Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 6 cited by

Probing Supernova Neutrino Boosted Dark Matter with Collective Excitation

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper argues that neutrinos from galactic core-collapse supernovae boost light dark matter to MeV-scale energies, and that the resulting plasmon excitation in silicon detectors gives SENSEI and DAMIC-M exclusion limits on dark…

desk verdict A clean, genuinely new calculation combining Galactic SN neutrino-boosted DM with plasmon-enhanced silicon detection, but the size of the claimed improvement rests on an imported finite-Q dielectric function that the paper does not validate. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.07591 v2 pith:QFCRNGCN submitted 2025-01-09 hep-ph

Jun-Wei Sun , Lei Wu , Yan-Hao Xu , Bin Zhu This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-ph
keywords supernovaneutrinoboosteddarkmatterplasmonexcitationsub-MeVsemiconductordetectorssiliconskipper-CCDmatter-electronscatteringlightmediatorgalacticneutrinos
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper proposes that neutrinos from galactic core-collapse supernovae can boost light dark matter particles to MeV-scale kinetic energies, and that these boosted particles can be detected in silicon skipper-CCD experiments through the collective excitation of plasmons rather than through single-electron recoils. It constructs an analytic, position-dependent galactic supernova neutrino flux, computes the boosted dark matter flux at Earth, and folds it into the dielectric response of silicon to derive exclusion limits on the dark matter–electron scattering cross section. Using SENSEI and DAMIC-M data, the paper finds limits roughly three to four orders of magnitude more stringent than Super-Kamiokande for dark matter masses between 1 keV and 1 MeV, reaching cross sections near $10^{-37}$ cm$^2$ for couplings $g_\nu=g_\chi=0.005$ with a light mediator. If correct, this would make compact semiconductor detectors a leading tool for sub-MeV dark matter searches without requiring new experimental infrastructure.

What carries the argument

The central object is the dielectric energy-loss function $\mathrm{Im}[-1/\epsilon(Q, E_e)]$ of silicon, whose plasmon resonance at $E_e \sim 15$–20 eV amplifies the dark matter–electron scattering rate by orders of magnitude relative to elastic scattering on free electrons. It enters the event rate through Eq. (15), the differential cross section expressed in terms of a reference cross section $\bar\sigma_{\chi e}$ and a dark matter form factor $F_{\rm DM}(Q)^2$, which takes the light-mediator form $(\alpha m_e/Q)^4$. On the astrophysical side, the companion machinery is the position-dependent factor $K(\boldsymbol\ell)$ from Eq. (18), integrated over the line of sight to give the effective distance $D_{\rm eff} = 10.7$ kpc, which converts the galactic supernova neutrino flux into the boosted dark matter flux at Earth. The pinched Fermi–Dirac neutrino spectrum in Eq. (4), with parameters from Table I, supplies the neutrino energies that drive the boost.

What would settle it

A ballistic simulation of supernova-neutrino-boosted dark matter arrival times that shows the sub-MeV flux arriving in bursts shorter than a detector exposure would break the steady-flux ansatz. Equivalently, an independent many-body calculation of silicon's loss function with no plasmon peak at $E_e \sim 15$–20 eV would eliminate the claimed enhancement and bring the SENSEI and DAMIC-M limits back in line with Super-Kamiokande.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's central discovery is that the exponential falloff of the supernova neutrino spectrum above roughly 10 MeV, combined with the plasmon resonance in silicon's energy loss function at electron energies of about 15 to 20 eV, turns semiconductor detectors into the most sensitive probes of supernova-neutrino-boosted dark matter. Concretely, the paper shows that with a light $Z'$ mediator and $g_\nu = g_\chi = 0.005$, the SENSEI exposure of 534.89 g·day and the DAMIC-M SR2 exposure exclude the dark matter–electron cross section $\bar\sigma_{\chi e}$ down to about $10^{-37}$ cm$^2$ for $m_\chi$ between 1 keV and 1 MeV, three to four orders of magnitude below the Super-Kamiokande bound of roughly $10^{-33}$ cm$^2$. The enhanced sensitivity comes from the event rate peaking at 3 to 6 electron-hole pairs, where SENSEI and DAMIC-M have low backgrounds, while the supernova-neutrino-boosted dark matter flux above Super-Kamiokande's 3.49 MeV threshold is exponentially suppressed. The paper also derives the full angular structure of the galactic flux, finding a factor-of-eight enhancement toward the Galactic Center and an effective distance $D_{\rm eff} = 10.7$ kpc that corrects the previously assumed 16.4 kpc.

Load-bearing premise

The whole limit rests on treating the galactic supernova rate as a steady, time-averaged source of boosted dark matter, which holds only if the low-energy part of the flux arrives at Earth spread over more than roughly a century.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • SENSEI and DAMIC-M data, analysed through the plasmon channel, exclude dark matter–electron cross sections down to about $10^{-37}$ cm$^2$ for $m_\chi$ between 1 keV and 1 MeV with a light mediator, a reach three to four orders beyond Super-Kamiokande.
  • The plasmon channel is essentially a low-energy probe: signals peak at 3 to 6 electron-hole pairs, so skipper-CCD experiments with single-electron sensitivity are the natural discovery instruments for supernova-neutrino-boosted dark matter.
  • The galactic supernova distribution matters quantitatively: full line-of-sight integration gives $D_{\rm eff} = 10.7$ kpc instead of 16.4 kpc, a 1.6-fold correction, and boosts the boosted dark matter flux toward the Galactic Center by about a factor of eight.
  • Because the supernova-neutrino-boosted dark matter flux scales as $1/m_\chi^2$ and the event rate as $1/m_\chi^3$, the sensitivity is strongest for the lightest dark matter in the 1 keV to 1 MeV window.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the steady-flux assumption were replaced by a burst-like arrival model, the effective exposure for each detector would shrink to the burst duration, likely loosening the limits; a detailed ballistic propagation study of the keV-scale flux would settle this.
  • The same dielectric-function formalism should apply to other collective excitations, such as phonons or magnons, and to other targets, so supernova-neutrino-boosted dark matter might yield comparable enhancements in germanium, diamond, or polar materials—an extension the paper does not work out.
  • The light-mediator requirement means the three-to-four-order gain disappears for heavy mediators; a reader should not extrapolate the bounds to models with $m_{Z'} \gg Q$.
  • The predicted anisotropic flux, peaked toward the Galactic Center, could be used as a directional signature to distinguish supernova-neutrino-boosted dark matter from backgrounds in future detectors with angular or diurnal sensitivity.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies light dark matter that is boosted by neutrinos from core-collapse supernovae in the Milky Way. It constructs a position-dependent, time-averaged supernova neutrino flux using a spatial distribution of supernova sources, computes the resulting boosted dark matter flux, and derives exclusion limits on the dark-matter-electron reference cross section sigma_bar_chi_e for SENSEI, DAMIC-M, Super-Kamiokande-IV, and XENON1T, in a leptophilic Z' model with a light mediator. The central result is that, for dark matter masses between about 1 keV and 1 MeV, the plasmon-enhanced event rate in silicon makes the SENSEI and DAMIC-M limits three to four orders of magnitude stronger than the Super-K bound.

