Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 3 cited by

LZ 2025 data set the strongest direct-detection limits on cosmic-ray-boosted sub-MeV dark matter, beating XENONnT and, for light mediators, even large neutrino detectors.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 08:28 UTC pith:WSA44Y65

load-bearing objection Useful LZ 2025 update, but the light-mediator world-leading claim is undercut by an attenuation mismatch between the abstract and the body. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2601.16903 v3 pith:WSA44Y65 submitted 2026-01-23 hep-ph astro-ph.COhep-ex

Cosmic-ray-electron boosted light dark matter: Implications of LZ 2025 data

Sk Jeesun , Anirban Majumdar This is my paper
classification hep-ph astro-ph.COhep-ex PACS 95.35.+d
keywords dark mattercosmic-ray boosted dark mattersub-MeV dark matterdirect detectionLZ experimentlight mediatorelectron recoilXENONnT
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper asks whether the latest LZ 2025 electron-recoil data can detect sub-MeV dark matter that has been accelerated to detectable energies by cosmic-ray electrons in the galactic halo. The authors show that LZ 2025 improves the previous XENONnT constraint on the dark-matter–electron cross section by roughly a factor of a few (O(1)) for energy-independent scattering, and remains stronger than XENONnT when realistic vector- or scalar-mediator cross sections are used. In the light-mediator regime, where neutrino detectors are hampered by high energy thresholds, LZ 2025's ~keV threshold lets it exclude previously unexplored mediator parameter space, making it the strongest direct-detection probe of this scenario. The result matters because it demonstrates that multi-ton liquid-xenon detectors, already probing the GeV-scale neutrino fog, can simultaneously reach sub-MeV dark matter through a different, cosmic-ray-boosted population.

Core claim

The central claim is that the 3.2 ton-year LZ WS2024 data set, through a binned Poisson-likelihood analysis of low-energy electron recoils, yields 2σ exclusion limits on the cosmic-ray-electron-boosted dark matter flux that are stronger than all previous direct-detection constraints for sub-MeV electrophilic dark matter. For a constant (energy-independent) cross section, the improvement over the XENONnT limit is roughly a factor of a few at dark-matter masses around 0.1 MeV. When the cross section is energy-dependent, via a vector or scalar mediator, the limits depend strongly on the mediator mass through the form factor F_DM(q^2); in the light-mediator limit (mediator mass much smaller than

What carries the argument

The analysis uses the standard cosmic-ray upscattering mechanism: a subdominant relativistic component of halo dark matter is produced by collisions with cosmic-ray electrons, and its flux is computed from an effective diffusion length D_eff ≈ 1 kpc and locally measured interstellar electron spectra. The central object carrying the argument is the mediator-mass-dependent form factor F_DM(q^2) = (q_ref^2 + m_med^2)/(q^2 + m_med^2), which interpolates between heavy-mediator (F=1) and light-mediator (F ≈ (α m_e/q)^2) limits; it governs both the boosted flux and the detector recoil rate. Event rates use atomic-shell ionization thresholds for xenon, a Gaussian energy-resolution smearing, and a ni

Load-bearing premise

The analysis assumes no attenuation of the boosted dark matter flux as it passes through the Earth, an approximation the paper itself notes is valid only below a few × 10^-28 cm²; for the light-mediator limits plotted up to 10^-27 cm², attenuation could be significant and would reduce the predicted event rate, weakening the exclusions.

