Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 74 references

Search for post-inflationary QCD axions with a quantum-limited tunable microwave receiver

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A quantum-limited scan around 10.2 GHz finds no QCD axion signal and excludes two hadronic axion models near 42 µeV.

desk verdict Solid incremental haloscope result around 42 µeV, with an overstated abstract and one unquantified systematic (form-factor constancy) that a serious referee should push on. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.11589 v1 pith:ORHX4FX6 submitted 2025-06-13 hep-ex

Giosuè Sardo Infirri , David Alesini , Caterina Braggio , Giulio Cappelli , Giovanni Carugno , Domenico D'Agostino , Alessandro D'Elia , Daniele Di Gioacchino
show 17 more authors
Raffaele Di Vora Martina Esposito Paolo Falferi Umberto Gambardella Antonios Gardikiotis Claudio Gatti Carlo Ligi Giordano Lilli Augusto Lombardi Giovanni Maccarrone Dora Maiello Antonello Ortolan Arpit Ranadive Alessio Rettaroli Nicolas Roch Simone Tocci Giuseppe Ruoso
This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-ex
keywords QCDaxiondarkmatterhaloscopeaxion-photoncouplingpost-inflationaryaxionstravelingwaveparametricamplifiertunablemicrowavecavityquantum-limiteddetection
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

The paper reports a microwave haloscope search for axion dark matter around $m_a \simeq 42\,\mu\mathrm{eV}$, scanning 38 MHz near 10.2 GHz with a quantum-limited receiver. No axion signal candidate was observed, and the experiment sets 90% confidence upper limits on the axion-photon coupling at the $10^{-14}\,\mathrm{GeV}^{-1}$ level. On that basis the paper claims that hadronic QCD axion models with anomaly coefficient ratio $E/N = 44/3$ and $E/N = 29/3$ are excluded in narrow mass intervals between 41.991 µeV and 42.234 µeV. This matters because lattice-based arguments favour the post-inflationary axion mass region above 40 µeV, where no previous cavity haloscope had reached QCD-axion sensitivity. A sympathetic reader would take the central achievement to be the first tunable haloscope scan at these masses with a readout noise of about 2.3 photons.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the haloscope: a 1-liter sapphire-loaded cylindrical copper cavity operated in the TM030 mode inside an 8 T magnetic field, whose frequency is tuned by a clamshell mechanism that opens the two copper halves by up to one degree. Axion conversion power is governed by Eq. (1) with the form factor $C_{030} = 0.43$, a value from finite-element simulations checked by one room-temperature bead pull at a 0.3 degree opening angle and assumed constant across the tuning range. The readout chain, a traveling-wave parametric amplifier at about 120 mK followed by HEMT amplifiers, gives the lowest noise temperature reported for a tunable haloscope above 40 µeV, with a minimum of about 1.1 K, or 2.3 photons. Signal searches use Fano fits to track the cavity resonance, a Savitzky-Golay filter for baseline estimation, and Monte Carlo confidence belts with a signal-to-noise threshold of 4.5 to set 90% C.L. limits.

What would settle it

A direct measurement of $C_{030}$ as a function of clamshell opening angle, by bead-pull or cold-cavity perturbation at several frequencies across 10.154–10.212 GHz, would falsify the constancy assumption if it deviates by more than the few-percent level; such a deviation would rescale the coupling limits and could move or erase the excluded $E/N = 44/3$ and $E/N = 29/3$ mass intervals.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that, after 225 hours of integrated acquisition across 124 nominal tuning points between 10.154 GHz and 10.212 GHz, no axion signal appeared, and the resulting 90% C.L. limits on the axion-photon coupling reach on average about $3.4$ times the KSVZ coupling over a 300 kHz band with one hour of integration. In the mass interval from 41.991 µeV to 42.234 µeV, the limits dip below the coupling predicted for hadronic axion models with $E/N = 44/3$ and $E/N = 29/3$, excluding those models over a width of 153 neV and 136 neV respectively. The paper states this as a direct exclusion of viable hadronic axion models in a currently preferred post-inflationary region with $m_a > 40\,\mu\mathrm{eV}$. The discovery, on the paper's terms, is that a dielectric-loaded tunable haloscope with a traveling-wave parametric amplifier can operate at 10.2 GHz with a system noise temperature as low as 1.1 K, corresponding to 2.3 photons, and convert that sensitivity into model exclusion.

