Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 7 minor 1 cited by

Discovering the Higgsino at CTAO-North within the Decade

T0 review · 3 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper argues that CTAO-North, observing the Galactic Center at large zenith angles, can discover or exclude the 1.1 TeV thermal higgsino within a few years, reaching $5\sigma$ by 2028 under the median Auriga profile and conclusive…

desk verdict Solid, transparent forecast; the genuinely new northern-site reach is real, but the 2028 five-sigma date rests on an idealized background model that the paper flags without quantifying. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.08084 v1 pith:GENBWG5L submitted 2025-06-09 hep-ph astro-ph.COastro-ph.HE

Shotaro Abe , Tomohiro Inada , Emmanuel Moulin , Nicholas L. Rodd , Benjamin R. Safdi , Weishuang Linda Xu This is my paper
classification hep-phastro-ph.COastro-ph.HE
keywords higgsinodarkmatterthermalrelicCTAO-Northgamma-raylinesearchlarge-zenith-angleobservationsGalacticCenterJ-factorindirectdetection
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 projects that the northern site of the Cherenkov Telescope Array in La Palma could discover the 1.1 TeV thermal higgsino—a supersymmetric dark matter candidate whose relic abundance would match observations—within the next few years. The challenge is that the Galactic Center, the brightest expected annihilation signal, rises only about 58 degrees from the zenith at that site, deeper into the atmosphere than gamma-ray telescopes usually observe. The paper shows that large-zenith-angle observations enlarge the effective area by nearly an order of magnitude at TeV energies, turning the site's poor elevation into an advantage. With 100 hours per year of such data, the projected signal exceeds $5\sigma$ by 2028 for the median Auriga dark matter profile and reaches conclusive detection by 2030 for a broad range of inner-Galaxy profiles. If correct, this would put a WIMP discovery within reach years before CTAO-South, direct detection, or future colliders.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is large-zenith-angle ($\sim 60^\circ$) observation with the four LSTs of CTAO-North—later joined by nine MSTs—which increases the on-axis effective area by almost an order of magnitude at TeV energies so that the northern array roughly matches CTAO-South at 1 TeV despite the Galactic Center's low elevation. The signal template is the full higgsino annihilation spectrum, including the loop-level $\gamma\gamma$ and $\gamma Z$ lines, the resummed endpoint contribution, and the continuum from $W/Z$ hadronization; the line-plus-endpoint and continuum contribute about equally to the discovery test statistic. The analysis bins 100 GeV–10 TeV Asimov data into five $1^\circ$ annuli around the Galactic Center and joins per-annulus profile likelihoods, with the J-factor—the line-of-sight integral of $\rho^2_{\mathrm{DM}}$—encoding the uncertain dark matter distribution from the Auriga and FIRE-2 hydrodynamical simulations and the Einasto/NFW profiles.

What would settle it

Point CTAO-North at the Galactic Center for 100 hours at zenith angles near 60 degrees and fit the 0.1–10 TeV spectrum with the cosmic-ray and diffuse astrophysical backgrounds; if the best-fit normalization of a 1.1 TeV line-plus-endpoint component is zero at the sensitivity projected here, the paper's Auriga-median discovery claim is falsified. A 500-hour dedicated search around 1.1 TeV would make the test decisive.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the thermal higgsino—a nearly pure electroweakino with mass $\sim 1.1$ TeV set by the relic abundance—produces a gamma-ray signature in the inner Galaxy that CTAO-North can detect within the decade, provided the dark matter density toward the Galactic Center is not too small. The signature combines a narrow line-plus-endpoint feature at the higgsino mass, which has no known standard astrophysical counterpart, with a broader continuum from $W^+W^-$ and $ZZ$ final states. The paper's projections use Asimov data, a profile-likelihood test statistic with the signal normalization as the single parameter, and perfectly known background templates for the misidentified cosmic-ray and astrophysical backgrounds. The headline results are that the median Auriga J-factor yields discovery significance above $5\sigma$ by 2028 with 100 hours per year of large-zenith-angle data, the Einasto profile yields conclusive detection by 2030, and the median FIRE-2 profile remains far more challenging, requiring decades of CTAO data.

Load-bearing premise

The projected discovery times assume the backgrounds—cosmic rays and ordinary gamma-rays from the Galaxy—are understood perfectly, so if the real large-zenith-angle sky is harder to model than simulations suggest, the 2028 and 2030 milestones could move later.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the projection is right, CTAO-North can discover or rule out the thermal higgsino before CTAO-South starts data-taking, and before any planned collider or direct-detection experiment can reach it.
  • A sharp spectral feature near 1.1 TeV toward the Galactic Center would be a smoking-gun annihilation signal, since no known standard astrophysical source produces such a narrow line.
  • Under the median Auriga profile, $5\sigma$ discovery is expected by 2028; under Einasto, conclusive detection by 2030; under the median FIRE-2 profile, the model remains out of reach for decades even with both CTAO sites.
  • Including the full higgsino spectrum—line, endpoint, and continuum—roughly doubles the discovery test statistic relative to line-only or continuum-only searches, halving the observation time needed.
  • The next necessary step the paper identifies is a cosmic-ray background model built from OFF-source observations at the same large zenith angles, which early CTAO-North data can soon test.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A null result from the first few hundred hours would begin to constrain the Milky Way's inner dark matter profile rather than only the higgsino, effectively turning CTAO-North into a J-factor probe for cuspy versus cored halos.
  • The same large-zenith-angle strategy should transfer to other TeV-scale WIMP candidates and to searches for narrow axion-like-particle spectral features, since the gain in effective area is not specific to the higgsino spectrum.
  • Re-running the projection with the two nuisance background normalizations per annulus that the paper says a realistic analysis would include would quantify how much of the 2028/2030 timeline is an artifact of the idealized background assumption.
  • A confirmed line at 1.1 TeV would motivate coordinated follow-up with CTAO-South and higher-resolution instruments to measure the radial profile of the signal and check that it tracks the expected dark matter distribution.
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 / 7 minor

