Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 155 references

Noble Dark Matter: Surprising Elusiveness of Dark Baryons

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Dark matter made of heavy composite baryons can become an almost pure SU(2)_L singlet above the TeV scale, suppressing its interactions with the Standard Model to near-invisibility.

desk verdict A genuinely useful classification of composite SU(2)_L dark baryons, plus a plausible mechanism for singlet-dominated dark matter; the main caveat is a not-fully-validated four-body integral fit behind the Nc=4 quantitative claims. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.14240 v1 pith:R7CBQEIB submitted 2024-12-18 hep-ph

Pouya Asadi , Austin Batz , Graham D. Kribs This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-ph
keywords darkmattercompositebaryonsSU(2)_LrepresentationsH-paritynon-relativisticquarkmodelnoble
topics Dark Matter
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 in a simple confining dark sector, the dark matter candidate -- a composite baryon built from heavy quarks charged under SU(2)_L -- is naturally almost inert. For dark quark masses above roughly a TeV, the lightest neutral baryon is either a pure SU(2)_L singlet or a mostly-singlet state with only a tiny admixture of a 5-plet. Because a recently identified H-parity symmetry forbids the leading electromagnetic moments of such hadrons, and because a singlet has no tree-level electroweak couplings, direct and indirect detection signals are strongly suppressed. The result is that a broad class of WIMP-like theories is much more elusive than the standard single-multiplet WIMP picture, and new collider searches are needed to probe them.

What carries the argument

The key machinery is the Young-tableau classification of baryon flavor representations, which for spin-S baryons has Nc/2 - S rows of two boxes and 2S columns of one box, together with the non-relativistic quark model mass calculation using a variational spatial wavefunction psi = (1 + k1 sum |ri - rj|) exp(-k sum |ri - rj|) and a generalized Fermi-Breit potential that includes W and Z exchange. The mass operator is evaluated in the SU(2)_L basis and then diagonalized to find mass eigenstates; the ratio of off-diagonal to diagonal entries, controlled by electroweak couplings and spatial integrals, determines how singlet-dominated the lightest state is. In the heavy-quark limit the mixing is suppressed because electroweak symmetry appears approximately restored in the dark sector.

What would settle it

A lattice QCD computation of the baryon spectrum for SU(2) and SU(4) dark gauge groups with heavy fundamental quarks (mq much larger than the confinement scale) would settle the claim: if the lightest neutral baryon in the (Nc, Nf) = (2,4) or (4,3) theory is found to have a dominant 5-plet component rather than a dominant singlet component, the singlet-dominance conclusion fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that for a confining SU(Nc) dark sector with heavy quarks in the Nf-plet of SU(2)_L (zero hypercharge), the lightest baryon -- the dark matter candidate -- is predominantly an SU(2)_L singlet once the quark mass mq exceeds roughly O(1) TeV. In the benchmark models (Nc, Nf) = (2,4) and (4,3), the lowest-spin baryon spectrum contains a singlet and a 5-plet; the mass matrix mixing these states is driven by electroweak boson exchange, and the mixing vanishes as mq and the confinement scale become much larger than mW, so the mass eigenstate becomes almost pure singlet. Since H-parity forbids the leading electromagnetic moments of neutral dark hadrons, and since a singlet has no tree-level electroweak couplings, the candidate's interactions with Standard Model particles are extremely feeble -- the 'Noble Dark Matter' scenario. The paper also classifies the SU(2)_L representations of baryons for general Nc and Nf via Young-tableau arguments, identifying four categories; categories I and II (singlets present) are the ones that realize this elusiveness.

Load-bearing premise

The conclusion that the lightest baryon is a singlet depends on the non-relativistic quark model augmented by a specific variational wavefunction ansatz and a conjectured Laurent-series fit for four-body spatial integrals; if that approximation misses the true ground state, the mass ordering -- and with it the singlet-dominance -- could change.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For mq above about 1 TeV, direct detection cross sections of the benchmark models fall below the neutrino fog, so current and near-future xenon experiments lose sensitivity to this class of dark matter.
  • The suppression is not limited to the two benchmarks: any of the category I and II (Nc, Nf) combinations in Table I yields a mostly-singlet lightest baryon, so the same elusiveness repeats across many confining dark sectors.
  • Collider searches -- long-lived particles, disappearing tracks, semi-visible jets, and emerging jets -- become the primary way to probe these models, replacing direct detection.
  • Mass splittings between the heavier neutral and singly-charged baryons approach the roughly 166 MeV electroweak splitting of a heavy SU(2)_L multiplet, giving a sharp consistency check and a target for displaced-vertex searches.
  • For a first-order confinement phase transition, the symmetric dark baryon abundance is depleted by the squeezeout mechanism, so the relevant abundance today is likely asymmetric, consistent with strongly suppressed annihilation signals.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the singlet-dominance conclusion survives a more precise treatment such as lattice QCD, the WIMP paradigm is broader than commonly assumed: an SU(2)_L multiplet combined with a singlet can be the natural low-energy content of a confining sector, not just a single multiplet like the Wino.
  • The same mechanism -- heavy constituents plus H-parity -- could apply to dark sectors with scalar constituents (Appendix B4), so the 'noble' behavior is likely a generic feature of composite electroweak multiplets rather than a quirk of the two benchmark models.
  • A consequence the authors leave implicit is that an almost pure singlet baryon also becomes nearly invisible to galactic-center annihilation searches that currently exclude pure 5-plet or triplet WIMPs; the composite realization therefore opens parameter space that elementary WIMP models cannot occupy without fine-tuning.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper studies a dark sector with a confining SU(N_c) gauge group and vector-like dark quarks that transform as an N_f-plet of the Standard Model SU(2)_L. The authors classify the SU(2)_L representations of the lightest dark baryons for several (N_c,N_f) combinations and identify four phenomenological categories, focusing on the cases (2,4) and (4,3), where the lowest-spin spectrum contains both an SU(2)_L singlet and a 5-plet. Using a non-relativistic quark model with electroweak gauge-boson exchange and a variational spatial wavefunction, they compute the baryon mass spectrum and the mixing between the singlet and the neutral 5-plet state. Their main result is that for dark quark masses above roughly 1 TeV the lightest baryon is dominantly an SU(2)_L singlet, with strongly suppressed couplings to the Standard Model; this is combined with the previously introduced H-parity to define 'Noble Dark Matter.' The paper also gives rough estimates of direct detection rates and discusses indirect and collider phenomenology.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the paper identifies a broad and previously underappreciated class of composite WIMP-like dark matter that is much more elusive than an elementary electroweak multiplet such as a wino. The calculability of the mass spectrum and mixing from a simple UV theory is a genuine strength, as is the systematic group-theoretic enumeration of baryon representations and the explicit consistency checks: the W^{1,2}/W^3 cancellations in the electroweak-symmetric limit, the approach to the 166 MeV charged-neutral splitting at large m_q, and the expected decoupling of mixing for m_q >> m_W. The paper also provides a useful Landau-pole analysis of the electroweak running. The main weakness is quantitative: the central singlet-dominance prediction for the (4,3) model depends on a conjectured Laurent-series treatment of N_c=4 spatial integrals, and the robustness of that step is not yet demonstrated.

