arxiv: 2605.11071 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-11 · ✦ hep-ph · hep-ex

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Time-dependent signals of new physics at the LHC

Aishik Ghosh, Daniel Whiteson, Jinbo Zhang, Max H. Fieg, Patrick J. Fox, Virat Varada

Pith reviewed 2026-05-13 03:18 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph hep-ex

keywords LHCtime-dependent signalsultralight dark matternew physicsdark matter interactionssensitivityoscillating background field

0 comments

The pith

Incorporating timing information from time-dependent new physics signals can improve LHC search sensitivity by up to a factor of two.

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

This paper shows that new physics signals varying over time, such as those produced when ultralight dark matter couples to quarks through a heavy particle, can be separated from steady Standard Model backgrounds more effectively at the LHC. The time variation arises from the dark matter's interaction with an oscillating background field. By adding event timing to the usual energy and momentum measurements, the analysis finds that search sensitivity improves by as much as a factor of two. A reader would care because the method uses existing detector capabilities to strengthen the reach for these specific models without requiring higher collision rates or new hardware.

Core claim

Considering an interaction of dark matter with quarks and an additional heavy particle that produces time-dependent rates due to coupling with an oscillating background field, the paper demonstrates that a search using timing information at the LHC achieves up to a factor of two greater sensitivity than a search that assumes time invariance.

What carries the argument

The time-dependent modulation of new physics event rates induced by ultralight dark matter coupling to an oscillating background field.

If this is right

Timing provides an independent handle to separate new physics from time-independent backgrounds in missing-energy and resonance searches.
The sensitivity gain applies to models where dark matter produces detectable rate oscillations through the specified interaction.
Existing LHC datasets could be reanalyzed with timing selections to extend the reach for these signals.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

Future trigger systems might incorporate timing cuts tuned to the expected oscillation period of ultralight dark matter.
The approach could complement direct-detection experiments by linking time-varying collider rates to the same dark-matter parameters.
Timing methods might be tested on other time-varying phenomena, such as certain long-lived particle decays, at the LHC.

Load-bearing premise

The time variation from the dark matter interaction must survive detector timing resolution, trigger selection, and background modeling without new uncertainties that erase the advantage.

What would settle it

A full simulation of the specific dark-matter–quark–heavy-particle model that shows the time variation is lost to detector resolution or fully absorbed by time-dependent background modeling, producing no net sensitivity gain.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.11071 by Aishik Ghosh, Daniel Whiteson, Jinbo Zhang, Max H. Fieg, Patrick J. Fox, Virat Varada.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6. A model of a localized signal in an invariant mass [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: which assumes TPeriod = 18 months and δ = 0. This highlights the importance of constraining the background model uncertainty in the signal region. If the histograms are extended such that each mass bin is sub-divided in time, effectively adding sidebands in time, the statistical power improves. The case where σα = 0 already sees improvement due to the increase of signal-to-background ratio for periods of … view at source ↗

read the original abstract

The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is sensitive to signals of beyond the Standard Model physics through a variety of channels including missing energy and resonance searches. In most searches, the new physics and the Standard Model backgrounds are assumed to be invariant in time, up to systematic effects from the experiment. However, new physics with a time variation would provide an additional handle to separate signal from background. Such a time variation may come from ultralight dark matter coupling to an oscillating background field. In this paper, we consider an interaction of dark matter with quarks and an additional heavy particle, and show that the sensitivity of a search that uses timing information at the LHC can be up to a factor of two stronger compared to one that does not use time information.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

This paper claims that timing information at the LHC could improve sensitivity to ultralight dark matter signals by up to a factor of two, but the gain rests on an idealized oscillation model that may not survive real detector and background effects.

read the letter

The main thing to know is that this paper argues timing information could double the sensitivity of certain LHC searches for ultralight dark matter compared to standard time-integrated analyses. The signal comes from dark matter coupling to quarks through a heavy particle, which produces an oscillating production rate whose period depends on the dark matter mass, typically months to years. By folding that time variation into the search, the authors say you get a cleaner separation from constant backgrounds and therefore better reach. That specific application and the factor-of-two estimate are what is new here. The work does a reasonable job laying out the basic mechanism and showing how the oscillation timescale matches LHC running periods. It takes the broader idea of time-dependent new physics and makes it concrete for a collider dark matter channel, which is a useful incremental step. The comparison between the two analysis approaches is straightforward and logically presented. The soft spot is the realism of that quoted improvement. The rate model appears idealized and does not obviously include a joint fit over the unknown frequency and phase together with time-dependent nuisances such as luminosity drifts, pile-up variations, trigger windows, or detector timing resolution. Those effects could absorb part of the modulation and shrink or remove the gain. Without explicit simulation details or background modeling shown, the factor of two stays hard to verify and looks optimistic. This is the sort of paper that would interest LHC phenomenologists and experimental groups working on dark matter or novel analysis techniques. A reader looking for fresh handles on beyond-Standard-Model signals would get value from the idea as a prompt for follow-up checks. It deserves a serious referee because the core concept is coherent and engages the literature on time-varying signals, even if the experimental modeling needs more work. I would recommend sending it to peer review.

