Constraining the Z' Mass in 331 Models using Direct Dark Matter Detection

Farinaldo S. Queiroz; Stefano Profumo

REVIEW

Constraining the Z' Mass in 331 Models using Direct Dark Matter Detection

Stefano Profumo, Farinaldo S. Queiroz

High Energy Physics - Phenomenology · Submitted 30 Jul 2013 · 37 references

Pith's verdict: A real, checkable Z' mass bound from LUX in the 3-3-1LHN model, undermined mainly by an abstract that claims more scope than the body delivers.

T0 · AI review

How this review was made: An AI referee (selfhosted/deepseek-v4.1-flash) read the paper on November 10, 2026 and answered a fixed list of questions about it. T0 is the starting level every paper gets. The levels describe how deeply Pith has checked the paper, never the authors.

T0 AI review An AI read the paper and answered a fixed list of questions.
T1 Audit Automatic checks that the references and files the paper relies on exist and match.
T2 Compute The paper's code or calculations re-run with the same results.
T3 Formal statement The claims written out in a formal math language a computer can read.
T4 Proof Those claims proved, and the proof checked by computer.

How Pith checks papers →

· 4 major objections · 10 minor · Ask about this paper · The compiled record · Read the full review →

Challenge this review Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗

Cite ▾

arXiv ID1307.7802 (version 2)

Pith IDYMX2U7B7, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review

CitationFarinaldo S. Queiroz, Stefano Profumo. "Constraining the Z' Mass in 331 Models using Direct Dark Matter Detection." arXiv:1307.7802 (2013). https://pith.science/paper/YMX2U7B7

Cite this reviewBibTeX for Pith's review of this paper

Claim paper

Why Pith says this

Highlight any text to comment on it.

Editor's note

read the letter

Bottom line: the number is real and worth having — M_Z' ≳ 2 TeV in the 3-3-1LHN model from LUX 2013 — but the abstract oversells its scope, and the body knows it better than the abstract does. What is actually new: the model and its Z' couplings (Table I) come from the authors' earlier work. The additions here are a micrOMEGAs implementation that includes coannihilation and 3/4-body final states, and the spin-independent direct detection cross section with the resulting Z' mass bound. The direct detection piece is the valuable one, because the Z' couplings are fixed by gauge symmetry — nothing is tuned to LUX, so the comparison is honest. The discussion of complementarity with collider, FCNC, and STU limits is useful and correctly framed. Soft spots, in order of how much they matter. The abstract's 'independently of the dark matter mass' (abstract:s3) is wrong as stated. Sec. III.B itself says that for N1 below about 600 GeV you need a Z' well above 2 TeV, and Fig. 6 shows the usual reduced-mass dependence. The bound also only means something where the relic density is viable, which their own scan restricts to M_N1 < M_Z'/2 or M_N1 ≳ 1 TeV. The body is more careful than the abstract; the abstract is what needs fixing. Second, 'the important effect of coannihilation' (abstract:s2) does not survive Sec. III.A, which says coannihilation only thickens the curves. That is fine physics, but it is the sentence carrying the 'unprecedented accuracy' claim. Third, Fig. 7's caption says XENON100 excludes the red region while the text says LUX 2013. Those limits differ; pick one. On the reader's Z-Z' mixing worry: it does not land. The mixing is O(v^2/v_chi'^2) ~ 1%, so a few percent on the cross section, not a factor of a few. Scalar exchange is likewise Yukawa-suppressed, so the paper's qualitative dismissal is correct. The bound is robust at the factor-of-2 level, which for sigma ~ 1/M_Z'^4 is what you would expect from a tree-level estimate. Who it is for: people building 331 models or quoting Z' direct detection bounds. Modest but legitimate. Send it out; referees should push on the abstract's scope claims, not on the calculation.

Referee report

Significance

If the bound holds as stated, it is a useful and physically transparent result: because the Z' couplings to quarks and to N1 are fixed by gauge symmetry (Table I) rather than fitted, the spin-independent cross section is essentially a one-parameter prediction in M_Z' (modulo M_N1), and the comparison with direct detection is a genuine test rather than a fit. The mapping of the bound onto the symmetry-breaking scale, and hence onto the masses of the V+, U0, q' and heavy scalar states, makes it complementary to the collider, FCNC, STU and muon-decay limits cited in the introduction. I give credit for the micrOMEGAs implementation with 3- and 4-body final states, for the inclusion of heavy-fermion coannihilation, and for the two-dimensional scan in Fig. 7, which displays the relic-density windows, the instability region and the direct-detection exclusion on the same plane; that figure is the most informative in the paper. The result is robust at the factor-of-two level, since sigma ~ 1/M_Z'^4, so a factor-4 error in the cross section moves the quoted 2 TeV to roughly 1.4-2.8 TeV.

Major objections (4)

