Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 5 cited by

Blazar Boosted ALP and vector portal Dark matter confronting light mediator searches

T0 review · 2 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 Blazar-boosted dark matter lets Super-Kamiokande exclude sub-MeV ALP and vector mediator regions that other searches leave open.

desk verdict Solid, clearly written extension of blazar-boosted DM to light ALP and vector mediators; the electron-only Super-K exclusions are plausible but hinge on an optimistic DM spike, and the hadrophilic section has a dimensional error. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.11569 v2 pith:GFBF4NNP submitted 2025-01-20 hep-ph hep-ex

Sk Jeesun This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phhep-ex PACS 95.35.+d14.80.Va
keywords blazar-boosteddarkmatteraxion-likeparticlemediatorvectorportalSuper-Kamiokandesub-MeVspikeelectronscatteringboosted
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

This paper aims to show that dark matter boosted by blazar jets can be observed through electron recoils in Super-Kamiokande, and that the resulting 95% confidence limits reach parameter space that other experiments cannot touch. The central claim is that for ALP-mediated dark matter with $m_\chi \lesssim 10$ MeV and an ALP mediator with $m_a \sim 30$–$100$ MeV and $g_{ae} \lesssim 10^{-4}$, Super-K's null observation excludes the coupling region. Because the pseudoscalar cross-section is momentum-suppressed at low energies, such sub-MeV dark matter is otherwise very hard to detect; the blazar boost puts its recoil energy above detector thresholds. The paper also finds that vector mediators give stronger limits, and that letting the mediator couple to protons as well as electrons further improves the reach. A sympathetic reader would take away that blazar-boosted dark matter is presented as the leading direct probe of sub-MeV dark matter with light ALP or vector mediators.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the differential blazar-boosted dark matter flux $\mathrm{d}\phi_\chi/\mathrm{d}T_\chi$ in Eq. (4), which multiplies the line-of-sight integral of the dark matter spike density $\Sigma_{\rm DM}$ by the jet-particle spectrum and the DM–electron scattering cross-section. The spike profile is taken from the Gondolo–Silk model, $\rho(r)\propto r^{-\gamma}$ with $\gamma=7/3$ inside $R_{\rm sp}=10^5 R_s$, normalized so the spike mass equals the black hole mass. The blazar jet is treated as a homogeneous blob with a power-law electron/proton spectrum, using benchmark parameters for TXS 0506+56 and BL Lacertae. For ALP mediators the cross-section carries a $T_\chi^2$ momentum suppression, and the boost to $\sim$ GeV–TeV kinetic energies is what lifts the recoils above the Super-K threshold.

What would settle it

Measure the dark matter density profile around TXS 0506+56's central black hole from stellar kinematics or from a resolved annihilation signal: if the profile is closer to $\gamma\simeq 3/2$ or cored rather than $\gamma=7/3$, the line-of-sight integral $\Sigma_{\rm DM}$ drops by orders of magnitude and the Super-K null limits in Figs. 2–6 no longer exclude the stated couplings. A direct check is also to search for the BBDM signal with direction-toward-blazar events in Super-K data; observing zero such events while spike parameters are pinned down would be the discriminating test.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The discovery claim is that null electron-recoil data from Super-Kamiokande, interpreted as scattering of blazar-boosted dark matter, exclude previously unconstrained couplings for both ALP and vector portal dark matter. In the minimal ALP model $\mathcal{L}\supset ig_{a\chi}a\bar\chi\gamma^5\chi + ig_{ae}a\bar e\gamma^5 e$, the boosted flux produces Super-K bounds that extend to $m_\chi\lesssim 10$ MeV and $m_a\sim30$–$100$ MeV with $g_{ae}\lesssim 10^{-4}$, a region where BaBar, NA64, beam-dump, and stellar-cooling constraints are absent or weaker. For vector mediators the same analysis excludes couplings roughly an order of magnitude smaller in $g_V$ because there is no momentum suppression. When the mediator also couples to protons, the proton jet upscatters additional dark matter and the bounds improve by $O(1)$–$4\times$ in coupling, excluding for example $m_a\sim200$–$400$ MeV in the quark-coupled ALP case. The paper states that this is previously unexplored territory for ALP-mediated sub-MeV dark matter searches.

