Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 128 references

The Dark Side of a Tera-Z Factory

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper argues that a Tera-Z electron-positron collider can indirectly probe dark matter through tiny loop-level deviations in electroweak precision observables, with two-loop effects sometimes dominating and distinguishing portal…

desk verdict A genuinely useful, transparent forward projection of Tera-Z sensitivity to t-channel DM portals—the new two-loop RGE terms are real and dominate in quark portals—but the headline reach is gated by an explicit optimistic assumption about SM theory errors on R_b and A_FB^b. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.17803 v3 pith:RVSGY6LX submitted 2025-07-23 hep-ph hep-ex

Pablo Olgoso , Paride Paradisi , Nudzeim Selimovic This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phhep-ex
keywords darkmattert-channelmediatorelectroweakprecisionobservablesTera-ZfactoryFCC-eeSMEFTtwo-loopRGEZ-pole
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 argues that a future Tera-Z electron-positron collider (FCC-ee or CEPC) can indirectly discover or constrain dark matter through tiny deviations in electroweak precision observables, even though dark-sector particles only enter Standard Model processes through loop effects. In the t-channel portal models considered, the dark matter and its mediator are charged under a stabilizing $Z_2$ symmetry, so the leading visible-sector imprint is one-loop; the paper shows that certain two-loop running effects can dominate that imprint. The payoff would be a new, largely complementary probe of TeV-scale thermal dark matter: in quark-coupled portals the $Z$-pole observables $R_b$ and $A_{FB}^b$ are the most sensitive, while in leptonic portals the electroweak measurements are sometimes the only available probe of the relic-density region. If the projections hold, a Tera-Z run would probe parameter space that direct detection and gamma-ray telescopes cannot cover, and the sign pattern of the deviations would distinguish portal structures.

What carries the argument

The machinery is one-loop SMEFT matching followed by renormalization-group evolution: the heavy t-channel mediator and dark matter are integrated out at their mass scale, and the resulting Wilson coefficients are run down to $m_Z$. The workhorse is the combination of operators that shifts the $Z b_L b_L$ vertex, $[C_{Hq}^{(1)}+C_{Hq}^{(3)}]_{33}$, which sets $R_b$ and $A_{FB}^b$. On top of the finite one-loop matching, four-quark operators generated at one loop mix into this combination through top-Yukawa-enhanced anomalous dimensions, producing two-loop leading-log terms — Eqs. (9) and (13) — that dominate the signal in the quark portals. These terms are the named objects carrying the argument: they convert a precision measurement into a dark-matter constraint and give each portal a characteristic sign.

What would settle it

Compute the complete two-loop matching for the $\chi\Phi u_R$ portal and redo the fit: if the leading-log result of Eq. (13) is reduced by more than roughly a factor of two, the claimed 30-fold enhancement and sign flip of $\delta R_b$ disappear. Alternatively, if a future Tera-Z measurement of $R_b$ matches the Standard Model within the currently achievable theory uncertainty band, the claimed sensitivity to these portals would not materialize.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a Tera-Z run can indirectly probe the presence of dark matter in a broad class of $Z_2$-symmetric t-channel simplified models, and that in some cases it is the only probe. The paper establishes this by matching each portal at one loop onto the SMEFT, evolving the Wilson coefficients to the $Z$ pole, and confronting the resulting shifts in the $Z$-pole observables with projected FCC-ee sensitivities. The sharp quantitative findings are two two-loop leading-log RGE terms: in the $\chi\Phi q_L$ portal the term of Eq. (9) dominates the one-loop matching and improves the bound on the portal coupling by a factor of two, while in the $\chi\Phi u_R$ portal Eq. (13) exceeds the one-loop result by a factor of about 30 and flips the sign of $\delta R_b$. These effects give the Tera-Z program sensitivity to mediator masses around a TeV and dark matter masses in the 0.5–2 TeV range, and the resulting sign and correlation patterns of the deviations discriminate between quark-doublet and quark-singlet portals.

Load-bearing premise

The whole projected reach rests on the assumption that Standard Model theory uncertainties on the key observables will be reduced enough that the experimental Tera-Z precision is not spoiled; otherwise the exclusion regions in the figures shrink or disappear.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A Tera-Z run would exclude or constrain TeV-scale t-channel mediator models over much of the thermal relic-abundance target region, including parts of parameter space that DARWIN and CTAO cannot reach.
  • The two-loop leading-log terms are not a small correction: including them strengthens the $\chi\Phi q_L$ bound by a factor of two and makes the $\chi\Phi u_R$ signal about 30 times larger than the one-loop estimate, so omitting them would badly misestimate the reach.
  • Measuring the sign of $\delta R_b$ (positive for quark-doublet portals, negative for quark-singlet portals) would discriminate between the two portal structures using $Z$-pole data alone.
  • In leptophilic portals such as $\chi\Phi e_R$ and $\phi\Psi e_R$, electroweak precision observables would be the only practical probe of thermal dark matter parameter space, since direct detection is suppressed by lepton masses.
  • Correlations among electroweak precision observables, not just individual pulls, carry portal-discriminating information, and improved Standard Model theory calculations for $R_b$ and $A_{FB}^b$ would unlock most of the gain.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If two-loop leading-log effects are this large, a full two-loop matching computation could shift the normalization of the bounds; the qualitative conclusion that Tera-Z probes t-channel dark matter is robust, but the exact contours in the exclusion figures should be treated as order-of-magnitude until then.
  • The same $Z b_L b_L$ operator combination is constrained by top-quark and flavor observables; cross-correlating Tera-Z projections with high-luminosity LHC top measurements could independently test the two-loop RGE picture.
  • The sign-of-$\delta R_b$ diagnostic could be applied to other electroweak-charged dark sectors beyond t-channel portals, turning $R_b$ measurements into a general probe of dark-sector loop imprints.
  • If Standard Model theory errors on $R_b$ are not reduced below the projected experimental precision, the claimed 'only probe' role in leptonic portals would weaken, although complementarity with direct and indirect searches would remain.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. This paper analyzes the potential of a future Tera-Z factory (FCC-ee/CEPC) to indirectly probe t-channel dark matter portals, in which a Z2-odd dark sector (Majorana fermion or scalar DM plus a scalar or fermion mediator) couples to SM fermions. The authors perform one-loop SMEFT matching with SOLD and matchmakereft, include one-loop RGE running with DSixTools, and derive analytic expressions for the dominant Wilson coefficients (Eqs. 8-24). They compute projected sensitivities for electroweak precision observables, using R_b and A_FB^b as the most powerful probes, and combine these with relic-density, direct-detection, and indirect-detection constraints. The central claims are that a Tera-Z run can indirectly probe otherwise inaccessible t-channel DM parameter space, that two-loop leading-log effects can dominate and even flip the sign of the deviation in the u_R portal, and that correlation patterns among observables can discriminate between portal structures.

