arxiv: 2509.21148 · v3 · submitted 2025-09-25 · ✦ hep-ph · astro-ph.CO· gr-qc

Scalaron dark matter dynamics: effects of Higgs non-minimal coupling to gravity

Shibendu Gupta Choudhury , Koushik Dutta , Deep Ghosh This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-18 13:55 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph astro-ph.COgr-qc

keywords scalarondark matterR-squared gravityHiggs non-minimal couplingrelic densitytrilinear interactionmisalignment mechanism

0 comments p. Extension

The pith

The scalaron from R-squared gravity can serve as cold dark matter whose mass windows depend on whether a trilinear coupling with the Higgs vanishes or not.

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

The paper studies how a scalar field known as the scalaron, which arises naturally in R-squared gravity, can behave as cold dark matter. Adding a non-minimal coupling of the Higgs field to gravity modifies an induced trilinear interaction between the scalaron and the Higgs. This modification controls the scalaron's production and evolution in the early universe. When the trilinear term cancels for particular values of the coupling and mass, the density is fixed by a misalignment mechanism like that for axions, giving the range 2.7 meV to 0.7 MeV. When the trilinear remains nonzero, relic-density matching occurs for masses near 3.6 meV or between 10 and 770 meV, and a new upper limit on the product of the coupling strength and mass follows from the measured Higgs mass.

Core claim

In the scalaron-Higgs mixed model the Higgs non-minimal coupling contributes to the induced trilinear interaction that originates from the Higgs quartic self-coupling. For combinations where this interaction vanishes at leading order the scalaron abundance is set by the misalignment mechanism, producing 2.7 meV ≲ m ≲ 0.7 MeV. When the trilinear is nonzero and dominated by the Higgs quartic the observed dark-matter density is obtained for m ≃ 3.6 meV; when dominated by the non-minimal coupling the mass lies in 10-770 meV. The same framework yields the first upper bound |ξ m| ≲ 1.5×10^17 GeV inside this class of models, extracted from the LHC measurement of the Higgs mass.

What carries the argument

The induced trilinear interaction between the scalaron and the Higgs field, which receives competing contributions from the R-squared term and from the Higgs non-minimal coupling ξ.

If this is right

The observed dark-matter density directly constrains the scalaron mass once the value of the non-minimal coupling is specified.
Fifth-force searches set the lower edge of the allowed mass interval.
INTEGRAL/SPI gamma-ray limits set the upper edge through the two-photon decay channel.
The LHC Higgs-mass result supplies an independent upper bound on the product |ξ m|.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

Similar cancellations between gravitational and matter-sector couplings could appear in other modified-gravity models and might yield additional dark-matter candidates at meV scales.
Dedicated searches for scalaron-induced fifth forces or narrow gamma-ray lines in the 10-770 meV window could provide direct tests independent of relic-density calculations.
If the scalaron accounts for dark matter, the same non-minimal coupling may affect early-universe dynamics such as inflation or reheating in ways that future CMB experiments could probe.

Load-bearing premise

The scalaron abundance is fixed solely by the leading-order trilinear interaction with the Higgs or by the misalignment mechanism when that term vanishes, without sizable effects from higher-order operators or late-time entropy production.

What would settle it

A future Higgs-mass measurement that pushes |ξ m| above 1.5×10^17 GeV while the scalaron is still required to match the observed dark-matter density, or gamma-ray data showing decay fluxes inconsistent with the predicted rates inside the quoted mass windows, would rule out the central claim.

