Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 3 cited by

Using the TeV–PeV diffuse gamma-ray glow of the Galactic plane as measured by LHAASO and HAWC, this paper sets the strongest current constraints on decaying ultra-heavy dark matter—excluded lifetimes below about 10^29 seconds above 100 TeV—

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 ↗

T0 review

2026-08-04 18:43 UTC pith:4FQAV546

load-bearing objection Solid constraints paper; the background-model worry is a non-issue because the limits are conservative, and the main claims hold up. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2509.09609 v1 pith:4FQAV546 submitted 2025-09-11 astro-ph.HE astro-ph.COhep-ph

Constraints on Ultra-heavy DM from TeV-PeV gamma-ray diffuse measurements

Manuel Rocamora , Pedro De La Torre Luque , Miguel A. S\'anchez-Conde This is my paper
classification astro-ph.HE astro-ph.COhep-ph
keywords ultra-heavy dark matterdark matter decaydark matter annihilationdiffuse gamma-ray emissionGalactic planeLHAASOHAWCinverse Compton emission
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 paper tries to establish that ultra-heavy dark matter particles with masses from a few TeV to tens of PeV can be probed more strongly than ever before using measurements of the diffuse gamma-ray glow of the Galactic plane at TeV–PeV energies. It combines the LHAASO and HAWC diffuse-emission data with a full model of dark-matter-induced gamma rays, including prompt photons, secondary inverse-Compton emission from dark-matter-produced electrons and positrons, and absorption of very-high-energy photons. Adding a conservative astrophysical background model strengthens the limits by up to an order of magnitude. The resulting decay-lifetime constraints, around 10^29 seconds, are competitive with IceCube and, above certain masses, become the strongest available. If true, dark matter decaying into standard particles must be extremely long-lived, and future observatories like CTA and SWGO could push the bounds further.

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's central claim is that the diffuse gamma-ray emission measured from the Galactic plane by LHAASO (WCDA+KM2A) and HAWC, in the energy range roughly 0.3 TeV to 1 PeV, provides the most powerful current gamma-ray probe of very heavy dark matter. For decaying dark matter, the paper derives lower limits on the lifetime that reach about 10^29 s for masses above 100 TeV, improving on previous gamma-ray bounds and matching the best neutrino limits. For annihilating dark matter, the limits become the strongest gamma-ray constraints above about 1000 TeV. These results follow from consistently modelling the prompt gamma rays, the secondary inverse-Compton emission from the

What carries the argument

The load-bearing combination is the diffuse Galactic plane datasets of LHAASO (WCDA and KM2A) and HAWC, together with a three-part emission model: prompt gamma rays from dark-matter annihilation or decay, inverse-Compton gamma rays from the secondary electrons and positrons propagated through the Galaxy, and gamma-ray absorption by photon-photon pair production on the cosmic microwave background. On top of this, the strongest limits use a deliberately conservative 'Min' model of the astrophysical hadronic diffuse emission (built to fit the lower envelope of local cosmic-ray measurements) as the background. The background subtraction is what turns the data into an order-of-magnitude stronger

Load-bearing premise

The strongest constraints assume the 'Min' hadronic background model—which fits the lower envelope of cosmic-ray measurements and neglects unresolved sources—is the true astrophysical diffuse emission; if the real background is higher, the dark-matter limits weaken accordingly.

What would settle it

Recompute the limits using an alternative background model that includes an unresolved-source component normalized to the data and check whether the reported lifetime limits above 10^29 s survive; if the limits drop by more than a few tens of percent, the background choice is the deciding factor.

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

If this is right

  • If decaying dark matter exists with lifetime below about 10^29 s and mass above about 100 TeV, its gamma-ray signature would already appear in the LHAASO Galactic plane data; the observed smooth power-law spectra therefore exclude such configurations.
  • The inclusion of the astrophysical background model improves the constraints by up to an order of magnitude, meaning that better background models directly translate into stronger dark-matter limits.
  • The constraints from these mid-longitude diffuse regions are largely insensitive to the dark-matter density profile, especially for decay, reducing a common source of systematic uncertainty.
  • The same method applied to future CTA and SWGO data should push sensitivity to higher masses and lower cross sections or longer lifetimes.
  • Annihilation limits above 1000 TeV are competitive with IceCube bounds and can dominate in particular channels.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Because the paper's no-background (conservative) limits are weaker than some existing bounds at intermediate masses, the competitive annihilation claim rests heavily on the adopted 'Min' background model; a reader comparing the dashed and solid curves before citing should weigh this dependence.
  • The 'Min' model fits the lower envelope of cosmic-ray measurements and omits unresolved sources, so if future surveys reveal a substantial population of unresolved point sources, the reported 'strongest constraints' would weaken proportionally.
  • The paper's own morphological comparison shows a pure decaying-DM signal does not match the LHAASO latitude profile, suggesting dark matter is at most sub-dominant; the constraints are therefore best read as upper limits on DM contributions rather than hints of a signal.
  • The secondary inverse-Compton emission is computed with a state-of-the-art propagation code; different propagation assumptions could shift the secondary contribution and thus the limits, especially for leptonic channels, though the paper finds the effect is spectator for the LHAASO region.

