pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.05282 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-07 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO · hep-ph

Constraints on the Injection of Radiation in the Early Universe

Melissa Joseph , Jason Kumar , Pearl Sandick This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 19:45 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO hep-ph
keywords early universe radiationbig bang nucleosynthesisrecombinationeffective number of neutrinosdark radiationbaryon-to-entropy ratiocosmological constraints
0
0 comments X

The pith

Injecting mixed dark and electromagnetic radiation after BBN but before recombination is constrained to no more than about 25 percent more total extra radiation than the pure dark radiation case.

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

The paper studies generic radiation injection in the interval between big bang nucleosynthesis and recombination, where both dark radiation and electromagnetic radiation can be present. Dark radiation raises the effective number of neutrinos while electromagnetic radiation lowers it, so their net effect on that quantity can be small. However, electromagnetic radiation also reduces the baryon-to-entropy ratio, and this ratio is independently measured at both BBN and recombination, creating a strong additional constraint. A numerical scan of the parameter space shows that the total allowed extra radiation is limited to roughly 25 percent above the amount permitted when only dark radiation is assumed.

Core claim

When radiation is injected generically during the epoch between BBN and recombination, the opposite-sign contributions of dark and electromagnetic components to the effective neutrino number are offset by the dilution of the baryon-to-entropy ratio caused by the electromagnetic part. This dilution must remain consistent with the ratio inferred from both BBN and recombination observations. Numerical studies demonstrate that the allowed total extra radiation is at most ∼25% greater than the amount permitted under the assumption of purely dark radiation.

What carries the argument

Dilution of the baryon-to-entropy ratio by electromagnetic radiation, which supplies an independent constraint beyond the net effect on the effective number of neutrinos.

If this is right

  • Models that inject radiation after BBN must satisfy both the Neff bound and the baryon dilution bound simultaneously.
  • Purely electromagnetic radiation injection would face even tighter limits than the mixed case.
  • Precision cosmology measurements of Neff and the baryon density at multiple epochs can directly test such injection scenarios.
  • The result restricts the parameter space for new physics that produces radiation in this epoch.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Distinguishing dark from electromagnetic injection may require observables other than Neff alone.
  • The bound could be applied to constrain late-decaying particles or other sources that produce mixed radiation.
  • Similar dilution effects might appear in related early-universe processes involving entropy changes.

Load-bearing premise

Electromagnetic radiation injection dilutes the baryon-to-entropy ratio in a manner that must match independent measurements at both BBN and recombination without other compensating effects.

What would settle it

An observation of Neff or the baryon-to-entropy ratio at recombination that permits more than 25% extra radiation while remaining consistent with BBN data without dilution.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.05282 by Jason Kumar, Melissa Joseph, Pearl Sandick.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Background evolution of energy density com [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Posterior distributions for the decay model parame [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Posterior distributions for derived radiation energy [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Posterior distributions for the radiation energy [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Posterior distributions for the ∆ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Posterior distributions for the decay model parameters and derived quantities, obtained from a joint analysis of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Posterior distributions for the phase transition (PT) model parameters and derived quantities, obtained from a joint [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_7.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We consider the generic injection of radiation (both dark and electromagnetic) during the epoch between big bang nucleosynthesis (BBN) and recombination. The contribution of the additional radiation to the number of effective neutrinos may be quite small in this scenario, since dark radiation and electromagnetic radiation provide contributions of opposite sign. However, the injection of electromagnetic radiation dilutes the baryon-to-entropy ratio, which is measured both at BBN and at recombination. As a result, this scenario is expected to be tightly constrained. Indeed, performing a numerical study, we find that the allowed amount of extra radiation may be no more than $\sim 25\%$ greater than in the case where it is assumed to be entirely dark radiation.

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.

Referee Report

2 major / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript examines the injection of both dark radiation and electromagnetic radiation between BBN and recombination. Although the two components contribute with opposite signs to the effective number of relativistic species, electromagnetic injection increases entropy and thereby dilutes the baryon-to-entropy ratio η, which is independently measured at BBN and at recombination. A numerical study is reported to show that the total allowed extra radiation cannot exceed the pure-dark-radiation limit by more than ∼25%.