What would settle it

Recompute the light-mediator exclusion contours with a full numerical treatment of Earth attenuation (the method used in earlier works cited by the paper) and check whether the LZ 2025 limits above σ ≈ 3×10^-28 cm² remain unchanged; if the contours retreat to weaker cross sections by more than a factor of about two, the claim that LZ 2025 excludes previously unexplored light-mediator parameter space would be falsified for that region.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • If correct, LZ 2025 data alone provide the strongest direct-detection bound on sub-MeV electrophilic dark matter for energy-independent DM–electron scattering, improving the XENONnT limit by ~O(1) (a factor of a few).
  • In the light-mediator regime, a ~1 keV-threshold xenon detector now constrains parameter space previously reachable only by huge neutrino detectors, excluding mediator masses ≲ 1 MeV and couplings g_V^e ≳ 10^-4 for m_χ ~ 1 MeV.
  • The results establish that the mediator mass is a decisive parameter: the same detector yields exclusion limits spanning many orders of magnitude in cross section depending on whether the mediator is heavy or light.
  • The LZ constraints are complementary to astrophysical limits (solar reflection, stellar cooling, big-bang nucleosynthesis) and, for the light-vector-mediator case, supersede them in the region m_χ ≲ 10 MeV and m_V ≲ 1 MeV.
  • Future ton-scale or larger detectors with keV thresholds, such as DARWIN, JUNO, DUNE, and Hyper-Kamiokande, will extend this reach, as the authors note.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The paper's explicit omission of Earth attenuation (stated in the text as valid only below a few × 10^-28 cm²) means the light-mediator limits plotted up to 10^-27 cm² likely sit above the attenuation threshold; a full attenuation treatment would probably shift those contours to weaker cross sections, softening the claimed exclusion in the region where the paper claims the largest advantage. This
  • The reported O(1) improvement is relative to a previous XENONnT analysis that used the same cosmic-ray flux and diffusion length; an apples-to-apples comparison with an updated background treatment could change the exact magnitude, though the qualitative ordering is likely robust.
  • A testable extension: apply the same analysis to the full XENONnT low-energy electron-recoil exposure and to PandaX-4T data; agreement among the three would solidify the cosmic-ray-boost interpretation, while disagreement would point to systematic uncertainties in the flux model or backgrounds.
  • The sensitivity to the assumed diffusion halo size (D_eff = 1 vs 10 kpc) and to the interstellar cosmic-ray electron spectrum implies that the excluded cross sections carry an overall normalization uncertainty; future measurements of the local CR electron spectrum could sharpen or shift the bounds.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper computes the cosmic-ray-electron (CRe) boosted dark matter flux for sub-MeV electrophilic DM, uses the public LZ WS2024 electron-recoil data to derive 2σ exclusion limits on the DM-electron cross section, and extends the analysis to scalar- and vector-mediated energy-dependent cross sections in both heavy- and light-mediator limits. It claims an O(1) improvement over the previous XENONnT bound for constant cross sections and, in the light-mediator regime, constraints that are stronger than those from much larger neutrino detectors. The derivation is transparent and uses standard inputs: the CRe flux parametrization of Eq. (3), D_eff = 1 kpc, the LZ efficiency curve, a binned Poisson likelihood with nuisance parameters, and benchmarks based on simplified scalar/vector mediator models.