Load-bearing premise

Every target blazar harbors a steep dark matter spike with density $\rho(r)\propto r^{-7/3}$ out to $10^5$ Schwarzschild radii, normalized to the black hole mass; if the spike is flattened by annihilation, disrupted by mergers, or simply absent, the predicted flux and the claimed exclusions largely disappear.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Super-K's null electron-recoil data exclude ALP-mediated sub-MeV dark matter with $m_\chi\lesssim 10$ MeV in the $m_a\sim 30$–$100$ MeV, $g_{ae}\lesssim 10^{-4}$ region, which BaBar, NA64, beam-dump, and stellar-cooling searches leave open.
  • The vector-portal exclusions reach $g_{Ve}\sim 10^{-5}$ for $m_\chi=1$ MeV and $\sim 2\times10^{-6}$ for $m_\chi=0.1$ MeV at $m_V/m_\chi=10$, roughly an order of magnitude stronger in coupling than the ALP limits.
  • Including proton upscattering through quark-coupled ALPs or a $B-L$ vector mediator raises the boosted flux, improving the coupling bounds by $O(1)$–$4\times$ and probing, for example, ALP masses around $200$–$400$ MeV.
  • For $m_\chi\lesssim 0.1$ MeV the exclusions persist even with an annihilation cross-section as large as $\langle\sigma v\rangle=3\times10^{-26}$ cm$^3$ s$^{-1}$, because the spike density is not depleted for these DM masses.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because the signal scales as $g^4$, a density-profile change of about $10^3$ moves the coupling limit by only a factor of about $6$; one could invert this sensitivity to place limits on the spike slope if a coupling were ever measured.
  • The same flux calculation applied to other bright blazars with heavy central black holes would map out a larger patch of the light-mediator plane; IceCube, DUNE, and JUNO are natural next detectors for this signal.
  • The ALP result is the distinctive part of the paper's case: any pseudoscalar-mediated sub-MeV dark matter suffers the same momentum suppression, so blazar boosting may be the generic route to that class, whereas vector mediators are already scrutinized by many experiments.
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

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies light dark matter boosted by blazar jets and detected via electron scattering in Super-Kamiokande. It treats two minimal mediator scenarios: an ALP portal (electrophilic and also quark/electron coupled) and a vector portal (electrophilic and B-L type). Using the blob-jet formalism of refs. [31,32] and a DM spike profile around the SMBH, it computes the boosted DM flux, the expected recoil spectrum at Super-K, and derives 95% CL exclusion regions in the mediator mass-coupling planes. The central claim is that blazar-boosted DM excludes previously unconstrained parameter space for sub-MeV to ~10 MeV DM, especially for ALP mediators with m_a ~ 30-100 MeV and g_ae below about 10^-4, where existing beam-dump, BaBar, NA64, and stellar-cooling bounds are avoided.

Significance. If the predicted flux is reliable, the paper gives a concrete way to probe sub-MeV DM through electron scattering at Super-K, a channel that is otherwise kinematically difficult because of momentum suppression for pseudoscalar mediators. The analytic setup follows the standard treatment of refs. [20,31,32], the cross sections have the expected Lorentz structure, and the comparison with existing mediator constraints is useful. The paper also explicitly shows the sensitivity of the flux to the DM annihilation cross section and spike slope, which is a strength. The main limitation is that the headline exclusion regions depend on the optimistic Gondolo-Silk spike with gamma = 7/3; the paper shows but does not quantitatively propagate the large variations of Sigma_DM with gamma and with annihilation into its central claims.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. II.B, Eq. (4), Fig. B.1(b)] The entire predicted flux is proportional to the line-of-sight column Sigma_DM, and the paper's own Fig. B.1(b) shows Sigma_DM/m_chi varying by several orders of magnitude between gamma = 7/3 and gamma = 3/2, and by about 10^3 for <sigma v> = 10^-28 cm^3/s at m_chi = 1 MeV. The central claim in Sec. III.A that 'Super Kamiokande excludes these parameter spaces for m_chi <~ 10 MeV' is made for the optimistic gamma = 7/3 profile, and the 'new parameter space' ranges quoted in Table II refer to that profile only. The dashed gamma = 3/2 curves in Figs. 2-6 are shown, but their consequences for the headline claim are not stated. Please quantify the surviving new parameter space under (i) gamma = 3/2, (ii) annihilation with <sigma v> = 10^-28 cm^3/s, and (iii) no spike (NFW-only), and revise the abstract and conclusion so that the exclusions are presented as conditional on the spike model rather than as unconditional statements.
  2. [Sec. III.A, Fig. 2, Table II] The m_chi = 1 MeV row is one of the headline results, but the paper's own robustness discussion says that for <sigma v> = 10^-28 cm^3/s and m_chi = 1 MeV the line-of-sight density drops by about 10^3, weakening the g_ae limit by roughly a factor of six. The text acknowledges that 'in such case new regions probed by BBDM become small,' yet the abstract and Table II still present the m_chi = 1 MeV exclusion as part of the newly probed parameter space without this qualification. Since the exclusion scales as g_ae^4 proportional to Sigma_DM, the newly excluded band at g_ae ~ 2 x 10^-5 to 1 x 10^-4 shrinks substantially for realistic annihilation. The paper should either mark Fig. 2 and Table II as applying only to asymmetric DM with <sigma v> = 0, or explicitly state which m_chi = 1 MeV regions survive <sigma v> = 10^-28 cm^3/s.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. II.A] The definition beta_j = sqrt(1 - gamma_e^2) should be beta_j = sqrt(1 - 1/gamma_e^2); as written, gamma_e > 1 gives an imaginary speed, which is clearly a typographical error.
  2. [Eqs. (14) and (15)] Eq. (15) contains the term {(m_i + m_chi)^2, which should presumably be (m_e + m_chi)^2, and Eq. (14) has unbalanced parentheses in the curly bracket. Please correct the notation.
  3. [Appendix B, Fig. B.1] The caption of Fig. B.1 refers to 'Fig.1(a)' and 'Fig.1(b)' instead of Fig. B.1(a) and Fig. B.1(b); the same issue appears in the caption of Fig. A.7.
  4. [Throughout] There are several typos and inconsistent labels: 'orgnaize', 'relevent', 'coloumns', 'elctrophilic', and the recurring 'TXS 056+56' in figure captions for TXS 0506+56. A careful proofread is needed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the Super-K limits are conditional consequences of external astrophysical and particle-physics inputs, not fitted parameters renamed as predictions.