Significance. If the quantitative reach claims hold, this is a valuable and timely contribution: it provides a systematic, forward (non-circular) calculation for a broad class of t-channel DM models, with explicit analytic expressions and publicly used automated tools, and it gives falsifiable sign-correlation patterns between precision observables. The qualitative complementarity arguments, especially for leptonic portals where Tera-Z may be the only probe, are convincing. However, the headline numerical claims are currently gated by two explicitly acknowledged but unquantified assumptions: SM theory uncertainties not spoiling the experimental precision, and the neglect of Sommerfeld/bound-state effects in the coannihilation region. The paper deserves publication after those load-bearing points are addressed.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. III.A, Eq. (4)] The chi-squared in Eq. (4) and all exclusion contours in Figs. 1, 6, 8, 10, 11, 13, and 15 are built using only projected experimental uncertainties. The text states the 'optimistic assumption that theoretical uncertainties do not spoil the experimental ones,' but no theory-error covariance term or improvement scenario is included. Since R_b and A_FB^b are the dominant observables and their current SM theory errors are comparable to or larger than the FCC-ee projections, this assumption is load-bearing for the central claim that two-loop effects become accessible. Please quantify the effect of including current and improved SM theory uncertainties (e.g., the scenarios of Ref. [88]) on at least the main contour figures, and specify the theory-error budget required for the two-loop contributions to be observable.
  2. [Sec. III.B, Fig. 5] The relic-density target regions are computed neglecting Sommerfeld enhancement and bound-state formation, as stated in Sec. III.B. This is most consequential in the coannihilation and near-degeneracy region, where the paper claims unique Tera-Z sensitivity (for example Fig. 5 with y_Q = 0 and small mass splitting). These non-perturbative effects can significantly modify the annihilation cross section and therefore shift the positions of the target lines. Please include an estimate of their impact, based on Refs. [99-102] or a dedicated calculation, and state how the complementarity conclusions change if the thermal target lines move.
  3. [Sec. IV.A.1-IV.A.2, Eqs. (9) and (13)] The central two-loop claims are based on one-loop matching plus one-loop RGE, retaining only the leading-log mixing of four-quark operators into the Hq operators. The paper states that a full two-loop matching would 'only lead to slight corrections,' but no estimate or bound is provided. Given that the signal size is at the percent-to-per-mille level and that the claim 'improves the bound up to a factor of two' is quantitative, please provide an estimate of the neglected two-loop finite terms and of the uncertainty from the truncation of the RGE, and show that they are small compared to the projected precision and to the one-loop signal. Without this, the factor-of-two improvement and the sign-discrimination claim are not yet demonstrated to be robust.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 2 caption] The caption displays the Lagrangian as -y_U χ q_L^3 Φ† + h.c., but the section and text describe the χΦqL model with coupling y_Q; please correct the caption.
  2. [Conclusions, Sec. V] The statement that this article is 'the first study' of Tera-Z sensitivity to one-loop-generated effects is too strong in light of Refs. [52, 55, 56] and related SMEFT Tera-Z literature; please qualify the novelty claim.
  3. [Sec. IV.A.1, Eq. (9)] For reproducibility, please provide the intermediate one-loop matching coefficients for the four-quark operators O_qq^(1) and O_qq^(3) that enter the leading-log expression in Eq. (9), since those coefficients are not written explicitly in the text.
  4. [Eq. (4)] Please specify how correlations among the electroweak observables are implemented in the projected Tera-Z covariance matrix, in particular whether only experimental correlations are included and how the input scheme {α_EM, m_Z, G_F} is propagated.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

Forward one-loop matching plus RGE calculation with no fitted target observables; stated theory-error caveats are assumptions, not circular reductions.

full rationale

The core derivation is self-contained: each portal starts from a UV Lagrangian (e.g., Eq. 7), is matched onto SMEFT at one loop using stated analytic expressions (Eqs. 8, 12, 15, 18, 20, 22, 24), is run to the weak scale with one-loop RGEs (Eqs. 9, 13), and is converted to EWPO shifts compared with projected experimental uncertainties via the chi-squared in Eq. 4. No parameter is fitted to the target observables, and the two-loop-leading-log contributions are computed, not adjusted, so the predictions do not reduce to their inputs by construction. The paper explicitly flags the main gating assumptions: "we adopt an optimistic assumption where theoretical uncertainties do not spoil the experimental ones" (Sec. III.A), and it neglects Sommerfeld enhancement and bound-state formation in the coannihilation regime (Sec. III.B); these are honest caveats about future theory-error budgets, not circular steps. Self-citations (matchmakereft, SOLD, and methodology Ref. [85]) support tooling or fitting methodology and do not supply the novel physics claims; no uniqueness theorem or pre-adopted ansatz is invoked to force the result. Accordingly, no circular step is exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on seven stated modeling choices: thermal freeze-out defines the target region; Z2 symmetry forces loop-level corrections; one-loop SMEFT matching captures the leading effects; SM theory errors do not spoil experimental precision; leading-log RGE gives the dominant two-loop terms; Sommerfeld and bound-state effects are negligible; and specific flavor alignments suppress flavor violation. The first, second, third, fifth, seventh and eighth are standard domain assumptions for this class of models. The fourth is explicitly labeled optimistic and is the most fragile. The fifth and sixth are acknowledged approximations that sit exactly in the claimed unique-sensitivity region. No new particles or entities are introduced beyond the declared model fields and the Z2 symmetry, which are the content of the simplified models being studied, so the invented-entities ledger is empty.