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 / 6 minor

Summary. The paper derives constraints on annihilating and decaying ultra-heavy dark matter (TeV-PeV masses) using recent HAWC and LHAASO measurements of the Galactic diffuse gamma-ray emission. The DM signal model includes prompt gamma rays from PPPC4DM/HDMSpectra, inverse-Compton emission from DM-produced e± propagated with DRAGON2/HERMES, and gamma-ray absorption on the CMB. Limits are set with a one-sided chi-square statistic, both without an astrophysical background and with a conservative 'Min' hadronic background model. The main results are 95% CL exclusion curves for τ+τ−, b bbar, and W+W− channels; the authors report that LHAASO provides the strongest gamma-ray constraints at high masses, competitive with IceCube, and that these constraints are less sensitive to the DM density profile than Galactic-center searches.

Significance. The topic is timely and the analysis is a useful addition. If the limits are valid, they extend indirect DM searches to tens of PeV using public data and state-of-the-art simulation codes. The inclusion of secondary IC emission and gamma-ray absorption is a genuine improvement over prompt-only treatments, and the deliberate use of a conservative background model is a strength. The paper also demonstrates that the derived limits are robust to the choice of DM density profile in the high-latitude regions. I agree with the stress-test note that the reader's weakest-assumption concern runs in the opposite direction: because Eq. (4) only penalizes model predictions above the data, a larger astrophysical background would make the DM upper limits stronger, not weaker. The 'Min' background is therefore a conservative choice. The central claim is credible, but the one-sided chi-square calibration and the fixed background treatment need additional support before the quantitative limits can be fully endorsed.

major comments (3)
  1. [Eq. (4), Section III] The test statistic sums only over bins with φ_mod_i > D_i, and the paper then identifies the 2σ limit with χ²=4, citing Refs. [62,63]. A truncated sum of this kind is not chi-square distributed, so the coverage of the resulting 95% CL limits is not guaranteed. Please provide a Monte Carlo calibration of the threshold, or replace the procedure with a profile-likelihood ratio; otherwise the numerical limits in Figs. 6-8 are not precisely calibrated confidence intervals.
  2. [Section IV, Figs. 6-8] The 'with bkg' limits (dashed curves) use the 'Min' background model [39,40] as a fixed, additive component. Although the model is conservative by construction, the headline improvement of up to an order of magnitude is conditional on this single background realization. Please quantify the sensitivity by varying the background normalization/shape within the spread of local CR measurements, or by adding a plausible unresolved-source component, and show the resulting band on the dashed curves. This would support the claim of setting the 'strongest constraints' without overstating the robustness.
  3. [Sections II and IV] The paper says it uses LHAASO data from both WCDA and KM2A detectors, but it never specifies how the two data sets enter the chi-square sum in Eq. (5). Are they fit jointly with separate energy-bin lists? Is the energy overlap between WCDA and KM2A handled to avoid double counting? Please state the exact regions, energy bins, and any treatment of correlated systematics; this is needed to reproduce the reported LHAASO limits.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract / Section II] The phrase '300 hundred GeV' should be '300 GeV' or 'hundreds of GeV'.
  2. [Figure 5] The bottom panel x-axis is labeled 'Galactic longitude [deg]', but the range (−10° to 10°), the caption, and the text indicate it shows a latitude profile. Relabel as 'Galactic latitude [deg]'.
  3. [Section III] The sentence ending 'because the prompt emission drops off rapidly below the.' is incomplete; please finish the sentence.
  4. [Section IV / Appendix A] The text mentions a Moore profile in the discussion of DM distribution uncertainty, but Appendix A and Fig. 9 only show Einasto, NFW, and Burkert. Either add the Moore comparison or remove the mention.
  5. [References] References [53] and [54] appear to be identical (Leung & Ng, same arXiv number). Merge or correct.
  6. [Section III, gamma-ray absorption] The claim that neglecting Galactic radiation fields changes absorption by only ~10% should be supported with a brief explanation or a numerical check, and the sign of the effect should be stated.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the DM signal modeling is independent and the only self-cited background model is an external CR-based input, not a fitted prediction.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. Prompt gamma-ray spectra are taken from external codes (PPPC4DM, HDMSpectra), secondary inverse-Compton emission is computed with DRAGON2/HERMES, and absorption is implemented in HERMES; none of these reduce to the DM limits being derived. The only self-referential element is the 'Min' hadronic background model from Refs. [39,40], co-authored by one of the present authors, but the paper states it is 'built to fit the lower bound of the local CR measurements' and 'the minimal flux predicted from a fit to lower energy gamma-ray data' — i.e., it is calibrated to cosmic-ray and lower-energy data, not to the HAWC/LHAASO TeV-PeV data used for the DM constraints, nor to the DM hypothesis. Equation (4) is a one-sided chi-square in which the DM lifetime/cross-section is a free parameter, so the resulting limits are not predetermined by any fitted quantity. Adding the background strengthens limits simply because a positive model component reduces the allowed DM signal; the conservative 'Min' choice (omitting unresolved sources) makes the limits weaker, not artificially strong. The comparisons with IceCube, HAWC, HESS, and LHAASO dSph limits are external benchmarks. No equation, parameter, or claim reduces by construction to its own input, so no circular step can be exhibited.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central constraints depend on a set of inputs from prior literature and on the authors' own background model. None of these are fit in this paper, but their uncertainties feed directly into the strength of the claimed limits, especially the background normalization and the DM density profile for annihilation.

