pith. sign in

arxiv: 2511.07511 · v3 · submitted 2025-11-10 · ✦ hep-ph

Seasons of Dark Matter Freeze-In Shaped by the Weather of the Early Universe

Francesco D'Eramo , Alessandro Lenoci , Tommaso Sassi This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-17 23:23 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph
keywords dark matterfreeze-inearly universephase-space distributionmomentum distributionmass boundscosmological history
0
0 comments X

The pith

The early universe's composition before nucleosynthesis sets the mass bound for freeze-in dark matter by shaping its momentum distribution into distinct seasons.

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

This paper explores how the early universe's composition before nucleosynthesis, referred to as its weather, affects freeze-in dark matter. Different cosmological histories lead to distinct seasons in the dark matter's momentum distribution. These seasons determine the warmness of the dark matter particles. Understanding this connection matters because it directly impacts the lower mass limit that freeze-in dark matter must satisfy to be consistent with cosmological data.

Core claim

The central claim is that variations in the cosmological history before nucleosynthesis give rise to distinct seasons in the DM momentum distribution that govern its warmness. Studying decay-driven production across diverse cosmological histories maps how these conditions shape DM phase-space properties, showing that the early universe composition plays a key role in determining the mass bound on freeze-in DM.

What carries the argument

The mapping from diverse cosmological histories to distinct seasons in the dark matter momentum distribution, which controls the particle warmness.

If this is right

  • Different early-universe compositions produce dark matter with different degrees of warmness.
  • The lower mass bound on freeze-in dark matter changes with the specific cosmological history before nucleosynthesis.
  • Imprints of freeze-in dark matter on cosmological structures depend on the pre-nucleosynthesis conditions through these momentum seasons.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • This mapping could be applied to production channels other than decays to test whether similar seasons emerge.
  • Small-scale structure surveys could indirectly constrain early-universe composition by measuring the warmness of freeze-in candidates.
  • Assuming a purely radiation-dominated era may systematically shift the allowed mass window for freeze-in dark matter.

Load-bearing premise

That decay-driven production across diverse cosmological histories before nucleosynthesis can be mapped to distinct seasons in the DM momentum distribution that govern its warmness without other mechanisms dominating.

What would settle it

A explicit calculation of the phase-space distribution for a non-standard early-universe history that shows no resulting change in DM warmness or mass bound compared with the standard history.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.07511 by Alessandro Lenoci, Francesco D'Eramo, Tommaso Sassi.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Cosmological histories considered in this work with a new species Φ redshifting slower (left panel) or faster (right [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: shows numerical solutions of the Boltzmann equation for (M, mχ) = (1 TeV, 30 keV), with the mother decay width fixed by the relic density requirement. Each color corresponds to a different cosmological history for freeze-in production, while the thick dotted black line shows a thermal MB distribution for reference. The PSDs are plotted as functions of the present-day normalized physical momentum p0/Tχ(t0),… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Lower bound on the DM mass as a function of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Quantifying the imprints of freeze-in dark matter (DM) on cosmological structures requires knowledge of its phase-space distribution. We investigate how variations in the cosmological history before nucleosynthesis, the "weather" of that epoch, give rise to distinct "seasons" in the DM momentum distribution that govern its warmness. Studying decay-driven production across diverse cosmological histories, we map how these conditions shape DM phase-space properties. Our study quantifies how the early universe composition plays a key role in determining the mass bound on freeze-in DM.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper claims that variations in the early universe's cosmological history before nucleosynthesis ('weather') produce distinct 'seasons' in the momentum distribution of freeze-in dark matter generated through decays. These seasons determine the warmness of the DM, thereby influencing the mass bounds derived from cosmological observations.