full rationale

The derivation chain is conditional and externally anchored. The blazar jet spectrum (eq. 2) uses SED-fitted parameters from [45,46]; the DM spike profile (Sec. II B) adopts the Gondolo-Silk gamma = 7/3 profile [35] and the Gnedin-Primack gamma = 3/2 profile [53] with the standard mass normalization, and the mediator cross-sections (eqs. 11, 12, 14, 15) are specified model inputs. The Super-K recoil rate (eq. 8) is then compared with the observed Super-K electron-scattering sample and background model from [39] as analyzed in [32], so the 95% CL contours in Figs. 2-6 are derived from a null observation rather than from fitting parameters to produce the headline exclusion. The chosen benchmarks (gaχ = sqrt(4π), <σv> = 0, gamma = 7/3) are disclosed free choices, and the paper explicitly states and quantifies how nonzero <σv> or gamma = 3/2 changes the limits (Sec. III A, Fig. B.1, dashed curves in Figs. 2-6). This is an astrophysical robustness risk, not a circular reduction: the claimed new parameter space is conditional on the assumed spike, but no equation in the paper reduces the prediction to its own input by construction. The only self-citations ([42] and [72]) are side references for ALP phenomenology and Neff constraints, neither of which is load-bearing for the central exclusion claim.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new particles, forces, or conserved quantities are invented. The ALP, the vector mediator, and the fermion DM χ are standard simplified-model ingredients taken from prior literature. The paper's contribution is a new set of constraints for these existing ingredients, so the invented-entity ledger is empty. The free parameters that do the real work are the disclosed benchmarks gaχ = √4π, ⟨σv⟩ = 0, and the spike slope γ = 7/3, each of which shifts the quoted limits by factors to orders of magnitude; the dominant physical axiom is the existence and steepness of the DM spike around the blazar SMBH.

