Search for dark-matter axions beyond the quantum limit: the Cosmological Axion Sarov Haloscope (CASH) proposal

Alexander E. Pukhov; Alexander M. Sergeev; Alexander S. Chepurnov; Alexander V. Chiginev; Alexander V. Derbin; Andrey L. Pankratov; Arkady A. Yukhimchuk; Dmitrii A. Semenov; Dmitry S. Gorbunov; Dmitry V. Salnikov

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 105 references

Search for dark-matter axions beyond the quantum limit: the Cosmological Axion Sarov Haloscope (CASH) proposal

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A proposed haloscope could reach dark-matter axion couplings of 1.6e-15 GeV^-1 at 38 µeV.

desk verdict A serious haloscope proposal whose sensitivity projections rest on two untested detector assumptions; deserves refereeing, but the projected reach should be labeled conditional on detector efficiency and magnetic-field compatibility. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.18595 v1 pith:MTCTUAPO submitted 2025-06-23 hep-ph astro-ph.COhep-exphysics.ins-det

Andrey L. Pankratov , Pavel A. Belov , Eduard E. Boos , Alexander S. Chepurnov , Alexander V. Chiginev , Alexander V. Derbin , Ilia S. Drachnev , Lev V. Dudko

show 19 more authors

Dmitry S. Gorbunov Maxim A. Gorlach Vadim V. Ivanov Leonid V. Kravchuk Maxim V. Libanov Michael M. Merkin Valentina N. Muratova Alexander E. Pukhov Dmitry V. Salnikov Petr S. Satunin Dmitrii A. Semenov Alexander M. Sergeev Maksim I. Starostin Igor I. Tkachev Sergey V. Troitsky Maxim V. Trushin Evgenii V. Unzhakov Maxim M. Vyalkov Arkady A. Yukhimchuk

This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-phastro-ph.COhep-exphysics.ins-det

keywords axiondarkmatterhaloscopesingle-photondetectorJosephsonjunctionmicrowavecavityaxion-photoncouplingstandardquantumlimitQCD

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

The paper proposes CASH, a cavity haloscope for dark-matter axions in the mass range $38$--$54~\mu$eV that replaces the usual microwave amplifier with a Josephson-junction single-photon detector. The central claim is that this avoids the standard quantum limit, so the only relevant noise is the detector's dark-count rate of about $0.01$ Hz. With that noise level, a fixed-frequency measurement at $38~\mu$eV using a $1.7$ T magnet reaches $C_\gamma = 0.22$ ($g_{a\gamma\gamma}\simeq 1.6\times 10^{-15}$ GeV$^{-1}$) in $10^6$ seconds, and a one-year scan with a $7$ T or $10$ T magnet reaches $C_\gamma = 0.36$ or $0.25$, respectively. If these projections hold, CASH would be the most sensitive haloscope in this mass window and would cover all favored QCD axion models there.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the underdamped Josephson junction as a threshold single-photon detector: biased near its critical current, an arriving microwave photon switches it from the superconducting to the resistive state, producing a measurable gap-voltage pulse, and the switching rate in the dark sets the background. The argument is carried by two analytic expressions: Eq. (10), which converts a measured dark-count rate $R_{\rm d.c.}$ into a $C_\gamma$ sensitivity at fixed observation time, and Eq. (16), which optimizes $Q_0$ against the number of frequency steps needed to scan a mass interval. The cavity design is a cylindrical TM$_{010}$ copper resonator tuned with a movable copper rod, whose simulated form factor stays above about $0.57$ across the tuning range; the detector, the cavity, and the magnet are co-located in a dilution refrigerator at $10$--$20$ mK.

What would settle it

Energize the CASH magnet at $1.7$ T or $7$ T with the cavity cold at about $20$ mK and the Josephson-junction detector biased in its sensitive range, then time switching events with no injected signal: if the dark-count rate exceeds $0.01$ Hz, or if a calibrated photon flux injected into the cavity shows detection efficiency well below unity, the projected $C_\gamma$ values in Eqs. (11) and (12) and Table II are not reached.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The discovery claim is quantitative: single-photon counting with an underdamped Josephson junction bypasses the amplifier noise that sets the standard quantum limit, and leaves Poisson-distributed dark counts as the dominant background. Using the signal rate from axion-photon conversion in a TM$_{010}$ copper cavity and the SNR formula for signal plus background, the paper derives a coupling sensitivity $C_\gamma$ that depends only on magnetic field, cavity quality factor, volume, form factor, observation time, and dark-count rate. The headline numbers are $C_\gamma=0.22$ at fixed mass $38~\mu$eV with $1.7$ T in $10^6$ s (Eq. 11), $C_\gamma=0.05$ with $7$ T at the same fixed mass (Eq. 12), and a scan of $38$--$54~\mu$eV in one year reaching $C_\gamma=0.36$ at $7$ T or $0.25$ at $10$ T (Table II). The scan analysis optimizes the unloaded quality factor: too high a $Q_0$ narrows the resonance and costs frequency steps, so the optimal $Q_0$ for a one-year scan is $8\times 10^4$, requiring about $1.4\times 10^4$ tuning steps.

Load-bearing premise

The sensitivity estimates assume that the Josephson-junction detector maintains a dark-count rate at or below $0.01$ Hz while operating inside the CASH cryostat in the presence of a $1.7$--$10$ T magnetic field, and that it records essentially every signal photon; the demonstrated $0.01$ Hz rate comes from a separate cryogenic measurement without the final magnetized configuration.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

At the fixed mass $38~\mu$eV, CASH I with $1.7$ T and $10^6$ s would exclude $C_\gamma>0.22$ at 95% CL, covering both standard benchmark QCD axion models at that mass.
With the same non-tunable cavity at $7$ T, the fixed-mass exclusion improves to $C_\gamma=0.05$ ($g_{a\gamma\gamma}=3.9\times10^{-16}$ GeV$^{-1}$).
CASH II's one-year scan of $38$--$54~\mu$eV would reach $C_\gamma=0.36$ at $7$ T or $0.25$ at $10$ T, below the benchmark coupling of $0.75$ and below all favored QCD axion couplings.
Because the optimal unloaded quality factor for the one-year scan is $Q_0=8\times10^4$, the experiment's reach is limited mainly by dark counts and tuning-step overhead, not by maximizing cavity quality.
Without the magnetic field, the same single-photon detector and cavity can search for dark-photon dark matter, extending the setup's physics reach beyond axions.