major comments (2)
  1. [App. C4, Eqs. (C49)-(C50)] The central singlet-dominance result for (N_c,N_f)=(4,3) rests on the m_V-dependent N_c=4 spatial expectation values obtained from fits to a conjectured Laurent-series form with poles at m_V/k=-6 and -8, with n_min and n_max fixed by heuristic scaling arguments. For d_3 the authors state that the numerical integrals did not converge and the result was obtained by anti-differentiating the fit for d_2. The phenomenologically crucial regime m_q ~ O(1) TeV corresponds to m_W/k ~ O(1), i.e. between the fitted poles, where the Laurent expansion is evaluated far from the asymptotic regime that motivated the pole positions. An error in these expectation values changes both the singlet/5-plet mass splitting and the off-diagonal mixing; if the sign of the splitting or the size of the overlap were wrong, the claim that the lightest baryon is a nearly pure singlet above 1 TeV would lose its quantitative support. I ask for a direct numerical integration check of the N_c=4 integrals, or an independent method, together with a demonstration that the final mixing angle is insensitive to the fit ambiguities.
  2. [Sec. IIIB and Eq. (5)] The variational ansatz is a single two-parameter template with no systematic way to estimate its deviation from the true ground state for N_c=4. The authors honestly report that the two choices of minimization direction produce about 10% uncertainty in |<m_DM|5-plet>|^2 and shift the drop-off in Fig. 1 by less than half an order of magnitude in m_q, but this only probes the minimization ambiguity, not whether the exponential-plus-linear template is adequate. Because the mass ordering between the singlet and 5-plet and the mixing angle are determined by small differences of sizable potential terms, a test with a second independent variational template or a systematically enlarged basis is needed to establish that the 'noble' character is not an artifact of the ansatz.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. V] In the sentence 'the ground state of the Hamiltonian... in Nobel Dark Matter', 'Nobel' should be 'Noble'.
  2. [Sec. V] The phrase 'when the the DM candidates are' contains a duplicated 'the'.
  3. [App. C4, after Eq. (C50)] The statement 'We find good numerical agreement with this approach' would be more useful with a quantitative measure of the fit residuals or a comparison plot for representative expectation values.
  4. [Fig. 2] The figure caption labels a curve as 'XENONnT (projected)', but the cited reference [68] is the physics-reach paper for XENON1T; please clarify which projection is being shown and cite the appropriate source.
  5. [Table I] The table would be easier to read if the main text noted explicitly that 'lowest-spin' means spin-0 for even N_c and spin-1/2 for odd N_c; this information currently appears only in App. B1.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the singlet-dominance prediction follows from an independent variational mass calculation with external cross-checks; the H-parity input is a checkable symmetry, not a fitted target.

full rationale

The paper's central claim, that the lightest dark baryon is dominantly an SU(2)_L singlet above the TeV scale, is obtained by a first-principles non-relativistic quark-model calculation rather than by fitting the claimed result. The mass operator in Eq. (3) is derived from a generalized Fermi-Breit potential, the spin-flavor matrix elements are derived from explicit group-theoretic wavefunctions in App. B, and the spatial expectation values are estimated by a variational template in Eq. (5). No parameter is fitted to the final observable (the singlet/5-plet mass ordering or the mixing angle). The only numerical fits, in App. C 4, are of intermediate spatial integrals a_n, b, c_n, d_n to the conjectured Laurent forms in Eqs. (C49)-(C50); those fitted quantities are inputs to the Hamiltonian, not re-statements of the mass splitting or mixing prediction. The authors explicitly acknowledge the least secure step, noting 'For d3 with Nc = 4, we encountered difficulties in the convergence of the numerical integrals, so we found our estimate of d3 by anti-differentiating our estimate of d2'; this is a numerical limitation, not a circular reduction. The H-parity symmetry is cited from the authors' prior Ref. [10], and it is load-bearing for the 'noble gas' phenomenology, but it is a discrete symmetry of the dark-sector Lagrangian stated explicitly in Sec. II A, is parameter-free, and does not include the target mass-ordering result as an assumption. The 166 MeV cross-check against Ref. [65] provides an external anchor for the electroweak mass splittings, and the gauge-invariance checks in App. C 3 (cancellation of W^1,2 and W^3 contributions in the symmetric phase) are independent consistency conditions. Overall, no derivation step is equivalent to its inputs by construction, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction; the calculation is self-contained apart from a checkable symmetry input from prior work.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claim depends on a small set of model inputs (m_q, Lambda_chi, Nc, Nf) and on several approximation choices in the mass calculation, most notably the variational template and the fitted Laurent series for spatial integrals. The group-theoretic decompositions are exact, but the mass ordering that leads to singlet dominance is not fully controlled by first-principles input.

free parameters (4)
  • Dark quark mass m_q = scanned over ~100 GeV to ~3 TeV in Fig. 1
    Input mass scale of the model; the claim of singlet dominance applies at m_q >~ 1 TeV. Not fitted to data, but a free parameter of the theory.
  • Dark confinement scale Lambda_chi = ratios Lambda_chi/m_q = 10^-2 and 10^-6 used in Fig. 2
    Sets the confinement scale; the heavy quark limit requires Lambda_chi << m_q, and the paper does not compute the regime m_q ~ Lambda_chi.
  • Variational parameters k and k1 = minimized to give lowest mass eigenvalues
    Parameters of the template wavefunction in Eq. (5); they set the bound-state size and enter all mass predictions.
  • Laurent series coefficients f_{n,x} = fit to numerical spatial integrals
    In Eq. (C49), the Nc=4 spatial expectation values are parameterized by Laurent series in mV/k with coefficients fitted to numerical integrals; pole structure and truncation are conjectured via Eq. (C50).
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption SU(Nc) color confines and dark quarks form color-singlet baryons that are the stable DM candidates.
    Secs. I and II; the whole DM candidate picture assumes confinement and baryon number conservation.
  • domain assumption Heavy quark limit: m_q >> Lambda_chi, so a non-relativistic quark model with perturbative electroweak corrections is valid.
    Sec. III and App. C; the paper states it cannot reliably compute masses when m_q is not much larger than Lambda_chi.
  • domain assumption H-parity is an exact symmetry of the dark sector Lagrangian and forbids leading EM moments and mixing between adjacent odd SU(2)_L multiplets.
    Sec. IIA, based on Ref [10]; central to the suppressed interactions, though the paper rederives the transformation.
  • domain assumption Lowest-lying baryons have symmetric spatial wavefunctions and minimal spin, leading to the flavor tableau in Eq. (B2).
    App. B1; assumed to identify the relevant baryon representations. Excited spatial states are neglected.
  • ad hoc to paper The variational template wavefunction psi = (1 + k1 sum |ri-rj|) exp(-k sum |ri-rj|) approximates the ground state.
    Eq. (5) and App. C4; no proof this template spans the true ground state; the mass ordering depends on it.
  • ad hoc to paper For Nc=4, spatial expectation values can be represented by the Laurent series in Eq. (C49) with conjectured pole positions and nmax = 2(Nc-2) + nmax(Nc=2).
    App. C4; the paper states these are conjectures and relies on 'good numerical agreement' without rigorous error estimates.
invented entities (1)
  • Confining SU(Nc) dark sector with vector-like dark quarks Q transforming as an Nf-plet of SU(2)_L independent evidence
    purpose: To generate a stable, neutral, mostly singlet dark baryon as the DM candidate; the dark sector is the proposed new physics.
    The model provides falsifiable handles: collider production of charged dark hadrons, dark meson signatures, and a predicted drop of direct detection cross section below the neutrino fog for mDM >~ 0.1-1 TeV. No independent observational evidence exists yet, but the predictions are testable.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Noble Dark Matter: Surprising Elusiveness of Dark Baryons." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/R7CBQEIB

@misc{pith2026241214240,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Noble Dark Matter: Surprising Elusiveness of Dark Baryons},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/R7CBQEIB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.14240}
}
abstract