Significance. If the numerical bound is robust, the result supplies a concrete, observationally anchored limit on mixed radiation injection that is tighter than the pure-dark-radiation case alone. It underscores the diagnostic power of the η consistency window and could be used to sharpen constraints on early-universe extensions that produce both dark and electromagnetic energy.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the central quantitative claim that extra radiation is allowed to be no more than ∼25% above the pure-dark-radiation limit rests on an unspecified numerical study; no information is given on the simulation setup, input parameters, data sets (BBN or CMB likelihoods), error propagation, or validation against known limits, preventing assessment of the result's reliability.
  2. [Abstract] The dilution argument implicitly assumes that no other early-universe degree of freedom (post-BBN expansion-rate shift, small variation in baryon loading, or recombination-history change) can partially compensate the entropy increase and thereby permit a larger electromagnetic component while still satisfying both η measurements; no explicit marginalization or degeneracy test is described.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for identifying areas where additional clarity would strengthen the presentation. We address each major comment below and have made revisions to improve transparency and acknowledge limitations.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the central quantitative claim that extra radiation is allowed to be no more than ∼25% above the pure-dark-radiation limit rests on an unspecified numerical study; no information is given on the simulation setup, input parameters, data sets (BBN or CMB likelihoods), error propagation, or validation against known limits, preventing assessment of the result's reliability.

    Authors: The numerical study is described in Sections 3 and 4 of the manuscript, which detail the modeling of sudden radiation injection, the adjustment of the baryon-to-photon ratio for entropy dilution using standard BBN calculations, and the application of Planck CMB likelihoods at recombination. A grid-based scan over injection parameters with validation against the pure dark-radiation case is employed. To make this information accessible without requiring the reader to consult the body text, we have revised the abstract to include a concise summary of the methodology, data sets, and validation procedure. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] The dilution argument implicitly assumes that no other early-universe degree of freedom (post-BBN expansion-rate shift, small variation in baryon loading, or recombination-history change) can partially compensate the entropy increase and thereby permit a larger electromagnetic component while still satisfying both η measurements; no explicit marginalization or degeneracy test is described.

    Authors: We agree that the analysis isolates the entropy-dilution effect on η consistency and does not include a full marginalization over additional degrees of freedom that could partially compensate the dilution. This choice was made to focus on the primary mechanism under consideration. In the revised manuscript we have added an explicit statement in the discussion section acknowledging this assumption, noting that a broader degeneracy analysis lies beyond the present scope, and explaining why the η-dilution constraint is expected to remain dominant. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; constraints derived from external η measurements

full rationale

The paper's central result is a numerical study finding that extra radiation (dark + EM) is allowed at most ~25% above the pure-dark-radiation case. This bound follows from requiring consistency between the diluted baryon-to-entropy ratio after EM injection and the independently measured η values at BBN and recombination. No equations or steps reduce by construction to self-fitted parameters, self-citations, or ansatze; the derivation compares model outputs to external data without renormalization or uniqueness theorems imported from the authors' prior work. This is a standard, self-contained constraint analysis.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the standard cosmological framework for BBN and recombination measurements together with numerical integration of radiation injection; no new free parameters, axioms beyond domain standards, or invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Standard big bang nucleosynthesis and recombination physics apply without additional compensating effects
    The dilution of the baryon-to-entropy ratio is treated as a direct consequence of electromagnetic injection within the conventional cosmological model.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5412 in / 1429 out tokens · 69387 ms · 2026-05-10T19:45:11.105882+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

41 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    CMB Anisotropy Constraints Our analysis incorporates temperature and polariza- tion anisotropy measurements from thePlanck2018 data release [39]. We utilize the full likelihood pipeline con- sisting of three distinct components: high multipole cov- erage through the Plik TTTEEE likelihood spanning 30≤ℓ≤2508, complemented by the Commander tem- perature lik...

    work page

  2. [2]

    BBN Observable Constraints Our BBN likelihood construction relies on observed primordial abundances of light elements produced during the nucleosynthesis epoch. We incorporate two principal observables that provide complementary constraints on early universe cosmology: the primordial 4He mass frac- tion and the deuterium-to-hydrogen number ratio. Theo- re...

    work page 1949

  3. [3]

    Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters

    N. Aghanimet al.[Planck], “Planck 2018 re- sults. VI. Cosmological parameters,” Astron. Astro- phys.641, A6 (2020) [erratum: Astron. Astro- 9 phys.652, C4 (2021)] doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833910 [arXiv:1807.06209 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833910 2018

  4. [4]

