Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 52 references

Novel Signatures of Matter-Induced Dark Matter Decay in Large-Volume Neutrino Telescopes

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper argues that a dark matter component that is long-lived in vacuum could decay at observable rates near Earth, producing pairs of non-collimated muons that large-volume neutrino telescopes could see with almost no Standard Model…

desk verdict A concrete new dimuon signature for matter-induced dark matter decay, but the rates rest on an unscreened scalar profile that needs closer scrutiny. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.05284 v1 pith:BVFJIQPG submitted 2026-08-05 hep-ph astro-ph.COastro-ph.HE

Hooman Davoudiasl , Dan Hooper , Samyak Jain This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phastro-ph.COastro-ph.HE
keywords darkmatterdecaymatter-induceddimuoneventsneutrinotelescopeslong-rangescalarfieldkineticmixingexcitedIceCube
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 argues that a class of dark matter models that is invisible to conventional searches becomes testable when the Earth itself acts as a catalyst. An excited dark state $\chi_2$ that is effectively stable in vacuum can decay much faster inside or near ordinary matter, because nucleons source a long-range scalar field. In the first realization the field shifts the dark masses so that the two-body decay $\chi_2 \to \chi_1 Z'$ (with $Z'$ a new heavy gauge boson) opens up near Earth, with a benchmark lifetime of about $1.5 \times 10^{18}$ s; in the second it generates kinetic mixing that enables $\chi_2 \to \chi_1 \mu^+ \mu^-$, with a benchmark lifetime near $8 \times 10^{19}$ s. Both channels produce pairs of energetic, non-collimated muons from a common vertex at rates of order one to ten events per cubic kilometer per year, a topology with negligible Standard Model background. That is the pith: matter-induced decay could make a previously invisible dark sector observable in existing neutrino telescopes.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the classical scalar field $\phi$ sourced by ordinary nucleons through the Yukawa term $-y_N \phi \bar{N} N$. In the unscreened spherical-Earth limit its surface value is $\phi(R_\oplus) \approx -y_N M_\oplus / (4\pi R_\oplus m_N)$, which is small in coupling but enormous in aggregate because the Earth contains about $10^{51}$ nucleons. That field then does one of two jobs. In the mass-shift scenario it enters the effective dark masses $m_{\chi_i}^{\rm eff} = m_{\chi_i} + y_i \phi$, changing the $\chi_2$-$\chi_1$ mass splitting and, when $(y_2 - y_1)\phi$ bridges the gap $m_{Z'} - (m_{\chi_2} - m_{\chi_1})$, kinematically opens $\chi_2 \to \chi_1 Z'$. In the kinetic-mixing scenario it appears in the operator $\frac{1}{2}(\phi/M)^2 Z'_{\mu\nu} F^{\mu\nu}$, which after diagonalization gives the $Z'$ a photon-like coupling to muons suppressed by $\varepsilon = \phi^2/M^2$ and enables $\chi_2 \to \chi_1 \mu^+\mu^-$. The huge nucleon number is what converts extremely small couplings like $y_i y_N \sim 10^{-26}$ into GeV-scale effects.

What would settle it

Run a dedicated search in IceCube and KM3NeT for events with two muon tracks (each $E_\mu \gtrsim 100$ GeV) emerging from a common vertex with opening angles between about $10^\circ$ and $90^\circ$; the absence of such events in roughly 10 km$^3$ years of exposure would exclude the benchmark lifetimes in Eqs. (12) and (17), while a handful of events would support the mechanism.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper shows that an excited dark matter component $\chi_2$ that is stable, or nearly stable, in vacuum can decay at observable rates near ordinary matter. Ordinary nucleons source a classical scalar field that either shifts the dark-state masses or induces kinetic mixing between a heavy $Z'$ and the photon. With benchmark parameters $g_\chi = 10^{-22}$, $m_{Z'} = 200$ GeV, and a 300 GeV vacuum mass splitting, the mass-shift scenario gives $\tau(\chi_2 \to \chi_1 Z') \approx 1.5 \times 10^{18}$ s; with $\varepsilon \approx 10^{-20}$, $m_{Z'} = 1$ TeV, and the same splitting, the kinetic-mixing scenario gives $\tau(\chi_2 \to \chi_1 \mu^+\mu^-) \approx 8 \times 10^{19}$ s. These lifetimes correspond to event rates of roughly one to ten dimuon events per cubic kilometer per year at the local dark matter density, and the paper computes that the muon pairs emerge with broad opening angles and energies of order 100 GeV or more, making them reconstructable in large-volume neutrino telescopes and essentially free of Standard Model background.