free parameters (3)
  • Portal couplings |yQ|, |yU|, |yE|, |yL| = Scanned, e.g. 0 to 3 at fixed mediator masses; perturbative unitarity caps in Tab. II
    These are scan coordinates for the exclusion contours, not numbers fitted to data. The projected Tera-Z bounds are read off as contours in these couplings.
  • Quartic Higgs-mediator couplings kappa, kappa1, kappa2 = Set to 0 for the base contours; kappa2 excluded above about 0.15 for M_Phi = 2 TeV
    Hand-set to zero in the main analysis; their effects are shown separately (Figs. 2 and 5). The coannihilation-only target region with y to 0 is probed through kappa2, so the contours depend on this hand choice.
  • Mass splitting (MMed - MDM)/MMed = Scanned from 0 to 1; benchmark mediator masses 1.5, 2, 2.5 TeV
    The splitting scan defines the coannihilation region where the paper claims unique Tera-Z sensitivity. Benchmark masses are display choices chosen above LHC bounds, not fitted.
assumptions (8)
  • domain assumption Standard thermal freeze-out with a standard cosmological history sets the DM target region via the relic abundance Omega h^2 < 0.12
    Sec. III.B. All complementarity statements are relative to the freeze-out target region. Non-thermal histories or alternative DM production mechanisms would remove the target region.
  • domain assumption A Z2 symmetry stabilizes the DM and forces all visible-sector effects to appear first at one loop
    Sec. II and III.A. The entire program of loop-level SMEFT corrections depends on this model ingredient.
  • domain assumption The heavy DM and mediator can be integrated out at one loop onto the SMEFT, with the leading effects captured by one-loop matching
    Sec. III.A: 'the leading effects appearing at one loop due to Z2 symmetry and quadratic couplings of the heavy particles'. This is standard practice for this mass regime.
  • ad hoc to paper Standard Model theory uncertainties will not spoil the projected experimental precision at Tera-Z
    Sec. III.A: 'we adopt an optimistic assumption where theoretical uncertainties do not spoil the experimental ones'. This is the most fragile premise; it is load-bearing for the R_b and A_FB^b reach and for the claim that two-loop effects become accessible.
  • domain assumption One-loop RGE on top of one-loop matching captures the dominant two-loop corrections (Eqs. 9 and 13)
    Secs. IV.A.1-2. The factor-of-two improvement and the sign dichotomy rest on this leading-log estimate; the paper states that a full two-loop matching is beyond scope.
  • domain assumption Sommerfeld enhancement and bound-state formation are negligible in the relic density calculation
    Sec. III.B: 'We neglect non-perturbative effects... which can be important in the coannihilation regime'. The claimed unique Tera-Z sensitivity in the near-degenerate region (Fig. 5) sits exactly there.
  • domain assumption Specific flavor alignments suppress loop-level flavor violation: third-generation-only quark couplings, single-generation or MFV lepton couplings
    Sec. IV. The reach estimates depend on these alignments; anarchic flavor structures would push the new physics scale beyond Tera-Z reach.
  • domain assumption An Einasto dark matter profile and standard astrophysical inputs describe the indirect detection signals
    Sec. III.D, Eq. (6). This is a standard modeling choice for gamma-ray line and continuum flux predictions.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The Dark Side of a Tera-Z Factory." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RVSGY6LX

@misc{pith2026250717803,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The Dark Side of a Tera-Z Factory},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RVSGY6LX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.17803}
}
abstract

The future circular $e^+e^-$ collider (FCC-ee or CEPC) will provide unprecedented sensitivity to indirect new physics signals emerging as small deviations from the Standard Model predictions in electroweak precision tests. Assuming new physics scenarios containing a dark matter candidate and a $t$-channel mediator, we analyse the synergy and interplay of future Tera-$Z$ factories and non-collider tests conducted through direct and indirect searches of dark matter. Our results highlight the excellent prospect for a Tera-$Z$ run to indirectly probe the presence and nature of dark matter.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.17803 by the authors.

Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Feynman diagrams showing the leading-order contri [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (14 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_9.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: , this significantly weakens the exclusion limits for Mχ ≃ 1.3 TeV. Besides, in the limit of nearly degen￾erate masses, γ-ray line searches at H.E.S.S. [128] also impose constraints in this scenario. For completeness, we also show the limit on yL set by partial wave p…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_12.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_11.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_14.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_13.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: FIG. 16 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_16.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: FIG. 15 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_15.png]
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: FIG. 17. Scale Λ at which a Landau pole appears, as a func [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_17.png]
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: FIG. 18. Scale Λ at which a Landau pole appears, as a func [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_18.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

128 extracted references · 18 canonical work pages

  1. [88]

    Freitas et al.,Theoretical uncertainties for electroweak and Higgs-boson precision measurements at FCC-ee,1906.05379

    A. Freitas et al.,Theoretical uncertainties for electroweak and Higgs-boson precision measurements at FCC-ee,1906.05379. [89]https://indico.cern.ch/event/1551879/

    arXiv 1906

  2. [1]

    Cirelli, A

    M. Cirelli, A. Strumia and J. Zupan,Dark Matter, 2406.01705

    arXiv

  3. [2]

    Patt and F

    B. Patt and F. Wilczek,Higgs-field portal into hidden sectors,hep-ph/0605188

    arXiv

  4. [3]

    O’Connell, M

    D. O’Connell, M. J. Ramsey-Musolf and M. B. Wise, Minimal Extension of the Standard Model Scalar Sector,Phys. Rev. D75(2007) 037701, [hep-ph/0611014]

    arXiv 2007

  5. [4]

    Krnjaic,Probing Light Thermal Dark-Matter With a Higgs Portal Mediator,Phys

    G. Krnjaic,Probing Light Thermal Dark-Matter With a Higgs Portal Mediator,Phys. Rev. D94(2016) 073009, [1512.04119]

    arXiv 2016

  6. [5]

    Arcadi, A

    G. Arcadi, A. Djouadi and M. Raidal,Dark Matter through the Higgs portal,Phys. Rept.842(2020) 1–180, [1903.03616]

    arXiv 2020

  7. [6]

