Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 53 references

Beyond the Veil: Charting WIMP Territories at the Neutrino Floor

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper establishes that non-standard cosmological histories and non-thermal production mechanisms can dramatically alter the relationship between relic density and direct-detection prospects, keeping viable WIMP parameter space open at…

desk verdict Useful benchmark maps for the neutrino floor, with a real but acknowledged caveat about the EMD initial conditions; the alleged mass-ratio typo does not hold up. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.16987 v1 pith:GJT44H2K submitted 2025-07-22 hep-ph

Giorgio Arcadi , Manfred Lindner , Stefano Profumo This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-ph
keywords WIMPdarkmatterneutrinofloordirectdetectionbenchmarksfreeze-inearlydominationfast-expandinguniversesimplifiedmodelselectroweakmultiplets
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 aims to show that the neutrino floor—the irreducible background from coherent neutrino-nucleus scattering—does not mark the end of well-motivated WIMP dark matter. Its central claim is that production mechanisms beyond standard thermal freeze-out, especially freeze-in and non-standard early-Universe histories such as early matter domination or fast expansion, can place viable WIMP candidates inside the reach of next-generation direct-detection experiments. A sympathetic reader would take away that the operative benchmark for the final WIMP search is the neutrino floor itself, not the current experimental limits. The paper maps where in the mass–cross-section plane each portal model and electroweak multiplet can still give the observed relic density while remaining detectable.

What carries the argument

The central machinery is a coupled Boltzmann system for the exotic energy component $\Phi$, the radiation bath, and the dark-matter number density, solved with the variable transformation $\Phi = \rho_\phi a^3$, $N_{\rm DM}=n_{\rm DM}a^3$, $A=a/a_I$ (Eqs. 18–20). The relevant parameters are the equation-of-state $\omega$, the decay rate $\Gamma_\phi$, the branching fraction $b_{\rm DM}$ for $\Phi$ decaying into dark matter, and the reheating temperature $T_R$ at which the Universe returns to radiation domination. Two approximate regimes carry the phenomenology: the reannihilation condition $\langle\sigma v\rangle > 1.96\times 10^{-29}\,{\rm cm^3 s^{-1}} b_{\rm DM}^{-1}(1\,{\rm GeV}/T_R)^{4/3}$, with relic density $\Omega^{\rm NT}_{\rm DM}h^2 \simeq (T_{\rm s.f.o.}/T_R)\,\Omega^T_{\rm DM}h^2$, and the direct-production regime $\Omega^{\rm NT}_{\rm DM}h^2 \simeq 0.2\times 10^4 b_{\rm DM}(10\,{\rm TeV}/m_\phi)(T_R/1\,{\rm MeV})(100\,{\rm GeV}/m_{\rm DM})$. For fast expansion ($\rho_\Phi\propto a^{-(4+n)}$, $n>0$) the yield formulas (Eqs. 32 and 34) give the enhanced freeze-out and suppressed freeze-in that shift viable couplings upward into detectable territory. Loop-induced spin-independent cross-sections from Refs. [18] and [30] supply the detection axes for electroweak multiplets and t-channel models.