Load-bearing premise

The entire signal rests on the Earth sourcing an unscreened, long-range scalar field whose surface value is given by Eq. (6); if screening, nonlinearities, or a finite scalar range suppress that field, the mass-shift and kinetic-mixing enhancements, and with them the observable event rates, go away.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • IceCube, KM3NeT, Baikal-GVD, and Super-Kamiokande can search for the common-vertex dimuon topology with essentially no Standard Model background, so even a handful of events would be a discovery.
  • Published constraints on cosmic-ray positrons and the isotropic gamma-ray background do not exclude these decays, because the vacuum decay rate is suppressed by roughly nine orders of magnitude relative to the matter-enhanced rate.
  • Sparsely instrumented arrays are sensitive only when the dark mass splitting is roughly $\gtrsim 200$ GeV, while denser detectors such as Super-Kamiokande, KM3NeT/ORCA, and the IceCube Upgrade could probe smaller splittings.
  • Neutron-star heating does not close the window: even maximal energy deposition from incident $\chi_2$ particles would keep a neutron star near $5 \times 10^{-3}$ eV, below observational sensitivity.
  • IceCube could also constrain cosmologically long-lived charged massive particles, whose decays into muon pairs could yield up to about $10^3$ events per cubic kilometer per year at the currently allowed abundance.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Inference: the same Earth-sourced scalar would also be sourced by the Sun, so solar-region enhancement of $\chi_2$ decay is a natural extension; the paper does not quantify it, but it could make the Sun a complementary target.
  • Inference: a null result from the proposed dimuon search would translate directly into upper bounds on the product of the nucleon-scalar coupling and the dark gauge coupling (or the kinetic-mixing scale), because the event-rate formula is linear in the inverse lifetime.
  • Inference: the caution the authors raise about extrapolating the linear scalar profile to neutron-star densities applies equally to the Sun and white dwarfs; if screening sets in at high density, the mechanism might only operate near lower-density bodies, which would change which telescopes can see it.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a new observable signature of dark matter decay in large-volume neutrino telescopes: dimuon events with non-negligible opening angle and negligible Standard Model background. The central idea is matter-induced decay of a long-lived excited dark matter state chi2 in the presence of the Earth. Two mechanisms are presented. First, a long-range scalar field phi sourced by nucleons shifts the dark-sector masses (Eqs. 7-8), kinematically opening chi2 -> chi1 Z' near Earth (Eqs. 10-12). Second, the scalar induces environmental kinetic mixing epsilon = phi^2/M^2 (Eq. 14), enhancing chi2 -> chi1 mu+ mu- in matter-rich regions (Eqs. 16-17). The paper calculates decay kinematics (opening-angle distributions, Eqs. 21, 23-24), argues that neutron-star heating is not constraining (Sec. V), and briefly discusses CHAMP-induced multi-muon events (Sec. VI). The claimed rates are roughly one to ten dimuon events per cubic kilometer per year for benchmark parameters, in scenarios that evade vacuum decay constraints.

Significance. If the rates hold, the experimental signature, a dimuon event with a common vertex and no Standard Model background, is genuinely novel and would motivate dedicated searches in IceCube and KM3NeT. The paper is careful to check against several external constraints (positron spectrum, isotropic gamma-ray background, fifth-force bounds, neutron-star heating), and the rate estimates follow from clearly stated Lagrangians and benchmark parameters. The individual components are not new, but the combined matter-induced decay channel for neutrino telescopes is a fresh idea with falsifiable predictions.

