Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 2 cited by

This paper claims that in a three-Higgs-doublet model with an inert doublet, the tree-level dark matter-nucleon scattering cross section can vanish exactly for certain dark-sector mass splittings, creating a direct-detection blind spot.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

In a Z3 x Z2-symmetric three-Higgs-doublet model with one inert doublet, the tree-level dark matter-nucleon scattering cross-section can vanish in a blind spot set by the dark sector mass splitting.

T0 review reviewed 2026-08-05 challenge →

load-bearing objection A plausible tree-level direct-detection blind spot in a new Z3-charged three-Higgs-doublet model, but the abstract alone doesn't tell us whether loop corrections fill the hole; worth refereeing, with a demand for the one-loop estimate. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2508.13583 v1 pith:ZQJINFJI submitted 2025-08-19 hep-ph

Inert dark matter in three Higgs doublet model: a blind spot narrative

Amit Dutta Banik , Tapoja Jha , Eija Tanskanen This is my paper
classification hep-ph
keywords inert dark matterthree Higgs doublet modelZ3 symmetryblind spotdirect detectionthermal relic abundancevacuum stabilityprofile likelihood
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The reading

This paper tries to show that the WIMP dark matter candidate in a three-Higgs-doublet model with an inert doublet has a blind spot: for certain values of the mass splittings among the inert scalars, the tree-level dark matter-nucleon scattering cross section is exactly zero. That zero is what would let the candidate satisfy the observed relic abundance while remaining invisible to current direct detection experiments. The paper supports the scenario with a full analysis of vacuum stability, unitarity, relic abundance, and direct detection limits, and it uses a profile likelihood scan to constrain the allowed parameter space.

Core claim

The central claim is that in the (2+I)HDM-$\mathbb{Z}_3$ model, built from three Higgs doublets with a $\mathbb{Z}_3 \times \mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry where one doublet is inert, the tree-level dark matter-nucleon elastic scattering cross section vanishes for specific mass splittings among the inert scalars. The lightest neutral inert scalar serves as the dark matter candidate, and the blind spot occurs when the Higgs-mediated amplitude cancels, controlled by the mass splitting of the dark-sector particles. The paper then shows that parameter points on this blind spot can simultaneously satisfy vacuum stability, perturbative unitarity, the observed thermal relic abundance, and current direct det

What carries the argument

The engine of the argument is the $\mathbb{Z}_3 \times \mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetric scalar potential of the three-Higgs-doublet model, with one doublet inert. The inert doublet provides the dark matter candidate, the lightest neutral scalar, and the mass splittings between the neutral inert scalars (and the charged inert scalar) control the tree-level coupling that drives spin-independent dark matter-nucleus scattering. The blind spot is the locus in parameter space where that coupling, and hence the scattering amplitude, vanishes; this cancellation is what lets the WIMP evade direct detection while remaining a normal thermal relic.

Load-bearing premise

The argument assumes that loop-level contributions to the dark matter-nucleon scattering cross section remain below current and future direct-detection sensitivity wherever the tree-level amplitude vanishes.

