annihilation equations. The Sommerfeld-enhanced section uses standard external formulas (Eqs. 16-19) and fixes alpha_chi by the thermal relic condition (Eq. 20), an independent cosmological input. The self-citations [43], [51], and [67] are not load-bearing: the NFW scaling relations from [67] are also supplied by the independent Ref. [75] and are cross-checked in footnote 7 against direct profile values, while the mediator-escape assumption follows Ref. [50] in addition to [51]. The paper itself flags the equilibration-timescale limitation in Sec. IX ('the equilibrium timescale is somewhat larger than the actual age of the dSphs, and the bounds might get weakened if the above-mentioned assumption is relaxed'), which is a robustness caveat, not a circular step. A separate physics concern is that the SE section says it uses Eq. (10), under which SE would not alter the flux, while Figs. 6-7 show large SE effects; this internal inconsistency and the very large alpha_chi values raised in review are correctness risks outside the scope of circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central calculation uses standard capture formulas and an assumed long-lived scalar mediator. The main unreviewed inputs are the equilibrium assumption flagged by the authors, the extended-target capture treatment, and the strongly coupled Sommerfeld sector. No parameters are fitted to the Fermi-LAT data; the limit-setting is a direct translation of observed flux upper limits.

free parameters (3)
  • mediator mass m_phi = 5.0 and 100.0 MeV
    Chosen by hand in the Sommerfeld-enhanced analysis; the limits shift by a factor of a few between these values.
  • dark fine structure constant alpha_chi = 0.097/epsilon_phi^2 * (m_chi/TeV)
    Fixed by requiring the thermal relic density Omega h^2 = 0.12 at freeze-out (Eq. 20). Not fitted to gamma-ray data, but can exceed unity by orders of magnitude for small mediator masses.
  • stellar core temperature T_star,c = 30000 K
    Adopted from Ref. [98] to set the DM thermal velocity inside stars for the Sommerfeld factor.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Capture-annihilation equilibrium in each dSph, so Gamma_ann = C_C/2 (Eq. 10).
    The paper assumes equilibrium despite noting in Sec. IX that the equilibrium timescale may exceed the dSph age; violating this weakens the quoted limits.
  • ad hoc to paper DM is captured by the stellar component treated as a single extended object with the dSph escape velocity.
    Capture formulas (Eqs. 2-6) use the stellar population radius and total stellar mass with the dSph escape velocity, which may not represent capture into individual stars where annihilation occurs.
  • domain assumption The light mediator is long-lived and decays outside the dSph, L_phi >> R_1/2, so gamma rays escape without absorption.
    Adopted from secluded-DM literature; the paper ignores any interactions of mediators with matter inside the dSph.
  • domain assumption The NFW profile with analytical rho_s and r_s from Refs. [67,75] describes the DM distribution in each dSph.
    Standard but unverified for each target; the paper's uncertainty analysis shows order-one effects on the limits from these parameters.
invented entities (1)
  • Light long-lived scalar mediator phi decaying to gamma-gamma independent evidence
    purpose: Carries DM annihilation products out of the dSph to produce gamma rays; also mediates the Sommerfeld potential.
    The mediator is not invented by this paper; it is the standard secluded-DM scalar. External collider and fixed-target searches provide independent handles, but the paper itself does not add a new falsifiable prediction.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Searching for dark matter annihilating into light long-lived mediators from stars inside dwarf spheroidal galaxies." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4AO6FQHQ

@misc{pith2026250104663,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Searching for dark matter annihilating into light long-lived mediators from stars inside dwarf spheroidal galaxies},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4AO6FQHQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.04663}
}
abstract

