pith. the verified trust layer for science. sign in

arxiv: 2507.13432 · v2 · submitted 2025-07-17 · ✦ hep-ph · astro-ph.HE

INTEGRAL, eROSITA and Voyager Constraints on Light Bosonic Dark Matter: ALPs, Dark Photons, Scalars, B-L and L_{i}-L_{j} Vectors

Thong T.Q. Nguyen , Pedro De la Torre Luque , Isabelle John , Shyam Balaji , Pierluca Carenza , Tim Linden This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-19 04:09 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph astro-ph.HE
keywords light bosonic dark matteraxion-like particlesdark photons511 keV lineeROSITAVoyagerdark matter constraints
0
0 comments X p. Extension

The pith

511 keV line observations set the strongest limits on light bosonic dark matter decay below 1 GeV.

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

The paper calculates the electron-positron pairs produced by the decay of various light bosonic dark matter candidates and uses this to predict signals in cosmic rays and X-rays. It then compares these predictions to data from the Voyager probe, the INTEGRAL satellite's measurement of the 511 keV annihilation line, and eROSITA X-ray observations to place limits on the particles' lifetimes and interaction strengths. A reader should care because these limits help rule out or constrain simple dark matter models that might otherwise explain the universe's missing mass. The work shows how astrophysical data can probe particle physics in regimes inaccessible to colliders.

Core claim

Light bosonic dark matter decays into e+e- pairs, and the resulting flux and radiation can be directly compared to local measurements and sky maps. For models including electrophilic axion-like particles, dark photons, scalars, and B-L or Li-Lj vector bosons, the 511 keV data from INTEGRAL typically gives the best limits for masses under 1 GeV while eROSITA X-ray data dominates between 1 and 10 GeV. The analysis also includes a forecast for future 21 cm observations with HERA.

What carries the argument

The e+e- yield from dark matter decay and the resulting spectra for cosmic rays and X-rays, used to constrain decay lifetime and coupling in each model.

If this is right

  • World-leading limits on bosonic dark matter decay lifetimes below 1 GeV from 511 keV observations.
  • Strongest constraints in the 1-10 GeV range from eROSITA X-ray continuum.
  • Improved bounds on couplings for ALPs, dark photons, scalars, and specific vector bosons.
  • Future limits expected from 21 cm line searches with HERA data.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • These constraints could guide the design of next-generation dark matter searches by highlighting the most promising mass ranges.
  • Similar multi-messenger analyses might be applied to other decay channels or different dark matter candidates.
  • If the background subtraction is accurate, it strengthens the case for using gamma-ray and X-ray data in dark matter studies.
  • Extensions to extragalactic signals or other telescopes could provide independent checks.

Load-bearing premise

The signals observed by INTEGRAL, eROSITA and Voyager can be attributed to dark matter decay after subtracting known backgrounds, with dark matter following a standard galactic halo profile.

What would settle it

Finding that the 511 keV line or X-ray continuum is fully explained by astrophysical sources without any dark matter contribution would invalidate the derived limits on bosonic dark matter.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.13432 by Isabelle John, Pedro De la Torre Luque, Pierluca Carenza, Shyam Balaji, Thong T.Q. Nguyen, Tim Linden.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Branching ratios for all Standard Model decay final [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Branching ratio for all the SM decay modes of a scalar [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Branching ratios of vector particle decays to the SM, with flavor-conserving interactions, similar to Figure [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Comparison of the longitudinal profile of the 511 keV [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Constraints on electrophilic ALP dark matter: ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Constraints on dark photon dark matter: ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Constraints on scalar dark matter: ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Constraints on the universal [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Constraints on lepton-flavor-dependent [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The decay of light bosonic dark matter particles can produce a bright electron/positron ($e^+e^-$) flux that can be strongly constrained by local Voyager observations of the direct $e^+e^-$ flux, as well as 511 keV Line and X-ray continuum observations of $e^+e^-$ emission. We carefully analyze the $e^+e^-$ yield and resulting cosmic-ray and X-ray spectra from theoretically well-motivated light dark matter models, including: (a) electrophilic axion-like particles, (b) dark photons, (c) scalars, and (d) $B-L$ and $L_{i}-L_{j}$ vector bosons. We use the morphology and spectrum of the INTEGRAL 511 keV line data, the eROSITA X-ray continuum spectrum and the Voyager $e^+e^-$ spectrum to constrain the decay lifetime and coupling of each dark matter model. We find that 511 keV observations typically set world-leading limits on bosonic dark matter decay below masses of $\sim$1 GeV, while eROSITA observations provide the strongest constraints in the range from 1--10 GeV. Finally, we forecast future limits from 21 cm line searches with next-generation HERA data.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript analyzes constraints on the decay of light bosonic dark matter (electrophilic ALPs, dark photons, scalars, B-L vectors, and Li-Lj vectors) into e+e- pairs. It employs Voyager local e+e- flux measurements, INTEGRAL 511 keV line morphology and spectrum, and eROSITA X-ray continuum data to bound the decay lifetime and couplings for each model. The central result is that 511 keV observations typically yield world-leading limits below ~1 GeV while eROSITA provides the strongest bounds from 1-10 GeV; forecasts for future HERA 21 cm searches are also presented.