Load-bearing premise

The limits rest on the assumption that the cavity form factor $C_{030} = 0.43$ stays constant throughout the tuning range, a value checked by simulation and a single bead-pull measurement at one opening angle rather than at each tuning step.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the exclusion holds, hadronic QCD axion models with $E/N = 44/3$ and $E/N = 29/3$ cannot account for the local dark matter density at axion masses between 41.991 µeV and 42.234 µeV.
  • The demonstration that a tunable cavity haloscope can reach near-KSVZ coupling sensitivity at 10.2 GHz opens a practical path for covering the full 9.5–11 GHz range the apparatus was designed for.
  • The average one-hour sensitivity of about $3.4$ times the KSVZ coupling over a 300 kHz band means a modest increase in magnet strength and duty cycle would let the same technique probe weaker couplings, including DFSZ-type models in the post-inflationary window.
  • Since no candidate was found at the chosen threshold, the data place a direct experimental constraint on QCD axion dark matter in the post-inflationary sub-window around 42 µeV.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Extension: the assumption of constant $C_{030} = 0.43$ is tested only at one opening angle; measuring the form factor at several clamshell positions would harden the exclusion, and a few-percent variation would rescale the coupling limits and could shrink or shift the excluded mass intervals.
  • Extension: if lattice simulations relocate the preferred post-inflationary mass window, the same tuning-plus-TWPA design can be re-scanned over its wider 9.5–11 GHz range, so the technique's value does not depend on the specific 42 µeV window.
  • Extension: the reported noise performance suggests that quantum-limited amplifiers could also benefit other high-mass haloscope concepts, such as dielectric or plasma haloscopes, where receiver noise currently limits sensitivity.
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 reports a haloscope search for QCD axion dark matter in a ~38 MHz window centered near 10.2 GHz (axion mass ~42 µeV) using the QUAX apparatus: a dielectrically loaded, clamshell-tunable cavity in an 8 T magnet, read out by a TWPA-based chain with system noise temperatures down to ~1.1 K. After 225 hours of integration over 147 measurement points, no signal candidate survives the SNR=4.5 threshold, and 90% C.L. upper limits on the axion-photon coupling are set at the ~10^-14 GeV^-1 level. The authors claim exclusion of hadronic axion models with E/N=44/3 and E/N=29/3 in narrow mass intervals between 41.991 and 42.234 µeV.