[Abstract (abstract:s3) and Sec. III.B, Figs. 6-7] The abstract states that LUX puts a bound M_Z' >~ 2 TeV 'independently of the dark matter mass', but the body does not support the qualifier. The spin-independent cross section of Eqs. (25)-(27) scales with the WIMP-nucleus reduced mass squared, so for a light N1 the predicted rate falls and the bound on M_Z' weakens; the LUX 2013 limit curve itself is also mass-dependent, rising steeply at low WIMP mass. In addition, the bound is only meaningful where the thermal relic density matches the observed value, and Fig. 4 shows that for each M_Z' the viable N1 values are confined to a narrow resonance window near M_N1 ~ M_Z'/2 and to M_N1 >~ 1 TeV on the coannihilation side. The abstract and the conclusions should therefore state the bound together with the N1 mass range over which it applies, rather than claiming mass independence.
[Sec. III.B, Fig. 6] Fig. 6 draws the XENON100 (2012) and LUX (2013) limits as horizontal lines of constant cross section across the whole 200-1000 GeV N1 mass range shown. The published limits are not horizontal: they are quoted as a function of WIMP mass and rise substantially at low WIMP mass. Since the paper's central claim concerns the mass dependence (or lack thereof) of the bound, the comparison should use the actual published limit curves, or the authors should state explicitly that the horizontal lines are a conservative approximation and justify that approximation over the plotted range. As drawn, the figure cannot support a statement about mass independence.
[Sec. III.B, paragraph following Fig. 6] The sentence 'For a N1 lighter than ~600 GeV one will need a Z' much heavier than 2 TeV in order to evade the XENON100 limits' appears to have the wrong sign relative to the stated scaling. Since the predicted cross section decreases with the reduced mass, a lighter N1 gives a smaller rate and hence a weaker, not stronger, lower bound on M_Z'. The sentence also sits uneasily with the abstract's mass-independence claim and with the attribution of the exclusion to LUX rather than XENON100. The authors should recheck this statement against their own numerical scan and either correct it or explain the mechanism that reverses the naive mu^2 scaling.
[Sec. III.A and Abstract (abstract:s2)] The abstract advertises 'unprecedented accuracy' and 'the important effect of coannihilation across the heavy fermion sector', but Sec. III.A concludes that coannihilation 'only produce[s] some scatter in the abundance plot' and 'do[es] not play a crucial role in setting the thermal relic abundance'. The two statements are in tension. Either the coannihilation effect should be quantified (for example, by showing the relic density with coannihilation switched off against the full result for at least one benchmark), or the abstract should be softened. Similarly, 'unprecedented accuracy' is not substantiated: no comparison with the earlier calculations of Refs. [7,8] is presented, and the improvement from 3- and 4-body final states is asserted rather than demonstrated.

Minor objections (10)

[Fig. 7 caption] The caption attributes the red excluded region to XENON100 [36], whereas the text of Sec. III.B attributes it to LUX 2013 [35]. The caption also describes the relic-density points as 'black, blue and green', while the text describes them as green (overabundant), light blue (underabundant) and a dark blue line (correct density). Please make the caption and text consistent.
[Table I] The table lists g'_V(NN) = -g'_A(NN), i.e. a purely chiral Z' coupling to N1. Since the spin-independent rate of Eqs. (25)-(26) is driven by the vector coupling of N1, it would help to state explicitly the value of the vector coupling that enters B_N and to confirm that the SI rate is not accidentally suppressed by this structure.
[Sec. III.B] The paper asserts that 'since only gauge couplings are involved, the scattering cross section is determined by the mass of the WIMP and the Z' only', but Z-Z' kinetic mixing is never discussed. An explicit estimate of the mixing angle and of its effect on the SI cross section, even if it is at the percent level as naive v^2/v_chi'^2 power counting suggests, would make the robustness claim verifiable.
[Sec. III.B] The scalar contributions from S1, S2 and P1 are dismissed qualitatively. A short quantitative estimate of the scalar-exchange contribution to the SI cross section, showing it is negligible relative to the Z' tree-level term over the scanned parameter space, would strengthen the argument.
[Sec. II, Mass Eigenstates] The text states that all results were computed 'without using any assumption on the vevs or on the constant couplings', but the numerical study fixes v_chi' = 2, 3, 4, 5 TeV and assumes couplings of order one. Please state precisely which parameters are scanned and which are fixed.
[Sec. III.B] The statement that 'we let all coupling constants free to vary randomly' is unclear given that the Z' couplings are fixed by gauge symmetry in Table I. Please specify which couplings are varied in the direct-detection calculation.
[Sec. III.B and Conclusions] The claim that the bounds apply 'up to some extent' to generic 331-like models is asserted without demonstration. Either quantify the sense in which the Z' couplings of those models resemble Table I, or soften the claim.
[Sec. III.B, Eq. (18)] The velocity distribution is assumed Maxwell-Boltzmann with rho_DM = 0.3 GeV/cm^3, but the adopted v_0 and v_esc are not stated. Please give them, since the event-rate normalization affects the comparison with the quoted limits.
[Figs. 1 and 4] Fig. 1 caption reads 'total width (read)' for 'red'. In Fig. 4, please state in the caption what the vertical thickness of each band represents, since the text explains it only in the body.
[Throughout] There are several typographical and grammatical errors that should be corrected: '3-3-1LHC model' in the Gauge Bosons paragraph, 'exclusivley', 'On the order hand', 'symmetry symmetry', 'Techinicolor', 'it is not to relevant', 'what sort or couplings', 'know quantities', 'Maxwell-Botzmann', and 'V ariety'.

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

The paper

The paper claims

In a 331 extension of the Standard Model, the extra Z' boson must be heavier than about 2 TeV, or its exchange would have produced a dark matter signal that LUX did not see.

The reading

This paper asks whether a specific extension of the electroweak gauge group — the so-called 3-3-1LHN model, in which $SU(3)_L$ replaces $SU(2)_L$ — can supply a viable dark matter particle, and what that particle's existence implies for the extra neutral gauge boson $Z'$ the extension predicts. The candidate is $N_1$, the lightest of the new heavy neutral fermions, kept stable by a discrete parity. Because $N_1$ communicates with ordinary quarks only through $Z'$ exchange, the same coupling that fixed how much dark matter annihilated away in the early universe also fixes how hard it would recoil off a xenon nucleus today. That single link lets a null direct-detection result be converted into a limit on the $Z'$ mass, and — since every new mass in the model scales with the same symmetry-breaking vacuum expectation value — into a limit on the entire new-physics scale. The authors argue the resulting bound, $M_{Z'} > 2$ TeV, holds essentially regardless of how heavy the dark matter particle itself is.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the $Z'$ itself, acting as both annihilation mediator and scattering mediator. On the relic-density side, the authors implement the model in a customized micrOMEGAs, including 3- and 4-body final states and coannihilation among $N_1$, $N_2$ and $N_3$ (with masses varied within 10% of each other), and exhibit the resonance funnel at $M_{N_1} = M_{Z'}/2$ for $M_{Z'} = 0.8, 1.2, 1.6, 2$ TeV. On the scattering side, the Dirac fermion $N_1$ has a vector coupling to quarks, giving a spin-independent cross section of the form $σ_0 = μ^2 B_N^2 / 64π$ with $B_N = α_V^u (A+Z) + α_V^d (2A - Z)$, whose $A^2$ coherence enhancement is what makes the spin-independent channel the strongest handle even though the spin-dependent cross section is numerically larger. The scalar and pseudoscalar states $S_1$, $S_2$ and $P_1$ are argued to be irrelevant: no resonance arises from a light $S_1$, and $P_1$ exchange is $p$-wave suppressed.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's claim is that the 3-3-1LHN model's dark matter candidate $N_1$ can reproduce the observed relic density through $Z'$-mediated annihilation (with a resonance at $M_{N_1} = M_{Z'}/2$) plus coannihilation among the heavy neutral fermions, and that the spin-independent cross section this same $Z'$ produces off nuclei is large enough that the LUX 2013 limit excludes $M_{Z'} < 2$ TeV. The authors emphasize that the exclusion is largely independent of the dark matter mass, because only gauge couplings enter the scattering: the cross section is set by the $Z'$ mass and the WIMP mass alone. Translated through the model's mass relations, the bound says the symmetry-breaking scale sits at $v_{χ'} = 4$–$5$ TeV, dragging every new fermion, quark, scalar and gauge boson of the theory up to the few-TeV range. The authors present this as complementary to collider, flavour-changing-neutral-current, electroweak-precision and muon-decay limits on the same boson, and note that the bound should carry over, at least approximately, to other 331-like models where a singlet neutral fermion is the dark matter and the $Z'$ is the mediator.