Dark matter could be a baryonic composite of strongly-coupled constituents transforming under SU(2)$_L$. We classify the SU(2)$_L$ representations of baryons in a class of simple confining dark sectors and find that the lightest state can be a pure singlet or a singlet that mixes with other neutral components of SU(2)$_L$ representations, which strongly suppresses the dark matter candidate's interactions with the Standard Model. We focus on models with a confining $\text{SU}(N_c)$ and heavy dark quarks constituting vector-like $N_f$-plet of SU(2)$_L$. For benchmark $N_c$ and $N_f$, we calculate baryon mass spectra, incorporating electroweak gauge boson exchange in the non-relativistic quark model, and demonstrate that above TeV mass scales, dark matter is dominantly a singlet state. The combination of this singlet nature with the recently discovered $\mathcal{H}$-parity results in an inert state analogous to noble gases, hence we coin the term Noble Dark Matter. Our results can be understood in the non-relativistic effective theory that treats the dark baryons as elementary states, where we find singlets accompanying triplets, 5-plets, or more exotic representations. This generalization of WIMP-like theories is more difficult to find or rule out than dark matter models that include only a single SU(2)$_L$ multiplet (such as a Wino), motivating new searches in colliders and a re-analysis of direct and indirect detection prospects in astrophysical observations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.14240 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: Mass [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: Rough estimates of direct detection cross sections [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

155 extracted references · 5 canonical work pages

  1. [18]

    Spatial Expectation V alues We use the variational method to estimate the spatial expectation values in the inter-quark potential with the template wavefunction in Eq. (5). We minimize baryon masses with respect to the k and k1 parameters, thereby placing a bound on the ground state of the Hamiltonian. We are free to use any normalizable template function...

  2. [1]

    Baryon states with identical fermionic constituents must be totally anti-symmetric under particle exchange

    Spin and Flavor Representations We employ the quark model [61–63], wherein hadron states are products of color, flavor, spin, and spatial wavefunc- tions. Baryon states with identical fermionic constituents must be totally anti-symmetric under particle exchange. Meson constituents transform in conjugate representations of their symmetry groups, so a multi...

  3. [2]

    Recall that SU(2) L is a subgroup of SU( Nf )

    Finding Hadron W avefunctions and SU (2)L Representations Now that we have the flavor representations in SU( Nf ), we can formally understand why the baryon states are in specific SU(2) L multiplets. Recall that SU(2) L is a subgroup of SU( Nf ). For H-parity symmetric models, we are interested in the embedding of SU(2) L in SU(Nf ) where one identifies t...

  4. [3]

    Find a complete basis of constituent spin configurations for the desired hadron spin state

  5. [4]

    middlest

    Find a complete basis of flavor configurations for the hadrons with the “middlest” electric charge ( Q = 1 /2 when Nc is odd and Nf is even and Q = 0 otherwise)

  6. [5]

    For baryons, symmetrize the states and eliminate linear dependence and overlap of the symmetrized states

    Combine the spin and flavor eigenstates to obtain a complete basis of spin-flavor eigenstates with this charge. For baryons, symmetrize the states and eliminate linear dependence and overlap of the symmetrized states

  7. [6]

    Deduce the spectrum of hadron SU(2) L multiplets from the eigenvalues of J 2

    Transform the basis of spin-flavor eigenstates to a basis that diagonalizes J 2 of SU(2) L. Deduce the spectrum of hadron SU(2) L multiplets from the eigenvalues of J 2

  8. [7]

    We elaborate on each step below, including examples

    Apply the SU(2) L ladder operators to the eigenstates of J 2 with the middlest charge to find all other SU(2) L eigenstates in each multiplet. We elaborate on each step below, including examples. We start with the middlest electric charge because all SU(2) L multiplets contain a state with this charge. One could alternatively start with the highest charge...

Show all 155 references
  1. [8]

    tableau operator

    More Insights on the SU (Nf ) → SU(2)L Decomposition There is more than one way to construct baryon wavefunctions and determine the decomposition of the flavor representation into representations of SU(2)L. The algorithm we described in App. B 2 is simple to perform, naturally...

  2. [9]

    For Nc = 2, the spin-1 representations for a particular Nf become the spin-0 representations for Nf + 1

  3. [10]

    For spin-1, this is reversed

    For Nc even and not divisible by 4, the smallest spin-0 representation is a singlet for Nf even and a triplet for Nf odd. For spin-1, this is reversed

  4. [11]

    For Nc divisible by 4, the smallest spin-0 representation is a singlet, and the smallest spin-1 representation is a triplet

  5. [12]

    There are, however, instances of spin-3/2 singlets for Nc = 3 and spin-1/2 singlets for larger odd Nc

    For Nc = 3, we have found no instances of spin-1/2 singlets. There are, however, instances of spin-3/2 singlets for Nc = 3 and spin-1/2 singlets for larger odd Nc

  6. [13]

    We invite the reader to attempt to prove these patterns or observe others

    When holding Nc fixed and increasing Nf by 1, the size of the largest representation increases by Nc. We invite the reader to attempt to prove these patterns or observe others. 13 Another (less efficient) way to find the SU(2)L decomposition would be to compute the ranks of th...

  7. [14]

    The dark sector Lagrangian would be modified to include the scalar’s quartic self-interactions and dimension-4 couplings between the scalar and the SM Higgs boson

    Scalar Quarks We have so far considered only spin-1/2 dark quarks, but scalar quarks also have interesting phenomenology. The dark sector Lagrangian would be modified to include the scalar’s quartic self-interactions and dimension-4 couplings between the scalar and the SM Higg...

  8. [15]

    The Mass Hamiltonian The mass operator in Eq. (3) comes from the Hamiltonian H = Hfree + X i<j Vij , (C1) where Vij is the inter-quark potential, and Hfree is the free Hamiltonian Hfree = X i mi + p2 i 2mi , (C2) in the non-relativistic approximation. At first order in the gau...

  9. [16]

    Spontaneous breaking of electroweak symmetry breaks that degeneracy at one loop due to self-energy corrections

    Quark Mass Splittings Invariance of the Lagrangian under SU(2)L requires that the tree-level quark masses in our model must be degener- ate. Spontaneous breaking of electroweak symmetry breaks that degeneracy at one loop due to self-energy corrections. These have the form Q Q ...

  10. [17]

    (3) act on the spin-flavor wavefunctions found in App

    Spin-flavor Matrix Elements The charge, spin, and ladder operators in Eq. (3) act on the spin-flavor wavefunctions found in App. B 2. Here, we discuss the actions of these operators on SU(2) L eigenstates in the ( Nc, Nf ) = (4 , 3) and (2 , 4) models. We use the following not...

  11. [19]

    Bohr radius

    (C45) p2 i = k2(k2 + kk1 + k2 1) k2 + 3kk1 + 3k2 1 . (C46) Note that the denominators above contain identical normalization factors, and integrals whose integrands are quadratic in ψ must be quadratic in k1. For greater than two bodies, we resort to numerical computation. For ...