    Haisch, M

    U. Haisch, M. Ruhdorfer, K. Schmid and A. Weiler, Quantum collider probes of the fermionic Higgs portal, SciPost Phys.16(2024) 112, [2311.03995]

    arXiv 2024

  8. [7]

    Ghosh, P

    A. Ghosh, P. Konar, C. Sen and B. Thacker, Illuminating Degenerate Dark Sector of Inert Doublet Model at Muon Collider,2508.06289

    arXiv

Show all 128 references
  1. [8]

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

    B. Holdom,Two U(1)’s and Epsilon Charge Shifts, Phys. Lett. B166(1986) 196–198

    1986

  2. [9]

    Fayet,Extra U(1)’s and New Forces,Nucl

    P. Fayet,Extra U(1)’s and New Forces,Nucl. Phys. B 347(1990) 743–768

    1990

  3. [10]

    B. A. Dobrescu,Massless gauge bosons other than the photon,Phys. Rev. Lett.94(2005) 151802, [hep-ph/0411004]

    2005 arXiv

  4. [11]

    del Aguila, M

    F. del Aguila, M. Masip and M. Perez-Victoria, Physical parameters and renormalization of U(1)-a x U(1)-b models,Nucl. Phys. B456(1995) 531–549, [hep-ph/9507455]

    1995 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Graham, C

    M. Graham, C. Hearty and M. Williams,Searches for Dark Photons at Accelerators,Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.71(2021) 37–58, [2104.10280]

    2021 arXiv

  6. [13]

    Nomura and J

    Y. Nomura and J. Thaler,Dark Matter through the Axion Portal,Phys. Rev. D79(2009) 075008, [0810.5397]

    2009 arXiv

  7. [14]

    S. Gola, S. Mandal and N. Sinha,ALP-portal majorana dark matter,Int. J. Mod. Phys. A37(2022) 2250131, [2106.00547]

    2022 arXiv

  8. [15]

    Bharucha, F

    A. Bharucha, F. Br¨ ummer, N. Desai and S. Mutzel, Axion-like particles as mediators for dark matter: beyond freeze-out,JHEP02(2023) 141, [2209.03932]

    2023 arXiv

  9. [16]

    D. K. Ghosh, A. Ghoshal and S. Jeesun,Axion-like particle (ALP) portal freeze-in dark matter confronting ALP search experiments,JHEP01(2024) 026, [2305.09188]

    2024 arXiv

  10. [17]

    J. A. Dror, S. Gori and P. Munbodh,QCD axion-mediated dark matter,JHEP09(2023) 128, [2306.03145]

    2023 arXiv

  11. [18]

    Armando, P

    G. Armando, P. Panci, J. Weiss and R. Ziegler, Leptonic ALP portal to the dark sector,Phys. Rev. D 109(2024) 055029, [2310.05827]

    2024 arXiv

  12. [19]

    Allen, A

    S. Allen, A. Blackburn, O. Cardenas, Z. Messenger, N. H. Nguyen and B. Shuve,Electroweak axion portal to dark matter,Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 095010, [2405.02403]

    2024 arXiv

  13. [20]

    D’Eramo and T

    F. D’Eramo and T. Sassi,Axion portal to scalar Dark Matter: unveiling stabilizing symmetry footprints, JHEP07(2025) 031, [2502.19491]

    2025 arXiv

  14. [21]

    Blennow, E

    M. Blennow, E. Fernandez-Martinez, A. Olivares-Del Campo, S. Pascoli, S. Rosauro-Alcaraz and A. V. Titov,Neutrino Portals to Dark Matter, Eur. Phys. J. C79(2019) 555, [1903.00006]

    2019 arXiv

  15. [22]

    Gorbunov and M

    D. Gorbunov and M. Shaposhnikov,How to find neutral leptons of theνMSM?,JHEP10(2007) 015, 16 [0705.1729]

    2007 arXiv

  16. [23]

    Alekhin et al.,A facility to Search for Hidden Particles at the CERN SPS: the SHiP physics case, Rept

    S. Alekhin et al.,A facility to Search for Hidden Particles at the CERN SPS: the SHiP physics case, Rept. Prog. Phys.79(2016) 124201, [1504.04855]

    2016 arXiv

  17. [24]

    Davighi, A

    J. Davighi, A. Greljo and N. Selimovic,Topological Portal to the Dark Sector,Phys. Rev. Lett.134(2025) 111804, [2401.09528]

    2025 arXiv

  18. [25]

    Davighi, S

    J. Davighi, S. Moldovsky, H. Murayama, C. Scherb and N. Selimovic,Topological Freeze-out by Semi-Annihilation,2506.05468

    arXiv

  19. [26]

    Arcadi, D

    G. Arcadi, D. Cabo-Almeida, M. Dutra, P. Ghosh, M. Lindner, Y. Mambrini et al.,The Waning of the WIMP: Endgame?,2403.15860

    arXiv

  20. [27]

    Garny, A

    M. Garny, A. Ibarra and S. Vogl,Signatures of Majorana dark matter with t-channel mediators,Int. J. Mod. Phys. D24(2015) 1530019, [1503.01500]

    2015 arXiv

  21. [28]

    Giacchino, A

    F. Giacchino, A. Ibarra, L. L. Honorez, M. H. Tytgat and S. Wild,Signatures from scalar dark matter with a vector-like quark mediator,Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2016(2016) 002

    2016

  22. [29]

    S. Baek, P. Ko and P. Wu,Top-philic scalar dark matter with a vector-like fermionic top partner, Journal of High Energy Physics2016(2016) 1–22

    2016

  23. [30]

    Garny, J

    M. Garny, J. Heisig, M. Hufnagel and B. L¨ ulf, Top-philic dark matter within and beyond the WIMP paradigm,Phys. Rev. D97(2018) 075002, [1802.00814]

    2018 arXiv

  24. [31]

    Colucci, B

    S. Colucci, B. Fuks, F. Giacchino, L. L. Honorez, M. H. Tytgat and J. Vandecasteele,Top-philic vectorlike portal to scalar dark matter,Physical Review D98(2018) 035002

    2018

  25. [32]

    Arina, B

    C. Arina, B. Fuks, L. Mantani, H. Mies, L. Panizzi and J. Salko,Closing in ont-channel simplified dark matter models,Phys. Lett. B813(2021) 136038, [2010.07559]