Load-bearing premise

The whole bound rests on the spin-independent cross section being set entirely by tree-level $Z'$ exchange with the couplings listed in the paper's Table I, with no $Z$–$Z'$ mixing and with scalar exchange genuinely negligible.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

If the bound holds, the symmetry-breaking scale of the model is pushed to $v_{χ'} \simeq 4$–$5$ TeV, so all the new quarks, neutral fermions, scalars and the charged gauge bosons $V^\pm$ and $U^0$ sit at a few TeV and are, in principle, within reach of the LHC.
For $M_{N_1} < M_{Z'}/2$ the $Z'$ decays predominantly invisibly into $N_1 \bar{N}_1$ pairs, so the dilepton searches that constrain the right-handed-neutrino version of the model lose sensitivity and missing-energy searches become the relevant channel.
The direct-detection bound is complementary to, and of comparable reach as, limits from colliders, flavour-changing neutral currents, $S$, $T$, $U$ oblique corrections and muon decay, so a future $Z'$ discovery would need to satisfy all of them at once.
Because the scattering is governed by gauge couplings alone, the exclusion can be stated as a bound in the $(M_{Z'}, M_{N_1})$ plane rather than as a bound at one benchmark dark matter mass.

Reading between the lines

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

The quoted 2 TeV number is a factor-of-a-few statement: a $Z$–$Z'$ kinetic mixing term, never discussed in the paper, would rescale the spin-independent cross section and move the bound proportionally, so it would be worth quantifying before treating 2 TeV as a hard, model-independent threshold.
The near-independence from the dark matter mass follows from the pure vector coupling; any scalar-mediated contribution to the cross section would reintroduce mass dependence and could reopen sub-2-TeV $Z'$ masses near the resonance, where the relic density is anyway correct.
Since the same vacuum expectation value fixes $M_{V^\pm}$ and $M_{U^0}$, a future measurement or exclusion of the charged gauge boson at the LHC would provide an independent cross-check on the direct-detection bound, or expose a tension between the two sectors.
A joint likelihood combining invisible-width LHC searches with the xenon recoil limit would be sharper than either alone, because the two experiments probe the same coupling in complementary kinematic regimes.

Original abstract

We investigate a so-called 331 extension of the Standard Model gauge sector which accommodates neutrino masses and where the lightest of the new neutral fermions in the theory is a viable particle dark matter candidate. In this model, processes mediated by the additional $Z^{\prime}$ gauge boson set both the dark matter relic abundance and the scattering cross section off of nuclei. We calculate with unprecedented accuracy the dark matter relic density, including the important effect of coannihilation across the heavy fermion sector, and show that indeed the candidate particle has the potential of having the observed dark matter density. We find that the recent LUX results put very stringent bounds on the mass of the extra gauge boson, $M_{Z^{\prime}} \gtrsim 2$~TeV, independently of the dark matter mass. We also comment on regime where our bounds on the $Z^{\prime}$ mass may apply to generic 331-like models, and on implications for LHC phenomenology.

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged, kept beside the review and separate from it. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 4,450 input tokens, $0.0002 reported.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.12 · states limitation 0.44 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.03 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.98 · compares with prior results 0.24 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v2. Results and the main claim are underlined; show every role.

We investigate a so-called 331 extension of the Standard Model gauge sector which accommodates neutrino masses and where the lightest of the new neutral fermions in the theory is a viable particle dark matter candidate. In this model, processes mediated by the additional $Z^{\prime}$ gauge boson set both the dark matter relic abundance and the scattering cross section off of nuclei. We calculate with unprecedented accuracy the dark matter relic density, including the important effect of coannihilation across the heavy fermion sector, and show that indeed the candidate particle has the potential of having the observed dark matter density. We find that the recent LUX results put very stringent bounds on the mass of the extra gauge boson, $M_{Z^{\prime}} \gtrsim 2$~TeV, independently of the dark matter mass. We also comment on regime where our bounds on the $Z^{\prime}$ mass may apply to generic 331-like models, and on implications for LHC phenomenology.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#	sentence	role	the authors' own work	states the main conclusion	strength
s0	We investigate a so-called 331 extension of the Standard Model gauge sector which accommodates neutrino masses and where the lightest of the new neutral fermions in the theory is a viable particle dark matter candidate.	background 0.66	0.17	0.03	asserted 0.89
s1	In this model, processes mediated by the additional $Z^{\prime}$ gauge boson set both the dark matter relic abundance and the scattering cross section off of nuclei.	background 0.74	0.21	0.04	asserted 1.00
s2	We calculate with unprecedented accuracy the dark matter relic density, including the important effect of coannihilation across the heavy fermion sector, and show that indeed the candidate particle has the potential of having the observed dark matter density.	result 0.56	0.97	0.07	asserted 0.53
s3	We find that the recent LUX results put very stringent bounds on the mass of the extra gauge boson, $M_{Z^{\prime}} \gtrsim 2$~TeV, independently of the dark matter mass.	result 1.00	0.93	0.89	asserted 1.00
s4	We also comment on regime where our bounds on the $Z^{\prime}$ mass may apply to generic 331-like models, and on implications for LHC phenomenology.	interpretation 0.90	0.64	0.03	hedged possibility 0.85