Significance. If the results hold, they provide an updated direct-detection constraint on sub-MeV CRe-boosted DM and demonstrate that a low-threshold xenon detector can compete with, and partly surpass, neutrino detectors in the light-mediator region. The paper's strengths are its use of public LZ data, the explicit treatment of energy-dependent cross sections for two mediator structures, and a statistical framework that follows the published LZ background model. The main caveat is the treatment of Earth attenuation, which is explicitly dropped in the body despite being promised in the abstract, and which is most dangerous exactly in the light-mediator regime where the paper claims world-leading limits.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract vs. Constraints (Fig. 3 and Fig. 5(b))] The submitted abstract states that the attenuation effect on the boosted DM flux is incorporated, but the body ('Constraints' section) explicitly says 'For simplicity, in this work we do not include the effect of attenuation' and quotes an attenuation roof of a few × 10^-28 cm^2 in the heavy-mediator limit. Fig. 3 nevertheless shows light-mediator exclusion contours up to σ_χe = 10^-27 cm^2, and Fig. 5(b) uses benchmark cross sections 6×10^-28 and 4×10^-28 cm^2. Since the light-mediator cross section is enhanced at the low momentum transfers relevant during propagation through the Earth, attenuation is likely important at or below these cross sections, not only in the heavy-mediator limit. The predicted event rates — and therefore the exclusion contours in the upper part of Fig. 3 — are not reliable as presented, and the claimed world-leading light-mediator constraint is not yet demonstr
  2. [Constraints (Figs. 3 and 4)] The central claim that LZ 2025 is world-leading in the light-mediator regime is supported only by quoting Super-K and IceCube limits from Ref. [20] in the text; those limits are not overlaid on Fig. 3 or on the mediator-plane plots, so the comparison cannot be checked against the LZ contours. Please include the neutrino-detector limits on the same axes (or provide a table of cross sections at fixed m_χ) for the light-mediator case, and specify the mediator-mass range over which the comparison holds, since 'heavy' means different m_med values for Super-K and LZ. Without this, the headline claim exceeds what the figures demonstrate.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Introduction / Recoil spectra] The exposure value is inconsistent: the Introduction gives 3.2 ton-year, the Recoil spectra section gives 3.3 ton×year, and Ref. [13] is titled '4.2 Tonne×Year Exposure'. Please clarify the actual exposure used in Eq. (9), since this directly normalizes the event rate.
  2. [Throughout] There are several typos: 'LUX-ZAPELIN' should be 'LUX-ZEPLIN', 'big bag nucleosynthesis' should be 'big bang nucleosynthesis', and 'parameters space' should be 'parameter space'.
  3. [Eqs. (1) and (4)] The notation for the minimum cosmic-ray electron energy is T_min^e in Eq. (1) but T_min^i in Eq. (4); please unify the notation.
  4. [Recoil spectra (Eq. 12)] The energy resolution σ = 0.323√E_reco is dimensionful; please specify the units (keV^0.5) so the smearing function is unambiguous.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity found: LZ limits computed from external CR-e flux inputs and public LZ data via direct spectrum scan; no fitted parameter is renamed as prediction.

full rationale

The derivation is self-contained in the relevant sense. The boosted flux (eq. 1) uses the observed cosmic-ray electron spectrum externally fitted to Voyager/Fermi-LAT/PAMELA/AMS-02 (eq. 3) and a fixed conservative D_eff = 1 kpc from a NFW profile. The cross sections (eqs. 7-8) and target recoil spectra (eqs. 9-12, A1-A2) follow standard kinematics with an external form factor. The final contours are obtained by scanning (m_chi, sigma) and comparing the predicted smeared recoil spectra with the public LZ WS2024 1D ROI data using a Poisson chi-square (eqs. B1-B3). Thus no prediction is forced by fitting the target data. The self-citations are contextual and not load-bearing; the central formalism cites external works. A caveat exists but is not circularity: the abstract says attenuation is incorporated while the body says attenuation is not included and plots light-mediator limits above the quoted attenuation roof. That is an omitted physical effect or internal inconsistency, not a reduction of a result to its inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The calculation rests entirely on the standard cosmic-ray-boosted DM framework from [16,19,20,35]; no new particles or fitted-to-target parameters are introduced. The only hand-set numerical input is D_eff = 1 kpc, and the CRe spectrum is an external empirical fit. The paper's new content is the application to LZ 2025 public data, with the caveats above.