Several astrophysical and cosmological observations suggest the existence of dark matter (DM) through its gravitational effects, yet its nature remains elusive. Despite the lack of DM signals from direct detection experiments, efforts continue to focus on the indirect detection of DM from DM-rich astrophysical objects. Dwarf spheroidal galaxies (dSphs) are among the most promising targets for such searches. In this work, we aim to investigate the expected DM capture rate from the stellar component of ten nearby DM-rich dSphs, assuming that the accumulated DM eventually annihilates into light, long-lived mediators (LLLMs) which decay into gamma rays outside the dSphs. We analyze nearly 16 years of {\it Fermi}-LAT data to search for DM annihilation through LLLMs, and, from the observed stacked flux upper limits, set limits on the DM-nucleon scattering cross section for the case of a generic DM scenario. Additionally, we incorporate the Sommerfeld enhancement (SE) effect into the DM annihilation process assuming scalar DM model, and obtain bounds on the DM-nucleon scattering cross section of $\sim~10^{-36} {\rm cm}^2$ for DM masses around 100 GeV. This allows us to explore an alternative avenue for exploring DM phenomena from dSphs and compare our results with the bounds reported by direct DM detection experiments and other celestial bodies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.04663 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: Bin-by-bin flux upper limits at 95% CL observed by [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: Differential gamma ray flux as a function of DM mass ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3: Upper limits on DM mass versus DM-nucleon scattering cross section from individual dSphs and from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Effect of individual and combined astrophysical uncertainties on DM annihilation fluxes from Sgr dSph. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: Effect of astrophysical uncertainties on the DM-nucleon scattering cross section bounds from Sgr dSph. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: Effect of SE on DM annihilation flux from Sgr dSph. The left (right) plot corresponds to the mediator mass [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7: Upper limits on DM-nucleon scattering cross section as a function of DM mass including the SE using the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8: Comparison between the bounds obtained from dSphs in this work with those already available in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_8.png]

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. Complementary Planetary Spectroscopy Probes of Dark Matter

    hep-ph 2025-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Dark matter annihilation energy deposited in planetary atmospheres and interiors, compared against existing UV airglow and heat flow measurements, yields new sub-GeV scattering constraints and long-lived mediator reach.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

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

  1. [1]

    M. G. Walker, M. Mateo, E. W. Olszewski, J. Penarrubia, N. W. Evans, and G. Gilmore,A Universal Mass Profile for Dwarf Spheroidal Galaxies,Astrophys. J.704(2009) 1274–1287, [ arXiv:0906.0341]. [Erratum: Astrophys.J. 710, 886–890 (2010)]

    arXiv 2009

  2. [2]

    E. L. Lokas,Dark matter distribution in dwarf spheroidal galaxies,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.333(2002) 697, [astro-ph/0112023]

    arXiv 2002

  3. [3]

    Battaglia, A

    G. Battaglia, A. Helmi, and M. Breddels,Internal kinematics and dynamical models of dwarf spheroidal galaxies around the Milky Way,New Astron. Rev.57(2013) 52–79, [arXiv:1305.5965]

    arXiv 2013

  4. [4]

    Walker,Dark Matter in the Galactic Dwarf Spheroidal Satellites, p

    M. Walker,Dark Matter in the Galactic Dwarf Spheroidal Satellites, p. 1039–1089. Springer Netherlands, 2013. arXiv:1205.0311. 17

    arXiv 2013

  5. [5]

    L. E. Strigari,Dark matter in dwarf spheroidal galaxies and indirect detection: a review,Rept. Prog. Phys.81(2018), no. 5 056901, [arXiv:1805.05883]

    arXiv 2018

  6. [6]

    Esteban, A

    I. Esteban, A. H. G. Peter, and S. Y. Kim,Milky Way satellite velocities reveal the dark matter power spectrum at small scales,Phys. Rev. D110(2024), no. 12 123013, [arXiv:2306.04674]

    arXiv 2024

  7. [7]

    McDaniel, M

    A. McDaniel, M. Ajello, C. M. Karwin, M. Di Mauro, A. Drlica-Wagner, and M. A. S´ anchez-Conde,Legacy analysis of dark matter annihilation from the Milky Way dwarf spheroidal galaxies with 14 years of Fermi-LAT data,Phys. Rev. D 109(2024), no. 6 063024, [arXiv:2311.04982]

    arXiv 2024

  8. [8]

    F ermi-LA TCollaboration, A. A. Abdo et al.,Observations of Milky Way Dwarf Spheroidal galaxies with the Fermi-LAT detector and constraints on Dark Matter models,Astrophys. J.712(2010) 147–158, [arXiv:1001.4531]

    arXiv 2010

Show all 103 references
  1. [9]

    Ackermann et al.,Constraining Dark Matter Models from a Combined Analysis of Milky Way Satellites with the Fermi Large Area Telescope,Phys

    F ermi-LA TCollaboration, M. Ackermann et al.,Constraining Dark Matter Models from a Combined Analysis of Milky Way Satellites with the Fermi Large Area Telescope,Phys. Rev. Lett.107(2011) 241302, [arXiv:1108.3546]

    2011 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Ackermann et al.,Dark Matter Constraints from Observations of 25 Milky Way Satellite Galaxies with the Fermi Large Area Telescope,Phys

    F ermi-LA TCollaboration, M. Ackermann et al.,Dark Matter Constraints from Observations of 25 Milky Way Satellite Galaxies with the Fermi Large Area Telescope,Phys. Rev. D89(2014) 042001, [arXiv:1310.0828]. [11]F ermi-LA TCollaboration, M. Ackermann et al.,Searching for Dark M...