What would settle it

Take one of the profile-likelihood-best parameter points at the tree-level blind spot and compute the one-loop spin-independent dark matter-nucleon cross section. If that cross section is larger than the current experimental upper limit for a dark matter mass in that range, the blind spot is undone for that point. A future direct-detection signal in a region the paper identifies as a blind spot would also falsify the claim.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • In the blind-spot regions, the model's WIMP has no tree-level scattering off nuclei, so null results from direct-detection experiments do not constrain it.
  • The same dark-sector mass splittings that set the blind spot also enter the annihilation cross section that sets the relic abundance, coupling the direct-detection prediction to cosmology.
  • The vacuum stability and unitarity conditions can be satisfied simultaneously with the blind spot, so the model is not excluded by internal consistency requirements.
  • The profile likelihood scan gives preferred ranges for the inert scalar mass splittings, giving collider searches a concrete target.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The paper's zero is at tree level; a one-loop computation would likely restore a small but nonzero cross section, and whether that remainder is below future experimental reach decides how much of the blind-spot narrative survives.
  • The mechanism may not be unique to this model: any inert-doublet setup whose Higgs-mediated amplitude is controlled by a dark-sector mass splitting should show a similar blind-spot locus, so the result maps onto a wider class of WIMP models.
  • If the blind spot survives radiative corrections, it would motivate experimental strategies that measure the dark-sector mass splitting (for example, through missing-energy signatures at colliders) rather than relying on direct detection alone.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a three-Higgs-doublet model with a Z3 x Z2 symmetry that renders one doublet inert, denoted (2+I)HDM-Z3. The central claim, stated in the abstract, is that the tree-level dark matter-nucleon spin-independent scattering cross-section vanishes for specific dark-sector mass splittings, producing a direct-detection blind spot. The authors report performing vacuum-stability, unitarity, relic-abundance, and direct-detection analyses, together with a profile-likelihood scan to constrain the parameter space. The abstract is readable, but the supplied full text is heavily corrupted and almost entirely unreadable, so the derivations, numerical results, and figures cannot be independently checked.

Significance. If the central claim is correct, the model would provide a WIMP candidate whose tree-level direct-detection amplitude cancels at special mass splittings, which is a nontrivial and phenomenologically relevant feature. The claimed tree-level cancellation is a checkable internal statement and does not rely on fitting external data, which is a strength. However, the practical significance hinges on whether radiative corrections restore a cross-section above current and future experimental sensitivity; the abstract explicitly limits the claim to tree level, and no loop computation is visible. The manuscript also does not provide machine-checked proofs, reproducible code, or usable numerical tables, so the profile-likelihood constraints cannot be assessed. The result is potentially interesting but not yet established.

major comments (3)
  1. [Full text (all sections after abstract)] The supplied full text is corrupted mojibake; essentially no equation, table, or figure is legible. This makes it impossible to verify the scalar potential, the mass matrices, the blind-spot condition, the relic-density calculation, or the statistical procedure. This is a blocking issue for review, not merely a presentation defect, because the central derivation is absent from the readable record.
  2. [Abstract, phrase 'tree-level dark matter-nucleon scattering cross-section vanishes'] The paper claims only a tree-level cancellation. In inert-doublet models, one-loop Higgs-penguin and box diagrams with inert scalars and gauge bosons generically give a nonzero spin-independent cross-section at the tree-level blind-spot point, controlled by quartic and gauge couplings rather than by the combination that cancels at tree level. No one-loop estimate or bound is presented. Unless these corrections are shown to be below current and future direct-detection limits, the 'blind spot narrative' overstates the model's evasion of direct-detection constraints.
  3. [Profile likelihood analysis (section header present but unreadable)] The abstract announces a profile-likelihood analysis and constraint of the parameter space, but none of the defining elements are recoverable from the corrupted text: no likelihood function, scan ranges, nuisance parameters, best-fit points, confidence intervals, or comparison to data. The claimed surviving parameter space therefore cannot be checked, and the paper should supply these details in a readable form.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Grammar: 'three Higgs doublet scenario' should be 'a three Higgs doublet scenario'; 'making one doublet inert' is a dangling participle. Consider revising for clarity.
  2. [Header/running text] The visible header contains 'arXiv:2508.13584v1 [cs.CV] 19 Aug 2025', which mismatches the hep-ph paper under review. Likely an artifact, but it should be corrected in any resubmission.
  3. [General] No references are visible in the readable portion. The authors should ensure that the final version includes a complete reference list, especially for the standard tools (vacuum stability conditions, unitarity bounds, relic abundance code, direct-detection limits).

