Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 201 references

Searching for Dark Matter with MeVCube

T0 review · 3 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 claims that MeVCube, a proposed CubeSat MeV telescope, could find or constrain dark matter using gamma rays from evaporating primordial black holes and from particle dark matter decaying or annihilating to photons.

desk verdict Solid first DM forecast for MeVCube, but the abstract's 'much better discovery reach' overstates the FSR cases and the LEO background omission leaves the size of the reach uncertain. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.13162 v2 pith:4FL5PC4E submitted 2025-01-22 hep-ph astro-ph.COastro-ph.HEhep-ex

Akash Kumar Saha This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phastro-ph.COastro-ph.HEhep-ex
keywords darkmatterMeVgamma-rayastronomygapprimordialblackholesHawkingevaporationindirectdetectionCubeSattelescopeFisherforecasting
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 argues that MeVCube, a small CubeSat Compton telescope planned for the 200 keV to 10 MeV band, could discover or strongly constrain dark matter through its non-gravitational gamma-ray signals. For evaporating primordial black holes and for particle dark matter decaying or annihilating directly to two photons, the projected 95% confidence limits beat existing limits from COMPTEL, INTEGRAL, CMB data, and Galactic 511 keV observations. For dark matter that first produces electron-positron pairs whose final-state radiation yields MeV photons, the projected reach is weaker than existing limits but still complementary. If the forecast is right, a low-cost, fast-to-launch CubeSat could become a serious dark-matter instrument in the long-unexplored 'MeV gap' before larger telescopes fly.

What carries the argument

The forecasting machinery is a $7\times 7$ Fisher information matrix built from one dark-matter parameter ($f_{\rm PBH}$, $1/\tau$, or $\langle\sigma v\rangle$) and six diffuse-background parameters, with the signal weighted by MeVCube's simulated effective area and convolved with its energy resolution. The dark-matter flux uses the standard J-factor expression for Galactic halo models, Hawking-evaporation photon spectra are taken from the BlackHawk code, direct photon channels are treated as delta-function lines, and final-state-radiation spectra use the closed-form photon spectrum of Eq. (10). The background is the sum of a broken power law with exponential cutoff for Galactic photons and a power law for extragalactic photons.

What would settle it

A full detector-level background simulation of the CdZnTe instrument in low Earth orbit, including charged cosmic rays, trapped-radiation encounters such as the South Atlantic Anomaly, albedo photons, and instrumental noise, would settle whether the added event rate exceeds the diffuse photon background used in the Fisher forecast; if it does, the projected limits in Figs. 1 and 2 weaken and could fall back to the existing COMPTEL, INTEGRAL, and CMB bounds.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Using a benchmark observation of the Galactic Center region $|l|\le 5^\circ$, $|b|\le 5^\circ$ for $10^7$ s, with an NFW dark-matter profile, MeVCube in 2U, 6U, and 12U configurations would set projected 95% upper limits on the PBH dark-matter fraction that penetrate parameter space not yet excluded by 511 keV, COMPTEL, INTEGRAL, X-ray, and CMB bounds. For particle dark matter decaying or annihilating directly to two photons, the same analysis probes longer lifetimes and smaller velocity-averaged annihilation cross-sections than all existing limits shown. The 12U configuration reaches heavier dark-matter masses because its effective area extends to about 10 MeV. For the $\chi\to e^+e^-$ and $\chi\chi\to e^+e^-$ channels with final-state radiation, MeVCube's projected limits do not beat existing constraints, but the paper presents them as complementary probes.

Load-bearing premise

The projections assume that the only backgrounds that matter for the Galactic Center observation are the diffuse Galactic and extragalactic photon fluxes of Eqs. (14) and (15), leaving out instrumental backgrounds, cosmic-ray charged particles, and Earth-albedo photons, which the paper notes but does not quantify.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the forecast is correct, a 2U to 12U MeVCube staring at the Galactic Center for $10^7$ s would improve on the best existing limits on evaporating primordial-black-hole dark matter in the asteroid-mass window.
  • For dark matter decaying or annihilating directly to two photons, MeVCube would probe lifetimes longer than and annihilation cross-sections smaller than those currently excluded by COMPTEL, INTEGRAL, and CMB data.
  • The 12U configuration's extended energy response lets it reach heavier dark-matter masses than the 2U and 6U versions.
  • The $\sqrt{t_{\rm obs}}$ scaling shown for PBH dark matter means even a one-day observation can enter new parameter space, with longer exposures giving proportionally better reach.
  • For the $e^+e^-$ final-state channels, MeVCube would provide weaker but complementary limits that can cross-check other MeV instruments.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the sensitivity holds, the economics of indirect dark-matter searches shift: a constellation of small MeVCube-type satellites could collectively reach the effective area of a flagship mission at a fraction of the launch cost and could be launched much sooner than a large telescope.
  • Because the reach depends on the Galactic dark-matter profile, with Einasto giving stronger limits than NFW and isothermal giving weaker ones, the same observations could double as a probe of the halo profile when combined with other data.
  • The paper's correction of the Galactic-background exponential cutoff from 2 MeV to 20 MeV implies that some earlier MeV-telescope forecasts for heavy decaying or annihilating dark matter may have been too optimistic; re-running those forecasts with the corrected background would test how many published projections shift.
  • A null result from MeVCube before larger MeV missions launch would provide the first real MeV-gap constraints since COMPTEL's era, sharpening the science case for the next generation of telescopes in this band.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper presents a Fisher-matrix forecast of the dark matter discovery potential of the proposed MeVCube CubeSat. It computes gamma-ray fluxes from evaporating primordial black holes (using BlackHawk and Hazma) and from particle dark matter decaying or annihilating to photons or to e+e− with final-state radiation. The forecast uses the MeVCube effective area and energy resolution from Ref. [43], a 10^7 s observation of the Galactic Center region |l|,|b|≤5°, and a diffuse Galactic plus extragalactic background model. It reports projected 95% limits for 2U, 6U, and 12U configurations, finding that the direct photon channels can surpass existing limits, while the FSR channels are weaker than existing constraints. The paper explicitly acknowledges LEO instrumental, albedo, and cosmic-ray backgrounds as a caveat but does not model or quantify them.