Summary. The paper projects the sensitivity of CTAO-North to a 1.1 TeV thermal higgsino dark matter annihilation signal from the Galactic Center, using large-zenith-angle (60°) observations with the LST array and, later, the addition of MSTs. The signal model combines the γγ/γZ line, the resummed endpoint, and the WW/ZZ continuum using the DMγSpec code. Backgrounds are modeled with the prod5-v0.1 cosmic-ray templates and the Fermi p8r3 diffuse model extrapolated above 2 TeV. The analysis bins Asimov data in five annuli and 100 energy bins, assumes perfect background knowledge with no nuisance parameters, and reports the discovery TS as a function of calendar year for several J-factor scenarios. The central result is that for the median Auriga J-factor, CTAO-North reaches over 5σ significance by 2028, with the Einasto profile intermediate and the FIRE-2 median much weaker; the abstract states that conclusive detection by 2030 is possible for a range of inner-Galaxy density profiles. The Discussion explicitly acknowledges that the results are idealized and do not include background mismodeling or nuisance parameters.

Significance. If the projection holds up under closer scrutiny, the paper materially advances the indirect-detection timeline: a well-motivated thermal WIMP, the higgsino, could be tested at CTAO-North within the decade, before CTAO-South becomes fully operational and far before any collider sensitivity. The strengths of the paper are its precise treatment of the higgsino annihilation spectrum with resummed endpoint corrections, its use of publicly available CTAO instrument response functions, its bracketing of J-factor uncertainty with Auriga and FIRE-2 hydrodynamical simulations, and its transparent, reproducible analysis framework with an explicit statement of idealized assumptions. The central prediction is falsifiable and specific: the projected discovery TS as a function of time, J-factor profile, and instrument configuration is concrete. The main weakness is that the headline timeline rests on an idealized treatment of backgrounds, whose quantitative impact on the discovery significance is not assessed.

major comments (3)
  1. [End Matter A; Fig. 3; Discussion] The central timeline claim (5σ by 2028 for the Auriga median, and 'conclusive detection by 2030' in the abstract) is computed under the assumption of perfect background knowledge with no nuisance parameters (End Matter A: 'we assume perfect knowledge of the background flux'; main text: 'we assume a perfect model for the background components, with no free parameters'). Figure 3 shows that the cosmic-ray background dominates the total counts above roughly 1 TeV, and End Matter A states that the line+endpoint and continuum components contribute roughly equally to the discovery TS. Because the continuum is a broad spectral template, a small spectral-index error or normalization offset in the simulated 60°-zenith cosmic-ray background could be partially degenerate with the signal, either absorbing part of the signal or leaving residual fluctuations that inflate the apparent TS. The Discussion concedes this ('our results follow from an idealized analysis, with no mismodeling for the backgrounds...') but does not quantify the effect. I ask the authors to include a projection with the two nuisance parameters per annulus described in End Matter A, and ideally also a spectral-index tilt nuisance, or at minimum a quantitative estimate of the TS degradation from realistic background uncertainties. Without this, the 2028/2030 discovery claims are not robust.
  2. [Sec. 'CTAO-North Instrument Response'; Fig. 2; Fig. B1] The sensitivity gain that drives the projection comes almost entirely from the large-zenith-angle effective area, which is about an order of magnitude larger at 1 TeV than at 20° zenith (Fig. 2). The cosmic-ray background rejection and energy resolution at 60° are taken from the prod5-v0.1 Monte Carlo IRFs (Fig. B1), but these large-zenith templates are not validated against real CTAO data. The paper itself notes that MAGIC reports systematic uncertainties of about 15% in energy scale and 20% in flux normalization at large zenith angles, and argues these can be mitigated with nuisance parameters, yet the analysis does not implement or test that mitigation. Because the cosmic-ray background dominates the signal region, a zenith-angle-dependent mis-modeling of the CR rejection efficiency would directly bias the projected TS. Please either validate the 60° prod5-v0.1 background template against available MAGIC or LST-1 data, or present a sensitivity scan that varies the assumed cosmic-ray background shape and normalization.
  3. [Sec. 'Discovery Prospects at CTAO-North'; End Matter A] The astrophysical gamma-ray background is modeled with the Fermi p8r3 diffuse model, extrapolated above 2 TeV with a power law as in Ref. [12]. The signal's continuum component extends below about 1 TeV and contributes roughly half of the discovery TS (End Matter A). If the true inner-Galaxy diffuse emission above 2 TeV deviates from the assumed power law, for example due to unresolved sources or a spectral break, the continuum signal template could be partially absorbed or mimicked by the background. The paper does not quantify the systematic uncertainty associated with this extrapolation. Please include a test with an alternative diffuse background template or a free spectral index for the astrophysical component, and discuss how such a change would affect the projected discovery timeline.
minor comments (7)
  1. [Introduction] The phrase 'is has been demonstrated' should read 'it has been demonstrated'.
  2. [Sec. 'Higgsino Annihilation'] The typo 'final sates' should read 'final states'.
  3. [Sec. 'Discovery Prospects at CTAO-North'] The word 'optimisitc' should read 'optimistic'.
  4. [Abstract / Discussion] The abstract states 'conclusive detection ... by 2030' without the 'idealized analysis' qualifier that the Discussion attaches to the results; please align the abstract with the caveat that this projection assumes perfect background knowledge.
  5. [Fig. 4 caption] The color code for the '3σ evidence by 2030' and '3σ evidence by 2050' regions may be difficult to distinguish in grayscale; please add patterns, symbols, or labels to make the figure self-contained.
  6. [Sec. 'Discovery Prospects at CTAO-North'] The assumed 100 hours/year observing rate is described as optimistic, but no justification is given; please cite the source for the dark-time estimate or compare explicitly with the 250 hours/year maximum mentioned in the text.
  7. [Sec. 'Discovery Prospects at CTAO-North'] The sentence 'the higgsino may be discovered or disfavored within a few years' refers to disfavoring the model, but Fig. 1 only presents discovery TS; an exclusion projection (e.g., expected upper limit on the annihilation cross-section) would make the word 'disfavored' quantitative.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the CTAO-North higgsino projection combines independent particle-physics spectra, publicly simulated J-factors, and public instrument response functions, with self-citations providing methodology rather than the predicted reach.