major comments (3)
  1. [III.B and Eqs. (14)-(18)] The kinetic-mixing signal is not robust to rather mild suppression of the scalar field. Eq. (17) requires epsilon ~ phi^2/M^2 = 1e-20, while Eq. (18) gives the vacuum rate scaling as 1/M^4. If screening reduces phi by a factor F, keeping epsilon fixed forces M down by F, so the vacuum width increases by F^4. The manuscript states in Sec. III.B that the vacuum decay is smaller than the near-Earth rate by a factor of about 1e9; this factor shrinks to about 1e9/F^4, so F ~ 5-10 already puts the vacuum gamma-ray production at or above the limits quoted from Refs. [21,32]. The assertion of consistency with gamma-ray constraints therefore holds only if the unscreened linear profile in Eq. (6) is accurate to better than an order of magnitude. This is load-bearing because the same concern cannot be fully compensated by lowering M.
  2. [III.A and Eqs. (6)-(12)] The mass-shift rate in Eq. (12) is proportional to [(Delta m_eff)^2 - m_Z'^2]^{3/2}, so it is highly sensitive to the scalar field value at the Earth's surface. Eq. (6) is explicitly an unscreened linear limit, acknowledged as illustrative at the end of the paragraph containing Eq. (6), but the benchmark value y_N ~ 10^-26 is chosen so that phi gives shifts of order 100 GeV. If screening, nonlinearities, or a finite scalar range suppress phi at the surface by even a factor of a few, the threshold condition Delta m_eff > m_Z' fails and the rate vanishes. The paper does not quantify the allowed suppression for the mass-shift channel, so the central rate claim rests on Eq. (6) being approximately correct at the Earth's surface.
  3. [III.A-III.B and Eq. (4)] The headline event rates of about 0.6 yr^-1 km^-3 in Eq. (4) are physical decay rates per volume in the medium, not detector event rates. The paper nowhere includes an effective detector volume (the reported IceCube and KM3NeT detector sizes are not used), a muon reconstruction efficiency, a containment requirement for the common vertex, or a trigger threshold beyond the statement in Sec. IV that both muons must have E_mu > 100 GeV. For a signal defined by two muon tracks emerging from a common vertex inside the instrumented volume, these are large multiplicative effects, plausibly O(1-10). The abstract and conclusions should state that the rates are rates per volume in the medium, not projections for a specific detector.
minor comments (5)
  1. [III.A, Eq. (12)] The normalization in Eq. (12) is written with the ratio (300^2 - 200^2)/[(Delta m_eff)^2 - m_Z'^2]^{3/2}, which is dimensionally awkward; expressing the phase-space factor as [(Delta m_eff/m_Z')^2 - 1]^{3/2} would be clearer.
  2. [IV, Eq. (24)] The joint distribution d^2 Gamma / dm_mumu dcos theta is presented without its normalization; stating the numerical median opening angle of 75 degrees without a plot or an explicit integrated distribution makes the result hard to reproduce. A figure showing the opening-angle distribution for the benchmark would help.
  3. [IV, after Eq. (21)] The sentence stating that the kinematically allowed opening angles range from about 93.3 to 180 degrees appears before the muon energy cut is applied; as written it seems inconsistent with the subsequent statement that the energy cut restricts the angles to 93.3-98.2 degrees. Clarify that the second range is after applying E_mu > 100 GeV.
  4. [VI, Eq. (27)] The CHAMP rate estimate uses N_p ~ 10^39 protons in a cubic kilometer but then quotes the rate per km^3; the sentence around Eq. (27) should state explicitly that Y_X is the abundance per proton and that the CHAMPs are assumed to be distributed uniformly in the detector volume.
  5. [III.B, Eq. (14)] The operator (phi/M)^2 Z'_mu_nu F^mu_nu is presented as a phenomenological choice with n=2; the text could state whether this operator can be UV-completed without introducing a new hierarchy problem or whether it should be read as a low-energy EFT.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper's benchmark lifetimes and event rates follow from explicitly stated Lagrangian inputs and standard kinematics, with no fitted parameter renamed as a prediction.