Significance. If the projected sensitivities are confirmed under more realistic background assumptions, the paper would provide a strong quantitative argument that small, low-cost CubeSats can probe new parameter space in the under-explored MeV gap. The strengths are the use of publicly available spectral codes (BlackHawk, Hazma), the inclusion of the telescope energy resolution, the marginalization over background parameters, and the appendices that test dependence on DM density profile, observation time, and the Ec=20 MeV correction of the galactic background model. The central limitation is that the discovery reach is computed with a photon-only diffuse background model that omits LEO-specific backgrounds; the magnitude of the resulting degradation is not quantified. A second, smaller normalization error in the annihilation flux also needs correction.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section V, Appendix E, Eqs. (14)-(21)] The forecast includes only the Galactic and extragalactic diffuse photon backgrounds. The manuscript acknowledges in Section V, citing Cumani et al. [148], that a LEO CubeSat will also see cosmic-ray induced events, albedo photons, and instrumental backgrounds, but it does not implement these in the Fisher analysis. This is load-bearing because the projected limits in Figs. 1 and 2 depend on the background entering Eq. (20); with a 12U effective area of only about 22 cm^2 at 1 MeV, an unvetoed albedo plus instrumental component at the levels expected from the Cumani et al. model could dominate the extragalactic component of Eq. (15) and correspondingly degrade the limits. I ask the authors to add a quantitative estimate of these LEO backgrounds, using the model in Ref. [148] or an equivalent treatment, and to show the resulting sensitivity curves for at least the benchmark 12U case.
  2. [Eq. (1) with Eq. (2) and Eq. (9)] For α=2, Eq. (1) uses the prefactor 1/(2α−1)=1/3. With J defined in Eq. (2) and the annihilation spectrum given in Eq. (9), the standard flux for self-conjugate annihilating dark matter has a prefactor 1/2, not 1/3. The resulting annihilation flux in the paper is therefore low by a factor 2/3, and the projected ⟨σv⟩ limits in the right panels of Fig. 2 are weakened by a factor 1.5 relative to the correct normalization. The same factor propagates to the FSR annihilation channel through C_2 in Eq. (10). This does not change the qualitative conclusion for direct annihilation, but the normalization should be corrected.
  3. [Abstract and Section IV, Fig. 2 (bottom row)] The abstract states "In all cases, we find that MeVCube will have much better discovery reach compared to existing limits," but the text in Section IV and the bottom row of Fig. 2 show that for χ→e+e− and χχ→e+e− with FSR, the MeVCube sensitivities are weaker than existing X-ray and gamma-ray limits. This overstatement should be corrected, for example by restricting the claim to the direct photon channels and presenting the FSR results as complementary probes.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section V] The word "insteresting" in the discussion of strongly interacting dark matter should be "interesting."
  2. [Appendix E] The phrase "father orbits" should be "farther orbits."
  3. [Eq. (16)-(17)] The symbol ϵ is used both as the Gaussian width parameter in Eq. (16) and, through Eq. (17), as the fractional energy resolution; renaming one of them would avoid ambiguity.
  4. [Appendix D and Section IV] The effective area curves from Ref. [43] are used numerically but are not reproduced in the paper; providing a small table or a link to digitized values would improve reproducibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the DM signal fluxes, instrument response, and background inputs are external and independent, and the projected sensitivities are benchmarked against published limits.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. DM signal fluxes are computed from independent physics: PBH Hawking spectra are obtained from the public BlackHawk code and cross-checked against semi-analytic greybody factors (Eqs. 5-7, Section II A), while particle DM decay and annihilation spectra are analytic (Eqs. 8-13). The instrument response, including effective area and energy resolution, is taken from the separate MeVCube instrument paper [43], not from this work. The astrophysical backgrounds in Eqs. (14)-(15) have fiducial values fixed by external COMPTEL and cosmic X-ray background fits (Section IV), and the Fisher matrix in Eqs. (20)-(21) marginalizes over the six background parameters rather than fitting any dark matter parameter. The resulting limits are displayed against independent published bounds from INTEGRAL, COMPTEL, CMB, XMM-Newton, and Voyager; no dark matter parameter is fitted to data. The author's self-citations (Refs. [126,128]) appear only as contextual constraints in the literature summary and are not load-bearing for the MeVCube projection. The acknowledged omission of LEO instrumental, cosmic-ray, and albedo backgrounds (Section V, Appendix E) is an unquantified assumption affecting robustness of the projected reach, but it is not a circular step: it does not make any output equivalent to an input by construction. Thus no circularity is found.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a standard set of astrophysical and instrumental assumptions: a chosen DM density profile, a monochromatic non-spinning PBH population, exclusive decay/annihilation channels, and a background model fitted to external COMPTEL and cosmic X-ray data. No new particles or forces are introduced. The most fragile inputs are the LEO background model, which is omitted, and the NFW profile assumption, which is tested only in an appendix.

free parameters (7)
  • Galactic background normalization Abkg_g = 0.013 MeV^-1 cm^-2 s^-1 sr^-1
    Fitted to COMPTEL inner-galaxy data and used in Eq. (14); Fisher marginalization reduces its impact, but the projected limits depend on this amplitude.
  • Galactic background slope alpha_g = 1.8
    Spectral index of the Galactic diffuse background in Eq. (14), obtained from COMPTEL data.
  • Galactic background cutoff index gamma_bar = 2
    Shape parameter in the exponential cutoff of Eq. (14); fixed by the background model fit.
  • Galactic background cutoff energy Ec = 20 MeV
    Cutoff energy of the Galactic background; the author corrects a typo in Ref. [110] and validates 20 MeV against COMPTEL data in Appendix C.
  • Extragalactic background normalization Abkg_eg = 0.004135 MeV^-1 cm^-2 s^-1 sr^-1
    Fitted to the cosmic X-ray background spectrum in the 150 keV to 5 MeV range and used in Eq. (15).
  • Extragalactic background slope alpha_eg = 2.8956
    Spectral index of the extragalactic background in Eq. (15), from fits to the measured cosmic X-ray background.
  • Observation time tobs = 1e7 s
    Benchmark exposure of about 4 months, chosen following the MeVCube concept paper's ~2 month estimate; limits scale as sqrt(tobs), so this choice directly sets the reach.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption NFW DM density profile with (a,b,c)=(1,3,1), rs=20 kpc, rho_sun=0.4 GeV/cm^3, r_sun=8.3 kpc
    Used to compute J-factors in Eq. (2). Appendix B shows limits weaken with a cored Isothermal profile, so the central sensitivity depends on this astrophysical choice.
  • domain assumption PBHs are non-spinning, uncharged, and have a monochromatic mass distribution
    Hawking spectra from BlackHawk assume this; spinning PBHs would change the photon spectra and shift the limits.
  • domain assumption 100% branching ratio for each particle DM channel
    Decay or annihilation to gamma-gamma or e+e- is assumed exclusive; realistic models with mixed branching would reduce the photon flux.
  • domain assumption DM is self-conjugated for annihilation
    Stated in Sec. II B; if DM is not its own antiparticle, an extra factor of 1/2 in Eq. (1) would shift the limits.
  • domain assumption Only the Galactic DM signal is considered; extragalactic DM is subdominant for the chosen ROI
    Invoked in Sec. IV; valid for |l| <= 5 deg, |b| <= 5 deg but not for all-sky analyses.
  • domain assumption Background functional forms in Eqs. (14) and (15) from Bartels et al. and Beacom-Yuksel
    The forecast trusts these analytic forms and their COMPTEL and cosmic X-ray background fits; the author only corrects the cutoff energy Ec.
  • standard math Fisher matrix Gaussianity with fiducial DM signal equal to zero
    The forecast assumes a Gaussian likelihood and uses Eq. (21) for 95% limits; this is standard in the literature but cannot capture non-Gaussian tails or systematic uncertainties.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Searching for Dark Matter with MeVCube." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4FL5PC4E

@misc{pith2026250113162,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Searching for Dark Matter with MeVCube},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4FL5PC4E}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.13162}
}
read the original abstract

CubeSat technology is an emerging alternative to large-scale space telescopes due to its short development time and cost-effectiveness. MeVCube is a proposed CubeSat mission to study the least explored MeV gamma-ray sky, also known as the `MeV gap'. Besides being sensitive to a plethora of astrophysical phenomena, MeVCube can also be important in the hunt for dark matter. If dark matter is made up of evaporating primordial black holes, then it can produce photons in the sensitivity range of MeVCube. Besides, particle dark matter can also decay or annihilate to produce final state gamma-ray photons. We perform the first comprehensive study of dark matter discovery potential of a near-future MeVCube CubeSat mission. In all cases, we find that MeVCube will have much better discovery reach compared to existing limits in the parameter space. This may be an important step towards discovering dark matter through its non-gravitational interactions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.13162 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Sensitivities on the fraction of DM made up [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (Top row) sensitivities on the lifetime (left) and velocity averaged cross-section (right) for particle DM with observations by MeVCube of sizes 2U (brown solid line), 6U (blue solid line), and 12U (green solid line). The existing limits include observations of diffuse galactic emission from INTEGRAL [29, 34] (purple dashed line) and COMPTEL [35] (orange dashed line), CMB anisotropy measurements [36] (red dashed lin… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Fisher forecast constraints on the model and the background parameters. This plot assumes a non-spinning PBH [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Same as the previous figure, but now for particle DM of mass 1 MeV annihilating directly to two photons. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Dependence of PBH DM sensitivities with a 12U [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Dependence of PBH DM sensitivities on various ob [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

201 extracted references · 22 canonical work pages

  1. [43]

    Cirelli, N

    M. Cirelli, N. Fornengo, J. Koechler, E. Pinetti and B. M. Roach, Putting all the X in one basket: Updated X-ray constraints on sub-GeV Dark Matter , JCAP 07 (2023) 026, [ 2303.08854]

    arXiv 2023

  2. [148]

    De la Torre Luque, S

    P. De la Torre Luque, S. Balaji and J. Silk, New 511 keV Line Data Provide Strongest sub-GeV Dark Matter Constraints, Astrophys. J. Lett. 973 (2024) L6, [2312.04907]

    arXiv 2024

  3. [1]

    Bertone and D

    G. Bertone and D. Hooper, History of dark matter , Rev. Mod. Phys. 90 (2018) 045002, [ 1605.04909]

    arXiv 2018

  4. [2]

    The variation in our limits due to different values of tobs is shown in Appendix B

    We choose tobs = 107 s as our benchmark observation time. The variation in our limits due to different values of tobs is shown in Appendix B. The effective area, Aeff (Eγ) is taken from Fig. 5 of Ref. [43]. In our case, F is a 7×7 symmetric matrix with 1 model parameter ( fPBH or (1 /τ ) or ⟨σv⟩) and 6 background parameters ( Abkg g , αg, ¯γ, Ec, Abkg eg ...