What would settle it

Re-run the Boltzmann solver of the non-standard cosmology section with the initial $\Phi$ energy density reduced by a factor of ten (or with $m_\phi$ varied away from $10^6$ GeV) and check whether the viable points in Figs. 6, 10, and 13, including the 100 GeV SU(2) doublet, still give $\Omega h^2 = 0.12$; if they do not, the reach conclusions shift.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper establishes benchmark maps for s-channel scalar and vector portals, t-channel mediator models, and electroweak multiplets, computed under standard freeze-out, standard freeze-in, freeze-in during early matter domination, non-thermal production from a decaying component, and freeze-out or freeze-in during fast expansion. The operative result is a set of viable regions in the $(m_{\rm DM}, \sigma^{\rm SI}_{\rm DM,p})$ plane that survive the neutrino floor for next-generation exposures. In particular, a 100 GeV SU(2) doublet, underabundant in standard freeze-out, can acquire the correct relic density through the reannihilation regime of early matter domination ($\Omega^{\rm NT} h^2 \simeq (T_{\rm s.f.o.}/T_R)\, \Omega^T h^2$) or through enhanced freeze-out in a fast-expanding universe, with loop-induced direct-detection cross-sections in reach of future detectors. The paper reads the neutrino floor as a waypoint rather than a wall: the parameter space accessible to ultimate experiments remains rich and worth charting.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the non-standard component starts with the fixed energy density $\rho_\phi=\frac12 m_\phi^2 M_{\rm Pl}^2$ with $m_\phi=10^6$ GeV and zero initial dark-matter abundance, together with loop-induced cross-sections taken from earlier computations; the paper itself notes the initial ratio could be a free parameter.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the central claim is right, the neutrino floor, not current limits, becomes the benchmark for judging whether WIMP dark matter is ruled out; null results up to the floor would still leave the freeze-in and non-standard-cosmology regions open.
  • Feebly interacting freeze-in portals, normally invisible to direct detection, can be pushed into detectable territory when freeze-in happens during a fast-expanding epoch, giving next-generation exposures a concrete target in the $10^{-10}$ to $10^{-3}$ coupling window.
  • An underabundant 100 GeV SU(2) doublet becomes a viable, detectable benchmark through non-thermal production in early matter domination, giving experiments a theoretically motivated low-mass electroweak target.
  • For t-channel and electroweak multiplet models, the loop-induced cross-section is the quantity that decides detectability, meaning the roadmap is sensitive to higher-order calculations.
  • Non-standard cosmological histories provide a general reconciliation mechanism: models whose thermal cross-sections are excluded by direct detection can survive with the correct relic density when the expansion history is modified.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial extension: the paper fixes the initial energy density of $\Phi$ to $\rho_\phi=\frac12 m_\phi^2 M_{\rm Pl}^2$ with $m_\phi=10^6$ GeV and notes the ratio could be a free parameter; if the initial density is smaller, the reannihilation and direct-production regimes shift, so the reach maps in Figs. 6, 10, and 13 should be re-run over that parameter.
  • Editorial extension: because the detection axes for t-channel and electroweak models are taken from Refs. [18] and [30] rather than recomputed, an independent recalculation of the loop-induced cross-sections would test a load-bearing input of every reach conclusion.
  • Editorial extension: a testable corollary of the benchmark maps is that multi-target or directional detectors could distinguish non-standard-cosmology scenarios from standard freeze-out by the recoil spectrum shape, since the same cross-section arises from different velocity distributions in early matter domination versus fast-expanding histories.
  • Editorial extension: the freeze-in-during-fast-expansion coupling window identified here suggests collider searches for long-lived mediators and direct detection are complementary probes of the same benchmark points, a connection the paper leaves implicit.
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

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents benchmark predictions for WIMP direct detection at the neutrino floor for simplified s-channel, t-channel, and electroweak multiplet models, under standard thermal freeze-out, freeze-in, early matter domination (EMD), and fast-expanding cosmologies. It derives approximate relic-density and spin-independent cross-section relations (Eqs. 5-14), then uses Boltzmann-solver scans to map the (m_DM, sigma_SI) plane with current LZ limits and projected XLZD sensitivity. The central claim is that non-standard cosmological histories and non-thermal production keep large parts of the parameter space near the neutrino floor viable. The final cross-section formulas agree with the literature, and the paper is useful as a survey, but the quantitative EMD benchmark maps rely on an arbitrarily fixed initial energy density of the exotic component (footnote 5), and the consistency of the thermal EMD points at low reheating temperatures requires clarification.