Significance. If the result holds, the paper identifies a promising detection channel for sub-MeV dark matter: collective excitations in semiconductor detectors from supernova-neutrino-boosted dark matter. The paper is self-contained in its analytic treatment of the neutrino flux and boosted dark matter flux, and it improves on earlier point-source treatments by including the Galactic supernova spatial distribution; the authors show explicitly how this changes the effective distance factor D_eff from 16.4 kpc to 10.7 kpc. The numerical significance is conditional, however, because the claimed three-to-four-order enhancement is driven by the imported dielectric response function of silicon and by a SENSEI statistical treatment that is only sketched in the text.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 4, Eq. (25) and the integration ranges stated after Eq. (29)] The central numerical claim rests entirely on the finite-momentum energy-loss function Im[-1/epsilon(Q,E_e)], imported from Ref. [80] without being displayed, derived, or validated in this manuscript. The claimed three-to-four-order improvement over Super-K comes from the plasmon peak, and silicon plasmons enter the Landau-damped single-particle continuum for Q around 1-2 keV, which lies inside the stated integration range Q in [1.2 eV, 5 keV]. If the adopted model retains too much undamped plasmon weight at those momenta, the rates and exclusion limits are inflated. The authors should provide the Q and energy dependence of the adopted energy-loss function, show the contribution to the event rate from different Q bins, and either justify the extrapolation to Q around 5 keV or restrict the integration to momenta where the response function is validated by independent calculation or measurement.
  2. [Section 5, Eqs. (29)-(30) and Fig. 5] The SENSEI limit is not reproducible from the information given. The text says that a likelihood analysis is used and the Fig. 5 caption refers to four observed events with Q greater than or equal to 3, but the paper does not provide the likelihood function, the background model, or the per-electron-hole-pair effective exposures G_ne that enter Eq. (30). For an exposure of 534.89 g.day and an observed event count at the few-event level, the resulting upper limit on sigma_bar_chi_e depends strongly on the assumed background. The authors should specify the observed counts, the background expectations, and the exact statistical procedure (or provide the published likelihood from Ref. [82]) used to draw the red exclusion region.
  3. [Section 4, discussion near Eq. (24)] The steady-state treatment of the supernova-neutrino-boosted dark matter flux assumes that the arrival-time spread of the boosted particles is much longer than the detector exposure. The manuscript's justification is qualitative: it states that the duration must exceed about 100 years and that it is proportional to m_chi and inversely proportional to the dark matter kinetic energy, so that keV-scale dark matter can satisfy the requirement. No quantitative arrival-time calculation is presented for the m_chi and T_chi ranges that actually contribute to the plasmon signal. This is load-bearing because Eq. (24) uses the time-averaged galactic supernova rate; if the relevant low-T_chi component arrives on shorter timescales, the expected event rate is overestimated. The authors should provide a quantitative estimate of the arrival duration for the relevant phase space and confirm that the time-averaged flux is valid.
  4. [Section 5, Eqs. (31)-(33) and the Super-K comparison] The Super-K analysis uses b = N_obs = 70092 with a global efficiency epsilon = 0.5, but the quoted 70,092 events are the measured solar-neutrino data and already include a specific background model. The paper should clarify whether b = N_obs is intended as a background-only hypothesis and state explicitly that this produces a conservative upper limit. Without this clarification, the statistical comparison between the Super-K bound and the SENSEI/DAMIC-M bounds is not described on equal footing, even though the overall conclusion may not change.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 4, below Eq. (19)] In the sentence defining the local neutrino flux, d_phi_loc_chi/dE_nu should read d_phi_loc_nu/dE_nu.
  2. [Section 3, after Eq. (11)] There is a typo: 'electron enery' should be 'electron energy'.
  3. [Section 4, Eq. (25) and Eqs. (16)-(17)] The mediator mass is denoted m_Z' in Eqs. (16)-(17) but m_A' in Eq. (25); please use one consistent notation.
  4. [Section 5, after Eq. (29)] The text says that the integrals range 'from a minimum value to infinity,' but the numerical evaluation uses the stated finite ranges omega in [1.11 eV, 50 eV] and Q in [1.2 eV, 5 keV]. Please clarify how the quoted integration limits are combined with the kinematic limits in Eq. (26).

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Headline enhancement is inherited from same-author prior work [80] via an unvalidated self-citation; the SNνBDM flux calculation itself is independent.

  1. self citation load bearing [BENCHMARK MODEL, after Eq. (17)]
    "According to Ref. [80], the plasmon enhancement is only significant in the light mediator scenario; therefore, we consider only the light mediator throughout this paper."

    The central numerical result—semiconductor limits on σ̄_χe some 3–4 orders stronger than Super-K (Fig. 5)—is computed only in the light-mediator scenario. The sole justification for choosing that scenario is this sentence, which cites Ref. [80] (Liang, Su, Wu, Zhu), a paper sharing authors L. Wu and B. Zhu with the present work. The Q-dependent energy-loss function Im[−1/ε(Q,Ee)] that produces the plasmon peak is imported from that same prior work and is not re-derived or independently validated here; the paper additionally refers to [80] for the XENON1T limit. The headline enhancement is therefore presupposed through a same-author citation rather than derived within this manuscript, although the galactic-SN flux treatment in Eqs. (1)–(24) is an independent calculation.

full rationale

No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no equation is circular by construction: the neutrino flux (Eq. 1), the boosted-DM flux (Eq. 24), and the detector rates (Eqs. 25–33) are computed from astrophysical inputs, standard matrix elements, and experimental exposures/event counts from SENSEI, DAMIC-M, and Super-K. The only circularity-adjacent element is the load-bearing self-citation of Ref. [80] for the statement that plasmon enhancement occurs only in the light-mediator scenario and for the underlying dielectric energy-loss function. Because the galactic-supernova spatial-average calculation and the resulting flux are independent content, the score is 4 rather than higher; the imported plasmon premise is a robustness/correctness concern as much as a circularity concern.

Assumptions & free parameters 8 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on a standard but simplified model of DM interactions and several astrophysical inputs. There are no free parameters fitted to the target data; the cross section is the parameter being constrained. The main phenomenological choices are the SN rate, spectral parameters, the galactic SN distribution, and the mediator mass, which are all taken from published references. The one parameter that is tuned to the phenomenon is the light mediator mass, which is set to maximize the plasmon effect. This is a model choice, not a circular derivation. The 'predicted' signal rate is computed from the flux and cross section, then compared to data to set limits, which is a legitimate use.