  12. [20]

    Dark Matter,

    M. Cirelli, A. Strumia, and J. Zupan, “Dark Matter,” arXiv:2406.01705 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  13. [21]

    Vectorlike Confinement at the LHC,

    C. Kilic, T. Okui, and R. Sundrum, “Vectorlike Confinement at the LHC,” JHEP 02 (2010) 018, arXiv:0906.0577 [hep-ph]

    2010 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Weakly Interacting Stable Pions,

    Y. Bai and R. J. Hill, “Weakly Interacting Stable Pions,” Phys. Rev. D 82 (2010) 111701, arXiv:1005.0008 [hep-ph]

    2010 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Dynamical generation of the weak and Dark Matter scales from strong interactions,

    O. Antipin, M. Redi, and A. Strumia, “Dynamical generation of the weak and Dark Matter scales from strong interactions,” JHEP 01 (2015) 157, arXiv:1410.1817 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Stealth Dark Matter: Dark scalar baryons through the Higgs portal,

    T. Appelquist et al. , “Stealth Dark Matter: Dark scalar baryons through the Higgs portal,” Phys. Rev. D 92 no. 7, (2015) 075030, arXiv:1503.04203 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Dark Matter as a weakly coupled Dark Baryon,

    A. Mitridate, M. Redi, J. Smirnov, and A. Strumia, “Dark Matter as a weakly coupled Dark Baryon,” JHEP 10 (2017) 210, arXiv:1707.05380 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Effective Theories of Dark Mesons with Custodial Symmetry,

    G. D. Kribs, A. Martin, and T. Tong, “Effective Theories of Dark Mesons with Custodial Symmetry,” JHEP 08 (2019) 020, arXiv:1809.10183 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Dark Mesons at the LHC,

    G. D. Kribs, A. Martin, B. Ostdiek, and T. Tong, “Dark Mesons at the LHC,” JHEP 07 (2019) 133, arXiv:1809.10184 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Composite Dark Matter with Forbidden Annihilation,

    T. Abe, R. Sato, and T. Yamanaka, “Composite Dark Matter with Forbidden Annihilation,” arXiv:2404.03963 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  21. [29]

    Direct Detection of Dark Baryons Naturally Suppressed by H-parity,

    P. Asadi, G. D. Kribs, and C. J. H. Mantel, “Direct Detection of Dark Baryons Naturally Suppressed by H-parity,” arXiv:2410.23631 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  22. [30]

    Direct Detection of Non-Chiral Dark Matter,

    R. Essig, “Direct Detection of Non-Chiral Dark Matter,” Phys. Rev. D 78 (2008) 015004, arXiv:0710.1668 [hep-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  23. [31]

    A complete calculation for direct detection of Wino dark matter,

    J. Hisano, K. Ishiwata, and N. Nagata, “A complete calculation for direct detection of Wino dark matter,” Phys. Lett. B 690 (2010) 311–315, arXiv:1004.4090 [hep-ph]

    2010 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Standard Model anatomy of WIMP dark matter direct detection I: weak-scale matching,

    R. J. Hill and M. P. Solon, “Standard Model anatomy of WIMP dark matter direct detection I: weak-scale matching,” Phys. Rev. D 91 (2015) 043504, arXiv:1401.3339 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Standard Model anatomy of WIMP dark matter direct detection II: QCD analysis and hadronic matrix elements,

    R. J. Hill and M. P. Solon, “Standard Model anatomy of WIMP dark matter direct detection II: QCD analysis and hadronic matrix elements,” Phys. Rev. D 91 (2015) 043505, arXiv:1409.8290 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Power Corrections to the Universal Heavy WIMP-Nucleon Cross Section,

    C.-Y. Chen, R. J. Hill, M. P. Solon, and A. M. Wijangco, “Power Corrections to the Universal Heavy WIMP-Nucleon Cross Section,” Phys. Lett. B 781 (2018) 473–479, arXiv:1801.08551 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Closing the window on WIMP Dark Matter,

    S. Bottaro, D. Buttazzo, M. Costa, R. Franceschini, P. Panci, D. Redigolo, and L. Vittorio, “Closing the window on WIMP Dark Matter,” Eur. Phys. J. C 82 no. 1, (2022) 31, arXiv:2107.09688 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  28. [36]

    The last complex WIMPs standing,

    S. Bottaro, D. Buttazzo, M. Costa, R. Franceschini, P. Panci, D. Redigolo, and L. Vittorio, “The last complex WIMPs standing,” Eur. Phys. J. C 82 no. 11, (2022) 992, arXiv:2205.04486 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  29. [37]

    General heavy WIMP nucleon elastic scattering,

    Q. Chen, G.-J. Ding, and R. J. Hill, “General heavy WIMP nucleon elastic scattering,” Phys. Rev. D 108 no. 11, (2023) 116023, arXiv:2309.02715 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Looking for WIMPs through the neutrino fogs,

    I. M. Bloch, S. Bottaro, D. Redigolo, and L. Vittorio, “Looking for WIMPs through the neutrino fogs,” arXiv:2410.02723 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  31. [39]

    Echoes of a hidden valley at hadron colliders,

    M. J. Strassler and K. M. Zurek, “Echoes of a hidden valley at hadron colliders,” Phys. Lett. B 651 (2007) 374–379, arXiv:hep-ph/0604261

    2007 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Phenomenology of hidden valleys at hadron colliders,

    T. Han, Z. Si, K. M. Zurek, and M. J. Strassler, “Phenomenology of hidden valleys at hadron colliders,” JHEP 07 (2008) 008, arXiv:0712.2041 [hep-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Macroscopic Strings and ’Quirks’ at Colliders,

    J. Kang and M. A. Luty, “Macroscopic Strings and ’Quirks’ at Colliders,” JHEP 11 (2009) 065, arXiv:0805.4642 [hep-ph]

    2009 arXiv

  34. [42]

    A Pure-Glue Hidden Valley I. States and Decays,

    J. E. Juknevich, D. Melnikov, and M. J. Strassler, “A Pure-Glue Hidden Valley I. States and Decays,” JHEP 07 (2009) 055, arXiv:0903.0883 [hep-ph]

    2009 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Quirky Composite Dark Matter,

    G. D. Kribs, T. S. Roy, J. Terning, and K. M. Zurek, “Quirky Composite Dark Matter,” Phys. Rev. D 81 (2010) 095001, arXiv:0909.2034 [hep-ph]

    2010 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Pure-glue hidden valleys through the Higgs portal,

    J. E. Juknevich, “Pure-glue hidden valleys through the Higgs portal,” JHEP 08 (2010) 121, arXiv:0911.5616 [hep-ph]

    2010 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Quirks at the Tevatron and Beyond,

    R. Harnik, G. D. Kribs, and A. Martin, “Quirks at the Tevatron and Beyond,” Phys. Rev. D 84 (2011) 035029, arXiv:1106.2569 [hep-ph]

    2011 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Composite Scalar Dark Matter,

    M. Frigerio, A. Pomarol, F. Riva, and A. Urbano, “Composite Scalar Dark Matter,” JHEP 07 (2012) 015, arXiv:1204.2808 [hep-ph]

    2012 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Emerging Jets,

    P. Schwaller, D. Stolarski, and A. Weiler, “Emerging Jets,” JHEP 05 (2015) 059, arXiv:1502.05409 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Semivisible Jets: Dark Matter Undercover at the LHC,

    T. Cohen, M. Lisanti, and H. K. Lou, “Semivisible Jets: Dark Matter Undercover at the LHC,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 no. 17, (2015) 171804, arXiv:1503.00009 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Composite Dark Sectors,

    A. Carmona and M. Chala, “Composite Dark Sectors,” JHEP 06 (2015) 105, arXiv:1504.00332 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Triggering Soft Bombs at the LHC,

    S. Knapen, S. Pagan Griso, M. Papucci, and D. J. Robinson, “Triggering Soft Bombs at the LHC,” JHEP 08 (2017) 076, arXiv:1612.00850 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Tracking down Quirks at the Large Hadron Collider,

    S. Knapen, H. K. Lou, M. Papucci, and J. Setford, “Tracking down Quirks at the Large Hadron Collider,” Phys. Rev. D 96 no. 11, (2017) 115015, arXiv:1708.02243 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Stopping Quirks at the LHC,