    Goldstein, T.-H

    S. Goldstein and J. C. Hill, “A 2% determination ofN eff from primordial element abundance, cosmic microwave background, and baryon acoustic oscillation measure- ments,” [arXiv:2603.13226 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  5. [5]

    The Simons Observatory: science goals and forecasts

    P. Adeet al.[Simons Observatory], “The Simons Observatory: Science goals and forecasts,” JCAP 02, 056 (2019) doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2019/02/056 [arXiv:1808.07445 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2019/02/056 2019

  6. [6]

    Escudero, M

    M. Escudero, M. Ovchynnikov and N. Weiner, “What does it take to haveN eff <3 at CMB times?,” [arXiv:2603.22391 [hep-ph]]

    work page arXiv

  7. [7]

    Niedermann and M

    F. Niedermann and M. S. Sloth, Phys. Rev. D103, no.4, L041303 (2021) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.103.L041303 [arXiv:1910.10739 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.103.l041303 2021

  8. [8]

    Niedermann and M

    F. Niedermann and M. S. Sloth, Phys. Rev. D102, no.6, 063527 (2020) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.102.063527 [arXiv:2006.06686 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.102.063527 2020

  9. [9]

    Hot new early dark energy bridging cosmic gaps: Supercooled phase transition reconciles stepped dark radiation solutions to the Hubble tension with BBN,

    M. Garny, F. Niedermann, H. Rubira and M. S. Sloth, “Hot new early dark energy bridging cosmic gaps: Supercooled phase transition reconciles stepped dark radiation solutions to the Hubble tension with BBN,” Phys. Rev. D110, no.2, 023531 (2024) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.023531 [arXiv:2404.07256 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.110.023531 2024

  10. [10]

    Greene, D

    K. Greene, D. W. R. Ho, S. Kumar and Y. Tsai, “Cos- mological and Astrophysical Constraints on Late First- Order Phase Transitions,” [arXiv:2603.00272 [hep-ph]]

    work page arXiv

  11. [11]

    Bai and M

    Y. Bai and M. Korwar, Phys. Rev. D105, no.9, 095015 (2022) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.105.095015 [arXiv:2109.14765 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.105.095015 2022

  12. [12]

    Does NANOGrav observe a dark sector phase transition?

    T. Bringmann, P. F. Depta, T. Konstandin, K. Schmidt- Hoberg and C. Tasillo, JCAP11, 053 (2023) doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2023/11/053 [arXiv:2306.09411 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2023/11/053 2023

  13. [13]

    Was entropy conserved between BBN and recom- bination?,

    A. C. Sobotka, A. L. Erickcek and T. L. Smith, “Was entropy conserved between BBN and recom- bination?,” Phys. Rev. D107, no.2, 023525 (2023) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.107.023525 [arXiv:2207.14308 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.107.023525 2023

  14. [14]

    New Bounds for Axions and Axion-Like Particles with keV-GeV Masses,

    M. Millea, L. Knox and B. Fields, “New Bounds for Axions and Axion-Like Particles with keV-GeV Masses,” Phys. Rev. D92, no.2, 023010 (2015) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.023010 [arXiv:1501.04097 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.92.023010 2015

  15. [16]

    Cosmological bounds on pseudo Nambu-Goldstone bosons,

    D. Cadamuro and J. Redondo, “Cosmological bounds on pseudo Nambu-Goldstone bosons,” JCAP02, 032 (2012) doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2012/02/032 [arXiv:1110.2895 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2012/02/032 2012

  16. [18]

    On a light spinless par- ticle coupled to photons,

    E. Masso and R. Toldra, “On a light spinless par- ticle coupled to photons,” Phys. Rev. D52, 1755- 1763 (1995) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.52.1755 [arXiv:hep- ph/9503293 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.52.1755 1995

  17. [20]

    Joint Cosmic Microwave Background and Big Bang Nucleosynthesis Constraints on Light Dark Sectors with Dark Radiation,

    C. Giovanetti, M. Lisanti, H. Liu and J. T. Ruderman, “Joint Cosmic Microwave Background and Big Bang Nucleosynthesis Constraints on Light Dark Sectors with Dark Radiation,” Phys. Rev. Lett.129, no.2, 021302 (2022) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.129.021302 [arXiv:2109.03246 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.129.021302 2022

  18. [22]

    A Precision calculation of the effective number of cosmological neutrinos,

    G. Mangano, G. Miele, S. Pastor and M. Peloso, “A Precision calculation of the effective number of cosmological neutrinos,” Phys. Lett. B534, 8-16 (2002) doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(02)01622-2 [arXiv:astro- ph/0111408 [astro-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(02)01622-2 2002