Significance. If the headline exclusion withstands scrutiny, this is a milestone: it would be the first cavity-haloscope bound that rules out specific QCD axion models in the post-inflationary mass region above 40 µeV. The experiment itself is well executed: the quantum-limited receiver, the low system noise at these frequencies, the documented Monte Carlo confidence belts, and the explicit correction for the ~30% baseline-filtering underestimation of axion power are all strengths. The paper also gives a transparent error budget (~4%) for the measured cavity and receiver parameters. The central physics claim, however, rests on two assumptions—constant cavity form factor across tuning and a continuous scan without unexcluded gaps—that need to be demonstrated or conservatively folded into the limits.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract and Conclusion] The abstract claims 'viable hadronic axion models are ruled out in a currently preferred post-inflationary region ma > 40 µeV.' This overstates the result: Section 'Data analysis and Results' shows that only two specific anomaly-coefficient ratios (E/N=44/3 and E/N=29/3) are excluded, and only in narrow intervals of 153 neV and 136 neV within 41.991–42.234 µeV. The limit curve does not reach KSVZ sensitivity over the entire ma > 40 µeV region; the quoted average sensitivity is about 3.4× the KSVZ coupling over a 300 kHz band. Please revise the abstract and conclusion to state precisely which models are excluded in which mass ranges.
  2. [Experimental apparatus and data collection (form factor paragraph)] The exclusion of the E/N=29/3 model depends on the assumption that the TM030 form factor C030 = 0.43 is constant throughout the tuning range. The only experimental check is a single room-temperature bead pull at a 0.3° opening angle giving 0.40 ± 0.02. Since the clamshell tuning changes the gap between the two copper halves up to 1°, and the same mechanical clearances produce a large step-to-step spread in Q0 (Fig. 3a), there is no direct evidence that the field overlap factor is stable at the percent level. The conversion power in Eq. (1) scales with C, so the derived coupling limit scales as C^{-1/2}; a 20% change in C would shift the limit by about 10%, comparable to the margin of the 136 neV exclusion interval for E/N=29/3. Please either measure C030 at multiple tuning positions or add a systematic uncertainty band from the assumed constancy to the limit curve. This is a load-bearing point for the central claim.
  3. [Figure 4 caption and Data analysis and Results] The Figure 4 caption states 'The missing band at about 42.017 µeV is due to data removal for rf contamination.' This band lies inside the quoted excluded interval 41.991–42.234 µeV. If no limit is set in that sub-band, the statement that hadronic axion models are excluded over the entire interval is not strictly correct. Please specify the width of the removed band, show how the exclusion intervals were computed in the presence of the gap, and either quote the intervals excluding the gap or provide a conservative treatment that accounts for the missing coverage.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Data analysis and Results, Eq. (1)] Equation (1) gives the axion signal power without explicitly showing the cavity form factor, volume, magnetic field, and loaded quality factor that enter the actual conversion power. Please clarify how these measured parameters are folded into the limit calculation, either by writing the full expression or by stating that they are absorbed into the normalization of P_in.
  2. [Conclusion] The conclusion says the scanning was performed 'within a ∼ 60 MHz extended region,' while the abstract and the body state the scanned range is 38 MHz. Please reconcile this wording; if 60 MHz refers to the full tuning range of the cavity rather than the scanned region, say so explicitly.
  3. [Abstract] The phrase 'viable hadronic axion models' should be qualified by naming the specific anomaly coefficient ratios that are actually excluded, to avoid giving the impression that all hadronic models are ruled out in the whole region.
  4. [Figure 4] In the lower panel, the lines for E/N=44/3 and E/N=29/3 should be labeled directly on the plot or in the caption so that the excluded intervals are visually identifiable.
  5. [References] Reference [12] is cited in the text as 'the landscape of qcd axion models'; the title should be capitalized as 'QCD' for consistency.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the axion-photon coupling limits are set from measured cavity and noise parameters and null data, compared against external hadronic-axion model predictions; self-citations are technical and non-load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained against external benchmarks. The central limit on g_{aγγ} follows from the standard Sikivie haloscope power formula (Eq. (1), citing external refs [13,14]), measured cavity parameters (Q0, β, fc), measured noise temperature Tsys, and the absence of a rescan candidate. The Monte Carlo confidence belts use the KSVZ coupling only as a normalization unit, which cancels when the 90% C.L. limit is scaled from the SNR threshold, so the limit is not fitted to the model lines it excludes. The excluded hadronic models (E/N = 44/3 and 29/3) are compared against the external review [12] (Di Luzio et al.), not against a model derived in this paper, and the excluded mass intervals (153 neV and 136 neV between 41.991 and 42.234 µeV) are empirical outcomes of where the data-derived limit curve dips below those external prediction lines. Self-citations to prior QUAX work ([24–29,33]) concern technical apparatus methods (clamshell tuning, noise-temperature procedure, TWPA chain, earlier run limits for the comparison figure) that are standard, externally repeatable techniques and are not load-bearing for the exclusion claim. The stated assumption that the form factor C030 = 0.43 is constant throughout the tuning range is a systematic-uncertainty limitation: if it drifts, the limit curve rescales as C^{-1/2} and the excluded intervals could shift. That is a robustness concern, not a circular construction, because C030 is not fitted to the axion-search data and the limit does not reduce to any fitted input by definition. The paper also explicitly discloses coverage limitations (intruder modes, a mechanical tuning problem, and rf-contamination data removal at 42.017 µeV), confirming that the limits are data-derived rather than constructed to match the excluded models.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new particles, forces, or parameters fitted to data. All inputs are measured quantities or standard literature values. The load-bearing assumptions are the halo model and the constancy of the cavity form factor, plus the external hadronic model predictions.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The local dark matter is fully composed of axions with density rho_a = 0.45 GeV/cm^3 and a Maxwell-Boltzmann velocity distribution with width delta_nu_a ~ 10 kHz.
    Used in Eq. (1) to convert observed power into a coupling limit; if the halo model is wrong, the limits change. The value is taken from the literature, not measured here.
  • domain assumption The cavity form factor C030 is constant at 0.43 across the tuning range.
    Stated after simulations and a single bead-pull measurement; not verified at each tuning step, so the coupling limit could scale with actual variations.
  • domain assumption The axion-photon coupling predictions for hadronic models with E/N = 44/3 and 29/3 from Di Luzio et al. are correct.
    Used to draw the exclusion conclusion; if the model predictions differ, the exclusion changes.
  • standard math The radiometer equation and the axion signal power formula (Eq. 1) describe the conversion correctly.
    Standard physics for haloscopes, not derived in this paper.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Search for post-inflationary QCD axions with a quantum-limited tunable microwave receiver." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ORHX4FX6

@misc{pith2026250611589,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Search for post-inflationary QCD axions with a quantum-limited tunable microwave receiver},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ORHX4FX6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.11589}
}
abstract

A search for cosmological axions has been performed by scanning a frequency region of $38\,$MHz centered at about $10.2\,$GHz, corresponding to an axion mass $m_a \simeq 42\,\mu$eV. The QUAX experimental apparatus, a haloscope comprised of a 1-liter volume tunable cavity immersed in an $8\,$T magnetic field and a quantum-limited detection chain, set limits on the axion-photon coupling at the $10^{-14}\,$GeV$^{-1}$ level. As no signal candidate has been observed, viable hadronic axion models are ruled out in a currently preferred post-inflationary region $m_a > 40\,\mu$eV.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.11589 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a) The microwave resonator is a dielectrically loaded [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Cavity mode map showing the lowest order TM03n [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. System parameters for each frequency measurement [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Axion–photon coupling exclusion regions at 90% C.L. as a function of axion mass from this work, previous QUAX results [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

74 extracted references · 50 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    R. D. Peccei and H. R. Quinn, Phys. Rev. Lett. 38, 1440 (1977)

    1977

  2. [2]

    Weinberg, Phys

    S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 40, 223 (1978)

    1978

  3. [3]

    Wilczek, Phys

    F. Wilczek, Phys. Rev. Lett. 40, 279 (1978)

    1978

  4. [4]

