pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2605.08080 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-08 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

CMB Limits on the Absorption of Light Vector and Axial-Vector Dark Matter

Gabriele Montefalcone , Nicola Bellomo , Kimberly K. Boddy
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-11 01:50 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO
keywords dark matterCMB anisotropiesvector dark matteraxial-vector dark matterleptophilic interactionsenergy depositionhydrogen absorptionPlanck 2018
0
0 comments X

The pith

Planck CMB observations constrain vector and axial-vector dark matter couplings to electrons via energy injection into the primordial plasma.

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

The paper models how sub-MeV spin-1 dark matter particles can convert into photons through inelastic scattering with free electrons or absorption by neutral hydrogen atoms, thereby depositing energy that alters the ionization history of the early universe. This energy input modifies the free-electron fraction and imprints on the temperature, polarization, and lensing power spectra measured by Planck. The authors translate these effects into upper limits on the relevant DM-electron coupling constants across the mass range 100 eV to 100 keV, identifying which channel dominates at different masses. The resulting bounds constitute an independent cosmological test of leptophilic dark matter interactions.

Core claim

Leptophilic sub-MeV spin-1 dark matter can inject energy into the primordial plasma through inelastic scattering with free electrons or absorption by neutral hydrogen, altering CMB anisotropies; using Planck 2018 data, the authors derive upper limits on the vector and axial-vector DM-electron couplings for masses between 100 eV and 100 keV, with inelastic scattering dominating above the keV scale due to form-factor suppression and hydrogen absorption dominating at lower masses due to post-recombination efficiency.

What carries the argument

Energy deposition efficiency from DM-induced photon production, which changes the free-electron fraction and thereby shifts the CMB temperature, polarization, and lensing spectra.

If this is right

  • For DM masses above a few keV, the inelastic scattering channel supplies the strongest CMB bound because the atomic form factor suppresses absorption.
  • Below the keV scale, absorption by neutral hydrogen provides the leading constraint because energy injected after recombination efficiently changes the free-electron fraction.
  • The derived coupling limits remain weaker than laboratory and astrophysical bounds yet furnish a fully independent cosmological consistency check.
  • The same energy-injection framework can be applied to future CMB experiments to tighten the mass-dependent constraints.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the form-factor modeling proves more uncertain at high energies than assumed, the crossover mass where scattering overtakes absorption would shift.
  • Extending the analysis to include velocity-dependent couplings or non-standard recombination histories could reveal whether the current limits are conservative.
  • The CMB probe remains valuable even if laboratory bounds improve, because it directly tests the cosmological abundance and thermal history of the same particles.

Load-bearing premise

The calculated energy deposition rates and the hydrogen atomic form factor are accurate enough that the resulting shift in ionization history maps directly onto the observed CMB power spectra without additional unaccounted systematics.

What would settle it

A precise measurement of the CMB power spectra or the reionization optical depth that deviates from the ionization history predicted by the DM energy-injection model at the claimed coupling strengths.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.08080 by Gabriele Montefalcone, Kimberly K. Boddy, Nicola Bellomo.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Feynman diagrams for tree-level DM-electron inelastic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. CMB temperature ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Comparison of our [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Energy deposition functions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_8.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Leptophilic sub-MeV spin-1 dark matter (DM) can be converted into a photon via inelastic scattering with a free electron or absorption by a neutral hydrogen atom in the primordial plasma. We study for the first time the impact of the energy injection resulting from such processes on cosmic microwave background (CMB) anisotropies. We obtain upper limits on the vector and axial-vector DM-electron couplings using Planck 2018 temperature, polarization, and lensing data for DM masses between 100 eV and 100 keV. We find that, due to the suppression of the hydrogen atomic form factor at high energies, inelastic scattering provides the dominant constraint for DM masses above the keV scale. At lower masses, hydrogen ionization through DM absorption is the leading channel, driven by the higher efficiency of post-recombination energy injection in modifying the free-electron fraction. Although the bounds we derive are considerably weaker than existing laboratory and astrophysical limits, they provide a robust and independent cosmological probe of leptophilic DM interactions.