    2021 arXiv

  26. [33]

    Arina, B

    C. Arina, B. Fuks, J. Heisig, M. Kr¨ amer, L. Mantani and L. Panizzi,Comprehensive exploration of t-channel simplified models of dark matter,Phys. Rev. D108 (2023) 115007, [2307.10367]

    2023 arXiv

  27. [34]

    Bertuzzo, T

    E. Bertuzzo, T. Sassi and A. Tesi,Complex dark photon dark matter EFT,JHEP10(2024) 109, [2406.14437]

    2024 arXiv

  28. [35]

    Arina et al.,t-channel dark matter at the LHC, 2504.10597

    C. Arina et al.,t-channel dark matter at the LHC, 2504.10597

  29. [36]

    A. Roy, M. A. Schmidt and G. Valencia,Monojet and direct detection constraints on real scalar dark matter: EFT and a simple UV completion,2509.14869

  30. [37]

    Angel, D

    L. Angel, D. Borah, J. P. Neto, F. S. Queiroz and V. de Souza,Constraining Effective Field Theories for dark matter candidates annihilating into gamma-ray lines with CTAO,2509.08050

    arXiv

  31. [38]

    I. Reis, A. Scaffidi, E. Moulin and M. White,The complementary of CTAO, direct detection and collider searches for dark matter in Effective Field Theories and Simplified models,2509.06628

  32. [39]

    B´ elanger, M

    G. B´ elanger, M. Mitra, R. Padhan and A. Roy, Illuminating Scalar Dark Matter Co-Scattering in EFT with Monophoton Signatures,2508.06040

  33. [40]

    Biondini, L

    S. Biondini, L. Tiberi and O. Panella,Connecting t-channel dark matter models to the Standard Model Effective Field Theory,JHEP10(2025) 060, [2507.00925]. [41]FCCcollaboration, M. Benedikt et al.,Future Circular Collider Feasibility Study Report: Volume 1, Physics, Experiments...

    2025 arXiv

  34. [43]

    Anastopoulos et al.,LEP3: A High-Luminosity e+e- Higgs and ElectroweakFactory in the LHC Tunnel,2504.00541

    C. Anastopoulos et al.,LEP3: A High-Luminosity e+e- Higgs and ElectroweakFactory in the LHC Tunnel,2504.00541

  35. [44]

    Accettura et al.,Towards a muon collider,Eur

    C. Accettura et al.,Towards a muon collider,Eur. Phys. J. C83(2023) 864, [2303.08533]. [45]ILCcollaboration,The International Linear Collider Technical Design Report - Volume 2: Physics, 1306.6352. [46]CLICdp, CLICcollaboration, T. K. Charles et al., The Compact Linear Collide...

    2023 arXiv

  36. [48]

    de Blas,New physics at the FCC-ee: indirect discovery potential,Eur

    J. de Blas,New physics at the FCC-ee: indirect discovery potential,Eur. Phys. J. Plus136(2021) 897

    2021

  37. [49]

    de Blas, Y

    J. de Blas, Y. Du, C. Grojean, J. Gu, V. Miralles, M. E. Peskin et al.,Global SMEFT Fits at Future Colliders, inSnowmass 2021, 6, 2022,2206.08326

    2021 arXiv

  38. [50]

    J. F. Kamenik, A. Korajac, M. Szewc, M. Tammaro and J. Zupan,Flavor-violating Higgs and Z boson decays at a future circular lepton collider,Phys. Rev. D109(2024) L011301, [2306.17520]

    2024 arXiv

  39. [51]

    Celada, T

    E. Celada, T. Giani, J. ter Hoeve, L. Mantani, J. Rojo, A. N. Rossia et al.,Mapping the SMEFT at high-energy colliders: from LEP and the (HL-)LHC to the FCC-ee,JHEP09(2024) 091, [2404.12809]

    2024 arXiv

  40. [52]

    Allwicher, M

    L. Allwicher, M. McCullough and S. Renner,New physics at Tera-Z: precision renormalised,JHEP02 (2025) 164, [2408.03992]

    2025 arXiv

  41. [53]

    B. A. Erdelyi, R. Gr¨ ober and N. Selimovic,How large can the light quark Yukawa couplings be?,JHEP05 (2025) 189, [2410.08272]

    2025 arXiv

  42. [54]

    Greljo, H

    A. Greljo, H. Tiblom and A. Valenti,New physics through flavor tagging at FCC-ee,2411.02485

    arXiv

  43. [55]

    Gargalionis, J

    J. Gargalionis, J. Quevillon, P. N. H. Vuong and T. You,Linear Standard Model extensions in the SMEFT at one loop and Tera-Z,2412.01759

  44. [56]

    Maura, B

    V. Maura, B. A. Stefanek and T. You,Accuracy complements energy: electroweak precision tests at Tera-Z,2412.14241

    arXiv

  45. [57]

    Davighi,In Search of an InvisibleZ ′,2412.07694

    J. Davighi,In Search of an InvisibleZ ′,2412.07694

    arXiv

  46. [58]

    B. A. Erdelyi, R. Gr¨ ober and N. Selimovic,Probing new physics with the electron Yukawa coupling,JHEP 05(2025) 135, [2501.07628]

    2025 arXiv

  47. [59]

    ter Hoeve, L

    J. ter Hoeve, L. Mantani, J. Rojo, A. N. Rossia and E. Vryonidou,Connecting scales: RGE effects in the SMEFT at the LHC and future colliders,JHEP06 (2025) 125, [2502.20453]

    2025 arXiv

  48. [60]

    Maura, B

    V. Maura, B. A. Stefanek and T. You,The Higgs Self-Coupling at FCC-ee,2503.13719

    arXiv

  49. [61]

    Allwicher, G

    L. Allwicher, G. Isidori and M. Pesut,Flavored circular collider: cornering New Physics at FCC-ee via flavor-changing processes,Eur. Phys. J. C85(2025) 631, [2503.17019]. [62]FCCcollaboration,Prospects in BSM physics at FCC,

    2025 arXiv

  50. [63]

    Greljo, B

    A. Greljo, B. A. Stefanek and A. Valenti,Cornering Natural SUSY at a Tera-ZFactory,2507.03073. 17

    arXiv

  51. [64]

    Cornet-Gomez, V

    F. Cornet-Gomez, V. Miralles, M. Miralles L´ opez, M. Moreno Ll´ acer and M. Vos,Future collider constraints on top-quark operators,2503.11518. [65]DAR WINcollaboration, J. Aalbers et al.,DAR WIN: towards the ultimate dark matter detector,JCAP11 (2016) 017, [1606.07001]. [66]C...