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity identified: the blind-spot claim is an internal tree-level cancellation, and the parameter scan is constrained by external data rather than fitted into a prediction.

full rationale

No circular step can be exhibited from the available text. The paper's central claim is that, in the (2+I)HDM-Z3 model, the tree-level dark matter-nucleon scattering cross-section vanishes for certain dark-sector mass splittings. That is an internal dynamical statement about the model's amplitudes, not a quantity fitted to the data it is later used to explain. The profile-likelihood analysis then imposes vacuum stability, unitarity, relic abundance, and direct-detection constraints, which are external inputs (e.g., Planck relic density, current DD limits), so the scan follows the standard constrain-not-predict pattern. The abstract explicitly limits the vanishing to tree level, so any concern that one-loop corrections refill the blind spot is a correctness/completeness issue and not a circularity issue. The supplied full text is heavily corrupted/mojibake, preventing equation-level verification, but no quotable reduction of a prediction to its own fitted input, and no load-bearing self-citation chain, can be identified. Therefore the honest finding is no significant circularity, score 0.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 4 axioms · 1 invented entities

Reconstructed from the abstract only because the supplied full text is not readable. The model's scanning parameters (masses and quartic couplings) are free inputs constrained by external data, which is normal for this literature. No entity beyond the declared scalar doublet content is needed. Residual issue: the blind spot is stated at tree level only, so an implicit assumption is that loop-level direct detection remains below sensitivity.

free parameters (3)
  • Dark sector mass splitting (e.g., m_H - m_A, charged-neutral splittings)
    The abstract states the tree-level cross-section vanishes 'depending on the mass splitting of dark sector particles'. In the scan this splitting is a free input, effectively tuned toward the blind spot region.
  • Scalar quartic couplings of the Z3 x Z2 potential
    Profiled in the profile likelihood analysis and constrained by vacuum stability, unitarity, relic abundance, and direct detection; their values are not reported in the abstract.
  • Dark matter mass m_DM (lightest inert neutral scalar)
    A scanned parameter that sets the freeze-out abundance and coannihilation kinematics with the other inert states; the range is not stated in the abstract.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption The Z3 x Z2 discrete symmetry is exact and unbroken; the inert doublet acquires no vacuum expectation value and does not mix with the active doublets.
    Required for the lightest inert neutral state to be a stable dark matter candidate and for the tree-level blind spot calculation to apply. Stated in the abstract's model setup: 'the scalar potential is augmented by Z3 x Z2 symmetry making one doublet inert'.
  • domain assumption Thermal freeze-out of a weakly interacting scalar is the mechanism that fixes the dark matter relic abundance.
    The abstract's 'relic abundance' analysis presumes the standard WIMP freeze-out framework; a non-thermal history would change the conclusions.
  • standard math Tree-level vacuum stability and perturbative unitarity criteria as normally imposed on multi-Higgs potentials are valid and sufficient.
    The abstract lists 'vacuum stability, unitarity' as constraints; these rest on standard positivity and partial-wave bound conditions for the scalar potential.
  • domain assumption Nucleon matrix elements for the spin-independent scattering amplitude are taken from the standard sigma-term inputs used in the direct detection literature.
    Even a tree-level vanishing cross-section and any loop-level residual inherit the usual hadronic uncertainties; such inputs are unavoidable in the claim that DM 'vanishes' or stays below experimental bounds.
invented entities (1)
  • Inert third scalar doublet (Z3-charged) with CP-even H, CP-odd A, and charged H+ states independent evidence
    purpose: Provides the dark matter candidate and produces the direct detection blind spot via mass-splitting-dependent couplings to the Higgs boson.
    These states are the declared model content, not an auxiliary postulate. They are in principle falsifiable through collider searches for charged and additional neutral scalars and through the DM relic density, though the blind spot suppresses the direct detection handle by design.

reviewed 2026-08-05 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Inert dark matter in three Higgs doublet model: a blind spot narrative." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZQJINFJI

@misc{pith2026250813583,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Inert dark matter in three Higgs doublet model: a blind spot narrative},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZQJINFJI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.13583}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
abstract