free parameters (4)
  • Galactic diffuse background normalization ('Min' model) = fit to lower envelope of cosmic-ray data in Refs. [39,40]
    The limits with background (dashed lines in Figs. 6-8) assume this background flux as known; its normalization is not re-fit here and its uncertainty is not propagated, so it is a free input from prior work that strongly affects the claimed constraints.
  • Local dark matter density rho_sun = 0.4 GeV/cm^3
    Assumed from Refs. [43,44]; normalizes the entire DM signal and thus the resulting limits.
  • Einasto profile parameters (alpha_s, r_s) = 0.17, 15.7 kpc
    Taken from Ref. [42]; influence annihilation constraints by up to a factor ~3 for LHAASO, as discussed in Appendix A.
  • DRAGON2 propagation setup = as in Ref. [40]
    Controls the IC secondary emission calculation; adopted from the authors' background model paper without independent validation in this work.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption DM annihilates/decays into SM final states with spectra given by PPPC4DM/HDMSpectra
    Injection spectra are inputs from external codes; uncertainties in hadronization at PeV energies are not fully quantified in this paper.
  • domain assumption The 'Min' hadronic background model accurately represents the astrophysical diffuse emission in the HAWC/LHAASO regions
    Section III and IV; the main constraints with background rely on this model, which lacks unresolved-source contribution.
  • domain assumption Gamma-ray absorption is dominated by pair production on the CMB; other radiation fields contribute at most ~10%
    Section III, as stated in the text; they neglect IR/starlight fields explicitly.
  • domain assumption The LHAASO source mask removes point-source emission reliably
    Used in the LHAASO flux predictions; the mask strongly suppresses DM flux at low latitudes, affecting the morphology comparison and the derived limits.
  • standard math The one-sided chi-square statistic with chi^2 = 4 yields valid 2-sigma limits
    Following Refs. [61-63]; this is a standard procedure but assumes Gaussian bins and known sigma_i.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 21440 in / 10140 out tokens · 105205 ms · 2026-08-04T18:43:51.484752+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Recent experiments have measured the Galactic $\gamma$-ray diffuse emission up to PeV energies, opening a window to study acceleration of Galactic cosmic rays and their propagation up to the cosmic-ray knee. Furthermore, these observations provide a powerful tool to set strong constraints into very-heavy dark matter particles, with masses in the TeV-PeV range. In this paper, we explore the potential of the newest observations of diffuse emissions at the Galactic plane from HAWC and LHAASO to probe this kind of dark matter over a wide mass range. Here, we model secondary emissions (inverse-Compton) from the electrons and positrons produced in the annihilation/decay of dark matter, on top of their prompt $\gamma$-ray emission, including the effects of absorption of high-energy photons via pair production. Furthermore, we show that including the astrophysical backgrounds (namely diffuse emission from cosmic-ray collisions or emission from unresolved sources) can significantly improve these limits. We find that the new measurements provided, specially by LHAASO with the combination of the WCDA and KM2A detectors, allow us to set strong constraints in decaying dark matter, being competitive and even improving the strongest constraints at the moment. We also highlight that these regions lead to constraints that are less affected by uncertainties from the dark matter distribution and discuss how CTA north and SWGO will be able to improve limits in this mass range.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.09609 by Manuel Rocamora, Miguel A. S\'anchez-Conde, Pedro De la Torre Luque.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Skymap depicting the two datasets considered in this work. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Gamma-ray flux produced in DM decay into [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Absorption effect in the studied LHAASO region, normal [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Examples of DM annihilation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Longitude (top) and latitude (bottom) profiles of LHAASO [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. DM annihilation cross-section (left) and decay lifetime (right) limits. Blue lines show the limits obtained using HAWC data while [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Annihilation cross-sections 95% confidence limits. Black solid (dashed) lines show our conservative (stringent) constraints; blue and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Decay lifetime 95% confidence limits. Black lines show our results, dashed blue shows HAWC constraints with the Virgo Cluster [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Dark matter density profiles explored in this work. Black shows the Einasto profile [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Annihilation cross-section (top) and mean decay lifetime (bottom) 95% confidence limits for different DM distributions: Black shows [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. Annihilation cross-section 95% confidence limits for the different LHAASO regions. Blue represents the inner region (15 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. Same as Figure [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_12.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. The potential of diffuse Galactic Ridge neutrino measurements to constrain dark matter

    astro-ph.HE 2026-05 conditional novelty 6.0

    ANTARES Galactic Ridge upper limits yield competitive dark-matter annihilation/decay bounds, the first neutrino-based branon constraints, and a negative KM3NeT forecast for the thermal relic cross-section.

  2. Too Heavy to Hide: Gamma-Ray Constraints on Annihilating Dark Matter beyond Unitarity

    hep-ph 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Gamma-ray upper limits from five high-energy observatories constrain the annihilation cross sections of composite dark matter in the mass range 10^5--10^12 GeV.

  3. The potential of diffuse Galactic Ridge neutrino measurements to constrain dark matter

    astro-ph.HE 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    ANTARES Galactic Ridge neutrino measurements can constrain annihilating and decaying dark matter for various masses and profiles while comparing to astrophysical backgrounds, with forecasts for future observatories.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

78 extracted references · 8 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Dark matter,

    Marco Cirelli, Alessandro Strumia, and Jure Zupan, “Dark matter,” (2024), arXiv:2406.01705 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  2. [2]

    The quest for the nature of the dark matter: The need of a new paradigm,

    Fabrizio Nesti, Paolo Salucci, and Nicola Turini, “The quest for the nature of the dark matter: The need of a new paradigm,” Astronomy2, 90–104 (2023)

    2023

  3. [3]

    Precise relic wimp abundance and its impact on searches for dark matter annihilation,

    Gary Steigman, Basudeb Dasgupta, and John F. Beacom, “Precise relic wimp abundance and its impact on searches for dark matter annihilation,” Physical Review D86(2012), 10.1103/physrevd.86.023506