    2016

  52. [67]

    Cirelli, N

    M. Cirelli, N. Fornengo and A. Strumia,Minimal dark matter,Nucl. Phys. B753(2006) 178–194, [hep-ph/0512090]

    2006 arXiv

  53. [68]

    Cirelli, A

    M. Cirelli, A. Strumia and M. Tamburini,Cosmology and Astrophysics of Minimal Dark Matter,Nucl. Phys. B787(2007) 152–175, [0706.4071]

    2007 arXiv

  54. [69]

    Cirelli and A

    M. Cirelli and A. Strumia,Minimal Dark Matter: Model and results,New J. Phys.11(2009) 105005, [0903.3381]

    2009 arXiv

  55. [70]

    Hambye, F

    T. Hambye, F. S. Ling, L. Lopez Honorez and J. Rocher,Scalar Multiplet Dark Matter,JHEP07 (2009) 090, [0903.4010]

    2009 arXiv

  56. [71]

    Cohen, J

    T. Cohen, J. Kearney, A. Pierce and D. Tucker-Smith, Singlet-Doublet Dark Matter,Phys. Rev. D85(2012) 075003, [1109.2604]

    2012 arXiv

  57. [72]

    Kumericki, I

    K. Kumericki, I. Picek and B. Radovcic,TeV-scale Seesaw with Quintuplet Fermions,Phys. Rev. D86 (2012) 013006, [1204.6599]. [73]ALEPH, DELPHI, L3, OPAL, SLD, LEP Electroweak Working Group, SLD Electroweak Group, SLD Heavy Flavour Groupcollaboration, S. Schael et al.,Precision ...

    2012 arXiv

  58. [75]

    Janot and S

    P. Janot and S. Jadach,Improved Bhabha cross section at LEP and the number of light neutrino species,Phys. Lett. B803(2020) 135319, [1912.02067]

    2020 arXiv

  59. [76]

    d’Enterria and C

    D. d’Enterria and C. Yan,Revised QCD effects on the Z→b ¯bforward-backward asymmetry,2011.00530. [77]SLDcollaboration, K. Abe et al.,First direct measurement of the parity violating coupling of the Z0 to the s quark,Phys. Rev. Lett.85(2000) 5059–5063, [hep-ex/0006019]. [78]Par...

    2000 arXiv

  60. [84]

    Bres´ o-Pla, A

    V. Bres´ o-Pla, A. Falkowski and M. Gonz´ alez-Alonso, AF Bin the SMEFT: precision Z physics at the LHC, JHEP08(2021) 021, [2103.12074]

    2021 arXiv

  61. [85]

    Allwicher, G

    L. Allwicher, G. Isidori, J. M. Lizana, N. Selimovic and B. A. Stefanek,Third-family quark-lepton Unification and electroweak precision tests,JHEP05 (2023) 179, [2302.11584]

    2023 arXiv

  62. [86]

    Altmann et al.,ECF A Higgs, electroweak, and top Factory Study, vol

    J. Altmann et al.,ECF A Higgs, electroweak, and top Factory Study, vol. 5/2025 ofCERN Yellow Reports: Monographs. 6, 2025, 10.23731/CYRM-2025-005

    2025 doi

  63. [87]

    Belloni et al.,Report of the Topical Group on Electroweak Precision Physics and Constraining New Physics for Snowmass 2021,2209.08078

    A. Belloni et al.,Report of the Topical Group on Electroweak Precision Physics and Constraining New Physics for Snowmass 2021,2209.08078

    2021 arXiv

  64. [90]

    Brivio and M

    I. Brivio and M. Trott,The Standard Model as an Effective Field Theory,Phys. Rept.793(2019) 1–98, [1706.08945]

    2019 arXiv

  65. [91]

    Guedes, P

    G. Guedes, P. Olgoso and J. Santiago,Towards the one loop IR/UV dictionary in the SMEFT: One loop generated operators from new scalars and fermions, SciPost Phys.15(2023) 143, [2303.16965]

    2023 arXiv

  66. [92]

    Guedes and P

    G. Guedes and P. Olgoso,From the EFT to the UV: the complete SMEFT one-loop dictionary,2412.14253

    arXiv

  67. [93]

    R. M. Fonseca,GroupMath: A Mathematica package for group theory calculations,Comput. Phys. Commun. 267(2021) 108085, [2011.01764]

    2021 arXiv

  68. [94]

    Carmona, A

    A. Carmona, A. Lazopoulos, P. Olgoso and J. Santiago,Matchmakereft: automated tree-level and one-loop matching,SciPost Phys.12(2022) 198, [2112.10787]

    2022 arXiv

  69. [95]

    Garny, A

    M. Garny, A. Ibarra and S. Vogl,Dark matter annihilations into two light fermions and one gauge boson: General analysis and antiproton constraints, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2012 (2012) 033

    2012

  70. [96]

    Toma,Internal bremsstrahlung signature of real scalar dark matter and consistency¡? format?¿ with thermal relic density,Physical Review Letters111 (2013) 091301

    T. Toma,Internal bremsstrahlung signature of real scalar dark matter and consistency¡? format?¿ with thermal relic density,Physical Review Letters111 (2013) 091301

    2013

  71. [97]

    Ibarra, T

    A. Ibarra, T. Toma, M. Totzauer and S. Wild,Sharp Gamma-ray Spectral Features from Scalar Dark Matter Annihilations,Phys. Rev. D90(2014) 043526, [1405.6917]

    2014 arXiv

  72. [98]

    Sommerfeld, ¨Uber die beugung und bremsung der elektronen,Annalen der Physik403(1931) 257–330

    A. Sommerfeld, ¨Uber die beugung und bremsung der elektronen,Annalen der Physik403(1931) 257–330

    1931

  73. [99]