    2014 arXiv

  3. [12]

    Drlica-Wagner et al.,Search for Gamma-Ray Emission from DES Dwarf Spheroidal Galaxy Candidates with Fermi-LAT Data,Astrophys

    F ermi-LA T, DESCollaboration, A. Drlica-Wagner et al.,Search for Gamma-Ray Emission from DES Dwarf Spheroidal Galaxy Candidates with Fermi-LAT Data,Astrophys. J. Lett.809(2015), no. 1 L4, [arXiv:1503.02632]

    2015 arXiv

  4. [13]

    Albert et al.,Searching for Dark Matter Annihilation in Recently Discovered Milky Way Satellites with Fermi-LAT,Astrophys

    F ermi-LA T, DESCollaboration, A. Albert et al.,Searching for Dark Matter Annihilation in Recently Discovered Milky Way Satellites with Fermi-LAT,Astrophys. J.834(2017), no. 2 110, [arXiv:1611.03184]

    2017 arXiv

  5. [14]

    Ackermann et al.,Search for Dark Matter Satellites using the FERMI-LAT,Astrophys

    F ermi-LA TCollaboration, M. Ackermann et al.,Search for Dark Matter Satellites using the FERMI-LAT,Astrophys. J. 747(2012) 121, [arXiv:1201.2691]. [15]F ermi-LA TCollaboration, M. Ajello et al.,Fermi-LAT Observations of High-Energyγ-Ray Emission Toward the Galactic Center,Ast...

    2012 arXiv

  6. [17]

    Charles et al.,Sensitivity Projections for Dark Matter Searches with the Fermi Large Area Telescope,Phys

    F ermi-LA TCollaboration, E. Charles et al.,Sensitivity Projections for Dark Matter Searches with the Fermi Large Area Telescope,Phys. Rept.636(2016) 1–46, [arXiv:1605.02016]

    2016 arXiv

  7. [18]

    Zhao, X.-J

    Y. Zhao, X.-J. Bi, P.-F. Yin, and X. Zhang,Constraint on the velocity dependent dark matter annihilation cross section from gamma-ray and kinematic observations of ultrafaint dwarf galaxies,Phys. Rev. D97(2018), no. 6 063013, [arXiv:1711.04696]

    2018 arXiv

  8. [19]

    S. Hoof, A. Geringer-Sameth, and R. Trotta,A Global Analysis of Dark Matter Signals from 27 Dwarf Spheroidal Galaxies using 11 Years of Fermi-LAT Observations,JCAP02(2020) 012, [arXiv:1812.06986]

    2020 arXiv

  9. [20]

    Lu, Y.-L

    B.-Q. Lu, Y.-L. Wu, W.-H. Zhang, and Y.-F. Zhou,Constraints on the Sommerfeld-enhanced dark matter annihilation from the gamma rays of subhalos and dwarf galaxies,JCAP04(2018) 035, [arXiv:1711.00749]

    2018 arXiv

  10. [21]

    Petac, P

    M. Petac, P. Ullio, and M. Valli,On velocity-dependent dark matter annihilations in dwarf satellites,JCAP12(2018) 039, [arXiv:1804.05052]

    2018 arXiv

  11. [22]

    Ando and K

    S. Ando and K. Ishiwata,Sommerfeld-enhanced dark matter searches with dwarf spheroidal galaxies,Phys. Rev. D104 (2021), no. 2 023016, [arXiv:2103.01446]

    2021 arXiv

  12. [23]

    Zhao, X.-J

    Y. Zhao, X.-J. Bi, S.-J. Lin, and P.-F. Yin,Determination of dark matter distribution in Ursa Major III and constraints on dark matter annihilation*,Chin. Phys. C48(2024), no. 11 115112, [arXiv:2406.16769]

    2024 arXiv

  13. [24]

    Pospelov, A

    M. Pospelov, A. Ritz, and M. B. Voloshin,Secluded WIMP Dark Matter,Phys. Lett. B662(2008) 53–61, [arXiv:0711.4866]

    2008 arXiv

  14. [25]

    Pospelov and A

    M. Pospelov and A. Ritz,Astrophysical Signatures of Secluded Dark Matter,Phys. Lett. B671(2009) 391–397, [arXiv:0810.1502]

    2009 arXiv

  15. [26]