free parameters (8)
  • galactic CC SN rate = 2.3e-2 /yr
    Taken from Ref. [88]; no uncertainty is propagated in the flux or limits.
  • SN neutrino spectral parameters = E_tot: 6e52, 4.3e52, 2e52 erg; <E>: 13.3, 14.6, 16 MeV; alpha: 3.0, 3.3, 3.0
    From Table I, taken from Ref. [91]. These shape the high-energy tail that determines the boosted DM flux above detector thresholds.
  • SN spatial distribution parameters = R_d = 2.9 kpc, z_H = 95 pc
    From Ref. [89]; the double-exponential distribution affects Deff and the flux normalization.
  • NFW profile parameters = Rs = 20 kpc, R_sun = 8.5 kpc, rho_loc = 0.43 GeV/cm^3
    Standard values; the local density normalization directly scales the boosted DM flux.
  • Benchmark couplings = g_nu = g_chi = g_e = 0.005
    Chosen to produce visible fluxes in Fig. 3; the limits are for these couplings but the cross section is parameterized independently.
  • line-of-sight cutoff = 30 kpc
    Truncated l.o.s. integration; authors say it converges, but this choice introduces a small systematic.
  • Super-K signal efficiency = 0.5
    Assumed conservative value; the true efficiency is 0.5-0.75, which shifts the limit.
  • Background assumption for SENSEI = not fully specified
    The paper says 'a low background event rate' and uses 4 events with Q>=3, but does not detail the background model for the Poisson limit.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption SN neutrino flux is described by pinched Fermi-Dirac spectrum (Eq. 4)
    Standard astrophysical approximation, but different SN models yield different high-energy tails which matter for the boosted DM flux.
  • domain assumption Time-averaged steady-state DM flux from many SNe arriving simultaneously within exposure time
    The paper argues duration >100 years for keV-scale DM; this is a key assumption for using the time-averaged flux.
  • ad hoc to paper Leptophilic Z' mediator model with couplings to nu, e, chi (Eq. 7)
    A simplified model; the paper argues the mediator back-reaction on the neutrino flux can be neglected, and it is not supported by independent evidence.
  • ad hoc to paper Light mediator scenario, m_Z' = 1e-13 GeV, so F_DM ~ (alpha m_e/Q)^4
    Chosen because the light mediator limit is where the plasmon enhancement is significant, per Ref. [80].
  • domain assumption Validity of the dielectric function formalism (Eq. 15) and the energy loss function data for silicon
    The plasmon event rate depends on Im[-1/epsilon(Q,Ee)] from condensed matter physics; the paper uses this standard formalism but does not derive it.
  • domain assumption The electron-hole pair probability P(ne,Ee) from Ref. [124] at T=100K is accurate
    This converts the deposited energy into the observed ionization signal; uncertainties here directly affect the SENSEI/DAMIC-M limits.
invented entities (1)
  • Z' vector mediator
    purpose: Mediates neutrino-DM and DM-electron scattering; leptophilic interaction in Eq. (7)
    The Z' is a simplified model assumption. There is no new particle discovery claim, but the limits apply only within this model. The 'light mediator' case is heavily used but not independently evidenced.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Probing Supernova Neutrino Boosted Dark Matter with Collective Excitation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QFCRNGCN

@misc{pith2026250107591,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Probing Supernova Neutrino Boosted Dark Matter with Collective Excitation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QFCRNGCN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.07591}
}
abstract

We explore the supernova neutrino-boosted dark matter (SN$\nu$BDM) and its direct detection. During core-collapse supernovae, an abundance of neutrinos are emitted. These supernova neutrinos can transfer their kinetic energy to the light dark matter via their interactions, and thus are detected in the neutrino and dark matter experiments. Due to the exponential suppression of the high-energy neutrino flux, the kinetic energy carried by a large portion of SN$\nu$BDM falls within the MeV range. This could potentially produce the collective excitation signals in the semiconductor detectors with the skipper-CCD. We calculate the plasmon excitation rate induced by SN$\nu$BDM and derive the exclusion limits. In contrast with conventional neutrino and dark matter direct detection experiments, our results present a significant enhancement in sensitivity for the sub-MeV dark matter.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.07591 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The neutrino flux images produced by CC SNe [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The Contour of SNνBDM flux dϕχ/dTχdΩ (in units of GeV−1 cm−2 s −1 sr−1 ) with the kinetic energy taken as 1 MeV and mχ = 0.1 MeV. The coupling constants are set to gχ = gν = 0.005 and a light mediator mZ′ = 10−13 GeV is adopted. Red line represents the general result from (19) and the blue dashed shows the specific case from a local neutrino flux obtained by setting ℓ = 0. SNe, which results in Deff = 16.4 kpc. It i… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Comparison of the SNνBDM flux with cosmic ray electron BMD flux after solid angle integration of SNνBDM flux with coupling constant gν = gχ = ge = 0.005. The blue, green and red colors respectively correspond to mχ at 0.01 MeV, 0.1 MeV and 1 MeV. The solid line indicates the SNνBDM flux, and the dashed line indicates the cosmic ray electron boosted dark matter flux. The gray area indicates the region of interest of … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Differential event rate of dark matter and electron scattering after considering the Plasmon-enhanced result. Where [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Upper limit of the DM-electron cross section ¯σ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 6 Pith papers

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

  1. Inelastic Scattering Effects on Attenuation of Boosted Dark Matter

    hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    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.

  2. Dark Matter Heating of Compact Stars Beyond Capture: A Relativistic Framework for Energy Deposition by Particle Beams

    hep-ph 2026-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A new relativistic formalism computes capture and energy deposition of directed particle beams in compact stars, applied to blazar-boosted dark matter heating of white dwarfs and neutron stars.

  3. Constraints on Axion-Like Particles with the Silicon Detector at a Nuclear Reactor

    hep-ph 2026-01 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    New 90% C.L. limits on the ALP–photon coupling in the 0.1–100 keV range are derived from Connie and Atucha-II reactor data via plasmon excitation in silicon; a 30 kg·yr Oscura-style run could improve on NEON by about tenfold.

  4. Direct Detection of Leptophobic Dark Matter with Electronic Collective Excitations

    hep-ph 2025-10 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Leptophobic dark matter can excite plasmons in silicon through hadronic loops, and SENSEI data now constrain its nucleon cross section down to ~1e-31 cm^2 in the sub-MeV mass range.

  5. New Constraints on Neutrino-Dark Matter Interactions: A Comprehensive Analysis

    hep-ph 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Most benchmark neutrino-dark matter couplings adopted in previous studies are excluded when laboratory meson and Z decay bounds are combined with cosmological and astrophysical constraints, leaving only special galact...

  6. Neutrino lines and photon continua from cascade dark matter decay

    hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    In cascade dark-matter decay, neutrino-line searches can beat gamma-ray limits whenever the intermediate mediator is long-lived enough to suppress the photon flux.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

137 extracted references · 7 canonical work pages · cited by 6 Pith papers

  1. [80]

    Liang, L

    Z.-L. Liang, L. Su, L. Wu, and B. Zhu, Plasmon-enhanced Direct Detection of sub-MeV Dark Matter, arXiv:2401.11971

    arXiv

  2. [82]

    Adari et al., SENSEI: First Direct-Detection Results on sub-GeV Dark Matter from SENSEI at SNOLAB , arXiv:2312.13342

    SENSEI Collaboration, P. Adari et al., SENSEI: First Direct-Detection Results on sub-GeV Dark Matter from SENSEI at SNOLAB , arXiv:2312.13342

    arXiv

  3. [1]

    Values of parameters used in (4) for electron neu- trinos νe, anti-electron neutrinos ν¯e, and other neutrinos νx ≡ {νµ, ν¯µ, ντ , ν¯τ }, taken from Ref

    The geometric relationship between cylindrical and ν E ν tot (erg) ⟨Eν⟩ (MeV) α νe 6 × 1052 13.3 3.0 ν¯e 4.3 × 1052 14.6 3.3 νx 2 × 1052 16 3 Table I. Values of parameters used in (4) for electron neu- trinos νe, anti-electron neutrinos ν¯e, and other neutrinos νx ≡ {νµ, ν¯µ, ντ , ν¯τ }, taken from Ref. [91]. spherical coordinates is as follows R = q R2 ⊙...