We explore the phenomenology of three Higgs doublet scenario, where the scalar potential is augmented by $\mathbb{Z}_{3} \times \mathbb{Z}_{2}$ symmetry making one doublet inert. Thus in effect, our model of interest is two Higgs plus inert Higgs doublet model charged under $\mathbb{Z}_3$ ((2+I)HDM-$\mathbb{Z}_3$) symmetry. We observe a blind spot feature for dark matter direct detection, as the tree-level dark matter-nucleon scattering cross-section vanishes depending on the mass splitting of dark sector particles. We perform a detailed analysis based on vacuum stability, unitarity, relic abundance, and direct detection results on the model. We also perform profile likelihood analysis and constrain the corresponding parameter space.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. The Hilbert Series and the Flavor Invariants of the 3HDM

    hep-th 2026-04 conditional novelty 6.0

    The full multigraded Hilbert series of the 3HDM is computed in closed form, and a basis of SU(3)-invariant operators is constructed up to cubic order in the quartic couplings.

  2. The Hilbert Series and the Flavor Invariants of the 3HDM

    hep-th 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Hilbert series for 3HDM global symmetries is computed with explicit invariants constructed up to cubic order.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

68 extracted references · 19 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 15 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Planck collaboration, Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters , https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201833910 Astron. Astrophys. 641 (2020) A6 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1807.06209 1807.06209 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  2. [2]

    Jungman, M

    G. Jungman, M. Kamionkowski and K. Griest, Supersymmetric dark matter , https://doi.org/10.1016/0370-1573(95)00058-5 Phys. Rept. 267 (1996) 195 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9506380 hep-ph/9506380 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  3. [3]

    Bertone, D

    G. Bertone, D. Hooper and J. Silk, Particle dark matter: Evidence, candidates and constraints , https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2004.08.031 Phys. Rept. 405 (2005) 279 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0404175 hep-ph/0404175 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  4. [4]

    CMS collaboration, Observation of a New Boson at a Mass of 125 GeV with the CMS Experiment at the LHC , https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2012.08.021 Phys. Lett. B 716 (2012) 30 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1207.7235 1207.7235 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  5. [5]

    ATLAS collaboration, Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC , https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2012.08.020 Phys. Lett. B 716 (2012) 1 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1207.7214 1207.7214 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  6. [6]

    Huang and C.E.M

    P. Huang and C.E.M. Wagner, Blind Spots for neutralino Dark Matter in the MSSM with an intermediate m_A , https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.90.015018 Phys. Rev. D 90 (2014) 015018 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1404.0392 1404.0392 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  7. [7]

    O'Hare, A.M

    C.A.J. O'Hare, A.M. Green, J. Billard, E. Figueroa-Feliciano and L.E. Strigari, Readout strategies for directional dark matter detection beyond the neutrino background , https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.92.063518 Phys. Rev. D 92 (2015) 063518 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1505.08061 1505.08061 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  8. [8]

    Light stops, blind spots, and isospin violation in the MSSM

    A. Crivellin, M. Hoferichter, M. Procura and L.C. Tunstall, Light stops, blind spots, and isospin violation in the MSSM , https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2015)129 JHEP 07 (2015) 129 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1503.03478 1503.03478 ]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  9. [9]

    Blind spots for neutralino dark matter in the NMSSM

    M. Badziak, M. Olechowski and P. Szczerbiak, Blind spots for neutralino dark matter in the NMSSM , https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2016)179 JHEP 03 (2016) 179 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1512.02472 1512.02472 ]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  10. [10]

    T. Han, F. Kling, S. Su and Y. Wu, Unblinding the dark matter blind spots , https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP02(2017)057 JHEP 02 (2017) 057 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1612.02387 1612.02387 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  11. [11]

    Cheung and D

    C. Cheung and D. Sanford, Simplified Models of Mixed Dark Matter , https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2014/02/011 JCAP 02 (2014) 011 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1311.5896 1311.5896 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  12. [12]

    S. Baum, M. Carena, N.R. Shah and C.E.M. Wagner, Higgs portals for thermal Dark Matter. EFT perspectives and the NMSSM , https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP04(2018)069 JHEP 04 (2018) 069 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1712.09873 1712.09873 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  13. [13]

    Doublet-Triplet Fermionic Dark Matter

    A. Dedes and D. Karamitros, Doublet-Triplet Fermionic Dark Matter , https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.89.115002 Phys. Rev. D 89 (2014) 115002 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1403.7744 1403.7744 ]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  14. [14]