Significance. If the results are robust, the work provides a systematic, multi-messenger update on constraints for several well-motivated light DM scenarios. The consistent treatment of e+e- yield, propagation, and radiation across models, combined with both spectral and morphological information from the 511 keV line, strengthens the analysis relative to single-probe studies. The forecasts for next-generation radio data add forward-looking value.

major comments (2)
  1. [DM density profile and 511 keV morphology section] § on galactic DM distribution and 511 keV flux calculation: the limits rely on a conventional cuspy halo profile (likely NFW) for the line-of-sight integral of DM density. For decay signals the flux scales linearly with density; a cored profile (isothermal or Burkert) reduces the bulge column density by O(1) factors relative to the fiducial choice. This directly impacts whether the derived lifetimes remain world-leading compared to beam-dump or supernova bounds below ~1 GeV. A quantitative sensitivity study to alternative profiles is required to support the strongest claim in the abstract.
  2. [Data analysis and limit extraction sections] § on background subtraction and error budget for INTEGRAL and eROSITA: the claim that DM decay can be isolated after standard astrophysical background subtraction needs an explicit propagation of uncertainties in the e+e- yield, propagation modeling, and residual backgrounds into the final lifetime limits. Without this, it is unclear whether the quoted world-leading status holds once systematic errors are folded in.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Model definitions] Table summarizing the different models and their couplings would improve readability and allow direct comparison of the derived limits.
  2. [Figures] Figure captions for the 511 keV morphology plots should explicitly state the assumed halo profile and the energy range used for the fit.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful and constructive review. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript accordingly to strengthen the robustness of our results.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [DM density profile and 511 keV morphology section] § on galactic DM distribution and 511 keV flux calculation: the limits rely on a conventional cuspy halo profile (likely NFW) for the line-of-sight integral of DM density. For decay signals the flux scales linearly with density; a cored profile (isothermal or Burkert) reduces the bulge column density by O(1) factors relative to the fiducial choice. This directly impacts whether the derived lifetimes remain world-leading compared to beam-dump or supernova bounds below ~1 GeV. A quantitative sensitivity study to alternative profiles is required to support the strongest claim in the abstract.

    Authors: We agree that the DM density profile choice affects decay signals, which scale linearly with density. Our fiducial results use the standard NFW profile. In the revised manuscript we have added a quantitative sensitivity study employing isothermal and Burkert cored profiles. The bulge column density decreases by a factor of approximately 2–3, weakening the lifetime limits by a comparable amount. Nevertheless, the 511 keV constraints remain world-leading below ~1 GeV relative to beam-dump and supernova bounds. This analysis is now presented in a new subsection with an accompanying figure. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Data analysis and limit extraction sections] § on background subtraction and error budget for INTEGRAL and eROSITA: the claim that DM decay can be isolated after standard astrophysical background subtraction needs an explicit propagation of uncertainties in the e+e- yield, propagation modeling, and residual backgrounds into the final lifetime limits. Without this, it is unclear whether the quoted world-leading status holds once systematic errors are folded in.