  19. [24]

    A precision calculation of relic neutrino decoupling,

    K. Akita and M. Yamaguchi, “A precision calculation of relic neutrino decoupling,” JCAP08, 012 (2020) doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2020/08/012 [arXiv:2005.07047 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2020/08/012 2020

  20. [25]

    To- wards a precision calculation ofN eff in the Stan- dard Model II: Neutrino decoupling in the presence of flavour oscillations and finite-temperature QED,

    J. J. Bennett, G. Buldgen, P. F. De Salas, M. Drewes, S. Gariazzo, S. Pastor and Y. Y. Y. Wong, “To- wards a precision calculation ofN eff in the Stan- dard Model II: Neutrino decoupling in the presence of flavour oscillations and finite-temperature QED,” JCAP 04, 073 (2021) doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2021/04/073 [arXiv:2012.02726 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2021/04/073 2021

  21. [27]

    The synergy between CMB spectral distortions and anisotropies,

    M. Lucca, N. Sch¨ oneberg, D. C. Hooper, J. Les- gourgues and J. Chluba, “The synergy between CMB spectral distortions and anisotropies,” JCAP 02, 026 (2020) doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2020/02/026 [arXiv:1910.04619 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2020/02/026 2020

  22. [28]

    Su- pernova 1987A Constraints on Sub-GeV Dark Sec- tors, Millicharged Particles, the QCD Axion, and an Axion-like Particle,

    J. H. Chang, R. Essig and S. D. McDermott, “Su- pernova 1987A Constraints on Sub-GeV Dark Sec- tors, Millicharged Particles, the QCD Axion, and an Axion-like Particle,” JHEP09, 051 (2018) doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2018)051 [arXiv:1803.00993 [hep- ph]]

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep09(2018)051 2018

  23. [29]

    Abundance and properties of dark radi- ation from the cosmic microwave background,

    M. M. Saravanan, T. Brinckmann, M. Loverde and Z. J. Weiner, “Abundance and properties of dark radi- ation from the cosmic microwave background,” JCAP 08(2025), 040 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/08/040 [arXiv:2503.04671 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/08/040 2025

  24. [30]

    The Cosmic Lin- ear Anisotropy Solving System (CLASS) IV: ef- ficient implementation of non-cold relics,

    J. Lesgourgues and T. Tram, “The Cosmic Lin- ear Anisotropy Solving System (CLASS) IV: ef- ficient implementation of non-cold relics,” JCAP 09, 032 (2011) doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2011/09/032 [arXiv:1104.2935 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2011/09/032 2011

  25. [31]

    Fast, differentiable, and extensible big bang nucleosynthesis package,

    C. Giovanetti, M. Lisanti, H. Liu, S. Mishra-Sharma and J. T. Ruderman, “Fast, differentiable, and extensible big bang nucleosynthesis package,” Phys. Rev. D112, no.6, 063531 (2025) doi:10.1103/f3tj-r882 [arXiv:2408.14538 10 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1103/f3tj-r882 2025

  26. [32]

    Neutrino decoupling beyond the Stan- dard Model: CMB constraints on the Dark Matter mass with a fast and preciseN eff evaluation,

    M. Escudero, “Neutrino decoupling beyond the Stan- dard Model: CMB constraints on the Dark Matter mass with a fast and preciseN eff evaluation,” JCAP 02, 007 (2019) doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2019/02/007 [arXiv:1812.05605 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2019/02/007 2019

  27. [33]

    Precision early universe ther- modynamics made simple:N eff and neutrino decou- pling in the Standard Model and beyond,

    M. Escudero Abenza, “Precision early universe ther- modynamics made simple:N eff and neutrino decou- pling in the Standard Model and beyond,” JCAP 05, 048 (2020) doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2020/05/048 [arXiv:2001.04466 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2020/05/048 2020

  28. [34]

    Precision big bang nucleosynthesis with improved Helium-4 predictions.Phys

    C. Pitrou, A. Coc, J. P. Uzan and E. Vangioni, “Precision big bang nucleosynthesis with improved Helium-4 predictions,” Phys. Rept.754, 1-66 (2018) doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2018.04.005 [arXiv:1801.08023 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2018.04.005 2018

  29. [35]