  4. [2]

    Meng et al., Dark Matter Search Results from the PandaX-4T Commissioning Run, Phys

    PandaX-4T Collaboration, Y. Meng et al., Dark Matter Search Results from the PandaX-4T Commissioning Run, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127 (2021), no. 26 261802, [ arXiv:2107.13438]

    arXiv 2021

  5. [3]

    Wang et al., First experimental constraints on WIMP couplings in the effective field theory framework from CDEX , Sci

    CDEX Collaboration, Y. Wang et al., First experimental constraints on WIMP couplings in the effective field theory framework from CDEX , Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron. 64 (2021), no. 8 281011, [arXiv:2007.15555]

    arXiv 2021

  6. [4]

    Aprile et al., First Dark Matter Search with Nuclear Recoils from the XENONnT Experiment, arXiv:2303.14729

    XENON Collaboration, E. Aprile et al., First Dark Matter Search with Nuclear Recoils from the XENONnT Experiment, arXiv:2303.14729

    arXiv

  7. [5]

    Aalbers et al., First Dark Matter Search Results from the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment, arXiv:2207.03764

    LZ Collaboration, J. Aalbers et al., First Dark Matter Search Results from the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment, arXiv:2207.03764

    arXiv

  8. [6]

    Essig, M

    R. Essig, M. Fernandez-Serra, J. Mardon, A. Soto, T. Volansky, and T.-T. Yu, Direct Detection of sub-GeV Dark Matter with Semiconductor Targets , JHEP 05 (2016) 046, [ arXiv:1509.01598]

    arXiv 2016

Show all 137 references
  1. [7]

    Essig, J

    R. Essig, J. Mardon, and T. Volansky, Direct Detection of Sub-GeV Dark Matter , Phys. Rev. D 85 (2012) 076007, [arXiv:1108.5383]

    2012 arXiv

  2. [8]

    Emken, R

    T. Emken, R. Essig, C. Kouvaris, and M. Sholapurkar, Direct Detection of Strongly Interacting Sub-GeV Dark Matter via Electron Recoils, JCAP 09 (2019) 070, [arXiv:1905.06348]

    2019 arXiv

  3. [9]

    Essig, T

    R. Essig, T. Volansky, and T.-T. Yu, New Constraints and Prospects for sub-GeV Dark Matter Scattering off Electrons in Xenon , Phys. Rev. D 96 (2017), no. 4 043017, [arXiv:1703.00910]

    2017 arXiv

  4. [10]

    Andersson, A

    E. Andersson, A. B¨ okmark, R. Catena, T. Emken, H. K. Moberg, and E. ˚Astrand, Projected sensitivity to sub-GeV dark matter of next-generation semiconductor detectors, JCAP 05 (2020) 036, [ arXiv:2001.08910]

    2020 arXiv

  5. [11]

    Trickle, Z

    T. Trickle, Z. Zhang, and K. M. Zurek, Effective field theory of dark matter direct detection with collective excitations, Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022), no. 1 015001, [arXiv:2009.13534]

    2022 arXiv

  6. [12]

    L. Su, L. Wu, and B. Zhu, Probing for an ultralight dark photon from inverse Compton-like scattering , Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022), no. 5 055021, [arXiv:2105.06326]

    2022 arXiv

  7. [13]

    S. E. Vahsen, C. A. J. O’Hare, and D. Loomba, Directional Recoil Detection, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 71 (2021) 189–224, [ arXiv:2102.04596]

    2021 arXiv

  8. [14]

    G. Elor, R. McGehee, and A. Pierce, Maximizing Direct Detection with Highly Interactive Particle Relic Dark Matter , Phys. Rev. Lett. 130 (2023), no. 3 031803, [arXiv:2112.03920]

    2023 arXiv

  9. [15]

    Catena, T

    R. Catena, T. Emken, M. Matas, N. A. Spaldin, and E. Urdshals, Crystal responses to general dark matter-electron interactions, Phys. Rev. Res. 3 (2021), no. 3 033149, [ arXiv:2105.02233]

    2021 arXiv

  10. [16]

    H.-Y. Chen, A. Mitridate, T. Trickle, Z. Zhang, M. Bernardi, and K. M. Zurek, Dark matter direct detection in materials with spin-orbit coupling , Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022), no. 1 015024, [ arXiv:2202.11716]

    2022 arXiv

  11. [17]

    P. Du, D. Ega˜ na Ugrinovic, R. Essig, and M. Sholapurkar, Doped semiconductor devices for sub-MeV dark matter detection , Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024), no. 5 055009, [ arXiv:2212.04504]

    2024 arXiv

  12. [18]

    L. Su, L. Wu, N. Zhou, and B. Zhu, Accelerated-light-dark-matter–Earth inelastic scattering in direct detection, Phys. Rev. D 108 (2023), no. 3 035004, [arXiv:2212.02286]

    2023 arXiv

  13. [19]

    Catena, D

    R. Catena, D. Cole, T. Emken, M. Matas, N. Spaldin, W. Tarantino, and E. Urdshals, Dark matter-electron interactions in materials beyond the dark photon model, JCAP 03 (2023) 052, [ arXiv:2210.07305]

    2023 arXiv

  14. [20]

    Li and J

    T. Li and J. Liao, Electron-target experiment constraints on light dark matter produced in primordial black hole evaporation , Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022), no. 5 055043, [arXiv:2203.14443]

    2022 arXiv

  15. [21]

    Wang, W.-L

    W. Wang, W.-L. Xu, and J. M. Yang, Direct detection of finite-size dark matter via electron recoil , Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 38 (2023), no. 26n27 2350144, [arXiv:2304.13243]

    2023 arXiv

  16. [22]

    L. Su, L. Wu, and B. Zhu, An improved bound on accelerated light dark matter , Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron. 67 (2024), no. 2 221012, [ arXiv:2308.02204]

    2024 arXiv

  17. [23]

    P. N. Bhattiprolu, R. McGehee, and A. Pierce, A Dark Sink Enhances the Direct Detection of Freeze-in Dark Matter, arXiv:2312.14152

    arXiv

  18. [24]

    Liang, Y

    J.-H. Liang, Y. Liao, X.-D. Ma, and H.-L. Wang, Revisiting general dark matter-bound-electron interactions, Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024), no. 9 L091701, [arXiv:2405.04855]

    2024 arXiv

  19. [25]

    Liang, Y

    J.-H. Liang, Y. Liao, X.-D. Ma, and H.-L. Wang, A systematic investigation on dark matter-electron scattering in effective field theories , JHEP 07 (2024) 279, [arXiv:2406.10912]

    2024 arXiv

  20. [26]

    Knapen, T

    S. Knapen, T. Lin, M. Pyle, and K. M. Zurek, Detection of Light Dark Matter With Optical Phonons in Polar Materials , Phys. Lett. B 785 (2018) 386–390, [arXiv:1712.06598]

    2018 arXiv

  21. [27]

    He, Y.-C

    H.-J. He, Y.-C. Wang, and J. Zheng, Probing light inelastic dark matter from direct detection , Phys. Dark Univ. 46 (2024) 101670, [ arXiv:2403.03128]

    2024 arXiv

  22. [28]

    Mitridate, K

    A. Mitridate, K. Pardo, T. Trickle, and K. M. Zurek, Effective field theory for dark matter absorption on single phonons , Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024), no. 1 015010, [arXiv:2308.06314]

    2024 arXiv

  23. [29]

    Raya-Moreno, B

    M. Raya-Moreno, B. J. Kavanagh, L. Fabrega, and R. Rurali, Phonon dynamics for light dark matter detection, Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024), no. 11 112007, [arXiv:2311.11930]

    2024 arXiv

  24. [30]

    J. Guo, L. Wu, and B. Zhu, Halo-dependent Anharmonic Effects in Collective Excitation for Light Dark Matter Direct Detection , arXiv:2412.18330

    arXiv

  25. [31]