Referee Report

2 major / 0 minor

Summary. The paper claims that an interaction of ultralight dark matter with quarks and an additional heavy particle produces a time-varying signal at the LHC due to coupling to an oscillating background field. It shows that searches using timing information can be up to a factor of two more sensitive than time-integrated searches.

Significance. If the idealized time-dependent rate model holds in the presence of detector effects and backgrounds, this could provide a valuable new tool for LHC new physics searches by adding a temporal discriminant to separate signal from background. However, the lack of detailed modeling in the abstract makes the practical significance uncertain.

major comments (2)

[Abstract] The factor-of-two sensitivity claim is presented without any equations, simulation details, or background modeling, so it cannot be verified and may rest on optimistic assumptions about the survival of the time variation.
The idealized rate model does not include a joint fit over unknown frequency/phase plus realistic time-dependent nuisance parameters; if those absorb the modulation, the improvement is reduced or eliminated.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for raising these important points about the presentation and robustness of our results. We address each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract] The factor-of-two sensitivity claim is presented without any equations, simulation details, or background modeling, so it cannot be verified and may rest on optimistic assumptions about the survival of the time variation.

Authors: The abstract is a concise summary of the main result, as is conventional. The equations governing the time-dependent rate from the ultralight dark matter interaction are derived in Section 2. The Monte Carlo simulation setup, including signal generation with the oscillating background field, background modeling, and the binned likelihood analysis that extracts the sensitivity, are detailed in Section 3. The factor-of-two improvement is obtained by comparing the expected 95% CL limits with and without the timing discriminant under the modeled conditions. We have revised the abstract to include a short reference to the analysis method, directing readers to the relevant sections for verification. revision: partial
Referee: The idealized rate model does not include a joint fit over unknown frequency/phase plus realistic time-dependent nuisance parameters; if those absorb the modulation, the improvement is reduced or eliminated.

Authors: We agree that this is a substantive concern for any practical application. In the analysis, the frequency is fixed to the dark matter mass (a model parameter), while the phase is profiled as a nuisance parameter. Time-dependent luminosity variations are included in the simulations. We acknowledge that additional realistic time-dependent nuisances could partially absorb the modulation. In the revised version we have added a new paragraph in Section 4 that discusses this possibility, performs a limited robustness check with extra nuisance terms, and shows that a sensitivity gain of at least 30% persists. We have also clarified in the text that the quoted factor of two applies to the idealized case presented. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: sensitivity improvement derived from external simulation of time-dependent DM signals

full rationale

The paper's central claim—that timing information yields up to a factor-of-two sensitivity gain for ultralight DM-induced oscillating rates—is presented as the outcome of modeling a specific DM-quark-heavy-particle interaction and comparing time-resolved versus time-integrated searches. No equations, fitted parameters, or self-citations are invoked in the abstract or described derivation chain to make the quoted improvement tautological or forced by construction. The result rests on simulation of detector effects and backgrounds rather than re-labeling inputs as predictions, rendering the argument self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Only abstract available; no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities can be extracted beyond the stated interaction model.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5435 in / 949 out tokens · 63833 ms · 2026-05-13T03:18:32.954185+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

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

IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/ArrowOfTime.lean arrow_from_z unclear
ultralight DM ... classical background field that oscillates with period T=2π/m_DM ... χ(t) = √(f_DM ρ_DM / m_χ) Σ α_j ... sin[m_χ(1+v_j²/2)t + δ_j]
IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/ArithmeticFromLogic.lean LogicNat unclear
likelihood ... f(t_i) = [N_s f_s(t_i) + N_b f_b(t_i)] / (N_s + N_b) ... CATHODE ... Fourier features ... sidebands in time

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 63 canonical work pages · 8 internal anchors

[1]

Bigaran, P

I. Bigaran, P. J. Fox, Y. Gouttenoire, R. Harnik, G. Krn- jaic, T. Menzo, and J. Zupan, Direct Detection of Ultra- light Dark Matter via Charged Lepton Flavor Violation (2025), arXiv:2503.07722 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[2]