full rationale

The paper's central projection is assembled from genuinely external inputs. The higgsino annihilation spectrum comes from DMγSpec and PPPC4DMID, which are independent public calculations, and the J-factors come from public hydrodynamical simulation suites (Auriga, FIRE-2) plus Einasto/NFW profiles normalized to a fixed local density. The CTAO instrument response, including the large-zenith-angle effective area and cosmic-ray background, is taken from the public prod5-v0.1 library, and the astrophysical background from the public Fermi p8r3 model. The analysis is an Asimov projection: mock data are generated from signal-plus-background templates and then fit with the same templates, with the signal normalization as the only free parameter. This is a standard sensitivity forecast, not a fit to real data, and no parameter is adjusted to produce the claimed 5σ-by-2028 result. The self-citations to Ref. [12] supply the analysis framework, background spectral shapes, and validation discussion, but those are not results whose content is equivalent to the higgsino discovery claim; the framework is reused, not the conclusion. The authors explicitly flag the idealized treatment of backgrounds and the absence of nuisance parameters in the Discussion and End Matter, which is a genuine systematic-uncertainty caveat but not a circularity. There is no equation in which a predicted quantity is defined in terms of the target observable, no fitted parameter renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness argument imported from the authors' prior work to forbid alternatives. The conclusion is therefore self-contained, and any remaining concerns about background mismodeling or the J-factor spread belong to correctness risk rather than circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's central claim is a sensitivity forecast. It introduces no new free parameters that are fit to data; the listed free parameters are hand-chosen inputs (exposure, zenith angle, energy resolution, local density, pointing) that directly affect the projected test statistic. The axioms are mostly standard statistics, public instrument and background models, and the external particle physics spectrum. The weakest point is the idealized background assumption, which is not a standard axiom but a deliberate simplifying choice whose violation would weaken the conclusion.

free parameters (5)
  • Observation time per year = 100 hours
    Chosen for definiteness; the maximum possible is about 250 hours per year, so the choice is conservative but arbitrary.
  • Average zenith angle = 60 degrees
    Chosen because the Galactic Center culminates at 58 degrees at La Palma; affects effective area and energy threshold.
  • Assumed energy resolution = 15%
    Benchmark value used for the line and endpoint sensitivity; the IRFs show 10 to 20 percent depending on energy.
  • Local dark matter density normalization = 0.38 GeV/cm^3 at 8.3 kpc
    Used to renormalize all J-factors; taken from literature rather than fitted, but is a choice that directly scales the signal.
  • Pointing offsets = +/-0.42 degrees (LST-only) and +/-1.2 degrees (full arrays)
    Chosen based on field of view; the authors note the choice is not optimized and has minor impact in the idealized analysis.
assumptions (7)
  • standard math Poisson likelihood and Wilks' theorem for significance
    Used to compute the discovery test statistic in End Matter A; standard asymptotic statistics.
  • ad hoc to paper Perfect background model with no nuisance parameters
    Made to showcase the maximal reach; explicitly acknowledged as idealized in End Matter A and the Discussion.
  • domain assumption Fermi p8r3 diffuse model is a good description at TeV energies in the inner Galaxy and is extrapolated as a power law above 2 TeV
    Main text; needed to estimate the astrophysical background.
  • domain assumption prod5-v0.1 IRFs accurately represent CTAO performance, including at large zenith angles
    Main text; the entire effective area and background estimate relies on these Monte Carlo products.
  • domain assumption Auriga and FIRE-2 simulation profiles, renormalized to 0.38 GeV/cm^3 at 8.3 kpc, bracket the Milky Way's inner DM distribution
    Main text and Fig. 4; the J-factor range is the dominant uncertainty in the timeline.
  • domain assumption The higgsino annihilation spectrum from DMgammaSpec is correct
    Main text; the signal templates for line, endpoint, and continuum are taken from this external code.
  • domain assumption The thermal relic mass of the higgsino is 1.1 TeV
    Introduction; based on prior thermal relic calculations, fixes the signal energy.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Discovering the Higgsino at CTAO-North within the Decade." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GENBWG5L