    Preskill, M

    J. Preskill, M. B. Wise, and F. Wilczek, Phys. Lett. B 120, 127 (1983)

    1983

  5. [5]

    L. F. Abbott and P. Sikivie, A cosmological bound on the invisible axion, Physics Letters B 120, 133 (1983)

    work page 1983

  6. [6]

    Dine and W

    M. Dine and W. Fischler, The not-so-harmless axion, Physics Letters B 120, 137 (1983)

    1983

  7. [7]

    I. G. Irastorza and J. Redondo, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 102, 89 (2018)

    2018

  8. [8]

    J. E. Kim, Weak-interaction singlet and strong cp invari- ance, Physical Review Letters 43, 103 (1979)

    work page 1979

Show all 74 references
  1. [9]

    M. A. Shifman, A. Vainshtein, and V. I. Zakharov, Can confinement ensure natural cp invariance of strong inter- actions?, Nuclear Physics B 166, 493 (1980)

    1980

  2. [10]

    M. Dine, W. Fischler, and M. Srednicki, A simple solution to the strong cp problem with a harmless axion, Physics letters B 104, 199 (1981)

    1981

  3. [11]

    Zhitnitskij, On possible suppression of the axion- hadron interactions, Yadernaya Fizika 31, 497 (1980)

    A. Zhitnitskij, On possible suppression of the axion- hadron interactions, Yadernaya Fizika 31, 497 (1980)

    1980

  4. [12]

    Di Luzio, M

    L. Di Luzio, M. Giannotti, E. Nardi, and L. Visinelli, The landscape of qcd axion models, Physics Reports 870, 1 (2020), the landscape of QCD axion models

    2020

  5. [13]

    Sikivie, Experimental Tests of the Invisible Ax- ion, Phys

    P. Sikivie, Experimental Tests of the Invisible Ax- ion, Phys. Rev. Lett. 51, 1415 (1983), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 52, 695 (1984)]

    1983

  6. [14]

    Sikivie, Detection Rates for ’Invisible’ Axion Searches, Phys

    P. Sikivie, Detection Rates for ’Invisible’ Axion Searches, Phys. Rev. D 32, 2988 (1985), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 36, 974 (1987)]

    1985

  7. [15]

    Boutan, B

    C. Boutan, B. H. LaRoque, E. Lentz, N. S. Oblath, M. S. Taubman, J. Tedeschi, J. Yang, A. M. Jones, T. Braine, N. Crisosto, L. J. Rosenberg, G. Rybka, D. Will, D. Zhang, S. Kimes, R. Ottens, C. Bartram, D. Bowring, R. Cervantes, A. S. Chou, S. Knirck, D. V. Mitchell, A. Sonnen...

    2024

  8. [16]

    S. Ahn, J. Kim, B. I. Ivanov, O. Kwon, H. Byun, A. F. van Loo, S. Park, J. Jeong, S. Lee, J. Kim, i. m. c. b. u. Kutlu, A. K. Yi, Y. Nakamura, S. Oh, D. Ahn, S. Bae, H. Choi, J. Choi, Y. Chong, W. Chung, V. Gkika, J. E. Kim, Y. Kim, B. R. Ko, L. Miceli, D. Lee, J. Lee, K. W. 6...

    2024

  9. [17]

    M. J. Jewell, A. F. Leder, K. M. Backes, X. Bai, K. van Bibber, B. M. Brubaker, S. B. Cahn, A. Droster, M. H. Esmat, S. Ghosh, E. Graham, G. C. Hilton, H. Jackson, C. Laffan, S. K. Lamoreaux, K. W. Lehnert, S. M. Lewis, M. Malnou, R. H. Maruyama, D. A. Palken, N. M. Ra- pidis,...

    2023

  10. [18]

    Hoshino, S

    G. Hoshino, S. Knirck, M. H. Awida, G. I. Cancelo, S. Corrodi, M. Di Federico, B. Knepper, A. Lapuente, M. Littmann, D. W. Miller, D. V. Mitchell, D. Rodriguez, M. K. Ruschman, C. P. Salemi, M. A. Sawtell, L. Ste- fanazzi, A. Sonnenschein, G. W. Teafoe, and P. Winter (GigaBREA...

    2025

  11. [19]

    B. A. dos Santos Garcia, D. Bergermann, A. Cald- well, V. Dabhi, C. Diaconu, J. Diehl, G. Dvali, J. Egge, E. Garutti, S. Heyminck, F. Hubaut, A. Ivanov, J. Jochum, S. Knirck, M. Kramer, D. Kreikemeyer- Lorenzo, C. Krieger, C. Lee, D. Leppla-Weber, X. Li, A. Lindner, B. Majorov...

    2024 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Recent works based on lattice simulations [21, 22] mo- tivate the search for post-inflationary axions [23] with masses above 40 µeV

    were introduced to tackle higher masses, however the sensitivity of these instruments is still limited. Recent works based on lattice simulations [21, 22] mo- tivate the search for post-inflationary axions [23] with masses above 40 µeV. In this mass region no extended searches...