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 paper calculates the energy injection into the primordial plasma from leptophilic spin-1 DM via photon conversion through inelastic electron scattering and neutral-hydrogen absorption. It modifies the ionization history accordingly and derives upper limits on the vector and axial-vector DM-electron couplings from Planck 2018 TT, EE, and lensing data for DM masses 100 eV–100 keV. The authors conclude that inelastic scattering dominates the constraints above ~1 keV because of hydrogen form-factor suppression, while absorption dominates at lower masses.

Significance. If the energy-deposition and form-factor modeling is accurate, the work supplies the first CMB-derived limits on this specific interaction channel. These limits are weaker than laboratory and astrophysical bounds but constitute an independent cosmological probe that distinguishes the two channels by mass scale.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3.3, Eq. (12)] §3.3 and Eq. (12): The hydrogen atomic form factor is used to suppress the absorption rate at high momentum transfer; the transition to inelastic-scattering dominance at m_DM ≳ 1 keV rests on this suppression. No comparison to an independent atomic calculation (e.g., exact hydrogen wave functions) or uncertainty band on the form factor is provided, which directly scales the quoted coupling limits in the keV range.
  2. [§3.4] §3.4: The fraction of deposited energy that ionizes rather than heats is taken from standard prescriptions without a dedicated validation or sensitivity test for the inelastic-scattering channel. Because this fraction sets the redshift-dependent ionization rate and therefore x_e(z), even a factor-of-two uncertainty would shift the high-mass coupling bounds by a comparable factor.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract, §1] The abstract and §1 state that the bounds are 'considerably weaker' than existing limits; a brief quantitative comparison table would help readers assess the complementarity.
  2. [§2] Notation for the vector and axial-vector couplings (g_V, g_A) is introduced without an explicit definition of the interaction Lagrangian; adding the Lagrangian in §2 would remove ambiguity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of our manuscript and for the constructive comments, which help improve the clarity and robustness of our analysis. We address each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§3.3, Eq. (12)] §3.3 and Eq. (12): The hydrogen atomic form factor is used to suppress the absorption rate at high momentum transfer; the transition to inelastic-scattering dominance at m_DM ≳ 1 keV rests on this suppression. No comparison to an independent atomic calculation (e.g., exact hydrogen wave functions) or uncertainty band on the form factor is provided, which directly scales the quoted coupling limits in the keV range.

    Authors: We thank the referee for this observation. The atomic form factor employed in Eq. (12) follows the standard dipole approximation widely adopted in the literature for hydrogen absorption processes. While a direct comparison against exact hydrogen wave-function calculations or an explicit uncertainty band would provide additional rigor, such a dedicated atomic-physics computation exceeds the scope of the present cosmological study. In the revised manuscript we will expand Section 3.3 with a short discussion of the approximation, referencing variations reported in the atomic-physics literature and providing a qualitative estimate of its effect on the high-mass coupling limits. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [§3.4] §3.4: The fraction of deposited energy that ionizes rather than heats is taken from standard prescriptions without a dedicated validation or sensitivity test for the inelastic-scattering channel. Because this fraction sets the redshift-dependent ionization rate and therefore x_e(z), even a factor-of-two uncertainty would shift the high-mass coupling bounds by a comparable factor.