free parameters (2)
  • D_eff (effective diffusion column) = 1 kpc
    Hand-chosen conservative value; with a 10 kpc line-of-sight integral D_eff ~ 10 kpc, so the predicted boosted DM flux and all limits scale linearly with this choice.
  • Local CRe flux normalization/spectral coefficients in Eq. (3) = 1.799e44, 2.762e36, 3.853e40, 3.259e10, 3.204e5 (MeV units)
    Empirical fit by Boschini et al. to Voyager/Fermi/PAMELA/AMS-02 electron data. The boosted DM flux is directly proportional to this spectrum, so its normalization uncertainty propagates into the limits.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Local cosmic-ray electron flux is homogeneous, isotropic, and given by Eq. (3) over the whole diffusion region.
    Used to compute the boosted DM flux; assumes the local measured CRe spectrum extends unchanged to all directions up to D_eff = 1 kpc. Section: Cosmic ray boosted DM flux, Eq. (3).
  • domain assumption The Milky Way DM density follows the NFW profile with r_sun = 8.5 kpc and rho_local = 0.3 GeV/cm^3.
    Used in Eq. (2) for D_eff; standard but model-dependent.
  • domain assumption LZ WS2024 public data release [13] provides correct observed counts, efficiency curve, and background components with the quoted nuisance uncertainties.
    The entire chi^2 analysis in Appendix B rests on the public LZ data and background decomposition; no independent cross-check is performed.
  • domain assumption Xenon atomic response can be described by the effective charge function Z_eff(E_R) from Hartree-Fock binding energies [43].
    Used in Eq. (9) to convert scattering rate to electron recoil rate; approximation of atomic ionization thresholds.
  • ad hoc to paper Earth attenuation is negligible for the plotted parameter ranges, or its effect is not needed for the claimed limits.
    The body explicitly says attenuation is not included while the abstract claims it is. For light-mediator limits up to sigma ~ 1e-27 cm^2 this may be invalid since attenuation is quoted to matter for sigma > a few x 1e-28 cm^2.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 118 in / 17436 out tokens · 186321 ms · 2026-08-03T08:28:18.959390+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Current multiton detectors put stringent constraints on the GeV-scale galactic dark matter, pushing the allowed cross section almost toward the neutrino fog, yet remain mostly insensitive to the light dark matter. Cosmic rays can upscatter the nonrelativistic halo dark matter particles, making a subpopulation of them gain sufficient kinetic energy to be discernible in current direct search experiments. In this work, we explore this alternate strategy to probe sub-MeV electrophilic dark matter boosted by cosmic rays with the latest data of LZ 2025 (WS2024 run). We also incorporate the attenuation effect on the boosted dark matter flux during its propagation through the Earth and perform a full numerical treatment to obtain the resulting event rate. Our result shows LZ 2025 data improve the constraint on the MeV scale dark matter by almost $\sim\mathcal{O}(1)$ compared to the previous XENONnT limit for the energy-independent cross section. Using realistic energy-dependent cross sections, we also analyze such a scenario, where the associated mediator mass plays a crucial role in governing the event rate and hence the expected limits too. With energy-dependent cross sections, our obtained limits also remain stronger than the existing constraints from the XENONnT experiment. Even compared to the limits from neutrino detectors with much larger target masses, LZ 2025 can place stringent constraints in certain regions of the mediator parameter space, particularly in the light-mediator regime, excluding previously unexplored regions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2601.16903 by Anirban Majumdar, Sk Jeesun.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: Expected recoil signature of CRe boosted DM in LZ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Primordial black holes as cosmic accelerators of light dark matter: Novel direct detection constraints

    hep-ph 2026-02 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Primordial black hole evaporation generates light fermionic dark matter capable of producing electron recoils in XENONnT, LZ, and PandaX-4T, enabling new constraints on DM-electron interactions after including Earth a...

  2. Inelastic Scattering Effects on Attenuation of Boosted Dark Matter

    hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

    Resonant excitation of nucleons into Δ(1232) during Earth passage is a non-negligible attenuation channel for boosted dark matter at E_χ ≈ 1–2 GeV, lowering the PandaX-4T upper bound on σ̄_n in the heavy-mediator regime.