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.86.023506 2012

  4. [4]

    Combined search in dwarf spheroidal galaxies for branon dark matter annihilation signa- tures with the MAGIC Telescopes,

    Tjark Miener, Daniel Nieto, Viviana Gammaldi, Daniel Ker- szberg, and Javier Rico (MAGIC), “Combined search in dwarf spheroidal galaxies for branon dark matter annihilation signa- tures with the MAGIC Telescopes,” PoSGamma2022, 196 (2024), arXiv:2211.07979 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  5. [5]

    Constraints to the inert doublet model of dark matter with very high-energy gamma-rays observatories,

    Lucca Raddice Justino, Clarissa Siqueira, and Aion Viana, “Constraints to the inert doublet model of dark matter with very high-energy gamma-rays observatories,” (2024), arXiv:2411.05909 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2024

  6. [6]

    Multi-tev dark matter density in the inner milky way halo: spectral and dy- namical constraints,

    Jaume Zuriaga-Puig, Viviana Gammaldi, Daniele Gaggero, Thomas Lacroix, and M.A. S ´anchez-Conde, “Multi-tev dark matter density in the inner milky way halo: spectral and dy- namical constraints,” Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2023, 063 (2023)

    2023

  7. [7]

    Antiproton bounds on dark matter annihilation from a combined analysis using the DRAGON2 code,

    Pedro De la Torre Luque, Martin Wolfgang Winkler, and Tim Linden, “Antiproton bounds on dark matter annihilation from a combined analysis using the DRAGON2 code,” JCAP05, 104 (2024), arXiv:2401.10329 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  8. [8]

    Gamma-ray lines in 15 years of fermi-lat data: New constraints on higgs portal dark matter,

    Pedro De La Torre Luque, Juri Smirnov, and Tim Lin- den, “Gamma-ray lines in 15 years of fermi-lat data: New constraints on higgs portal dark matter,” Phys. Rev. D109, L041301 (2024)

    2024

  9. [9]

    Constraints on dark matter models from a Fermi LAT search for high-energy cosmic-ray electrons from the Sun,

    M. Ajelloet al.(Fermi LAT), “Constraints on dark matter models from a Fermi LAT search for high-energy cosmic-ray electrons from the Sun,” Phys. Rev. D84, 032007 (2011), arXiv:1107.4272 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  10. [10]

    Measurement of ultra-high-energy diffuse gamma-ray emission of the galactic plane from 10 tev to 1 pev with lhaaso-km2a,

    Zhen Caoet al., “Measurement of ultra-high-energy diffuse gamma-ray emission of the galactic plane from 10 tev to 1 pev with lhaaso-km2a,” Physical Review Letters131(2023), 10.1103/physrevlett.131.151001

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.131.151001 2023

  11. [11]

    Unitarity limits on the mass and radius of dark-matter particles,

    Kim Griest and Marc Kamionkowski, “Unitarity limits on the mass and radius of dark-matter particles,” Phys. Rev. Lett.64, 615–618 (1990)

    1990

  12. [12]

    Tev-scale thermal wimps: Unitarity and its consequences,

    Juri Smirnov and John F. Beacom, “Tev-scale thermal wimps: Unitarity and its consequences,” Physical Review D100(2019), 10.1103/physrevd.100.043029

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.100.043029 2019

  13. [13]

    Snow- mass2021 cosmic frontier white paper: Ultraheavy particle dark matter,

    Daniel Carney, Nirmal Raj, Yang Bai, Joshua Berger, Carlos Blanco, Joseph Bramante, Christopher Cappiello, Ma ´ıra Du- tra, Reza Ebadi, Kristi Engel, Edward Kolb, J. Patrick Hard- ing, Jason Kumar, Gordan Krnjaic, Rafael F. Lang, Rebecca K. Leane, Benjamin V . Lehmann, Shengchao Li, Andrew J. Long, Gopolang Mohlabeng, Ibles Olcina, Elisa Pueschel, Nichola...

    2023

  14. [15]

    Dark matter as a heavy thermal hot relic,

    Thomas Hambye, Matteo Lucca, and Laurent Vanderheyden, “Dark matter as a heavy thermal hot relic,” Physics Letters B 807, 135553 (2020)

    2020

  15. [16]

    A consistent theory of decaying dark matter connecting icecube to the sesame street,

    Marco Chianese and Alexander Merle, “A consistent theory of decaying dark matter connecting icecube to the sesame street,” Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2017, 017–017 (2017)

    2017

  16. [17]

    Neu- trinoful universe,

    Tetsutaro Higaki, Ryuichiro Kitano, and Ryosuke Sato, “Neu- trinoful universe,” Journal of High Energy Physics2014(2014), 10.1007/jhep07(2014)044

    doi:10.1007/jhep07(2014)044 2014

  17. [18]

    Gluequark dark matter,

    Roberto Contino, Andrea Mitridate, Alessandro Podo, and Michele Redi, “Gluequark dark matter,” Journal of High En- ergy Physics2019(2019), 10.1007/jhep02(2019)187

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep02(2019)187 2019

  18. [20]

    Superheavy dark matter,

    Daniel J. H. Chung, Edward W. Kolb, and Antonio Ri- otto, “Superheavy dark matter,” Physical Review D59(1998), 10.1103/physrevd.59.023501

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.59.023501 1998

  19. [21]

    Wimpzillas!