    Y. Kahn, G. Krnjaic, and B. Mandava, Dark Matter Detection with Bound Nuclear Targets: The Poisson Phonon Tail, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127 (2021), no. 8 081804, [arXiv:2011.09477]

    2021 arXiv

  26. [32]

    M. J. Dolan, F. Kahlhoefer, and C. McCabe, Directly detecting sub-GeV dark matter with electrons from nuclear scattering, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121 (2018), no. 10 101801, [arXiv:1711.09906]

    2018 arXiv

  27. [33]

    M. Ibe, W. Nakano, Y. Shoji, and K. Suzuki, Migdal Effect in Dark Matter Direct Detection Experiments , JHEP 03 (2018) 194, [ arXiv:1707.07258]

    2018 arXiv

  28. [34]

    N. F. Bell, J. B. Dent, J. L. Newstead, S. Sabharwal, and T. J. Weiler, Migdal effect and photon bremsstrahlung in effective field theories of dark matter 10 direct detection and coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering, Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020), no. 1 015012, [arXiv:1905.00046]

    2020 arXiv

  29. [35]

    Baxter, Y

    D. Baxter, Y. Kahn, and G. Krnjaic, Electron Ionization via Dark Matter-Electron Scattering and the Migdal Effect, Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020), no. 7 076014, [arXiv:1908.00012]

    2020 arXiv

  30. [36]

    Essig, J

    R. Essig, J. Pradler, M. Sholapurkar, and T.-T. Yu, Relation between the Migdal Effect and Dark Matter-Electron Scattering in Isolated Atoms and Semiconductors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124 (2020), no. 2 021801, [arXiv:1908.10881]

    2020 arXiv

  31. [37]

    Liang, L

    Z.-L. Liang, L. Zhang, F. Zheng, and P. Zhang, Describing Migdal effects in diamond crystal with atom-centered localized Wannier functions, Phys. Rev. D 102 (2020), no. 4 043007, [ arXiv:1912.13484]

    2020 arXiv

  32. [38]

    C. P. Liu, C.-P. Wu, H.-C. Chi, and J.-W. Chen, Model-independent determination of the Migdal effect via photoabsorption, Phys. Rev. D 102 (2020), no. 12 121303, [arXiv:2007.10965]

    2020 arXiv

  33. [39]

    Grilli di Cortona, A

    G. Grilli di Cortona, A. Messina, and S. Piacentini, Migdal effect and photon Bremsstrahlung: improving the sensitivity to light dark matter of liquid argon experiments, JHEP 11 (2020) 034, [arXiv:2006.02453]

    2020 arXiv

  34. [40]

    V. V. Flambaum, L. Su, L. Wu, and B. Zhu, New strong bounds on sub-GeV dark matter from boosted and Migdal effects , Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron. 66 (2023), no. 7 271011, [ arXiv:2012.09751]

    2023 arXiv

  35. [41]

    Liang, C

    Z.-L. Liang, C. Mo, F. Zheng, and P. Zhang, Describing the Migdal effect with a bremsstrahlung-like process and many-body effects, Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021), no. 5 056009, [ arXiv:2011.13352]

    2021 arXiv

  36. [42]

    N. F. Bell, J. B. Dent, B. Dutta, S. Ghosh, J. Kumar, and J. L. Newstead, Low-mass inelastic dark matter direct detection via the Migdal effect , Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021), no. 7 076013, [ arXiv:2103.05890]

    2021 arXiv

  37. [43]

    J. F. Acevedo, J. Bramante, and A. Goodman, Accelerating composite dark matter discovery with nuclear recoils and the Migdal effect , Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022), no. 2 023012, [ arXiv:2108.10889]

    2022 arXiv

  38. [44]

    P. Cox, M. J. Dolan, C. McCabe, and H. M. Quiney, Precise predictions and new insights for atomic ionization from the Migdal effect , Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023), no. 3 035032, [ arXiv:2208.12222]

    2023 arXiv

  39. [45]

    N. F. Bell, J. B. Dent, R. F. Lang, J. L. Newstead, and A. C. Ritter, Observing the Migdal effect from nuclear recoils of neutral particles with liquid xenon and argon detectors, Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022), no. 9 096015, [arXiv:2112.08514]

    2022 arXiv

  40. [46]

    Bringmann and M

    T. Bringmann and M. Pospelov, Novel direct detection constraints on light dark matter , Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 (2019), no. 17 171801, [ arXiv:1810.10543]

    2019 arXiv

  41. [47]

    J. Li, L. Su, L. Wu, and B. Zhu, Spin-dependent sub-GeV inelastic dark matter-electron scattering and Migdal effect. Part I. Velocity independent operator , JCAP 04 (2023) 020, [ arXiv:2210.15474]

    2023 arXiv

  42. [48]

    C. V. Cappiello, K. C. Y. Ng, and J. F. Beacom, Reverse Direct Detection: Cosmic Ray Scattering With Light Dark Matter , Phys. Rev. D 99 (2019), no. 6 063004, [arXiv:1810.07705]

    2019 arXiv

  43. [49]

    Y. Ema, F. Sala, and R. Sato, Light Dark Matter at Neutrino Experiments, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 (2019), no. 18 181802, [ arXiv:1811.00520]

    2019 arXiv

  44. [50]

    W. Wang, L. Wu, J. M. Yang, H. Zhou, and B. Zhu, Cosmic ray boosted sub-GeV gravitationally interacting dark matter in direct detection , JHEP 12 (2020) 072, [arXiv:1912.09904]. [Erratum: JHEP 02, 052 (2021)]

    2020 arXiv

  45. [51]

    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. D 101 (2020), no. 11 116007, [arXiv:1907.03782]

    2020 arXiv

  46. [52]

    L. Su, W. Wang, L. Wu, J. M. Yang, and B. Zhu, Atmospheric Dark Matter and Xenon1T Excess , Phys. Rev. D 102 (2020), no. 11 115028, [arXiv:2006.11837]

    2020 arXiv

  47. [53]

    Alvey, M

    J. Alvey, M. Campos, M. Fairbairn, and T. You, Detecting Light Dark Matter via Inelastic Cosmic Ray Collisions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123 (2019) 261802, [arXiv:1905.05776]

    2019 arXiv

  48. [54]

    Q.-H. Cao, R. Ding, and Q.-F. Xiang, Searching for sub-MeV boosted dark matter from xenon electron direct detection, Chin. Phys. C 45 (2021), no. 4 045002, [arXiv:2006.12767]

    2021 arXiv

  49. [55]

    S.-F. Ge, J. Liu, Q. Yuan, and N. Zhou, Diurnal Effect of Sub-GeV Dark Matter Boosted by Cosmic Rays , Phys. Rev. Lett. 126 (2021), no. 9 091804, [arXiv:2005.09480]

    2021 arXiv

  50. [56]

    Jho, J.-C

    Y. Jho, J.-C. Park, S. C. Park, and P.-Y. Tseng, Leptonic New Force and Cosmic-ray Boosted Dark Matter for the XENON1T Excess , Phys. Lett. B 811 (2020) 135863, [ arXiv:2006.13910]

    2020 arXiv

  51. [57]

    M. Du, J. Liang, Z. Liu, V. Q. Tran, and Y. Xue, On-shell mediator dark matter models and the Xenon1T excess, Chin. Phys. C 45 (2021), no. 1 013114, [arXiv:2006.11949]

