REVIEW 1 cited by
New cosmological bounds on hot relics: Axions $\&$ Neutrinos
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
abstract
Axions, if realized in nature, can be copiously produced in the early universe via thermal processes, contributing to the mass-energy density of thermal hot relics. In light of the most recent cosmological observations, we analyze two different thermal processes within a realistic mixed hot-dark-matter scenario which includes also massive neutrinos. Considering the axion-gluon thermalization channel we derive our most constraining bounds on the hot relic masses $m_a < 7.46$ eV and $\sum m_\nu< 0.114$ eV both at 95 per cent CL; while studying the axion-pion scattering, without assuming any specific model for the axion-pion interactions and remaining in the range of validity of the chiral perturbation theory, our most constraining bounds are improved to $m_a<0.91$ eV and $\sum m_\nu< 0.105$ eV, both at 95 per cent CL. Interestingly, in both cases, the total neutrino mass lies very close to the inverted neutrino mass ordering prediction. If future terrestrial double beta decay and/or long baseline neutrino experiments find that the nature mass ordering is the inverted one, this could rule out a wide region in the currently allowed thermal axion window. Our results therefore strongly support multi-messenger searches of axions and neutrino properties, together with joint analyses of their expected sensitivities.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Using $\Delta N_{\rm eff}$ to constrain preferred axion model dark matter
In preferred axion models with slow heavy-quark decays, axions produced after decoupling form dark radiation that can exceed Planck's ΔNeff bound, excluding much of the parameter space of models D and E.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.