    Garny and J

    M. Garny and J. Heisig,Bound-state effects on dark matter coannihilation: Pushing the boundaries of conversion-driven freeze-out,Physical Review D105 (2022) 055004

    2022

  74. [100]

    Becker, E

    M. Becker, E. Copello, J. Harz, K. A. Mohan and D. Sengupta,Impact of sommerfeld effect and bound state formation in simplified t-channel dark matter models,Journal of High Energy Physics2022(2022) 1–54. 18

    2022

  75. [101]

    Biondini and S

    S. Biondini and S. Vogl,Scalar dark matter coannihilating with a coloured fermion,Journal of High Energy Physics2019(2019) 1–39

    2019

  76. [102]

    Becker, K

    M. Becker, K. Fridell, J. Harz and C. Hati,Impact of Bound State Formation on Baryogenesis,2408.08361

    arXiv

  77. [103]

    Belanger, F

    G. Belanger, F. Boudjema, A. Pukhov and A. Semenov,MicrOMEGAs 2.0: A Program to calculate the relic density of dark matter in a generic model,Comput. Phys. Commun.176(2007) 367–382, [hep-ph/0607059]. [104]Planckcollaboration, N. Aghanim et al.,Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmolog...

    2007 arXiv

  78. [106]

    H. H. Patel,Package-X: A Mathematica package for the analytic calculation of one-loop integrals,Comput. Phys. Commun.197(2015) 276–290, [1503.01469]

    2015 arXiv

  79. [107]

    Gondolo and S

    P. Gondolo and S. Scopel,On the sbottom resonance in dark matter scattering,JCAP10(2013) 032, [1307.4481]

    2013 arXiv

  80. [108]

    Hisano, R

    J. Hisano, R. Nagai and N. Nagata,Effective Theories for Dark Matter Nucleon Scattering,JHEP05(2015) 037, [1502.02244]

    2015 arXiv

  81. [109]

    K. A. Mohan, D. Sengupta, T. M. P. Tait, B. Yan and C. P. Yuan,Direct detection and LHC constraints on a t-channel simplified model of Majorana dark matter at one loop,JHEP05(2019) 115, [1903.05650]

    2019 arXiv

  82. [110]

    Arcadi, D

    G. Arcadi, D. Cabo-Almeida, F. Mescia and J. Virto, Dark Matter Direct Detection int-channel mediator models,JCAP02(2024) 005, [2309.07896]. [111]LZcollaboration, J. Aalbers et al.,First Dark Matter Search Results from the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment,Phys. Rev. Lett.131(2023) 0...

    2024 arXiv

  83. [115]

    Schumann, L

    M. Schumann, L. Baudis, L. B¨ utikofer, A. Kish and M. Selvi,Dark matter sensitivity of multi-ton liquid xenon detectors,JCAP10(2015) 016, [1506.08309]. [116]Fermi-LAT, DEScollaboration, A. Albert et al., Searching for Dark Matter Annihilation in Recently Discovered Milky Way ...

    2015 arXiv

  84. [117]

    Geringer-Sameth, S

    A. Geringer-Sameth, S. M. Koushiappas and M. Walker,Dwarf galaxy annihilation and decay emission profiles for dark matter experiments, Astrophys. J.801(2015) 74, [1408.0002]

    2015 arXiv

  85. [118]

    Bergstrom,Radiative Processes in Dark Matter Photino Annihilation,Phys

    L. Bergstrom,Radiative Processes in Dark Matter Photino Annihilation,Phys. Lett. B225(1989) 372–380

    1989

  86. [119]

    Flores, K

    R. Flores, K. A. Olive and S. Rudaz,Radiative Processes in Lsp Annihilation,Phys. Lett. B232 (1989) 377–382

    1989

  87. [120]

    Srednicki, S

    M. Srednicki, S. Theisen and J. Silk,Cosmic Quarkonium: A Probe of Dark Matter,Phys. Rev. Lett.56(1986) 263

    1986

  88. [121]

    Bergstrom and H

    L. Bergstrom and H. Snellman,Observable Monochromatic Photons From Cosmic Photino Annihilation,Phys. Rev. D37(1988) 3737–3741

    1988

  89. [122]

    Bergstrom, T

    L. Bergstrom, T. Bringmann, M. Eriksson and M. Gustafsson,Gamma rays from Kaluza-Klein dark matter,Phys. Rev. Lett.94(2005) 131301, [astro-ph/0410359]

    2005 arXiv

  90. [123]

    Bringmann, L

    T. Bringmann, L. Bergstrom and J. Edsjo,New Gamma-Ray Contributions to Supersymmetric Dark Matter Annihilation,JHEP01(2008) 049, [0710.3169]

    2008 arXiv

  91. [124]

    Bergstrom, T

    L. Bergstrom, T. Bringmann and J. Edsjo, Complementarity of direct dark matter detection and indirect detection through gamma-rays,Phys. Rev. D 83(2011) 045024, [1011.4514]

    2011 arXiv

  92. [125]

    Okada and T

    H. Okada and T. Toma,Effect of degenerate particles on internal bremsstrahlung of majorana dark matter, Physics Letters B750(Nov., 2015) 266–271

    2015

  93. [126]

    Garny, A

    M. Garny, A. Ibarra, M. Pato and S. Vogl,Internal bremsstrahlung signatures in light of direct dark matter searches,JCAP12(2013) 046, [1306.6342]

    2013 arXiv

  94. [127]

    Einasto,O postroenii sostavnoy modeli galaktiki i opredelenii sistemy galakticheskikh parametrov,Trudy Astrofizicheskogo Instituta Alma-Ata5(1965) 87–100

    J. Einasto,O postroenii sostavnoy modeli galaktiki i opredelenii sistemy galakticheskikh parametrov,Trudy Astrofizicheskogo Instituta Alma-Ata5(1965) 87–100. [128]HESScollaboration, H. Abdallah et al.,Search for γ-Ray Line Signals from Dark Matter Annihilations in the Inner Ga...