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: theoretical result 0.95 · evidence from analysis of existing data 0.50.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read

arXiv listing abstract v2

not examined

full text
figures and tables
references and citing sentences
relations to other papers

levels run

P abstract

not run

S sections
T body sentences
C citations
R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

Figures

**Figure 1.** FIG. 1. Mass (blue) and total width (read) of the

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2. Selected annihilation channels which contribute to the ther

**Figure 5.** FIG. 5. WIMP-nucleon scattering process.

**Figure 6.** FIG. 6. SI scattering cross section off nuclei of the fermion

Showing 5 of the paper's 7 figures. See all figures in the PDF ↗ Figures reproduced from arXiv:1307.7802 by the authors.

References

Works cited (37)

[1]

T. Han, Z. Liu, A. Natarajan, [arXiv:1303.3040]; Andrew Fowlie, Kamila Kowalska, Leszek Roszkowski, Enrico Maria Sessolo, Yue-Lin Sming Tsai,[arXiv:1306.1567]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[2]

Ernest Ma, Phys.Rev. D85 (2012) 091701, [arXiv:1202.5828]; Wan-Lei Guo, Yue-Liang Wu, Yu-Feng Zhou, Int.J.Mod.Phys. D20 (2011) 1389-1397

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012
[3]

G. Belanger (Annecy, LAPTH), M. Kakizaki, A. Pukhov,JCAP 1102 (2011) 009, [arXiv:1012.2577]; Ken Hsieh, R.N. Mohap- atra, Salah Nasri (Maryland U.),Phys.Rev. D74 (2006) 066004, [hep-ph/0604154]; D. Hooper and S. Profumo, Phys. Rept.453, 29 (2007) [hep-ph/0701197]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2011
[4]

For a recent update on UED, see also: J. M. Cornell, S. Profumo and W. Shepherd, arXiv:1401.7050 [hep-ph]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[5]

Travis A. W. Martin, Alejandro de la Puente, arXiv:1304.7835; Maxim Perelstein, Andrew Spray, Phys.Rev. D75 (2007) 083519,[hep-ph/0610357]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2007
[6]

C. A. de S. Pires, P. S. Rodrigues da Silva, JCAP 0712:012 (2007)

View on Pith 2007
[7]

J.K. Mizukoshi, C.A. de S.Pires, F.S. Queiroz, P.S. Rodrigues da Silva, Phys.Rev. D83 (2011) 065024,[arXiv:1010.4097]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2011
[8]

J.D. Ruiz-Alvarez, C.A. de S.Pires, F. S. Queiroz, D. Restrepo, P.S.Rodrigues da Silva ,Phys.Rev. D86 (2012) 075011,[arXiv:1206.5779]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012
[9]

C. Kelso, C. A. de S. Pires, S. Profumo, F. S. Queiroz, P. S. Rodrigues da Silva, [arXiv:1308.6630]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[10]

C.A. de S.Pires, F.S. Queiroz, P.S. Rodrigues da Silva (Paraiba U.),Phys.Rev. D82 (2010) 105014,[arXiv:1002.4601]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2010
[11]

A. Alves, F. de Campos, M. Dias and J. M. Hoff da Silva, arXiv:1401.1127 [hep-ph]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[12]

F. Pisano and V . Pleitez, Phys. Rev. D46,(1992) 410,[hep- ph/9206242]; P. H. Frampton, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69,(1992) 2889; F. Queiroz, C.A. de S.Pires, P.S.Rodrigues da Silva, Phys.Rev. D82 (2010) 065018 , [arXiv:1003.1270]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1992
[13]

Alex G. Dias (Sao Paulo U.), C. A. de S. Pires (Paraiba U.), P. S. Rodrigues da Silva, Phys.Rev. D68 (2003) 115009, [hep- ph/0309058]; Phung Van Dong, Hoang Ngoc Long (Hanoi, Inst. Phys.), Dang Van Soa, Phys.Rev. D73 (2006) 075005, [hep- ph/0603108]

View on Pith 2003
[14]

J.G. Ferreira, Jr, P.R.D. Pinheiro, C.A.de S. Pires, P.S.Rodrigues da Silva, Phys.Rev. D84 (2011) 095019, [arXiv:1109.0031]; W. Caetano, C. A. de S. Pires, P. S. Rodrigues da Silva, D. Cogollo, F. S. Queiroz, Eur. Phys. J. C (2013) 73:2607, [arXiv:1305.7246]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2011
[15]

J.C. Montero, C.A. De S. Pires, V . Pleitez, Phys.Rev. D65 (2002) 095001,[hep-ph/0112246]; J.C. Montero, C.A. de S.Pires, V . Pleitez, Phys.Lett. B502 (2001) 167-170,[hep- ph/0011296]; D. Cogollo, H. Diniz, C.A. de S.Pires, Phys.Lett. B687 (2010) 400-404,[arXiv:1002.1944]; F. Queiroz, C.A. de S.Pires, P.S.Rodrigues da Silva, Phys.Rev. D82 (2010) 065018,[a...