full rationale

The paper's central claims are ordinary model-building, not circular derivation. The two mechanisms (mass-shift and kinetic-mixing) are defined by explicit Lagrangians in Eqs. (5) and (14), with free parameters (y_N, g_chi, m_Z', mass splitting, M, f_chi2) chosen by hand. The resulting lifetimes in Eqs. (12) and (17) are obtained from standard phase-space width formulas, Eqs. (10)-(11) and (16), and the event rates in Eq. (4) follow from the local dark-matter density and lifetime. No quantity in the target prediction is fitted to the data being 'predicted.' The paper explicitly labels the scalar profile in Eq. (6) as 'an illustrative unscreened limit,' and the screening sensitivity is a robustness concern, not a logical circularity. Self-citations such as Ref. [42] for environment-dependent kinetic mixing supply the motivating operator, but the operator is introduced as a model assumption rather than derived from the target signal; citing a prior proposal of the same ansatz is not circular when no derivation is claimed. Ref. [21] provides an external gamma-ray constraint, and Ref. [37] an external cosmology bound; these are independent evidence, not fitted inputs. The derivation chain is self-contained and does not reduce to its inputs by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 10 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 3 invented entities

The model adds a long-range scalar and an excited dark state, and the event rate depends on several hand-chosen benchmark parameters. The most fragile input is the unscreened, long-range scalar profile near the Earth. The vacuum suppression of the decay is achieved by kinematics or small couplings, not derived from a UV completion.

free parameters (10)
  • y_N = ~1e-24 (kinetic mixing); ~1e-26 (mass shift)
    Nucleon-scalar Yukawa controls the Earth-sourced scalar field in Eqs. (6) and (15); chosen near fifth-force limits.
  • y_1 and y_2 = y_2=0; y_1 chosen so that (y_2-y_1)phi bridges the threshold
    Sets the effective mass splitting in Eq. (8); the product y_i y_N near 1e-26 gives roughly 100 GeV mass shifts.
  • m_phi (scalar mass) = <~1e-23 GeV (long-range limit)
    The scalar range must exceed the Earth radius for Eq. (6) to apply; affects both the profile and dark-sector self-interactions.
  • m_chi2 - m_chi1 = 300 GeV (benchmark)
    Benchmark splitting used for visible muon energies and lifetimes; requires more than about 200 GeV for IceCube sensitivity.
  • m_Z' = 200 GeV (mass shift); 1 TeV (kinetic mixing)
    Sets the threshold and width in Eqs. (10)-(12) and (16)-(17).
  • g_chi = ~1e-22 (mass shift); order 1 (kinetic mixing direction)
    Dark gauge coupling controls the lifetimes in Eqs. (12) and (17).
  • g_mu = unspecified; branching to muons assumed
    Z'-muon coupling determines whether the Z' decays to muon pairs; the paper assumes a muonic branching fraction.
  • M = ~9e13 GeV
    Scale of the kinetic-mixing operator (phi/M)^2 in Eq. (14); chosen to give epsilon ~1e-20 for y_N ~1e-24.
  • epsilon = ~1e-20
    Effective kinetic mixing at Earth; controls the three-body width in Eq. (16).
  • f_chi2 = 0.5
    Assumed fraction of dark matter in the excited state; enters the event rate linearly in Eq. (4).
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Earth is a uniform spherical body and the scalar field is in the linear, unscreened, long-range limit (m_phi^-1 >> R_oplus), so Eq. (6) holds.
    The central matter enhancement and all rate estimates rest on this profile; the paper calls it illustrative and notes screening could change it.
  • domain assumption The low-energy Lagrangian in Eq. (5) captures the relevant dark sector: two fermions chi1 and chi2, a scalar phi, and a Z' with the stated couplings.
    No UV completion is provided; the mechanism assumes these states and couplings exist.
  • domain assumption The excited state chi2 makes up a fraction f_chi2 ~ 0.5 of dark matter with no specified production mechanism.
    The abundance enters the rate in Eq. (4); the cosmology of chi2 is not computed.
  • ad hoc to paper The kinetic-mixing operator uses n=2 in Eq. (14), giving epsilon = phi^2/M^2.
    The exponent n is called an illustrative choice depending on unknown ultraviolet physics.
  • domain assumption In the neutron-star estimate, every incident chi2 decays and deposits an order-one fraction of the mass splitting.
    Sec. V uses this to estimate heating; if screening prevents decay, the bound is weaker.
  • standard math Standard phase-space and kinetic-diagonalization results for two- and three-body decays are used without derivation.
    Eqs. (10), (16), (22)-(24) rely on standard kinematic identities and field redefinitions.
invented entities (3)
  • Long-range scalar field phi coupled to nucleons and dark fermions
    purpose: Sourced by ordinary matter, it changes the dark mass spectrum or induces kinetic mixing, triggering chi2 decay near Earth.
    No positive evidence exists; it is constrained only by the absence of fifth forces (MICROSCOPE) and no signal is predicted outside this paper.
  • Excited dark matter state chi2 with f_chi2 ~ 0.5
    purpose: Long-lived in vacuum but rapidly decaying in matter to chi1 and muon pairs.
    No production mechanism or relic abundance calculation is provided; the abundance is an input assumption.
  • Matter-induced kinetic-mixing operator (phi/M)^2 Z'_mu_nu F^mu_nu
    purpose: Enhances the Z' coupling to Standard Model charged fermions near Earth, enabling the three-body decay.
    The ultraviolet completion is unspecified and the exponent n=2 is chosen illustratively.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Novel Signatures of Matter-Induced Dark Matter Decay in Large-Volume Neutrino Telescopes." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/BVFJIQPG