    Branco, P.M

    G.C. Branco, P.M. Ferreira, L. Lavoura, M.N. Rebelo, M. Sher and J.P. Silva, Theory and phenomenology of two-Higgs-doublet models , https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2012.02.002 Phys. Rept. 516 (2012) 1 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1106.0034 1106.0034 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  15. [15]

    Gunion, H.E

    J.F. Gunion, H.E. Haber, G.L. Kane and S. Dawson, The Higgs Hunter's Guide , vol. 80 (2000), 10.1201/9780429496448 https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429496448

    doi:10.1201/9780429496448 2000

  16. [16]

    Deshpande and E

    N.G. Deshpande and E. Ma, Pattern of Symmetry Breaking with Two Higgs Doublets , https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.18.2574 Phys. Rev. D 18 (1978) 2574

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.18.2574 1978

  17. [17]

    Barbieri, L.J

    R. Barbieri, L.J. Hall and V.S. Rychkov, Improved naturalness with a heavy Higgs: An Alternative road to LHC physics , https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.74.015007 Phys. Rev. D 74 (2006) 015007 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0603188 hep-ph/0603188 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  18. [18]

    Dark Matter with Two Inert Doublets plus One Higgs Doublet

    V. Keus, S.F. King, S. Moretti and D. Sokolowska, Dark Matter with Two Inert Doublets plus One Higgs Doublet , https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11(2014)016 JHEP 11 (2014) 016 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1407.7859 1407.7859 ]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  19. [19]

    Keus, S.F

    V. Keus, S.F. King and S. Moretti, Phenomenology of the inert ( 2+1 ) and ( 4+2 ) Higgs doublet models , https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.90.075015 Phys. Rev. D 90 (2014) 075015 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1408.0796 1408.0796 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  20. [20]

    Observable Heavy Higgs Dark Matter

    V. Keus, S.F. King, S. Moretti and D. Sokolowska, Observable Heavy Higgs Dark Matter , https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11(2015)003 JHEP 11 (2015) 003 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1507.08433 1507.08433 ]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  21. [21]

    CP violating scalar Dark Matter

    A. Cordero-Cid, J. Hern\'andez-S\'anchez, V. Keus, S.F. King, S. Moretti, D. Rojas et al., CP violating scalar Dark Matter , https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP12(2016)014 JHEP 12 (2016) 014 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1608.01673 1608.01673 ]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  22. [22]

    Cordero-Cid, J

    A. Cordero-Cid, J. Hern\'andez-S\'anchez, V. Keus, S. Moretti, D. Rojas and D. Soko owska, Lepton collider indirect signatures of dark CP-violation , https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-7689-0 Eur. Phys. J. C 80 (2020) 135 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1812.00820 1812.00820 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  23. [23]

    Collider signatures of dark CP-violation

    A. Cordero-Cid, J. Hern\'andez-S\'anchez, V. Keus, S. Moretti, D. Rojas-Ciofalo and D. Soko owska, Collider signatures of dark CP -violation , https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.101.095023 Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020) 095023 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/2002.04616 2002.04616 ]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  24. [24]

    Hernandez-Sanchez, V

    J. Hernandez-Sanchez, V. Keus, S. Moretti, D. Rojas-Ciofalo and D. Sokolowska, Complementary Probes of Two-component Dark Matter , https://arxiv.org/abs/2012.11621 2012.11621

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  25. [25]

    Hern\'andez-Otero, J

    D. Hern\'andez-Otero, J. Hern\'andez-S\'anchez, S. Moretti and T. Shindou, The Z_3 soft breaking in the I(2+1)HDM and its probes at present and future colliders , https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.06323 2203.06323

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  26. [26]

    A. Dey, V. Keus, S. Moretti and C. Shepherd-Themistocleous, A smoking gun signature of the 3HDM , https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2024)038 JHEP 07 (2024) 038 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.06593 2310.06593 ]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  27. [27]