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002
[16]

P.V . Dong, D.T. Huong, M.C. Rodriguez, Hoang Ngoc Long, Nucl.Phys. B772 (2007) 150-174, [hep-ph/0701137]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2007
[17]

Hoang Ngoc Long, Adv.Stud.Theor.Phys. 4 (2010) 173-196, [arXiv:0710.5833]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2010
[18]

A. Doff, A.A. Natale, [arXiv:1303.3974];A. Doff, A.A. Natale, Int.J.Mod.Phys. A27 (2012) 1250156,[arXiv:1210.3390]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012
[19]

P. V . Dong, H. T. Hung, T. D. Tham, Phys. Rev. D 87, 115003 (2013), [arXiv:1305.0369]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013
[20]

D. T. Huong, C. S. Kim,H. N. Long, N. T. Thuy, [arxiv:1110.1482]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[21]

E. Ramirez Barreto, Y .A. Coutinho, J. Sa Borges, Phys.Lett. B689 (2010) 36-41,[arXiv:1004.3269]; E. Ramirez Barreto, Yara Do Amaral Coutinho, J. Sa Borges, Eur.Phys.J. C50 (2007) 909-917, [hep-ph/0703099]; E. Ramirez Barreto, Yara Do Amaral Coutinho, J. Sa Borges, [hep-ph/0605098]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2010
[22]

Y .A. Coutinho, V . Salustino Guimares, A.A. Nepomuceno, [arXiv:1304.7907]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[23]

Hoang Ngoc Long, V o Thanh Van, J.Phys. G25 (1999) 2319- 2324, [hep-ph/9909302]; D. Gomez Dumm, F. Pisano, V . Pleitez, Mod.Phys.Lett. A9 (1994) 1609-1615; James T. Liu, Phys.Rev. D50 (1994) 542-547, [ hep-ph/9312312];Jairo Alexis Rodriguez, Marc Sher, Phys.Rev. D70 (2004) 117702, [hep- ph/0407248]; Richard H. Benavides, Yithsbey Giraldo, William A. Ponce...

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999
[24]

J. T. Liu and D. Ng, Z.Phys. C62 (1994) 693-700, [hep- ph/9302271]; K. sasaki, Phys. Lett. B 308, (1993), 297; R. Martinez and F. Ochoa, Phys.Rev. D 80 (2009) 075020, [arXiv:0909.1121]; P. H. Frampton and M. Harada, Phys. ReV . D58, 095013 (1998); D. Chang and H. N. Long, Phys. Rev. D 73, (2006) 053006

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1994
[25]

D. Ng, Phys. Rev. D. 49 (1994) 4805 [hep-ph/9212284]; David L. Anderson, Marc Sher, Phys.Rev. D72 (2005) 095014, [hep- ph/0509200]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1994
[26]

C. Kelso, P. R. D. Pinheiro, F. S. Queiroz and W. Shep- herd, Eur. Phys. J. C 74, 2808 (2014) [arXiv:1312.0051 [hep- ph]]; A. Alves, S. Profumo and F. S. Queiroz, JHEP 1404, 063 (2014) [arXiv:1312.5281 [hep-ph]]; G. Arcadi, Y . Mam- brini, M. H. G. Tytgat and B. Zaldivar, JHEP 1403, 134 (2014) [arXiv:1401.0221 [hep-ph]]; C. Kelso, P. R. D. Pin- heiro, F. ...

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014
[27]

Alex G. Dias, R. Martinez, V . Pleitez, Eur.Phys.J. C39 (2005) 101-107, [hep-ph/0407141]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2005
[28]

J. Sa Borges, Y .A. Coutinho, E.R. Barreto, AIP Conf.Proc. 1520 (2012) 440-442; E. Ramirez Barreto, Y .A. Coutinho, J. Sa Borges,Phys.Rev. D83 (2011) 075001, [arXiv:1103.1267]; E. Ramirez Barreto (ABC Federal U.), Y .A. Coutinho, J. Sa Borges, Phys.Lett. B689 (2010) 36-41, [arXiv:1004.3269]; E. Ramirez Barreto, Y .A. Coutinho, J. Sa Borges, Braz.J.Phys. 3...

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012
[29]

ATLAS Collaboration, Phys.Lett.B 705 (2011) 28-46, [arXiv:1108.1316]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2011
[30]

ATLAS Collaboration, Eur. Phys. J. C (2012) 72: 2241, [arXiv:1209.4446]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012
[31]

Alex G. Dias, C. A. de S. Pires, P. S. Rodrigues da Silva, Phys.Lett. B628 (2005) 85-92, [arXiv:hep-ph/0508186]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2005
[32]

G. Belanger, F. Boudjema, A. Pukhov, A. Semenov, [arXiv:1305.0237]; G. Belanger, F. Boudjema, P. Brun, A. Pukhov, S. Rosier-Lees, P. Salati, A. Se- menov, Comput.Phys.Commun.182:842-856 (2011), [arXiv:1004.1092]; G. Belanger, F. Boudjema, A. Pukhov, A. Semenov, Comput.Phys.Commun.180:747-767 (2009), [arXiv:0803.2360]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2011
[33]

A. Bottino, F. Donato, N. Fornengo, S. Scopel, Astropart.Phys.18:205-211,2002, [hep-ph/0111229]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002
[34]

T. P. Cheng, Phys. Rev.D38 (1988) 2869

View on Pith 1988
[35]

LUX Collaboration, [arXiv:1310.8214]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[36]

XENON Collaboration, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 181301 (2012), [arXiv:1207.5988]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012
[37]

Rafael Lang, KITP Conference: Identifying and Char- acterizing Dark Matter via Multiple Probes, http : //online.kitp.ucsb.edu/online/dmatter c13/

View on Pith

Forward citations

Cited by 11 Pith papers

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

NLO+NLL Collider Bounds, Dirac Fermion and Scalar Dark Matter in the B-L Model
hep-ph 2016-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

For B-L gauge couplings below 0.4, 13 TeV LHC dilepton data at NLO+NLL excludes more Z' parameter space than the LEP bound, and only dark matter near the Z' resonance survives all constraints.
Neutrino Masses and Absence of Flavor Changing Interactions in the 2HDM from Gauge Principles
hep-ph 2017-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

An extra gauged U(1) with suitable charges can generate the discrete symmetry that suppresses flavor-changing neutral currents in the Type I Two Higgs Doublet Model while also permitting a seesaw mechanism for neutrin...
Explaining Dark Matter and $B$ Decay Anomalies with an $L_\mu - L_\tau$ Model
hep-ph 2016-09 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

A gauged L_mu minus L_tau model with a vector-like Dirac dark fermion can simultaneously address the b to s mu mu anomalies and thermal dark matter only for dark matter masses of roughly 5 to 23 GeV, with the Z' near ...
New Physics Contributions to the Muon Anomalous Magnetic Moment: A Numerical Code
hep-ph 2014-03 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

The paper provides a unified set of one-loop formulas and a public Mathematica code for computing new-physics contributions to the muon anomalous magnetic moment, together with mass bounds for each simplified model.
331 models facing new b -> s mu^+ mu^- data
hep-ph 2013-11 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Scanning the 331 models over the discrete parameter beta, the authors find that beta = minus sqrt 3 is excluded, that negative beta can soften the B_d to K-star mu mu anomaly, and that LEP-II data cap the new-physics ...