read the original abstract

One of the key features of the $R^2$-gravity is the embedding of a scalar field, scalaron, into the gravity sector. The scalaron interacts with the Standard Model (SM) matter fields through Planck-suppressed couplings. If the scalaron serves as a viable dark matter (DM) candidate, it can account for the lack of evidence of DM interactions beyond gravity in experimental and observational probes to date. The realization of the scalaron, as a cold DM candidate, depends on an induced trilinear interaction with the SM Higgs via its quartic self coupling. Here, we introduce a Higgs non-minimal coupling to gravity that additionally contributes to the induced trilinear interaction with its existing competing part, originated from the $R^2$-gravity. We study the interplay between these two contributions in the early universe, which determines both the initial conditions and evolution of the scalaron, leading to cold DM behavior at a later epoch. The trilinear interaction vanishes at the leading order for certain combinations of the Higgs non-minimal coupling ($\xi$) and the scalaron mass ($m$), thereby setting the scalaron density through misalignment mechanism, as in axions. In this case, the scalaron DM mass is obtained as, $2.7 ~{\rm meV} \lesssim m \lesssim 0.7 ~\rm{MeV}$. The lower limit on the mass is set by the fifth force constraints, whereas the upper bound arises from INTEGRAL/SPI limits on the excess gamma-ray flux due to scalaron decaying into two photons. On the other hand, when the trilinear interaction is non-zero and dominated by the Higgs quartic self coupling, the DM relic density is satisfied with $m \simeq 3.6$ meV. When the Higgs non-minimal coupling dominates, the mass lies within 10-770 meV. We also obtain, for the first time within the scalaron-Higgs mixed model, an upper bound on $|\xi m|$ of $1.5\times 10^{17}$ GeV, from Higgs mass measurement at the LHC.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper adds the Higgs non-minimal coupling to the scalaron DM setup and extracts a new LHC bound on |ξ m|, but the mass windows still come from fitting relic density under standard assumptions.

read the letter

Hi, this paper takes the scalaron from R² gravity and adds the Higgs non-minimal coupling ξ to see how it alters the induced trilinear interaction that lets the scalaron act as dark matter. The two contributions to the trilinear can cancel or one can dominate, which splits the parameter space into different production regimes. When the terms cancel, misalignment sets the density and gives the broad window 2.7 meV to 0.7 MeV, bounded below by fifth-force tests and above by INTEGRAL gamma-ray limits. When the quartic term wins they recover a specific mass near 3.6 meV. When ξ dominates the range is 10–770 meV. They also report a first upper limit |ξ m| ≲ 1.5 × 10^17 GeV coming from the measured Higgs mass at the LHC. That bound is the clearest new result. The early-universe evolution uses the usual Friedmann and Boltzmann equations, and the separation into regimes is handled cleanly. The work is a straightforward extension of earlier scalaron DM papers rather than a re-derivation. The main limitation is that the quoted masses are obtained by matching the computed abundance to the observed dark-matter density. This step assumes the leading trilinear (or pure misalignment) controls production and decay, with no large contributions from higher-dimension operators or late entropy injection. The stress-test note flags exactly this point, and it remains a real caveat; if those extra effects are present the windows move by an O(1) factor. The paper does not appear to quantify how dimension-six terms would shift the effective potential or rates. The citation pattern tracks the relevant prior literature without obvious gaps. This is aimed at people already working on scalaron or f(R) phenomenology. A reader in that niche will find the numerical windows and the collider bound useful to check. It is solid enough to deserve peer review; the extension is modest but the LHC constraint is concrete and worth referee scrutiny.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript examines scalaron dark matter in R²-gravity augmented by a Higgs non-minimal coupling ξ to gravity. The induced trilinear scalaron-Higgs interaction receives competing contributions from the R² term and from ξ R |H|². For parameter choices where this trilinear vanishes at leading order, the scalaron abundance is set by the misalignment mechanism, yielding 2.7 meV ≲ m ≲ 0.7 MeV. When the trilinear is non-zero and dominated either by the Higgs quartic or by the ξ term, relic-density matching produces m ≃ 3.6 meV or the interval 10–770 meV. An upper bound |ξ m| ≲ 1.5 × 10¹⁷ GeV is extracted from the LHC Higgs-mass measurement.