free parameters (3)
  • gaχ (ALP-DM coupling benchmark) = √(4π)
    Chosen by hand as the maximum perturbative coupling (Sec. III A). The derived gae limits scale inversely with gaχ, so this benchmark sets the strongest possible reach shown in Fig. 2.
  • γ (DM spike slope) = 7/3 (secondary plots use 3/2)
    Chosen from the Gondolo-Silk adiabatic spike [35]. The paper's own Fig. B.1(b) shows Σ_DM varying by orders of magnitude between γ = 7/3 and 3/2, so the headline limits assume the steepest profile.
  • ⟨σv⟩ (DM annihilation cross section) = 0
    Assumed zero for the main limits (asymmetric DM [65]). A realistic 10^-28 cm^3/s annihilation rate drops the spike density by about 10^3 and weakens the gae limits by about a factor of 6 for mχ ~ 1 MeV, as the paper itself states.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Adiabatic SMBH growth creates a DM spike with ρ ∝ r^-γ within Rsp = 10^5 Rs, spike mass normalized to MBH, with an inner accretion cutoff at r = 4 Rs.
    Gondolo-Silk model [35] as used in [31, 32]. The entire BBDM flux in eq. (4) is proportional to Σ_DM from this profile; if the spike is absent or flattened, the predicted flux and derived limits largely vanish.
  • domain assumption The blazar jet electron (and proton) spectra are described by single-zone 'blob' SED fits of TXS 0506+56 [45] and BL Lacertae [46] with the benchmark parameters of [32] (Table I).
    Eqs. (1)-(2) fix the upscattering particle flux. These parameters are fitted to electromagnetic and IceCube observations by other authors and carry known model uncertainty that is not propagated into the limits.
  • domain assumption The ALP is described by non-derivative pseudoscalar Yukawa couplings to χ and e (eq. 10), and for ma > 2mχ the ALP decays to χχ with near 100% branching ratio.
    Simplified-model Lagrangian used throughout Sec. III. The claimed new parameter space at gae ~ 10^-5 to 10^-4 with ma ~ 30-100 MeV exists only if the ALP decays invisibly to χ with BR ≈ 1, so that the BaBar, NA64 visible, and beam dump constraints are inapplicable in that regime.
  • domain assumption The hadrophilic ALP-nucleon coupling is gap ≈ 0.45 (c/f_a) m_p/(m_u+m_d), with form factor F_a(q²) = C_q/(q²+M_q²), C_q = 0.9, M_q = 0.33 GeV, and F_axial(q²) = 1/(1+q²/Λ_a²)² (Λ_a = 1.32 GeV), imported from [79].
    Sec. IV A/B. These inputs control the proton upscattering contribution that drives the stronger hadrophilic limits shown in Figs. 4-5. The normalization is dimensionally inconsistent as written (GeV^-1 coupling times a GeV^-2 form factor squared into a cross section) and no derivation is given.
  • domain assumption The Super-Kamiokande boosted-DM search [39] and the statistical analysis of [32] (three energy bins, atmospheric neutrino veto, efficiencies) convert predicted rates into 95% CL limits.
    Used in eq. (8) for the recoil rate. The background model, per-bin efficiencies, and the limit-setting procedure are not reproduced in the paper, so the claimed exclusions cannot be independently derived from this text alone.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Blazar Boosted ALP and vector portal Dark matter confronting light mediator searches." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GFBF4NNP

@misc{pith2026250111569,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Blazar Boosted ALP and vector portal Dark matter confronting light mediator searches},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GFBF4NNP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.11569}
}
read the original abstract

The trouble in detecting low mass dark matter due to its low kinetic energy can be ameliorated in the boosted dark matter framework, where a sub-population of galactic dark matter attains very high energy after being up-scattered by energetic standard model particles. However, in such a scenario the upper limits on the cross-section obtained hitherto are typically large. Hence in the minimal extension of standard model where new mediators act as a portal between the dark and visible sectors, the direct detection limits for sub-GeV dark matter might lie within the exclusion region of other ground based searches of the mediator. To evade this deadlock, we allude to blazar boosted dark matter electron scattering in multi-ton neutrino detector Super kamiokande. We consider minimal models such as axion like particle (ALP) and vector portal dark matter being upscattered by high energy blazar jet and analyse the interesting parameter reaches from Super kamiokande in the parameter space of the mediator, surpassing the existing constraints. Besides, this scenario exhibits stronger limits for previously unexplored ALP mediated sub-MeV dark matter search which is difficult due to associated momentum suppression.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.11569 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: Variation of differential flux of BBDM with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: 95% CL Constraints on BBDM in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3: 95% CL constraints on BBDM in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: 95% CL constraints on BBDM in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: 95% CL constraints on BBDM in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: 95% CL constraints on BBDM in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 5 Pith papers

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

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

    hep-ph 2026-02 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

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

  2. Inelastic Scattering Effects on Attenuation of Boosted Dark Matter

    hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 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.

  3. 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.

  4. Cosmic-ray boosted inelastic dark matter from neutrino-emitting active galactic nuclei

    hep-ph 2025-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A cosmic-ray boosted, inelastic dark matter flux from two neutrino-emitting AGNs gives new Super-K and XENONnT limits that reach part of the thermal freeze-out target for sub-GeV dark matter.

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

    hep-ph 2026-01 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Using LZ 2025 data, cosmic-ray-electron boosted sub-MeV dark matter is constrained at levels at or below the previous XENONnT reach, with the strongest gains claimed for light mediators.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

91 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages · cited by 5 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Zwicky, Die Rotverschiebung von extragalaktischen Nebeln, Helv

    F. Zwicky, Die Rotverschiebung von extragalaktischen Nebeln, Helv. Phys. Acta 6 (1933) 110

    1933

  2. [2]

    Rubin and W.K

    V.C. Rubin and W.K. Ford, Jr., Rotation of the Andromeda Nebula from a Spectroscopic Survey of Emission Regions, Astrophys. J. 159 (1970) 379

    1970

  3. [3]

    PAMELA collaboration, The cosmic-ray electron flux measured by the PAMELA experiment between 1 and 625 GeV , Phys. Rev. Lett. 106 (2011) 201101 [1103.2880]

    arXiv 2011

  4. [4]