    J. A. Evans and M. A. Luty, “Stopping Quirks at the LHC,” JHEP 06 (2019) 090, arXiv:1811.08903 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Strongly interacting dark sectors in the early Universe and at the LHC through a simplified portal,

    E. Bernreuther, F. Kahlhoefer, M. Kr¨ amer, and P. Tunney, “Strongly interacting dark sectors in the early Universe and at the LHC through a simplified portal,” JHEP 01 (2020) 162, arXiv:1907.04346 [hep-ph]. 30

    2020 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Casting a graph net to catch dark showers,

    E. Bernreuther, T. Finke, F. Kahlhoefer, M. Kr¨ amer, and A. M¨ uck, “Casting a graph net to catch dark showers,” SciPost Phys. 10 no. 2, (2021) 046, arXiv:2006.08639 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Perturbative benchmark models for a dark shower search program,

    S. Knapen, J. Shelton, and D. Xu, “Perturbative benchmark models for a dark shower search program,” Phys. Rev. D 103 no. 11, (2021) 115013, arXiv:2103.01238 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Unsupervised hadronic SUEP at the LHC,

    J. Barron, D. Curtin, G. Kasieczka, T. Plehn, and A. Spourdalakis, “Unsupervised hadronic SUEP at the LHC,” JHEP 12 (2021) 129, arXiv:2107.12379 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Dark vector mesons at LHC forward detector searches,

    T. Kuwahara and S.-R. Yuan, “Dark vector mesons at LHC forward detector searches,” JHEP 06 (2023) 208, arXiv:2303.03736 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Dark sector glueballs at the LHC,

    A. Batz, T. Cohen, D. Curtin, C. Gemmell, and G. D. Kribs, “Dark sector glueballs at the LHC,” JHEP 04 (2024) 070, arXiv:2310.13731 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Detecting technibaryon dark matter,

    J. Bagnasco, M. Dine, and S. D. Thomas, “Detecting technibaryon dark matter,” Phys. Lett. B 320 (1994) 99–104, arXiv:hep-ph/9310290

    1994 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Composite Inelastic Dark Matter,

    D. S. M. Alves, S. R. Behbahani, P. Schuster, and J. G. Wacker, “Composite Inelastic Dark Matter,” Phys. Lett. B 692 (2010) 323–326, arXiv:0903.3945 [hep-ph]

    2010 arXiv

  53. [61]

    The Cosmology of Composite Inelastic Dark Matter,

    D. Spier Moreira Alves, S. R. Behbahani, P. Schuster, and J. G. Wacker, “The Cosmology of Composite Inelastic Dark Matter,” JHEP 06 (2010) 113, arXiv:1003.4729 [hep-ph]

    2010 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Thermal dark matter from a confining sector,

    M. R. Buckley and E. T. Neil, “Thermal dark matter from a confining sector,” Phys. Rev. D 87 no. 4, (2013) 043510, arXiv:1209.6054 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Pionic Dark Matter,

    S. Bhattacharya, B. Meli´ c, and J. Wudka, “Pionic Dark Matter,”JHEP 02 (2014) 115, arXiv:1307.2647 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Accidental Composite Dark Matter,

    O. Antipin, M. Redi, A. Strumia, and E. Vigiani, “Accidental Composite Dark Matter,” JHEP 07 (2015) 039, arXiv:1503.08749 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Signatures of Large Composite Dark Matter States,

    E. Hardy, R. Lasenby, J. March-Russell, and S. M. West, “Signatures of Large Composite Dark Matter States,” JHEP 07 (2015) 133, arXiv:1504.05419 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  58. [66]

    Colored Dark Matter,

    V. De Luca, A. Mitridate, M. Redi, J. Smirnov, and A. Strumia, “Colored Dark Matter,” Phys. Rev. D 97 no. 11, (2018) 115024, arXiv:1801.01135 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  59. [67]

    Composite Dark Matter from Strongly-Interacting Chiral Dynamics,

    R. Contino, A. Podo, and F. Revello, “Composite Dark Matter from Strongly-Interacting Chiral Dynamics,” JHEP 02 (2021) 091, arXiv:2008.10607 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Dark Nuclei I: Cosmology and Indirect Detection,

    W. Detmold, M. McCullough, and A. Pochinsky, “Dark Nuclei I: Cosmology and Indirect Detection,” Phys. Rev. D 90 no. 11, (2014) 115013, arXiv:1406.2276 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Hidden SU(N) Glueball Dark Matter,

    A. Soni and Y. Zhang, “Hidden SU(N) Glueball Dark Matter,” Phys. Rev. D 93 no. 11, (2016) 115025, arXiv:1602.00714 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Indirect detection of composite asymmetric dark matter,

    R. Mahbubani, M. Redi, and A. Tesi, “Indirect detection of composite asymmetric dark matter,” Phys. Rev. D 101 no. 10, (2020) 103037, arXiv:1908.00538 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  63. [71]

    Composite strongly interacting dark matter,

    J. M. Cline, Z. Liu, G. D. Moore, and W. Xue, “Composite strongly interacting dark matter,” Phys. Rev. D 90 no. 1, (2014) 015023, arXiv:1312.3325 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  64. [72]

    Self-Interacting Dark Matter from a Non-Abelian Hidden Sector,

    K. K. Boddy, J. L. Feng, M. Kaplinghat, and T. M. P. Tait, “Self-Interacting Dark Matter from a Non-Abelian Hidden Sector,” Phys. Rev. D 89 no. 11, (2014) 115017, arXiv:1402.3629 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Big Bang Darkleosynthesis,

    G. Krnjaic and K. Sigurdson, “Big Bang Darkleosynthesis,” Phys. Lett. B 751 (2015) 464–468, arXiv:1406.1171 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  66. [74]

    Non-Abelian dark matter and dark radiation,

    M. A. Buen-Abad, G. Marques-Tavares, and M. Schmaltz, “Non-Abelian dark matter and dark radiation,” Phys. Rev. D 92 no. 2, (2015) 023531, arXiv:1505.03542 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  67. [75]

    Cosmological Abundance of Colored Relics,

    C. Gross, A. Mitridate, M. Redi, J. Smirnov, and A. Strumia, “Cosmological Abundance of Colored Relics,” Phys. Rev. D 99 no. 1, (2019) 016024, arXiv:1811.08418 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  68. [76]

    Large N -ightmare Dark Matter,

    L. Morrison, S. Profumo, and D. J. Robinson, “Large N -ightmare Dark Matter,” JCAP 05 (2021) 058, arXiv:2010.03586 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  69. [77]

    Searching for elusive dark sectors with terrestrial and celestial observations,

    R. Contino, K. Max, and R. K. Mishra, “Searching for elusive dark sectors with terrestrial and celestial observations,” JHEP 06 (2021) 127, arXiv:2012.08537 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  70. [78]

    Dark QCD matters,

    R. Garani, M. Redi, and A. Tesi, “Dark QCD matters,” JHEP 12 (2021) 139, arXiv:2105.03429 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  71. [79]

    Last Electroweak WIMP Standing: Pseudo-Dirac Higgsino Status and Compact Stars as Future Probes,

    R. Krall and M. Reece, “Last Electroweak WIMP Standing: Pseudo-Dirac Higgsino Status and Compact Stars as Future Probes,” Chin. Phys. C 42 no. 4, (2018) 043105, arXiv:1705.04843 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  72. [80]

    Hadron Masses in a Gauge Theory,

    A. De Rujula, H. Georgi, and S. L. Glashow, “Hadron Masses in a Gauge Theory,” Phys. Rev. D 12 (1975) 147–162

    1975

  73. [81]