    Keus, S.F

    V. Keus, S.F. King and S. Moretti, Three-Higgs-doublet models: symmetries, potentials and Higgs boson masses , https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2014)052 JHEP 01 (2014) 052 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1310.8253 1310.8253 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  28. [28]

    Constraints on Parameter Space from Perturbative Unitarity in Models with Three Scalar Doublets

    S. Moretti and K. Yagyu, Constraints on Parameter Space from Perturbative Unitarity in Models with Three Scalar Doublets , https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.91.055022 Phys. Rev. D 91 (2015) 055022 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1501.06544 1501.06544 ]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  29. [29]

    Constraints on the Parameter Space in an Inert Doublet Model with two Active Doublets

    M. Merchand and M. Sher, Constraints on the Parameter Space in an Inert Doublet Model with two Active Doublets , https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2020)108 JHEP 03 (2020) 108 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1911.06477 1911.06477 ]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  30. [30]

    Dark matter in three-Higgs-doublet models with $S_3$ symmetry

    W. Khater, A. Kun c inas, O.M. Ogreid, P. Osland and M.N. Rebelo, Dark matter in three-Higgs-doublet models with S _ 3 symmetry , https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2022)120 JHEP 01 (2022) 120 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/2108.07026 2108.07026 ]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  31. [31]

    Kuncinas, Status of dark matter in S_3 -symmetric 3HDM , https://doi.org/10.22323/1.436.0032 PoS CORFU2022 (2023) 032

    A. Kuncinas, Status of dark matter in S_3 -symmetric 3HDM , https://doi.org/10.22323/1.436.0032 PoS CORFU2022 (2023) 032

    work page doi:10.22323/1.436.0032 2023

  32. [32]

    Bento, H.E

    M.P. Bento, H.E. Haber, J.C. Rom \ a o and J.P. Silva, Multi-Higgs doublet models: physical parametrization, sum rules and unitarity bounds , https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11(2017)095 JHEP 11 (2017) 095 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1708.09408 1708.09408 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  33. [33]

    Prospects of light charged scalars in a three Higgs doublet model with $Z_3$ symmetry

    M. Chakraborti, D. Das, M. Levy, S. Mukherjee and I. Saha, Prospects for light charged scalars in a three-Higgs-doublet model with Z3 symmetry , https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.104.075033 Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) 075033 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/2104.08146 2104.08146 ]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  34. [34]

    Aranda, D

    A. Aranda, D. Hern\'andez-Otero, J. Hern\'andez-Sanchez, V. Keus, S. Moretti, D. Rojas-Ciofalo et al., Z _3 symmetric inert ( 2+1 )-Higgs-doublet model , https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.103.015023 Phys. Rev. D 103 (2021) 015023 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1907.12470 1907.12470 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  35. [35]

    Cabrera, J.A

    M.E. Cabrera, J.A. Casas, A. Delgado and S. Robles, Generalized Blind Spots for Dark Matter Direct Detection in the 2HDM , https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP02(2020)166 JHEP 02 (2020) 166 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1912.01758 1912.01758 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  36. [36]

    Arcadi and S

    G. Arcadi and S. Profumo, WIMPs Below the Radar: Blind Spots and Benchmarks Beyond the Neutrino Floor , https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.19062 2506.19062

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  37. [37]

    Glashow and S

    S.L. Glashow and S. Weinberg, Natural Conservation Laws for Neutral Currents , https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.15.1958 Phys. Rev. D 15 (1977) 1958

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.15.1958 1958

  38. [38]

    Light charged Higgs boson scenario in 3-Higgs doublet models

    A.G. Akeroyd, S. Moretti, K. Yagyu and E. Yildirim, Light charged Higgs boson scenario in 3-Higgs doublet models , https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X17501457 Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 32 (2017) 1750145 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1605.05881 1605.05881 ]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  39. [39]

    Kannike, Vacuum Stability Conditions From Copositivity Criteria , https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-2093-z Eur

    K. Kannike, Vacuum Stability Conditions From Copositivity Criteria , https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-2093-z Eur. Phys. J. C 72 (2012) 2093 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1205.3781 1205.3781 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2093