Show 6 more citing papers

Connection of $g-2_{\mu}$, electroweak, dark matter, and collider constraints on 331 models
hep-ph 2014-08 conditional novelty 4.5 of 10

Of six 331 models, only the two-Higgs-triplet version can accommodate the muon g-2 anomaly while surviving collider and dark matter bounds; the others are excluded as explanations.
Z' models for the LHCb and g-2 muon anomalies
hep-ph 2015-11 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

Di-muon resonance data, the B_s mass difference, and perturbativity force Z-prime explanations of the LHCb B anomalies to a Z-prime heavier than about 2.5 TeV or to suppressed couplings, while a Z-prime plus vector-li...
Dirac-Fermionic Dark Matter in $U(1)_X$ Models
hep-ph 2015-06 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

For four anomaly-free U(1)_X extensions with a Dirac fermion dark matter candidate, the combination of LHC dilepton, direct detection, indirect detection, and muon g-2 constraints excludes dark matter below about 1 Te...
Dark Matter Complementarity and the Z$^\prime$ Portal
hep-ph 2015-01 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

Combining LHC dilepton, LUX, XENON100, Fermi and muon g-2 limits excludes Z-prime dark matter mediators lighter than about 2.1 TeV when the Z-prime couples to ordinary fermions at least half as strongly as the Standar...
The Dark Z' Portal: Direct, Indirect and Collider Searches
hep-ph 2013-12 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

Combining LHC dijet and monojet searches with LUX, XENON100 and Fermi-LAT limits, the authors map the surviving parameter space of a leptophobic Z-prime dark matter portal and find that only heavy mediators or quark c...
The Waning of the WIMP? A Review of Models, Searches, and Constraints
hep-ph 2017-03 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

A broad review finds that most minimal WIMP models with spin-independent scattering are already excluded or will be probed by next-generation detectors, leaving only special cases.

How the literature uses it

44 arXiv papers cite this in 65 sentences

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

Papers citing it · 46 sentences without a confident label

Compares with it 4 papers

As we can see, the LUX constraints on elastic WIMP-nucleon scattering cross section along with the correct relic density observed by Planck are able to establish a lower bound on $Z^'$ mass, $m_Z^' ≳2400$ GeV, compatible with a model independent analysis performed in Ref. [ref] , as well as a particular 331 model with left handed neutrinos in the leptonic triplet [ref] .

Higgs mass and right-handed sneutrino WIMP in a supersymmetric 3-3-1 model · Direct Detection · 0.97
These limits represent significant improvement compared to previous bounds on $Z^'$ from 331 Models [ref] .

Limits on 331 vector bosons from LHC proton collision data · Limits on $Z^'_331$ · 0.98
From these results we see that $M_Z^''>M_Z^' >M_Z$, recovering the $Z^'$ of the $331_RHN$ [ref] model, and the $Z$ boson reproduces the well established massive neutral gauge boson of SM.

A compact 341 model at TeV scale · Gauge bosons mass spectrum · 0.93

Cites it as support 2 papers

This model is also consistent with all electroweak bounds, while offering plausible explanations to many open problems in particle physics, such as dark matter [ref] and the number of particle generations [ref] .

A 331 WIMPy Dark Radiation Model · INTRODUCTION · 0.96
The mixing of $N_1$ and charged leptons has a negligible effect on the DM phenomenology [ref] .

Dark Matter as a Source for Lepton Flavor Violation · Dark Matter · 0.96

Cites it as background 13 papers

A new massive and neutral $$ is an interesting feature of the low-energy limit of many extensions to the SM possessing a viable DM candidate [ref] .

Dirac-Fermionic Dark Matter in $U(1)_X$ Models · Dark Matter Phenomenology · 0.86
Typically, in dark matter models the same couplings govern the relic density and the scattering cross section [ref] .

The Semi-Hooperon: Gamma-ray and anti-proton excesses in the Galactic Center · Annihilations · 0.89
331 models [ref] are electroweak gauge extensions of the Standard Model (SM) which might address many questions left out by SM such as the charged quantization [ref] , the number of fermions generations [ref] , neutrinos oscillations, the Galactic Center gamma-ray excess [ref] as well as obey the direct detection bounds coming from the XENON100 and LUX experiments [ref] , the dark radiation [ref] observed by Planck [ref] among others.

Flavor Changing Neutral Current Processes in a Reduced Minimal Scalar Sector · Introduction · 0.98

What it cites · 32 sentences without a confident label

Uses the method or tool of 1 paper

Our results were obtained numerically using the micrOMEGAs package [ref] and we let all coupling constants free to vary randomly.

micrOMEGAs3.1 : a program for calculating dark matter observables · Direct Detection and bounds on the $Z^'$ · 1.00

Uses data or values from 3 papers

The red region is excluded by LUX 2013 limits [ref] .

First results from the LUX dark matter experiment at the Sanford Underground Research Facility · Direct Detection and bounds on the $Z^'$ · 0.85
In particular, a recent and restrictive limit was found on the mass of the $Z^'$ boson for the 3-3-1 model with right handed neutrinos using CMS data [ref] , namely, $M_Z^' > 2.2$ TeV.

Bounds on $Z^\prime$ from 3-3-1 model at the LHC energies · Mass Eigenstates · 0.84
Assuming SM couplings with fermions, restrictive bounds were derived on the mass of the $W^'$, namely $M_W^' > 2.55$ TeV at $95%$ C.L [ref] .