Reading between the lines

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

If the extrapolated dark-count rate of $10^{-3}$ Hz is achieved, the same formulas improve the projected limits roughly as $R_{\rm d.c.}^{1/4}$ in the dark-count-limited regime, pushing the fixed-mass limit at $1.7$ T toward $C_\gamma\simeq0.12$.
The tuning-rod simulations keep the form factor above $0.57$ across the whole $9.2$--$13.1$ GHz band, suggesting the cavity is not the bottleneck; a multi-cell or multi-resonator version could scan the same mass window faster with the same detector technology.
The same detector-noise-limited SNR analysis applies to other fixed-frequency dark-matter searches, such as hidden-photon searches in different mass windows, whenever a threshold single-photon detector is available.
A direct measurement of detection efficiency versus frequency with a calibrated injected tone would convert the quoted projected limits into a testable exclusion curve, since the sensitivity equations currently assume unit efficiency.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Colleague,

Quick take: this is a legitimate experimental proposal, not a hype piece. The new part is the integrated CASH design—tunable copper cavity, Josephson-junction single-photon detector, and a scan optimization over Q0 for a 38–54 µeV mass window—and the quantitative claim that it can hit Cγ ~0.36 (7 T) or 0.25 (10 T) in a year. That would be the first haloscope below DFSZ in that window, so the stakes are real. The sensitivity arithmetic is internally consistent; I checked the scaling of Eq. (16) and the numbers in Table II follow from the stated parameters. Credit where due: they use standard haloscope formulas, report measured dark count rates rather than invented ones, and include a genuine optimization over Q0 and scan overhead, which many proposals skip.

The soft spots are the ones the stress-test flagged, and they are real but not fatal to the proposal's value. First, no detector efficiency factor appears anywhere in Eqs. (7)–(16). R_sig is taken as the observed rate, which is only true for η=1. For a real JJ SPD at 8.8–13 GHz, η is not reported in ref. [40]; the demonstration there is switching from thermal photons, not a calibrated detection efficiency. If η turns out to be 0.1, the reach in Cγ worsens by roughly a factor of 1.8 in the background-dominated regime. That is not a small effect for a paper whose headline numbers depend on it. Second, the dark count rate of 0.01 Hz was measured in zero field; the Josephson critical current is flux-sensitive, and the paper does not describe magnetic shielding for the detector inside the 1.7–10 T environment. If dark counts rise tenfold, the reach again degrades by ~1.8. These are engineering validation issues, not errors in the formalism, and the authors are not hiding them—they simply haven't done those tests yet. My one real complaint is that the abstract and conclusion state the projected sensitivity as if it were a capability, rather than as a sensitivity conditional on detector performance. That overstatement should be fixed.

Who is this for? Anyone tracking haloscope proposals or single-photon detection for axion searches. It deserves a serious referee—the design is concrete, the math is solid, and the claimed reach is important if the detector integration holds up. I would send it to review, with the explicit request that the referee pressure-test the detector efficiency and magnetic-field assumptions.

Recommendation: accept for peer review.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a new haloscope experiment, CASH, to search for dark-matter axions in the 38–54 μeV mass range using an underdamped Josephson-junction single-photon detector coupled to a tunable copper cavity. The projected sensitivity is derived from the standard Sikivie power formula (Eq. 3) and a Poisson-counting SNR formula (Eq. 5), with input parameters from the authors' CST simulations of the cavity (frequency, Q0, form factor) and from their previous measurements of JJ dark counts. The headline projections are Cγ ≈ 0.22 (gaγγ ≈ 1.6×10^-15 GeV^-1) at a single fixed mass after 10^6 s with a 1.7 T magnet (Eq. 11), and a one-year scan down to Cγ = 0.36 (7 T) or Cγ = 0.25 (10 T) over 38–54 μeV (Table II), which would reach below the DFSZ benchmark for most of this range. The paper also discusses the tuning scheme, the optimal quality factor, and the comparison with existing and proposed haloscopes. The central derivation is conventional and internally consistent in its numerics, but several assumptions about detector performance in the final configuration are not fully supported.

Significance. Should the projected performance be realized, CASH would be a major step in axion dark-matter searches: it would cover a mass range that is not yet excluded and would reach couplings below the DFSZ benchmark, going well beyond the standard quantum limit with a single-photon detector. The paper's strength is its concrete design: measured dark-count data, detailed CST simulations of the tuning rod and form factor, and an explicit SNR optimization over Q0. The proposed experiment is falsifiable in the sense that the sensitivity curves in Figs. 7 and 8 make specific, testable predictions. However, the significance is conditional on two detector assumptions—near-unity single-photon detection efficiency and field-independent dark counts—that are not demonstrated in the present manuscript.

major comments (3)

[Sec. IV, Eqs. (5), (7), (10) and Eq. (11)] The sensitivity calculation uses the axion photon arrival rate R_sig directly in the SNR formula with no detector efficiency factor. For a real single-photon counter the observed signal rate is η R_sig, and the projected Cγ values in Eq. (11) and Table II are therefore those of a perfect detector (η=1). The manuscript reports dark counts and switching due to thermal photons in Ref. [40], but it does not report or reference a measured detection efficiency for the Al JJ SPD in the 8.8–13 GHz band. In the background-dominated regime, fixing SNR and time gives Cγ ∝ R_dc^{1/4}/√η, so η=0.1 would weaken the quoted reach by about a factor of 3, and even η=0.5 by about 40%. Please add an explicit efficiency factor to the signal rate in the SNR equations and either provide a measured value or clearly label η=1 as a working assumption.
[Secs. III.B and IV.A] The dark-count rate R_dc=0.01 Hz used in Eqs. (9)–(10) and Table II was measured in a stand-alone cryogenic test (Sec. III.A, Fig. 2) with no magnetic field. In the proposed experiment the SPD is connected by a coaxial line to a cavity in a 1.7–10 T magnet, and the paper does not discuss the effect of the magnetic field on the Josephson-junction critical current and switching statistics, nor any magnetic shielding for the detector. Since the Josephson critical current is flux-sensitive, the in-field dark-count rate is an open experimental question. Because Cγ scales as R_dc^{1/4} in the background-dominated regime, an order-of-magnitude increase in dark counts would weaken the projected sensitivity by about a factor of 1.8; this should be either validated with a measurement in the magnet bore or explicitly presented as a key technical risk.
[Sec. IV.A, Eq. (10)] As printed, this equation does not reproduce the numerical results quoted in Eq. (11). Solving Eq. (9) for Cγ gives Cγ = SNR/(B0√(G Q0)) × [ (1+√(1+4tR_dc/SNR^2))/(2t) ]^{1/2}, whereas Eq. (10) has √(SNR/(2t)) in place of SNR/√(2t). Evaluating the printed formula with the parameters stated for Eq. (11) does not yield Cγ=0.22, while the corrected expression does (for Cγ=0.22 it gives SNR≈1.65). Please correct Eq. (10) and also state the unit convention for B0, since Eq. (7) is written with B0 in Tesla while the natural-unit derivation requires B0 in GeV^2.