    Authors: We agree that a channel-specific sensitivity test is valuable. The ionization, excitation, and heating fractions are taken from the standard results in the literature for early-universe energy deposition. In the revised Section 3.4 we will include an explicit sensitivity analysis in which the ionization efficiency is varied by a factor of two; the resulting shifts in the derived coupling limits will be shown, thereby quantifying the robustness of the constraints for the inelastic-scattering channel. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: limits derived from external Planck likelihoods via forward modeling

full rationale

The paper performs a forward calculation of energy injection from vector/axial-vector DM processes (absorption and inelastic scattering) into the primordial plasma, using standard atomic form factors and deposition efficiencies to obtain the redshift-dependent ionization rate and resulting x_e(z). This modified recombination history is then passed to an external CMB Boltzmann solver and compared against the independent Planck 2018 TT/EE/lensing likelihoods to extract upper limits on the DM-electron couplings. No parameter in the signal model is fitted to the CMB data itself, nor is any key quantity (form factor, deposition fraction, or ionization efficiency) defined in terms of the target limits. The atomic-physics inputs are taken from established literature and are falsifiable independently of the present dataset. Consequently the derivation chain contains no self-definitional step, fitted-input prediction, or load-bearing self-citation that reduces the claimed result to its own inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The claim rests on standard cosmological perturbation theory, atomic physics inputs for hydrogen, and the assumption that DM-induced energy injection can be treated as a small perturbation to the standard recombination history. No new particles or forces are invented.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Standard Lambda-CDM recombination history and linear perturbation theory remain valid when a small additional energy injection term is added.
    Invoked when mapping DM energy deposition to changes in the free-electron fraction and CMB spectra.
  • domain assumption The hydrogen atomic form factor and DM-electron interaction matrix elements are correctly computed from quantum mechanics.
    Used to determine the relative importance of absorption versus inelastic scattering at different masses.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5479 in / 1423 out tokens · 32900 ms · 2026-05-11T01:50:57.870938+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

111 extracted references · 111 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Cross Section and Atomic Form Factor for DM-Induced Hydrogen Ionization 10

    Axial-vector case 10 B. Cross Section and Atomic Form Factor for DM-Induced Hydrogen Ionization 10

    work page

  2. [2]

    Ionization cross section 11

    work page

  3. [3]

    Evaluation of the atomic form factor 11

    work page

  4. [4]

    Derivation of the DM-electron Absorption Rate 12

    Contributions from individual bound states 12 C. Derivation of the DM-electron Absorption Rate 12

    work page

  5. [5]

    DM conversion via inelastic scattering 13 ∗ montefalcone@utexas.edu

    work page

  6. [6]

    CMB Limits on the Absorption of Light Vector and Axial-Vector Dark Matter

    DM absorption via hydrogen ionization 13 D. DM Absorption Implementation inDarkHistory13 References 14 I. INTRODUCTION The fundamental nature of dark matter (DM) remains one of the central open questions in modern cosmology and particle physics. While terrestrial experiments and astrophysical searches have placed increasingly stringent bounds on DM intera...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  7. [7]

    V ector case The tree-level process e−V→e−γreceives contribu- tions from the two Feynman diagrams shown in Fig. 1. Each diagram involves a (−igV¯eeγν) vertex for the DM coupling and a ( −ieγµ) vertex for the electromagnetic coupling, withe= √4παEM. The corresponding spin- and polarization-averaged squared amplitude is 10 |M|2 = 16παEMg2 V¯ee 3 (s−m2e)2 (m...

    work page

  8. [8]

    The spin and polarization averaging is performed with the same 1/6 factor

    Axial-vector case For the axial-vector model, the calculation proceeds identically to the vector case, with the sole modifica- tion being the replacement of the DM–electron vertex gV¯eeγν→gA¯eeγ5γνin both Feynman diagrams, reflect- ing the axial-vector structure of the coupling. The spin and polarization averaging is performed with the same 1/6 factor. Fo...

    work page

  9. [9]

    Ionization cross section We consider the process in which a vector DM parti- cle Vµwith energy ϵis absorbed by a hydrogen atom, ionizing it. In the NR regime relevant for cold DM at late cosmological times, the massive vector field is dominated by its longitudinal (temporal) component, and the interaction Lagrangian in Eq. (1) reduces to Lint ≈ −gV¯eeV 0 ...

    work page

  10. [10]