    Chiral Quarks and the Nonrelativistic Quark Model,

    A. Manohar and H. Georgi, “Chiral Quarks and the Nonrelativistic Quark Model,” Nucl. Phys. B 234 (1984) 189–212

    1984

  74. [82]

    Georgi, Weak Interactions and Modern Particle Theory

    H. Georgi, Weak Interactions and Modern Particle Theory . 1984

    1984

  75. [83]

    A generalization of the Fermi-Breit equation to non-Coulombic spatial interactions,

    M. De Sanctis, “A generalization of the Fermi-Breit equation to non-Coulombic spatial interactions,” Eur. Phys. J. A 41 (2009) 169–178

    2009

  76. [84]

    Minimal dark matter,

    M. Cirelli, N. Fornengo, and A. Strumia, “Minimal dark matter,” Nucl. Phys. B 753 (2006) 178–194, arXiv:hep-ph/0512090

    2006 arXiv

  77. [85]

    Dark nuclei. II. Nuclear spectroscopy in two-color QCD,

    W. Detmold, M. McCullough, and A. Pochinsky, “Dark nuclei. II. Nuclear spectroscopy in two-color QCD,” Phys. Rev. D 90 no. 11, (2014) 114506, arXiv:1406.4116 [hep-lat]

    2014 arXiv

  78. [86]

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

    LZ Collaboration Collaboration, J. Aalbers et al. , “Dark Matter Search Results from 4.2 Tonne-Years of Exposure of the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment,” arXiv:2410.17036 [hep-ex]

    arXiv

  79. [87]

    Physics reach of the XENON1T dark matter experiment,

    XENON Collaboration, E. Aprile et al. , “Physics reach of the XENON1T dark matter experiment,” JCAP 04 (2016) 027, arXiv:1512.07501 [physics.ins-det]

    2016 arXiv

  80. [88]

    Dark Matter Daily Modulation With Anisotropic Organic 31 Crystals,

    C. Blanco, Y. Kahn, B. Lillard, and S. D. McDermott, “Dark Matter Daily Modulation With Anisotropic Organic 31 Crystals,” Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) 036011, arXiv:2103.08601 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  81. [89]

    Molecular Migdal effect,

    C. Blanco, I. Harris, Y. Kahn, B. Lillard, and J. P´ erez-R ´ ıos, “Molecular Migdal effect,”Phys. Rev. D 106 no. 11, (2022) 115015, arXiv:2208.09002 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  82. [90]

    Inelastic dark matter,

    D. Tucker-Smith and N. Weiner, “Inelastic dark matter,” Phys. Rev. D 64 (2001) 043502, arXiv:hep-ph/0101138

    2001 arXiv

  83. [91]

    Magnetic Inelastic Dark Matter,

    S. Chang, N. Weiner, and I. Yavin, “Magnetic Inelastic Dark Matter,” Phys. Rev. D 82 (2010) 125011, arXiv:1007.4200 [hep-ph]

    2010 arXiv

  84. [92]

    Magnetic Fluffy Dark Matter,

    K. Kumar, A. Menon, and T. M. P. Tait, “Magnetic Fluffy Dark Matter,” JHEP 02 (2012) 131, arXiv:1111.2336 [hep-ph]

    2012 arXiv

  85. [93]

    Earth-Catalyzed Detection of Magnetic Inelastic Dark Matter with Photons in Large Underground Detectors,

    J. Eby, P. J. Fox, and G. D. Kribs, “Earth-Catalyzed Detection of Magnetic Inelastic Dark Matter with Photons in Large Underground Detectors,” arXiv:2312.08478 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  86. [94]

    Direct detection of dark matter polarizability,

    G. Ovanesyan and L. Vecchi, “Direct detection of dark matter polarizability,” JHEP 07 (2015) 128, arXiv:1410.0601 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  87. [95]

    Faint Light from Dark Matter: Classifying and Constraining Dark Matter-Photon Effective Operators,

    B. J. Kavanagh, P. Panci, and R. Ziegler, “Faint Light from Dark Matter: Classifying and Constraining Dark Matter-Photon Effective Operators,” JHEP 04 (2019) 089, arXiv:1810.00033 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  88. [96]

    Thermal squeezeout of dark matter,

    P. Asadi, E. D. Kramer, E. Kuflik, G. W. Ridgway, T. R. Slatyer, and J. Smirnov, “Thermal squeezeout of dark matter,” Phys. Rev. D 104 no. 9, (2021) 095013, arXiv:2103.09827 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  89. [97]

    Accidentally Asymmetric Dark Matter,

    P. Asadi, E. D. Kramer, E. Kuflik, G. W. Ridgway, T. R. Slatyer, and J. Smirnov, “Accidentally Asymmetric Dark Matter,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 127 no. 21, (2021) 211101, arXiv:2103.09822 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  90. [98]

    Glueballs in a thermal squeezeout model,

    P. Asadi, E. D. Kramer, E. Kuflik, T. R. Slatyer, and J. Smirnov, “Glueballs in a thermal squeezeout model,” JHEP 07 (2022) 006, arXiv:2203.15813 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  91. [99]

    Critical Behavior at Finite Temperature Confinement Transitions,

    B. Svetitsky and L. G. Yaffe, “Critical Behavior at Finite Temperature Confinement Transitions,” Nucl. Phys. B 210 (1982) 423–447

    1982

  92. [100]

    The Deconfinement phase transition in one flavor QCD,

    C. Alexandrou, A. Borici, A. Feo, P. de Forcrand, A. Galli, F. Jegerlehner, and T. Takaishi, “The Deconfinement phase transition in one flavor QCD,” Phys. Rev. D 60 (1999) 034504, arXiv:hep-lat/9811028

    1999 arXiv

  93. [101]

    Heavy quark potentials in quenched QCD at high temperature,

    O. Kaczmarek, F. Karsch, E. Laermann, and M. Lutgemeier, “Heavy quark potentials in quenched QCD at high temperature,” Phys. Rev. D 62 (2000) 034021, arXiv:hep-lat/9908010

    2000 arXiv

  94. [102]

    The High temperature phase transition in SU(N) gauge theories,

    B. Lucini, M. Teper, and U. Wenger, “The High temperature phase transition in SU(N) gauge theories,” JHEP 01 (2004) 061, arXiv:hep-lat/0307017

    2004 arXiv

  95. [103]

    Properties of the deconfining phase transition in SU(N) gauge theories,

    B. Lucini, M. Teper, and U. Wenger, “Properties of the deconfining phase transition in SU(N) gauge theories,” JHEP 02 (2005) 033, arXiv:hep-lat/0502003

    2005 arXiv

  96. [104]

    The Order of the quantum chromodynamics transition predicted by the standard model of particle physics,

    Y. Aoki, G. Endrodi, Z. Fodor, S. D. Katz, and K. K. Szabo, “The Order of the quantum chromodynamics transition predicted by the standard model of particle physics,” Nature 443 (2006) 675–678, arXiv:hep-lat/0611014

    2006 arXiv

  97. [105]

    Phase structure of finite temperature QCD in the heavy quark region,

    WHOT-QCD Collaboration, H. Saito, S. Ejiri, S. Aoki, T. Hatsuda, K. Kanaya, Y. Maezawa, H. Ohno, and T. Umeda, “Phase structure of finite temperature QCD in the heavy quark region,” Phys. Rev. D 84 (2011) 054502, arXiv:1106.0974 [hep-lat]. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 85, 079902 (2012)]

    2011 arXiv

  98. [106]

    Weakly Interacting Massive Particles and Neutron Stars,

    I. Goldman and S. Nussinov, “Weakly Interacting Massive Particles and Neutron Stars,” Phys. Rev. D 40 (1989) 3221–3230

    1989

  99. [107]