    2023

  5. [3]

    Cirelli, A

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

    arXiv

  6. [4]

    Aghanim et al., Planck 2018 results

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

    arXiv 2020

  7. [5]

    Lisanti, Lectures on Dark Matter Physics , in Theoretical Advanced Study Institute in Elementary Particle Physics: New Frontiers in Fields and Strings , pp

    M. Lisanti, Lectures on Dark Matter Physics , in Theoretical Advanced Study Institute in Elementary Particle Physics: New Frontiers in Fields and Strings , pp. 399–446, 2017. 1603.03797. DOI

    arXiv 2017

  8. [6]

    L. E. Strigari, Galactic Searches for Dark Matter , Phys. Rept. 531 (2013) 1–88, [ 1211.7090]

    arXiv 2013

Show all 201 references
  1. [7]

    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

  2. [8]

    T. R. Slatyer, Indirect detection of dark matter. , in Theoretical Advanced Study Institute in Elementary Particle Physics: Anticipating the Next Discoveries in Particle Physics, pp. 297–353, 2018. 1710.05137. DOI

    2018 arXiv

  3. [9]

    Hawking, Gravitationally collapsed objects of very low mass , Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 152 (04, 1971) 75–78

    S. Hawking, Gravitationally collapsed objects of very low mass , Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 152 (04, 1971) 75–78

    1971

  4. [10]

    Y. B. Zel’dovich and I. D. Novikov, The Hypothesis of Cores Retarded during Expansion and the Hot Cosmological Model, Sov. Astron. 10 (1967) 602

    1967

  5. [11]

    S. W. Hawking, Particle Creation by Black Holes , Commun. Math. Phys. 43 (1975) 199–220

    1975

  6. [12]

    S. W. Hawking, Black hole explosions? , Nature 248 (Mar., 1974) 30–31

    1974

  7. [13]

    Kn¨ odlseder,The future of gamma-ray astronomy , Comptes Rendus Physique 17 (2016) 663–678, [1602.02728]

    J. Kn¨ odlseder,The future of gamma-ray astronomy , Comptes Rendus Physique 17 (2016) 663–678, [1602.02728]

    2016 arXiv

  8. [14]

    B. J. Carr, The primordial black hole mass spectrum. , ApJ 201 (Oct., 1975) 1–19

    1975

  9. [15]

    Kierans, T

    C. Kierans, T. Takahashi and G. Kanbach, Compton Telescopes for Gamma-ray Astrophysics, 2208.07819

    arXiv

  10. [16]

    Engel et al., The Future of Gamma-Ray Experiments in the MeV-EeV Range , in Snowmass 2021, 3, 2022

    K. Engel et al., The Future of Gamma-Ray Experiments in the MeV-EeV Range , in Snowmass 2021, 3, 2022. 2203.07360

    2021

  11. [17]

    J. A. Tomsick et al., The Compton Spectrometer and Imager, 1908.04334

    1908 arXiv

  12. [18]

    Schoenfelder, H

    V. Schoenfelder, H. Aarts, K. Bennett, H. de Boer, J. Clear, W. Collmar et al., Instrument Description and Performance of the Imaging Gamma-Ray Telescope COMPTEL aboard the Compton Gamma-Ray Observatory, ApJS 86 (June, 1993) 657

    1993

  13. [19]

    Fleischhack, AMEGO-X: MeV gamma-ray Astronomy in the Multi-messenger Era , PoS ICRC2021 (2021) 649, [ 2108.02860]

    H. Fleischhack, AMEGO-X: MeV gamma-ray Astronomy in the Multi-messenger Era , PoS ICRC2021 (2021) 649, [ 2108.02860]

    2021 arXiv

  14. [20]

    Caputo et al., All-sky Medium Energy Gamma-ray Observatory: Exploring the Extreme Multimessenger Universe , 1907.07558

    AMEGO collaboration, R. Caputo et al., All-sky Medium Energy Gamma-ray Observatory: Exploring the Extreme Multimessenger Universe , 1907.07558

    1907 arXiv

  15. [21]

    E. Orlando et al., Exploring the MeV sky with a combined coded mask and Compton telescope: the Galactic Explorer with a Coded aperture mask Compton telescope (GECCO) , JCAP 07 (2022) 036, [2112.07190]

    2022 arXiv

  16. [22]

    Tavani et al., Science with e-ASTROGAM: A space mission for MeV–GeV gamma-ray astrophysics , JHEAp 19 (2018) 1–106, [1711.01265]

    e-ASTROGAM collaboration, M. Tavani et al., Science with e-ASTROGAM: A space mission for MeV–GeV gamma-ray astrophysics , JHEAp 19 (2018) 1–106, [1711.01265]

    2018 arXiv

  17. [23]

    Aramaki, P

    T. Aramaki, P. Hansson Adrian, G. Karagiorgi and H. Odaka, Dual MeV Gamma-Ray and Dark Matter Observatory - GRAMS Project , Astropart. Phys. 114 (2020) 107–114, [ 1901.03430]

    2020 arXiv

  18. [24]

    Dzhatdoev and E

    T. Dzhatdoev and E. Podlesnyi, Massive Argon Space Telescope (MAST): A concept of heavy time projection chamber for γ-ray astronomy in the 100 MeV–1 TeV energy range, Astropart. Phys. 112 (2019) 1–7, [1902.01491]

    2019 arXiv

  19. [25]

    https://science.nasa.gov/mission/cosi/

  20. [26]

    One of the problems faced by any upcoming telescope collaboration is the long planning duration and financial constraints

    and blue [27]), measurements of the diffuse Galactic gamma-ray flux by COMPTEL (teal) [28] and INTEGRAL (orange [29] and red [30]), extra-Galactic gamma-ray mea- surement (black) [31, 32], CMB measurements by PLANCK (lime) [33], and Galactic diffuse X-ray emission measurement ...

    2025 arXiv

  21. [27]

    X. Wu, M. Su, A. Bravar, J. Chang, Y. Fan, M. Pohl et al., PANGU: A High Resolution Gamma-ray Space Telescope, Proc. SPIE Int. Soc. Opt. Eng. 9144 (2014) 91440F, [1407.0710]

    2014 arXiv

  22. [28]

    Laha, Primordial Black Holes as a Dark Matter Candidate Are Severely Constrained by the Galactic Center 511 keV γ -Ray Line, Phys

    R. Laha, Primordial Black Holes as a Dark Matter Candidate Are Severely Constrained by the Galactic Center 511 keV γ -Ray Line, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123 (2019) 251101, [ 1906.09994]

    2019 arXiv

  23. [29]

    De la Torre Luque, J

    P. De la Torre Luque, J. Koechler and S. Balaji, Refining Galactic primordial black hole evaporation constraints, 2406.11949

  24. [30]

    Coogan, L

    A. Coogan, L. Morrison and S. Profumo, Direct detection of hawking radiation from asteroid-mass primordial black holes , Phys. Rev. Lett. 126 (Apr,

  25. [31]

    R. Laha, J. B. Mu˜ noz and T. R. Slatyer, INTEGRAL constraints on primordial black holes and particle dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020) 123514, [2004.00627]

    2020 arXiv

  26. [32]

    Berteaud, F

    J. Berteaud, F. Calore, J. Iguaz, P. D. Serpico and T. Siegert, Strong constraints on primordial black hole dark matter from 16 years of INTEGRAL/SPI observations, Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022) 023030, [2202.07483]

    2022 arXiv

  27. [33]

    Arbey, J

    A. Arbey, J. Auffinger and J. Silk, Constraining primordial black hole masses with the isotropic gamma ray background, Phys. Rev. D 101 (Jan, 2020) 023010

    2020

  28. [34]

    Chen, H.-H

    S. Chen, H.-H. Zhang and G. Long, Revisiting the constraints on primordial black hole abundance with the isotropic gamma ray background , 2112.15463

    arXiv

  29. [35]