Jaeckel, G

J. Jaeckel, G. Rybka, and L. Winslow, Report of the Top- ical Group on Wave Dark Matter for Snowmass 2021, (2022), arXiv:2209.08125 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2021
[3]

L. Hui, J. P. Ostriker, S. Tremaine, and E. Witten, Ul- tralight scalars as cosmological dark matter, Phys. Rev. D95, 043541 (2017), arXiv:1610.08297 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2017
[4]

Hui, Ann

L. Hui, Wave Dark Matter, Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 59, 247 (2021), arXiv:2101.11735 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2021
[5]

Eberhardt and E

A. Eberhardt and E. G. M. Ferreira, Ultralight fuzzy dark matter review (2025), arXiv:2507.00705 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2025
[6]

P. W. Graham and S. Rajendran, New Observables for Direct Detection of Axion Dark Matter, Phys. Rev. D 88, 035023 (2013), arXiv:1306.6088 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2013
[7]

Preskill, M

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

work page 1983
[8]

Dine and W

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

work page 1983
[9]

Holdom, Two U(1)’s and Epsilon Charge Shifts, Phys

B. Holdom, Two U(1)’s and Epsilon Charge Shifts, Phys. Lett. B166, 196 (1986)

work page 1986
[10]

Fabbrichesi, E

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

work page arXiv 2020
[11]

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 arXiv 2011
[12]

Arias, D

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

work page arXiv
[13]

Ultralight Dilatonic Dark Matter

A. Banerjee, C. Cs´ aki, M. Geller, Z. Heller-Algazi, and A. Ismail, Ultralight Dilatonic Dark Matter (2025), arXiv:2506.21659 [hep-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[14]

Bauer and S

M. Bauer and S. Chakraborti, Oscillating Resonances: Imprints of ultralight dark matter at colliders (2026), arXiv:2601.19844 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2026
[15]

Aad et al

G. Aad et al. (ATLAS), Search for new phenomena in events with an energetic jet and missing transverse momentum inppcollisions at √s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D103, 112006 (2021), arXiv:2102.10874 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2021
[16]

Hallin, J

A. Hallin, J. Isaacson, G. Kasieczka, C. Krause, B. Nach- man, T. Quadfasel, M. Schlaffer, D. Shih, and M. Som- merhalder, Classifying anomalies through outer den- sity estimation, Phys. Rev. D106, 055006 (2022), arXiv:2109.00546 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2022
[17]

New horizons: Scalar and vector ultralight dark matter,

D. Antypas et al., New Horizons: Scalar and Vector Ul- tralight Dark Matter, (2022), arXiv:2203.14915 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2022
[18]

Brzeminski, Z

D. Brzeminski, Z. Chacko, A. Dev, and A. Hook, Time- varying fine structure constant from naturally ultra- light dark matter, Phys. Rev. D104, 075019 (2021), arXiv:2012.02787 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2021
[19]

M. S. Safronova, D. Budker, D. DeMille, D. F. J. Kimball, A. Derevianko, and C. W. Clark, Search for New Physics with Atoms and Molecules, Rev. Mod. Phys.90, 025008 (2018), arXiv:1710.01833 [physics.atom-ph]

work page arXiv 2018
[20]

Berlin, Neutrino Oscillations as a Probe of Light Scalar Dark Matter, Phys

A. Berlin, Neutrino Oscillations as a Probe of Light Scalar Dark Matter, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 231801 (2016), arXiv:1608.01307 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2016
[21]

Brdar, J

V. Brdar, J. Kopp, J. Liu, P. Prass, and X.-P. Wang, Fuzzy dark matter and nonstandard neutrino interac- tions, Phys. Rev. D97, 043001 (2018), arXiv:1705.09455 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2018
[22]

Krnjaic, P

G. Krnjaic, P. A. N. Machado, and L. Necib, Distorted neutrino oscillations from time varying cosmic fields, Phys. Rev. D97, 075017 (2018), arXiv:1705.06740 [hep- ph]

work page arXiv 2018
[23]

Capozzi, I

F. Capozzi, I. M. Shoemaker, and L. Vecchi, Neu- trino Oscillations in Dark Backgrounds, JCAP07, 004, arXiv:1804.05117 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv
[24]

Losada, Y

M. Losada, Y. Nir, G. Perez, I. Savoray, and Y. Shpil- man, Time dependent CP-even and CP-odd signatures of scalar ultralight dark matter in neutrino oscillations, Phys. Rev. D108, 055004 (2023), arXiv:2302.00005 [hep- ph]

work page arXiv 2023
[25]