    Gherghetta, B

    T. Gherghetta, B. von Harling, A. D. Medina, M. A. Schmidt, and T. Trott,SUSY implications from WIMP annihilation into scalars at the Galactic Center,Phys. Rev. D91(2015) 105004, [arXiv:1502.07173]

    2015 arXiv

  16. [27]

    Holdom,Searching forϵCharges and a New U(1),Phys

    B. Holdom,Searching forϵCharges and a New U(1),Phys. Lett. B178(1986) 65–70

    1986

  17. [28]

    S. P. Martin,A Supersymmetry primer,Adv. Ser. Direct. High Energy Phys.18(1998) 1–98, [hep-ph/9709356]

    1998 arXiv

  18. [29]

    Batell, M

    B. Batell, M. Pospelov, A. Ritz, and Y. Shang,Solar Gamma Rays Powered by Secluded Dark Matter,Phys. Rev. D81 (2010) 075004, [arXiv:0910.1567]

    2010 arXiv

  19. [30]

    N. F. Bell, J. B. Dent, and I. W. Sanderson,Solar gamma ray constraints on dark matter annihilation to secluded mediators,Phys. Rev. D104(2021), no. 2 023024, [arXiv:2103.16794]

    2021 arXiv

  20. [31]

    Reece and L.-T

    M. Reece and L.-T. Wang,Searching for the light dark gauge boson in GeV-scale experiments,JHEP07(2009) 051, [arXiv:0904.1743]

    2009 arXiv

  21. [32]

    D. E. Morrissey and A. P. Spray,New Limits on Light Hidden Sectors from Fixed-Target Experiments,JHEP06(2014) 083, [arXiv:1402.4817]. [33]A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al.,Search for massive, long-lived particles using multitrack displaced vertices or displaced lepton pairs i...

    2014 arXiv

  22. [35]

    Schuster, N

    P. Schuster, N. Toro, and I. Yavin,Terrestrial and Solar Limits on Long-Lived Particles in a Dark Sector,Phys. Rev. D 81(2010) 016002, [arXiv:0910.1602]

    2010 arXiv

  23. [36]

    R. K. Leane, K. C. Y. Ng, and J. F. Beacom,Powerful Solar Signatures of Long-Lived Dark Mediators,Phys. Rev. D95 (2017), no. 12 123016, [arXiv:1703.04629]

    2017 arXiv

  24. [37]

    Cerme˜ no and M

    M. Cerme˜ no and M. A. P´ erez-Garc ´ ıa,Gamma rays from dark mediators in white dwarfs,Phys. Rev. D98(2018), no. 6 063002, [arXiv:1807.03318]

    2018 arXiv

  25. [38]

    Andrade, J

    M. Andrade, J. Fagiani, C. Siqueira, V. de Souza, and A. Viana,Prospects for the detection of Dark Matter with Long-lived Mediators in the Sun using the Southern Wide-field Gamma-ray Observatory,arXiv:2406.07489. [39]HA WCCollaboration, A. Albert et al.,Constraints on Spin-Dep...

    2018 arXiv

  26. [40]

    Arina, M

    C. Arina, M. Backovi´ c, J. Heisig, and M. Lucente,Solar γ rays as a complementary probe of dark matter,Phys. Rev. D96 (2017), no. 6 063010, [arXiv:1703.08087]

    2017 arXiv

  27. [41]

    Niblaeus, A

    C. Niblaeus, A. Beniwal, and J. Edsjo,Neutrinos and gamma rays from long-lived mediator decays in the Sun,JCAP11 (2019) 011, [arXiv:1903.11363]

    2019 arXiv

  28. [42]

    N. F. Bell, G. Busoni, and S. Robles,Capture of Leptophilic Dark Matter in Neutron Stars,JCAP06(2019) 054, [arXiv:1904.09803]

    2019 arXiv

  29. [43]

    Dasgupta, A

    B. Dasgupta, A. Gupta, and A. Ray,Dark matter capture in celestial objects: light mediators, self-interactions, and complementarity with direct detection,JCAP10(2020) 023, [arXiv:2006.10773]

    2020

  30. [44]

    I. Z. Rothstein, T. Schwetz, and J. Zupan,Phenomenology of Dark Matter annihilation into a long-lived intermediate state,JCAP07(2009) 018, [arXiv:0903.3116]

    2009 arXiv

  31. [45]

    Arkani-Hamed, D

    N. Arkani-Hamed, D. P. Finkbeiner, T. R. Slatyer, and N. Weiner,A Theory of Dark Matter,Phys. Rev. D79(2009) 015014, [arXiv:0810.0713]