    Authors: We thank the referee for emphasizing the need for a complete error budget. The original manuscript discussed the primary uncertainty sources but did not fully propagate them. We have now added an explicit propagation of uncertainties arising from the e+e- yield, cosmic-ray propagation modeling, and residual astrophysical backgrounds for both INTEGRAL and eROSITA. The revised limits are presented with conservative systematic error bands, and the world-leading status of the constraints is confirmed even after these systematics are included. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: limits extracted from external datasets using standard models

full rationale

The paper computes e+e- yields and spectra from first-principles decay channels in each bosonic DM model (ALPs, dark photons, scalars, B-L and Li-Lj vectors), then compares the resulting line-of-sight integrals and propagated fluxes against three independent external datasets (INTEGRAL 511 keV morphology/spectrum, eROSITA X-ray continuum, Voyager local e+e- flux). The galactic halo profile, propagation parameters, and background subtraction are taken from the literature as fixed inputs; the derived lifetime/coupling limits are therefore falsifiable against those external observations and do not reduce to any fitted quantity or self-citation by construction. No load-bearing step invokes a self-citation chain, renames a known result, or defines a prediction in terms of itself.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard astrophysical modeling of dark matter density profiles and particle decay kinematics drawn from prior literature, plus the assumption that backgrounds are correctly subtracted in each dataset. No new entities are introduced.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Dark matter follows a standard galactic halo density profile for flux calculations.
    Invoked to convert decay rates into predicted observable fluxes from INTEGRAL, eROSITA, and Voyager.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5806 in / 1281 out tokens · 146205 ms · 2026-05-19T04:09:29.031130+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

206 extracted references · 206 canonical work pages · 58 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    A History of Dark Matter

    G. Bertone and D. Hooper, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 045002 (2018), arXiv:1605.04909 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  2. [2]

    A New Era in the Quest for Dark Matter

    G. Bertone and T. Tait, M. P., Nature 562, 51 (2018), arXiv:1810.01668 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  3. [3]

    De la Torre Luque, P

    P. De la Torre Luque, P. Carenza, and T. T. Q. Nguyen, (2025), arXiv:2507.01962 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  4. [4]

    S. Roy, C. Blanco, C. Dessert, A. Prabhu, and T. Temim, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 071003 (2025), arXiv:2311.04987 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  5. [5]

    Cirelli, N

    M. Cirelli, N. Fornengo, J. Koechler, E. Pinetti, and B. M. Roach, JCAP 07, 026 (2023), arXiv:2303.08854 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  6. [6]

    Cirelli et al

    M. Cirelli et al. , Phys. Rev. D 103, 063022 (2021), arXiv:2007.11493 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  7. [7]

    H. Liu, W. Qin, G. W. Ridgway, and T. R. Slatyer, Phys. Rev. D 104, 043514 (2021), arXiv:2008.01084 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2021

  8. [8]

    W. Qin, J. B. Munoz, H. Liu, and T. R. Slatyer, Phys. Rev. D 109, 103026 (2024), arXiv:2308.12992 [astro- ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2024

  9. [9]

    Carenza, G

    P. Carenza, G. Lucente, and E. Vitagliano, Phys. Rev. D 107, 083032 (2023), arXiv:2301.06560 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  10. [10]

    J. W. Foster, M. Kongsore, C. Dessert, Y. Park, N. L. Rodd, K. Cranmer, and B. R. Safdi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 051101 (2021), arXiv:2102.02207 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2021

  11. [11]

    Implications of the first AMS-02 measurement for dark matter annihilation and decay

    H.-B. Jin, Y.-L. Wu, and Y.-F. Zhou, JCAP 11, 026 (2013), arXiv:1304.1997 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  12. [12]

    Constraints on Decaying Dark Matter from the Isotropic Gamma-Ray Background

    C. Blanco and D. Hooper, JCAP 03, 019 (2019), arXiv:1811.05988 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  13. [13]

    S. Das, J. A. Carpio, and K. Murase, (2024), arXiv:2405.06382 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  14. [14]

    Constraining Very Heavy Dark Matter Using Diffuse Backgrounds of Neutrinos and Cascaded Gamma Rays

    K. Murase and J. F. Beacom, JCAP 10, 043 (2012), arXiv:1206.2595 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  15. [15]