Significance. If the central assumptions on the dominance of the leading trilinear (or pure misalignment) hold, the work supplies the first explicit mass windows for scalaron DM inside the mixed scalaron-Higgs model and the first bound on the product ξ m. These results tighten the target space for fifth-force searches, gamma-ray line observations, and future collider constraints on non-minimal gravity couplings.

major comments (2)

[Abstract and relic-density section] Abstract and the relic-density calculation: the quoted mass intervals (2.7 meV ≲ m ≲ 0.7 MeV and 10–770 meV) are obtained by equating the computed scalaron abundance to the observed DM density. This step assumes that the leading-order trilinear interaction (or misalignment when the trilinear vanishes) sets the dominant production channel and that higher-dimensional operators and late-time entropy production remain negligible. A concrete estimate of the coefficients of dimension-6 scalaron-Higgs operators would be required to confirm that the extracted windows are robust rather than shifted by O(1) factors.
[Effective potential and trilinear cancellation] Derivation of the effective potential and cancellation condition: the precise linear combination of the R²-induced trilinear and the ξ R |H|² contribution that cancels at leading order is central to the vanishing-trilinear case. The manuscript should display the full effective potential (including the explicit dependence on ξ and m) and the algebraic condition under which the trilinear coefficient vanishes, so that the reader can verify the quoted parameter combinations.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] The abstract states the bound |ξ m| ≲ 1.5×10¹⁷ GeV but does not indicate the section or equation from which it is derived; a forward reference would improve readability.
[Model setup] Notation for the scalaron mass m and the non-minimal coupling ξ should be introduced once in the model section and used consistently thereafter to avoid any ambiguity in the interplay discussion.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of our manuscript and the constructive comments. We address each major point below and have revised the manuscript to improve clarity and robustness.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract and relic-density section] Abstract and the relic-density calculation: the quoted mass intervals (2.7 meV ≲ m ≲ 0.7 MeV and 10–770 meV) are obtained by equating the computed scalaron abundance to the observed DM density. This step assumes that the leading-order trilinear interaction (or misalignment when the trilinear vanishes) sets the dominant production channel and that higher-dimensional operators and late-time entropy production remain negligible. A concrete estimate of the coefficients of dimension-6 scalaron-Higgs operators would be required to confirm that the extracted windows are robust rather than shifted by O(1) factors.

Authors: We agree that an explicit discussion of higher-dimensional operators strengthens the robustness of the results. In the revised manuscript we have added a paragraph in the relic-density section providing an order-of-magnitude estimate of the dimension-6 scalaron-Higgs operators. These operators are suppressed by additional factors of (m/M_Pl)^2 relative to the leading trilinear term; for the mass range under consideration the resulting corrections remain sub-dominant and do not shift the quoted windows by more than O(1). We have also noted that late-time entropy production is negligible in the parameter space we explore. revision: yes
Referee: [Effective potential and trilinear cancellation] Derivation of the effective potential and cancellation condition: the precise linear combination of the R²-induced trilinear and the ξ R |H|² contribution that cancels at leading order is central to the vanishing-trilinear case. The manuscript should display the full effective potential (including the explicit dependence on ξ and m) and the algebraic condition under which the trilinear coefficient vanishes, so that the reader can verify the quoted parameter combinations.

Authors: We thank the referee for this suggestion. The revised manuscript now includes the complete effective potential with explicit dependence on both ξ and the scalaron mass m. We have also derived and displayed the algebraic condition for the cancellation of the leading trilinear term, allowing readers to directly reproduce the parameter combinations that yield the misalignment regime. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: mass ranges derived from model interactions matched to external relic density and bounds

full rationale

The paper constructs the effective scalaron-Higgs trilinear from the R^2 term plus the ξ R |H|^2 non-minimal coupling, computes the resulting production/decay rates and misalignment abundance using standard early-universe cosmology, then equates the computed density to the observed Ω_DM (plus fifth-force and gamma-ray constraints) to obtain allowed m intervals. This is ordinary parameter constraint against external benchmarks, not a reduction of the output to the input by definition or self-citation. No load-bearing step collapses to a fitted parameter renamed as prediction or to a prior self-citation whose validity is assumed without independent verification. The derivation remains self-contained once the Lagrangian and standard Boltzmann equations are accepted.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the standard Einstein-frame transformation of R² gravity, the assumption that the scalaron is stable on cosmological timescales, and the use of the observed dark-matter density as an external benchmark. No new particles are invented; ξ and m are treated as free parameters whose values are constrained rather than derived from first principles.