@misc{pith2026260805284,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Novel Signatures of Matter-Induced Dark Matter Decay in Large-Volume Neutrino Telescopes},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/BVFJIQPG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.05284}
}
abstract

Large-volume neutrino telescopes offer a unique opportunity to search for decaying dark matter through events containing a pair of energetic, highly non-collimated muon tracks emerging from a common vertex. Such events would have negligible Standard Model backgrounds and would constitute a striking signature of new physics. Conventional dark matter annihilation or decay, however, is too strongly constrained to produce an observable rate of such events. We therefore consider scenarios in which an excited dark matter state is extremely long-lived in vacuum but decays much more rapidly in the presence of ordinary matter. We present two realizations of this mechanism. In the first, a long-range scalar field sourced by ordinary matter modifies the dark-sector mass spectrum, kinematically opening the decay $\chi_2 \rightarrow \chi_1 Z'$ near the Earth while leaving it forbidden in vacuum. In the second, the scalar background induces kinetic mixing between a heavy $Z'$ and the photon, greatly enhancing the three-body decay $\chi_2\to\chi_1\mu^+\mu^-$ in matter-rich environments. We calculate the resulting distributions of muon energies and opening angles and show that viable regions of parameter space can yield observable event rates in IceCube, KM3NeT, and other large-volume neutrino telescopes while remaining consistent with existing constraints. We also briefly consider the sensitivity of IceCube to multi-muon events produced by the decays of cosmologically long-lived charged particles with masses $\gtrsim 1$ TeV.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

52 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    S. A.-M. et al., Limits on dark matter annihilation in the sun using the ANTARES neutrino telescope, Physics Letters B759, 69 (2016)

    work page 2016

  2. [2]

    Abbasiet al.(IceCube), Search for GeV-scale dark matter annihilation in the Sun with IceCube DeepCore, Phys

    R. Abbasiet al.(IceCube), Search for GeV-scale dark matter annihilation in the Sun with IceCube DeepCore, Phys. Rev. D105, 062004 (2022), arXiv:2111.09970 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2022

  3. [3]

    collaboration, Search for dark matter from the cen- ter of the Earth with 10 years of IceCube data, Eur

    I. collaboration, Search for dark matter from the cen- ter of the Earth with 10 years of IceCube data, Eur. Phys. J. C https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052- 025-14144-7 (2025)

    doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052- 2025

  4. [4]

    Abbasiet al.(IceCube), Search for neutrino lines from dark matter annihilation and decay with IceCube, Phys

    R. Abbasiet al.(IceCube), Search for neutrino lines from dark matter annihilation and decay with IceCube, Phys. Rev. D108, 102004 (2023), arXiv:2303.13663 [astro- ph.HE]

    arXiv 2023

  5. [5]

    M. G. Aartsenet al.(IceCube), Search for Dark Mat- ter Annihilation in the Galactic Center with IceCube-79, Eur. Phys. J. C75, 492 (2015), arXiv:1505.07259 [astro- ph.HE]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2015

  6. [6]

    M. G. Aartsenet al.(IceCube), Search for Neutrinos from Dark Matter Self-Annihilations in the center of the Milky Way with 3 years of IceCube/DeepCore, Eur. Phys. J. C 77, 627 (2017), arXiv:1705.08103 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2017

  7. [7]