  40. [40]

    Chakrabortty, P

    J. Chakrabortty, P. Konar and T. Mondal, Copositive Criteria and Boundedness of the Scalar Potential , https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.89.095008 Phys. Rev. D 89 (2014) 095008 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1311.5666 1311.5666 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  41. [41]

    Das and I

    D. Das and I. Saha, Alignment limit in three Higgs-doublet models , https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.100.035021 Phys. Rev. D 100 (2019) 035021 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1904.03970 1904.03970 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  42. [42]

    Peskin and T

    M.E. Peskin and T. Takeuchi, Estimation of oblique electroweak corrections , https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.46.381 Phys. Rev. D 46 (1992) 381

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.46.381 1992

  43. [43]

    Grimus, L

    W. Grimus, L. Lavoura, O.M. Ogreid and P. Osland, The Oblique parameters in multi-Higgs-doublet models , https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2008.04.019 Nucl. Phys. B 801 (2008) 81 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/0802.4353 0802.4353 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  44. [44]

    Grimus, L

    W. Grimus, L. Lavoura, O.M. Ogreid and P. Osland, A Precision constraint on multi-Higgs-doublet models , https://doi.org/10.1088/0954-3899/35/7/075001 J. Phys. G 35 (2008) 075001 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/0711.4022 0711.4022 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  45. [45]

    Bertolini, Quantum Effects in a Two Higgs Doublet Model of the Electroweak Interactions , https://doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(86)90341-X Nucl

    S. Bertolini, Quantum Effects in a Two Higgs Doublet Model of the Electroweak Interactions , https://doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(86)90341-X Nucl. Phys. B 272 (1986) 77

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(86)90341-x 1986

  46. [46]

    Particle Data Group collaboration, Review of Particle Physics , https://doi.org/10.1093/ptep/ptac097 PTEP 2022 (2022) 083C01

    doi:10.1093/ptep/ptac097 2022

  47. [47]

    Batra, B

    N. Batra, B. Coleppa, A. Khanna, S.K. Rai and A. Sarkar, Constraining the 3HDM parameter space using active learning , https://doi.org/10.1103/t5df-67wh Phys. Rev. D 112 (2025) 015011 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.07489 2504.07489 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  48. [48]

    Coleppa, A

    B. Coleppa, A. Khanna and G.B. Krishna, 3HDM at the ILC , https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.24094 2506.24094

    work page arXiv

  49. [49]

    Hmissou, S

    A. Hmissou, S. Moretti and L. Rahili, Investigating the 95 GeV Higgs Boson Excesses within the I(1+2)HDM , https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.03631 2502.03631

    work page arXiv

  50. [50]

    Tevatron Electroweak Working Group collaboration, Combination of CDF and D0 Results on the Width of the W boson , https://arxiv.org/abs/1003.2826 1003.2826

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  51. [51]

    D0 collaboration, Measurement of the W Boson Mass and Width at the D0 Experiment , in Meeting of the APS Division of Particles and Fields , 10, 2011 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1110.1093 1110.1093 ]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  52. [52]

    ALEPH, DELPHI, L3, OPAL, LEP Electroweak collaboration, Electroweak Measurements in Electron-Positron Collisions at W-Boson-Pair Energies at LEP , https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2013.07.004 Phys. Rept. 532 (2013) 119 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1302.3415 1302.3415 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  53. [53]

    Lundstrom, M

    E. Lundstrom, M. Gustafsson and J. Edsjo, The Inert Doublet Model and LEP II Limits , https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.79.035013 Phys. Rev. D 79 (2009) 035013 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/0810.3924 0810.3924 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  54. [54]

    ALEPH, DELPHI, L3, OPAL, LEP collaboration, Search for Charged Higgs bosons: Combined Results Using LEP Data , https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-013-2463-1 Eur. Phys. J. C 73 (2013) 2463 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1301.6065 1301.6065 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  55. [55]

    HFLAV collaboration, Averages of b -hadron, c -hadron, and -lepton properties as of summer 2016 , https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-5058-4 Eur. Phys. J. C 77 (2017) 895 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1612.07233 1612.07233 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  56. [56]