    Planck collaboration, Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys. 641 (2020) A6 [1807.06209]

    arXiv 2020

  5. [5]

    Scherrer and M.S

    R.J. Scherrer and M.S. Turner, On the Relic, Cosmic Abundance of Stable Weakly Interacting Massive Particles, Phys. Rev. D 33 (1986) 1585

    1986

  6. [6]

    Jungman, M

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

    arXiv 1996

  7. [7]

    Cirelli, A

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

    arXiv

  8. [8]

    Arcadi, M

    G. Arcadi, M. Dutra, P. Ghosh, M. Lindner, Y. Mambrini, M. Pierre et al., The waning of the WIMP? A review of models, searches, and constraints , Eur. Phys. J. C 78 (2018) 203 [ 1703.07364]

    arXiv 2018

Show all 91 references
  1. [9]

    Feng, Dark Matter Candidates from Particle Physics and Methods of Detection , Ann

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

    2010 arXiv

  2. [10]

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

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

    2019 arXiv

  3. [11]

    XENON collaboration, Search for New Physics in Electronic Recoil Data from XENONnT , Phys. Rev. Lett. 129 (2022) 161805 [ 2207.11330]

    2022 arXiv

  4. [12]

    XENON collaboration, First Dark Matter Search with Nuclear Recoils from the XENONnT Experiment , Phys. Rev. Lett. 131 (2023) 041003 [ 2303.14729]

    2023 arXiv

  5. [13]

    LZ collaboration, Search for new physics in low-energy electron recoils from the first LZ exposure , Phys. Rev. D 108 (2023) 072006 [ 2307.15753]

    2023 arXiv

  6. [14]

    LZ Collaborationcollaboration, Dark Matter Search Results from 4.2 Tonne-Years of Exposure of the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment , 2410.17036

    arXiv

  7. [15]

    PandaX-II collaboration, Results of dark matter search using the full PandaX-II exposure , Chin. Phys. C 44 (2020) 125001 [ 2007.15469]

    2020 arXiv

  8. [16]

    LUX collaboration, Results from a search for dark matter in the complete LUX exposure , Phys. Rev. Lett. 13 118 (2017) 021303 [ 1608.07648]

    2017 arXiv

  9. [17]

    DEAP collaboration, Search for dark matter with a 231-day exposure of liquid argon using DEAP-3600 at SNOLAB, Phys. Rev. D 100 (2019) 022004 [1902.04048]

    2019 arXiv

  10. [18]

    DarkSide collaboration, DarkSide-50 532-day Dark Matter Search with Low-Radioactivity Argon, Phys. Rev. D 98 (2018) 102006 [ 1802.07198]

    2018 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Yin, Highly-boosted dark matter and cutoff for cosmic-ray neutrinos through neutrino portal , EPJ Web Conf

    W. Yin, Highly-boosted dark matter and cutoff for cosmic-ray neutrinos through neutrino portal , EPJ Web Conf. 208 (2019) 04003 [ 1809.08610]

    2019 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Bringmann and M

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

    2019 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Das and M

    A. Das and M. Sen, Boosted dark matter from diffuse supernova neutrinos, Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) 075029 [2104.00027]

    2021 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Ghosh, A

    D. Ghosh, A. Guha and D. Sachdeva, Exclusion limits on dark matter-neutrino scattering cross section , Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022) 103029 [ 2110.00025]

    2022 arXiv

  15. [23]

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

    2019 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Maity and R

    T.N. Maity and R. Laha, Cosmic-ray boosted dark matter in Xe-based direct detection experiments , Eur. Phys. J. C 84 (2024) 117 [ 2210.01815]

    2024 arXiv

  17. [25]

    De Romeri, A

    V. De Romeri, A. Majumdar, D.K. Papoulias and R. Srivastava, XENONnT and LUX-ZEPLIN constraints on DSNB-boosted dark matter , JCAP 03 (2024) 028 [ 2309.04117]

    2024 arXiv

  18. [26]

    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) 015010 [ 2208.09405]

    2023 arXiv

  19. [27]

    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) 116007 [1907.03782]

    2020 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Y. Ema, F. Sala and R. Sato, Neutrino experiments probe hadrophilic light dark matter , SciPost Phys. 10 (2021) 072 [ 2011.01939]

    2021 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Bell, J.L

    N.F. Bell, J.L. Newstead and I. Shaukat-Ali, Cosmic-ray boosted dark matter confronted by constraints on new light mediators , Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024) 063034 [ 2309.11003]

    2024 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Guha and J.-C

    A. Guha and J.-C. Park, Constraints on cosmic-ray boosted dark matter with realistic cross section , JCAP 07 (2024) 074 [ 2401.07750]

    2024 arXiv

  23. [31]