    Albertet al.(ANTARES, IceCube), Combined search for neutrinos from dark matter self-annihilation in the Galactic Center with ANTARES and IceCube, Phys

    A. Albertet al.(ANTARES, IceCube), Combined search for neutrinos from dark matter self-annihilation in the Galactic Center with ANTARES and IceCube, Phys. Rev. D102, 082002 (2020), arXiv:2003.06614 [astro- ph.HE]

    arXiv 2020

  8. [8]

    Albertet al.(ANTARES), Search for dark matter towards the Galactic Centre with 11 years of ANTARES data, Phys

    A. Albertet al.(ANTARES), Search for dark matter towards the Galactic Centre with 11 years of ANTARES data, Phys. Lett. B805, 135439 (2020), arXiv:1912.05296 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2020

Show all 52 references
  1. [9]

    Aielloet al.(KM3NeT), First searches for dark matter with the KM3NeT neutrino telescopes, JCAP03, 058, arXiv:2411.10092 [astro-ph.HE]

    S. Aielloet al.(KM3NeT), First searches for dark matter with the KM3NeT neutrino telescopes, JCAP03, 058, arXiv:2411.10092 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv

  2. [10]

    Abbasiet al.(IceCube), Search for GeV-scale Dark Matter from the Galactic Center with IceCube- DeepCore, arXiv (2025), arXiv:2511.00918 [astro- ph.HE]

    R. Abbasiet al.(IceCube), Search for GeV-scale Dark Matter from the Galactic Center with IceCube- DeepCore, arXiv (2025), arXiv:2511.00918 [astro- ph.HE]

    2025 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Abbasiet al.(IceCube), Sensitivity Projections for Low-Mass Dark Matter Annihilation with the IceCube Upgrade, arXiv (2026), arXiv:2605.06600 [hep-ex]

    R. Abbasiet al.(IceCube), Sensitivity Projections for Low-Mass Dark Matter Annihilation with the IceCube Upgrade, arXiv (2026), arXiv:2605.06600 [hep-ex]

    2026 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Hooper and F

    D. Hooper and F. Vassallo, Searching for dark matter annihilation in the sun with the icecube upgrade, Phys. Rev. D112, 035014 (2025)

    2025

  5. [13]

    N. F. Bell, M. J. Dolan, and S. Robles, Searching for Sub- GeV Dark Matter in the Galactic Centre using Hyper- Kamiokande, JCAP09, 019, arXiv:2005.01950 [hep-ph]

    2005 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Aalberset al.(LZ), Dark Matter Search Results from 4.2 Tonne-Years of Exposure of the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment, Phys

    J. Aalberset al.(LZ), Dark Matter Search Results from 4.2 Tonne-Years of Exposure of the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 011802 (2025), arXiv:2410.17036 [hep-ex]

    2025 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Aprileet al.(XENON), WIMP Dark Matter Search Using a 3.1 Tonne-Year Exposure of the XENONnT Experiment, Phys

    E. Aprileet al.(XENON), WIMP Dark Matter Search Using a 3.1 Tonne-Year Exposure of the XENONnT Experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 221003 (2025), arXiv:2502.18005 [hep-ex]

    2025

  8. [16]

    Boet al.(PandaX), Dark Matter Search Results from 1.54 Tonne·Year Exposure of PandaX-4T, Phys

    Z. Boet al.(PandaX), Dark Matter Search Results from 1.54 Tonne·Year Exposure of PandaX-4T, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 011805 (2025), arXiv:2408.00664 [hep-ex]

    2025 arXiv

  9. [17]

    A. H. Abdelhameedet al.(CRESST), First results from the CRESST-III low-mass dark matter program, Phys. Rev. D100, 102002 (2019), arXiv:1904.00498 [astro- ph.CO]

    2019 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Amoleet al.(PICO), Dark Matter Search Results from the Complete Exposure of the PICO-60 C 3F8 Bubble Chamber, Phys

    C. Amoleet al.(PICO), Dark Matter Search Results from the Complete Exposure of the PICO-60 C 3F8 Bubble Chamber, Phys. Rev. D100, 022001 (2019), arXiv:1902.04031 [astro-ph.CO]

    2019 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Aghanimet al.(Planck), Planck 2018 results