    Substituting this decomposition into the matrix ele- ment in Eq

    Evaluation of the atomic form factor To evaluate the form factors numerically, we decom- pose the electron wavefunctions using the two-component spherical spinors Ω κ m(θ,ϕ) as [96, 97] ψe(⃗ r) =1 r ( fκ ϵ(r) Ωκ m(θ,ϕ) igκ ϵ(r) Ω−κ m (θ,ϕ) ) ,(B5) where f and g are the radial components of the elec- tron wavefunction, and the quantum number κ≡(j + 1/2)(−1...

    work page

  11. [11]

    (B10) have been writ- ten as sums over all initial bound states b

    Contributions from individual bound states So far, the form factors in Eq. (B10) have been writ- ten as sums over all initial bound states b. However, as discussed in the main text, in our analysis we re- tain only the contribution from the hydrogen ground state 1S1/2, since for DM masses well above the binding energies, mDM≫O(10 eV), the most tightly bou...

    work page

  12. [12]

    DM conversion via inelastic scattering The interaction rate per unit volume for the inelastic process (V/A)e−→γe−is obtained by integrating the cross section over the phase-space distributions of the incoming DM and electron. In the NR limit, relevant at late cosmological times, both species follow Maxwell– Boltzmann distributions, and we can write ⟨σv⟩=1...

    work page

  13. [13]

    The cross sections, Eqs

    DM absorption via hydrogen ionization For hydrogen ionization, the thermal averaging pro- ceeds analogously to the inelastic scattering case, with the free-electron number density ne replaced by the neu- tral hydrogen density nHI, and the electron velocity now referring to that of the bound electron within the hydro- gen atom. The cross sections, Eqs. (3)...

    work page

  14. [14]

    The result of Eq. (C4) then directly applies, giving ⟨σv⟩(V/A)H→p+e−≈g2 (V/A) ¯eea2 0QV/A(mDM).(C5) Appendix D: DM Absorption Implementation in DarkHistory We compute the energy deposition functions fc(z) using DarkHistory v2.0 [48, 49], which we modify to include the DM conversion processes discussed in Sec. III. In this appendix, we summarize the main m...

    work page

  15. [15]

    J. A. Adams, S. Sarkar, and D. W. Sciama, CMB anisotropy in the decaying neutrino cosmology, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.301, 210 (1998), arXiv:astro- ph/9805108

    work page arXiv 1998

  16. [16]

    Particle decays during the cosmic dark ages

    X.-L. Chen and M. Kamionkowski, Particle decays during the cosmic dark ages, Phys. Rev. D70, 043502 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0310473

    work page Pith review arXiv 2004

  17. [17]

    Detecting dark matter annihilation with CMB polarization: Signatures and experimental prospects,

    N. Padmanabhan and D. P. Finkbeiner, Detecting dark matter annihilation with CMB polarization: Signatures and experimental prospects, Phys. Rev. D72, 023508 15 (2005), arXiv:astro-ph/0503486

    work page arXiv 2005

  18. [18]

    Galli, F

    S. Galli, F. Iocco, G. Bertone, and A. Melchiorri, CMB constraints on Dark Matter models with large annihi- lation cross-section, Phys. Rev. D80, 023505 (2009), arXiv:0905.0003 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2009

  19. [19]

    T. R. Slatyer, N. Padmanabhan, and D. P. Finkbeiner, CMB Constraints on WIMP Annihilation: Energy Ab- sorption During the Recombination Epoch, Phys. Rev. D 80, 043526 (2009), arXiv:0906.1197 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2009

  20. [20]

    Effects of Dark Matter Annihilation on the Cosmic Microwave Background,

    T. Kanzaki, M. Kawasaki, and K. Nakayama, Ef- fects of Dark Matter Annihilation on the Cosmic Mi- crowave Background, Prog. Theor. Phys.123, 853 (2010), arXiv:0907.3985 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2010

  21. [21]