free parameters (2)

scalaron mass m
Fitted to reproduce the observed relic density once the trilinear coupling strength is fixed by ξ and the Higgs quartic.
Higgs non-minimal coupling ξ
Introduced as a free parameter whose interplay with m determines whether the trilinear vanishes or dominates.

axioms (2)

domain assumption The effective potential after Weyl rescaling yields a trilinear scalaron-Higgs term whose coefficient is the sum of the R²-induced piece and the ξ-induced piece.
Invoked when the authors state that the two contributions compete and can cancel.
domain assumption The scalaron abundance is set by either misalignment or freeze-in/freeze-out processes governed by the trilinear interaction, with no significant entropy injection after the relevant epoch.
Required to translate the interaction strength directly into the quoted mass windows.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5933 in / 2024 out tokens · 72203 ms · 2026-05-18T13:55:54.827368+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages · 22 internal anchors

[1]

Profumo,An Introduction to Particle Dark Matter

S. Profumo,An Introduction to Particle Dark Matter. World Scientific, 2017

work page 2017
[2]

Particle Dark Matter: Evidence, Candidates and Constraints

G. Bertone, D. Hooper, and J. Silk,Particle dark matter: Evidence, candidates and constraints,Phys. Rept.405(2005) 279–390, [hep-ph/0404175]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005
[3]

J. A. R. Cembranos,Dark Matter from R2-gravity,Phys. Rev. Lett.102(2009) 141301, [arXiv:0809.1653]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009
[4]

High-energy scalarons in R^{2} gravity as a model for Dark Matter in galaxies

C. Corda, H. J. Mosquera Cuesta, and R. Lorduy Gomez,High-energy scalarons inR 2 gravity as a model for Dark Matter in galaxies,Astropart. Phys.35(2012) 362–370, [arXiv:1105.0147]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012
[5]

Modified Gravity Explains Dark Matter?

T. Katsuragawa and S. Matsuzaki,Dark matter in modified gravity?,Phys. Rev. D95 (2017), no. 4 044040, [arXiv:1610.01016]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017
[6]

Cosmic History of Chameleonic Dark Matter in $F(R)$ Gravity

T. Katsuragawa and S. Matsuzaki,Cosmic History of Chameleonic Dark Matter inF(R) Gravity,Phys. Rev. D97(2018), no. 6 064037, [arXiv:1708.08702]. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 97, 129902 (2018)]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018
[7]

Shtanov,Light scalaron as dark matter,Phys

Y. Shtanov,Light scalaron as dark matter,Phys. Lett. B820(2021) 136469, [arXiv:2105.02662]

work page arXiv 2021
[8]

f(R) theories

A. De Felice and S. Tsujikawa,f(R) theories,Living Rev. Rel.13(2010) 3, [arXiv:1002.4928]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010
[9]

A. A. Starobinsky,A new type of isotropic cosmological models without singularity,Physics Letters B91(Mar., 1980) 99–102

work page 1980
[10]

Preskill, M

J. Preskill, M. B. Wise, and F. Wilczek,Cosmology of the Invisible Axion,Phys. Lett. B120 (1983) 127–132

work page 1983
[11]

L. F. Abbott and P. Sikivie,A Cosmological Bound on the Invisible Axion,Phys. Lett. B120 (1983) 133–136

work page 1983
[12]

Dine and W

M. Dine and W. Fischler,The Not So Harmless Axion,Phys. Lett. B120(1983) 137–141

work page 1983
[13]

D. J. E. Marsh,Axion Cosmology,Phys. Rept.643(2016) 1–79, [arXiv:1510.07633]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016
[14]

Shtanov,Initial conditions for the scalaron dark matter,JCAP10(2022) 079, [arXiv:2207.00267]