    N. Aghanimet al.(Planck), Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys.641, A6 (2020), [Erratum: Astron.Astrophys. 652, C4 (2021)], arXiv:1807.06209 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  12. [20]

    John and T

    I. John and T. Linden, Cosmic-Ray Positrons Strongly Constrain Leptophilic Dark Matter, JCAP12, 007, arXiv:2107.10261 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv

  13. [21]

    Blanco and D

    C. Blanco and D. Hooper, Constraints on Decaying Dark Matter from the Isotropic Gamma-Ray Background, JCAP03, 019, arXiv:1811.05988 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv

  14. [22]

    Circiello, M

    A. Circiello, M. Di Mauro, M. Ajello, C. Karwin, A. Drlica-Wagner, and M. ´A. S´ anchez-Conde, Legacy Analysis of Milky Way Dwarf Spheroidal Satellite Galax- ies: An Update, Astrophys. J. Lett.1004, L33 (2026), arXiv:2605.25586 [astro-ph.HE]. 7

    2026 arXiv

  15. [23]

    De la Torre Luque, M

    P. De la Torre Luque, M. W. Winkler, and T. Linden, Antiproton bounds on dark matter annihilation from a combined analysis using the DRAGON2 code, JCAP05, 104, arXiv:2401.10329 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv

  16. [24]

    R. N. Cahn and S. L. Glashow, Chemical Signatures for Superheavy Elementary Particles, Science213, 607 (1981)

    1981

  17. [25]

    De Rujula, S

    A. De Rujula, S. L. Glashow, and U. Sarid, CHARGED DARK MATTER, Nucl. Phys. B333, 173 (1990)

    1990

  18. [26]

    Dimopoulos, D

    S. Dimopoulos, D. Eichler, R. Esmailzadeh, and G. D. Starkman, Getting a Charge Out of Dark Matter, Phys. Rev. D41, 2388 (1990)

    1990

  19. [27]

    Ebadi, P

    R. Ebadi, P. W. Graham, S. Rajendran, E. H. Tanin, and S. S. Y. Wong, Searching for heavy charged relics in the Earth, (2026), arXiv:2607.09845 [hep-ph]

    2026 arXiv

  20. [28]

    M. Pato, F. Iocco, and G. Bertone, Dynamical con- straints on the dark matter distribution in the Milky Way, JCAP12, 001, arXiv:1504.06324 [astro-ph.GA]

    arXiv

  21. [29]

    Bergstrom, T

    L. Bergstrom, T. Bringmann, I. Cholis, D. Hooper, and C. Weniger, New Limits on Dark Matter Annihilation from AMS Cosmic Ray Positron Data, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 171101 (2013), arXiv:1306.3983 [astro-ph.HE]

    2013 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Ibarra, A

    A. Ibarra, A. S. Lamperstorfer, and J. Silk, Dark matter annihilations and decays after the AMS-02 positron measurements, Phys. Rev. D89, 063539 (2014), arXiv:1309.2570 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  23. [31]

    L. A. Cavasonza, H. Gast, M. Kr¨ amer, M. Pellen, and S. Schael, Constraints on leptophilic dark mat- ter from the AMS-02 experiment, Astrophys. J.839, 36 (2017), [Erratum: Astrophys.J. 869, 89 (2018)], arXiv:1612.06634 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Di Mauro and F

    M. Di Mauro and F. Donato, Composition of the Fermi- LAT isotropic gamma-ray background intensity: Emis- sion from extragalactic point sources and dark mat- ter annihilations, Phys. Rev. D91, 123001 (2015), arXiv:1501.05316 [astro-ph.HE]

    2015 arXiv

  25. [33]

    X. G. He, G. C. Joshi, H. Lew, and R. R. Volkas, NEW Z-prime PHENOMENOLOGY, Phys. Rev. D43, 22 (1991)

    1991

  26. [34]

    X.-G. He, G. C. Joshi, H. Lew, and R. R. Volkas, Simplest Z-prime model, Phys. Rev. D44, 2118 (1991)

    1991

  27. [35]

    Heeck and W

    J. Heeck and W. Rodejohann, GaugedL µ −L τ Symme- try at the Electroweak Scale, Phys. Rev. D84, 075007 (2011), arXiv:1107.5238 [hep-ph]