    Hutsi, J

    G. Hutsi, J. Chluba, A. Hektor, and M. Raidal, WMAP7 and future CMB constraints on annihilating dark matter: implications on GeV-scale WIMPs, Astron. Astrophys. 535, A26 (2011), arXiv:1103.2766 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2011

  22. [22]

    Galli, F

    S. Galli, F. Iocco, G. Bertone, and A. Melchiorri, Updated CMB constraints on dark matter annihilation cross sec- tions, Phys. Rev. D84, 027302 (2011), arXiv:1106.1528 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2011

  23. [23]

    Giesen, J

    G. Giesen, J. Lesgourgues, B. Audren, and Y. Ali- Haimoud, CMB photons shedding light on dark matter, JCAP12, 008, arXiv:1209.0247 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv

  24. [24]

    D. P. Finkbeiner, S. Galli, T. Lin, and T. R. Slatyer, Searching for dark matter in the CMB: A compact parametrization of energy injection from new physics, Phys. Rev. D85, 043522 (2012), arXiv:1109.6322 [astro- ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2012

  25. [25]

    T. R. Slatyer, Energy Injection And Absorption In The Cosmic Dark Ages, Phys. Rev. D87, 123513 (2013), arXiv:1211.0283 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2013

  26. [26]

    J. M. Cline and P. Scott, Dark Matter CMB Constraints and Likelihoods for Poor Particle Physicists, JCAP03, 044, [Erratum: JCAP 05, E01 (2013)], arXiv:1301.5908 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2013

  27. [27]

    Weniger, P

    C. Weniger, P. D. Serpico, F. Iocco, and G. Bertone, CMB bounds on dark matter annihilation: Nucleon energy- losses after recombination, Phys. Rev. D87, 123008 (2013), arXiv:1303.0942 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2013

  28. [28]

    Vincent,Constraints on dark matter annihilation from CMB observationsbefore Planck,JCAP07(2013) 046, [arXiv:1303.5094]

    L. Lopez-Honorez, O. Mena, S. Palomares-Ruiz, and A. C. Vincent, Constraints on dark matter annihilation from CMB observationsbefore Planck, JCAP07, 046, arXiv:1303.5094 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv

  29. [29]

    Vincent,Constraining Dark Matter Late-Time Energy Injection: Decays and P-Wave Annihilations,JCAP02(2014) 017, [arXiv:1308.2578]

    R. Diamanti, L. Lopez-Honorez, O. Mena, S. Palomares- Ruiz, and A. C. Vincent, Constraining Dark Matter Late- Time Energy Injection: Decays and P-Wave Annihilations, JCAP02, 017, arXiv:1308.2578 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv

  30. [30]

    M. S. Madhavacheril, N. Sehgal, and T. R. Slatyer, Cur- rent Dark Matter Annihilation Constraints from CMB and Low-Redshift Data, Phys. Rev. D89, 103508 (2014), arXiv:1310.3815 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2014

  31. [31]

    Slatyer, Marcos Valdes, and Fabio Iocco,Systematic Uncertainties In Constraining Dark Matter Annihilation From The Cosmic Microwave Background,Phys

    S. Galli, T. R. Slatyer, M. Valdes, and F. Iocco, Systematic Uncertainties In Constraining Dark Matter Annihilation From The Cosmic Microwave Background, Phys. Rev. D 88, 063502 (2013), arXiv:1306.0563 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2013

  32. [32]

    T. R. Slatyer, Indirect dark matter signatures in the cosmic dark ages. I. Generalizing the bound on s-wave dark matter annihilation from Planck results, Phys. Rev. D93, 023527 (2016), arXiv:1506.03811 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2016

  33. [33]

    Poulin, P

    V. Poulin, P. D. Serpico, and J. Lesgourgues, A fresh look at linear cosmological constraints on a decaying dark matter component, JCAP08, 036, arXiv:1606.02073 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv

  34. [34]

    T. R. Slatyer and C.-L. Wu, General Constraints on Dark Matter Decay from the Cosmic Microwave Background, Phys. Rev. D95, 023010 (2017), arXiv:1610.06933 [astro- ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2017