    2009 arXiv

  32. [46]

    transporting

    D. Kim, J.-C. Park, and S. Shin,Dark matter “transporting” mechanism explaining positron excesses,JHEP04(2018) 093, [arXiv:1702.02944]

    2018 arXiv

  33. [47]

    R. K. Leane and T. Linden,First Analysis of Jupiter in Gamma Rays and a New Search for Dark Matter,Phys. Rev. Lett. 131(2023), no. 7 071001, [arXiv:2104.02068]

    2023 arXiv

  34. [48]

    Li and J

    L. Li and J. Fan,Jupiter missions as probes of dark matter,JHEP10(2022) 186, [arXiv:2207.13709]

    2022 arXiv

  35. [49]

    J. L. Feng, J. Smolinsky, and P. Tanedo,Dark Photons from the Center of the Earth: Smoking-Gun Signals of Dark Matter,Phys. Rev. D93(2016), no. 1 015014, [arXiv:1509.07525]. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 96, 099901 (2017)]

    2016 arXiv

  36. [50]

    R. K. Leane, T. Linden, P. Mukhopadhyay, and N. Toro,Celestial-Body Focused Dark Matter Annihilation Throughout the Galaxy,Phys. Rev. D103(2021), no. 7 075030, [arXiv:2101.12213]

    2021 arXiv

  37. [51]

    Bhattacharjee, F

    P. Bhattacharjee, F. Calore, and P. D. Serpico,Gamma-ray flux limits from brown dwarfs: Implications for dark matter annihilating into long-lived mediators,Phys. Rev. D107(2023), no. 4 043012, [ arXiv:2211.08067]. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 109, 129904 (2024)]

    2023 arXiv

  38. [52]

    Beneke, S

    M. Beneke, S. Lederer, and K. Urban,Sommerfeld enhancement of resonant dark matter annihilation,Phys. Lett. B839 (2023) 137773, [arXiv:2209.14343]

    2023 arXiv

  39. [53]

    Wang, W.-L

    W. Wang, W.-L. Xu, J. M. Yang, B. Zhu, and R. Zhu,Sommerfeld enhancement for puffy self-interacting dark matter, JHEP01(2024) 114, [arXiv:2308.02170]

    2024 arXiv

  40. [54]

    Phoroutan-Mehr and H.-B

    M. Phoroutan-Mehr and H.-B. Yu,Relaxing Constraints on Dark Matter Annihilation Near the Supermassive Black Hole in M87,arXiv:2411.18751

    arXiv

  41. [55]

    A. G. Moskowitz and M. G. Walker,Stellar Density Profiles of Dwarf Spheroidal Galaxies,The Astrophysical Journal(10,

  42. [56]

    A. W. McConnachie,The observed properties of dwarf galaxies in and around the local group,The Astronomical Journal 144(June, 2012) 4, [arXiv:1204.1562]

    2012 arXiv

  43. [57]

    A. B. Pace,The Local Volume Database: a library of the observed properties of nearby dwarf galaxies and star clusters, arXiv e-prints(Nov., 2024) arXiv:2411.07424, [arXiv:2411.07424]

    2024

  44. [58]

    dSphs Catalog

    A. B. Pace, “dSphs Catalog.”https://lvd-interactive.streamlit.app/, 2025. Accessed: 2025-05-02

    2025

  45. [59]

    Abdollahi et al.,Incremental Fermi Large Area Telescope Fourth Source Catalog,Astrophys

    F ermi-LA TCollaboration, S. Abdollahi et al.,Incremental Fermi Large Area Telescope Fourth Source Catalog,Astrophys. J. Supp.260(2022), no. 2 53, [arXiv:2201.11184]

    2022 arXiv

  46. [60]

    W. A. Rolke, A. M. Lopez, and J. Conrad,Limits and confidence intervals in the presence of nuisance parameters,Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A551(2005) 493–503, [physics/0403059]

    2005 arXiv

  47. [61]

    R. R. Mu˜ noz, P. Cˆ ot´ e, F. A. Santana, M. Geha, J. D. Simon, G. A. Oyarz´ un, P. B. Stetson, and S. G. Djorgovski,A megacam survey of outer halo satellites. iii. photometric and structural parameters,The Astrophysical Journal860(June,

  48. [62]

    Bogorad, P

    Z. Bogorad, P. Graham, and H. Ramani,Constraints on Long-Ranged Interactions Between Dark Matter and the Standard Model,arXiv:2410.07324

    arXiv

  49. [63]