minor comments (4)

[Sec. IV.A, Eq. (7)] The unit convention for B0 is not stated; inserting B0=1.7 T and the G of Eq. (8) into Eq. (7) requires an implicit Tesla-to-GeV^2 conversion, and the text should say so explicitly.
[Sec. III.A and Fig. 2] The '10^4 s' dark-count time and the associated '0.001 Hz' rate are extrapolations from a dashed fit, not measured values; please label them as extrapolations in both the text and the figure caption.
[Sec. IV.A, text after Eq. (11)] The statement that 'all theoretically favored models of the Peccei-Quinn axion could be fully explored for this mass' is too strong, because the projection assumes the detector efficiency and magnetic-field compatibility discussed in the major comments.
[Sec. V] The conclusion repeats the 'not more than a single false switching event in 100 s' claim; this should be tied to the measured dark-count data rather than stated as an intrinsic detector property.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: CASH sensitivity follows from standard haloscope equations with measured detector parameters; self-citations are independent experimental evidence.

full rationale

The paper's central sensitivity derivation (Sec. IV, Eqs. 7, 9, 10, and 16) is self-contained: it combines the standard axion-to-photon conversion power of Eq. (3), geometric and quality-factor inputs from CST simulations and stated cavity parameters, and the detector dark-count rate R_dc = 0.01 Hz taken from direct measurements reported in Ref. [40]. No parameter is fitted to reproduce a target coupling; the quoted values C_gamma = 0.22, 0.05, 0.36, and 0.25 are solved analytically from the formulas for fixed observation time, magnetic field, quality factor, form factor, and dark-count rate. The authors' self-citations ([40], [69], [70]) serve as experimental inputs rather than as theoretical authority, and the cited measurements are independent of the present sensitivity projection, so they do not constitute circular evidence. Remaining concerns, such as the absence of a detection-efficiency factor, the zero-field measurement of the dark-count rate, and the extrapolation toward 0.001 Hz, are unsupported engineering assumptions or feasibility claims rather than circular reasoning. Therefore no circular step is present and the score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central projection depends on detector noise and efficiency parameters, assumed cavity quality and form factor, and standard axion dark matter inputs. No new particles, forces, or mediators are introduced.

free parameters (5)

Dark count rate R_dc = 0.01 Hz (demonstrated); extrapolated to 0.001 Hz
Measured in prior work [40] and used directly in Eqs. (9)-(10) and Table II. If the real rate is higher, the projected sensitivity degrades.
Detector quantum efficiency = not stated (implicitly 1)
The sensitivity equations assume every signal photon produces a detected event; no efficiency factor appears in Eqs. (5)-(10).
Cavity unloaded quality factor Q0 = 1e5 for CASH I; optimized 2e4 to 8e4 for CASH II
Assumed for copper at mK temperatures based on common haloscope values. Q0 enters linearly in signal rate and in the scan step count.
Form factor C_alpha = 0.69 for TM010; simulations show 0.57-0.77 with tuning rod
From CST simulations in Sec. III B; held constant in sensitivity estimates even though Fig. 4 shows variation with rod position.
Frequency-step overhead delta_t = 15 minutes
Assumed time for each tuning step; affects scan efficiency in Eqs. (15)-(16).

assumptions (4)

domain assumption Axion-photon interaction Lagrangian and QCD axion coupling relation (Eqs. 1-2)
The signal power formula (Eq. 3) derives from this interaction; it is standard in haloscope literature.
domain assumption Local dark matter density rho_a = 0.45 GeV/cm^3
Standard halo model value used in Eq. (8) for the signal rate.
domain assumption Signal and dark counts follow Poisson statistics
Used for SNR in Eq. (5); thermal photon occupancy is exponentially suppressed at 20 mK, so thermal noise is neglected.
domain assumption Cavity tuning covers contiguous mass intervals without gaps
The scan model in Eqs. (13)-(14) assumes each frequency step covers the full resonance width with no dead zones.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Search for dark-matter axions beyond the quantum limit: the Cosmological Axion Sarov Haloscope (CASH) proposal." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MTCTUAPO

@misc{pith2026250618595,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Search for dark-matter axions beyond the quantum limit: the Cosmological Axion Sarov Haloscope (CASH) proposal},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MTCTUAPO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.18595}
}

abstract

Firmly established in astrophysical observations, dark matter evades direct detection in experiments. Axions and axion-like particles are among the leading dark-matter candidates, and numerous attempts to detect them in laboratories have been performed. Here, we propose to advance these efforts substantially, extending the sensitivity for dark-matter axions in the mass range $(38-54)~\mu$eV down to the axion-photon couplings $g_{a\gamma\gamma}\lesssim \left(10^{-14}-10^{-15}\right)$ GeV$^{-1}$, motivated by generic models of Quantum Chromodynamics axion. Single-photon detectors operating at ultra-low temperatures are key elements of the experiment. The projected sensitivity will be reached in one year of data taking with magnetic field of $(1-10)$ T, making Cosmological Axion Sarov Haloscope (CASH) the most sensitive haloscope in this mass range.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.18595 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** Plot of the mean switching time of a single photon [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** (a) A cut view of the cavity with a SMA connector. The cavity has inner height of 120 mm and inner diameter of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (5 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: The dependence of (a) resonance frequency [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Measuring cavity bandwidth using a JJ SPD. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Projected sensitivity of the first (CASH-I; non [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png]