    Neutron Stars: Graveyard of Charged Dark Matter,

    A. Gould, B. T. Draine, R. W. Romani, and S. Nussinov, “Neutron Stars: Graveyard of Charged Dark Matter,” Phys. Lett. B 238 (1990) 337–343

    1990

  100. [108]

    Can Neutron stars constrain Dark Matter?,

    C. Kouvaris and P. Tinyakov, “Can Neutron stars constrain Dark Matter?,” Phys. Rev. D 82 (2010) 063531, arXiv:1004.0586 [astro-ph.GA]

    2010 arXiv

  101. [109]

    Neutron Stars as Dark Matter Probes,

    A. de Lavallaz and M. Fairbairn, “Neutron Stars as Dark Matter Probes,” Phys. Rev. D 81 (2010) 123521, arXiv:1004.0629 [astro-ph.GA]

    2010 arXiv

  102. [110]

    Constraints on Scalar Asymmetric Dark Matter from Black Hole Formation in Neutron Stars,

    S. D. McDermott, H.-B. Yu, and K. M. Zurek, “Constraints on Scalar Asymmetric Dark Matter from Black Hole Formation in Neutron Stars,” Phys. Rev. D 85 (2012) 023519, arXiv:1103.5472 [hep-ph]

    2012 arXiv

  103. [111]

    Excluding Light Asymmetric Bosonic Dark Matter,

    C. Kouvaris and P. Tinyakov, “Excluding Light Asymmetric Bosonic Dark Matter,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 107 (2011) 091301, arXiv:1104.0382 [astro-ph.CO]

    2011 arXiv

  104. [112]

    On the capture of dark matter by neutron stars,

    T. G¨ uver, A. E. Erkoca, M. Hall Reno, and I. Sarcevic, “On the capture of dark matter by neutron stars,” JCAP 05 (2014) 013, arXiv:1201.2400 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  105. [113]

    Growth of Black Holes in the interior of Rotating Neutron Stars,

    C. Kouvaris and P. Tinyakov, “Growth of Black Holes in the interior of Rotating Neutron Stars,” Phys. Rev. D 90 no. 4, (2014) 043512, arXiv:1312.3764 [astro-ph.SR]

    2014 arXiv

  106. [114]

    Detecting Dark Matter with Imploding Pulsars in the Galactic Center,

    J. Bramante and T. Linden, “Detecting Dark Matter with Imploding Pulsars in the Galactic Center,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 113 no. 19, (2014) 191301, arXiv:1405.1031 [astro-ph.HE]

    2014 arXiv

  107. [115]

    Multiscatter stellar capture of dark matter,

    J. Bramante, A. Delgado, and A. Martin, “Multiscatter stellar capture of dark matter,” Phys. Rev. D 96 no. 6, (2017) 063002, arXiv:1703.04043 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  108. [116]

    NonPrimordial Solar Mass Black Holes,

    C. Kouvaris, P. Tinyakov, and M. H. G. Tytgat, “NonPrimordial Solar Mass Black Holes,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 121 no. 22, (2018) 221102, arXiv:1804.06740 [astro-ph.HE]

    2018 arXiv

  109. [117]

    New Analysis of Neutron Star Constraints on Asymmetric Dark Matter,

    R. Garani, Y. Genolini, and T. Hambye, “New Analysis of Neutron Star Constraints on Asymmetric Dark Matter,” JCAP 05 (2019) 035, arXiv:1812.08773 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  110. [118]

    Premature black hole death of Population III stars by dark matter,

    S. A. R. Ellis, “Premature black hole death of Population III stars by dark matter,” JCAP 05 no. 05, (2022) 025, arXiv:2111.02414 [astro-ph.CO]

    2022 arXiv

  111. [119]

    Can LIGO Detect Nonannihilating Dark Matter?,

    S. Bhattacharya, B. Dasgupta, R. Laha, and A. Ray, “Can LIGO Detect Nonannihilating Dark Matter?,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 131 no. 9, (2023) 091401, arXiv:2302.07898 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  112. [120]

    Realistic neutron star constraints on bosonic asymmetric dark matter,

    N. F. Bell, A. Melatos, and K. Petraki, “Realistic neutron star constraints on bosonic asymmetric dark matter,” Phys. 32 Rev. D 87 no. 12, (2013) 123507, arXiv:1301.6811 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  113. [121]

    Constraints on bosonic dark matter from observation of old neutron stars,

    J. Bramante, K. Fukushima, and J. Kumar, “Constraints on bosonic dark matter from observation of old neutron stars,” Phys. Rev. D 87 no. 5, (2013) 055012, arXiv:1301.0036 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  114. [122]

    Bounds on self-interacting fermion dark matter from observations of old neutron stars,

    J. Bramante, K. Fukushima, J. Kumar, and E. Stopnitzky, “Bounds on self-interacting fermion dark matter from observations of old neutron stars,” Phys. Rev. D 89 no. 1, (2014) 015010, arXiv:1310.3509 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  115. [123]

    Asymmetric Dark Stars and Neutron Star Stability,

    M. I. Gresham and K. M. Zurek, “Asymmetric Dark Stars and Neutron Star Stability,” Phys. Rev. D 99 no. 8, (2019) 083008, arXiv:1809.08254 [astro-ph.CO]

    2019 arXiv

  116. [124]

    Celestial-Body Focused Dark Matter Annihilation Throughout the Galaxy,

    R. K. Leane, T. Linden, P. Mukhopadhyay, and N. Toro, “Celestial-Body Focused Dark Matter Annihilation Throughout the Galaxy,” Phys. Rev. D 103 no. 7, (2021) 075030, arXiv:2101.12213 [astro-ph.HE]

    2021 arXiv

  117. [125]

    FCC Physics Opportunities: Future Circular Collider Conceptual Design Report Volume 1,

    FCC Collaboration, A. Abada et al. , “FCC Physics Opportunities: Future Circular Collider Conceptual Design Report Volume 1,” Eur. Phys. J. C 79 no. 6, (2019) 474

    2019

  118. [126]

    FCC-ee: The Lepton Collider: Future Circular Collider Conceptual Design Report Volume 2,

    FCC Collaboration, A. Abada et al. , “FCC-ee: The Lepton Collider: Future Circular Collider Conceptual Design Report Volume 2,” Eur. Phys. J. ST 228 no. 2, (2019) 261–623

    2019

  119. [127]

    Z-boson decays into an invisible dark photon at the LHC, HL-LHC and future lepton colliders,

    M. Cobal, C. De Dominicis, M. Fabbrichesi, E. Gabrielli, J. Magro, B. Mele, and G. Panizzo, “ Z-boson decays into an invisible dark photon at the LHC, HL-LHC and future lepton colliders,” Phys. Rev. D 102 no. 3, (2020) 035027, arXiv:2006.15945 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  120. [128]

    WIMPs at High Energy Muon Colliders,

    T. Han, Z. Liu, L.-T. Wang, and X. Wang, “WIMPs at High Energy Muon Colliders,” Phys. Rev. D 103 no. 7, (2021) 075004, arXiv:2009.11287 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  121. [129]

    Closing the window for compressed Dark Sectors with disappearing charged tracks,

    R. Mahbubani, P. Schwaller, and J. Zurita, “Closing the window for compressed Dark Sectors with disappearing charged tracks,” JHEP 06 (2017) 119, arXiv:1703.05327 [hep-ph]. [Erratum: JHEP 10, 061 (2017)]

    2017 arXiv

  122. [130]

    Higgsino Dark Matter or Not: Role of Disappearing Track Searches at the LHC and Future Colliders,