Significance. If the benchmark maps are robust, the paper provides a useful roadmap for next-generation direct detection experiments and highlights concrete models that evade current limits but remain testable at the neutrino floor. The paper's main strength is its systematic coverage of production mechanisms and mediation topologies, with explicit use of published loop calculations for t-channel and electroweak multiplets rather than repeating them. The freeze-in and fast-expanding sections are built on established analytical results, and the final formulas (9) and (14) match the literature. However, the EMD benchmark maps are less model-independent than the abstract suggests, and the central 'remarkably rich' claim depends on an arbitrary initial condition that the authors acknowledge as a free parameter. The significance is therefore moderate: the qualitative message is credible, but the quantitative reach plots need additional robustness checks.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. III.A, footnote 5, Eq. (20)] The benchmark maps for the EMD scenarios fix the initial energy density of the exotic component to rho_phi(init) = (1/2) m_phi^2 M_Pl^2 with m_phi = 10^6 GeV, and footnote 5 explicitly acknowledges that the initial rho_phi/rho_R ratio is an arbitrary free parameter. This choice is load-bearing for the thermal freeze-out results: for a fixed reheating temperature T_R, the entropy dilution factor of any pre-reheating DM population is D ~ r T_i / T_R, where r = rho_phi(init)/rho_R(T_i), so the coupling required to match the observed relic density, and hence the predicted sigma_SI in Figs. 6 and 11, varies strongly with this ratio. The paper should either scan over a physically motivated range of rho_phi(init) (subject to Phi domination before BBN) or justify the chosen value from a concrete ultraviolet model before the reach conclusion 'remarkably rich' can be taken as robust.
  2. [Sec. III.A, Eqs. (22)-(24) and Fig. 6] For the adopted initial conditions (r ~ 2e24 for g_* ~ 100 at T_i = 10^6 GeV), the entropy dilution factor is D ~ 2e30 (1 GeV / T_R). Since the comoving DM yield before decay is bounded by its equilibrium value Y_eq <~ 0.1, a thermal freeze-out population produced at T_f >> T_R is diluted to Y <~ 1e-31, many orders of magnitude below the observed Y ~ 4e-12 (100 GeV / m_chi). The thermal EMD points in Fig. 6 can therefore only satisfy the relic-density constraint for T_R very close to T_s.f.o., with negligible dilution. The paper should state the actual T_R distribution of the viable points and clarify what fraction of the claimed new parameter space is not already covered by the standard freeze-out benchmark.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. III.B and Fig. 10 caption] There are several typos and formatting errors: 'Let's know consider' in Sec. III.B, 'XLSD' instead of 'XLZD' in the Fig. 10 caption, and inconsistent notation for the spin-independent cross-section (sigma_SI_chi,psi_p). These should be corrected.
  2. [Eqs. (7) and (13)] The mass-ratio notation in Eqs. (7) and (13) is confusing as typeset; writing the factor explicitly as (m_S / (5 m_chi))^4 and (m_Z' / (5 m_psi))^4 would remove ambiguity and make the consistency with Eqs. (5), (11), and the final formulas (9), (14) transparent.
  3. [Eq. (40) vs. Eq. (4)] Equation (40) in the conclusion omits the square root that appears in Eq. (4) and uses [n^2 - (2Y+1)^2] instead of sqrt(n^2 - (2Y+1)^2); the two forms should be reconciled.
  4. [References] The reference list contains duplicates: [11] and [25] are the same work, [19] and [32] are the same work, and [20] and [39] are the same work. These should be merged.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circular reductions; benchmark cross-sections are outputs of relic-density-constrained Boltzmann scans, and the same-author citations are parameter-free external support.

full rationale

No circular step can be exhibited. The central benchmark maps (Figs. 6, 10, 12, 13) are produced by integrating the Boltzmann system (18)/(20) under the stated initial conditions in Sec. III.A (rho_phi = 1/2 m_phi^2 M_Pl^2, m_phi = 10^6 GeV, zero initial DM), imposing the externally measured relic density as a constraint, and then computing the spin-independent cross-section as an output from the model amplitudes, Eqs. (8), (12), (14), and the loop-induced results from refs. [18] and [30]. The quoted DD sensitivities (LZ, XLZD, neutrino floor) are used as passive comparison curves, not as inputs that select the viable model points, so the predicted cross-sections are not fitted to the experiments they are said to probe. The use of same-author prior work is not circular: the fast-expanding formulas from refs. [14,15,51,55] and the t-channel loop cross-section from ref. [30] are parameter-free published derivations with stated assumptions, and the present paper does not smuggle its target conclusion into those citations. The main caveat appears in footnote 5, which acknowledges that the initial Phi/radiation ratio could be an additional free parameter with potential impact on the relic density and defers that study; this is a benchmark-robustness limitation, not a definitional equivalence or fitted-input prediction. No equation in the paper reduces by construction to its own input, so the paper is not circular beyond a low score reflecting modest self-citation density.