    Edward W. Kolb, Daniel J. H. Chung, and Antonio Riotto, “Wimpzillas!” (1998), arXiv:hep-ph/9810361 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  20. [22]

    Superheavy dark matter through higgs portal operators,

    Edward W. Kolb and Andrew J. Long, “Superheavy dark matter through higgs portal operators,” Physical Review D96(2017), 10.1103/physrevd.96.103540

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.96.103540 2017

  21. [23]

    Thermal relic dark matter be- yond the unitarity limit,

    Keisuke Harigaya, Masahiro Ibe, Kunio Kaneta, Wakutaka Nakano, and Motoo Suzuki, “Thermal relic dark matter be- yond the unitarity limit,” Journal of High Energy Physics2016 (2016), 10.1007/jhep08(2016)151

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep08(2016)151 2016

  22. [24]

    Self-interacting dark matter from the hidden heterotic-string sector,

    Alon E. Faraggi and Maxim Pospelov, “Self-interacting dark matter from the hidden heterotic-string sector,” Astroparticle Physics16, 451–461 (2002)

    2002

  23. [25]

    Self-interacting dark matter from a non-abelian hidden sector,

    Kimberly K. Boddy, Jonathan L. Feng, Manoj Kaplinghat, and Tim M.P. Tait, “Self-interacting dark matter from a non-abelian hidden sector,” Physical Review D89(2014), 10.1103/phys- revd.89.115017

    doi:10.1103/phys- 2014

  24. [26]

    Glueball dark matter,

    Pierluca Carenza, Tassia Ferreira, Roman Pasechnik, and Zhi- Wei Wang, “Glueball dark matter,” Physical Review D108 (2023), 10.1103/physrevd.108.123027

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.108.123027 2023

  25. [27]

    Brane-world dark matter,

    J. A. R. Cembranos, A. Dobado, and A. L. Maroto, “Brane-world dark matter,” Physical Review Letters90(2003), 10.1103/physrevlett.90.241301

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.90.241301 2003

  26. [28]

    Diffuse Galactic gamma-ray flux at very high energy,

    Paolo Lipari and Silvia Vernetto, “Diffuse Galactic gamma-ray flux at very high energy,” Phys. Rev. D98, 043003 (2018), arXiv:1804.10116 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  27. [29]

    Constraining dark matter lifetime with a deep gamma-ray survey of the perseus galaxy cluster with magic,

    The Magic Collaboration, “Constraining dark matter lifetime with a deep gamma-ray survey of the perseus galaxy cluster with magic,” Physics of the Dark Universe22, 38–47 (2018)

    2018

  28. [30]

    Gamma-ray dark matter searches in milky way satellites—a comparative review of data analysis methods and current results,

    Javier Rico, “Gamma-ray dark matter searches in milky way satellites—a comparative review of data analysis methods and current results,” Galaxies8(2020), 10.3390/galaxies8010025

    work page doi:10.3390/galaxies8010025 2020

  29. [31]

    Cherenkov Telescope Array Consortium,Science with the Cherenkov Telescope Array(2019)

    2019

  30. [32]

    The southern wide-field gamma-ray obser- vatory,

    Ruben Conceic ¸˜ao, “The southern wide-field gamma-ray obser- vatory,” (2023), arXiv:2309.04577 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  31. [33]

    Constraints on the galactic halo dark matter fromfermi-lat diffuse measurements,

    M. Ackermann, M. Ajello, W. B. Atwood, L. Baldini, G. Bar- biellini, D. Bastieri, K. Bechtol, R. Bellazzini, R. D. Blandford, E. D. Bloom, E. Bonamente, A. W. Borgland, E. Bottacini, T. J. Brandt, J. Bregeon, M. Brigida, P. Bruel, R. Buehler, S. Buson, G. A. Caliandro, R. A. Cameron, P. A. Caraveo, J. M. Casandjian, C. Cecchi, E. Charles, A. Chekhtman, J....

    2012

  32. [34]

    Constraints on the dark matter annihilation from fermi-lat ob- servation of m31,

    Zhengwei Li, Xiaoyuan Huang, Qiang Yuan, and Yupeng Xu, “Constraints on the dark matter annihilation from fermi-lat ob- servation of m31,” Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2016, 028–028 (2016)

    2016

  33. [35]

    First Results from the HAWC Gamma-Ray Observatory,

    Francisco Salesa Greus (HAWC), “First Results from the HAWC Gamma-Ray Observatory,” Nucl. Part. Phys. Proc.273- 275, 289–294 (2016)

    2016

  34. [36]

    The Large High Al- titude Air Shower Observatory (LHAASO) Science Book (2021 Edition),

    Andrea Addaziet al.(LHAASO), “The Large High Al- titude Air Shower Observatory (LHAASO) Science Book (2021 Edition),” Chin. Phys. C46, 035001–035007 (2022), arXiv:1905.02773 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2021

  35. [37]

    Galactic gamma-ray diffuse emission at tev energies with hawc data,

    R. Alfaroet al., “Galactic gamma-ray diffuse emission at tev energies with hawc data,” (2023), arXiv:2310.09117 [astro- ph.HE]

    arXiv 2023

  36. [38]

    Measurement of Very-high-energy Diffuse Gamma-ray Emissions from the Galactic Plane with LHAASO-WCDA,

    LHAASO Collaboration, “Measurement of Very-high-energy Diffuse Gamma-ray Emissions from the Galactic Plane with LHAASO-WCDA,” arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2411.16021 (2024), arXiv:2411.16021 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2024

  37. [39]