Significance. If the results are robust, this study would be significant because it quantifies the dependence of freeze-in DM phase-space properties on pre-BBN cosmology, moving beyond the standard assumption of radiation domination. This could refine constraints on DM models and highlight the interplay between early universe dynamics and DM phenomenology. The systematic study of diverse histories is a notable strength.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3] §3: The mapping from production history to the DM momentum distribution f(p) is central, but the analysis assumes decay-driven production sets the distribution without subsequent alterations; the manuscript should include an estimate showing that scattering or annihilation rates remain subdominant in the considered non-standard eras to support the distinct seasons claim.
  2. [Eq. (12)] Eq. (12): The expression for the phase-space distribution appears to assume instantaneous production; clarify how it accounts for the finite lifetime of the parent particle across varying expansion rates, as this affects the claimed season distinctions.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Fig. 3] Fig. 3: The color scheme in Figure 3 makes it difficult to distinguish the curves for different histories; using dashed lines or markers would improve clarity.
  2. [§2] Some equations in §2 use notation for the equation of state parameter that is not defined until later; consider moving the definition earlier for readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for the constructive comments, which have helped us strengthen the presentation of our results. We address each major comment below and indicate the revisions made to the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§3] §3: The mapping from production history to the DM momentum distribution f(p) is central, but the analysis assumes decay-driven production sets the distribution without subsequent alterations; the manuscript should include an estimate showing that scattering or annihilation rates remain subdominant in the considered non-standard eras to support the distinct seasons claim.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit demonstration of the subdominance of scattering and annihilation is necessary to justify that the phase-space distribution is determined solely by the decay production mechanism. In the revised manuscript we have added a new paragraph in §3 that provides order-of-magnitude estimates of the relevant interaction rates (both DM–SM scattering and DM self-annihilation) relative to the Hubble rate for each non-standard cosmological history considered. These estimates confirm that, for the DM masses and couplings explored in our parameter space, the mean free path remains larger than the Hubble length throughout the production epoch, so that the momentum distribution is not subsequently altered and the seasonal distinctions remain intact. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Eq. (12)] Eq. (12): The expression for the phase-space distribution appears to assume instantaneous production; clarify how it accounts for the finite lifetime of the parent particle across varying expansion rates, as this affects the claimed season distinctions.

    Authors: Equation (12) is obtained from the integral solution of the Boltzmann equation for the DM distribution function. The production term is integrated over cosmic time with the factor Γ exp(−∫Γ dt′), where Γ is the decay width of the parent particle; this explicitly incorporates the finite lifetime. The time-dependent Hubble parameter H(t) and scale factor a(t) that characterize each cosmological era enter both the integration limits and the redshifting of momenta. We have expanded the paragraph immediately following Eq. (12) to spell out this integration procedure and to emphasize how the spread in production times induced by the finite lifetime contributes to the distinct seasonal features in f(p). revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation is self-contained

full rationale

The paper derives the mapping from pre-nucleosynthesis cosmological histories to distinct seasons in the DM phase-space distribution by solving the Boltzmann equation for decay-driven freeze-in production under varying equations of state and entropy injections. This computation directly yields the momentum distribution properties that set the warmness and resulting mass bounds, without any step reducing a claimed prediction to a fitted input, self-citation chain, or definitional equivalence. The central claim quantifies the role of early-universe composition using standard production modeling that remains independent of the final mass-bound output.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review yields no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; full text required to populate the ledger.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5383 in / 1005 out tokens · 38106 ms · 2026-05-17T23:23:31.666274+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Exploring non-equilibrium effects in sequential freeze-in

    hep-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    In a two-scalar dark sector, non-equilibrium phase-space evolution during sequential freeze-in alters the dark matter relic abundance by up to an order of magnitude relative to the standard number-density treatment.

  2. Warm dark matter from freeze-in at stronger coupling

    hep-ph 2026-02 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Warm Higgs portal dark matter from stronger-coupling freeze-in is viable above 50-100 keV with a non-thermal momentum distribution not captured by the standard alpha-beta-gamma parametrization.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

82 extracted references · 82 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers · 30 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Supersymmetric Dark Matter

    G. Jungman, M. Kamionkowski, and K. Griest, Phys. Rept.267, 195 (1996), arXiv:hep-ph/9506380

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  2. [2]

    Particle Dark Matter: Evidence, Candidates and Constraints

    G. Bertone, D. Hooper, and J. Silk, Phys. Rept.405, 279 (2005), arXiv:hep-ph/0404175

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  3. [3]

    J. L. Feng, Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys.48, 495 (2010), arXiv:1003.0904 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  4. [4]

    Arbey and F

    A. Arbey and F. Mahmoudi, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.119, 103865 (2021), arXiv:2104.11488 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  5. [5]

    Dark Matter

    M. Cirelli, A. Strumia, and J. Zupan, (2024), arXiv:2406.01705 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  6. [6]

    Bozorgnia, J

    N. Bozorgnia, J. Bramante, J. M. Cline, D. Curtin, D. McKeen, D. E. Morrissey, A. Ritz, S. Viel, A. C. Vincent, and Y. Zhang, Can. J. Phys.103, 671 (2025), arXiv:2410.23454 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  7. [7]

    Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters

    N. Aghanim et al. (Planck), Astron. Astrophys.641, A6 (2020), [Erratum: Astron.Astrophys. 652, C4 (2021)], arXiv:1807.06209 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  8. [8]

    B. W. Lee and S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. Lett.39, 165 (1977)

    work page 1977

  9. [9]