@misc{pith2026250608084,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Discovering the Higgsino at CTAO-North within the Decade},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GENBWG5L}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.08084}
}
read the original abstract

We demonstrate that higgsino dark matter (DM) could be discovered within the next few years using the Cherenkov Telescope Array Observatory's soon-to-be-operational northern site (CTAO-North). A 1.1 TeV thermal higgsino is a highly motivated yet untested model of DM. Despite its strong theoretical motivation in supersymmetry and beyond, the higgsino is notoriously difficult to detect; it lies deep within the neutrino fog of direct detection experiments and could pose a challenge even for a future muon collider. We show that, in contrast, higgsino detection could be possible within this decade with CTAO-North in La Palma, Spain. The Galactic Center is the region where the dominant DM annihilation signature emerges, but it only barely rises above the horizon at the CTAO-North site. However, we project that this challenge can be overcome with large-zenith-angle observations at the northern site, enabling the conclusive detection of a higgsino signal by 2030 for a range of DM density profiles in the inner Galaxy.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.08084 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. The expected discovery test statistic (TS) for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. The on-axis effective area as a function of the pho [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. The expected background and signal counts within [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. The expected [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Stellar-like Galactic center excess challenges particle dark matter

    hep-ph 2025-11 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A mixed stellar-bulge and dark-matter fit to Fermi-LAT Galactic Center data yields upper limits on the annihilation cross section that reach the thermal relic line for masses ≲300 GeV under a contracted NFW halo profile.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

75 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [12]

    Hunting for Heavy Winos in the Galactic Center

    L. Rinchiuso, N. L. Rodd, I. Moult, E. Moulin, M. Baumgart, T. Cohen, T. R. Slatyer, I. W. Stewart, and V. Vaidya, “Hunting for Heavy Winos in the Galactic Center,”Phys. Rev. D98(2018) no. 12, 123014,arXiv:1808.04388 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2018

  2. [1]

    Implications of supersymmetry breaking with a little hierarchy between gauginos and scalars,

    J. D. Wells, “Implications of supersymmetry breaking with a little hierarchy between gauginos and scalars,” in 11th International Conference on Supersymmetry and the Unification of Fundamental Interactions. 6, 2003. arXiv:hep-ph/0306127

    arXiv 2003

  3. [2]

    For a detailed discussion of these points see Ref

    These predictions roughly bracket our current uncer- tainty on theJ-factor; the differences arise from an inter- play of baryons near the Galactic Center generating an adiabatic contraction of the DM halo and strong bary- onic feedback – arising, for instance, from supernovae – that disperse the baryons from the center, partially drag- ging DM with them. ...

    work page 2026

  4. [3]

    Split supersymmetry,

    G. F. Giudice and A. Romanino, “Split supersymmetry,”Nucl. Phys. B699(2004) 65–89, arXiv:hep-ph/0406088. [Erratum: Nucl.Phys.B 706, 487–487 (2005)]

    arXiv 2004

  5. [4]

    Supersymmetric unification without low energy supersymmetry and signatures for fine-tuning at the LHC,

    N. Arkani-Hamed and S. Dimopoulos, “Supersymmetric unification without low energy supersymmetry and signatures for fine-tuning at the LHC,”JHEP06(2005) 073,arXiv:hep-th/0405159

    arXiv 2005

  6. [5]

    Spread Supersymmetry,

    L. J. Hall and Y. Nomura, “Spread Supersymmetry,” JHEP01(2012) 082,arXiv:1111.4519 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2012

  7. [6]

    Mini-Split,

    A. Arvanitaki, N. Craig, S. Dimopoulos, and G. Villadoro, “Mini-Split,”JHEP02(2013) 126, arXiv:1210.0555 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2013

  8. [7]

    Simply Unnatural Supersymmetry,

    N. Arkani-Hamed, A. Gupta, D. E. Kaplan, N. Weiner, and T. Zorawski, “Simply Unnatural Supersymmetry,” arXiv:1212.6971 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

Show all 75 references
  1. [8]

    Race to find split Higgsino dark matter,

    R. T. Co, B. Sheff, and J. D. Wells, “Race to find split Higgsino dark matter,”Phys. Rev. D105(2022) no. 3, 035012,arXiv:2105.12142 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  2. [9]

    The last complex WIMPs standing,

    S. Bottaro, D. Buttazzo, M. Costa, R. Franceschini, P. Panci, D. Redigolo, and L. Vittorio, “The last complex WIMPs standing,”Eur. Phys. J. C82(2022) no. 11, 992,arXiv:2205.04486 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  3. [10]

    In Wino Veritas? Indirect Searches Shed Light on Neutralino Dark Matter,

    J. Fan and M. Reece, “In Wino Veritas? Indirect Searches Shed Light on Neutralino Dark Matter,” JHEP10(2013) 124,arXiv:1307.4400 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  4. [11]