  3. Primordial black holes as cosmic accelerators of light dark matter: Novel direct detection constraints

    hep-ph 2026-02 conditional novelty 5.0

    Hawking-evaporating primordial black holes could boost light dark matter to detectable energies, and the new electron-recoil constraints from XENONnT, LZ, and PandaX-4T tighten limits on its mass and cross-section.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 38 linked inside Pith · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Jungman, M

    G. Jungman, M. Kamionkowski and K. Griest, Supersymmetric dark matter,Phys. Rept.267(1996) 195–373, [hep-ph/9506380]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  2. [2]

    (dashed blue line) and DAMIC 2025 [45] limit for galactic halo DM (grey shaded region) are also portrayed. As an example, we choose a minimal model with fermion DMχand a beyond the standard model (BSM) vector mediatorVand write the following lagrangian, Lint ⊃ −gχ V ¯χγµχVµ −g e V ¯eγµeVµ,(13) ge V (gχ V ) is the respective coupling ofVwith electron (DM)....

    2025

  3. [3]

    Zwicky,Die Rotverschiebung von extragalaktischen Nebeln,Helv

    F. Zwicky,Die Rotverschiebung von extragalaktischen Nebeln,Helv. Phys. Acta6(1933) 110–127

    1933

  4. [4]

    V. C. Rubin and W. K. Ford, Jr.,Rotation of the Andromeda Nebula from a Spectroscopic Survey of Emission Regions,Astrophys. J.159(1970) 379–403. [5]PAMELAcollaboration, O. Adriani et al.,The cosmic-ray electron flux measured by the PAMELA experiment between 1 and 625 GeV,Phys. Rev. Lett. 106(2011) 201101, [1103.2880]. [6]Planckcollaboration, N. Aghanim et...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1970

  5. [5]

    Cirelli, A

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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  6. [7]

    Lin,Dark matter models and direct detection,PoS 333(2019) 009, [1904.07915]

    T. Lin,Dark matter models and direct detection,PoS 333(2019) 009, [1904.07915]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  7. [8]

    J. L. Feng,Dark Matter Candidates from Particle Physics and Methods of Detection,Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys.48(2010) 495–545, [1003.0904]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  8. [9]

    Aristizabal Sierra, V

    D. Aristizabal Sierra, V. De Romeri, L. J. Flores and D. K. Papoulias,Impact of COHERENT measurements, cross section uncertainties and new interactions on the neutrino floor,JCAP01(2022) 055, [2109.03247]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  9. [10]

    De Romeri, A

    V. De Romeri, A. Majumdar, D. K. Papoulias and R. Srivastava,New light mediators and the neutrino fog: Implications from XENONnT nuclear recoil data, 2512.08853. [11]XENONcollaboration, E. Aprile et al.,Energy resolution and linearity of XENON1T in the MeV 8 energy range,Eur. Phys. J. C80(2020) 785, [2003.03825]. [12]LZcollaboration, J. Aalbers et al.,Fir...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  10. [16]

    Bringmann and M

    T. Bringmann and M. Pospelov,Novel direct detection constraints on light dark matter,Phys. Rev. Lett.122 (2019) 171801, [1810.10543]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  11. [17]

    Y. Ema, F. Sala and R. Sato,Light Dark Matter at Neutrino Experiments,Phys. Rev. Lett.122(2019) 181802, [1811.00520]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  12. [18]

    J. B. Dent, B. Dutta, J. L. Newstead and I. M. Shoemaker,Bounds on Cosmic Ray-Boosted Dark Matter in Simplified Models and its Corresponding Neutrino-Floor,Phys. Rev. D101(2020) 116007, [1907.03782]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  13. [19]

    J. B. Dent, B. Dutta, J. L. Newstead, I. M. Shoemaker and N. T. Arellano,Present and future status of light dark matter models from cosmic-ray electron upscattering,Phys. Rev. D103(2021) 095015, [2010.09749]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  14. [20]

    Bardhan, S

    D. Bardhan, S. Bhowmick, D. Ghosh, A. Guha and D. Sachdeva,Bounds on boosted dark matter from direct detection: The role of energy-dependent cross sections, Phys. Rev. D107(2023) 015010, [2208.09405]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  15. [21]