    2021 arXiv

  52. [58]

    Z.-H. Lei, J. Tang, and B.-L. Zhang, Constraints on cosmic-ray boosted dark matter in CDEX-10 * , Chin. Phys. C 46 (2022), no. 8 085103, [ arXiv:2008.07116]

    2022 arXiv

  53. [59]

    I. M. Bloch, A. Caputo, R. Essig, D. Redigolo, M. Sholapurkar, and T. Volansky, Exploring new physics with O(keV) electron recoils in direct detection experiments, JHEP 01 (2021) 178, [arXiv:2006.14521]

    2021 arXiv

  54. [60]

    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. D 103 (2021) 095015, [arXiv:2010.09749]

    2021 arXiv

  55. [61]

    Guo, Y.-L

    G. Guo, Y.-L. S. Tsai, M.-R. Wu, and Q. Yuan, Elastic and Inelastic Scattering of Cosmic-Rays on Sub-GeV Dark Matter , Phys. Rev. D 102 (2020), no. 10 103004, [arXiv:2008.12137]

    2020 arXiv

  56. [62]

    Xia, Y.-H

    C. Xia, Y.-H. Xu, and Y.-F. Zhou, Production and attenuation of cosmic-ray boosted dark matter , JCAP 02 (2022), no. 02 028, [ arXiv:2111.05559]

    2022 arXiv

  57. [63]

    Wang, K.-Y

    W. Wang, K.-Y. Wu, L. Wu, and B. Zhu, Direct detection of spin-dependent sub-GeV dark matter via Migdal effect, Nucl. Phys. B 983 (2022) 115907, [arXiv:2112.06492]

    2022 arXiv

  58. [64]

    J.-W. Wang, A. Granelli, and P. Ullio, Direct Detection Constraints on Blazar-Boosted Dark Matter , Phys. Rev. Lett. 128 (2022), no. 22 221104, [arXiv:2111.13644]

    2022 arXiv

  59. [65]

    N. F. Bell, J. B. Dent, B. Dutta, S. Ghosh, J. Kumar, J. L. Newstead, and I. M. Shoemaker, Cosmic-ray upscattered inelastic dark matter , Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) 076020, [ arXiv:2108.00583]

    2021 arXiv

  60. [66]

    J. Li, J. Pei, and C. Zhang, Investigating the collinear splitting effects of boosted dark matter at neutrino detectors, JHEP 02 (2023) 068, [ arXiv:2209.10816]

    2023 arXiv

  61. [67]

    Feng, X.-W

    J.-C. Feng, X.-W. Kang, C.-T. Lu, Y.-L. S. Tsai, and F.-S. Zhang, Revising inelastic dark matter direct detection by including the cosmic ray acceleration , 11 JHEP 04 (2022) 080, [ arXiv:2110.08863]

    2022 arXiv

  62. [68]

    Xia, C.-Y

    C. Xia, C.-Y. Xing, and Y.-H. Xu, Boosted dark matter from Centaurus A and its detection , JHEP 03 (2024) 076, [arXiv:2401.03772]

    2024 arXiv

  63. [69]

    Bhowmick, D

    S. Bhowmick, D. Ghosh, and D. Sachdeva, Blazar boosted dark matter — direct detection constraints on σeχ: role of energy dependent cross sections , JCAP 07 (2023) 039, [ arXiv:2301.00209]

    2023 arXiv

  64. [70]

    Cappiello, Q

    C. Cappiello, Q. Liu, G. Mohlabeng, and A. C. Vincent, Cosmic Ray-Boosted Dark Matter at IceCube , arXiv:2405.00086

    arXiv

  65. [71]

    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, [ arXiv:2401.07750]

    2024 arXiv

  66. [72]

    Jho, J.-C

    Y. Jho, J.-C. Park, S. C. Park, and P.-Y. Tseng, Cosmic-Neutrino-Boosted Dark Matter ( νBDM), arXiv:2101.11262

    arXiv

  67. [73]

    S.-F. Ge, J. Sheng, C. Xia, and C.-Y. Xing, Nuclear Production and Analytic Attenuation of Energetic MeV Solar Dark Matter , 8, 2024. arXiv:2408.12448

    2024

  68. [74]

    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. D 107 (2023), no. 1 015010, [arXiv:2208.09405]

    2023 arXiv

  69. [75]

    Das and M

    A. Das and M. Sen, Boosted dark matter from diffuse supernova neutrinos, Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021), no. 7 075029, [arXiv:2104.00027]

    2021 arXiv

  70. [76]

    Lin, W.-H

    Y.-H. Lin, W.-H. Wu, M.-R. Wu, and H. T.-K. Wong, Searching for Afterglow: Light Dark Matter Boosted by Supernova Neutrinos, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130 (2023), no. 11 111002, [ arXiv:2206.06864]

    2023 arXiv

  71. [77]

    J. M. Cline, S. Gao, F. Guo, Z. Lin, S. Liu, M. Puel, P. Todd, and T. Xiao, Blazar Constraints on Neutrino-Dark Matter Scattering , Phys. Rev. Lett. 130 (2023), no. 9 091402, [ arXiv:2209.02713]

    2023 arXiv

  72. [78]

    D. K. Ghosh, T. Gupta, M. Heikinheimo, K. Huitu, and S. Jeesun, Boosted Dark Matter Driven by Cosmic Rays and Diffuse Supernova Neutrinos , arXiv:2411.11973

    arXiv

  73. [79]

    Lin, T.-H

    Y.-H. Lin, T.-H. Tsai, G.-L. Lin, H. T.-K. Wong, and M.-R. Wu, Signatures of afterglows from light dark matter boosted by supernova neutrinos in current and future large underground detectors, Phys. Rev. D 108 (2023), no. 8 083013, [ arXiv:2307.03522]

    2023 arXiv

  74. [81]

    Lin and M.-R

    Y.-H. Lin and M.-R. Wu, Supernova-Neutrino-Boosted Dark Matter from All Galaxies , Phys. Rev. Lett. 133 (2024), no. 11 111004, [ arXiv:2404.08528]

    2024 arXiv

  75. [83]

    Essig, R

    R. Essig, R. Plestid, and A. Singal, Collective excitations and low-energy ionization signatures of relativistic particles in silicon detectors , arXiv:2403.00123

    arXiv

  76. [84]

    CDEX Collaboration, Z. Y. Zhang et al., Constraints on Sub-GeV Dark Matter–Electron Scattering from the CDEX-10 Experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129 (2022), no. 22 221301, [ arXiv:2206.04128]

    2022 arXiv

  77. [85]

    Castell´ o-Mor, DAMIC-M Experiment: Thick, Silicon CCDs to search for Light Dark Matter , Nucl

    DAMIC-M Collaboration, N. Castell´ o-Mor, DAMIC-M Experiment: Thick, Silicon CCDs to search for Light Dark Matter , Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 958 (2020) 162933, [ arXiv:2001.01476]

    2020 arXiv

  78. [86]

    SuperCDMS Collaboration, D. W. Amaral et al., Constraints on low-mass, relic dark matter candidates from a surface-operated SuperCDMS single-charge sensitive detector, Phys. Rev. D 102 (2020), no. 9 091101, [arXiv:2005.14067]

    2020 arXiv

  79. [87]

    Arnaud et al., First germanium-based constraints on sub-MeV Dark Matter with the EDEL WEISS experiment, Phys

    EDEL WEISSCollaboration, Q. Arnaud et al., First germanium-based constraints on sub-MeV Dark Matter with the EDEL WEISS experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125 (2020), no. 14 141301, [ arXiv:2003.01046]

    2020 arXiv

  80. [88]

    W. Li, R. Chornock, J. Leaman, A. V. Filippenko, D. Poznanski, X. Wang, M. Ganeshalingam, and F. Mannucci, Nearby supernova rates from the lick observatory supernova search - iii. the rate-size relation, and the rates as a function of galaxy hubble type and colour: Nearby supe...