  35. [35]

    H. Liu, T. R. Slatyer, and J. Zavala, Contributions to cosmic reionization from dark matter annihilation and decay, Phys. Rev. D94, 063507 (2016), arXiv:1604.02457 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2016

  36. [36]

    Cosmological constraints on exotic injection of electromagnetic energy

    V. Poulin, J. Lesgourgues, and P. D. Serpico, Cosmological constraints on exotic injection of electromagnetic energy, JCAP03, 043, arXiv:1610.10051 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page Pith review arXiv

  37. [37]

    J. Cang, Y. Gao, and Y.-Z. Ma, Probing dark matter with future CMB measurements, Phys. Rev. D102, 103005 (2020), arXiv:2002.03380 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2020

  38. [38]

    Kawasaki, H

    M. Kawasaki, H. Nakatsuka, K. Nakayama, and T. Sekiguchi, Revisiting CMB constraints on dark mat- ter annihilation, JCAP12(12), 015, arXiv:2105.08334 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv

  39. [39]

    H. Liu, W. Qin, G. W. Ridgway, and T. R. Slatyer, Exotic energy injection in the early Universe. II. CMB spectral distortions and constraints on light dark mat- ter, Phys. Rev. D108, 043531 (2023), arXiv:2303.07370 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2023

  40. [40]

    Ferreira, Laura Lopez-Honorez, and Olga Mena,CMB and Lyman-αconstraints on dark matter decays to photons,JCAP06(2023) 060, [arXiv:2303.07426]

    F. Capozzi, R. Z. Ferreira, L. Lopez-Honorez, and O. Mena, CMB and Lyman- αconstraints on dark mat- ter decays to photons, JCAP06, 060, arXiv:2303.07426 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv

  41. [41]

    C. Xu, W. Qin, and T. R. Slatyer, CMB limits on decaying dark matter beyond the ionization threshold, Phys. Rev. D110, 123529 (2024), arXiv:2408.13305 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2024

  42. [42]

    Montefalcone, G

    G. Montefalcone, G. Elor, K. K. Boddy, and N. Bel- lomo, CMB constraints on loop-induced decays of lep- tophilic dark matter, Phys. Rev. D112, 023506 (2025), arXiv:2503.00110 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  43. [43]

    Working Group Report: New Light Weakly Coupled Particles,

    R. Essig et al., Working Group Report: New Light Weakly Coupled Particles, in Snowmass 2013: Snowmass on the Mississippi (2013) arXiv:1311.0029 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2013

  44. [44]

    Alexanderet al.(2016) arXiv:1608.08632 [hep-ph]

    J. Alexander et al., Dark Sectors 2016 Workshop: Com- munity Report (2016) arXiv:1608.08632 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2016

  45. [45]

    Fabbrichesi, E

    M. Fabbrichesi, E. Gabrielli, and G. Lanfranchi, The Dark Photon (2020), arXiv:2005.01515 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  46. [46]

    The Dark Photon: a 2026 Perspective,

    A. Caputo and R. Essig, The Dark Photon: a 2026 Per- spective (2026) arXiv:2603.08430 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2026

  47. [47]

    D. J. H. Chung, E. W. Kolb, and A. Riotto, Nonthermal supermassive dark matter, Phys. Rev. Lett.81, 4048 (1998), arXiv:hep-ph/9805473

    work page arXiv 1998

  48. [48]

    Ahmed, B

    A. Ahmed, B. Grzadkowski, and A. Socha, Gravita- tional production of vector dark matter, JHEP08, 059, arXiv:2005.01766 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2005

  49. [49]

    E. W. Kolb and A. J. Long, Cosmological gravita- tional particle production and its implications for cos- mological relics, Rev. Mod. Phys.96, 045005 (2024), arXiv:2312.09042 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2024

  50. [50]

    A. E. Nelson and J. Scholtz, Dark Light, Dark Matter and the Misalignment Mechanism, Phys. Rev. D84, 103501 (2011), arXiv:1105.2812 [hep-ph]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2011

  51. [51]

    Agrawal, N

    P. Agrawal, N. Kitajima, M. Reece, T. Sekiguchi, and F. Takahashi, Relic Abundance of Dark Photon Dark Mat- ter, Phys. Lett. B801, 135136 (2020), arXiv:1810.07188 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  52. [52]

    Can annihilating Dark Matter be lighter than a few GeVs?