Assumptions & free parameters 10 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central benchmark maps depend on a set of model parameters (masses, couplings) that are scanned, plus cosmological parameters (TR, bDM, n, initial Φ conditions) that are chosen or scanned. No parameter is fit to direct detection data; the relic density constraint fixes some couplings. The initial Φ energy density is an ad hoc choice flagged by the authors as potentially impactful. The paper introduces no new particle beyond the well-known simplified model states and the generic Φ fluid.

free parameters (10)
  • DM mass mχ/mψ = scanned [1, 1000] GeV
    Free parameter of all simplified models; benchmark maps are drawn in this variable.
  • Mediator masses mS, mZ', mΦ = scanned over [10 GeV, 10 TeV] / [1, 10] TeV
    Mass of the new scalar/vector mediator or t-channel scalar; varied in scans and fixed ratios in Fig. 2.
  • DM-mediator couplings λχ, gψ, gVψ = scanned [1e-10, 1] or [1e-2, 10] depending on regime
    Portal couplings; for freeze-out they are set by the relic density constraint, for freeze-in they are scanned.
  • Mediator-SM coupling cS (or gVf) = cS scanned; gVf fixed to 1 in Fig. 1
    Controls annihilation to SM and the direct detection cross-section; partially fixed by the thermalization condition (Eq. 17).
  • Reheating/transition temperature TR = scanned [10 MeV, min(10 GeV, Ts.f.o.)]
    Central parameter of EMD and fast-expanding scenarios; the viable region and DD reach depend strongly on it.
  • Branching parameter bDM = scanned [1e-10, 1]
    Twice the branching ratio of Φ -> DM DM; controls non-thermal production and reannihilation regime.
  • Fast-expansion exponent n = n = 2, 3, 4
    Sets ρΦ ∝ a^{-(4+n)}; three discrete values chosen.
  • Initial Φ energy density and mass = ρφ = 1/2 mφ² M_Pl², mφ = 10^6 GeV (scans), 10 TeV (Eq. 28)
    Chosen initial conditions; the paper flags varying the initial ratio as future work.
  • DM-nucleon form factor fp = ≈ 0.3
    Input hadronic matrix element from literature; enters all σ_SI predictions.
  • Exotic field equation of state ω = ω = 0 (EMD) or ω = -1 - n/3 (fast-expanding)
    Choice of expansion history; not scanned continuously.
assumptions (8)
  • domain assumption The relic density is generated solely by the mechanism under study, in a single-component DM scenario.
    Sec. II conclusion; the paper explicitly excludes multi-component DM and states it as future work.
  • domain assumption Velocity expansion of annihilation cross-sections is accurate away from resonances and thresholds.
    Sec. II footnote 4; the paper excludes those regions from the analytic estimates.
  • domain assumption Loop-induced DD cross-sections for electroweak multiplets and t-channel models are taken from Refs. [18] and [30] without recomputation.
    Sec. II.A and IV use these results for benchmark reach.
  • domain assumption The neutrino floor is the limiting background as computed in the cited CEvNS literature.
    The entire benchmark target definition rests on this.
  • ad hoc to paper The non-standard cosmological component Φ decays with constant rate ΓΦ, and its initial density is set to 1/2 mφ² M_Pl² with mφ = 10^6 GeV.
    Sec. III.A footnote 5; the paper acknowledges the initial ratio is an unvaried free parameter.
  • domain assumption For the fast-expanding-universe freeze-in calculation, DM production is dominated by SM annihilations (bDM = 0) and the Φ contribution is neglected.
    Sec. III.C focuses on thermal freeze-out and freeze-in from SM bath, neglecting non-thermal production.
  • domain assumption Standard BBN bounds apply, so TR > 10 MeV.
    Scan range lower bound; standard cosmological requirement.
  • domain assumption The standard cosmological model is radiation-dominated after reheating; modified expansion only affects early epochs.
    Sec. III; used to set the late-time behavior and BBN consistency.
invented entities (1)
  • Exotic energy component Φ (scalar field/fluid) with decay into SM and DM
    purpose: Drives early matter domination or fast expansion and produces DM non-thermally.
    A phenomenological cosmological ingredient with no direct experimental handle predicted in the paper; its mass and initial density are benchmark parameters.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Beyond the Veil: Charting WIMP Territories at the Neutrino Floor." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GJT44H2K

@misc{pith2026250716987,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Beyond the Veil: Charting WIMP Territories at the Neutrino Floor},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GJT44H2K}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.16987}
}
read the original abstract