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: Projected sensitivity of the first (CASH-I; non [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_8.png]

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: SNR dependence on Q0 for scanning the mass range (38 − 54) µeV, see eq. (16). The product CγB0 is taken to obtain the maximal value SNR= 1.65; δt = 15 min; Rd.c. = 0.01 Hz; Cα = C010 = 0.69. Left curve: τ = 3 months. The best sensitivity is for Q0 = 2 · 104 , CγB0 = 5 …

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

105 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages

[40]

Fox,Quantum Optics: An Introduction, Oxford Master Series in Physics (OUP Oxford, 2006)

M. Fox,Quantum Optics: An Introduction, Oxford Master Series in Physics (OUP Oxford, 2006)

2006
[1]

Berezinsky and J

V. Berezinsky and J. W. F. Valle, The keV majoron as a dark matter particle, Phys. Lett. B318, 360 (1993), arXiv:hep-ph/9309214

arXiv 1993
[2]

D. S. Gorbunov, Light sgoldstino: Precision measure- ments versus collider searches, Nucl. Phys. B602, 213 (2001), arXiv:hep-ph/0007325

work page Pith review arXiv 2001
[3]

S. P. de Alwis, Effective potentials for light moduli, Phys. Lett. B626, 223 (2005), arXiv:hep-th/0506266

work page Pith review arXiv 2005
[4]

Pilaftsis, Electroweak Resonant Leptogenesis in the Singlet Majoron Model, Phys

A. Pilaftsis, Electroweak Resonant Leptogenesis in the Singlet Majoron Model, Phys. Rev. D78, 013008 (2008), arXiv:0805.1677 [hep-ph]

arXiv 2008
[5]

Arvanitaki, S

A. Arvanitaki, S. Dimopoulos, S. Dubovsky, N. Kaloper, and J. March-Russell, String Axiverse, Phys. Rev. D81, 123530 (2010), arXiv:0905.4720 [hep-th]

arXiv 2010
[6]

Scale-invariance as the origin of dark radiation?

D. Gorbunov and A. Tokareva, Scale-invariance as the origin of dark radiation?, Phys. Lett. B739, 50 (2014), arXiv:1307.5298 [astro-ph.CO]

work page Pith review arXiv 2014
[7]

Bellazzini, A

B. Bellazzini, A. Mariotti, D. Redigolo, F. Sala, and J. Serra,R-axion at colliders, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 141804 (2017), arXiv:1702.02152 [hep-ph]

arXiv 2017

Show all 105 references

[8]

The measurements of JJ SPD characteristics were supported by RSF project 21-79-20227
[9]

Weinberg, A New Light Boson?, Phys

S. Weinberg, A New Light Boson?, Phys. Rev. Lett.40, 223 (1978)

1978
[10]

Wilczek, Problem of StrongPandTInvariance in the Presence of Instantons, Phys

F. Wilczek, Problem of StrongPandTInvariance in the Presence of Instantons, Phys. Rev. Lett.40, 279 (1978)

1978
[11]

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

1977
[12]

R. D. Peccei and H. R. Quinn, Constraints Imposed by CP Conservation in the Presence of Instantons, Phys. Rev. D16, 1791 (1977)

1977
[13]

Ringwald, Review on Axions

A. Ringwald, Review on Axions. arXiv:2404.09036 (2024) arXiv:2404.09036 [hep-ph]

2024 arXiv
[14]

Preskill, M

J. Preskill, M. B. Wise, and F. Wilczek, Cosmology of the Invisible Axion, Phys. Lett. B120, 127 (1983)

1983
[15]

L. F. Abbott and P. Sikivie, A Cosmological Bound on the Invisible Axion, Phys. Lett. B120, 133 (1983)

1983
[16]

Dine and W

M. Dine and W. Fischler, The Not So Harmless Axion, Phys. Lett. B120, 137 (1983)

1983
[17]

Arias, D

P. Arias, D. Cadamuro, M. Goodsell, J. Jaeckel, J. Re- dondo, and A. Ringwald, WISPy Cold Dark Matter, JCAP06, 013, arXiv:1201.5902 [hep-ph]

arXiv
[18]

I. G. Irastorza and J. Redondo, New experimental ap- proaches in the search for axion-like particles, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.102, 89 (2018), arXiv:1801.08127 [hep-ph]

2018 arXiv
[19]

J. E. Kim, Weak Interaction Singlet and Strong CP In- variance, Phys. Rev. Lett.43, 103 (1979)

1979
[20]

M. A. Shifman, A. I. Vainshtein, and V. I. Zakharov, Can Confinement Ensure Natural CP Invariance of Strong Interactions?, Nucl. Phys. B166, 493 (1980)

1980
[21]

M. Dine, W. Fischler, and M. Srednicki, A Simple Solu- tion to the Strong CP Problem with a Harmless Axion, Phys. Lett. B104, 199 (1981)

1981
[22]

A. R. Zhitnitsky, On Possible Suppression of the Axion Hadron Interactions, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.31, 260 (1980)

1980
[23]

Carenza, M

P. Carenza, M. Giannotti, J. Isern, A. Mirizzi, and O. Straniero, Axion astrophysics, Phys. Rept.1117, 1 (2025), arXiv:2411.02492 [hep-ph]

2025 arXiv
[24]

Libanov and S

M. Libanov and S. Troitsky, On the impact of magnetic- field models in galaxy clusters on constraints on axion- like particles from the lack of irregularities in high- energy spectra of astrophysical sources, Phys. Lett. B 802, 135252 (2020), arXiv:1908.03084 [astro-ph.HE]

2020 arXiv
[25]

Navaset al.(Particle Data Group), Review of particle physics, Phys

S. Navaset al.(Particle Data Group), Review of particle physics, Phys. Rev. D110, 030001 (2024)

2024
[26]

D. J. E. Marsh, Axion Cosmology, Phys. Rept.643, 1 (2016), arXiv:1510.07633 [astro-ph.CO]

2016 arXiv
[27]

C. B. Adamset al., Axion Dark Matter, inSnowmass 2021(2022) arXiv:2203.14923 [hep-ex]

2022 arXiv
[28]

C. A. J. O’Hare, Cosmology of axion dark matter, PoSCOSMICWISPers, 040 (2024), arXiv:2403.17697 [hep-ph]

2024 arXiv
[29]