    Bernal, J

    N. Bernal, J. Mart ´ ın-Albo, and S. Palomares-Ruiz,A novel way of constraining WIMPs annihilations in the Sun: MeV neutrinos,JCAP08(2013) 011, [arXiv:1208.0834]

    2013 arXiv

  50. [64]

    Bottino, G

    A. Bottino, G. Fiorentini, N. Fornengo, B. Ricci, S. Scopel, and F. L. Villante,Does solar physics provide constraints to weakly interacting massive particles?,Phys. Rev. D66(2002) 053005, [hep-ph/0206211]

    2002 arXiv

  51. [65]

    Garani and S

    R. Garani and S. Palomares-Ruiz,Dark matter in the Sun: scattering off electrons vs nucleons,JCAP05(2017) 007, [arXiv:1702.02768]

    2017 arXiv

  52. [66]

    R. K. Leane and J. Smirnov,Exoplanets as Sub-GeV Dark Matter Detectors,Phys. Rev. Lett.126(2021), no. 16 161101, [arXiv:2010.00015]. 19

    2021 arXiv

  53. [67]

    Bhattacharjee, D

    P. Bhattacharjee, D. Choudhury, K. Das, D. K. Ghosh, and P. Majumdar,Gamma-ray and Synchrotron Radiation from Dark Matter annihilations in Ultra-faint Dwarf Galaxies,arXiv:2011.08917

    2011 arXiv

  54. [68]

    J. F. Navarro, C. S. Frenk, and S. D. M. White,The Structure of cold dark matter halos,Astrophys. J.462(1996) 563–575, [astro-ph/9508025]

    1996 arXiv

  55. [69]

    J. F. Navarro, C. S. Frenk, and S. D. M. White,A Universal density profile from hierarchical clustering,Astrophys. J.490 (1997) 493–508, [astro-ph/9611107]

    1997 arXiv

  56. [70]

    Geringer-Sameth, S

    A. Geringer-Sameth, S. M. Koushiappas, and M. Walker,Dwarf galaxy annihilation and decay emission profiles for dark matter experiments,Astrophys. J.801(2015), no. 2 74, [arXiv:1408.0002]

    2015 arXiv

  57. [71]

    Hu, B.-Y

    X.-S. Hu, B.-Y. Zhu, T.-C. Liu, and Y.-F. Liang,Constraints on the annihilation of heavy dark matter in dwarf spheroidal galaxies with gamma-ray observations,Phys. Rev. D109(2024), no. 6 063036, [arXiv:2309.06151]

    2024 arXiv

  58. [72]

    Calore, M

    F. Calore, M. Cirelli, L. Derome, Y. Genolini, D. Maurin, P. Salati, and P. D. Serpico,AMS-02 antiprotons and dark matter: Trimmed hints and robust bounds,SciPost Phys.12(2022), no. 5 163, [arXiv:2202.03076]. [73]LHAASOCollaboration, Z. Cao et al.,Constraints on Ultraheavy Dar...

    2022 arXiv

  59. [74]

    Acharyya et al.,An indirect search for dark matter with a combined analysis of dwarf spheroidal galaxies from VERITAS,arXiv:2407.16518

    A. Acharyya et al.,An indirect search for dark matter with a combined analysis of dwarf spheroidal galaxies from VERITAS,arXiv:2407.16518

    arXiv

  60. [75]

    N. W. Evans, J. L. Sanders, and A. Geringer-Sameth,Simple J-Factors and D-Factors for Indirect Dark Matter Detection, Phys. Rev. D93(2016), no. 10 103512, [arXiv:1604.05599]

    2016 arXiv

  61. [76]

    Bramante, A

    J. Bramante, A. Delgado, and A. Martin,Multiscatter stellar capture of dark matter,Phys. Rev. D96(2017), no. 6 063002, [arXiv:1703.04043]

    2017 arXiv

  62. [77]

    Multiscatter stellar capture of dark matter

    C. Ilie, J. Pilawa, and S. Zhang,Comment on “Multiscatter stellar capture of dark matter”,Phys. Rev. D102(2020), no. 4 048301, [arXiv:2005.05946]

    2020 arXiv

  63. [78]

    Garani and S

    R. Garani and S. Palomares-Ruiz,Evaporation of dark matter from celestial bodies,JCAP05(2022), no. 05 042, [arXiv:2104.12757]

    2022 arXiv

  64. [79]

    Gould,Weakly Interacting Massive Particle Distribution in and Evaporation from the Sun,Astrophys

    A. Gould,Weakly Interacting Massive Particle Distribution in and Evaporation from the Sun,Astrophys. J.321(Oct.,

  65. [80]