    Wino Dark Matter Under Siege,

    T. Cohen, M. Lisanti, A. Pierce, and T. R. Slatyer, “Wino Dark Matter Under Siege,”JCAP10(2013) 061,arXiv:1307.4082 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  5. [13]

    CTA and SWGO can discover Higgsino dark matter annihilation,

    N. L. Rodd, B. R. Safdi, and W. L. Xu, “CTA and SWGO can discover Higgsino dark matter annihilation,”Phys. Rev. D110(2024) no. 4, 043003, arXiv:2405.13104 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Minimal dark matter,

    M. Cirelli, N. Fornengo, and A. Strumia, “Minimal dark matter,”Nucl. Phys. B753(2006) 178–194, arXiv:hep-ph/0512090

    2006 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Snowmass2021 Cosmic Frontier Dark Matter Direct Detection to the Neutrino Fog,

    D. S. Akeribet al., “Snowmass2021 Cosmic Frontier Dark Matter Direct Detection to the Neutrino Fog,” in Snowmass 2021. 3, 2022.arXiv:2203.08084 [hep-ex]

    2021 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Looking for WIMPs through the neutrino fogs,

    I. M. Bloch, S. Bottaro, D. Redigolo, and L. Vittorio, “Looking for WIMPs through the neutrino fogs,” arXiv:2410.02723 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  9. [17]

    Neutralino dark matter at 14 TeV and 100 TeV,

    M. Low and L.-T. Wang, “Neutralino dark matter at 14 TeV and 100 TeV,”JHEP08(2014) 161, arXiv:1404.0682 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Hunting wino and higgsino dark matter at the muon collider with disappearing tracks,

    R. Capdevilla, F. Meloni, R. Simoniello, and J. Zurita, “Hunting wino and higgsino dark matter at the muon collider with disappearing tracks,”JHEP06(2021) 133, arXiv:2102.11292 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Towards a muon collider,

    C. Accetturaet al., “Towards a muon collider,”Eur. Phys. J. C83(2023) no. 9, 864,arXiv:2303.08533 [physics.acc-ph]. [Erratum: Eur.Phys.J.C 84, 36 (2024)]

    2023 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Discovery reach for wino and higgsino dark matter with a disappearing track signature at a 100 TeVpp collider,

    M. Saito, R. Sawada, K. Terashi, and S. Asai, “Discovery reach for wino and higgsino dark matter with a disappearing track signature at a 100 TeVpp collider,”Eur. Phys. J. C79(2019) no. 6, 469, arXiv:1901.02987 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Physics Briefing Book: Input for the European Strategy for Particle Physics Update 2020,

    R. K. Elliset al., “Physics Briefing Book: Input for the European Strategy for Particle Physics Update 2020,” arXiv:1910.11775 [hep-ex]

    2020 arXiv

  14. [22]

    The Search for Electroweakinos,

    A. Canepa, T. Han, and X. Wang, “The Search for Electroweakinos,”Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.70(2020) 425–454,arXiv:2003.05450 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Muon Collider Forum report,

    K. M. Blacket al., “Muon Collider Forum report,” JINST19(2024) no. 02, T02015,arXiv:2209.01318 [hep-ex]

    2024 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Search for WIMPs at futureµ +µ+ colliders,

    H. Fukuda, T. Moroi, A. Niki, and S.-F. Wei, “Search for WIMPs at futureµ +µ+ colliders,”JHEP02(2024) 214,arXiv:2310.07162 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Going all the way in the search for WIMP dark matter at the muon collider through precision measurements,

    R. Franceschini and X. Zhao, “Going all the way in the search for WIMP dark matter at the muon collider through precision measurements,”Eur. Phys. J. C83 (2023) no. 6, 552,arXiv:2212.11900 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  18. [26]

    The Future of US Particle Physics - The Snowmass 2021 Energy Frontier Report,

    M. Narainet al., “The Future of US Particle Physics - The Snowmass 2021 Energy Frontier Report,” 7 arXiv:2211.11084 [hep-ex]

    2021 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Muon Collider Physics Summary,

    C. Aimeet al., “Muon Collider Physics Summary,” arXiv:2203.07256 [hep-ph]. [27]Muon ColliderCollaboration, J. de Blaset al., “The physics case of a 3 TeV muon collider stage,” arXiv:2203.07261 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  20. [28]

    Closing the window for compressed Dark Sectors with disappearing charged tracks,

    R. Mahbubani, P. Schwaller, and J. Zurita, “Closing the window for compressed Dark Sectors with disappearing charged tracks,”JHEP06(2017) 119, arXiv:1703.05327 [hep-ph]. [Erratum: JHEP 10, 061 (2017)]

    2017 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Discovering Electroweak Interacting Dark Matter at Muon Colliders using Soft Tracks,

    R. Capdevilla, F. Meloni, and J. Zurita, “Discovering Electroweak Interacting Dark Matter at Muon Colliders using Soft Tracks,”arXiv:2405.08858 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  22. [30]

    Higgsino Dark Matter in the MSSM,

    A. Delgado and M. Quir´ os, “Higgsino Dark Matter in the MSSM,”Phys. Rev. D103(2021) no. 1, 015024, arXiv:2008.00954 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Electric dipole moments in split supersymmetry,

    G. F. Giudice and A. Romanino, “Electric dipole moments in split supersymmetry,”Phys. Lett. B634 (2006) 307–314,arXiv:hep-ph/0510197