    2011

  81. [89]

    Abe et al., Solar neutrino measurements using the full data period of Super-Kamiokande-IV, Phys

    Super-Kamiokande Collaboration, K. Abe et al., Solar neutrino measurements using the full data period of Super-Kamiokande-IV, Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024), no. 9 092001, [ arXiv:2312.12907]

    2024

  82. [90]

    M. T. Keil, G. G. Raffelt, and H.-T. Janka, Monte Carlo study of supernova neutrino spectra formation , Astrophys. J. 590 (2003) 971–991, [astro-ph/0208035]

    2003 arXiv

  83. [91]

    S. M. Adams, C. S. Kochanek, J. F. Beacom, M. R. Vagins, and K. Z. Stanek, Observing the Next Galactic Supernova, Astrophys. J. 778 (2013) 164, [arXiv:1306.0559]

    2013 arXiv

  84. [92]

    Bernabei, P

    R. Bernabei, P. Belli, F. Montecchia, F. Nozzoli, F. Cappella, A. Incicchitti, D. Prosperi, R. Cerulli, C. J. Dai, H. L. He, H. H. Kuang, J. M. Ma, X. H. Ma, X. D. Sheng, Z. P. Ye, R. G. Wang, and Y. J. Zhang, Investigating electron interacting dark matter , Phys. Rev. D 77 (J...

    2008

  85. [93]

    Horiuchi, K

    S. Horiuchi, K. Sumiyoshi, K. Nakamura, T. Fischer, A. Summa, T. Takiwaki, H.-T. Janka, and K. Kotake, Diffuse supernova neutrino background from extensive core-collapse simulations of 8-100M⊙ progenitors, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 475 (2018), no. 1 1363–1374, [arXiv:1709.06567]

    2018 arXiv

  86. [94]

    P. J. Fox and E. Poppitz, Leptophilic dark matter , Phys. Rev. D 79 (Apr, 2009) 083528

    2009

  87. [95]

    Falkowski, J

    A. Falkowski, J. Juknevich, and J. Shelton, Dark Matter Through the Neutrino Portal , arXiv:0908.1790

    arXiv

  88. [96]

    Gonzalez Macias and J

    V. Gonzalez Macias and J. Wudka, Effective theories for Dark Matter interactions and the neutrino portal paradigm, JHEP 07 (2015) 161, [ arXiv:1506.03825]

    2015 arXiv

  89. [97]

    Chang, R

    S. Chang, R. Edezhath, J. Hutchinson, and M. Luty, Leptophilic effective wimps , Phys. Rev. D 90 (Jul,

  90. [98]

    Fileviez P´ erez, C

    P. Fileviez P´ erez, C. Murgui, and A. D. Plascencia, Neutrino-Dark Matter Connections in Gauge Theories , 12 Phys. Rev. D 100 (2019), no. 3 035041, [arXiv:1905.06344]

    2019 arXiv

  91. [99]

    Blennow, E

    M. Blennow, E. Fernandez-Martinez, A. Olivares-Del Campo, S. Pascoli, S. Rosauro-Alcaraz, and A. V. Titov, Neutrino Portals to Dark Matter , Eur. Phys. J. C 79 (2019), no. 7 555, [arXiv:1903.00006]

    2019 arXiv

  92. [100]

    Brdar, A

    V. Brdar, A. Greljo, J. Kopp, and T. Opferkuch, The Neutrino Magnetic Moment Portal: Cosmology, Astrophysics, and Direct Detection , JCAP 01 (2021) 039, [arXiv:2007.15563]

    2021 arXiv

  93. [101]

    Magill, R

    G. Magill, R. Plestid, M. Pospelov, and Y.-D. Tsai, Dipole Portal to Heavy Neutral Leptons , Phys. Rev. D 98 (2018), no. 11 115015, [ arXiv:1803.03262]

    2018 arXiv

  94. [102]

    D. F. G. Fiorillo, G. G. Raffelt, and E. Vitagliano, Strong Supernova 1987A Constraints on Bosons Decaying to Neutrinos , Phys. Rev. Lett. 131 (2023), no. 2 021001, [ arXiv:2209.11773]

    2023 arXiv

  95. [103]

    Akita, S

    K. Akita, S. H. Im, and M. Masud, Probing non-standard neutrino interactions with a light boson from next galactic and diffuse supernova neutrinos , JHEP 12 (2022) 050, [ arXiv:2206.06852]

    2022 arXiv

  96. [104]

    Lazar, Y.-Y

    J. Lazar, Y.-Y. Li, C. A. Arguelles, and V. Brdar, Supernovae Time Profiles as a Probe of New Physics at Neutrino Telescopes, arXiv:2403.09781

    arXiv

  97. [105]

    Akita, S

    K. Akita, S. H. Im, M. Masud, and S. Yun, Limits on heavy neutral leptons, Z bosons and majorons from high-energy supernova neutrinos , JHEP 07 (2024) 057, [arXiv:2312.13627]

    2024 arXiv

  98. [106]

    Hochberg, T

    Y. Hochberg, T. Lin, and K. M. Zurek, Absorption of light dark matter in semiconductors , Phys. Rev. D 95 (2017), no. 2 023013, [ arXiv:1608.01994]

    2017 arXiv

  99. [107]

    Hochberg, Y

    Y. Hochberg, Y. Kahn, M. Lisanti, K. M. Zurek, A. G. Grushin, R. Ilan, S. M. Griffin, Z.-F. Liu, S. F. Weber, and J. B. Neaton, Detection of sub-MeV Dark Matter with Three-Dimensional Dirac Materials , Phys. Rev. D 97 (2018), no. 1 015004, [ arXiv:1708.08929]

    2018 arXiv

  100. [108]

    I. M. Bloch, R. Essig, K. Tobioka, T. Volansky, and T.-T. Yu, Searching for Dark Absorption with Direct Detection Experiments, JHEP 06 (2017) 087, [arXiv:1608.02123]

    2017 arXiv

  101. [109]

    Hochberg, Y

    Y. Hochberg, Y. Kahn, M. Lisanti, C. G. Tully, and K. M. Zurek, Directional detection of dark matter with two-dimensional targets, Phys. Lett. B 772 (2017) 239–246, [arXiv:1606.08849]

    2017 arXiv

  102. [110]

    Trickle, Z

    T. Trickle, Z. Zhang, K. M. Zurek, K. Inzani, and S. M. Griffin, Multi-Channel Direct Detection of Light Dark Matter: Theoretical Framework , JHEP 03 (2020) 036, [arXiv:1910.08092]

    2020 arXiv

  103. [111]

    Griffin, S

    S. Griffin, S. Knapen, T. Lin, and K. M. Zurek, Directional Detection of Light Dark Matter with Polar Materials, Phys. Rev. D 98 (2018), no. 11 115034, [arXiv:1807.10291]

    2018 arXiv

  104. [112]

    R. M. Geilhufe, F. Kahlhoefer, and M. W. Winkler, Dirac Materials for Sub-MeV Dark Matter Detection: New Targets and Improved Formalism , Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020), no. 5 055005, [ arXiv:1910.02091]