    Clark, B

    S. Clark, B. Dutta, Y. Gao, L. E. Strigari and S. Watson, Planck Constraint on Relic Primordial Black Holes , Phys. Rev. D 95 (2017) 083006, [1612.07738]

    2017 arXiv

  30. [36]

    Siegert, C

    T. Siegert, C. Boehm, F. Calore, R. Diehl, M. G. H. Krause, P. D. Serpico et al., An INTEGRAL/SPI view of reticulum II: particle dark matter and primordial black holes limits in the MeV range , Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 511 (2022) 914–924, [ 2109.03791]

    2022 arXiv

  31. [37]

    Essig, E

    R. Essig, E. Kuflik, S. D. McDermott, T. Volansky and K. M. Zurek, Constraining Light Dark Matter with Diffuse X-Ray and Gamma-Ray Observations , JHEP 11 (2013) 193, [ 1309.4091]

    2013 arXiv

  32. [38]

    T. R. Slatyer, Indirect dark matter signatures in the cosmic dark ages. I. Generalizing the bound on s-wave dark matter annihilation from Planck results , Phys. Rev. D 93 (2016) 023527, [ 1506.03811]

    2016 arXiv

  33. [39]

    H. Liu, T. R. Slatyer and J. Zavala, Contributions to cosmic reionization from dark matter annihilation and decay, Phys. Rev. D 94 (2016) 063507, [ 1604.02457]. 13

    2016 arXiv

  34. [40]

    Calore, A

    F. Calore, A. Dekker, P. D. Serpico and T. Siegert, Constraints on light decaying dark matter candidates from 16 yr of INTEGRAL/SPI observations , Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 520 (2023) 4167–4172, [2209.06299]

    2023

  35. [41]

    Wadekar and Z

    D. Wadekar and Z. Wang, Strong constraints on decay and annihilation of dark matter from heating of gas-rich dwarf galaxies , Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022) 075007, [2111.08025]

    2022 arXiv

  36. [42]

    Boudaud, J

    M. Boudaud, J. Lavalle and P. Salati, Novel cosmic-ray electron and positron constraints on MeV dark matter particles , Phys. Rev. Lett. 119 (2017) 021103, [1612.07698]

    2017 arXiv

  37. [44]

    https://www.cubesat.org/cubesatinfo

  38. [45]

    Lucchetta, M

    G. Lucchetta, M. Ackermann, D. Berge and R. B¨ uhler, Introducing the MeVCube concept: a CubeSat for MeV observations, JCAP 08 (2022) 013, [ 2204.01325]

    2022 arXiv

  39. [46]

    Lucchetta, M

    G. Lucchetta, M. Ackermann, D. Berge, I. Bloch, R. B¨ uhler, H. Kolanoski et al.,Characterization of a CdZnTe detector for a low-power CubeSat application , JINST 17 (2022) P08004, [ 2204.00475]

    2022 arXiv

  40. [47]

    K. K. Boddy and J. Kumar, Indirect Detection of Dark Matter Using MeV-Range Gamma-Ray Telescopes , Phys. Rev. D 92 (2015) 023533, [ 1504.04024]

    2015 arXiv

  41. [48]

    A. Ray, R. Laha, J. B. Mu˜ noz and R. Caputo, Near future MeV telescopes can discover asteroid-mass primordial black hole dark matter , Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) 023516, [ 2102.06714]

    2021 arXiv

  42. [49]

    Coogan, L

    A. Coogan, L. Morrison and S. Profumo, Direct Detection of Hawking Radiation from Asteroid-Mass Primordial Black Holes , Phys. Rev. Lett. 126 (2021) 171101, [2010.04797]

    2021 arXiv

  43. [50]

    Coogan, L

    A. Coogan, L. Morrison and S. Profumo, Precision gamma-ray constraints for sub-GeV dark matter models, JCAP 08 (2021) 044, [ 2104.06168]

    2021 arXiv

  44. [51]

    Caputo, M

    A. Caputo, M. Negro, M. Regis and M. Taoso, Dark matter prospects with COSI: ALPs, PBHs and sub-GeV dark matter , JCAP 02 (2023) 006, [2210.09310]

    2023 arXiv

  45. [52]

    Coogan et al., Hunting for dark matter and new physics with GECCO , Phys

    A. Coogan et al., Hunting for dark matter and new physics with GECCO , Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023) 023022, [2101.10370]

    2023 arXiv

  46. [53]

    Ghosh, D

    D. Ghosh, D. Sachdeva and P. Singh, Future constraints on primordial black holes from XGIS-THESEUS, Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022) 023022, [2110.03333]

    2022 arXiv

  47. [54]

    Tseng and Y.-M

    P.-Y. Tseng and Y.-M. Yeh, 511 keV line and primordial black holes from first-order phase transitions, JCAP 08 (2023) 035, [ 2209.01552]

    2023 arXiv

  48. [55]

    Carenza and P

    P. Carenza and P. De la Torre Luque, Detecting neutrino-boosted axion dark matter in the MeV gap , Eur. Phys. J. C 83 (2023) 110, [ 2210.17206]

    2023 arXiv

  49. [56]

    Xie, Pinning down the primordial black hole formation mechanism with gamma-rays and gravitational waves, JCAP 06 (2023) 008, [2301.02352]

    K.-P. Xie, Pinning down the primordial black hole formation mechanism with gamma-rays and gravitational waves, JCAP 06 (2023) 008, [2301.02352]

    2023 arXiv

  50. [57]

    Berlin, G

    A. Berlin, G. Krnjaic and E. Pinetti, Reviving MeV-GeV indirect detection with inelastic dark matter , Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024) 035015, [ 2311.00032]

    2024 arXiv

  51. [58]

    Calz` a, J

    M. Calz` a, J. a. G. Rosa and F. Serrano, Primordial black hole superradiance and evaporation in the string axiverse, JHEP 05 (2024) 140, [ 2306.09430]

    2024 arXiv

  52. [59]

    Kasuya, M

    S. Kasuya, M. Kawasaki and N. Tsuji, MeV gamma rays from Q-ball decay , Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024) 083039, [2403.01675]

    2024 arXiv

  53. [60]

    H.-R. Cui, Y. Tsai and T. Xu, Hawking radiation of nonrelativistic scalars: applications to pion and axion production, JHEP 11 (2024) 071, [ 2407.01675]

    2024

  54. [61]

    K. E. O’Donnell and T. R. Slatyer, Constraints on Dark Matter with Future MeV Gamma-Ray Telescopes , 2411.00087

    arXiv

  55. [62]

    J. B. Dent, B. Dutta and T. Xu, Multi-messenger Probes of Asteroid Mass Primordial Black Holes: Superradiance Spectroscopy, Hawking Radiation, and Microlensing, 2404.02956

    arXiv

  56. [63]

    Z. Xie, B. Liu, J. Liu, Y.-F. Cai and R. Yang, Limits on the primordial black holes dark matter with future MeV detectors, Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024) 043020, [2401.06440]

    2024

  57. [64]

    Agashe, M

    K. Agashe, M. Buen-Abad, J. H. Chang, S. J. Clark, B. Dutta, Y. Tsai et al., Light in the Shadows: Primordial Black Holes Making Dark Matter Shine , 2409.13811

    arXiv

  58. [65]

    Compagnin, S

    F. Compagnin, S. Profumo and N. Fornengo, MeV dark matter with MeV dark photons in Abelian kinetic mixing theories, JCAP 03 (2023) 061, [ 2211.13825]

    2023 arXiv

  59. [66]

    Abusleme et al., JUNO sensitivity to the annihilation of MeV dark matter in the galactic halo , JCAP 09 (2023) 001, [ 2306.09567]

    JUNO collaboration, A. Abusleme et al., JUNO sensitivity to the annihilation of MeV dark matter in the galactic halo , JCAP 09 (2023) 001, [ 2306.09567]

    2023

  60. [67]

    K. K. Boddy, B. Dutta, A. J. Evans, W.-C. Huang, S. Moltner and L. E. Strigari, Indirect detection of dark matter absorption in the Galactic Center , 2404.17418

    arXiv

  61. [68]

    C. A. Manzari, Y. Park, B. R. Safdi and I. Savoray, Supernova Axions Convert to Gamma Rays in Magnetic Fields of Progenitor Stars , Phys. Rev. Lett. 133 (2024) 211002, [ 2405.19393]

    2024

  62. [69]

    Alpine et al., DarkNESS: developing a skipper-CCD instrument to search for Dark Matter from Low Earth Orbit, 2412.12084