    H. Fukuda, N. Nagata, H. Otono, and S. Shirai, “Higgsino Dark Matter or Not: Role of Disappearing Track Searches at the LHC and Future Colliders,” Phys. Lett. B 781 (2018) 306–311, arXiv:1703.09675 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  123. [131]

    Discovery reach for wino and higgsino dark matter with a disappearing track signature at a 100 TeV pp collider,

    M. Saito, R. Sawada, K. Terashi, and S. Asai, “Discovery reach for wino and higgsino dark matter with a disappearing track signature at a 100 TeV pp collider,” Eur. Phys. J. C 79 no. 6, (2019) 469, arXiv:1901.02987 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  124. [132]

    Hunting wino and higgsino dark matter at the muon collider with disappearing tracks,

    R. Capdevilla, F. Meloni, R. Simoniello, and J. Zurita, “Hunting wino and higgsino dark matter at the muon collider with disappearing tracks,” JHEP 06 (2021) 133, arXiv:2102.11292 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  125. [133]

    Discovering Electroweak Interacting Dark Matter at Muon Colliders using Soft Tracks,

    R. Capdevilla, F. Meloni, and J. Zurita, “Discovering Electroweak Interacting Dark Matter at Muon Colliders using Soft Tracks,” arXiv:2405.08858 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  126. [134]

    LHC Searches for Dark Sector Showers,

    T. Cohen, M. Lisanti, H. K. Lou, and S. Mishra-Sharma, “LHC Searches for Dark Sector Showers,” JHEP 11 (2017) 196, arXiv:1707.05326 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  127. [135]

    Sequential displaced vertices: Novel collider signature for long-lived particles,

    K. R. Dienes, D. Kim, T. T. Leininger, and B. Thomas, “Sequential displaced vertices: Novel collider signature for long-lived particles,” Phys. Rev. D 106 no. 9, (2022) 095012, arXiv:2108.02204 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  128. [136]

    Review of strongly-coupled composite dark matter models and lattice simulations,

    G. D. Kribs and E. T. Neil, “Review of strongly-coupled composite dark matter models and lattice simulations,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 31 no. 22, (2016) 1643004, arXiv:1604.04627 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  129. [137]

    Collider Searches for Long-Lived Particles Beyond the Standard Model,

    L. Lee, C. Ohm, A. Soffer, and T.-T. Yu, “Collider Searches for Long-Lived Particles Beyond the Standard Model,” Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 106 (2019) 210–255, arXiv:1810.12602 [hep-ph]. [Erratum: Prog.Part.Nucl.Phys. 122, 103912 (2022)]

    2019 arXiv

  130. [138]

    Searching for long-lived particles beyond the Standard Model at the Large Hadron Collider,

    J. Alimena et al. , “Searching for long-lived particles beyond the Standard Model at the Large Hadron Collider,” J. Phys. G 47 no. 9, (2020) 090501, arXiv:1903.04497 [hep-ex]

    2020

  131. [139]

    Rethinking jets with energy correlators: Tracks, resummation, and analytic continuation,

    H. Chen, I. Moult, X. Zhang, and H. X. Zhu, “Rethinking jets with energy correlators: Tracks, resummation, and analytic continuation,” Phys. Rev. D 102 (Sep, 2020) 054012. https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevD.102.054012

    2020 doi

  132. [140]

    Energy Correlators Taking Charge,

    K. Lee and I. Moult, “Energy Correlators Taking Charge,” arXiv:2308.00746 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  133. [141]

    Measurement of energy correlators inside jets and determination of the strong coupling αS(mZ ),

    CMS Collaboration, A. Hayrapetyan et al. , “Measurement of energy correlators inside jets and determination of the strong coupling αS(mZ ),” Phys. Rev. Lett. 133 (Aug, 2024) 071903. https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.133.071903

    2024 doi

  134. [142]

    Resummed Photon Spectra for WIMP Annihilation,

    M. Baumgart, T. Cohen, I. Moult, N. L. Rodd, T. R. Slatyer, M. P. Solon, I. W. Stewart, and V. Vaidya, “Resummed Photon Spectra for WIMP Annihilation,” JHEP 03 (2018) 117, arXiv:1712.07656 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  135. [143]

    Hunting for Heavy Winos in the Galactic Center,

    L. Rinchiuso, N. L. Rodd, I. Moult, E. Moulin, M. Baumgart, T. Cohen, T. R. Slatyer, I. W. Stewart, and V. Vaidya, “Hunting for Heavy Winos in the Galactic Center,” Phys. Rev. D 98 no. 12, (2018) 123014, arXiv:1808.04388 [astro-ph.HE]

    2018 arXiv

  136. [144]

    Precision Photon Spectra for Wino Annihilation,

    M. Baumgart, T. Cohen, E. Moulin, I. Moult, L. Rinchiuso, N. L. Rodd, T. R. Slatyer, I. W. Stewart, and V. Vaidya, “Precision Photon Spectra for Wino Annihilation,” JHEP 01 (2019) 036, arXiv:1808.08956 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  137. [145]

    The quintuplet annihilation spectrum,

    M. Baumgart, N. L. Rodd, T. R. Slatyer, and V. Vaidya, “The quintuplet annihilation spectrum,” JHEP 01 (2024) 158, arXiv:2309.11562 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  138. [146]

    Triviality of quantum electrodynamics revisited,

    D. Djukanovic, J. Gegelia, and U.-G. Meißner, “Triviality of quantum electrodynamics revisited,” Commun. Theor. Phys. 69 no. 3, (2018) 263, arXiv:1706.10039 [hep-th]

    2018 arXiv

  139. [147]

    Running Electroweak Couplings as a Probe of New Physics,

    D. S. M. Alves, J. Galloway, J. T. Ruderman, and J. R. Walsh, “Running Electroweak Couplings as a Probe of New Physics,” JHEP 02 (2015) 007, arXiv:1410.6810 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  140. [148]

    Tensor gauge fields in arbitrary representations of GL(D,R). II. Quadratic actions,

    X. Bekaert and N. Boulanger, “Tensor gauge fields in arbitrary representations of GL(D,R). II. Quadratic actions,” Commun. Math. Phys. 271 (2007) 723–773, arXiv:hep-th/0606198

    2007 arXiv

  141. [149]

    Berestetskii, E

    V. Berestetskii, E. Lifshitz, and L. Pitaevskii, Quantum Electrodynamics: Volume 4 . Course of theoretical physics. Elsevier Science, 1982. https://books.google.com/books?id=URL5NKX8vbAC

    1982

  142. [150]

    J. F. Donoghue, E. Golowich, and B. R. Holstein, Dynamics of the standard model , vol. 2. CUP, 2014. 33

    2014

  143. [151]

    D. J. Griffiths and D. F. Schroeter, Introduction to Quantum Mechanics . Cambridge University Press, 3 ed., 2018

    2018

  144. [152]

    M. D. Schwartz, Quantum Field Theory and the Standard Model . Cambridge University Press, 3, 2014

    2014

  145. [153]

    M. E. Peskin and D. V. Schroeder, An Introduction to quantum field theory . Addison-Wesley, Reading, USA, 1995

    1995

  146. [154]

    On the running coupling constant in QCD,

    G. M. Prosperi, M. Raciti, and C. Simolo, “On the running coupling constant in QCD,” Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 58 (2007) 387–438, arXiv:hep-ph/0607209

    2007 arXiv

  147. [155]

    On the lambert W function,

    R. Corless, G. Gonnet, D. Hare, D. Jeffrey, and D. Knuth, “On the lambert W function,” Advances in Computational Mathematics 5 (01, 1996) 329–359

    1996

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.