    2025 arXiv

  13. [21]

    A. J. Millar, S. M. Anlage, R. Balafendiev, P. Belov, K. van Bibber, J. Conrad, M. Demarteau, A. Droster, K. Dunne, A. G. Rosso, J. E. Gudmundsson, H. Jackson, G. Kaur, T. Klaesson, N. Kowitt, M. Lawson, A. Leder, A. Miyazaki, S. Morampudi, H. V. Peiris, H. S. Røising, G. Sing...

    2023

  14. [22]

    Buschmann, J

    M. Buschmann, J. W. Foster, A. Hook, A. Peterson, D. E. Willcox, W. Zhang, and B. R. Safdi, Dark mat- ter from axion strings with adaptive mesh refinement, Nature Communications 13, 10.1038/s41467-022-28669- y (2022)

    2022 doi

  15. [23]

    J. N. Benabou, M. Buschmann, J. W. Foster, and B. R. Safdi, Axion mass prediction from adaptive mesh re- finement cosmological lattice simulations, arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.08699 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  16. [24]

    C. A. J. O’Hare, G. Pierobon, J. Redondo, and Y. Y. Y. Wong, Simulations of axionlike particles in the postinfla- tionary scenario, Phys. Rev. D 105, 055025 (2022)

    2022

  17. [25]

    Rettaroli, D

    A. Rettaroli, D. Alesini, D. Babusci, C. Braggio, G. Carugno, D. D’Agostino, A. D’Elia, D. Di Gioacchino, R. Di Vora, P. Falferi, U. Gambardella, A. Gardikiotis, C. Gatti, C. Ligi, A. Lombardi, G. Maccarrone, A. Or- tolan, G. Ruoso, S. Tocci, and G. Vidali (QUAX Collab- oratio...

    2024

  18. [26]

    Alesini, C

    D. Alesini, C. Braggio, G. Carugno, N. Crescini, D. D’Agostino, D. Di Gioacchino, R. Di Vora, P. Falferi, S. Gallo, U. Gambardella, C. Gatti, G. Iannone, G. Lamanna, C. Ligi, A. Lombardi, R. Mezzena, A. Or- tolan, R. Pengo, N. Pompeo, A. Rettaroli, G. Ruoso, E. Silva, C. C. Sp...

    2019

  19. [27]

    Alesini, C

    D. Alesini, C. Braggio, G. Carugno, N. Crescini, D. D’Agostino, D. Di Gioacchino, R. Di Vora, P. Falferi, U. Gambardella, C. Gatti, G. Iannone, C. Ligi, A. Lom- bardi, G. Maccarrone, A. Ortolan, R. Pengo, A. Ret- taroli, G. Ruoso, L. Taffarello, and S. Tocci, Search for in- vi...

    2021

  20. [28]

    Alesini, D

    D. Alesini, D. Babusci, C. Braggio, G. Carugno, N. Crescini, D. D’Agostino, A. D’Elia, D. Di Gioacchino, R. Di Vora, P. Falferi, U. Gambardella, C. Gatti, G. Ian- none, C. Ligi, A. Lombardi, G. Maccarrone, A. Ortolan, R. Pengo, A. Rettaroli, G. Ruoso, L. Taffarello, and S. Toc...

    2022

  21. [29]

    Di Vora, A

    R. Di Vora, A. Lombardi, A. Ortolan, R. Pengo, G. Ruoso, C. Braggio, G. Carugno, L. Taffarello, G. Cappelli, N. Crescini, M. Esposito, L. Planat, A. Ranadive, N. Roch, D. Alesini, D. Babusci, A. D’Elia, D. Di Gioacchino, C. Gatti, C. Ligi, G. Maccarrone, A. Rettaroli, S. Tocci...

    2023

  22. [30]

    R. D. Vora, A. Gardikiotis, C. Braggio, G. Carugno, A. Lombardi, A. Ortolan, and G. Ruoso, A tunable di- electric resonator for axion searches at 11 ghz (2024), arXiv:2410.07774 [physics.ins-det]

    2024

  23. [31]

    Sikivie, Invisible axion search methods, Reviews of Modern Physics 93, 015004 (2021)

    P. Sikivie, Invisible axion search methods, Reviews of Modern Physics 93, 015004 (2021)

    2021

  24. [32]

    L. C. Maier Jr and J. Slater, Field strength measurements in resonant cavities, Journal of applied physics 23, 68 (1952)

    1952

  25. [33]

    Ranadive, M

    A. Ranadive, M. Esposito, L. Planat, E. Bonet, C. Naud, O. Buisson, W. Guichard, and N. Roch, Kerr reversal in josephson meta-material and traveling wave parametric amplification, Nature Communications 13, 1737 (2022)

    2022

  26. [34]

    Braggio, G

    C. Braggio, G. Cappelli, G. Carugno, N. Crescini, R. D. Vora, M. Esposito, A. Ortolan, L. Planat, A. Ranadive, N. Roch, and G. Ruoso, A haloscope amplification chain based on a traveling wave parametric amplifier, Review of Scientific Instruments 93, 094701 (2022)