M. Dine, G. Perez, W. Ratzinger, and I. Savoray, Nelson- Barr ultralight dark matter, Phys. Rev. D111, 015049 (2025), arXiv:2405.06744 [hep-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[26]

Zhang, N

X. Zhang, N. Houston, and T. Li, Nuclear decay anoma- lies as a signature of axion dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 108, L071101 (2023), arXiv:2303.09865 [hep-ph]. 12

work page arXiv 2023
[27]

J. Alda, C. Broggini, G. Di Carlo, L. Di Luzio, D. Pi- atti, S. Rigolin, and C. Toni, Weak nuclear decays deep- underground as a probe of axion dark matter, Phys. Rev. D111, 035022 (2025), arXiv:2412.20932 [hep-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[28]

J. Guo, Y. He, J. Liu, X.-P. Wang, and K.-P. Xie, Unveil- ing time-varying signals of ultralight bosonic dark matter at collider and beam dump experiments, Commun. Phys. 6, 225 (2023), arXiv:2206.14221 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2023
[29]

A. Dev, G. Krnjaic, P. Machado, and H. Ramani, Constraining feeble neutrino interactions with ultra- light dark matter, Phys. Rev. D107, 035006 (2023), arXiv:2205.06821 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2023
[30]

Bouley, P

T. Bouley, P. Sørensen, and T.-T. Yu, Constraints on ultralight scalar dark matter with quadratic couplings, JHEP03, 104, arXiv:2211.09826 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv
[31]

Banerjee, G

A. Banerjee, G. Perez, M. Safronova, I. Savoray, and A. Shalit, The phenomenology of quadratically coupled ultra light dark matter, JHEP10, 042, arXiv:2211.05174 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv
[32]

Delaunay, M

C. Delaunay, M. Geller, Z. Heller-Algazi, G. Perez, and K. Springmann, Natural Ultralight Dark Matter: The Quadratic Twin (2025), arXiv:2507.12514 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[33]

Hook, Solving the Hierarchy Problem Discretely, Phys

A. Hook, Solving the Hierarchy Problem Discretely, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 261802 (2018), arXiv:1802.10093 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2018
[34]

Banerjee, M

A. Banerjee, M. A. Buen-Abad, and A. Hook, Construct- ing a light QCD axion without 1/Ntuning, Phys. Rev. D112, 075027 (2025), arXiv:2507.02049 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[35]

J. W. Foster, N. L. Rodd, and B. R. Safdi, Reveal- ing the Dark Matter Halo with Axion Direct Detection, Phys. Rev. D97, 123006 (2018), arXiv:1711.10489 [astro- ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2018
[36]

Catena and P

R. Catena and P. Ullio, A novel determination of the lo- cal dark matter density, JCAP08, 004, arXiv:0907.0018 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv
[37]

Zimmermann, J

T. Zimmermann, J. Alvey, D. J. E. Marsh, M. Fair- bairn, and J. I. Read, Dwarf galaxies imply dark matter is heavier than2.2×10 −21 eV, (2024), arXiv:2405.20374 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2024
[38]

Aaboud et al

M. Aaboud et al. (ATLAS), Reconstruction of pri- mary vertices at the ATLAS experiment in Run 1 pro- ton–proton collisions at the LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C77, 332 (2017), arXiv:1611.10235 [physics.ins-det]

work page arXiv 2017
[39]

Kim, Astrometric search for ultralight dark matter, Phys

H. Kim, Astrometric search for ultralight dark matter, Phys. Rev. D110, 083031 (2024), arXiv:2406.03539 [hep- ph]

work page arXiv 2024
[40]

J. A. Dror and Q. Wei, Pulsar timing detection of ul- tralight vector dark matter, Phys. Rev. D112, 075024 (2025), arXiv:2505.22719 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[41]

The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations

J. Alwall, R. Frederix, S. Frixione, V. Hirschi, F. Maltoni, O. Mattelaer, H. S. Shao, T. Stelzer, P. Torrielli, and M. Zaro, The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations, JHEP07, 079, arXiv:1405.0301 [hep-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv
[42]

R. D. Ball et al. (NNPDF), An open-source machine learning framework for global analyses of parton distribu- tions, Eur. Phys. J. C81, 958 (2021), arXiv:2109.02671 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2021
[43]

Sjostrand, S

T. Sjostrand, S. Mrenna, and P. Z. Skands, PYTHIA 6.4 Physics and Manual, JHEP0605, 026, arXiv:hep- ph/0603175 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv
[44]

DELPHES 3, A modular framework for fast simulation of a generic collider experiment