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

    2022 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Granelli, P

    A. Granelli, P. Ullio and J.-W. Wang, Blazar-boosted dark matter at Super-Kamiokande , JCAP 07 (2022) 013 [2202.07598]

    2022 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Urry and P

    C.M. Urry and P. Padovani, Unified schemes for radio-loud active galactic nuclei , Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 107 (1995) 803 [ astro-ph/9506063]

    1995 arXiv

  26. [34]

    A.A. Abdo, M. Ackermann, I. Agudo, M. Ajello, H.D. Aller, M.F. Aller et al., The spectral energy distribution offermibright blazars , The Astrophysical Journal 716 (2010) 30–70

    2010

  27. [35]

    Gondolo and J

    P. Gondolo and J. Silk, Dark matter annihilation at the galactic center, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83 (1999) 1719 [astro-ph/9906391]

    1999 arXiv

  28. [36]

    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 [ 2301.00209]

    2023 arXiv

  29. [37]

    De Marchi, A

    A.G. De Marchi, A. Granelli, J. Nava and F. Sala, Did IceCube discover Dark Matter around Blazars? , 2412.07861

    arXiv

  30. [38]

    Herrera and K

    G. Herrera and K. Murase, Probing light dark matter through cosmic-ray cooling in active galactic nuclei , Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024) L011701 [ 2307.09460]

    2024 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Super-Kamiokande collaboration, Search for Boosted Dark Matter Interacting With Electrons in Super-Kamiokande, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120 (2018) 221301 [1711.05278]

    2018 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Peccei and H.R

    R.D. Peccei and H.R. Quinn, CP Conservation in the Presence of Instantons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 38 (1977) 1440

    1977

  33. [41]

    Bharucha, F

    A. Bharucha, F. Br¨ ummer, N. Desai and S. Mutzel, Axion-like particles as mediators for dark matter: beyond freeze-out, JHEP 02 (2023) 141 [ 2209.03932]

    2023 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Ghosh, A

    D.K. Ghosh, A. Ghoshal and S. Jeesun, Axion-like particle (ALP) portal freeze-in dark matter confronting ALP search experiments, JHEP 01 (2024) 026 [2305.09188]

    2024 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Bauer, M

    M. Bauer, M. Neubert and A. Thamm, Collider Probes of Axion-Like Particles , JHEP 12 (2017) 044 [1708.00443]

    2017 arXiv

  36. [44]

    NA64 collaboration, Search for pseudoscalar bosons decaying into e+e− pairs in the NA64 experiment at the CERN SPS , Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) L111102 [2104.13342]

    2021 arXiv

  37. [45]

    blob geometry

    and also showcase the effect of a less distant BL Lac- ertae [46] for comparison. Existence of TXS 0506+56 has also been indicated by the neutrino observations at IceCube [47], motivating the lepto-hadronic modeling of blazar jet [45]. Using the benchmark model parameters and ...

    2020

  38. [46]

    Cerruti, A

    M. Cerruti, A. Zech, C. Boisson, G. Emery, S. Inoue and J.P. Lenain, Leptohadronic single-zone models for the electromagnetic and neutrino emission of TXS 0506+056, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 483 (2019) L12 [1807.04335]

    2019 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Boettcher, A

    M. Boettcher, A. Reimer, K. Sweeney and A. Prakash, Leptonic and Hadronic Modeling of Fermi-Detected Blazars, Astrophys. J. 768 (2013) 54 [ 1304.0605]

    2013 arXiv

  40. [48]

    IceCube, Fermi-LAT, MAGIC, AGILE, ASAS-SN, HA WC, H.E.S.S., INTEGRAL, Kanata, Kiso, Kapteyn, Liverpool Telescope, Subaru, Swift NuSTAR, VERITAS, VLA/17B-403collaboration, Multimessenger observations of a flaring blazar coincident with high-energy neutrino IceCube-170922A , Sci...

    2018 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Cerruti, Leptonic and Hadronic Radiative Processes in Supermassive-Black-Hole Jets , Galaxies 8 (2020) 72 [2012.13302]

    M. Cerruti, Leptonic and Hadronic Radiative Processes in Supermassive-Black-Hole Jets , Galaxies 8 (2020) 72 [2012.13302]

    2020 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Ghisellini, F

    G. Ghisellini, F. Tavecchio, L. Foschini, G. Ghirlanda, L. Maraschi and A. Celotti, General physical properties of bright fermi blazars: Properties of bright fermi blazars, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 402 (2009) 497–518

    2009

  43. [51]

    Celotti and G

    A. Celotti and G. Ghisellini, The power of blazar jets , Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 385 (2008) 283 [0711.4112]