    P. Alpine et al., DarkNESS: developing a skipper-CCD instrument to search for Dark Matter from Low Earth Orbit, 2412.12084

    arXiv

  63. [70]

    J. H. Buckley, P. S. B. Dev, F. Ferrer and T. Okawa, Probing Heavy Axion-like Particles from Massive Stars with X-rays and Gamma Rays , 2412.21163

    arXiv

  64. [71]

    Boehm and P

    C. Boehm and P. Fayet, Scalar dark matter candidates , Nucl. Phys. B 683 (2004) 219–263, [ hep-ph/0305261]

    2004 arXiv

  65. [72]

    Pospelov, A

    M. Pospelov, A. Ritz and M. B. Voloshin, Secluded WIMP Dark Matter , Phys. Lett. B 662 (2008) 53–61, [0711.4866]

    2008 arXiv

  66. [73]

    Hochberg, E

    Y. Hochberg, E. Kuflik, T. Volansky and J. G. Wacker, Mechanism for Thermal Relic Dark Matter of Strongly Interacting Massive Particles , Phys. Rev. Lett. 113 (2014) 171301, [ 1402.5143]

    2014 arXiv

  67. [74]

    Boyarsky, M

    A. Boyarsky, M. Drewes, T. Lasserre, S. Mertens and O. Ruchayskiy, Sterile neutrino Dark Matter , Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 104 (2019) 1–45, [ 1807.07938]

    2019 arXiv

  68. [75]

    J. A. Evans, A. Ghalsasi, S. Gori, M. Tammaro and J. Zupan, Light Dark Matter from Entropy Dilution , JHEP 02 (2020) 151, [ 1910.06319]

    2020 arXiv

  69. [76]

    Dasgupta and J

    B. Dasgupta and J. Kopp, Sterile Neutrinos , Phys. Rept. 928 (2021) 1–63, [ 2106.05913]

    2021 arXiv

  70. [77]

    Chu, J.-L

    X. Chu, J.-L. Kuo and J. Pradler, Toward a full description of MeV dark matter decoupling: A self-consistent determination of relic abundance and Neff, Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022) 055022, [ 2205.05714]. 14

    2022 arXiv

  71. [78]

    Linden, T

    T. Linden, T. T. Q. Nguyen and T. M. P. Tait, X-Ray Constraints on Dark Photon Tridents , 2406.19445

    arXiv

  72. [79]

    T. T. Q. Nguyen, I. John, T. Linden and T. M. P. Tait, Strong Constraints on Dark Photon and Scalar Dark Matter Decay from INTEGRAL and AMS-02 , 2412.00180

    arXiv

  73. [80]

    Balan et al., Resonant or asymmetric: the status of sub-GeV dark matter , JCAP 01 (2025) 053, [2405.17548]

    S. Balan et al., Resonant or asymmetric: the status of sub-GeV dark matter , JCAP 01 (2025) 053, [2405.17548]

    2025 arXiv

  74. [81]

    Bringmann and C

    T. Bringmann and C. Weniger, Gamma Ray Signals from Dark Matter: Concepts, Status and Prospects , Phys. Dark Univ. 1 (2012) 194–217, [ 1208.5481]

    2012 arXiv

  75. [82]

    Shibata and M

    M. Shibata and M. Sasaki, Black hole formation in the Friedmann universe: Formulation and computation in numerical relativity, Phys. Rev. D 60 (1999) 084002, [gr-qc/9905064]

    1999 arXiv

  76. [83]

    Harada, C.-M

    T. Harada, C.-M. Yoo and K. Kohri, Threshold of primordial black hole formation , Phys. Rev. D 88 (2013) 084051, [ 1309.4201]

    2013 arXiv

  77. [84]

    Musco, K

    I. Musco, K. Jedamzik and S. Young, Primordial black hole formation during the QCD phase transition: Threshold, mass distribution, and abundance , Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024) 083506, [ 2303.07980]

    2024 arXiv

  78. [85]

    Harada, C.-M

    T. Harada, C.-M. Yoo, K. Kohri, K.-i. Nakao and S. Jhingan, Primordial black hole formation in the matter-dominated phase of the Universe , Astrophys. J. 833 (2016) 61, [ 1609.01588]

    2016 arXiv

  79. [86]

    J. C. Niemeyer and K. Jedamzik, Dynamics of primordial black hole formation , Phys. Rev. D 59 (1999) 124013, [ astro-ph/9901292]

    1999 arXiv

  80. [87]

    Musco, Threshold for primordial black holes: Dependence on the shape of the cosmological perturbations, Phys

    I. Musco, Threshold for primordial black holes: Dependence on the shape of the cosmological perturbations, Phys. Rev. D 100 (2019) 123524, [1809.02127]

    2019 arXiv

  81. [88]

    B. J. Carr and S. W. Hawking, Black holes in the early Universe, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 168 (1974) 399–415

    1974

  82. [89]

    C.-M. Yoo, T. Harada and H. Okawa, Threshold of Primordial Black Hole Formation in Nonspherical Collapse, Phys. Rev. D 102 (2020) 043526, [2004.01042]

    2020 arXiv

  83. [90]

    Clesse and J

    S. Clesse and J. Garc ´ ıa-Bellido,Massive Primordial Black Holes from Hybrid Inflation as Dark Matter and the seeds of Galaxies , Phys. Rev. D 92 (2015) 023524, [1501.07565]

    2015 arXiv

  84. [91]

    Jedamzik, Primordial black hole formation during the QCD epoch , Phys

    K. Jedamzik, Primordial black hole formation during the QCD epoch , Phys. Rev. D 55 (1997) 5871–5875, [astro-ph/9605152]

    1997 arXiv

  85. [92]

    Bhattacharya, S

    S. Bhattacharya, S. Mohanty and P. Parashari, Primordial black holes and gravitational waves in nonstandard cosmologies, Phys. Rev. D 102 (2020) 043522, [1912.01653]

    2020 arXiv

  86. [93]

    Bhaumik and R

    N. Bhaumik and R. K. Jain, Primordial black holes dark matter from inflection point models of inflation and the effects of reheating , JCAP 01 (2020) 037, [1907.04125]

    2020 arXiv

  87. [94]

    Bhaumik and R

    N. Bhaumik and R. K. Jain, Small scale induced gravitational waves from primordial black holes, a stringent lower mass bound, and the imprints of an early matter to radiation transition , Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) 023531, [ 2009.10424]

    2021 arXiv

  88. [95]

    Escriv` a, C

    A. Escriv` a, C. Germani and R. K. Sheth, Universal threshold for primordial black hole formation , Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020) 044022, [ 1907.13311]

    2020 arXiv

  89. [96]

    Escriv` a, E

    A. Escriv` a, E. Bagui and S. Clesse,Simulations of PBH formation at the QCD epoch and comparison with the GWTC-3 catalog , JCAP 05 (2023) 004, [2209.06196]

    2023 arXiv

  90. [97]

    Escriv` a and C.-M

    A. Escriv` a and C.-M. Yoo,Simulations of Ellipsoidal Primordial Black Hole Formation , 2410.03452

  91. [98]

    D. N. Page, Particle Emission Rates from a Black Hole: Massless Particles from an Uncharged, Nonrotating Hole, Phys. Rev. D 13 (1976) 198–206

    1976

  92. [99]

    D. N. Page, Particle Emission Rates from a Black Hole. 2. Massless Particles from a Rotating Hole , Phys. Rev. D 14 (1976) 3260–3273

    1976

  93. [100]

    J. H. MacGibbon and B. R. Webber, Quark and gluon jet emission from primordial black holes: The instantaneous spectra, Phys. Rev. D 41 (1990) 3052–3079

    1990

  94. [101]

    Arbey and J

    A. Arbey and J. Auffinger, BlackHawk: A public code for calculating the Hawking evaporation spectra of any black hole distribution , Eur. Phys. J. C 79 (2019) 693, [1905.04268]

    2019 arXiv

  95. [102]

    Arbey and J

    A. Arbey and J. Auffinger, Physics Beyond the Standard Model with BlackHawk v2.0 , Eur. Phys. J. C 81 (2021) 910, [ 2108.02737]

    2021 arXiv

  96. [103]

    Coogan, L

    A. Coogan, L. Morrison and S. Profumo, Hazma: A Python Toolkit for Studying Indirect Detection of Sub-GeV Dark Matter , JCAP 01 (2020) 056, [1907.11846]