    D. Song, N. Hiroshima, and K. Murase, JCAP 05, 087 (2024), arXiv:2401.15606 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2024

  16. [16]

    D. Song, K. Murase, and A. Kheirandish, JCAP 03, 024 (2024), arXiv:2308.00589 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2024

  17. [17]

    C. W. Bauer, N. L. Rodd, and B. R. Webber, JHEP 06, 121 (2021), arXiv:2007.15001 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  18. [18]

    Gamma-ray Constraints on Decaying Dark Matter and Implications for IceCube

    T. Cohen, K. Murase, N. L. Rodd, B. R. Safdi, and Y. Soreq, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 021102 (2017), arXiv:1612.05638 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  19. [19]

    Baldes, F

    I. Baldes, F. Calore, K. Petraki, V. Poireau, and N. L. Rodd, SciPost Phys. 9, 068 (2020), arXiv:2007.13787 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  20. [20]

    C. Han, M. L. L´ opez-Ib´ a˜ nez, A. Melis, O. Vives, and J. M. Yang, Phys. Rev. D 103, 035028 (2021), arXiv:2007.08834 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  21. [21]

    The Axiflavon

    L. Calibbi, F. Goertz, D. Redigolo, R. Ziegler, and J. Zupan, Phys. Rev. D 95, 095009 (2017), arXiv:1612.08040 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  22. [22]

    Fabbrichesi, E

    M. Fabbrichesi, E. Gabrielli, and G. Lanfranchi, (2020), 10.1007/978-3-030-62519-1, arXiv:2005.01515 [hep-ph]

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-030-62519-1 2020

  23. [23]

    Hebecker, J

    A. Hebecker, J. Jaeckel, and R. Kuespert, JHEP 04, 116 (2024), arXiv:2311.10817 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2024

  24. [24]

    Fayet, Nucl

    P. Fayet, Nucl. Phys. B 187, 184 (1981)

    work page 1981

  25. [25]

    Fayet, Nucl

    P. Fayet, Nucl. Phys. B 347, 743 (1990)

    work page 1990

  26. [26]

    T. T. Q. Nguyen, I. John, T. Linden, and T. M. P. Tait, (2024), arXiv:2412.00180 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  27. [27]

    E. J. Chun and S. Yun, Phys. Rev. D 106, 095027 (2022), arXiv:2205.03617 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  28. [28]

    Stone et al., Science 341, 150 (2013)

    E. Stone et al., Science 341, 150 (2013)

    work page 2013

  29. [29]

    Cummings et al., Astrophys

    A. Cummings et al., Astrophys. J. 831, 18 (2016)

    work page 2016

  30. [30]

    Constraints on dark matter and the shape of the Milky Way dark halo from the 511 keV line

    Y. Ascasibar, P. Jean, C. Boehm, and J. Knoedlseder, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 368, 1695 (2006), arXiv:astro-ph/0507142

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  31. [31]

    Can annihilating Dark Matter be lighter than a few GeVs?

    C. Boehm, T. A. Ensslin, and J. Silk, J. Phys. G 30, 279 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0208458

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  32. [32]

    Boehm, D

    C. Boehm, D. Hooper, J. Silk, M. Casse, and J. Paul, Phys. Rev. Lett.92, 101301 (2004), arXiv:astro- ph/0309686

    work page arXiv 2004

  33. [33]

    A. C. Vincent, P. Martin, and J. M. Cline, JCAP 04, 022 (2012), arXiv:1201.0997 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  34. [34]

    R. J. Wilkinson, A. C. Vincent, C. Bœhm, and C. McCabe, Phys. Rev. D 94, 103525 (2016), 13 arXiv:1602.01114 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  35. [35]

    Aghaie, P

    M. Aghaie, P. De la Torre Luque, A. Dondarini, D. Gaggero, G. Marino, and P. Panci, (2025), arXiv:2501.10504 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  36. [36]

    Calore, P

    F. Calore, P. Carenza, M. Giannotti, J. Jaeckel, G. Lu- cente, L. Mastrototaro, and A. Mirizzi, Phys. Rev. D 105, 063026 (2022), arXiv:2112.08382 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  37. [37]

    C. V. Cappiello, M. Jafs, and A. C. Vincent, JCAP 11, 003 (2023), arXiv:2307.15114 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  38. [38]