We establish comprehensive theoretical benchmarks for Weakly Interacting Massive Particles (WIMPs) accessible to ultimate direct detection experiments, focusing on the challenging parameter space between current experimental limits and the irreducible neutrino background. We systematically examine both thermal freeze-out and freeze-in production mechanisms across a range of simplified dark matter models, including s-channel scalar and vector portals, t-channel mediator scenarios, and electroweakly interacting multiplets. For thermal relics, we identify parameter regions where suppressed direct detection cross-sections naturally arise through momentum-dependent interactions and blind-spot configurations, while maintaining the correct relic abundance. We extensively investigate freeze-in scenarios, demonstrating how feebly interacting massive particles (FIMPs) in portal models can populate experimentally accessible parameter space despite their ultra-weak couplings. Additionally, we explore how non-standard cosmological histories including early matter domination and fast-expanding Universe scenarios can dramatically alter the relationship between relic density and detection prospects, opening new avenues for discovery. Our analysis provides a roadmap for next-generation experiments approaching the neutrino floor, highlighting complementary detection strategies and identifying the most promising theoretical targets for ultimate sensitivity dark matter searches. These benchmarks establish the theoretical foundation for the final push toward comprehensive coverage of well-motivated WIMP parameter space.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.16987 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (10 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: Outcome of a parameter scan for the four portal simplified models assuming thermal pro [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: displays the results in the (mχ, σSI χ,ψp) plane, with different colors corresponding to the reheating temperature values. As customary, the plots also include current exclusion limits from LZ, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_13.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

53 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    reannihila- tion

    Reannihilation and Direct Production Regimes As in the previous subsection, we first illustrate the solution of the Boltzmann equations for some benchmarks. Fig. 8 considers the case of the scalars-channel simplified model with scalar DM. We have selected two benchmark parameter sets: (mχ, mS, cS) = (100 GeV, 1TeV, 1) and (200GeV, 30GeV, 1), and studied t...

    work page

  2. [2]

    A prominent example is a DM candidate charged under SU (2)L with mass be- low 1 TeV, which would satisfy these requirements due to its enhanced annihilation cross-section

    Model-Specific Predictions The reannihilation regime typically enables the correct relic density for models characterized by DM annihilation cross-sections significantly above the thermally favored value of⟨σv⟩ ∼3 × 10−26cm3s−1. A prominent example is a DM candidate charged under SU (2)L with mass be- low 1 TeV, which would satisfy these requirements due ...

    work page

  3. [3]

    WIMP miracle problem

    Direct Detection Prospects Having provided an insight about the solution of the Boltzmann’s equation we can now inves- tigate, in a more systematic way, the potential for direct detection (DD) facilities to probe the non-thermal DM production scenarios described above. We have hence repeated the parameter scans illustrated in the previous subsection but c...

    work page

  4. [4]

    Implication of neutrino backgrounds on the reach of next generation dark matter direct detection experiments,

    J. Billard, E. Figueroa-Feliciano, and L. Strigari, “Implication of neutrino backgrounds on the reach of next generation dark matter direct detection experiments,”Phys. Rev. D89 (2014) 023524, 28 arXiv:1307.5458 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2014

  5. [5]

    Snowmass2021 cosmic frontier dark matter direct detection to the neutrino fog,

    LUX-ZEPLIN Collaboration, D. Akeribet al., “Snowmass2021 cosmic frontier dark matter direct detection to the neutrino fog,”arXiv:2203.08084 [hep-ex]

    arXiv

  6. [6]

    Effective field theory treatment of the neutrino background in direct dark matter detection experiments,

    J. Dent, B. Dutta, J. Newstead, and L. Strigari, “Effective field theory treatment of the neutrino background in direct dark matter detection experiments,”Phys. Rev. D95 (2017) 051701, arXiv:1612.06264 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2017

  7. [7]

    Can we overcome the neutrino floor at high masses?,

    C. O’Hare, “Can we overcome the neutrino floor at high masses?,”Phys. Rev. D102 (2020) 063024, arXiv:2002.07499 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2020

  8. [8]

    Electronic bandstructure and optical gain of lattice matched III-V dilute nitride bismide quantum wells for 1.55 $\mu$m optical communication systems

    D. A. Sierra, N. Rojas, and M. Tytgat, “Neutrino non-standard interactions and dark matter searches with multi-ton scale detectors,”JHEP 01 (2018) 015, arXiv:1706.07007 [hep-ph]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2018