    1965 arXiv

  95. [131]

    Cuoco, J

    A. Cuoco, J. Heisig, M. Korsmeier and M. Kr¨ amer, Constraining heavy dark matter with cosmic-ray antiprotons,JCAP04(2018) 004, [1711.05274]

    2018 arXiv

  96. [132]

    Demetriou, G

    G. Demetriou, G. Isidori, G. Piazza and E. Pinsard, The third-generation-philic WIMP: an EFT analysis, 2505.04708. [133]CMScollaboration, T. C. Collaboration et al.,Search for supersymmetry in proton-proton collisions at 13 TeV in final states with jets and missing transverse ...

    2019 arXiv

  97. [138]

    Cid Vidal et al.,Report from Working Group 3: Beyond the Standard Model physics at the HL-LHC and HE-LHC,CERN Yellow Rep

    X. Cid Vidal et al.,Report from Working Group 3: Beyond the Standard Model physics at the HL-LHC and HE-LHC,CERN Yellow Rep. Monogr.7(2019) 585–865, [1812.07831]. [139]ATLAScollaboration,Prospects for benchmark Supersymmetry searches at the high luminosity LHC with the ATLAS D...

    2019 arXiv

  98. [143]

    Grzadkowski, M

    B. Grzadkowski, M. Iskrzynski, M. Misiak and J. Rosiek,Dimension-Six Terms in the Standard Model Lagrangian,JHEP10(2010) 085, [1008.4884]

    2010 arXiv

  99. [144]

    Gherardi, D

    V. Gherardi, D. Marzocca and E. Venturini,Matching scalar leptoquarks to the SMEFT at one loop,JHEP 07(2020) 225, [2003.12525]

    2020 arXiv

  100. [145]

    E. E. Jenkins, A. V. Manohar and M. Trott, Renormalization Group Evolution of the Standard Model Dimension Six Operators II: Yukawa Dependence,JHEP01(2014) 035, [1310.4838]

    2014 arXiv

  101. [146]

    Celis, J

    A. Celis, J. Fuentes-Martin, A. Vicente and J. Virto, DsixTools: The Standard Model Effective Field Theory Toolkit,Eur. Phys. J. C77(2017) 405, [1704.04504]

    2017 arXiv

  102. [147]

    D’Ambrosio, G

    G. D’Ambrosio, G. F. Giudice, G. Isidori and A. Strumia,Minimal flavor violation: An Effective field theory approach,Nucl. Phys. B645(2002) 155–187, [hep-ph/0207036]

    2002 arXiv

  103. [148]

    Guedes and J

    G. Guedes and J. Santiago,New leptons with exotic decays: collider limits and dark matter complementarity,JHEP01(2022) 111, [2107.03429]

    2022 arXiv

  104. [149]

    C. E. Yaguna,Gamma rays from the annihilation of singlet scalar dark matter,Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2009(Mar., 2009) 003–003

    2009

  105. [150]

    Gonderinger, Y

    M. Gonderinger, Y. Li, H. Patel and M. J. Ramsey-Musolf,Vacuum stability, perturbativity, and scalar singlet dark matter,Journal of High Energy Physics2010(Jan., 2010)

    2010

  106. [151]

    Djouadi, O

    A. Djouadi, O. Lebedev, Y. Mambrini and J. Quevillon,Implications of lhc searches for higgs-portal dark matter,Physics Letters B709(Mar.,

  107. [152]

    J. M. Cline, P. Scott, K. Kainulainen and C. Weniger, Update on scalar singlet dark matter,Physical Review D88(Sept., 2013)

    2013

  108. [153]

    Kaplinghat, S

    M. Kaplinghat, S. Tulin and H.-B. Yu,Direct detection portals for self-interacting dark matter,Physical Review D89(2014) 035009

    2014

  109. [154]

    Duerr, P

    M. Duerr, P. Fileviez P´ erez and J. Smirnov,Scalar Dark Matter: Direct vs. Indirect Detection,JHEP06 (2016) 152, [1509.04282]

    2016 arXiv

  110. [155]

    Han and S

    H. Han and S. Zheng,New constraints on higgs-portal scalar dark matter,Journal of High Energy Physics 2015(2015) 1–14

    2015

  111. [156]

    G. B. Gelmini, V. Takhistov and E. Vitagliano,Scalar direct detection: In-medium effects,Physics Letters B 809(2020) 135779

    2020

  112. [157]

    S. M. Vermeulen, P. Relton, H. Grote, V. Raymond, C. Affeldt, F. Bergamin et al.,Direct limits for scalar field dark matter from a gravitational-wave detector, Nature600(2021) 424–428

    2021

  113. [158]

    Itzykson and J

    C. Itzykson and J. B. Zuber,Quantum Field Theory. International Series In Pure and Applied Physics. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1980

    1980

  114. [159]

    M. S. Chanowitz, M. A. Furman and I. Hinchliffe, Weak Interactions of Ultraheavy Fermions. 2.,Nucl. Phys. B153(1979) 402–430

    1979

  115. [160]

    Di Luzio and M

    L. Di Luzio and M. Nardecchia,What is the scale of new physics behind theB-flavour anomalies?,Eur. Phys. J. C77(2017) 536, [1706.01868]

    2017 arXiv

  116. [161]

    Hisano, K

    J. Hisano, K. Ishiwata and N. Nagata,Gluon contribution to the dark matter direct detection,Phys. Rev. D82(2010) 115007, [1007.2601]

    2010 arXiv

  117. [162]

    Hisano, R

    J. Hisano, R. Nagai and N. Nagata,Singlet Dirac Fermion Dark Matter with Mediators at Loop,JHEP 12(2018) 059, [1808.06301]

    2018 arXiv

  118. [163]

    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. D91(2015) 043505, [1409.8290]

    2015 arXiv

  119. [164]

    R. D. Young and A. W. Thomas,Octet baryon masses and sigma terms from an SU(3) chiral extrapolation, Phys. Rev. D81(2010) 014503, [0901.3310]. [165]JLQCD Collaborationcollaboration, H. Ohki, K. Takeda, S. Aoki, S. Hashimoto, T. Kaneko, H. Matsufuru et al.,Nucleon strange quark...

    2010 arXiv

  120. [166]

    J. F. Owens, A. Accardi and W. Melnitchouk,Global parton distributions with nuclear and finite-Q 2 corrections,Phys. Rev. D87(2013) 094012, [1212.1702]

    2013 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.