    2022

  27. [35]

    Cervantes, G

    R. Cervantes, G. Carosi, S. Kimes, C. Hanretty, B. H. LaRoque, G. Leum, P. Mohapatra, N. Oblath, R. Ottens, Y. Park, et al. , Admx-orpheus first search for 70 µ ev dark photon dark matter: Detailed design, operations, and analysis, Physical Review D 106, 102002 (2022)

    2022

  28. [36]

    Quiskamp, B

    A. Quiskamp, B. T. McAllister, P. Altin, E. N. Ivanov, M. Goryachev, and M. E. Tobar, Direct search for dark matter axions excluding alp cogenesis in the 63- to 67- µev range with the organ experiment, Science Advances 8, eabq3765 (2022)

    2022

  29. [37]

    R. H. Dicke, The measurement of thermal radiation at microwave frequencies, in Classics in Radio Astronomy (Springer, Dordrecht, 1946) pp. 106–113

    1946

  30. [38]

    DePanfilis, A

    S. DePanfilis, A. Melissinos, B. Moskowitz, J. Rogers, Y. K. Semertzidis, W. Wuensch, H. Halama, A. Prodell, 7 W. Fowler, and F. Nezrick, Limits on the abundance and coupling of cosmic axions at 4.5¡ m a¡ 5.0 µev, Physical Review Letters 59, 839 (1987)

    1987

  31. [39]

    W. U. Wuensch, S. De Panfilis-Wuensch, Y. K. Se- mertzidis, J. T. Rogers, A. C. Melissinos, H. J. Halama, B. E. Moskowitz, A. G. Prodell, W. B. Fowler, and F. A. Nezrick, Results of a laboratory search for cosmic axions and other weakly coupled light particles, Phys. Rev. D 40...

    1989

  32. [40]

    Hagmann, P

    C. Hagmann, P. Sikivie, N. S. Sullivan, and D. B. Tanner, Results from a search for cosmic axions, Phys. Rev. D42, 1297 (1990)

    1990

  33. [41]

    Hagmann, D

    C. Hagmann, D. Kinion, W. Stoeffl, K. van Bibber, E. Daw, J. McBride, H. Peng, L. Rosenberg, H. Xin, J. Laveigne, P. Sikivie, N. Sullivan, D. Tanner, D. Moltz, F. Nezrick, M. Turner, N. Golubev, and L. Kravchuk, First results from a second generation galactic axion ex- perimen...

    1996

  34. [42]

    S. J. Asztalos, G. Carosi, C. Hagmann, D. Kinion, K. van Bibber, M. Hotz, L. J. Rosenberg, G. Rybka, J. Hoskins, J. Hwang, P. Sikivie, D. B. Tanner, R. Bradley, and J. Clarke, Squid-based microwave cavity search for dark- matter axions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 041301 (2010)

    2010

  35. [43]

    N. Du, N. Force, R. Khatiwada, E. Lentz, R. Ottens, L. J. Rosenberg, G. Rybka, G. Carosi, N. Woollett, D. Bowring, A. S. Chou, A. Sonnenschein, W. Wester, C. Boutan, N. S. Oblath, R. Bradley, E. J. Daw, A. V. Dixit, J. Clarke, S. R. O’Kelley, N. Crisosto, J. R. Glea- son, S. J...

    2018

  36. [44]

    Braine, R

    T. Braine, R. Cervantes, N. Crisosto, N. Du, S. Kimes, L. J. Rosenberg, G. Rybka, J. Yang, D. Bowring, A. S. Chou, R. Khatiwada, A. Sonnenschein, W. Wester, G. Carosi, N. Woollett, L. D. Duffy, R. Bradley, C. Boutan, M. Jones, B. H. LaRoque, N. S. Oblath, M. S. Taubman, J. Cla...

    2020

  37. [45]

    Bartram, T

    C. Bartram, T. Braine, E. Burns, R. Cervantes, N. Crisosto, N. Du, H. Korandla, G. Leum, P. Moha- patra, T. Nitta, L. J. Rosenberg, G. Rybka, J. Yang, J. Clarke, I. Siddiqi, A. Agrawal, A. V. Dixit, M. H. Aw- ida, A. S. Chou, M. Hollister, S. Knirck, A. Sonnenschein, W. Wester...

    2021

  38. [46]

    Boutan, M

    C. Boutan, M. Jones, B. H. LaRoque, N. S. Oblath, R. Cervantes, N. Du, N. Force, S. Kimes, R. Ottens, L. J. Rosenberg, G. Rybka, J. Yang, G. Carosi, N. Woollett, D. Bowring, A. S. Chou, R. Khatiwada, A. Sonnenschein, W. Wester, R. Bradley, E. J. Daw, A. Agrawal, A. V. Dixit, J...