ATLAS search for a heavy gauge boson decaying to a charged lepton and a neutrino in pp collisions at sqrt(s) = 7 TeV · Gauge Bosons · 0.92

Compares with 4 papers

Moreover, these limits are complementary to other limits coming from colliders [ref] , Flavor Changing Neutral Current processes [ref] , electroweak corrections to the S,T,U parameters [ref] , and from muon decay [ref] .

Heavy quark signals from radiative corrections to the $Z^{\prime}$ boson decay in 3-3-1 models · Direct Detection and bounds on the $Z^'$ · 0.81
Moreover, these limits are complementary to other limits coming from colliders [ref] , Flavor Changing Neutral Current processes [ref] , electroweak corrections to the S,T,U parameters [ref] , and from muon decay [ref] .

FCNC in the 3-3-1 model with right-handed neutrinos · Direct Detection and bounds on the $Z^'$ · 0.81
Moreover, these limits are complementary to other limits coming from colliders [ref] , Flavor Changing Neutral Current processes [ref] , electroweak corrections to the S,T,U parameters [ref] , and from muon decay [ref] .

Bounds on $Z^\prime$ from 3-3-1 model at the LHC energies · Direct Detection and bounds on the $Z^'$ · 0.81

Cites as background 14 papers

A variety limits have been placed on the mass of this boson and they come from different sources [ref] and from different models.

FCNC in the 3-3-1 model with right-handed neutrinos · Mass Eigenstates · 0.94
A variety limits have been placed on the mass of this boson and they come from different sources [ref] and from different models.

Heavy quark signals from radiative corrections to the $Z^{\prime}$ boson decay in 3-3-1 models · Mass Eigenstates · 0.94
The phenomenological aspects associated with the five gauge bosons in the model have been thoroughly explored in Ref. [ref] , to which we refer the interested Reader.

Vector- and Scalar-Bilepton Pair Production in Hadron Colliders · Gauge Bosons · 1.00

Discussion

Disagree with the review, or know something it missed? Leave a comment, highlight any passage above to comment on it, or challenge this review formally.

[1] [1]

T. Han, Z. Liu, A. Natarajan, [arXiv:1303.3040]; Andrew Fowlie, Kamila Kowalska, Leszek Roszkowski, Enrico Maria Sessolo, Yue-Lin Sming Tsai,[arXiv:1306.1567]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[2] [2]

Ernest Ma, Phys.Rev. D85 (2012) 091701, [arXiv:1202.5828]; Wan-Lei Guo, Yue-Liang Wu, Yu-Feng Zhou, Int.J.Mod.Phys. D20 (2011) 1389-1397

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012

[3] [3]

G. Belanger (Annecy, LAPTH), M. Kakizaki, A. Pukhov,JCAP 1102 (2011) 009, [arXiv:1012.2577]; Ken Hsieh, R.N. Mohap- atra, Salah Nasri (Maryland U.),Phys.Rev. D74 (2006) 066004, [hep-ph/0604154]; D. Hooper and S. Profumo, Phys. Rept.453, 29 (2007) [hep-ph/0701197]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2011

[4] [4]

For a recent update on UED, see also: J. M. Cornell, S. Profumo and W. Shepherd, arXiv:1401.7050 [hep-ph]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[5] [5]

Travis A. W. Martin, Alejandro de la Puente, arXiv:1304.7835; Maxim Perelstein, Andrew Spray, Phys.Rev. D75 (2007) 083519,[hep-ph/0610357]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2007

[6] [6]

C. A. de S. Pires, P. S. Rodrigues da Silva, JCAP 0712:012 (2007)

View on Pith 2007

[7] [7]

J.K. Mizukoshi, C.A. de S.Pires, F.S. Queiroz, P.S. Rodrigues da Silva, Phys.Rev. D83 (2011) 065024,[arXiv:1010.4097]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2011

[8] [8]

J.D. Ruiz-Alvarez, C.A. de S.Pires, F. S. Queiroz, D. Restrepo, P.S.Rodrigues da Silva ,Phys.Rev. D86 (2012) 075011,[arXiv:1206.5779]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012

[9] [9]

C. Kelso, C. A. de S. Pires, S. Profumo, F. S. Queiroz, P. S. Rodrigues da Silva, [arXiv:1308.6630]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[10] [10]

C.A. de S.Pires, F.S. Queiroz, P.S. Rodrigues da Silva (Paraiba U.),Phys.Rev. D82 (2010) 105014,[arXiv:1002.4601]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2010

[11] [11]

A. Alves, F. de Campos, M. Dias and J. M. Hoff da Silva, arXiv:1401.1127 [hep-ph]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[12] [12]

F. Pisano and V . Pleitez, Phys. Rev. D46,(1992) 410,[hep- ph/9206242]; P. H. Frampton, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69,(1992) 2889; F. Queiroz, C.A. de S.Pires, P.S.Rodrigues da Silva, Phys.Rev. D82 (2010) 065018 , [arXiv:1003.1270]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1992

[13] [13]

Alex G. Dias (Sao Paulo U.), C. A. de S. Pires (Paraiba U.), P. S. Rodrigues da Silva, Phys.Rev. D68 (2003) 115009, [hep- ph/0309058]; Phung Van Dong, Hoang Ngoc Long (Hanoi, Inst. Phys.), Dang Van Soa, Phys.Rev. D73 (2006) 075005, [hep- ph/0603108]

View on Pith 2003

[14] [14]

J.G. Ferreira, Jr, P.R.D. Pinheiro, C.A.de S. Pires, P.S.Rodrigues da Silva, Phys.Rev. D84 (2011) 095019, [arXiv:1109.0031]; W. Caetano, C. A. de S. Pires, P. S. Rodrigues da Silva, D. Cogollo, F. S. Queiroz, Eur. Phys. J. C (2013) 73:2607, [arXiv:1305.7246]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2011

[15] [15]

J.C. Montero, C.A. De S. Pires, V . Pleitez, Phys.Rev. D65 (2002) 095001,[hep-ph/0112246]; J.C. Montero, C.A. de S.Pires, V . Pleitez, Phys.Lett. B502 (2001) 167-170,[hep- ph/0011296]; D. Cogollo, H. Diniz, C.A. de S.Pires, Phys.Lett. B687 (2010) 400-404,[arXiv:1002.1944]; F. Queiroz, C.A. de S.Pires, P.S.Rodrigues da Silva, Phys.Rev. D82 (2010) 065018,[a...