    2006 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Last Electroweak WIMP Standing: Pseudo-Dirac Higgsino Status and Compact Stars as Future Probes,

    R. Krall and M. Reece, “Last Electroweak WIMP Standing: Pseudo-Dirac Higgsino Status and Compact Stars as Future Probes,”Chin. Phys. C42(2018) no. 4, 043105,arXiv:1705.04843 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Interpreting the Electron EDM Constraint,

    C. Cesarotti, Q. Lu, Y. Nakai, A. Parikh, and M. Reece, “Interpreting the Electron EDM Constraint,”JHEP05 (2019) 059,arXiv:1810.07736 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Direct Detection of Electroweak-Interacting Dark Matter,

    J. Hisano, K. Ishiwata, N. Nagata, and T. Takesako, “Direct Detection of Electroweak-Interacting Dark Matter,”JHEP07(2011) 005,arXiv:1104.0228 [hep-ph]

    2011 arXiv

  27. [35]

    WIMP-nucleon scattering with heavy WIMP effective theory,

    R. J. Hill and M. P. Solon, “WIMP-nucleon scattering with heavy WIMP effective theory,”Phys. Rev. Lett. 112(2014) 211602,arXiv:1309.4092 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Standard Model anatomy of WIMP dark matter direct detection I: weak-scale matching,

    R. J. Hill and M. P. Solon, “Standard Model anatomy of WIMP dark matter direct detection I: weak-scale matching,”Phys. Rev. D91(2015) 043504, arXiv:1401.3339 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Standard Model anatomy of WIMP dark matter direct detection II: QCD analysis and hadronic matrix elements,

    R. J. Hill and M. P. Solon, “Standard Model anatomy of WIMP dark matter direct detection II: QCD analysis and hadronic matrix elements,”Phys. Rev. D91(2015) 043505,arXiv:1409.8290 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Direct detection rate of heavy Higgsino-like and Wino-like dark matter,

    Q. Chen and R. J. Hill, “Direct detection rate of heavy Higgsino-like and Wino-like dark matter,”Phys. Lett. B 804(2020) 135364,arXiv:1912.07795 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Implications of purity constraints on light Higgsinos,

    S. P. Martin, “Implications of purity constraints on light Higgsinos,”Phys. Rev. D109(2024) no. 9, 095045,arXiv:2403.19598 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Enhancing Direct Detection of Higgsino Dark Matter,

    P. W. Graham, H. Ramani, and S. S. Y. Wong, “Enhancing Direct Detection of Higgsino Dark Matter,” arXiv:2409.07768 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  33. [41]

    WIMPs at High Energy Muon Colliders,

    T. Han, Z. Liu, L.-T. Wang, and X. Wang, “WIMPs at High Energy Muon Colliders,”Phys. Rev. D103(2021) no. 7, 075004,arXiv:2009.11287 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Matching resummed endpoint and continuumγ-ray spectra from dark-matter annihilation,

    M. Beneke, K. Urban, and M. Vollmann, “Matching resummed endpoint and continuumγ-ray spectra from dark-matter annihilation,”Phys. Lett. B834(2022) 137248,arXiv:2203.01692 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Higgsino Dark Matter Confronts 14 Years of Fermiγ-Ray Data,

    C. Dessert, J. W. Foster, Y. Park, B. R. Safdi, and W. L. Xu, “Higgsino Dark Matter Confronts 14 Years of Fermiγ-Ray Data,”Phys. Rev. Lett.130(2023) no. 20, 201001,arXiv:2207.10090 [hep-ph]. [44]CT A ConsortiumCollaboration, M. Actiset al., “Design concepts for the Cherenkov T...

    2023 arXiv

  36. [46]

    Theoretical Predictions for the Inner Dark Matter Distribution in the Milky Way Informed by Simulations,

    A. Hussein, L. Necib, M. Kaplinghat, S. Y. Kim, A. Wetzel, J. I. Read, M. P. Rey, and O. Agertz, “Theoretical Predictions for the Inner Dark Matter Distribution in the Milky Way Informed by Simulations,”arXiv:2501.14868 [hep-ph]. [47]MAGICCollaboration, H. Abeet al., “Search f...

    2023 arXiv

  37. [50]

    Prospects for detecting heavy WIMP dark matter with the Cherenkov Telescope Array: The Wino and Higgsino,

    L. Rinchiuso, O. Macias, E. Moulin, N. L. Rodd, and T. R. Slatyer, “Prospects for detecting heavy WIMP dark matter with the Cherenkov Telescope Array: The Wino and Higgsino,”Phys. Rev. D103(2021) no. 2, 023011,arXiv:2008.00692 [astro-ph.HE]. [51]https: //www.ctao.org/news/the-...