    De la Torre Luque, S

    P. De la Torre Luque, S. Balaji, and J. Silk, Astrophys. J. Lett. 973, L6 (2024), arXiv:2312.04907 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  39. [39]

    De la Torre Luque, S

    P. De la Torre Luque, S. Balaji, M. Fairbairn, F. Sala, and J. Silk, (2024), arXiv:2410.16379 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2024

  40. [40]

    Inverse Compton constraints on the Dark Matter e+e- excesses

    M. Cirelli and P. Panci, Nucl. Phys. B 821, 399 (2009), arXiv:0904.3830 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  41. [41]

    De la Torre Luque, S

    P. De la Torre Luque, S. Balaji, and J. Koechler, As- trophys. J. 968, 46 (2024), arXiv:2311.04979 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  42. [42]

    De la Torre Luque, J

    P. De la Torre Luque, J. Koechler, and S. Balaji, Phys. Rev. D 110, 123022 (2024), arXiv:2406.11949 [astro- ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2024

  43. [43]

    eROSITA Science Book: Mapping the Structure of the Energetic Universe

    A. Merloni, P. Predehl, W. Becker, H. B¨ ohringer, T. Boller, H. Brunner, M. Brusa, K. Dennerl, M. Freyberg, P. Friedrich, A. Georgakakis, F. Haberl, G. Hasinger, N. Meidinger, J. Mohr, K. Nandra, A. Rau, T. H. Reiprich, J. Robrade, M. Salvato, A. Santan- gelo, M. Sasaki, A. Schwope, J. Wilms, and t. German eROSITA Consortium, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:1209....

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  44. [44]

    Zheng, G

    X. Zheng, G. Ponti, M. Freyberg, J. Sanders, N. Lo- catelli, A. Merloni, A. Strong, M. Sasaki, J. Comparat, W. Becker, J. Kerp, C. Maitra, T. Liu, P. Predehl, K. Anastasopoulou, and G. Lamer, A&A 681, A77 (2024), arXiv:2312.06745 [astro-ph.GA]

    work page arXiv 2024

  45. [45]

    Predehl et al

    P. Predehl et al. (eROSITA), Astron. Astrophys. 647, A1 (2021), arXiv:2010.03477 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2021

  46. [46]

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

    C. Antel et al. , Eur. Phys. J. C 83, 1122 (2023), arXiv:2305.01715 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  47. [47]

    The landscape of QCD axion models

    L. Di Luzio, M. Giannotti, E. Nardi, and L. Visinelli, Phys. Rept. 870, 1 (2020), arXiv:2003.01100 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  48. [48]

    The Low-Energy Frontier of Particle Physics

    J. Jaeckel and A. Ringwald, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 60, 405 (2010), arXiv:1002.0329 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  49. [49]

    Axions In String Theory

    P. Svrcek and E. Witten, JHEP 06, 051 (2006), arXiv:hep-th/0605206

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  50. [50]

    The type IIB string axiverse and its low-energy phenomenology

    M. Cicoli, M. Goodsell, and A. Ringwald, JHEP 10, 146 (2012), arXiv:1206.0819 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  51. [51]

    On Axion Reheating in the String Landscape

    J. Halverson, C. Long, B. Nelson, and G. Salinas, Phys. Rev. D 99, 086014 (2019), arXiv:1903.04495 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  52. [52]

    Carenza, R

    P. Carenza, R. Pasechnik, and Z.-W. Wang, (2024), arXiv:2411.11716 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  53. [53]

    Carenza, R

    P. Carenza, R. Pasechnik, and Z.-W. Wang, (2024), arXiv:2408.14245 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  54. [54]

    S. Roy, A. Prabhu, C. Thompson, S. J. Witte, C. Blanco, and J. Zhang, (2025), arXiv:2505.20450 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  55. [55]

    Limits on Axion Couplings from the first 80-day data of PandaX-II Experiment

    C. Fu et al. (PandaX), Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 181806 (2017), arXiv:1707.07921 [hep-ex]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  56. [56]

    New limits on Bosonic Dark Matter, Solar Axions, Pauli Exclusion Principle Violation, and Electron Decay from the Majorana Demonstrator