    2020 arXiv

  97. [104]

    Cirelli, N

    M. Cirelli, N. Fornengo, B. J. Kavanagh and E. Pinetti, Integral X-ray constraints on sub-GeV Dark Matter , Phys. Rev. D 103 (2021) 063022, [ 2007.11493]

    2021 arXiv

  98. [105]

    Goodman, M

    J. Goodman, M. Ibe, A. Rajaraman, W. Shepherd, T. M. P. Tait and H.-B. Yu, Gamma Ray Line Constraints on Effective Theories of Dark Matter , Nucl. Phys. B 844 (2011) 55–68, [ 1009.0008]

    2011 arXiv

  99. [106]

    Rajaraman, T

    A. Rajaraman, T. M. P. Tait and D. Whiteson, Two Lines or Not Two Lines? That is the Question of Gamma Ray Spectra, JCAP 09 (2012) 003, [1205.4723]

    2012 arXiv

  100. [107]

    Bergstrom, G

    L. Bergstrom, G. Bertone, J. Conrad, C. Farnier and C. Weniger, Investigating Gamma-Ray Lines from Dark Matter with Future Observatories , JCAP 11 (2012) 025, [ 1207.6773]

    2012 arXiv

  101. [108]

    Ibarra, S

    A. Ibarra, S. Lopez Gehler and M. Pato, Dark matter constraints from box-shaped gamma-ray features, JCAP 07 (2012) 043, [ 1205.0007]

    2012 arXiv

  102. [109]

    L. Li, G. Huang, S. Xi, S. Zhang, C. Zhou, D. Liu et al., γ-ray energy spectrum response tailing in CdZnTe detector, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 1037 (Aug., 2022) 166922

    2022

  103. [110]

    Schlesinger, J

    T. Schlesinger, J. Toney, H. Yoon, E. Lee, B. Brunett, L. Franks et al., Cadmium zinc telluride and its use as a nuclear radiation detector material , Materials Science and Engineering: R: Reports 32 (2001) 103–189

    2001

  104. [111]

    https://cztlab.engin.umich.edu/wp-content/ uploads/sites/187/2015/03/Willy-Kaye.pdf

    2015

  105. [112]

    Bartels, D

    R. Bartels, D. Gaggero and C. Weniger, Prospects for indirect dark matter searches with MeV photons , JCAP 05 (2017) 001, [ 1703.02546]

    2017 arXiv

  106. [113]

    J. F. Beacom and H. Yuksel, Stringent constraint on galactic positron production, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97 (2006) 071102, [ astro-ph/0512411]

    2006 arXiv

  107. [114]

    A. W. Strong, R. Diehl, H. Halloin, V. Sch¨ onfelder, L. Bouchet, P. Mandrou et al., Gamma-ray continuum 15 emission from the inner Galactic region as observed with INTEGRAL/SPI , A&A 444 (Dec., 2005) 495–503, [astro-ph/0509290]

    2005 arXiv

  108. [115]

    A. W. Strong, H. Bloemen, R. Diehl, W. Hermsen and V. Schoenfelder, Comptel skymapping: A New approach using parallel computing , Astrophys. Lett. Commun. 39 (1999) 209, [ astro-ph/9811211]

    1999 arXiv

  109. [116]

    Ballesteros, J

    G. Ballesteros, J. Coronado-Bl´ azquez and D. Gaggero, X-ray and gamma-ray limits on the primordial black hole abundance from Hawking radiation , Phys. Lett. B 808 (2020) 135624, [ 1906.10113]

    2020 arXiv

  110. [117]

    Bringmann, M

    T. Bringmann, M. Doro and M. Fornasa, Dark Matter signals from Draco and Willman 1: Prospects for MAGIC II and CTA , JCAP 01 (2009) 016, [0809.2269]

    2009 arXiv

  111. [118]

    T. D. P. Edwards and C. Weniger, A Fresh Approach to Forecasting in Astroparticle Physics and Dark Matter Searches, JCAP 02 (2018) 021, [ 1704.05458]

    2018 arXiv

  112. [119]

    Dasgupta, R

    B. Dasgupta, R. Laha and A. Ray, Neutrino and positron constraints on spinning primordial black hole dark matter , Phys. Rev. Lett. 125 (2020) 101101, [1912.01014]

    2020 arXiv

  113. [120]

    R. Laha, P. Lu and V. Takhistov, Gas heating from spinning and non-spinning evaporating primordial black holes , Phys. Lett. B 820 (2021) 136459, [2009.11837]

    2021 arXiv

  114. [121]

    Kim, A constraint on light primordial black holes from the interstellar medium temperature , 2007.07739

    H. Kim, A constraint on light primordial black holes from the interstellar medium temperature , 2007.07739

    2007 arXiv

  115. [122]

    Bernal, V

    N. Bernal, V. Mu˜ noz Albornoz, S. Palomares-Ruiz and P. Villanueva-Domingo, Current and future neutrino limits on the abundance of primordial black holes , JCAP 10 (2022) 068, [ 2203.14979]

    2022 arXiv

  116. [123]

    Wang, D.-M

    S. Wang, D.-M. Xia, X. Zhang, S. Zhou and Z. Chang, Constraining primordial black holes as dark matter at JUNO, Phys. Rev. D 103 (2021) 043010, [2010.16053]

    2021 arXiv

  117. [124]

    Liu and K

    Q. Liu and K. C. Y. Ng, Sensitivity floor for primordial black holes in neutrino searches , Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024) 063024, [ 2312.06108]

    2024 arXiv

  118. [125]

    De Romeri, P

    V. De Romeri, P. Mart ´ ınez-Mirav´ e and M. T´ ortola, Signatures of primordial black hole dark matter at DUNE and THEIA , JCAP 10 (2021) 051, [2106.05013]

    2021 arXiv

  119. [126]

    Clark, B

    S. Clark, B. Dutta, Y. Gao, Y.-Z. Ma and L. E. Strigari, 21 cm limits on decaying dark matter and primordial black holes , Phys. Rev. D 98 (2018) 043006, [1803.09390]

    2018 arXiv

  120. [127]

    Mittal, A

    S. Mittal, A. Ray, G. Kulkarni and B. Dasgupta, Constraining primordial black holes as dark matter using the global 21-cm signal with X-ray heating and excess radio background, JCAP 03 (2022) 030, [2107.02190]

    2022 arXiv

  121. [128]

    A. K. Saha and R. Laha, Sensitivities on nonspinning and spinning primordial black hole dark matter with global 21-cm troughs , Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022) 103026, [2112.10794]

    2022 arXiv

  122. [129]

    P. K. Natwariya, A. C. Nayak and T. Srivastava, Constraining spinning primordial black holes with global 21-cm signal , Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 510 (2021) 4236, [ 2107.12358]

    2021 arXiv

  123. [130]

    A. K. Saha, A. Singh, P. Parashari and R. Laha, Hunting Primordial Black Hole Dark Matter in Lyman-α Forest, 2409.10617

  124. [131]

    Boudaud and M

    M. Boudaud and M. Cirelli, Voyager 1 e± Further Constrain Primordial Black Holes as Dark Matter , Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 (2019) 041104, [ 1807.03075]

    2019 arXiv

  125. [132]

    M. H. Chan and C. M. Lee, Constraining Primordial Black Hole Fraction at the Galactic Centre using radio observational data , Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 497 (2020) 1212–1216, [ 2007.05677]

    2020 arXiv

  126. [133]

    Gould, Femtolensing of Gamma-Ray Bursters , ApJ 386 (Feb., 1992) L5

    A. Gould, Femtolensing of Gamma-Ray Bursters , ApJ 386 (Feb., 1992) L5

    1992

  127. [134]

    A. Katz, J. Kopp, S. Sibiryakov and W. Xue, Femtolensing by Dark Matter Revisited , JCAP 12 (2018) 005, [ 1807.11495]

    2018 arXiv

  128. [135]

    R. J. Nemiroff and A. Gould, Probing for MACHOs of mass 10(**-15)-solar-mass - 10**-7-solar-mass with gamma-ray burst parallax spacecraft, Astrophys. J. Lett. 452 (1995) L111, [ astro-ph/9505019]

    1995 arXiv

  129. [136]