    Prospects for detection of a galactic diffuse neutrino flux,

    Pedro De la Torre Luque, Daniele Gaggero, Dario Grasso, and A. Marinelli, “Prospects for detection of a galactic diffuse neutrino flux,” Front. Astron. Space Sci.9, 1041838 (2022), arXiv:2209.10011 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  38. [40]

    Galactic diffuse gamma rays meet the pev frontier,

    P. De La Torre Luque, D. Gaggero, D. Grasso, O. Fornieri, K. Egberts, C. Steppa, and C. Evoli, “Galactic diffuse gamma rays meet the pev frontier,” Astronomy & Astrophysics 672, A58 (2023)

    2023

  39. [41]

    The inner structure ofΛCDM haloes - III. Universality and asymp- totic slopes,

    J. F. Navarro, E. Hayashi, C. Power, A. R. Jenkins, C. S. Frenk, S. D. M. White, V . Springel, J. Stadel, and T. R. Quinn, “The inner structure ofΛCDM haloes - III. Universality and asymp- totic slopes,” MNRAS349, 1039–1051 (2004), arXiv:astro- ph/0311231 [astro-ph]

    arXiv 2004

  40. [42]

    The diversity and similar- ity of simulated cold dark matter haloes,

    Julio F. Navarro, Aaron Ludlow, V olker Springel, Jie Wang, Mark V ogelsberger, Simon D. M. White, Adrian Jenkins, Car- los S. Frenk, and Amina Helmi, “The diversity and similar- ity of simulated cold dark matter haloes,” MNRAS402, 21–34 (2010), arXiv:0810.1522 [astro-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  41. [43]

    Dark matter distribution in the milky way: microlens- ing and dynamical constraints,

    Fabio Iocco, Miguel Pato, Gianfranco Bertone, and Philippe Jetzer, “Dark matter distribution in the milky way: microlens- ing and dynamical constraints,” Journal of Cosmology and As- troparticle Physics2011, 029–029 (2011)

    2011

  42. [44]

    The local dark matter density,

    J I Read, “The local dark matter density,” Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics41, 063101 (2014)

    2014

  43. [45]

    PPPC 4 DM ID: a poor particle physi- cist cookbook for dark matter indirect detection,

    Marco Cirelli, Gennaro Corcella, Andi Hektor, Gert H ¨utsi, Mario Kadastik, Paolo Panci, Martti Raidal, Filippo Sala, and Alessandro Strumia, “PPPC 4 DM ID: a poor particle physi- cist cookbook for dark matter indirect detection,” J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys.2011, 051 (2011), arXiv:1012.4515 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  44. [46]

    CosmiXs: cosmic messenger spectra for indirect dark matter searches,

    Chiara Arina, Mattia Di Mauro, Nicolao Fornengo, Jan Heisig, Adil Jueid, and Roberto Ruiz de Austri, “CosmiXs: cosmic messenger spectra for indirect dark matter searches,” J. Cos- mology Astropart. Phys.2024, 035 (2024), arXiv:2312.01153 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  45. [47]

    Dark matter spectra from the electroweak to the Planck scale,

    Christian W. Bauer, Nicholas L. Rodd, and Bryan R. Web- ber, “Dark matter spectra from the electroweak to the Planck scale,” Journal of High Energy Physics2021, 121 (2021), arXiv:2007.15001 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  46. [48]

    Fermi-LAT Observations of the Diffuse Gamma-Ray Emission: Implications for Cosmic Rays and the Interstellar Medium,

    M. Ackermannet al.(Fermi-LAT), “Fermi-LAT Observations of the Diffuse Gamma-Ray Emission: Implications for Cosmic Rays and the Interstellar Medium,” Astrophys. J.750, 3 (2012), arXiv:1202.4039 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  47. [49]

    The gamma-ray and neutrino sky: A consistent picture of Fermi-LAT, Milagro, and IceCube results,

    Daniele Gaggero, Dario Grasso, Antonio Marinelli, Alfredo Ur- bano, and Mauro Valli, “The gamma-ray and neutrino sky: A consistent picture of Fermi-LAT, Milagro, and IceCube results,” Astrophys. J. Lett.815, L25 (2015), arXiv:1504.00227 [astro- ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  48. [50]

    Development of the Model of Galactic Interstellar Emission for Standard Point-Source Anal- ysis of Fermi Large Area Telescope Data,

    F. Aceroet al.(Fermi-LAT), “Development of the Model of Galactic Interstellar Emission for Standard Point-Source Anal- ysis of Fermi Large Area Telescope Data,” Astrophys. J. Suppl. 223, 26 (2016), arXiv:1602.07246 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  49. [51]

    Radial dis- tribution of the diffuseγ-ray emissivity in the Galactic disk,

    Ruizhi Yang, Felix Aharonian, and Carmelo Evoli, “Radial dis- tribution of the diffuseγ-ray emissivity in the Galactic disk,” Phys. Rev. D93, 123007 (2016), arXiv:1602.04710 [astro- ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  50. [52]

    Constrain- ing decaying very heavy dark matter from galaxy clusters with 14 year fermi-lat data,

    Deheng Song, Kohta Murase, and Ali Kheirandish, “Constrain- ing decaying very heavy dark matter from galaxy clusters with 14 year fermi-lat data,” Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2024, 024 (2024)

    2024

  51. [54]

    Improving hawc dark matter constraints with inverse-compton emission,

    Dylan M. H. Leung and Kenny C. Y . Ng, “Improving hawc dark matter constraints with inverse-compton emission,” (2023), arXiv:2312.08989 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  52. [55]

    A search for dark matter in the galac- tic halo with hawc,

    A.U. Abeysekaraet al., “A search for dark matter in the galac- tic halo with hawc,” Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2018, 049–049 (2018)