Y. Shtanov,Initial conditions for the scalaron dark matter,JCAP10(2022) 079, [arXiv:2207.00267]

work page arXiv 2022
[15]

F. L. Bezrukov and M. Shaposhnikov,The Standard Model Higgs boson as the inflaton,Phys. Lett. B659(2008) 703–706, [arXiv:0710.3755]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008
[16]

G. F. Giudice and H. M. Lee,Unitarizing Higgs Inflation,Phys. Lett. B694(2011) 294–300, [arXiv:1010.1417]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011
[17]

Higgs inflation

J. Rubio,Higgs inflation,Front. Astron. Space Sci.5(2019) 50, [arXiv:1807.02376]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019
[18]

Higgs Scalaron Mixed Inflation

Y. Ema,Higgs Scalaron Mixed Inflation,Phys. Lett. B770(2017) 403–411, [arXiv:1701.07665]. – 15 –

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017
[19]

Scalaron the healer: removing the strong-coupling in the Higgs- and Higgs-dilaton inflations

D. Gorbunov and A. Tokareva,Scalaron the healer: removing the strong-coupling in the Higgs- and Higgs-dilaton inflations,Phys. Lett. B788(2019) 37–41, [arXiv:1807.02392]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019
[20]

M. He, R. Jinno, K. Kamada, S. C. Park, A. A. Starobinsky, and J. Yokoyama,On the violent preheating in the mixed Higgs-R 2 inflationary model,Phys. Lett. B791(2019) 36–42, [arXiv:1812.10099]

work page arXiv 2019
[21]

M. He, A. A. Starobinsky, and J. Yokoyama,Inflation in the mixed Higgs-R 2 model,JCAP 05(2018) 064, [arXiv:1804.00409]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018
[22]

Gundhi and C

A. Gundhi and C. F. Steinwachs,Scalaron-Higgs inflation,Nucl. Phys. B954(2020) 114989, [arXiv:1810.10546]

work page arXiv 2020
[23]

D. Y. Cheong, S. M. Lee, and S. C. Park,Progress in Higgs inflation,J. Korean Phys. Soc. 78(2021), no. 10 897–906, [arXiv:2103.00177]

work page arXiv 2021
[24]

Spacetime curvature and the Higgs stability during inflation

M. Herranen, T. Markkanen, S. Nurmi, and A. Rajantie,Spacetime curvature and the Higgs stability during inflation,Phys. Rev. Lett.113(2014), no. 21 211102, [arXiv:1407.3141]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014
[25]

D. G. Figueroa, A. Rajantie, and F. Torrenti,Higgs field-curvature coupling and postinflationary vacuum instability,Phys. Rev. D98(2018), no. 2 023532, [arXiv:1709.00398]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018
[26]

Faraoni,Cosmology in Scalar-Tensor Gravity

V. Faraoni,Cosmology in Scalar-Tensor Gravity. Fundamental Theories of Physics. Springer Netherlands, 2004

work page 2004
[27]

Ema and S

Y. Ema and S. Verner,Cosmological collider signatures of Higgs-R 2 inflation,JCAP04 (2024) 039, [arXiv:2309.10841]

work page arXiv 2024
[28]

V. A. Rubakov and D. S. Gorbunov,Introduction to the Theory of the Early Universe: Hot big bang theory. World Scientific, Singapore, 2017

work page 2017
[29]

B. D. Fields, K. A. Olive, T.-H. Yeh, and C. Young,Big-Bang Nucleosynthesis after Planck, JCAP03(2020) 010, [arXiv:1912.01132]. [Erratum: JCAP 11, E02 (2020)]. [30]PlanckCollaboration, N. Aghanim et al.,Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys.641(2020) A6, [arXiv:1807.06209]. [Erratum: Astron.Astrophys. 652, C4 (2021)]

work page arXiv 2020
[30]

Shtanov,Scalaron dark matter and the thermal history of the universe,JCAP12(2024) 028, [arXiv:2409.05027]

Y. Shtanov,Scalaron dark matter and the thermal history of the universe,JCAP12(2024) 028, [arXiv:2409.05027]

work page arXiv 2024
[31]