    Goldberg, Phys

    H. Goldberg, Phys. Rev. Lett.50, 1419 (1983), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 103, 099905 (2009)]

    work page 1983

  10. [10]

    R. J. Scherrer and M. S. Turner, Phys. Rev. D33, 1585 (1986), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 34, 3263 (1986)]

    work page 1986

  11. [11]

    Srednicki, R

    M. Srednicki, R. Watkins, and K. A. Olive, Nucl. Phys. B310, 693 (1988)

    work page 1988

  12. [12]

    Gondolo and G

    P. Gondolo and G. Gelmini, Nucl. Phys. B360, 145 (1991)

    work page 1991

  13. [13]

    The Waning of the WIMP? A Review of Models, Searches, and Constraints

    G. Arcadi, M. Dutra, P. Ghosh, M. Lindner, Y. Mam- brini, M. Pierre, S. Profumo, and F. S. Queiroz, Eur. Phys. J. C78, 203 (2018), arXiv:1703.07364 [hep-ph]. 6

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  14. [14]

    WIMP dark matter candidates and searches - current status and future prospects

    L. Roszkowski, E. M. Sessolo, and S. Trojanowski, Rept. Prog. Phys.81, 066201 (2018), arXiv:1707.06277 [hep- ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  15. [15]

    Arcadi, D

    G. Arcadi, D. Cabo-Almeida, M. Dutra, P. Ghosh, M. Lindner, Y. Mambrini, J. P. Neto, M. Pierre, S. Pro- fumo, and F. S. Queiroz, Eur. Phys. J. C85, 152 (2025), arXiv:2403.15860 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  16. [16]

    L. J. Hall, K. Jedamzik, J. March-Russell, and S. M. West, JHEP03, 080 (2010), arXiv:0911.1120 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  17. [17]

    Thermally Generated Gauge Singlet Scalars as Self-Interacting Dark Matter

    J. McDonald, Phys. Rev. Lett.88, 091304 (2002), arXiv:hep-ph/0106249

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  18. [18]

    Sterile neutrinos, dark matter, and the pulsar velocities in models with a Higgs singlet

    A. Kusenko, Phys. Rev. Lett.97, 241301 (2006), arXiv:hep-ph/0609081

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  19. [19]

    Hidden gauginos of an unbroken U(1): Cosmological constraints and phenomenological prospects

    A. Ibarra, A. Ringwald, and C. Weniger, JCAP01, 003 (2009), arXiv:0809.3196 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  20. [20]

    UltraViolet Freeze-in

    F. Elahi, C. Kolda, and J. Unwin, JHEP03, 048 (2015), arXiv:1410.6157 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  21. [21]

    On UltraViolet Freeze-in Dark Matter during Reheating

    S.-L. Chen and Z. Kang, JCAP05, 036 (2018), arXiv:1711.02556 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  22. [22]

    Bernal et al.,Ultraviolet Freeze-in and Non-Standard Cosmologies,JCAP11(2019) 026 [1909.07992]

    N. Bernal, F. Elahi, C. Maldonado, and J. Unwin, JCAP 11, 026 (2019), arXiv:1909.07992 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2019

  23. [23]

    R. T. Co, F. D’Eramo, L. J. Hall, and D. Pappadopulo, JCAP12, 024 (2015), arXiv:1506.07532 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  24. [24]

    J. A. Evans and J. Shelton, JHEP04, 056 (2016), arXiv:1601.01326 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  25. [25]

    Dark Matter Freeze-in Production in Fast-Expanding Universes

    F. D’Eramo, N. Fernandez, and S. Profumo, JCAP02, 046 (2018), arXiv:1712.07453 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  26. [26]

    Singlet-Doublet Dark Matter Freeze-in: LHC displaced signatures versus cosmology

    L. Calibbi, L. Lopez-Honorez, S. Lowette, and A. Mari- otti, JHEP09, 037 (2018), arXiv:1805.04423 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  27. [27]

    Decentralized distributed optimization with accelerated ADMM for Wasserstein barycenters.arXiv preprint arXiv:1806.07396, 2018

    D. Curtin et al., Rept. Prog. Phys.82, 116201 (2019), arXiv:1806.07396 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2019

  28. [28]

    LHC-friendly minimal freeze-in models

    G. B´ elanger et al., JHEP02, 186 (2019), arXiv:1811.05478 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  29. [29]

    Junius, L

    S. Junius, L. Lopez-Honorez, and A. Mariotti, JHEP07, 136 (2019), arXiv:1904.07513 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2019

  30. [30]

    J. M. No, P. Tunney, and B. Zaldivar, JHEP03, 022 (2020), arXiv:1908.11387 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  31. [31]