    2018

  53. [56]

    Cosmic-ray propagation with DRAGON2: I. numerical solver and astrophysical ingredients,

    Carmelo Evoli, Daniele Gaggero, Andrea Vittino, Giuseppe Di Bernardo, Mattia Di Mauro, Arianna Ligorini, Piero Ullio, and Dario Grasso, “Cosmic-ray propagation with DRAGON2: I. numerical solver and astrophysical ingredients,” J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys.2017, 015 (2017), arXiv:1607.07886 [astro- ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  54. [57]

    Simu- lating the Galactic multi-messenger emissions with HERMES,

    A. Dundovic, C. Evoli, D. Gaggero, and D. Grasso, “Simu- lating the Galactic multi-messenger emissions with HERMES,” A&A653, A18 (2021), arXiv:2105.13165 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  55. [58]

    Gamma-ray bounds from EAS detectors and heavy decaying dark mat- ter constraints,

    Arman Esmaili and Pasquale Dario Serpico, “Gamma-ray bounds from EAS detectors and heavy decaying dark mat- ter constraints,” J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys.2015, 014–014 (2015), arXiv:1505.06486 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  56. [59]

    The cosmic-ray sea explains the diffuse Galactic gamma-ray and neutrino emission from GeV to PeV,

    Pedro De La Torre Luque, Daniele Gaggero, Dario Grasso, An- tonio Marinelli, and Manuel Rocamora, “The cosmic-ray sea explains the diffuse Galactic gamma-ray and neutrino emission from GeV to PeV,” (2025), arXiv:2502.18268 [astro-ph.HE]. 14

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  57. [60]

    Interpreting the lhaaso galactic diffuse emission data,

    Vittoria Vecchiotti, Giada Peron, Elena Amato, Stefano Menchiari, Giovanni Morlino, Giulia Pagliaroli, and Francesco L. Villante, “Interpreting the lhaaso galactic diffuse emission data,” (2024), arXiv:2411.11439 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2024

  58. [61]

    Limits on dark matter annihila- tion signals from the Fermi LAT 4-year measurement of the isotropic gamma-ray background,

    Fermi LAT Collaboration, “Limits on dark matter annihila- tion signals from the Fermi LAT 4-year measurement of the isotropic gamma-ray background,” J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys.2015, 008–008 (2015), arXiv:1501.05464 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  59. [62]

    Putting all the X in one basket: Updated X-ray constraints on sub-GeV Dark Matter,

    Marco Cirelli, Nicolao Fornengo, Jordan Koechler, Elena Pinetti, and Brandon M. Roach, “Putting all the X in one basket: Updated X-ray constraints on sub-GeV Dark Matter,” J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys.2023, 026 (2023), arXiv:2303.08854 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  60. [63]

    Refining Galactic primordial black hole evapora- tion constraints,

    Pedro De la Torre Luque, Jordan Koechler, and Shyam Balaji, “Refining Galactic primordial black hole evapora- tion constraints,” arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2406.11949 (2024), arXiv:2406.11949 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2024

  61. [64]

    First implications of tibet- asg data for heavy dark matter,

    Arman Esmaili and P.D. Serpico, “First implications of tibet- asg data for heavy dark matter,” Physical Review D104(2021), 10.1103/physrevd.104.l021301

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.104.l021301 2021

  62. [65]

    First Detection of sub-PeV Diffuse Gamma Rays from the Galactic Disk: Evi- dence for Ubiquitous Galactic Cosmic Rays beyond PeV Ener- gies,

    M. Amenomoriet al.(Tibet ASgamma), “First Detection of sub-PeV Diffuse Gamma Rays from the Galactic Disk: Evi- dence for Ubiquitous Galactic Cosmic Rays beyond PeV Ener- gies,” Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 141101 (2021), arXiv:2104.05181 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  63. [66]

    The Structure of cold dark matter halos,

    Julio F. Navarro, Carlos S. Frenk, and Simon D. M. White, “The Structure of cold dark matter halos,” Astrophys. J.462, 563–575 (1996), arXiv:astro-ph/9508025

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  64. [67]

    Dark matter substructure within galactic ha- los,

    Ben Mooreet al., “Dark matter substructure within galactic ha- los,” The Astrophysical Journal524, L19–L22 (1999)

    1999

  65. [68]

    The Structure of dark matter halos in dwarf galaxies,

    A. Burkert, “The Structure of dark matter halos in dwarf galaxies,” Astrophys. J. Lett.447, L25 (1995), arXiv:astro- ph/9504041

    arXiv 1995

  66. [69]

    An optimized search for dark mat- ter in the galactic halo with HAWC,

    A. Albert, R. Alfaro, C. Alvarez, J. C. Arteaga-Vel ´azquez, D. Avila Rojas, H. A. Ayala Solares, E. Belmont-Moreno, K. S. Caballero-Mora, T. Capistr ´an, A. Carrami ˜nana, S. Casanova, O. Chaparro-Amaro, U. Cotti, J. Cotzomi, E. De la Fuente, R. Diaz Hernandez, B. L. Dingus, M. A. DuVernois, M. Durocher, J. C. D ´ıaz-V´elez, C. Espinoza, K. L. Fan, N. Fr...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  67. [70]

    Search for signatures of dark matter annihilation in the galactic center with hawc,