Show all 53 references
  1. [9]

    Higgs portal dark matter freeze-in at stronger coupling: observational benchmarks,

    G. Arcadi, F. Costa, A. Goudelis, and O. Lebedev, “Higgs portal dark matter freeze-in at stronger coupling: observational benchmarks,” arXiv:2406.19110 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  2. [10]

    Dark matter direct detection is testing freeze-in,

    T. Hambye, M. Tytgat, J. Vandecasteele, and L. Vanderheyden, “Dark matter direct detection is testing freeze-in,” Phys. Rev. D98 (2018) 075017, arXiv:1807.05022 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Freeze-in at stronger coupling,

    C. Cosme, F. Costa, and O. Lebedev, “Freeze-in at stronger coupling,”JHEP 10 (2023) 015, arXiv:2303.16216 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  4. [13]

    From WIMPs to FIMPs: Impact of early matter domination,

    J. Silva-Malpartida, N. Bernal, J. Jones-Pérez, and R. Lineros, “From WIMPs to FIMPs: Impact of early matter domination,” arXiv:2406.17284 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  5. [15]

    Feebly interacting dark matter,

    G. Bélanger, S. Chakraborti, and A. Pukhov, “Feebly interacting dark matter,”arXiv:2304.07200 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  6. [16]

    Inelastic freeze-in,

    S. Heeba, T. Lin, and K. Schutz, “Inelastic freeze-in,”Phys. Rev. D108 (2023) 075028, arXiv:2303.08535 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  7. [19]

    Minimal dark matter,

    M. Cirelli, N. Fornengo, and A. Strumia, “Minimal dark matter,”Nucl. Phys. B753 (2006) 178–194, arXiv:hep-ph/0512090

    2006 arXiv

  8. [20]

    Cosmology and Astrophysics of Minimal Dark Matter,

    M. Cirelli, A. Strumia, and M. Tamburini, “Cosmology and Astrophysics of Minimal Dark Matter,” Nucl. Phys. B787 (2007) 152–175, arXiv:0706.4071 [hep-ph]

    2007 arXiv

  9. [21]

    Direct Detection of Electroweak-Interacting Dark Matter,

    J. Hisano, K. Ishiwata, N. Nagata, and T. Takesako, “Direct Detection of Electroweak-Interacting Dark Matter,” JHEP 07 (2011) 005, arXiv:1104.0228 [hep-ph]

    2011 arXiv

  10. [24]

    Casting a wide signal net with future direct dark matter detection experiments,

    G. Gelmini, V. Takhistov, and S. Witte, “Casting a wide signal net with future direct dark matter detection experiments,” JCAP 07 (2018) 009, arXiv:1804.01638 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  11. [25]

    How high is the neutrino floor?,

    C. Bœhm, S. Cebrían, P. Machado, A. O. Campo, E. Perdomo, and E. Reid, “How high is the neutrino floor?,” JCAP 01 (2019) 043, arXiv:1809.06385 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  12. [26]

    Direct detections of dark matter in the presence of non-standard neutrino interactions,

    W. Chao, J. Jiang, and X. Zhang, “Direct detections of dark matter in the presence of non-standard neutrino interactions,”Phys. Rev. D100 (2019) 083517, arXiv:1907.04074 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  13. [27]

    Dark matter vs. neutrinos: the effect of astrophysical uncertainties and timing information on the neutrino floor,

    J. H. Davis, “Dark matter vs. neutrinos: the effect of astrophysical uncertainties and timing information on the neutrino floor,”JCAP 03 (2015) 012, arXiv:1412.1475 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  14. [28]

    Implications of unitarity and gauge invariance for simplified dark matter models,

    F. Kahlhoefer, K. Schmidt-Hoberg, T. Schwetz, and S. Vogl, “Implications of unitarity and gauge invariance for simplified dark matter models,”JHEP 02 (2016) 016, arXiv:1510.02110 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  15. [29]

    Closing in ont-channel simplified dark matter models,

    C. Arina, B. Fuks, L. Mantani, H. Mies, L. Panizzi, and J. Salko, “Closing in ont-channel simplified dark matter models,”Phys. Lett. B813 (2021) 136038, arXiv:2010.07559 [hep-ph] . 29