    2018

  39. [47]

    Goodman, M

    C. Goodman, M. Guzzetti, C. Hanretty, L. J. Rosenberg, G. Rybka, J. Sinnis, D. Zhang, J. Clarke, I. Siddiqi, A. S. Chou, M. Hollister, S. Knirck, A. Sonnenschein, T. J. Caligiure, J. R. Gleason, A. T. Hipp, P. Sikivie, M. E. Solano, N. S. Sullivan, D. B. Tanner, R. Khatiwada, ...

    2025

  40. [48]

    Bartram, T

    C. Bartram, T. Braine, R. Cervantes, N. Crisosto, N. Du, G. Leum, P. Mohapatra, T. Nitta, L. J. Rosenberg, G. Rybka, J. Yang, J. Clarke, I. Siddiqi, A. Agrawal, A. V. Dixit, M. H. Awida, A. S. Chou, M. Hollister, S. Knirck, A. Sonnenschein, W. Wester, J. R. Gleason, A. T. Hipp...

    2023

  41. [49]

    S. Lee, S. Ahn, J. Choi, B. R. Ko, and Y. K. Semertzidis, Axion dark matter search around 6 .7 µeV, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 101802 (2020)

    2020

  42. [50]

    Jeong, S

    J. Jeong, S. Youn, S. Bae, J. Kim, T. Seong, J. E. Kim, and Y. K. Semertzidis, Search for invisible axion dark matter with a multiple-cell haloscope, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 221302 (2020)

    2020

  43. [51]

    O. Kwon, D. Lee, W. Chung, D. Ahn, H. Byun, F. Caspers, H. Choi, J. Choi, Y. Chong, H. Jeong, J. Jeong, J. E. Kim, J. Kim, i. m. c. b. u. Kutlu, J. Lee, M. Lee, S. Lee, A. Matlashov, S. Oh, S. Park, S. Uchaikin, S. Youn, and Y. K. Semertzidis, First results from an ax- ion hal...

    2021

  44. [52]

    Y. Lee, B. Yang, H. Yoon, M. Ahn, H. Park, B. Min, D. Kim, and J. Yoo, Searching for invisible axion dark matter with an 18 t magnet haloscope, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 241805 (2022)

    2022

  45. [53]

    H. Yoon, M. Ahn, B. Yang, Y. Lee, D. Kim, H. Park, B. Min, and J. Yoo, Axion haloscope using an 18 t high temperature superconducting magnet, Phys. Rev. D106, 092007 (2022)

    2022

  46. [54]

    J. Kim, O. Kwon, i. m. c. b. u. Kutlu, W. Chung, A. Mat- lashov, S. Uchaikin, A. F. van Loo, Y. Nakamura, S. Oh, H. Byun, D. Ahn, and Y. K. Semertzidis, Near-quantum- noise axion dark matter search at capp around 9 .5 µeV, 8 Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 091602 (2023)

    2023

  47. [55]

    A. K. Yi, S. Ahn, i. m. c. b. u. Kutlu, J. Kim, B. R. Ko, B. I. Ivanov, H. Byun, A. F. van Loo, S. Park, J. Jeong, O. Kwon, Y. Nakamura, S. V. Uchaikin, J. Choi, S. Lee, M. Lee, Y. C. Shin, J. Kim, D. Lee, D. Ahn, S. Bae, J. Lee, Y. Kim, V. Gkika, K. W. Lee, S. Oh, T. Seong, D...

    2023

  48. [56]

    B. Yang, H. Yoon, M. Ahn, Y. Lee, and J. Yoo, Extended axion dark matter search using the capp18t haloscope, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 081801 (2023)

    2023

  49. [57]

    Y. Kim, J. Jeong, S. Youn, S. Bae, K. Lee, A. F. van Loo, Y. Nakamura, S. Oh, T. Seong, S. Uchaikin, J. E. Kim, and Y. K. Semertzidis, Experimental search for in- visible dark matter axions around 22 µeV, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 051802 (2024)

    2024

  50. [58]

    B. M. Brubaker, L. Zhong, Y. V. Gurevich, S. B. Cahn, S. K. Lamoreaux, M. Simanovskaia, J. R. Root, S. M. Lewis, S. Al Kenany, K. M. Backes, I. Urdinaran, N. M. Rapidis, T. M. Shokair, K. A. van Bibber, D. A. Palken, M. Malnou, W. F. Kindel, M. A. Anil, K. W. Lehn- ert, and G....

    2017

  51. [59]

    K. M. Backes, D. A. Palken, S. A. Kenany, B. M. Brubaker, S. B. Cahn, A. Droster, G. C. Hilton, S. Ghosh, H. Jackson, S. K. Lamoreaux, A. F. Leder, K. W. Lehnert, S. M. Lewis, M. Malnou, R. H. Maruyama, N. M. Rapidis, M. Simanovskaia, S. Singh, D. H. Speller, I. Urdinaran, L. ...