Baryakhtar, L

M. Baryakhtar, L. Rosenberg, and G. Rybka, Search- ing for the QCD Dark Matter Axion, (2025), arXiv:2504.10607 [hep-ex]

2025 arXiv
[30]

Ballesteros, J

G. Ballesteros, J. Redondo, A. Ringwald, and C. Tamarit, Unifying inflation with the axion, dark mat- ter, baryogenesis and the seesaw mechanism, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 071802 (2017), arXiv:1608.05414 [hep-ph]

2017 arXiv
[31]

R. T. Co, L. J. Hall, and K. Harigaya, Predictions for Axion Couplings from ALP Cogenesis, JHEP01, 172, arXiv:2006.04809 [hep-ph]

2006 arXiv
[32]

Buschmann, J

M. Buschmann, J. W. Foster, A. Hook, A. Peterson, D. E. Willcox, W. Zhang, and B. R. Safdi, Dark matter 10 from axion strings with adaptive mesh refinement, Na- ture Commun.13, 1049 (2022), arXiv:2108.05368 [hep- ph]

2022 arXiv
[33]

A. H. Sopov and R. R. Volkas, VISHν: solving five Stan- dard Model shortcomings with a Poincar´ e-protected electroweak scale, Phys. Dark Univ.42, 101381 (2023), arXiv:2206.11598 [hep-ph]

2023 arXiv
[34]

J. N. Benabou, M. Buschmann, J. W. Foster, and B. R. Safdi, Axion mass prediction from adaptive mesh refinement cosmological lattice simulations, (2024), arXiv:2412.08699 [hep-ph]

2024 arXiv
[35]

Sikivie, Experimental Tests of the Invisible Ax- ion, Phys

P. Sikivie, Experimental Tests of the Invisible Ax- ion, Phys. Rev. Lett.51, 1415 (1983), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 52, 695 (1984)]

1983
[36]

Krauss, J

L. Krauss, J. Moody, F. Wilczek, and D. E. Morris, Calculations for Cosmic Axion Detection, Phys. Rev. Lett.55, 1797 (1985)

1985
[37]

Sikivie, Detection Rates for ’Invisible’ Axion Searches, Phys

P. Sikivie, Detection Rates for ’Invisible’ Axion Searches, Phys. Rev. D32, 2988 (1985), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 36, 974 (1987)]

1985
[38]

Sikivie, Invisible Axion Search Methods, Rev

P. Sikivie, Invisible Axion Search Methods, Rev. Mod. Phys.93, 015004 (2021), arXiv:2003.02206 [hep-ph]

2021 arXiv
[39]

W. U. Wuensch, S. De Panfilis-Wuensch, S. K. Se- mertzidis, and et al., Results of a laboratory search for cosmic axions and other weakly coupled light particles, Phys. Rev. D40, 3153 (1989)

1989
[41]

A. L. Pankratov, A. V. Gordeeva, A. V. Chiginev, L. S. Revin, A. V. Blagodatkin, N. Crescini, and L. S. Kuzmin, Detection of single-mode thermal microwave photons using an underdamped Josephson junction, Nat. Commun.16, 1 (2025)

2025
[42]

Grahamet al., Rydberg-atom-based single-photon detection for haloscope axion searches, Phys

E. Grahamet al., Rydberg-atom-based single-photon detection for haloscope axion searches, Phys. Rev. D 109, 032009 (2024), arXiv:2310.15352 [hep-ex]

2024 arXiv
[43]

G. V. Prokopenko, S. V. Shitov, I. L. Lapitskaya, V. P. Koshelets, and J. Mygind, Dynamic characteristics of S-band DC SQUID amplifier, IEEE Trans. Appl. Su- percond.16, 1042 (2003)

2003
[44]

Spietz, K

L. Spietz, K. Irwin, and J. Aumentado, Input impedance and gain of a gigahertz amplifier using a dc supercon- ducting quantum interference device in a quarter wave resonator, Appl. Phys. Lett.93, 082506 (2008)

2008
[45]

Castellanos-Beltran, K

M. Castellanos-Beltran, K. Irwin, G. Hilton, and et al., Amplification and squeezing of quantum noise with a tunable Josephson metamaterial, Nat. Phys.4, 929–931 (2008)

2008
[46]

Pogorzalek, K

S. Pogorzalek, K. Fedorov, M. Xu, and et al., Se- cure quantum remote state preparation of squeezed mi- crowave states, Nat. Comm.10, 2604 (2019)

2019
[47]

J. Qiu, A. Grimsmo, K. Peng, and et al., Broadband squeezed microwaves and amplification with a Joseph- son travelling-wave parametric amplifier, Nat. Phys.19, 706–713 (2023)

2023
[48]

Malnou, D

M. Malnou, D. A. Palken, B. M. Brubaker, L. R. Vale, G. C. Hilton, and K. W. Lehnert, Squeezed vacuum used to accelerate the search for a weak classical signal, Phys. Rev. X9, 021023 (2019), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.X 10, 039902 (2020)], arXiv:1809.06470 [quant-ph]

2019 arXiv
[49]

Antelet al., Feebly-interacting particles: FIPs 2022 Workshop Report, Eur

C. Antelet al., Feebly-interacting particles: FIPs 2022 Workshop Report, Eur. Phys. J. C83, 1122 (2023), arXiv:2305.01715 [hep-ph]

2023 arXiv
[50]

Stern, ADMX Status, PoSICHEP2016, 198 (2016), arXiv:1612.08296 [physics.ins-det]

I. Stern, ADMX Status, PoSICHEP2016, 198 (2016), arXiv:1612.08296 [physics.ins-det]

2016 arXiv
[51]

S. J. Asztaloset al.(ADMX), A SQUID-based mi- crowave cavity search for dark-matter axions, Phys. Rev. Lett.104, 041301 (2010), arXiv:0910.5914 [astro- ph.CO]

2010 arXiv
[52]

Duet al.(ADMX), A Search for Invisible Axion Dark Matter with the Axion Dark Matter Experiment, Phys

N. Duet al.(ADMX), A Search for Invisible Axion Dark Matter with the Axion Dark Matter Experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 151301 (2018), arXiv:1804.05750 [hep- ex]

2018 arXiv
[53]