    Jung and T

    S. Jung and T. Kim, Gamma-ray burst lensing parallax: Closing the primordial black hole dark matter mass window , Phys. Rev. Res. 2 (2020) 013113, [1908.00078]

    2020 arXiv

  130. [137]

    Bai and N

    Y. Bai and N. Orlofsky, Microlensing of X-ray Pulsars: a Method to Detect Primordial Black Hole Dark Matter, Phys. Rev. D 99 (2019) 123019, [ 1812.01427]

    2019 arXiv

  131. [138]

    R. Laha, Lensing of fast radio bursts: Future constraints on primordial black hole density with an extended mass function and a new probe of exotic compact fermion and boson stars , Phys. Rev. D 102 (2020) 023016, [ 1812.11810]

    2020 arXiv

  132. [139]

    Montero-Camacho, X

    P. Montero-Camacho, X. Fang, G. Vasquez, M. Silva and C. M. Hirata, Revisiting constraints on asteroid-mass primordial black holes as dark matter candidates, JCAP 08 (2019) 031, [ 1906.05950]

    2019 arXiv

  133. [140]

    Ghosh and A

    D. Ghosh and A. K. Mishra, Gravitation wave signal from asteroid mass primordial black hole dark matter , Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024) 043537, [ 2208.14279]

    2024 arXiv

  134. [141]

    T. X. Tran, S. R. Geller, B. V. Lehmann and D. I. Kaiser, Close encounters of the primordial kind: a new observable for primordial black holes as dark matter , 2312.17217

    arXiv

  135. [142]

    Gawade, S

    P. Gawade, S. More and V. Bhalerao, On the feasibility of primordial black hole abundance constraints using lensing parallax of GRBs , Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 527 (2023) 3306–3314, [ 2308.01775]

    2023 arXiv

  136. [143]

    Tamta, N

    M. Tamta, N. Raj and P. Sharma, Breaking into the window of primordial black hole dark matter with x-ray microlensing, 2405.20365

    arXiv

  137. [144]

    Crescimbeni, G

    F. Crescimbeni, G. Franciolini, P. Pani and A. Riotto, Can we identify primordial black holes? Tidal tests for subsolar-mass gravitational-wave observations , Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024) 124063, [ 2402.18656]

    2024 arXiv

  138. [145]

    Thoss and A

    V. Thoss and A. Burkert, Primordial Black Holes in the Solar System , 2409.04518

    arXiv

  139. [146]

    Crescimbeni, G

    F. Crescimbeni, G. Franciolini, P. Pani and M. Vaglio, Cosmology and nuclear-physics implications of a subsolar gravitational-wave event , 2408.14287

    arXiv

  140. [147]

    De la Torre Luque, S

    P. De la Torre Luque, S. Balaji and J. Koechler, Importance of Cosmic-Ray Propagation on Sub-GeV Dark Matter Constraints , Astrophys. J. 968 (2024) 46, [2311.04979]

    2024 arXiv

  141. [149]

    De la Torre Luque, S

    P. De la Torre Luque, S. Balaji, M. Fairbairn, F. Sala and J. Silk, 511 keV Galactic Photons from a Dark Matter Spike , 2410.16379. 16

    arXiv

  142. [150]

    Cumani, M

    P. Cumani, M. Hernanz, J. Kiener, V. Tatischeff and A. Zoglauer, Background for a gamma-ray satellite on a low-Earth orbit , Exper. Astron. 47 (2019) 273–302, [1902.06944]

    2019 arXiv

  143. [151]

    Bhoonah, J

    A. Bhoonah, J. Bramante, B. Courtman and N. Song, Etched plastic searches for dark matter , Phys. Rev. D 103 (2021) 103001, [ 2012.13406]

    2021 arXiv

  144. [152]

    Y. Li, Z. Liu and Y. Xue, XQC and CSR constraints on strongly interacting dark matter with spin and velocity dependent cross sections, JCAP 05 (2023) 060, [2209.04387]

    2023 arXiv

  145. [153]

    B. D. Wandelt, R. Dave, G. R. Farrar, P. C. McGuire, D. N. Spergel and P. J. Steinhardt, Selfinteracting dark matter, in 4th International Symposium on Sources and Detection of Dark Matter in the Universe (DM 2000), pp. 263–274, 6, 2000. astro-ph/0006344

    2000 arXiv

  146. [154]

    P. Du, R. Essig, B. J. Rauscher and H. Xu, Constraints on Strongly-Interacting Dark Matter from the James Webb Space Telescope , 2412.13131

    arXiv

  147. [155]

    Tamagawa et al., NinjaSat: Astronomical X-ray CubeSat Observatory, 2412.03016

    T. Tamagawa et al., NinjaSat: Astronomical X-ray CubeSat Observatory, 2412.03016

    arXiv

  148. [156]

    https://cosi.ssl.berkeley.edu/

  149. [157]

    Brown, T

    K. Brown, T. G. Rose, B. K. Malphrus, J. A. Kruth, E. T. Thomas, M. S. Combs et al., The cosmic x-ray background nanosat (cxbn): Measuring the cosmic x-ray background using the cubesat form factor , 2012

    2012

  150. [158]

    Weiss, A

    W. Weiss, A. Moffat, A. Schwarzenberg-Czerny, O. Koudelka, C. Grant, R. Zee et al., Brite-constellation: Nanosatellites for precision photometry of bright stars , Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific 126 (09, 2013)

    2013

  151. [159]

    J. P. Mason, T. N. Woods, A. Caspi, P. C. Chamberlin, C. Moore, A. Jones et al., Miniature X-Ray Solar Spectrometer (MinXSS) - A Science-Oriented, University 3U CubeSat , 1508.05354

    arXiv

  152. [160]

    B. R. Johnson, C. J. Vourch, T. D. Drysdale, A. Kalman, S. Fujikawa, B. Keating et al., A CubeSat for Calibrating Ground-Based and Sub-Orbital Millimeter-Wave Polarimeters (CalSat) , J. Astron. Inst. 04 (2015) 1550007, [ 1505.07033]

    2015 arXiv

  153. [161]

    Chattopadhyay, A

    T. Chattopadhyay, A. D. Falcone, D. N. Burrows, D. B. Fox and D. Palmer, BlackCAT CubeSat: A Soft X-ray Sky Monitor, Transient Finder, and Burst Detector for High-energy and Multimessenger Astrophysics, 1807.03333

    arXiv

  154. [162]

    Iuzzolino, D

    M. Iuzzolino, D. Accardo, G. Rufino, E. Oliva, A. Tozzi and P. Schipani, A cubesat payload for exoplanet detection, Sensors 17 (2017)

    2017

  155. [163]

    Kaaret et al., HaloSat: A CubeSat to Study the Hot Galactic Halo , Astrophys

    P. Kaaret et al., HaloSat: A CubeSat to Study the Hot Galactic Halo , Astrophys. J. 884 (2019) 162, [1909.13822]

    2019 arXiv

  156. [164]

    Yang, Y.-C

    C.-Y. Yang, Y.-C. Chang, H.-H. Liang, C.-Y. Chu, J.-Y. Hsiang, J.-L. Chiu et al., Feasibility of Observing Gamma-ray Polarization from Cygnus X-1 Using a CubeSat, Astron. J. 160 (2020) 54, [ 1911.12958]

    2020 arXiv

  157. [165]

    Feng et al., PolarLight: a CubeSat X-ray Polarimeter based on the Gas Pixel Detector , Exper

    H. Feng et al., PolarLight: a CubeSat X-ray Polarimeter based on the Gas Pixel Detector , Exper. Astron. 47 (2019) 225–243, [ 1903.01619]

    2019 arXiv

  158. [166]

    Yatsu and N

    Y. Yatsu and N. Kawai, Cubesat for ultraviolet time-domain astronomy, 2019

    2019

  159. [167]

    Fuschino et al., HERMES: An ultra-wide band X and gamma-ray transient monitor on board a nano-satellite constellation , Nucl

    F. Fuschino et al., HERMES: An ultra-wide band X and gamma-ray transient monitor on board a nano-satellite constellation , Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 936 (2019) 199–203, [ 1812.02432]

    2019 arXiv

  160. [168]

    Elsaesser, F

    A. Elsaesser, F. Merenda, R. K. Lindner, R. Walker, S. Buehler, G. Boer et al., Spectrocube: a european 6u nanosatellite spectroscopy platform for astrobiology and astrochemistry, Acta Astronautica (2020)