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002

[16] [16]

P.V . Dong, D.T. Huong, M.C. Rodriguez, Hoang Ngoc Long, Nucl.Phys. B772 (2007) 150-174, [hep-ph/0701137]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2007

[17] [17]

Hoang Ngoc Long, Adv.Stud.Theor.Phys. 4 (2010) 173-196, [arXiv:0710.5833]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2010

[18] [18]

A. Doff, A.A. Natale, [arXiv:1303.3974];A. Doff, A.A. Natale, Int.J.Mod.Phys. A27 (2012) 1250156,[arXiv:1210.3390]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012

[19] [19]

P. V . Dong, H. T. Hung, T. D. Tham, Phys. Rev. D 87, 115003 (2013), [arXiv:1305.0369]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013

[20] [20]

D. T. Huong, C. S. Kim,H. N. Long, N. T. Thuy, [arxiv:1110.1482]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[21] [21]

E. Ramirez Barreto, Y .A. Coutinho, J. Sa Borges, Phys.Lett. B689 (2010) 36-41,[arXiv:1004.3269]; E. Ramirez Barreto, Yara Do Amaral Coutinho, J. Sa Borges, Eur.Phys.J. C50 (2007) 909-917, [hep-ph/0703099]; E. Ramirez Barreto, Yara Do Amaral Coutinho, J. Sa Borges, [hep-ph/0605098]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2010

[22] [22]

Y .A. Coutinho, V . Salustino Guimares, A.A. Nepomuceno, [arXiv:1304.7907]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[23] [23]

Hoang Ngoc Long, V o Thanh Van, J.Phys. G25 (1999) 2319- 2324, [hep-ph/9909302]; D. Gomez Dumm, F. Pisano, V . Pleitez, Mod.Phys.Lett. A9 (1994) 1609-1615; James T. Liu, Phys.Rev. D50 (1994) 542-547, [ hep-ph/9312312];Jairo Alexis Rodriguez, Marc Sher, Phys.Rev. D70 (2004) 117702, [hep- ph/0407248]; Richard H. Benavides, Yithsbey Giraldo, William A. Ponce...

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999

[24] [24]

J. T. Liu and D. Ng, Z.Phys. C62 (1994) 693-700, [hep- ph/9302271]; K. sasaki, Phys. Lett. B 308, (1993), 297; R. Martinez and F. Ochoa, Phys.Rev. D 80 (2009) 075020, [arXiv:0909.1121]; P. H. Frampton and M. Harada, Phys. ReV . D58, 095013 (1998); D. Chang and H. N. Long, Phys. Rev. D 73, (2006) 053006

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1994

[25] [25]

D. Ng, Phys. Rev. D. 49 (1994) 4805 [hep-ph/9212284]; David L. Anderson, Marc Sher, Phys.Rev. D72 (2005) 095014, [hep- ph/0509200]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1994

[26] [26]

C. Kelso, P. R. D. Pinheiro, F. S. Queiroz and W. Shep- herd, Eur. Phys. J. C 74, 2808 (2014) [arXiv:1312.0051 [hep- ph]]; A. Alves, S. Profumo and F. S. Queiroz, JHEP 1404, 063 (2014) [arXiv:1312.5281 [hep-ph]]; G. Arcadi, Y . Mam- brini, M. H. G. Tytgat and B. Zaldivar, JHEP 1403, 134 (2014) [arXiv:1401.0221 [hep-ph]]; C. Kelso, P. R. D. Pin- heiro, F. ...

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014

[27] [27]

Alex G. Dias, R. Martinez, V . Pleitez, Eur.Phys.J. C39 (2005) 101-107, [hep-ph/0407141]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2005

[28] [28]

J. Sa Borges, Y .A. Coutinho, E.R. Barreto, AIP Conf.Proc. 1520 (2012) 440-442; E. Ramirez Barreto, Y .A. Coutinho, J. Sa Borges,Phys.Rev. D83 (2011) 075001, [arXiv:1103.1267]; E. Ramirez Barreto (ABC Federal U.), Y .A. Coutinho, J. Sa Borges, Phys.Lett. B689 (2010) 36-41, [arXiv:1004.3269]; E. Ramirez Barreto, Y .A. Coutinho, J. Sa Borges, Braz.J.Phys. 3...

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012

[29] [29]

ATLAS Collaboration, Phys.Lett.B 705 (2011) 28-46, [arXiv:1108.1316]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2011

[30] [30]

ATLAS Collaboration, Eur. Phys. J. C (2012) 72: 2241, [arXiv:1209.4446]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012

[31] [31]

Alex G. Dias, C. A. de S. Pires, P. S. Rodrigues da Silva, Phys.Lett. B628 (2005) 85-92, [arXiv:hep-ph/0508186]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2005

[32] [32]

G. Belanger, F. Boudjema, A. Pukhov, A. Semenov, [arXiv:1305.0237]; G. Belanger, F. Boudjema, P. Brun, A. Pukhov, S. Rosier-Lees, P. Salati, A. Se- menov, Comput.Phys.Commun.182:842-856 (2011), [arXiv:1004.1092]; G. Belanger, F. Boudjema, A. Pukhov, A. Semenov, Comput.Phys.Commun.180:747-767 (2009), [arXiv:0803.2360]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2011

[33] [33]

A. Bottino, F. Donato, N. Fornengo, S. Scopel, Astropart.Phys.18:205-211,2002, [hep-ph/0111229]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002

[34] [34]

T. P. Cheng, Phys. Rev.D38 (1988) 2869

View on Pith 1988

[35] [35]

LUX Collaboration, [arXiv:1310.8214]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[36] [36]

XENON Collaboration, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 181301 (2012), [arXiv:1207.5988]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012

[37] [37]

Rafael Lang, KITP Conference: Identifying and Char- acterizing Dark Matter via Multiple Probes, http : //online.kitp.ucsb.edu/online/dmatter c13/

View on Pith