    2011 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Altmannshofer, S

    W. Altmannshofer, S. Gori, M. Pospelov, and I. Yavin, Neutrino Trident Production: A Powerful Probe of New Physics with Neutrino Beams, Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 091801 (2014), arXiv:1406.2332 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Escudero, D

    M. Escudero, D. Hooper, G. Krnjaic, and M. Pierre, Cos- mology with A Very Light Lµ −L τ Gauge Boson, JHEP 03, 071, arXiv:1901.02010 [hep-ph]

    1901 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Khoury and A

    J. Khoury and A. Weltman, Chameleon cosmology, Phys. Rev. D69, 044026 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0309411

    2004 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Khoury and A

    J. Khoury and A. Weltman, Chameleon fields: Awaiting surprises for tests of gravity in space, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 171104 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0309300

    2004 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Hinterbichler and J

    K. Hinterbichler and J. Khoury, Symmetron fields: Screening long-range forces through local symmetry restoration, Phys. Rev. Lett.104, 231301 (2010), arXiv:1001.4525 [hep-th]

    2010 arXiv

  33. [41]

    K. A. Olive and M. Pospelov, Environmental depen- dence of masses and coupling constants, Phys. Rev. D 77, 043524 (2008), arXiv:0709.3825 [hep-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Davoudiasl and J

    H. Davoudiasl and J. Gehrlein, Indirect signals of dark matter can change depending on where you look, Phys. Rev. D107, 023002 (2023), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 107, 089902 (2023)], arXiv:2208.04964 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Fayet, MICROSCOPE limits for new long-range forces and implications for unified theories, Phys

    P. Fayet, MICROSCOPE limits for new long-range forces and implications for unified theories, Phys. Rev. D97, 055039 (2018), arXiv:1712.00856 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Touboulet al.(MICROSCOPE), MICROSCOPE Mission: Final Results of the Test of the Equiva- lence Principle, Phys

    P. Touboulet al.(MICROSCOPE), MICROSCOPE Mission: Final Results of the Test of the Equiva- lence Principle, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 121102 (2022), arXiv:2209.15487 [gr-qc]

    2022 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Gopalakrishna, S

    S. Gopalakrishna, S. Jung, and J. D. Wells, Higgs boson decays to four fermions through an abelian hidden sector, Phys. Rev. D78, 055002 (2008), arXiv:0801.3456 [hep- ph]

    2008 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Guillot, G

    S. Guillot, G. G. Pavlov, C. Reyes, A. Reisenegger, L. Ro- driguez, B. Rangelov, and O. Kargaltsev, Hubble Space Telescope Nondetection of PSR J2144–3933: The Cold- est Known Neutron Star, Astrophys. J.874, 175 (2019), arXiv:1901.07998 [astro-ph.HE]

    2019 arXiv

  39. [47]

    D. G. Yakovlev and C. J. Pethick, Neutron star cool- ing, Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys.42, 169 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0402143

    2004 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Yamagata, Y

    T. Yamagata, Y. Takamori, and H. Utsunomiya, Search for anomalously heavy hydrogen in deep sea water at 4000-m, Phys. Rev. D47, 1231 (1993)

    1993

  41. [49]

    M. G. Aartsenet al.(IceCube), The IceCube Neu- trino Observatory: Instrumentation and Online Systems, JINST12(03), P03012, [Erratum: JINST 19, E05001 (2024)], arXiv:1612.05093 [astro-ph.IM]

    2024 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Adrian-Martinezet al.(KM3Net), Letter of in- tent for KM3NeT 2.0, J

    S. Adrian-Martinezet al.(KM3Net), Letter of in- tent for KM3NeT 2.0, J. Phys. G43, 084001 (2016), arXiv:1601.07459 [astro-ph.IM]

    2016 arXiv

  43. [51]

    A. D. Avrorinet al.(Baikal-GVD), Baikal-GVD: sta- tus and prospects, EPJ Web Conf.191, 01006 (2018), arXiv:1808.10353 [astro-ph.IM]

    2018 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Fukudaet al.(Super-Kamiokande), The Super- Kamiokande detector, Nucl

    Y. Fukudaet al.(Super-Kamiokande), The Super- Kamiokande detector, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A501, 418 (2003)

    2003

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.