    Busoni, A

    G. Busoni, A. De Simone, and W.-C. Huang,On the Minimum Dark Matter Mass Testable by Neutrinos from the Sun, JCAP07(2013) 010, [arXiv:1305.1817]

    2013 arXiv

  66. [81]

    S. Gori, S. Profumo, and B. Shakya,Wobbly Dark Matter Signals at Cherenkov Telescopes from Long Lived Mediator Decays,Phys. Rev. Lett.122(2019), no. 19 191103, [arXiv:1812.08694]

    2019 arXiv

  67. [82]

    D’Eramo and S

    F. D’Eramo and S. Profumo,Sub-GeV Dark Matter Shining at Future MeVγ-Ray Telescopes,Phys. Rev. Lett.121 (2018), no. 7 071101, [arXiv:1806.04745]

    2018 arXiv

  68. [83]

    Ibarra, S

    A. Ibarra, S. Lopez Gehler, and M. Pato,Dark matter constraints from box-shaped gamma-ray features,JCAP07(2012) 043, [arXiv:1205.0007]

    2012 arXiv

  69. [84]

    R. K. Leane and J. Tong,Optimal Celestial Bodies for Dark Matter Detection,arXiv:2405.05312

    arXiv

  70. [85]

    Hofmann and R

    W. Hofmann and R. Zanin,The Cherenkov Telescope Array,arXiv:2305.12888

    arXiv

  71. [86]

    Sommerfeld, ¨Uber die Beugung und Bremsung der Elektronen,Annalen Phys.403(1931), no

    A. Sommerfeld, ¨Uber die Beugung und Bremsung der Elektronen,Annalen Phys.403(1931), no. 3 257–330

    1931

  72. [87]

    K. K. Boddy, J. Kumar, L. E. Strigari, and M.-Y. Wang,Sommerfeld-Enhanced J-Factors For Dwarf Spheroidal Galaxies, Phys. Rev. D95(2017), no. 12 123008, [arXiv:1702.00408]

    2017 arXiv

  73. [88]

    Liu, Y.-L

    Z.-P. Liu, Y.-L. Wu, and Y.-F. Zhou,Sommerfeld enhancements with vector, scalar and pseudoscalar force-carriers,Phys. Rev. D88(2013) 096008, [arXiv:1305.5438]

    2013 arXiv

  74. [89]

    Dasgupta and R

    B. Dasgupta and R. Laha,Neutrinos in IceCube/KM3NeT as probes of Dark Matter Substructures in Galaxy Clusters, Phys. Rev. D86(2012) 093001, [arXiv:1206.1322]

    2012 arXiv

  75. [90]

    M. Du, R. Fang, Z. Liu, and V. Q. Tran,Enhanced long-lived dark photon signals at lifetime frontier detectors,Phys. Rev. D105(2022), no. 5 055012, [arXiv:2111.15503]

    2022 arXiv

  76. [91]

    T. A. Chowdhury and S. Nasri,The Sommerfeld Enhancement in the Scotogenic Model with Large Electroweak Scalar Multiplets,JCAP01(2017) 041, [arXiv:1611.06590]

    2017 arXiv

  77. [92]

    N. F. Bell, M. J. Dolan, A. Ghosh, and M. Virgato,Neutrino portals to MeV WIMPs with s-channel mediators, arXiv:2412.02994

    arXiv

  78. [93]

    Hisano, S

    J. Hisano, S. Matsumoto, M. M. Nojiri, and O. Saito,Non-perturbative effect on dark matter annihilation and gamma ray signature from galactic center,Phys. Rev. D71(2005) 063528, [hep-ph/0412403]

    2005 arXiv

  79. [94]

    Biondini and M

    S. Biondini and M. Laine,Thermal dark matter co-annihilating with a strongly interacting scalar,JHEP04(2018) 072, [arXiv:1801.05821]

    2018 arXiv

  80. [95]

    J. Liu, N. Weiner, and W. Xue,Signals of a Light Dark Force in the Galactic Center,JHEP08(2015) 050, [arXiv:1412.1485]

    2015 arXiv

  81. [96]

    Cassel,Sommerfeld factor for arbitrary partial wave processes,J

    S. Cassel,Sommerfeld factor for arbitrary partial wave processes,J. Phys. G37(2010) 105009, [arXiv:0903.5307]

    2010 arXiv

  82. [97]

    J. L. Feng, M. Kaplinghat, and H.-B. Yu,Sommerfeld Enhancements for Thermal Relic Dark Matter,Phys. Rev. D82 (2010) 083525, [arXiv:1005.4678]