    2021 arXiv

  38. [56]

    Explosive dark matter annihilation,

    J. Hisano, S. Matsumoto, and M. M. Nojiri, “Explosive dark matter annihilation,”Phys. Rev. Lett.92(2004) 031303,arXiv:hep-ph/0307216

    2004 arXiv

  39. [57]

    Non-perturbative effect on dark matter annihilation and gamma ray signature from galactic center,

    J. Hisano, S. Matsumoto, M. M. Nojiri, and O. Saito, “Non-perturbative effect on dark matter annihilation and gamma ray signature from galactic center,”Phys. Rev. D71(2005) 063528,arXiv:hep-ph/0412403

    2005 arXiv

  40. [58]

    Cosmology and Astrophysics of Minimal Dark Matter,

    M. Cirelli, A. Strumia, and M. Tamburini, “Cosmology and Astrophysics of Minimal Dark Matter,”Nucl. Phys. B787(2007) 152–175,arXiv:0706.4071 [hep-ph]

    2007 arXiv

  41. [59]

    A Theory of Dark Matter,

    N. Arkani-Hamed, D. P. Finkbeiner, T. R. Slatyer, and N. Weiner, “A Theory of Dark Matter,”Phys. Rev. D 79(2009) 015014,arXiv:0810.0713 [hep-ph]

    2009 arXiv

  42. [60]

    Calculating the Annihilation Rate of Weakly 8 Interacting Massive Particles,

    M. Baumgart, I. Z. Rothstein, and V. Vaidya, “Calculating the Annihilation Rate of Weakly 8 Interacting Massive Particles,”Phys. Rev. Lett.114 (2015) 211301,arXiv:1409.4415 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  43. [61]

    Soft Collinear Effective Theory for Heavy WIMP Annihilation,

    M. Bauer, T. Cohen, R. J. Hill, and M. P. Solon, “Soft Collinear Effective Theory for Heavy WIMP Annihilation,”JHEP01(2015) 099,arXiv:1409.7392 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  44. [62]

    Heavy Dark Matter Annihilation from Effective Field Theory,

    G. Ovanesyan, T. R. Slatyer, and I. W. Stewart, “Heavy Dark Matter Annihilation from Effective Field Theory,”Phys. Rev. Lett.114(2015) no. 21, 211302, arXiv:1409.8294 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  45. [63]

    Constraints on Galactic Wino Densities from Gamma Ray Lines,

    M. Baumgart, I. Z. Rothstein, and V. Vaidya, “Constraints on Galactic Wino Densities from Gamma Ray Lines,”JHEP04(2015) 106,arXiv:1412.8698 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  46. [64]

    Semi-inclusive wino and higgsino annihilation to LL’,

    M. Baumgart and V. Vaidya, “Semi-inclusive wino and higgsino annihilation to LL’,”JHEP03(2016) 213, arXiv:1510.02470 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  47. [65]

    One-loop correction to heavy dark matter annihilation,

    G. Ovanesyan, N. L. Rodd, T. R. Slatyer, and I. W. Stewart, “One-loop correction to heavy dark matter annihilation,”Phys. Rev. D95(2017) no. 5, 055001, arXiv:1612.04814 [hep-ph]. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 100, 119901 (2019)]

    2017 arXiv

  48. [66]

    Resummed Photon Spectra for WIMP Annihilation,

    M. Baumgart, T. Cohen, I. Moult, N. L. Rodd, T. R. Slatyer, M. P. Solon, I. W. Stewart, and V. Vaidya, “Resummed Photon Spectra for WIMP Annihilation,” JHEP03(2018) 117,arXiv:1712.07656 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  49. [67]

    Precision Photon Spectra for Wino Annihilation,

    M. Baumgart, T. Cohen, E. Moulin, I. Moult, L. Rinchiuso, N. L. Rodd, T. R. Slatyer, I. W. Stewart, and V. Vaidya, “Precision Photon Spectra for Wino Annihilation,”JHEP01(2019) 036,arXiv:1808.08956 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  50. [68]

    Energeticγ-rays from TeV scale dark matter annihilation resummed,

    M. Beneke, A. Broggio, C. Hasner, and M. Vollmann, “Energeticγ-rays from TeV scale dark matter annihilation resummed,”Phys. Lett. B786(2018) 347–354,arXiv:1805.07367 [hep-ph]. [Erratum: Phys.Lett.B 810, 135831 (2020)]

    2018 arXiv

  51. [69]

    Resummed photon spectrum from dark matter annihilation for intermediate and narrow energy resolution,

    M. Beneke, A. Broggio, C. Hasner, K. Urban, and M. Vollmann, “Resummed photon spectrum from dark matter annihilation for intermediate and narrow energy resolution,”JHEP08(2019) 103,arXiv:1903.08702 [hep-ph]. [Erratum: JHEP 07, 145 (2020)]

    2019 arXiv

  52. [70]

    Electroweak resummation of neutralino dark-matter annihilation into high-energy photons,

    M. Beneke, S. Lederer, and C. Peset, “Electroweak resummation of neutralino dark-matter annihilation into high-energy photons,”JHEP01(2023) 171, arXiv:2211.14341 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  53. [71]

    The quintuplet annihilation spectrum,

    M. Baumgart, N. L. Rodd, T. R. Slatyer, and V. Vaidya, “The quintuplet annihilation spectrum,” JHEP01(2024) 158,arXiv:2309.11562 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  54. [72]

    PPPC 4 DM ID: A Poor Particle Physicist Cookbook for Dark Matter Indirect Detection,

    M. Cirelli, G. Corcella, A. Hektor, G. Hutsi, M. Kadastik, P. Panci, M. Raidal, F. Sala, and A. Strumia, “PPPC 4 DM ID: A Poor Particle Physicist Cookbook for Dark Matter Indirect Detection,”JCAP 03(2011) 051,arXiv:1012.4515 [hep-ph]. [Erratum: JCAP 10, E01 (2012)]

    2011 arXiv

  55. [73]

    Sommerfeld effect for continuum gamma-ray spectra from Dark Matter annihilation,

    B. J¨ ager and M. Vollmann, “Sommerfeld effect for continuum gamma-ray spectra from Dark Matter annihilation,”JHEP02(2024) 051,arXiv:2310.11067 [hep-ph]. [74]MAGICCollaboration, J. Aleksi´ cet al., “The major upgrade of the MAGIC telescopes, Part II: A performance study using ...