    2020

  161. [169]

    Fabiani, E

    S. Fabiani, E. Del Monte, I. Baffo, S. Bonomo, D. Brienza, R. Campana et al., The cubesat solar polarimeter (cusp) mission overview , in Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2024: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray, vol. 13093, pp. 850–857, SPIE, 2024

    2024

  162. [170]

    Solomey et al., Concept for a space-based near-solar neutrino detector, Nucl

    N. Solomey et al., Concept for a space-based near-solar neutrino detector, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 1049 (2023) 168064, [2206.00703]

    2023 arXiv

  163. [171]

    France, B

    K. France, B. Fleming, A. Egan, J.-M. Desert, L. Fossati, T. T. Koskinen et al., The colorado ultraviolet transit experiment mission overview , The Astronomical Journal 165 (2023) 63

    2023

  164. [172]

    P. F. Bloser, D. Murphy, F. Fiore and J. Perkins, CubeSats for Gamma-Ray Astronomy , 2212.11413

    arXiv

  165. [173]

    Braga et al., LECX: a cubesat experiment to detect and localize cosmic explosions in hard X rays , Mon

    J. Braga et al., LECX: a cubesat experiment to detect and localize cosmic explosions in hard X rays , Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 493 (2020) 4852–4860, [2001.08278]

    2020 arXiv

  166. [174]

    Wen, X.-T

    J.-X. Wen, X.-T. Zheng, J.-D. Yu, Y.-P. Che, D.-X. Yang, H.-Z. Gao et al., Compact cubesat gamma-ray detector for grid mission , Nuclear Science and Techniques 32 (2021) 99

    2021

  167. [175]

    Rukdee, Trade-off study of a high-resolution spectrograph on a CubeSat to study exoplanets , in Techniques and Instrumentation for Detection of Exoplanets X (S

    S. Rukdee, Trade-off study of a high-resolution spectrograph on a CubeSat to study exoplanets , in Techniques and Instrumentation for Detection of Exoplanets X (S. B. Shaklan and G. J. Ruane, eds.), vol. 11823, p. 118230K, International Society for Optics and Photonics, SPIE, ...

    2021

  168. [176]

    Kushwah, T

    R. Kushwah, T. A. Stana and M. Pearce, The design and performance of CUBES — a CubeSat X-ray detector, JINST 16 (2021) P08038, [ 2107.09281]

    2021 arXiv

  169. [177]

    D. R. Ardila, E. Shkolnik, P. Scowen, D. Jacobs, D. Gregory, T. Barman et al., The star-planet activity research cubesat (sparcs): Determining inputs to planetary habitability , arXiv:2211.05897 (2022)

    2022 arXiv

  170. [178]

    Lehtolainen, J

    A. Lehtolainen, J. Huovelin, S. Korpela, E. Kilpua, H. Andersson, D. Giurisato et al., Sunstorm 1/x-ray flux monitor for cubesats (xfm-cs): Instrument characterization and first results , Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometer...

    2022

  171. [179]

    Knapp, S

    M. Knapp, S. Seager, B.-O. Demory, A. Krishnamurthy, M. W. Smith, C. M. Pong et al., Demonstrating high-precision photometry with a cubesat: Asteria observations of 55 cancri e , The astronomical journal 160 (2020) 23

    2020

  172. [180]

    Raskin, T

    G. Raskin, T. Delabie, W. De Munter, H. Sana, B. Vandenbussche, B. Vandoren et al., Cubespec: low-cost space-based astronomical spectroscopy, in Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2018: Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Wave , vol. 10698, pp. 1639–1650, SPIE, 2018

    2018

  173. [181]

    P´ al et al.,GRBAlpha: The smallest astrophysical space observatory - I

    A. P´ al et al.,GRBAlpha: The smallest astrophysical space observatory - I. Detector design, system description, and satellite operations , Astron. Astrophys. 677 (2023) A40, [ 2302.10048]

    2023

  174. [182]

    Werner et al., CAMELOT: Cubesats Applied for MEasuring and LOcalising Transients - Mission Overview , Proc

    CAMELOT collaboration, N. Werner et al., CAMELOT: Cubesats Applied for MEasuring and LOcalising Transients - Mission Overview , Proc. SPIE 17 Int. Soc. Opt. Eng. 10699 (2018) 106992P, [1806.03681]

    2018 arXiv

  175. [183]

    Zhu et al., MeV astrophysical spectroscopic surveyor (MASS): a compton telescope mission concept , Exper

    J. Zhu et al., MeV astrophysical spectroscopic surveyor (MASS): a compton telescope mission concept , Exper. Astron. 57 (2024) 2, [ 2312.11900]

    2024 arXiv

  176. [184]

    Diwan, K

    R. Diwan, K. de Kuijper, P. S. Pal, A. Ritter, P. Saz Parkinson, A. C. T. Kong et al., Performance Evaluation of a silicon-based 6U Cubesat detector for soft γ-ray astronomy, 2308.09266

    arXiv

  177. [185]

    de Kuijper, R

    K. de Kuijper, R. Diwan, P. S. Pal, A. Ritter, P. M. Saz Parkinson, A. C. T. Kong et al., Evaluation of the performance of a CdZnTe-based soft γ-ray detector for CubeSat payloads, Exper. Astron. 57 (2024) 16, [2401.09735]

    2024 arXiv

  178. [186]

    Lacour, M

    S. Lacour, M. Nowak, P. Bourget, F. Vincent, A. Kellerer, V. Lapeyr` ere et al.,SAGE: using CubeSats for Gravitational Wave Detection , Proc. SPIE Int. Soc. Opt. Eng. 10699 (2018) 106992R, [ 1806.08106]

    2018 arXiv

  179. [187]

    Albrecht et al., Report of the Dark Energy Task Force, astro-ph/0609591

    A. Albrecht et al., Report of the Dark Energy Task Force, astro-ph/0609591

    arXiv

  180. [188]

    Wittman, Fisher Matrix for Beginners, https: // wittman

    D. Wittman, Fisher Matrix for Beginners, https: // wittman. physics. ucdavis. edu/ Fisher-matrix-guide. pdf,

  181. [189]

    Albrecht, L

    A. Albrecht, L. Amendola, G. Bernstein, D. Clowe, D. Eisenstein, L. Guzzo et al., Findings of the Joint Dark Energy Mission Figure of Merit Science Working Group, arXiv e-prints (Jan., 2009) arXiv:0901.0721, [0901.0721]

    2009 arXiv

  182. [190]

    Coe, Fisher Matrices and Confidence Ellipses: A Quick-Start Guide and Software , arXiv e-prints (June,

    D. Coe, Fisher Matrices and Confidence Ellipses: A Quick-Start Guide and Software , arXiv e-prints (June,

  183. [191]

    https://www.nasa.gov/news-release/ nasa-awards-launch-services-contract-for-space-telescope-mission/

  184. [192]

    L. Wolz, M. Kilbinger, J. Weller and T. Giannantonio, On the Validity of Cosmological Fisher Matrix Forecasts, JCAP 09 (2012) 009, [ 1205.3984]

    2012 arXiv

  185. [193]

    A. S. Lamperstorfer, Spectral Features from Dark Matter Annihilations and Decays in Indirect Searches . PhD thesis, Munich, Tech. U., 9, 2015

    2015

  186. [194]

    https://www.spacex.com/rideshare/

  187. [195]

    https://www.nanosats.eu/

  188. [196]

    https://www.nanosats.eu/img/fig/Nanosats_years_ black_2024-12-31_large.png

  189. [197]

    ˇR ´ ıpa, G

    J. ˇR ´ ıpa, G. Dilillo, R. Campana and G. Galg´ oczi,A comparison of trapped particle models in low earth orbit, in Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2020: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray , vol. 11444, pp. 597–606, SPIE, 2020

    2020

  190. [198]

    https://www.rocketlabusa.com/launch/electron/

  191. [199]

    Tatischeff, P

    V. Tatischeff, P. Ubertini, T. Mizuno and L. Natalucci, Orbits and background of gamma-ray space instruments. 2022. 2209.07316

    2022 arXiv

  192. [201]

    https://www.eoportal.org/satellite-missions/ integral#eop-quick-facts-section . 18

  193. [2009]

    arXiv:0906.4123, [ 0906.4123]

    arXiv

Pith tools

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