Braineet al.(ADMX), Extended Search for the In- visible Axion with the Axion Dark Matter Experiment, Phys

T. Braineet al.(ADMX), Extended Search for the In- visible Axion with the Axion Dark Matter Experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 101303 (2020), arXiv:1910.08638 [hep-ex]

2020 arXiv
[54]

S. Lee, S. Ahn, J. Choi, B. R. Ko, and Y. K. Semertzidis, Axion Dark Matter Search around 6.7µeV, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 101802 (2020), arXiv:2001.05102 [hep-ex]

2020 arXiv
[55]

Jeong, S

J. Jeong, S. Youn, S. Bae, J. Kim, T. Seong, J. E. Kim, and Y. K. Semertzidis, Search for Invisible Axion Dark Matter with a Multiple-Cell Haloscope, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 221302 (2020), arXiv:2008.10141 [hep-ex]

2020 arXiv
[56]

Kwonet al.(CAPP), First Results from an Axion Haloscope at CAPP around 10.7µeV, Phys

O. Kwonet al.(CAPP), First Results from an Axion Haloscope at CAPP around 10.7µeV, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 191802 (2021), arXiv:2012.10764 [hep-ex]

2021 arXiv
[57]

Alesiniet al., Galactic axions search with a super- conducting resonant cavity, Phys

D. Alesiniet al., Galactic axions search with a super- conducting resonant cavity, Phys. Rev. D99, 101101 (2019), arXiv:1903.06547 [physics.ins-det]

2019 arXiv
[58]

Alesiniet al., Search for invisible axion dark matter of mass ma = 43µeV with the QUAX–aγexperiment, Phys

D. Alesiniet al., Search for invisible axion dark matter of mass ma = 43µeV with the QUAX–aγexperiment, Phys. Rev. D103, 102004 (2021), arXiv:2012.09498 [hep-ex]

2021 arXiv
[59]

Zhonget al.(HAYSTAC), Results from phase 1 of the HAYSTAC microwave cavity axion experiment, Phys

L. Zhonget al.(HAYSTAC), Results from phase 1 of the HAYSTAC microwave cavity axion experiment, Phys. Rev. D97, 092001 (2018), arXiv:1803.03690 [hep-ex]

2018 arXiv
[60]

M. J. Jewellet al.(HAYSTAC), New results from HAYSTAC’s phase II operation with a squeezed state receiver, Phys. Rev. D107, 072007 (2023), arXiv:2301.09721 [hep-ex]

2023 arXiv
[61]

Horns, J

D. Horns, J. Jaeckel, A. Lindner, A. Lobanov, J. Re- dondo, and A. Ringwald, Searching for WISPy Cold Dark Matter with a Dish Antenna, JCAP04, 016, arXiv:1212.2970 [hep-ph]

arXiv
[62]

Bajjaliet al., First results from BRASS-p broadband searches for hidden photon dark matter, JCAP08, 077, arXiv:2306.05934 [hep-ex]

F. Bajjaliet al., First results from BRASS-p broadband searches for hidden photon dark matter, JCAP08, 077, arXiv:2306.05934 [hep-ex]

arXiv
[63]

Hoshinoet al.(GigaBREAD), First Axionlike Par- ticle Results from a Broadband Search for Wavelike Dark Matter in the 44 to 52µeV Range with a Coax- ial Dish Antenna, Phys

G. Hoshinoet al.(GigaBREAD), First Axionlike Par- ticle Results from a Broadband Search for Wavelike Dark Matter in the 44 to 52µeV Range with a Coax- ial Dish Antenna, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 171002 (2025), arXiv:2501.17119 [hep-ex]

2025 arXiv
[64]

Beurtheyet al., MADMAX Status Report, (2020), arXiv:2003.10894 [physics.ins-det]

S. Beurtheyet al., MADMAX Status Report, (2020), arXiv:2003.10894 [physics.ins-det]

2020 arXiv
[65]

B. A. d. S. Garciaet al., First search for axion dark matter with a Madmax prototype, (2024), arXiv:2409.11777 [hep-ex]

2024 arXiv
[66]

Lawson, A

M. Lawson, A. J. Millar, M. Pancaldi, E. Vitagliano, and F. Wilczek, Tunable axion plasma haloscopes, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 141802 (2019), arXiv:1904.11872 [hep- ph]

2019 arXiv
[67]

A. J. Millaret al.(ALPHA), Searching for dark mat- ter with plasma haloscopes, Phys. Rev. D107, 055013 (2023), arXiv:2210.00017 [hep-ph]

2023 arXiv
[68]

S. K. Lamoreaux, K. A. van Bibber, K. W. Lehnert, and G. Carosi, Analysis of single-photon and linear am- 11 plifier detectors for microwave cavity dark matter axion searches, Phys. Rev. D88, 035020 (2013)

2013
[69]

A. O. Sushkov, Quantum Science and the Search for Axion Dark Matter, Phys. Rev. X Quantum4, 020101 (2023)

2023
[70]

A. L. Pankratov, L. S. Revin, A. V. Gordeeva, A. A. Yablokov, L. S. Kuzmin, and E. V. Ilichev, Towards a microwave single-photon counter for searching axions, npj Quantum Information8, 1 (2022)

2022
[71]

D. A. Ladeynov, A. L. Pankratov, L. S. Revin, A. V. Gordeeva, A. V. Chiginev, S. A. Razov, and E. V. Ilichev, Detection of 5 GHz photons by Al Josephson junctions at 0.7 K, Academia Quantum , in press (2025), arXiv:2405.04426 [cond-mat.dis-nn]

2025 arXiv
[72]

Lescanne, S

R. Lescanne, S. Del´ eglise, E. Albertinale, U. R´ eglade, T. Capelle, E. Ivanov, T. Jacqmin, Z. Leghtas, and E. Flurin, Irreversible Qubit-Photon Coupling for the Detection of Itinerant Microwave Photons, Phys. Rev. X10, 021038 (2020)

2020
[73]

Albertinale, L

E. Albertinale, L. Balembois, E. Billaud, V. Ranjan, D. Flanigan, T. Schenkel, D. Est` eve, D. Vion, P. Bertet, and E. Flurin, Detecting spins by their fluorescence with a microwave photon counter, Nature600, 434 (2021)

2021
[74]

Balembois, J

L. Balembois, J. Travesedo, L. Pallegoix, A. May, E. Bil- laud, M. Villiers, D. Est` eve, D. Vion, P. Bertet, and E. Flurin, Cyclically operated microwave single-photon counter with sensitivity of 10 −22 W/ √ hz, Phys. Rev. Appl.21, 014043 (2024)

2024
[75]

Barends, J

R. Barends, J. Wenner, M. Lenander, Y. Chen, R. C. Bialczak, J. Kelly, E. Lucero, P. O’Malley, M. Mariantoni, D. Sank, H. Wang, T. C. White, Y. Yin, J. Zhao, A. N. Cleland, J. M. Martinis, and J. J. A. Baselmans, Minimizing quasiparticle generation from stray infrared light in...