    2008 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Gorchtein, S

    M. Gorchtein, S. Profumo and L. Ubaldi, Probing Dark Matter with AGN Jets , Phys. Rev. D 82 (2010) 083514 [1008.2230]

    2010 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Ullio, H

    P. Ullio, H. Zhao and M. Kamionkowski, A Dark matter spike at the galactic center? , Phys. Rev. D 64 (2001) 043504 [astro-ph/0101481]

    2001 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Gnedin and J.R

    O.Y. Gnedin and J.R. Primack, Dark Matter Profile in 14 the Galactic Center , Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 (2004) 061302 [astro-ph/0308385]

    2004 arXiv

  47. [55]

    J. Liu, Y. Luo and M. Song, Investigation of the concurrent effects of ALP-photon and ALP-electron couplings in Collider and Beam Dump Searches , JHEP 09 (2023) 104 [ 2304.05435]

    2023 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Armando, P

    G. Armando, P. Panci, J. Weiss and R. Ziegler, Leptonic ALP portal to the dark sector , Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024) 055029 [ 2310.05827]

    2024 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Angel et al., Toward a search for axionlike particles at the LNLS , Phys

    L. Angel et al., Toward a search for axionlike particles at the LNLS , Phys. Rev. D 108 (2023) 055030 [2305.13384]

    2023 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Bechis, T.W

    D.J. Bechis, T.W. Dombeck, R.W. Ellsworth, E.V. Sager, P.H. Steinberg, L.J. Teig et al., Search for Axion Production in Low-energy Electron Bremsstrahlung, Phys. Rev. Lett. 42 (1979) 1511

    1979

  51. [59]

    Blumlein et al., Limits on the mass of light (pseudo)scalar particles from Bethe-Heitler e+ e- and mu+ mu- pair production in a proton - iron beam dump experiment, Int

    J. Blumlein et al., Limits on the mass of light (pseudo)scalar particles from Bethe-Heitler e+ e- and mu+ mu- pair production in a proton - iron beam dump experiment, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 7 (1992) 3835

    1992

  52. [60]

    Andreas, O

    S. Andreas, O. Lebedev, S. Ramos-Sanchez and A. Ringwald, Constraints on a very light CP-odd Higgs of the NMSSM and other axion-like particles , JHEP 08 (2010) 003 [ 1005.3978]

    2010 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Liu and G.A

    Y.-S. Liu and G.A. Miller, Validity of the Weizs¨ acker-Williams approximation and the analysis of beam dump experiments: Production of an axion, a dark photon, or a new axial-vector boson , Phys. Rev. D 96 (2017) 016004 [ 1705.01633]

    2017 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Waites, A

    L. Waites, A. Thompson, A. Bungau, J.M. Conrad, B. Dutta, W.-C. Huang et al., Axionlike particle production at beam dump experiments with distinct nuclear excitation lines , Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023) 095010 [2207.13659]

    2023 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Andreev et al., Improved exclusion limit for light dark matter from e+e- annihilation in NA64 , Phys

    Y.M. Andreev et al., Improved exclusion limit for light dark matter from e+e- annihilation in NA64 , Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) L091701 [ 2108.04195]

    2021 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Caputo and G

    A. Caputo and G. Raffelt, Astrophysical Axion Bounds: The 2024 Edition , PoS COSMICWISPers (2024) 041 [2401.13728]

    2024 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Tremaine and J.E

    S. Tremaine and J.E. Gunn, Dynamical Role of Light Neutral Leptons in Cosmology , Phys. Rev. Lett. 42 (1979) 407

    1979

  58. [66]

    Petraki and R.R

    K. Petraki and R.R. Volkas, Review of asymmetric dark matter, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 28 (2013) 1330028 [1305.4939]

    2013 arXiv

  59. [67]

    Okada, S

    N. Okada, S. Okada and Q. Shafi, Light Z ′ and dark matter from U (1)X gauge symmetry , Phys. Lett. B 810 (2020) 135845 [ 2003.02667]

    2020 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Coloma, P

    P. Coloma, P. Coloma, M.C. Gonzalez-Garcia, M.C. Gonzalez-Garcia, M. Maltoni, M. Maltoni et al., Constraining new physics with Borexino Phase-II spectral data, JHEP 07 (2022) 138 [ 2204.03011]

    2022 arXiv

  61. [69]

    BaBar collaboration, Search for a Dark Photon in e+e− Collisions at BaBar , Phys. Rev. Lett. 113 (2014) 201801 [1406.2980]

    2014 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Bauer, P

    M. Bauer, P. Foldenauer and J. Jaeckel, Hunting All the Hidden Photons , JHEP 07 (2018) 094 [ 1803.05466]

    2018 arXiv

  63. [71]

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

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

    2019 arXiv

  64. [72]