    Misiak and M

    M. Misiak and M. Steinhauser, Weak radiative decays of the B meson and bounds on M_ H^ in the Two-Higgs-Doublet Model , https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-4776-y Eur. Phys. J. C 77 (2017) 201 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1702.04571 1702.04571 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  57. [57]

    Arbey, F

    A. Arbey, F. Mahmoudi, O. Stal and T. Stefaniak, Status of the Charged Higgs Boson in Two Higgs Doublet Models , https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-5651-1 Eur. Phys. J. C 78 (2018) 182 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1706.07414 1706.07414 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  58. [58]

    Alloul, N.D

    A. Alloul, N.D. Christensen, C. Degrande, C. Duhr and B. Fuks, FeynRules 2.0 - A complete toolbox for tree-level phenomenology , https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2014.04.012 Comput. Phys. Commun. 185 (2014) 2250 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1310.1921 1310.1921 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  59. [59]

    Belanger, F

    G. Belanger, F. Boudjema, A. Pukhov and A. Semenov, micrOMEGAs \_ 3: A program for calculating dark matter observables , https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2013.10.016 Comput. Phys. Commun. 185 (2014) 960 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1305.0237 1305.0237 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  60. [60]

    LZ collaboration, Dark Matter Search Results from 4.2 \, \, Tonne-Years of Exposure of the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment , https://doi.org/10.1103/4dyc-z8zf Phys. Rev. Lett. 135 (2025) 011802 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.17036 2410.17036 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  61. [61]

    X.-G. He, T. Li, X.-Q. Li, J. Tandean and H.-C. Tsai, Constraints on Scalar Dark Matter from Direct Experimental Searches , https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.79.023521 Phys. Rev. D 79 (2009) 023521 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/0811.0658 0811.0658 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  62. [62]

    Storn and K

    R. Storn and K. Price, Differential Evolution A Simple and Efficient Heuristic for global Optimization over Continuous Spaces , https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008202821328 J. Global Optim. 11 (1997) 341

    doi:10.1023/a:1008202821328 1997

  63. [63]

    AbdusSalam et al., Simple and statistically sound recommendations for analysing physical theories , https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6633/ac60ac Rept

    S.S. AbdusSalam et al., Simple and statistically sound recommendations for analysing physical theories , https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6633/ac60ac Rept. Prog. Phys. 85 (2022) 052201 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/2012.09874 2012.09874 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  64. [64]

    Statistical Analyses of Higgs- and Z-Portal Dark Matter Models

    J. Ellis, A. Fowlie, L. Marzola and M. Raidal, Statistical Analyses of Higgs- and Z-Portal Dark Matter Models , https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.97.115014 Phys. Rev. D 97 (2018) 115014 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.09912 1711.09912 ]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  65. [65]

    Yaguna and O

    C.E. Yaguna and O. Zapata, Singlet Dirac dark matter streamlined , https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2024/06/049 JCAP 06 (2024) 049 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/2401.13101 2401.13101 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  66. [66]

    Wilks, The Large-Sample Distribution of the Likelihood Ratio for Testing Composite Hypotheses , https://doi.org/10.1214/aoms/1177732360 Annals Math

    S.S. Wilks, The Large-Sample Distribution of the Likelihood Ratio for Testing Composite Hypotheses , https://doi.org/10.1214/aoms/1177732360 Annals Math. Statist. 9 (1938) 60

    arXiv 1938

  67. [67]

    LZ collaboration, First Dark Matter Search Results from the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment , https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.041002 Phys. Rev. Lett. 131 (2023) 041002 [ https://arxiv.org/abs/2207.03764 2207.03764 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  68. [68]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION blank.sep after.quote 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry output.state after.quoted.block = 'skip 'add.period if write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip output.state after.quote = after.quoted.block 'output.state := after.block 'output.state := if if FUNCTION new.sentence out...

This paper was first reviewed by deepseek-v4-flash on August 5, 2026.