    2021 arXiv

  16. [30]

    Systematic approach to B-physics anomalies and t-channel dark matter,

    G. Arcadi, L. Calibbi, M. Fedele, and F. Mescia, “Systematic approach to B-physics anomalies and t-channel dark matter,”Phys. Rev. D104 no. 11, (2021) 115012,arXiv:2103.09835 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  17. [31]

    Muong − 2 and B-anomalies from Dark Matter,

    G. Arcadi, L. Calibbi, M. Fedele, and F. Mescia, “Muong − 2 and B-anomalies from Dark Matter,” Phys. Rev. Lett.127 no. 6, (2021) 061802,arXiv:2104.03228 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  18. [32]

    Comprehensive exploration of t-channel simplified models of dark matter,

    C. Arina, B. Fuks, J. Heisig, M. Krämer, L. Mantani, and L. Panizzi, “Comprehensive exploration of t-channel simplified models of dark matter,”Phys. Rev. D108 no. 11, (2023) 115007, arXiv:2307.10367 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  19. [33]

    Dark Matter Direct Detection int-channel mediator models,

    G. Arcadi, D. Cabo-Almeida, F. Mescia, and J. Virto, “Dark Matter Direct Detection int-channel mediator models,” JCAP 02 (2024) 005, arXiv:2309.07896 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  20. [34]

    t-channel dark matter at the LHC,

    C. Arinaet al., “t-channel dark matter at the LHC,”arXiv:2504.10597 [hep-ph]

  21. [35]

    Wino-like Minimal Dark Matter and future colliders,

    M. Cirelli, F. Sala, and M. Taoso, “Wino-like Minimal Dark Matter and future colliders,”JHEP 10 (2014) 033, arXiv:1407.7058 [hep-ph] . [Erratum: JHEP 01, 041 (2015)]

    2014 arXiv

  22. [36]

    Coannihilation without chemical equilibrium,

    M. Garny, J. Heisig, B. Lülf, and S. Vogl, “Coannihilation without chemical equilibrium,”Phys. Rev. D 96 no. 10, (2017) 103521,arXiv:1705.09292 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  23. [37]

    Fourth Exception in the Calculation of Relic Abundances,

    R. T. D’Agnolo, D. Pappadopulo, and J. T. Ruderman, “Fourth Exception in the Calculation of Relic Abundances,” Phys. Rev. Lett.119 no. 6, (2017) 061102,arXiv:1705.08450 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  24. [38]

    Axinos as cold dark matter,

    L. Covi, J. E. Kim, and L. Roszkowski, “Axinos as cold dark matter,”Phys. Rev. Lett.82 (1999) 4180–4183, arXiv:hep-ph/9905212

    1999 arXiv

  25. [39]

    SuperWIMP dark matter signals from the early universe,

    J. L. Feng, A. Rajaraman, and F. Takayama, “SuperWIMP dark matter signals from the early universe,” Phys. Rev. D68 (2003) 063504, arXiv:hep-ph/0306024

    2003 arXiv

  26. [40]

    Three exceptions in the calculation of relic abundances,

    K. Griest and D. Seckel, “Three exceptions in the calculation of relic abundances,”Phys. Rev. D43 (1991) 3191–3203

    1991

  27. [41]

    Cosmic abundances of stable particles: Improved analysis,

    P. Gondolo and G. Gelmini, “Cosmic abundances of stable particles: Improved analysis,”Nucl. Phys. B 360 (1991) 145–179

    1991

  28. [42]

    Evading Direct Dark Matter Detection in Higgs Portal Models,

    G. Arcadi, C. Gross, O. Lebedev, S. Pokorski, and T. Toma, “Evading Direct Dark Matter Detection in Higgs Portal Models,”Phys. Lett. B769 (2017) 129–133, arXiv:1611.09675 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  29. [43]

    WIMPs Below the Radar: Blind Spots and Benchmarks Beyond the Neutrino Floor,

    G. Arcadi and S. Profumo, “WIMPs Below the Radar: Blind Spots and Benchmarks Beyond the Neutrino Floor,” arXiv:2506.19062 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  30. [44]

    Reconstructing Non-standard Cosmologies with Dark Matter,

    P. Arias, N. Bernal, A. Herrera, and C. Maldonado, “Reconstructing Non-standard Cosmologies with Dark Matter,” JCAP 10 (2019) 047, arXiv:1906.04183 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  31. [45]