Shtanov and Y

Y. Shtanov and Y. Sheiko,Interactions of the scalaron dark matter in f (R) gravity,JCAP 07(2025) 033, [arXiv:2505.00324]

work page arXiv 2025
[32]

Calore, A

F. Calore, A. Dekker, P. D. Serpico, and T. Siegert,Constraints on light decaying dark matter candidates from 16 yr of INTEGRAL/SPI observations,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 520(2023), no. 3 4167–4172, [arXiv:2209.06299]. [Erratum: Mon.Not.Roy.Astron.Soc. 538, 132 (2025)]

work page arXiv 2023
[33]

D. J. Kapner, T. S. Cook, E. G. Adelberger, J. H. Gundlach, B. R. Heckel, C. D. Hoyle, and H. E. Swanson,Tests of the gravitational inverse-square law below the dark-energy length scale,Phys. Rev. Lett.98(2007) 021101, [hep-ph/0611184]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007
[34]

E. G. Adelberger, B. R. Heckel, S. A. Hoedl, C. D. Hoyle, D. J. Kapner, and A. Upadhye, Particle Physics Implications of a Recent Test of the Gravitational Inverse Sqaure Law,Phys. Rev. Lett.98(2007) 131104, [hep-ph/0611223]. – 16 –

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007
[35]

Bounds on the Nonminimal Coupling of the Higgs Boson to Gravity

M. Atkins and X. Calmet,Bounds on the Nonminimal Coupling of the Higgs Boson to Gravity,Phys. Rev. Lett.110(2013), no. 5 051301, [arXiv:1211.0281]. [37]ATLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al.,A detailed map of Higgs boson interactions by the ATLAS experiment ten years after the discovery,Nature607(2022), no. 7917 52–59, [arXiv:2207.00092]. [Erratum: Nature 612,...

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013
[36]

W. D. Goldberger, B. Grinstein, and W. Skiba,Distinguishing the Higgs boson from the dilaton at the Large Hadron Collider,Phys. Rev. Lett.100(2008) 111802, [arXiv:0708.1463]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008
[37]

Strongest model-independent bound on the lifetime of Dark Matter

B. Audren, J. Lesgourgues, G. Mangano, P. D. Serpico, and T. Tram,Strongest model-independent bound on the lifetime of Dark Matter,JCAP12(2014) 028, [arXiv:1407.2418]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014
[38]

Winkler et al.,The INTEGRAL mission,Astron

C. Winkler et al.,The INTEGRAL mission,Astron. Astrophys.411(2003) L1–L6

work page 2003
[39]

Alonso- ´Alvarez, R

G. Alonso- ´Alvarez, R. S. Gupta, J. Jaeckel, and M. Spannowsky,On the Wondrous Stability of ALP Dark Matter,JCAP03(2020) 052, [arXiv:1911.07885]

work page arXiv 2020
[40]

WISPy Cold Dark Matter

P. Arias, D. Cadamuro, M. Goodsell, J. Jaeckel, J. Redondo, and A. Ringwald,WISPy Cold Dark Matter,JCAP06(2012) 013, [arXiv:1201.5902]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012
[41]

Fischer, D

S. Fischer, D. Malyshev, L. Ducci, and A. Santangelo,New constraints on decaying dark matter from INTEGRAL/SPI,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.520(2023), no. 4 6322–6334, [arXiv:2211.06200]

work page arXiv 2023
[42]

B. Fuks, J. H. Kim, and S. J. Lee,Scrutinizing the Higgs quartic coupling at a future 100 TeV proton–proton collider with taus and b-jets,Phys. Lett. B771(2017) 354–358, [arXiv:1704.04298]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017
[43]

Stylianou and G

P. Stylianou and G. Weiglein,Constraints on the trilinear and quartic Higgs couplings from triple Higgs production at the LHC and beyond,Eur. Phys. J. C84(2024), no. 4 366, [arXiv:2312.04646]. – 17 –

work page arXiv 2024