    2010 arXiv

  83. [98]

    Mashchenko, H

    S. Mashchenko, H. M. P. Couchman, and A. Sills,Modeling star formation in dwarf spheroidal galaxies: A Case for extended dark matter halos,Astrophys. J.624(2005) 726–741, [astro-ph/0502126]

    2005 arXiv

  84. [99]

    T. R. Slatyer,The Sommerfeld enhancement for dark matter with an excited state,JCAP02(2010) 028, [arXiv:0910.5713]. 20

    2010 arXiv

  85. [100]

    Acevedo and A

    S. Acevedo and A. R. Zerwekh,Sommerfeld Enhancement for Vector Dark Matter in the Fundamental Representation of SU(2) L,arXiv:2401.13389

    arXiv

  86. [101]

    Lattanzi and J

    M. Lattanzi and J. I. Silk,Can the WIMP annihilation boost factor be boosted by the Sommerfeld enhancement?,Phys. Rev. D79(2009) 083523, [arXiv:0812.0360]

    2009 arXiv

  87. [102]

    Hisano, S

    J. Hisano, S. Matsumoto, and M. M. Nojiri,Explosive dark matter annihilation,Phys. Rev. Lett.92(2004) 031303, [hep-ph/0307216]. [103]SuperCDMSCollaboration, R. Agnese et al.,Results from the Super Cryogenic Dark Matter Search Experiment at Soudan,Phys. Rev. Lett.120(2018), no....

    2004 arXiv

  88. [105]

    Ajaj et al.,Search for dark matter with a 231-day exposure of liquid argon using DEAP-3600 at SNOLAB,Phys

    DEAPCollaboration, R. Ajaj et al.,Search for dark matter with a 231-day exposure of liquid argon using DEAP-3600 at SNOLAB,Phys. Rev. D100(2019), no. 2 022004, [arXiv:1902.04048]

    2019 arXiv

  89. [106]

    J. F. Acevedo, R. K. Leane, and L. Santos-Olmsted,Milky Way white dwarfs as sub-GeV to multi-TeV dark matter detectors,JCAP03(2024) 042, [arXiv:2309.10843]. [107]VERIT ASCollaboration, A. Acharyya et al.,Indirect search for dark matter with a combined analysis of dwarf spheroi...

    2024 arXiv

  90. [108]

    Aalbers et al.,First Dark Matter Search Results from the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment,Phys

    LZCollaboration, J. Aalbers et al.,First Dark Matter Search Results from the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment,Phys. Rev. Lett.131(2023), no. 4 041002, [arXiv:2207.03764]. [109]PandaXCollaboration, Z. Bo et al.,Dark Matter Search Results from 1.54 Tonne·Year Exposure of PandaX-4T, ar...

    2023 arXiv

  91. [110]

    K. K. Rogers, C. Dvorkin, and H. V. Peiris,Limits on the Light Dark Matter–Proton Cross Section from Cosmic Large-Scale Structure,Phys. Rev. Lett.128(2022), no. 17 171301, [arXiv:2111.10386]

    2022 arXiv

  92. [111]

    E. O. Nadler, V. Gluscevic, K. K. Boddy, and R. H. Wechsler,Constraints on Dark Matter Microphysics from the Milky Way Satellite Population,Astrophys. J. Lett.878(2019), no. 2 32, [ arXiv:1904.10000]. [Erratum: Astrophys.J.Lett. 897, L46 (2020), Erratum: Astrophys.J. 897, L46 (2020)]

    2019 arXiv

  93. [112]

    Maamari, V

    K. Maamari, V. Gluscevic, K. K. Boddy, E. O. Nadler, and R. H. Wechsler,Bounds on velocity-dependent dark matter-proton scattering from Milky Way satellite abundance,Astrophys. J. Lett.907(2021), no. 2 L46, [arXiv:2010.02936]. [113]DESCollaboration, E. O. Nadler et al.,Milky W...

    2021 arXiv

  94. [114]

    Gluscevic and K

    V. Gluscevic and K. K. Boddy,Constraints on Scattering of keV–TeV Dark Matter with Protons in the Early Universe, Phys. Rev. Lett.121(2018), no. 8 081301, [arXiv:1712.07133]

    2018 arXiv

  95. [115]

    K. K. Boddy and V. Gluscevic,First Cosmological Constraint on the Effective Theory of Dark Matter-Proton Interactions, Phys. Rev. D98(2018), no. 8 083510, [arXiv:1801.08609]

    2018 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.