    K. J. Bae, M. Park, and M. Zhang, Phys. Rev. D101, 115036 (2020), arXiv:2001.02142 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  32. [32]

    Calibbi, F

    L. Calibbi, F. D’Eramo, S. Junius, L. Lopez-Honorez, and A. Mariotti, JHEP05, 234 (2021), arXiv:2102.06221 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  33. [33]

    Arias, B

    P. Arias, B. D´ ıaz S´ aez, L. Duarte, J. Jones-Perez, W. Ro- driguez, and D. Z. Herrera, (2025), arXiv:2507.15930 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  34. [34]

    X. Chu, T. Hambye, and M. H. G. Tytgat, JCAP05, 034 (2012), arXiv:1112.0493 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  35. [35]

    Direct Detection of sub-GeV Dark Matter with Semiconductor Targets

    R. Essig, M. Fernandez-Serra, J. Mardon, A. Soto, T. Volansky, and T.-T. Yu, JHEP05, 046 (2016), arXiv:1509.01598 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  36. [36]

    Making dark matter out of light: freeze-in from plasma effects

    C. Dvorkin, T. Lin, and K. Schutz, Phys. Rev. D 99, 115009 (2019), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 105, 119901 (2022)], arXiv:1902.08623 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  37. [37]

    K. K. Boddy, K. Freese, G. Montefalcone, and B. Shams Es Haghi, Phys. Rev. D111, 063537 (2025), arXiv:2405.06226 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  38. [38]

    Bernal, C.S

    N. Bernal, C. S. Fong, and ´O. Zapata, JHEP02, 161 (2025), arXiv:2412.04550 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  39. [39]

    These probes are complementary, each affected by differ- ent systematics and relying on distinct techniques

    work page

  40. [40]

    Structure of Dark Matter Halos in Warm Dark Matter models and in models with Long-Lived Charged Massive Particles

    A. Kamada, N. Yoshida, K. Kohri, and T. Takahashi, JCAP03, 008 (2013), arXiv:1301.2744 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  41. [41]

    Warm Dark Matter via Ultra-Violet Freeze-In: Reheating Temperature and Non-Thermal Distribution for Fermionic Higgs Portal Dark Matter

    J. McDonald, JCAP08, 035 (2016), arXiv:1512.06422 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  42. [42]

    S. B. Roland and B. Shakya, JCAP05, 027 (2017), arXiv:1609.06739 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  43. [43]

    Cold keV dark matter from decays and scatterings

    J. Heeck and D. Teresi, Phys. Rev. D96, 035018 (2017), arXiv:1706.09909 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  44. [44]

    K. J. Bae, A. Kamada, S. P. Liew, and K. Yanagi, JCAP 01, 054 (2018), arXiv:1707.06418 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2018

  45. [45]

    Cold light dark matter in extended seesaw models

    S. Boulebnane, J. Heeck, A. Nguyen, and D. Teresi, JCAP04, 006 (2018), arXiv:1709.07283 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  46. [46]

    Kamada and K

    A. Kamada and K. Yanagi, JCAP11, 029 (2019), arXiv:1907.04558 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2019

  47. [47]

    Dvorkin, T

    C. Dvorkin, T. Lin, and K. Schutz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 111301 (2021), arXiv:2011.08186 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2021

  48. [48]

    Ballesteros, M.A.G

    G. Ballesteros, M. A. G. Garcia, and M. Pierre, JCAP 03, 101 (2021), arXiv:2011.13458 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  49. [49]

    D’Eramo and A

    F. D’Eramo and A. Lenoci, JCAP10, 045 (2021), arXiv:2012.01446 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  50. [50]

    Baumholzer, V

    S. Baumholzer, V. Brdar, and E. Morgante, JCAP05, 004 (2021), arXiv:2012.09181 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  51. [51]

    Egana-Ugrinovic, R

    D. Egana-Ugrinovic, R. Essig, D. Gift, and M. LoVerde, JCAP05, 013 (2021), arXiv:2102.06215 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2021

  52. [52]

    Y. Du, F. Huang, H.-L. Li, Y.-Z. Li, and J.-H. Yu, JCAP 04, 012 (2022), arXiv:2111.01267 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  53. [53]

    Decant, J

    Q. Decant, J. Heisig, D. C. Hooper, and L. Lopez- Honorez, JCAP03, 041 (2022), arXiv:2111.09321 [astro- ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2022

  54. [54]

    K. R. Dienes, F. Huang, J. Kost, B. Thomas, and H.-B. Yu, Phys. Rev. D106, 123521 (2022), arXiv:2112.09105 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2022

  55. [55]