    N. Abgrall et al. (Majorana), Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 161801 (2017), arXiv:1612.00886 [nucl-ex]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  57. [57]

    Searches for electron interactions induced by new physics in the EDELWEISS-III germanium bolometers

    E. Armengaud et al. (EDELWEISS), Phys. Rev. D 98, 082004 (2018), arXiv:1808.02340 [hep-ex]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  58. [58]

    Aralis et al

    T. Aralis et al. (SuperCDMS), Phys. Rev. D 101, 052008 (2020), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 103, 039901 (2021)], arXiv:1911.11905 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2020

  59. [59]

    Aprile et al

    E. Aprile et al. (XENON), Phys. Rev. D 102, 072004 (2020), arXiv:2006.09721 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2020

  60. [60]

    Agostini et al

    M. Agostini et al. (GERDA), Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 011801 (2020), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 129, 089901 (2022)], arXiv:2005.14184 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2020

  61. [61]

    D. S. Akerib et al. (LUX), Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 261301 (2017), arXiv:1704.02297 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  62. [62]

    Li et al

    T. Li et al. (PandaX), (2024), arXiv:2409.00773 [hep- ex]

    work page arXiv 2024

  63. [63]

    Zeng et al

    X. Zeng et al. (PandaX), Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 041001 (2025), arXiv:2408.07641 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2025

  64. [64]

    Aalbers et al

    J. Aalbers et al. (LZ), Phys. Rev. D 108, 072006 (2023), arXiv:2307.15753 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2023

  65. [65]

    Agnes et al

    P. Agnes et al. (DarkSide), Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 101002 (2023), arXiv:2207.11968 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2023

  66. [66]

    Aprile et al

    E. Aprile et al. (XENON), Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 161805 (2022), arXiv:2207.11330 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2022

  67. [67]

    R. Z. Ferreira, M. C. D. Marsh, and E. M¨ uller, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 221302 (2022), arXiv:2202.08858 [hep- ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  68. [68]

    Carenza and G

    P. Carenza and G. Lucente, Phys. Rev. D 103, 123024 (2021), arXiv:2104.09524 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  69. [69]

    Carenza, M

    P. Carenza, M. Giannotti, J. Isern, A. Mirizzi, and O. Straniero, (2024), arXiv:2411.02492 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  70. [70]

    Ghosh and D

    D. Ghosh and D. Sachdeva, JCAP 10, 060 (2020), arXiv:2007.01873 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  71. [71]

    Carenza and G

    P. Carenza and G. Lucente, Phys. Rev. D 104, 103007 (2021), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 110, 049901 (2024)], arXiv:2107.12393 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  72. [72]

    R. Z. Ferreira, M. C. D. Marsh, and E. M¨ uller, JCAP 11, 057 (2022), arXiv:2205.07896 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  73. [73]

    Ning and B

    O. Ning and B. R. Safdi, (2025), arXiv:2503.09682 [hep- ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  74. [74]

    Ghosh, S

    O. Ghosh, S. Jacobsen, and T. Linden, (2025), arXiv:2501.08978 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2025

  75. [75]

    P. F. Depta, M. Hufnagel, and K. Schmidt-Hoberg, JCAP 04, 011 (2021), arXiv:2011.06519 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  76. [76]

    Collider Probes of Axion-Like Particles

    M. Bauer, M. Neubert, and A. Thamm, JHEP 12, 044 (2017), arXiv:1708.00443 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  77. [77]

    P. W. Graham, J. Mardon, and S. Rajendran, Phys. Rev. D 93, 103520 (2016), arXiv:1504.02102 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  78. [78]

    Is the Lightest Kaluza-Klein Particle a Viable Dark Matter Candidate?

    G. Servant and T. M. P. Tait, Nucl. Phys. B 650, 391 (2003), arXiv:hep-ph/0206071

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  79. [79]

    A. E. Nelson and J. Scholtz, Phys. Rev. D 84, 103501 (2011), arXiv:1105.2812 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  80. [80]

    Naturally Light Hidden Photons in LARGE Volume String Compactifications

    M. Goodsell, J. Jaeckel, J. Redondo, and A. Ringwald, JHEP 11, 027 (2009), arXiv:0909.0515 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

Showing first 80 references.