2011
[76]

X. Bai, M. J. Jewell, S. K. Lamoreaux, R. H. Maruyama, and K. van Bibber, On the use of dielectric elements in axion searches with microwave resonant cavities, Jour- nal of Instrumentation18, P07017
[77]

A. Yi, T. Seong, S. Lee, S. Ahn, B. Ivanov, S. Uchaikin, B. Ko, and Y. K. Semertzidis, Enhanced tunable cav- ity development for axion dark matter searches using a piezoelectric motor in combination with gears, JINST 19(07), T07004, arXiv:2406.07782 [hep-ex]

arXiv
[78]

Bartramet al.(ADMX), Search for Invisible Axion Dark Matter in the 3.3–4.2µeV Mass Range, Phys

C. Bartramet al.(ADMX), Search for Invisible Axion Dark Matter in the 3.3–4.2µeV Mass Range, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 261803 (2021), arXiv:2110.06096 [hep-ex]

2021 arXiv
[79]

Bartramet al.(ADMX), Axion Dark Matter eX- periment around 3.3µeV with Dine-Fischler-Srednicki- Zhitnitsky Discovery Ability, (2024), arXiv:2408.15227 [hep-ex]

C. Bartramet al.(ADMX), Axion Dark Matter eX- periment around 3.3µeV with Dine-Fischler-Srednicki- Zhitnitsky Discovery Ability, (2024), arXiv:2408.15227 [hep-ex]

2024 arXiv
[80]

Boutanet al.(ADMX), Piezoelectrically Tuned Mul- timode Cavity Search for Axion Dark Matter, Phys

C. Boutanet al.(ADMX), Piezoelectrically Tuned Mul- timode Cavity Search for Axion Dark Matter, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 261302 (2018), arXiv:1901.00920 [hep- ex]

2018 arXiv
[81]

Crisosto, P

N. Crisosto, P. Sikivie, N. S. Sullivan, D. B. Tanner, J. Yang, and G. Rybka, ADMX SLIC: Results from a SuperconductingLCCircuit Investigating Cold Axions, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 241101 (2020), arXiv:1911.05772 [astro-ph.CO]

2020 arXiv
[82]

De Panfilis, A

S. De Panfilis, A. C. Melissinos, B. E. Moskowitz, J. T. Rogers, Y. K. Semertzidis, W. Wuensch, H. J. Halama, A. G. Prodell, W. B. Fowler, and F. A. Nezrick, Limits on the Abundance and Coupling of Cosmic Axions at 4.5-Microev<m(a)<5.0-Microev, Phys. Rev. Lett.59, 839 (1987)

1987
[83]

Wuensch, S

W. Wuensch, S. De Panfilis-Wuensch, Y. K. Se- mertzidis, J. T. Rogers, A. C. Melissinos, H. J. Halama, B. E. Moskowitz, A. G. Prodell, W. B. Fowler, and F. A. Nezrick, Results of a Laboratory Search for Cosmic Ax- ions and Other Weakly Coupled Light Particles, Phys. Rev. D40, ...

1989
[84]

Hagmann, P

C. Hagmann, P. Sikivie, N. S. Sullivan, and D. B. Tan- ner, Results from a search for cosmic axions, Phys. Rev. D42, 1297 (1990)

1990
[85]

Hagmannet al., First results from a second gener- ation galactic axion experiment, Nucl

C. Hagmannet al., First results from a second gener- ation galactic axion experiment, Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl.51, 209 (1996), arXiv:astro-ph/9607022

1996 arXiv
[86]

Y. Lee, B. Yang, H. Yoon, M. Ahn, H. Park, B. Min, D. Kim, and J. Yoo, Searching for Invisible Axion Dark Matter with an 18 T Magnet Haloscope, Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 241805 (2022), arXiv:2206.08845 [hep-ex]

2022 arXiv
[87]

H. Yoon, M. Ahn, B. Yang, Y. Lee, D. Kim, H. Park, B. Min, and J. Yoo, Axion haloscope using an 18 T high temperature superconducting magnet, Phys. Rev. D106, 092007 (2022), arXiv:2206.12271 [hep-ex]

2022 arXiv
[88]

Kimet al., Near-Quantum-Noise Axion Dark Matter Search at CAPP around 9.5µeV, Phys

J. Kimet al., Near-Quantum-Noise Axion Dark Matter Search at CAPP around 9.5µeV, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 091602 (2023), arXiv:2207.13597 [hep-ex]

2023 arXiv
[89]

A. K. Yiet al., Axion Dark Matter Search around 4.55µeV with Dine-Fischler-Srednicki-Zhitnitskii Sen- sitivity, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 071002 (2023), arXiv:2210.10961 [hep-ex]

2023 arXiv
[90]

B. Yang, H. Yoon, M. Ahn, Y. Lee, and J. Yoo, Ex- tended Axion Dark Matter Search Using the CAPP18T Haloscope, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 081801 (2023), arXiv:2308.09077 [hep-ex]

2023 arXiv
[91]

Kimet al., Experimental Search for Invisible Dark Matter Axions around 22µeV, Phys

Y. Kimet al., Experimental Search for Invisible Dark Matter Axions around 22µeV, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 051802 (2024), arXiv:2312.11003 [hep-ex]

2024 arXiv
[92]

Ahnet al.(CAPP), Extensive Search for Axion Dark Matter over 1 GHz with CAPP’S Main Ax- ion Experiment, Phys

S. Ahnet al.(CAPP), Extensive Search for Axion Dark Matter over 1 GHz with CAPP’S Main Ax- ion Experiment, Phys. Rev. X14, 031023 (2024), arXiv:2402.12892 [hep-ex]