    Z. Xu, Q. Zhou, and S. Zheng, Phys. Rev. D110, 115003 (2024), arXiv:2407.08225 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  56. [56]

    Becker, J

    M. Becker, J. Harz, E. Morgante, C. Puchades-Ib´ a˜ nez, and P. Schwaller, JHEP06, 160 (2025), arXiv:2502.01729 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  57. [57]

    There could be exceptions; see, e.g., Ref. [?]

    work page

  58. [58]

    P. N. Bhattiprolu, G. Elor, R. McGehee, and A. Pierce, JHEP01, 128 (2023), arXiv:2210.15653 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  59. [59]

    Cosme, F

    C. Cosme, F. Costa, and O. Lebedev, Phys. Rev. D109, 075038 (2024), arXiv:2306.13061 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  60. [60]

    Becker, E

    M. Becker, E. Copello, J. Harz, J. Lang, and Y. Xu, JCAP01, 053 (2024), arXiv:2306.17238 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  61. [61]

    Silva-Malpartida, N

    J. Silva-Malpartida, N. Bernal, J. Jones-P´ erez, and R. A. Lineros, JCAP09, 015 (2023), arXiv:2306.14943 [hep- ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  62. [62]

    Koivunen, O

    N. Koivunen, O. Lebedev, and M. Raidal, Eur. Phys. J. C84, 1234 (2024), arXiv:2403.15533 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  63. [63]

    Arcadi et al.,Higgs portal dark matter freeze-in at stronger coupling: observational benchmarks,JHEP07 (2024) 044 [2405.03760]

    G. Arcadi, F. Costa, A. Goudelis, and O. Lebedev, JHEP 07, 044 (2024), arXiv:2405.03760 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  64. [64]

    Lebedev, A

    O. Lebedev, A. P. Morais, V. Oliveira, and R. Pasechnik, JHEP04, 136 (2025), arXiv:2410.21874 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  65. [65]

    Barman, S

    B. Barman, S. Bhattacharya, S. Jahedi, D. Pradhan, and A. Sarkar, Phys. Lett. B869, 139863 (2025), arXiv:2406.11963 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  66. [66]

    Silva-Malpartida, N

    J. Silva-Malpartida, N. Bernal, J. Jones-P´ erez, and R. A. Lineros, JCAP03, 003 (2025), arXiv:2408.08950 [hep- ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  67. [67]

    Barman, S

    B. Barman, S. Bhattacharya, S. Jahedi, D. Pradhan, and A. Sarkar, JHEP07, 157 (2025), arXiv:2410.18198 [hep- ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  68. [68]

    Borah, N

    D. Borah, N. Das, S. Jahedi, and D. Pradhan, JHEP11, 049 (2025), arXiv:2506.13860 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  69. [69]

    Arias, D

    P. Arias, D. Karamitros, and L. Roszkowski, JCAP05, 041 (2021), arXiv:2012.07202 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  70. [70]

    We employ the reduced Planck mass defined asM Pl ≡ 7 (8πG)−1/2 ≃2.4×10 18 GeV

    work page

  71. [71]

    Standard Model thermodynamics across the electroweak crossover

    M. Laine and M. Meyer, JCAP07, 035 (2015), arXiv:1503.04935 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  72. [72]

    Non-relativistic matter,w Φ = 0, is a case of this kind

    work page

  73. [73]

    Kination,w Φ = 1, is a case of this kind

    work page

  74. [74]

    D’Eramo, A

    F. D’Eramo, A. Lenoci, and A. Dekker, (2025), arXiv:2506.13864 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  75. [75]

    A of Ref

    See App. A of Ref. [74] for a detailed derivation

    work page

  76. [76]

    What is the lowest possible reheating temperature?

    S. Hannestad, Phys. Rev. D70, 043506 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0403291

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  77. [77]

    P. F. de Salas, M. Lattanzi, G. Mangano, G. Miele, S. Pastor, and O. Pisanti, Phys. Rev. D92, 123534 (2015), arXiv:1511.00672 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  78. [78]

    Barbieri, T

    N. Barbieri, T. Brinckmann, S. Gariazzo, M. Lattanzi, S. Pastor, and O. Pisanti, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 181003 (2025), arXiv:2501.01369 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  79. [79]

    The Cosmic Linear Anisotropy Solving System (CLASS) IV: Efficient implementation of non-cold relics

    J. Lesgourgues and T. Tram, JCAP09, 032 (2011), arXiv:1104.2935 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  80. [80]

    D’Eramo, F

    F. D’Eramo, F. Hajkarim, and A. Lenoci, JCAP03, 009 (2024), arXiv:2311.04974 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

Showing first 80 references.