    Thermal and non-thermal DM production in non-Standard Cosmologies: a mini review,

    G. Arcadi, “Thermal and non-thermal DM production in non-Standard Cosmologies: a mini review,” arXiv:2406.11042 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  32. [46]

    WIMPs during reheating,

    N. Bernal and Y. Xu, “WIMPs during reheating,”JCAP 12 (2022) 017, arXiv:2209.07546 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  33. [47]

    From WIMPs to FIMPs with low reheating temperatures,

    J. Silva-Malpartida, N. Bernal, J. Jones-Pérez, and R. A. Lineros, “From WIMPs to FIMPs with low reheating temperatures,”JCAP 09 (2023) 015, arXiv:2306.14943 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  34. [48]

    Thermal dark matter with low-temperature reheating,

    N. Bernal, K. Deka, and M. Losada, “Thermal dark matter with low-temperature reheating,”JCAP 09 (2024) 024, arXiv:2406.17039 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  35. [49]

    Ultra-Relativistic Freeze-Out During Reheating,

    S. E. Henrich, M. Gross, Y. Mambrini, and K. A. Olive, “Ultra-Relativistic Freeze-Out During Reheating,” arXiv:2505.04703 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  36. [50]

    Largest temperature of the radiation era and its cosmological implications,

    G. F. Giudice, E. W. Kolb, and A. Riotto, “Largest temperature of the radiation era and its cosmological implications,” Phys. Rev. D64 (2001) 023508, arXiv:hep-ph/0005123

    2001 arXiv

  37. [51]

    Accurate estimate of the relic density and the kinetic decoupling in non-thermal dark matter models,

    G. Arcadi and P. Ullio, “Accurate estimate of the relic density and the kinetic decoupling in non-thermal dark matter models,”Phys. Rev. D84 (2011) 043520, arXiv:1104.3591 [hep-ph]

    2011 arXiv

  38. [52]

    The Effect of a late decaying scalar on the neutralino relic density,

    G. Gelmini, P. Gondolo, A. Soldatenko, and C. E. Yaguna, “The Effect of a late decaying scalar on the neutralino relic density,”Phys. Rev. D74 (2006) 083514, arXiv:hep-ph/0605016

    2006 arXiv

  39. [53]

    Light Higgsino Dark Matter from Non-thermal Cosmology,

    L. Aparicio, M. Cicoli, B. Dutta, F. Muia, and F. Quevedo, “Light Higgsino Dark Matter from Non-thermal Cosmology,” JHEP 11 (2016) 038, arXiv:1607.00004 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  40. [54]

    When the Universe Expands Too Fast: Relentless Dark Matter,

    F. D’Eramo, N. Fernandez, and S. Profumo, “When the Universe Expands Too Fast: Relentless Dark Matter,” JCAP 05 (2017) 012, arXiv:1703.04793 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  41. [55]

    Quintessence and the relic density of neutralinos,

    P. Salati, “Quintessence and the relic density of neutralinos,”Phys. Lett. B571 (2003) 121–131, arXiv:astro-ph/0207396

    2003 arXiv

  42. [56]

    SUSY dark matter and quintessence,

    S. Profumo and P. Ullio, “SUSY dark matter and quintessence,”JCAP 11 (2003) 006, arXiv:hep-ph/0309220. 30

    2003 arXiv

  43. [57]

    String or M theory axion as a quintessence,

    K. Choi, “String or M theory axion as a quintessence,”Phys. Rev. D62 (2000) 043509, arXiv:hep-ph/9902292

    2000 arXiv

  44. [58]

    Dark Matter Freeze-in Production in Fast-Expanding Universes,

    F. D’Eramo, N. Fernandez, and S. Profumo, “Dark Matter Freeze-in Production in Fast-Expanding Universes,” JCAP 02 (2018) 046, arXiv:1712.07453 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  45. [59]

    The waning of the WIMP: Endgame?,

    G. Arcadi, D. Cabo-Almeida, M. Dutra, P. Ghosh, M. Lindner, Y. Mambrini, J. P. Neto, M. Pierre, S. Profumo, and F. Queiroz, “The waning of the WIMP: Endgame?,”arXiv:2410.16520 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.