2024 arXiv
[93]

C. M. Adairet al., Search for Dark Matter Axions with CAST-CAPP, Nature Commun.13, 6180 (2022), arXiv:2211.02902 [hep-ex]

2022 arXiv
[94]

Changet al.(TASEH), First Results from the Taiwan Axion Search Experiment with a Haloscope at 19.6µeV, Phys

H. Changet al.(TASEH), First Results from the Taiwan Axion Search Experiment with a Haloscope at 19.6µeV, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 111802 (2022), arXiv:2205.05574 [hep-ex]

2022 arXiv
[95]

Grenet, R

T. Grenet, R. Ballou, Q. Basto, K. Martineau, P. Perrier, P. Pugnat, J. Quevillon, N. Roch, and C. Smith, The Grenoble Axion Haloscope platform (GrAHal): development plan and first results, (2021), arXiv:2110.14406 [hep-ex]

2021 arXiv
[97]

A. P. Quiskamp, B. T. McAllister, P. Altin, E. N. Ivanov, M. Goryachev, and M. E. Tobar, Direct search for dark matter axions excluding ALP cogenesis in the 63- to 67-µeV range with the ORGAN experiment, Sci. Adv.8, abq3765 (2022), arXiv:2203.12152 [hep-ex]

2022 arXiv
[98]

Quiskamp, B

A. Quiskamp, B. T. McAllister, P. Altin, E. N. Ivanov, M. Goryachev, and M. E. Tobar, Exclusion of Axionlike- 12 Particle Cogenesis Dark Matter in a Mass Window above 100µeV, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 031601 (2024), arXiv:2310.00904 [hep-ex]

2024 arXiv
[99]

A. P. Quiskamp, G. Flower, S. Samuels, B. T. McAllis- ter, P. Altin, E. N. Ivanov, M. Goryachev, and M. E. Tobar, Near-quantum limited axion dark matter search with the ORGAN experiment around 26µeV, (2024), arXiv:2407.18586 [hep-ex]

2024 arXiv
[100]

A. A. Melc´ onet al.(CAST), First results of the CAST- RADES haloscope search for axions at 34.67µeV, JHEP 21, 075, arXiv:2104.13798 [hep-ex]

arXiv
[101]

Ahyouneet al., RADES axion search results with a High-Temperature Superconducting cavity in an 11.7 T magnet, (2024), arXiv:2403.07790 [hep-ex]

S. Ahyouneet al., RADES axion search results with a High-Temperature Superconducting cavity in an 11.7 T magnet, (2024), arXiv:2403.07790 [hep-ex]

2024
[102]

Alesiniet al., Search for Galactic axions with a high- Q dielectric cavity, Phys

D. Alesiniet al., Search for Galactic axions with a high- Q dielectric cavity, Phys. Rev. D106, 052007 (2022), arXiv:2208.12670 [hep-ex]

2022 arXiv
[103]

Di Voraet al.(QUAX), Search for galactic axions with a traveling wave parametric amplifier, Phys

R. Di Voraet al.(QUAX), Search for galactic axions with a traveling wave parametric amplifier, Phys. Rev. D108, 062005 (2023), arXiv:2304.07505 [hep-ex]

2023 arXiv
[104]

Rettaroliet al.(QUAX), Search for axion dark mat- ter with the QUAX–LNF tunable haloscope, Phys

A. Rettaroliet al.(QUAX), Search for axion dark mat- ter with the QUAX–LNF tunable haloscope, Phys. Rev. D110, 022008 (2024), arXiv:2402.19063 [physics.ins- det]

2024 arXiv
[105]

O’Hare, cajohare/axionlimits: Axionlimits,https: //cajohare.github.io/AxionLimits/(2020)

C. O’Hare, cajohare/axionlimits: Axionlimits,https: //cajohare.github.io/AxionLimits/(2020)

2020
[106]

B. T. McAllister, G. Flower, J. Kruger, E. N. Ivanov, M. Goryachev, J. Bourhill, and M. E. Tobar, The ORGAN Experiment: An axion haloscope above 15 GHz, Phys. Dark Univ.18, 67 (2017), arXiv:1706.00209 [physics.ins-det]

2017 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [40]

Fox,Quantum Optics: An Introduction, Oxford Master Series in Physics (OUP Oxford, 2006)

M. Fox,Quantum Optics: An Introduction, Oxford Master Series in Physics (OUP Oxford, 2006)

2006

[2] [1]

Berezinsky and J

V. Berezinsky and J. W. F. Valle, The keV majoron as a dark matter particle, Phys. Lett. B318, 360 (1993), arXiv:hep-ph/9309214

arXiv 1993

[3] [2]

D. S. Gorbunov, Light sgoldstino: Precision measure- ments versus collider searches, Nucl. Phys. B602, 213 (2001), arXiv:hep-ph/0007325

work page Pith review arXiv 2001

[4] [3]

S. P. de Alwis, Effective potentials for light moduli, Phys. Lett. B626, 223 (2005), arXiv:hep-th/0506266

work page Pith review arXiv 2005

[5] [4]

Pilaftsis, Electroweak Resonant Leptogenesis in the Singlet Majoron Model, Phys

A. Pilaftsis, Electroweak Resonant Leptogenesis in the Singlet Majoron Model, Phys. Rev. D78, 013008 (2008), arXiv:0805.1677 [hep-ph]

arXiv 2008

[6] [5]

Arvanitaki, S

A. Arvanitaki, S. Dimopoulos, S. Dubovsky, N. Kaloper, and J. March-Russell, String Axiverse, Phys. Rev. D81, 123530 (2010), arXiv:0905.4720 [hep-th]

arXiv 2010

[7] [6]

Scale-invariance as the origin of dark radiation?

D. Gorbunov and A. Tokareva, Scale-invariance as the origin of dark radiation?, Phys. Lett. B739, 50 (2014), arXiv:1307.5298 [astro-ph.CO]

work page Pith review arXiv 2014

[8] [7]

Bellazzini, A

B. Bellazzini, A. Mariotti, D. Redigolo, F. Sala, and J. Serra,R-axion at colliders, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 141804 (2017), arXiv:1702.02152 [hep-ph]

arXiv 2017