    N. F. Bell, M. J. Dolan and S. Robles,Searching for Sub-GeV Dark Matter in the Galactic Centre using Hyper-Kamiokande,JCAP09(2020) 019, [2005.01950]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  16. [22]

    D. K. Ghosh, T. Gupta, M. Heikinheimo, K. Huitu and S. Jeesun,Boosted dark matter driven by cosmic rays and diffuse supernova neutrinos,Phys. Rev. D111 (2025) 063019, [2411.11973]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  17. [23]

    J.-W. Wang, A. Granelli and P. Ullio,Direct Detection Constraints on Blazar-Boosted Dark Matter,Phys. Rev. Lett.128(2022) 221104, [2111.13644]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  18. [24]

    Jeesun,Blazar boosted ALP and vector portal dark matter confronting light mediator searches,Phys

    S. Jeesun,Blazar boosted ALP and vector portal dark matter confronting light mediator searches,Phys. Rev. D111(2025) 103022, [2501.11569]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  19. [25]

    A. G. De Marchi, A. Granelli, J. Nava and F. Sala, Boosted dark matter versus dark matter-induced neutrinos from single and stacked blazars,JHEP12 (2025) 136, [2507.12278]

    arXiv 2025

  20. [26]

    Das and M

    A. Das and M. Sen,Boosted dark matter from diffuse supernova neutrinos,Phys. Rev. D104(2021) 075029, [2104.00027]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  21. [27]

    De Romeri, A

    V. De Romeri, A. Majumdar, D. K. Papoulias and R. Srivastava,XENONnT and LUX-ZEPLIN constraints on DSNB-boosted dark matter,JCAP03 (2024) 028, [2309.04117]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  22. [28]

    Bhalla, F

    B. Bhalla, F. Hajkarim, D. Kim and K. Sinha, Supernova-Boosted Dark Matter at Large-Volume Neutrino Detectors,2506.15765

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  23. [29]

    H. An, M. Pospelov, J. Pradler and A. Ritz,Directly Detecting MeV-scale Dark Matter via Solar Reflection, Phys. Rev. Lett.120(2018) 141801, [1708.03642]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  24. [30]

    Emken, R

    T. Emken, R. Essig and H. Xu,Solar reflection of dark matter with dark-photon mediators,JCAP07(2024) 023, [2404.10066]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  25. [31]

    Ghosh, A

    D. Ghosh, A. Guha and D. Sachdeva,Exclusion limits on dark matter-neutrino scattering cross section,Phys. Rev. D105(2022) 103029, [2110.00025]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  26. [32]

    A. Das, T. Herbermann, M. Sen and V. Takhistov, Energy-dependent boosted dark matter from diffuse supernova neutrino background,JCAP07(2024) 045, [2403.15367]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  27. [33]

    M. J. Boschini et al.,Solution of heliospheric propagation: unveiling the local interstellar spectra of cosmic ray species,Astrophys. J.840(2017) 115, [1704.06337]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  28. [34]

    J. F. Navarro, C. S. Frenk and S. D. M. White,A Universal density profile from hierarchical clustering, Astrophys. J.490(1997) 493–508, [astro-ph/9611107]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  29. [35]

    heavy mediator

    (dashed blue line), solar reflected DM [29] (orange shaded region) and the combined DD limits from SuperCDMS [36], SENSEI [37], and XENON10 [38] for galactic halo DM (grey shaded region) are also shown. The termdΦ CR e /dTe in eq.(1) signifies the local inter- stellar flux of cosmic electrons and is obtained from the observations in experiments like Voyag...