    2024 arXiv

  56. [75]

    CTAO Instrument Response Functions - prod5 version v0.1

    C. T. A. Observatory and C. T. A. Consortium, “CTAO Instrument Response Functions - prod5 version v0.1.” https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5499840, 2021. [76]https://www.cta-observatory.org

    2021 doi

  57. [77]

    Ctao instrument response functions - prod5 version v0.1

    C. T. A. Observatory and C. T. A. Consortium, “Ctao instrument response functions - prod5 version v0.1.” https://zenodo.org/records/5499840, 2021. [78]MAGIC Coll.Collaboration, M. L. Ahnenet al., “Observations of Sagittarius A* during the pericenter passage of the G2 object wi...

    2017

  58. [79]

    Fruck, The Galactic Center resolved with MAGIC and a new technique for Atmospheric Calibration

    C. Fruck, The Galactic Center resolved with MAGIC and a new technique for Atmospheric Calibration. PhD thesis, Munich University of Technology, Germany, Jan., 2015

    2015

  59. [80]

    Toward the ultimate reach of current imaging atmospheric Cherenkov telescopes and their sensitivity to TeV dark matter,

    A. Montanari, E. Moulin, and N. L. Rodd, “Toward the ultimate reach of current imaging atmospheric Cherenkov telescopes and their sensitivity to TeV dark matter,”Phys. Rev. D107(2023) no. 4, 043028, arXiv:2210.03140 [astro-ph.HE]

    2023 arXiv

  60. [81]

    TeVCat.”https://www.tevcat.org/. [82]CT A LST ProjectCollaboration, K. Abeet al., “Galactic Center Studies with CTA-LST-1,

    “TeVCat.”https://www.tevcat.org/. [82]CT A LST ProjectCollaboration, K. Abeet al., “Galactic Center Studies with CTA-LST-1,” vol. ICRC2023, p. 574. 2023. [83]CT ACollaboration, A. Acharyyaet al., “Sensitivity of the Cherenkov Telescope Array to a dark matter signal from the Ga...

    2021 arXiv

  61. [84]

    On the Construction of a Composite Model for the Galaxy and on the Determination of the System of Galactic Parameters,

    J. Einasto, “On the Construction of a Composite Model for the Galaxy and on the Determination of the System of Galactic Parameters,”Trudy Astrofizicheskogo Instituta Alma-Ata5(1965) 87

    1965

  62. [85]

    The Auriga Project: the properties and formation mechanisms of disc galaxies across cosmic time,

    R. J. J. Grand, F. A. G´ omez, F. Marinacci, R. Pakmor, V. Springel, D. J. R. Campbell, C. S. Frenk, A. Jenkins, and S. D. M. White, “The Auriga Project: the properties and formation mechanisms of disc galaxies across cosmic time,”Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.467 (2017) no. 1, 1...

    2017 arXiv

  63. [86]

    Overview and public data release of the augmented Auriga Project: cosmological simulations of dwarf and Milky Way-mass galaxies,

    R. J. J. Grand, F. Fragkoudi, F. A. G´ omez, A. Jenkins, F. Marinacci, R. Pakmor, and V. Springel, “Overview and public data release of the augmented Auriga Project: cosmological simulations of dwarf and Milky Way-mass galaxies,”Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.532 (2024) no. 2, 181...

    2024 arXiv

  64. [87]

    Amplified J-factors in the Galactic Centre for velocity-dependent dark matter annihilation in FIRE simulations,

    D. McKeown, J. S. Bullock, F. J. Mercado, Z. Hafen, M. Boylan-Kolchin, A. Wetzel, L. Necib, P. F. Hopkins, and S. Yu, “Amplified J-factors in the Galactic Centre for velocity-dependent dark matter annihilation in FIRE simulations,”Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.513 (2022) no. 1, 5...

    2022 arXiv

  65. [88]

    Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics,

    G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross, and O. Vitells, “Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics,”Eur. Phys. J. C71(2011) 1554, arXiv:1007.1727 [physics.data-an]. [Erratum: Eur.Phys.J.C 73, 2501 (2013)]

    2011 arXiv

  66. [89]

    TASI Lectures on the Particle Physics and Astrophysics of Dark Matter,

    B. R. Safdi, “TASI Lectures on the Particle Physics and Astrophysics of Dark Matter,”PoST ASI2022(2024) 009,arXiv:2303.02169 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  67. [90]

    Full one loop calculation of neutralino annihilation into two photons,

    L. Bergstrom and P. Ullio, “Full one loop calculation of neutralino annihilation into two photons,”Nucl. Phys. B504(1997) 27–44,arXiv:hep-ph/9706232. 9 END MA TTER A. ANAL YSIS DET AILS Here, we provide a more detailed description of the analysis used to construct the projecti...

    1997 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.