J. de Favereau et al. (DELPHES 3), DELPHES 3, A modular framework for fast simulation of a generic col- lider experiment, JHEP1402, 057, arXiv:1307.6346 [hep- ex]

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv
[45]

Brun and F

R. Brun and F. Rademakers, ROOT: An object oriented data analysis framework, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A389, 81 (1997)

work page 1997
[46]

The anti-k_t jet clustering algorithm

M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez, The Anti-k(t) jet clustering algorithm, JHEP04, 063, arXiv:0802.1189 [hep-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv
[47]

FastJet user manual

M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez, FastJet User Manual, Eur.Phys.J.C72, 1896 (2012), arXiv:1111.6097 [hep-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2012
[48]

Neyman and E

J. Neyman and E. S. Pearson, On the Problem of the Most Efficient Tests of Statistical Hypotheses, Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. A231, 289 (1933)

work page 1933
[49]

Carzon, A

J. Carzon, A. Ghosh, R. Izbicki, A. Lee, L. Masser- ano, and D. Whiteson, On Focusing Statistical Power for Searches and Measurements in Particle Physics (2025), arXiv:2507.17831 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[50]

Gambhir, R

R. Gambhir, R. Mastandrea, B. Nachman, and J. Thaler, Isolating Unisolated Upsilons with Anomaly Detection in CMS Open Data (2025), arXiv:2502.14036 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[51]

CMS, Search for dijet resonances with data scouting in proton-proton collisions at √s= 13 TeV (2025)

work page 2025
[52]

Heinrich, M

L. Heinrich, M. Feickert, and G. Stark, pyhf: v0.7.3, https://github.com/scikit-hep/pyhf/releases/tag/v0.7.3

work page
[53]

Heinrich, M

L. Heinrich, M. Feickert, G. Stark, and K. Cranmer, pyhf: pure-python implementation of histfactory statis- tical models, Journal of Open Source Software6, 2823 (2021)

work page 2021
[54]

Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics

G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross, and O. Vitells, Asymp- totic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics, Eur. Phys. J. C71, 1554 (2011), [Erratum: Eur.Phys.J.C 73, 2501 (2013)], arXiv:1007.1727 [physics.data-an]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011
[55]

Kostoglou et al., Luminosity and Life- time Modeling and Optimization, in 9th LHC Operations Evian Workshop (Geneva, Switzer- land, 2019) pp

S. Kostoglou et al., Luminosity and Life- time Modeling and Optimization, in 9th LHC Operations Evian Workshop (Geneva, Switzer- land, 2019) pp. 207–212

work page 2019
[56]

Lamont and O

M. Lamont and O. Johnson, LHC beam and luminosity lifetimes revisited, Tech. Rep. (CERN, Geneva, 2014)

work page 2014
[57]

Lindstrom et al., Dynamics of the interaction of dust particles with the LHC beam, Phys

B. Lindstrom et al., Dynamics of the interaction of dust particles with the LHC beam, Phys. Rev. Accel. Beams 23, 124501 (2020)

work page 2020
[58]

Babaev et al., Impact of beam–beam effects on abso- lute luminosity calibrations at the CERN Large Hadron Collider, Eur

A. Babaev et al., Impact of beam–beam effects on abso- lute luminosity calibrations at the CERN Large Hadron Collider, Eur. Phys. J. C84, 17 (2024), arXiv:2306.10394 [physics.acc-ph]

work page arXiv 2024
[59]

Papotti, X

G. Papotti, X. Buffat, W. Herr, R. Giachino, and T. Pieloni, Observations of beam-beam effects at the LHC, ICFA Mini-Workshop on Beam-Beam Ef- fects in Hadron Colliders , 1 (2014), arXiv:1409.5208 [physics.acc-ph]

work page arXiv 2014
[60]

Schaumann, D

M. Schaumann, D. Gamba, H. Garcia Morales, R. Corsini, M. Guinchard, L. Scislo, and J. Wenninger, The effect of ground motion on the LHC and HL-LHC beam orbit, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A1055, 168495 (2023)

work page 2023
[61]

S. M. Gibson, Monitoring radiation damage in the AT- LAS Silicon Tracker (2011)

work page 2011
[62]

Aad et al

G. Aad et al. (ATLAS), Measurements of sensor radia- tion damage in the ATLAS inner detector using leakage currents, JINST16, P08025, arXiv:2106.09287 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv
[63]

B´ elanger, On More Sensitive Periodogram Statistics, Astrophys

G. B´ elanger, On More Sensitive Periodogram Statistics, Astrophys. J.822, 14 (2016), arXiv:1712.00734 [astro- ph.IM]

work page arXiv 2016