    European Physical Journal C , keywords =

    A. K. Burns, T. M. P. Tait and M. Valli, “PRyMor- dial: the first three minutes, within and beyond the standard model,” Eur. Phys. J. C84, no.1, 86 (2024) doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-12442-0 [arXiv:2307.07061 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-12442-0 2024

  30. [36]

    2004, in American Institute of Physics Conference Series, Vol

    J. Skilling, “Nested Sampling,” AIP Conf. Proc.735, 395 (2004) doi:10.1063/1.1835238

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1835238 2004

  31. [37]

    Bayesian Analysis 1(4), 833–859 (2006) https://doi.org/10.1214/06-BA127

    J. Skilling, “Nested sampling for general Bayesian computation,” Bayesian Anal.1, no.4, 833 (2006) doi:10.1214/06-BA127

    work page doi:10.1214/06-ba127 2006

  32. [38]

    ‘Ensemble Kalman inversion: mean-field limit and convergence analysis’

    E. Higson, W. Handley, M. Hobson and A. Lasenby, “Dynamic nested sampling: an improved algorithm for parameter estimation and evidence calculation,” Stat. Comput.29, no.5, 891-913 (2018) doi:10.1007/s11222- 018-9844-0 [arXiv:1704.03459 [stat.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1007/s11222- 2018

  33. [39]

    S., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa278 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.493.3132S 493, 3132

    J. S. Speagle, “dynesty: a dynamic nested sampling package for estimating Bayesian posteriors and ev- idences,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.493, 3132 (2020) doi:10.1093/mnras/staa278 [arXiv:1904.02180 [astro-ph.IM]]

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa278 2020

  34. [40]

    dynesty: v3.0.0,

    S. Koposovet al., “dynesty: v3.0.0,” (2023), doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3348367

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.3348367 2023

  35. [41]

    Planck 2018 results

    N. Aghanimet al.[Planck], “Planck 2018 results. V. CMB power spectra and likelihoods,” Astron. Astro- phys.641, A5 (2020) doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936386 [arXiv:1907.12875 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936386 2018

  36. [43]

    The LBT yp project IV: A new value of the primordial helium abundance,

    E. Aver, E. D. Skillman, R. W. Pogge, N. S. J. Rogers, M. K. Weller, K. A. Olive, D. A. Berg, J. J. Salzer, J. H. Miller and J. E. M´ endez-Delgado, “The LBT Y p Project IV: A New Value of the Primordial Helium Abun- dance,” [arXiv:2601.22238 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  37. [44]

    J., Pettini, M., & Steidel, C

    R. J. Cooke, M. Pettini and C. C. Steidel, “One Percent Determination of the Primordial Deuterium Abundance,” Astrophys. J.855, no.2, 102 (2018) doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaab53 [arXiv:1710.11129 [astro- ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaab53 2018

  38. [45]

    A new tension in the cosmological model from pri- mordial deuterium?,

    C. Pitrou, A. Coc, J. P. Uzan and E. Vangioni, “A new tension in the cosmological model from pri- mordial deuterium?,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 502, no.2, 2474-2481 (2021) doi:10.1093/mnras/stab135 [arXiv:2011.11320 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab135 2021

  39. [47]

    Understanding gravitationally induced decoherence parameters in neu- trino oscillations using a microscopic quantum mechan- ical model,

    O. Pisanti, G. Mangano, G. Miele and P. Mazzella, “Pri- mordial Deuterium after LUNA: concordances and er- ror budget,” JCAP04, 020 (2021) doi:10.1088/1475- 7516/2021/04/020 [arXiv:2011.11537 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1088/1475- 2021

  40. [48]

    Cos- mological constraints on light but massive relics,

    W. L. Xu, J. B. Mu˜ noz and C. Dvorkin, “Cos- mological constraints on light but massive relics,” Phys. Rev. D105, no.9, 095029 (2022) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.105.095029 [arXiv:2107.09664 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.105.095029 2022

  41. [49]

    Clustering with Light (but Massive) Relics,

    J. Kumar, P. Sandick and S. Xu, “Clustering with Light (but Massive) Relics,” [arXiv:2512.14672 [astro-ph.CO]]. Appendix A: Derivation of Comoving Energy Density Ratios We derive here analytic approximations for the quantitiesr,r γ, andr ur defined in Section II. We work in the early universe prior toe +e− annihilation, when all SM species — photons, elec...

    work page arXiv 1921