    R. Alfaro, C. Alvarez, A. Andr ´es, E. Anita-Rangel, M. Araya, J. C. Arteaga-Vel ´azquez, D. Avila Rojas, H. A. Ayala So- lares, R. Babu, P. Bangale, A. Bernal, K. S. Caballero-Mora, T. Capistr´an, A. Carrami ˜nana, F. Carre ´on, S. Casanova, A. L. Colmenero-Cesar, U. Cotti, J. Cotzomi, S. Couti ˜no de Le ´on, E. De la Fuente, D. Depaoli, P. Desiati, N. D...

    arXiv 2025

  68. [71]

    Constraints on Ultraheavy Dark Matter Properties from Dwarf Spheroidal Galaxies with LHAASO Observations,

    Zhen Cao, F. Aharonian, Q. An, Bai Axikegu, Y . X., Y . W. Bao, D. Bastieri, X. J. Bi, Y . J. Bi, J. T. Cai, Q. Cao, W. Y . Cao, Zhe Cao, J. Chang, J. F. Chang, A. M. Chen, E. S. Chen, Liang Chen, Lin Chen, Long Chen, M. J. Chen, M. L. Chen, Q. H. Chen, S. H. Chen, S. Z. Chen, T. L. Chen, Y . Chen, N. Cheng, Y . D. Cheng, M. Y . Cui, S. W. Cui, X. H. Cui,...

    arXiv 2024

  69. [72]

    Searches for connections between dark matter and high-energy neutrinos with IceCube,

    IceCube Collaboration, “Searches for connections between dark matter and high-energy neutrinos with IceCube,” J. Cos- mology Astropart. Phys.2023, 003 (2023), arXiv:2205.12950 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2023

  70. [73]

    Search for Dark Matter Annihilation Signals in the H.E.S.S. Inner Galaxy Sur- vey,

    H. Abdalla, F. Aharonian, F. Ait Benkhali, E. O. Ang ¨uner, C. Armand, H. Ashkar, M. Backes, V . Baghmanyan, V . Bar- bosa Martins, R. Batzofin, Y . Becherini, D. Berge, K. Bernl¨ohr, B. Bi, M. B ¨ottcher, J. Bolmont, M. de Bony de Lavergne, 15 R. Brose, F. Brun, F. Cangemi, S. Caroff, M. Cerruti, T. Chand, A. Chen, G. Cotter, J. Damascene Mbarubucyeye, J...

    arXiv 2022

  71. [74]

    Search for decaying dark matter in the Virgo cluster of galaxies with HAWC,

    A. Albert, R. Alfaro, C. Alvarez, J. C. Arteaga-Vel´azquez, H. A. Ayala Solares, R. Babu, E. Belmont-Moreno, K. S. Caballero- Mora, T. Capistr´an, A. Carrami ˜nana, S. Casanova, J. Cotzomi, S. Couti˜no de Le´on, D. Depaoli, R. Diaz Hernandez, M. A. Du- Vernois, M. Durocher, N. Fraija, J. A. Garc´ıa-Gonz´alez, M. M. Gonz´alez, J. A. Goodman, J. P. Harding,...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  72. [75]

    Constraints on Heavy Decaying Dark Matter from 570 Days of LHAASO Observations,

    Zhen Cao, F. Aharonian, Q. An, Bai Axikegu, L. X., Y . X. Bai, Y . W. Bao, D. Bastieri, X. J. Bi, Y . J. Bi, J. T. Cai, Zhe Cao, J. Chang, J. F. Chang, E. S. Chen, Liang Chen, Liang Chen, Long Chen, M. J. Chen, M. L. Chen, Q. H. Chen, S. H. Chen, S. Z. Chen, T. L. Chen, Y . Chen, H. L. Cheng, N. Cheng, Y . D. Cheng, S. W. Cui, X. H. Cui, Y . D. Cui, B. D’...

    arXiv 2022

  73. [76]

    Nature of branon dark matter,

    A. L. Maroto, “Nature of branon dark matter,” Phys. Rev. D69, 043509 (2004)

    2004

  74. [77]

    Dark matter line searches with the Cherenkov Telescope Array,

    S. Abeet al.(CTAO), “Dark matter line searches with the Cherenkov Telescope Array,” JCAP07, 047 (2024), arXiv:2403.04857 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  75. [78]

    Prospects for a survey of the galactic plane with the Cherenkov Telescope Array,

    S. Abeet al.(CTA Consortium), “Prospects for a survey of the galactic plane with the Cherenkov Telescope Array,” JCAP10, 081 (2024), arXiv:2310.02828 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  76. [79]

    Searching for dark matter in the galactic halo with a wide field of view tev gamma-ray observatory in the southern hemisphere,

    Aion Viana, Harm Schoorlemmer, Andrea Albert, Vitor de Souza, J. Patrick Harding, and Jim Hinton, “Searching for dark matter in the galactic halo with a wide field of view tev gamma-ray observatory in the southern hemisphere,” Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2019, 061–061 (2019)

    2019

  77. [80]

    Lhaaso galactic planeγ-rays strongly constrain heavy dark matter,

    Celine Boehm, Ranjan Laha, and Tarak Nath Maity, “Lhaaso galactic planeγ-rays strongly constrain heavy dark matter,” (2025), arXiv:2509.07982 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  78. [81]

    Breaking dark: Hunting heavy decaying dark matter with tibet as γ and lhaaso- km2a,

    Abhishek Dubey and Akash Kumar Saha, “Breaking dark: Hunting heavy decaying dark matter with tibet as γ and lhaaso- km2a,” (2025), arXiv:2509.08039 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

This paper was first reviewed by deepseek-v4-flash on August 4, 2026.