    2025

  30. [36]

    Guha and J.-C

    A. Guha and J.-C. Park,Constraints on cosmic-ray boosted dark matter with realistic cross section,JCAP 07(2024) 074, [2401.07750]. [36]SuperCDMScollaboration, R. Agnese et al.,First Dark Matter Constraints from a SuperCDMS Single-Charge Sensitive Detector,Phys. Rev. Lett.121 (2018) 051301, [1804.10697]. [37]SENSEIcollaboration, M. Crisler, R. Essig, J. Es...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  31. [38]

    Essig, A

    R. Essig, A. Manalaysay, J. Mardon, P. Sorensen and T. Volansky,First Direct Detection Limits on sub-GeV Dark Matter from XENON10,Phys. Rev. Lett.109 (2012) 021301, [1206.2644]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  32. [39]

    A. C. Cummings, E. C. Stone, B. C. Heikkila, N. Lal, W. R. Webber, G. J´ ohannesson et al.,Galactic Cosmic Rays in the Local Interstellar Medium: Voyager 1 Observations and Model Results,Astrophys. J.831 (2016) 18. [40]Fermi-LATcollaboration, M. Ackermann et al., Measurement of separate cosmic-ray electron and positron spectra with the Fermi Large Area Te...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  33. [42]

    M. J. Boschini et al.,HelMod in the works: from direct observations to the local interstellar spectrum of cosmic-ray electrons,Astrophys. J.854(2018) 94, [1801.04059]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  34. [43]

    Chen, H.-C

    J.-W. Chen, H.-C. Chi, C. P. Liu and C.-P. Wu, Low-energy electronic recoil in xenon detectors by solar neutrinos,Phys. Lett. B774(2017) 656–661, [1610.04177]. [44]LZcollaboration, G. Pereira, C. Silva and V. N. Solovov,Energy resolution of the LZ detector for high-energy electronic recoils,JINST18(2023) C04007. [45]DAMIC-Mcollaboration, K. Aggarwal et al...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  35. [46]

    C. V. Cappiello, Q. Liu, G. Mohlabeng and A. C. Vincent,Cosmic ray-boosted dark matter at IceCube, Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 095031, [2405.00086]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  36. [47]

    Hardy and R

    E. Hardy and R. Lasenby,Stellar cooling bounds on new light particles: plasma mixing effects,JHEP02(2017) 033, [1611.05852]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  37. [48]

    Y.-D. Tsai, J. Eby, J. Arakawa, D. Farnocchia and M. S. Safronova,OSIRIS-REx constraints on local dark matter and cosmic neutrino profiles,JCAP02(2024) 029, [2210.03749]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  38. [49]

    Knapen, T

    S. Knapen, T. Lin and K. M. Zurek,Light Dark Matter: Models and Constraints,Phys. Rev. D96(2017) 115021, [1709.07882]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  39. [50]

    Krnjaic and S

    G. Krnjaic and S. D. McDermott,Implications of BBN Bounds for Cosmic Ray Upscattered Dark Matter,Phys. Rev. D101(2020) 123022, [1908.00007]. [51]BaBarcollaboration, J. P. Lees et al.,Search for a Dark Photon ine +e− Collisions at BaBar,Phys. Rev. Lett.113(2014) 201801, [1406.2980]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  40. [52]

    Bauer, P

    M. Bauer, P. Foldenauer and J. Jaeckel,Hunting All the Hidden Photons,JHEP07(2018) 094, [1803.05466]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  41. [53]

    Banerjee et al.,Dark matter search in missing energy events with NA64,Phys

    D. Banerjee et al.,Dark matter search in missing energy events with NA64,Phys. Rev. Lett.123(2019) 121801, [1906.00176]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  42. [54]

    F. M. L. Almeida, Jr., M. Barbi and M. A. B. do Vale, A Proposal for a different chi square function for Poisson distributions,Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A449 (2000) 383–395, [hep-ex/9911042]. 10

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  43. [2025]

    Limits corresponding tom χ = 1 MeV, 10 MeV and 100 MeV are represented by the region above the purple, orange and blue solid lines respectively. Here, we choose a minimal model with fermion DMχ and a scalar mediatorSwith the following Yukawa like lagrangian, Lint ⊃ −gχ SS¯χχ−ge SS¯ee,(C1) ge S (gχ S) is the respective coupling ofVwith electron (DM). The m...

    2025