    2020 arXiv

  105. [113]

    S. M. Griffin, K. Inzani, T. Trickle, Z. Zhang, and K. M. Zurek, Multichannel direct detection of light dark matter: Target comparison , Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020), no. 5 055004, [ arXiv:1910.10716]

    2020 arXiv

  106. [114]

    Coskuner, A

    A. Coskuner, A. Mitridate, A. Olivares, and K. M. Zurek, Directional Dark Matter Detection in Anisotropic Dirac Materials, Phys. Rev. D 103 (2021), no. 1 016006, [ arXiv:1909.09170]

    2021 arXiv

  107. [115]

    S. M. Griffin, Y. Hochberg, K. Inzani, N. Kurinsky, T. Lin, and T. Chin, Silicon carbide detectors for sub-GeV dark matter , Phys. Rev. D 103 (2021), no. 7 075002, [arXiv:2008.08560]

    2021 arXiv

  108. [116]

    Trickle, Z

    T. Trickle, Z. Zhang, and K. M. Zurek, Detecting Light Dark Matter with Magnons , Phys. Rev. Lett. 124 (2020), no. 20 201801, [ arXiv:1905.13744]

    2020 arXiv

  109. [117]

    Cavoto, F

    G. Cavoto, F. Luchetta, and A. D. Polosa, Sub-GeV Dark Matter Detection with Electron Recoils in Carbon Nanotubes, Phys. Lett. B 776 (2018) 338–344, [arXiv:1706.02487]

    2018 arXiv

  110. [118]

    Hochberg, Y

    Y. Hochberg, Y. Kahn, N. Kurinsky, B. V. Lehmann, T. C. Yu, and K. K. Berggren, Determining Dark-Matter–Electron Scattering Rates from the Dielectric Function, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127 (2021), no. 15 151802, [ arXiv:2101.08263]

    2021 arXiv

  111. [119]

    Ge and I

    S.-F. Ge and I. M. Shoemaker, Constraining Photon Portal Dark Matter with Texono and Coherent Data , JHEP 11 (2018) 066, [ arXiv:1710.10889]

    2018 arXiv

  112. [120]

    Kahn and T

    Y. Kahn and T. Lin, Searches for light dark matter using condensed matter systems , Rept. Prog. Phys. 85 (2022), no. 6 066901, [ arXiv:2108.03239]

    2022 arXiv

  113. [121]

    B. M. Roberts, V. A. Dzuba, V. V. Flambaum, M. Pospelov, and Y. V. Stadnik, Dark matter scattering on electrons: Accurate calculations of atomic excitations and implications for the DAMA signal , Phys. Rev. D 93 (2016), no. 11 115037, [arXiv:1604.04559]

    2016 arXiv

  114. [122]

    Knapen, J

    S. Knapen, J. Kozaczuk, and T. Lin, Dark matter-electron scattering in dielectrics , Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021), no. 1 015031, [ arXiv:2101.08275]

    2021 arXiv

  115. [123]

    Blanco, J

    C. Blanco, J. I. Collar, Y. Kahn, and B. Lillard, Dark Matter-Electron Scattering from Aromatic Organic Targets, Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020), no. 5 056001, [arXiv:1912.02822]

    2020 arXiv

  116. [124]

    Based on theoret- ical considerations related to Q and Ee, the evaluation of the integrals ranges from a minimum value to infinity

    for a temperature of 100 Kelvin. Based on theoret- ical considerations related to Q and Ee, the evaluation of the integrals ranges from a minimum value to infinity. It is worth noting that the contribution of the plasmon resonance is mainly confined to the very low range of el...

  117. [125]

    S. M. Griffin, K. Inzani, T. Trickle, Z. Zhang, and K. M. Zurek, Extended calculation of dark matter-electron scattering in crystal targets , Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021), no. 9 095015, [ arXiv:2105.05253]

    2021 arXiv

  118. [126]

    Ramanathan and N

    K. Ramanathan and N. Kurinsky, Ionization yield in silicon for eV-scale electron-recoil processes, Phys. Rev. D 102 (2020), no. 6 063026, [ arXiv:2004.10709]

    2020 arXiv

  119. [127]

    Kozaczuk and T

    J. Kozaczuk and T. Lin, Plasmon production from dark matter scattering , Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020), no. 12 123012, [ arXiv:2003.12077]

    2020 arXiv

  120. [128]

    Ge, X.-G

    S.-F. Ge, X.-G. He, X.-D. Ma, and J. Sheng, Revisiting the fermionic dark matter absorption on electron target, JHEP 05 (2022) 191, [ arXiv:2201.11497]

    2022 arXiv

  121. [129]

    Lasenby and A

    R. Lasenby and A. Prabhu, Dark matter–electron scattering in materials: Sum rules and heterostructures, Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022), no. 9 095009, [arXiv:2110.01587]

    2022 arXiv

  122. [130]

    Liang, L

    Z.-L. Liang, L. Zhang, P. Zhang, and F. Zheng, The wavefunction reconstruction effects in calculation of DM-induced electronic transition in semiconductor targets, JHEP 01 (2019) 149, [ arXiv:1810.13394]

    2019 arXiv

  123. [131]

    Blanco, R

    C. Blanco, R. Essig, M. Fernandez-Serra, H. Ramani, and O. Slone, Dark matter direct detection with quantum dots , Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023), no. 9 095035, [arXiv:2208.05967]

    2023 arXiv

  124. [132]

    Catena, T

    R. Catena, T. Emken, M. Matas, N. A. Spaldin, and E. Urdshals, Direct searches for general dark matter-electron interactions with graphene detectors: Part I. Electronic structure calculations , Phys. Rev. Res. 5 (2023), no. 4 043257, [ arXiv:2303.15497]

    2023 arXiv

  125. [133]

    Catena, T

    R. Catena, T. Emken, M. Matas, N. A. Spaldin, and E. Urdshals, Direct searches for general dark matter-electron interactions with graphene detectors: 13 Part II. Sensitivity studies , Phys. Rev. Res. 5 (2023), no. 4 043258, [ arXiv:2303.15509]

    2023 arXiv

  126. [134]

    Y. Gu, L. Wu, and B. Zhu, Detection of inelastic dark matter via electron recoils in SENSEI , Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022), no. 7 075004, [ arXiv:2203.06664]

    2022 arXiv

  127. [135]

    Xia, Y.-H

    C. Xia, Y.-H. Xu, and Y.-F. Zhou, Azimuthal asymmetry in cosmic-ray boosted dark matter flux , Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023), no. 5 055012, [arXiv:2206.11454]

    2023 arXiv

  128. [136]

    Arnquist et al., First Constraints from DAMIC-M on Sub-GeV Dark-Matter Particles Interacting with Electrons , Phys

    DAMIC-M Collaboration, I. Arnquist et al., First Constraints from DAMIC-M on Sub-GeV Dark-Matter Particles Interacting with Electrons , Phys. Rev. Lett. 130 (2023), no. 17 171003, [ arXiv:2302.02372]

    2023 arXiv

  129. [137]

    Aprile et al., Light Dark Matter Search with Ionization Signals in XENON1T , Phys

    XENON Collaboration, E. Aprile et al., Light Dark Matter Search with Ionization Signals in XENON1T , Phys. Rev. Lett. 123 (2019), no. 25 251801, [arXiv:1907.11485]

    2019 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.