    2021

  52. [60]

    Zhong, S

    L. Zhong, S. Al Kenany, K. M. Backes, B. M. Brubaker, S. B. Cahn, G. Carosi, Y. V. Gurevich, W. F. Kindel, S. K. Lamoreaux, K. W. Lehnert, S. M. Lewis, M. Mal- nou, R. H. Maruyama, D. A. Palken, N. M. Rapidis, J. R. Root, M. Simanovskaia, T. M. Shokair, D. H. Speller, I. Urdin...

    2018

  53. [61]

    X. Bai, M. J. Jewell, J. Echevers, K. van Bibber, A. Droster, M. H. Esmat, S. Ghosh, E. Graham, H. Jackson, C. Laffan, S. K. Lamoreaux, A. F. Leder, K. W. Lehnert, S. M. Lewis, R. H. Maruyama, R. D. Nath, N. M. Rapidis, E. P. Ruddy, M. Silva-Feaver, M. Simanovskaia, S. Singh, ...

    2025

  54. [62]

    Chang, J.-Y

    H. Chang, J.-Y. Chang, Y.-C. Chang, Y.-H. Chang, Y.- H. Chang, C.-H. Chen, C.-F. Chen, K.-Y. Chen, Y.-F. Chen, W.-Y. Chiang, W.-C. Chien, H. T. Doan, W.-C. Hung, W. Kuo, S.-B. Lai, H.-W. Liu, M.-W. OuYang, P.- I. Wu, and S.-S. Yu, First results from the taiwan axion search exp...

    2022

  55. [63]

    C. M. Adair, K. Altenm¨ uller, V. Anastassopoulos, S. Ar- guedas Cuendis, J. Baier, K. Barth, A. Belov, D. Bozice- vic, H. Br¨ auninger, G. Cantatore, F. Caspers, J. F. Cas- tel, S. A. C ¸ etin, W. Chung, H. Choi, J. Choi, T. Dafni, M. Davenport, A. Dermenev, K. Desch, B. D¨ o...

    2022

  56. [64]

    ´Alvarez Melc´ on, S

    A. ´Alvarez Melc´ on, S. Arguedas Cuendis, J. Baier, K. Barth, H. Br¨ auninger, S. Calatroni, G. Canta- tore, F. Caspers, J. F. Castel, S. A. Cetin, C. Co- gollos, T. Dafni, M. Davenport, A. Dermenev, K. De- sch, A. D ´ ıaz-Morcillo, B. D¨ obrich, H. Fischer, W. Funk, J. D. Ga...

    2021

  57. [65]

    Ahyoune, A

    S. Ahyoune, A. ´A. Melc´ on, S. A. Cuendis, S. Calatroni, C. Cogollos, A. D ´ ıaz-Morcillo, B. D¨ obrich, J. Gallego, J. Garc ´ ıa-Barcel´ o, B. Gimeno,et al., Rades axion search results with a high-temperature superconducting cavity in an 11.7 t magnet, Journal of High Energy...

    2025

  58. [66]

    A. P. Quiskamp, G. R. Flower, S. Samuels, B. T. McAl- lister, P. Altin, E. N. Ivanov, M. Goryachev, and M. E. Tobar, Near-quantum-limited axion dark matter search with the organ experiment around 26 µeV, Phys. Rev. D 111, 095007 (2025)

    2025

  59. [67]

    Braggio, L

    C. Braggio, L. Balembois, R. Di Vora, Z. Wang, J. Trav- esedo, L. Pallegoix, G. Carugno, A. Ortolan, G. Ruoso, U. Gambardella, D. D’Agostino, P. Bertet, and E. Flurin, Quantum-enhanced sensing of axion dark matter with a transmon-based single microwave photon counter, Phys. Re...

    2025

  60. [68]

    Di Luzio, F

    L. Di Luzio, F. Mescia, and E. Nardi, Redefining the Axion Window, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 031801 (2017), arXiv:1610.07593 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Di Luzio, F

    L. Di Luzio, F. Mescia, and E. Nardi, Window for pre- ferred axion models, Phys. Rev. D 96, 075003 (2017), arXiv:1705.05370 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  62. [70]

    O’Hare, cajohare/axionlimits: Axionlimits, https:// cajohare.github.io/AxionLimits/ (2020)

    C. O’Hare, cajohare/axionlimits: Axionlimits, https:// cajohare.github.io/AxionLimits/ (2020)

    2020

  63. [71]

    P. A. Zyla et al. , (Particle Data Group), Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2020, 10.1093/ptep/ptaa104 (2020), 083C01, https://academic.oup.com/ptep/article- pdf/2020/8/083C01/34673722/ptaa104.pdf

    2020 doi

  64. [72]

    M. S. Turner, Phys. Rev. D 42, 3572 (1990)

    1990

  65. [73]

    G. J. Feldman and R. D. Cousins, Unified approach to the classical statistical analysis of small signals, Physical 9 review D 57, 3873 (1998)

    1998

  66. [74]

    A. G. Rosso, J. Conrad, and J. Jeong, Baseline fil- tering and peak reconstruction for haloscope-like axion searches, arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.04288 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.