    Hardy and R

    E. Hardy and R. Lasenby, Stellar cooling bounds on new light particles: plasma mixing effects , JHEP 02 (2017) 033 [1611.05852]

    2017 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Ghosh, P

    D.K. Ghosh, P. Ghosh, S. Jeesun and R. Srivastava, The Neff at CMB challenges U (1)X light gauge boson scenarios, 2404.10077

    arXiv

  66. [74]

    Majumdar, D.K

    A. Majumdar, D.K. Papoulias and R. Srivastava, Dark matter detectors as a novel probe for light new physics , Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022) 013001 [ 2112.03309]

    2022 arXiv

  67. [75]

    De Romeri, D.K

    V. De Romeri, D.K. Papoulias and C.A. Ternes, Light vector mediators at direct detection experiments , 2402.05506

    arXiv

  68. [76]

    A.N. Khan, W. Rodejohann and X.-J. Xu, Borexino and general neutrino interactions , Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020) 055047 [ 1906.12102]

    2020 arXiv

  69. [77]

    Atzori Corona, M

    M. Atzori Corona, M. Cadeddu, N. Cargioli, F. Dordei, C. Giunti, Y.F. Li et al., Probing light mediators and (g − 2)µ through detection of coherent elastic neutrino nucleus scattering at COHERENT , JHEP 05 (2022) 109 [2202.11002]

    2022 arXiv

  70. [78]

    M. Ibe, S. Kobayashi, Y. Nakayama and S. Shirai, Cosmological constraint on dark photon from N ef f, JHEP 04 (2020) 009 [ 1912.12152]

    2020 arXiv

  71. [79]

    Escudero, Neutrino decoupling beyond the Standard Model: CMB constraints on the Dark Matter mass with a fast and precise Neff evaluation, JCAP 02 (2019) 007 [1812.05605]

    M. Escudero, Neutrino decoupling beyond the Standard Model: CMB constraints on the Dark Matter mass with a fast and precise Neff evaluation, JCAP 02 (2019) 007 [1812.05605]

    2019 arXiv

  72. [80]

    Y. Ema, F. Sala and R. Sato, Neutrino experiments probe hadrophilic light dark matter , SciPost Phys. 10 (2021) 072

    2021

  73. [81]

    Dolan, F

    M.J. Dolan, F. Kahlhoefer, C. McCabe and K. Schmidt-Hoberg, A taste of dark matter: Flavour constraints on pseudoscalar mediators , JHEP 03 (2015) 171 [1412.5174]

    2015 arXiv

  74. [82]

    Bjorken, S

    J.D. Bjorken, S. Ecklund, W.R. Nelson, A. Abashian, C. Church, B. Lu et al., Search for Neutral Metastable Penetrating Particles Produced in the SLAC Beam Dump, Phys. Rev. D 38 (1988) 3375

    1988

  75. [83]

    Okada, Z ′ Portal Dark Matter in the Minimal B − L Model, Adv

    S. Okada, Z ′ Portal Dark Matter in the Minimal B − L Model, Adv. High Energy Phys. 2018 (2018) 5340935 [1803.06793]

    2018 arXiv

  76. [84]

    Potter and G

    W.J. Potter and G. Cotter, New constraints on the structure and dynamics of black hole jets , Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 453 (2015) 4070 [ 1508.00567]

    2015 arXiv

  77. [85]

    Vila, G.E

    G.S. Vila, G.E. Romero and N.A. Casco, An inhomogeneous lepto-hadronic model for the radiation of relativistic jets - application to xte j1118+480 , A&A 538 (2012) A97

    2012

  78. [86]

    Alekseev et al., The DELPHI experiment at LEP , Part

    G.D. Alekseev et al., The DELPHI experiment at LEP , Part. Nucl. Lett. 98 (2001) 5

    2001

  79. [87]

    NA64 collaboration, Search for Axionlike and Scalar Particles with the NA64 Experiment , Phys. Rev. Lett. 125 (2020) 081801 [ 2005.02710]

    2020 arXiv

  80. [88]

    Carenza and G

    P. Carenza and G. Lucente, Supernova bound on axionlike particles coupled with electrons , Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) 103007 [ 2107.12393]

    2021 arXiv

  81. [89]

    N. Bar, K. Blum and G. D’Amico, Is there a supernova bound on axions? , Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020) 123025 [1907.05020]

    2020 arXiv

  82. [90]

    Hardy, A

    E. Hardy, A. Sokolov and H. Stubbs, Supernova bounds on new scalars from resonant and soft emission , 2410.17347

  83. [91]

    Giannotti, I

    M. Giannotti, I. Irastorza, J. Redondo and A. Ringwald, Cool WISPs for stellar cooling excesses , JCAP 05 (2016) 057 [ 1512.08108]. 15

    2016 arXiv

Pith tools

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