    C. Boehm, T. A. Ensslin, and J. Silk, Can Annihilating dark matter be lighter than a few GeVs?, J. Phys. G30, 279 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0208458. 16

    work page Pith review arXiv 2004

  53. [53]

    P. D. Serpico and G. G. Raffelt, MeV-mass dark matter and primordial nucleosynthesis, Phys. Rev. D70, 043526 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0403417

    work page arXiv 2004

  54. [54]

    K. M. Nollett and G. Steigman, BBN And The CMB Constrain Light, Electromagnetically Coupled WIMPs, Phys. Rev. D89, 083508 (2014), arXiv:1312.5725 [astro- ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2014

  55. [55]

    Steigman and K

    G. Steigman and K. M. Nollett, Light WIMPs, Equivalent Neutrinos, BBN, and the CMB, Mem. Soc. Ast. It.85, 175 (2014), arXiv:1401.5488 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2014

  56. [56]

    K. M. Nollett and G. Steigman, BBN And The CMB Constrain Neutrino Coupled Light WIMPs, Phys. Rev. D 91, 083505 (2015), arXiv:1411.6005 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2015

  57. [57]

    Escudero,Neutrino decoupling beyond the Standard Model: CMB constraints on the Dark Matter mass with a fast and preciseN eff evaluation,JCAP02(2019) 007, [1812.05605]

    M. Escudero, Neutrino decoupling beyond the Standard Model: CMB constraints on the Dark Matter mass with a fast and precise Neffevaluation, JCAP02, 007, arXiv:1812.05605 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv

  58. [58]

    Sabti, J

    N. Sabti, J. Alvey, M. Escudero, M. Fairbairn, and D. Blas, Refined Bounds on MeV-scale Thermal Dark Sectors from BBN and the CMB, JCAP01, 004, arXiv:1910.01649 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 1910

  59. [59]

    Giovanetti, M

    C. Giovanetti, M. Lisanti, H. Liu, and J. T. Ruderman, Joint Cosmic Microwave Background and Big Bang Nu- cleosynthesis Constraints on Light Dark Sectors with Dark Radiation, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 021302 (2022), arXiv:2109.03246 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  60. [60]

    R. An, K. K. Boddy, and V. Gluscevic, Interacting light thermal-relic dark matter: Self-consistent cos- mological bounds, Phys. Rev. D109, 123522 (2024), arXiv:2402.14223 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2024

  61. [61]

    Aghanim et al

    N. Aghanimet al.(Planck Collaboration), Planck 2018 Results. V. CMB Power Spectra and Likelihoods, As- tron. Astrophys.641, A5 (2020), arXiv:1907.12875 [astro- ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2018

  62. [62]

    H. Liu, G. W. Ridgway, and T. R. Slatyer, Code package for calculating modified cosmic ionization and thermal histories with dark matter and other exotic energy injec- tions, Phys. Rev. D101, 023530 (2020), arXiv:1904.09296 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2020

  63. [63]

    H. Liu, W. Qin, G. W. Ridgway, and T. R. Slatyer, Exotic energy injection in the early Universe. I. A novel treatment for low-energy electrons and photons, Phys. Rev. D108, 043530 (2023), arXiv:2303.07366 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2023

  64. [64]

    D. Blas, J. Lesgourgues, and T. Tram, The Cosmic Linear Anisotropy Solving System (CLASS) II: Approximation Schemes, JCAP07, 034, arXiv:1104.2933 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv

  65. [65]

    Baruch, P

    C. Baruch, P. Ilten, Y. Soreq, and M. Williams, Axial vectors in DarkCast, JHEP11, 124, arXiv:2206.08563 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv

  66. [66]

    Changes in Dark Matter Properties After Freeze-Out

    T. Cohen, D. E. Morrissey, and A. Pierce, Changes in Dark Matter Properties After Freeze-Out, Phys. Rev. D 78, 111701 (2008), arXiv:0808.3994 [hep-ph]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2008

  67. [67]

    M. J. Baker, J. Kopp, and A. J. Long, Filtered Dark Matter at a First Order Phase Transition, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 151102 (2020), arXiv:1912.02830 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  68. [68]

    G. Elor, R. McGehee, and A. Pierce, Maximizing Di- rect Detection with Highly Interactive Particle Relic Dark Matter, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 031803 (2023), arXiv:2112.03920 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  69. [69]

    A. Das, S. Das, and S. K. Sethi, Mass-varying dark matter and its cosmological signature, Phys. Rev. D108, 083501 (2023), arXiv:2303.17947 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2023

  70. [70]

    Mandal and N

    S. Mandal and N. Sehgal, Mass-varying dark matter from a phase transition, Phys. Rev. D107, 123003 (2023), arXiv:2212.07884 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  71. [71]

    Redondo and M

    J. Redondo and M. Postma, Massive hidden photons as lukewarm dark matter, JCAP02, 005, arXiv:0811.0326 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv

  72. [72]

    Stellar cooling bounds on new light particles: plasma mixing effects,

    E. Hardy and R. Lasenby, Stellar cooling bounds on new light particles: plasma mixing effects, JHEP02, 033, arXiv:1611.05852 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv

  73. [73]

    H. An, M. Pospelov, and J. Pradler, New stellar con- straints on dark photons, Phys. Lett. B725, 190 (2013), arXiv:1302.3884 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2013

  74. [74]

    Redondo and G

    J. Redondo and G. Raffelt, Solar constraints on hidden photons re-visited, JCAP08, 034, arXiv:1305.2920 [hep- ph]

    work page arXiv

  75. [75]

    Light Dark Matter: Models and Constraints,

    S. Knapen, T. Lin, and K. M. Zurek, Light Dark Matter: Models and Constraints, Phys. Rev. D96, 115021 (2017), arXiv:1709.07882 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2017

  76. [76]

    H. A. Bethe and E. E. Salpeter, Quantum mechanics of one- and two-electron atoms , 1st ed. (Springer-Verlag, 1957)

    work page 1957

  77. [77]

    I. I. Sobelman, Atomic spectra and radiative transitions , 2nd ed. (Springer-Verlag, 1992)

    work page 1992

  78. [78]

    Exotic energy injection with ExoCLASS: Application to the Higgs portal model and evaporating black holes

    P. St¨ ocker, M. Kr¨ amer, J. Lesgourgues, and V. Poulin, Exotic energy injection with ExoCLASS: Application to the Higgs portal model and evaporating black holes, JCAP 03, 018, arXiv:1801.01871 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page Pith review arXiv

  79. [79]

    Ali-Ha ¨ ımoud, S

    Y. Ali-Ha ¨ ımoud, S. Seher Gandhi, and T. L. Smith, Ex- act treatment of weak dark matter-baryon scattering for linear-cosmology observables, Physical Review D109, 10.1103/physrevd.109.083523 (2024)

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.109.083523 2024

  80. [80]

    Conservative Constraints on Early Cosmology: an illustration of the Monte Python cosmological parameter inference code

    B. Audren, J. Lesgourgues, K. Benabed, and S. Prunet, Conservative Constraints on Early Cosmology: An Il- lustration of the MontePython Cosmological Parameter Inference Code, JCAP02, 001, arXiv:1210.7183 [astro- ph.CO]

    work page Pith review arXiv

Showing first 80 references.