pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.04827 · v1 · pith:75MWXIH6new · submitted 2026-06-03 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO · astro-ph.GA

Steep Redshift Evolution of the Ionizing Escape Fraction at z = 5--12: Empirical Constraints and Comparison with Simulations

Zihan Wang , Huanyuan Shan This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-28 05:03 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO astro-ph.GA
keywords alphaionizingreionizationconstraintsempiricalmodelplanckbudget
0
0 comments X

The pith

The ionizing escape fraction rises steeply with redshift from about 2 percent at z=5 to 9 percent at z=12.

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

This paper derives the first empirical constraints on the ionizing photon escape fraction as a function of both halo mass and redshift during reionization. It fits a three-parameter power-law model to HST and JWST UV luminosity functions, Planck optical depth, neutral fraction data, and one prior, using abundance matching to connect observed magnitudes to halo masses and an ODE solver for the ionization history. The profile likelihood yields a steep redshift exponent near 2, so the population-averaged escape fraction climbs sharply while sub-threshold halos supply more than 80 percent of the ionizing photons at z greater than or equal to 10. If this holds, reionization calculations must incorporate strong redshift dependence rather than fixed escape fractions, and the model remains consistent with Planck at 0.7 sigma. The result also shows that luminosity-weighted averages in simulations can mask the underlying per-halo trend.

Core claim

Conditioned on UV luminosity functions at z=5-12, Planck Thomson optical depth, neutral fraction measurements, and a high-redshift prior, a dense grid scan and MCMC on the model f_esc = f_0 (M/10^10 M_sun)^α_M [(1+z)/10]^α_z returns profile-likelihood constraints f_0=0.061_{-0.023}^{+0.018}, α_M=0.18_{-0.30}^{+0.22}, α_z=1.98_{-0.42}^{+0.48}. The resulting population-averaged escape fraction therefore increases from roughly 2 percent at z=5 to 9 percent at z=12, with halos below the observational threshold contributing more than 80 percent of the ionizing budget at z greater than or equal to 10; the steep-evolution solution also reproduces the observed optical depth to within 0.7 sigma.

What carries the argument

The three-parameter power-law escape-fraction model f_esc(M_h,z) linked to data through abundance matching of M_UV to halo mass and a validated reionization ODE solver.

If this is right

  • Sub-threshold halos supply more than 80 percent of the ionizing photons at z greater than or equal to 10.
  • The model yields a Thomson optical depth of 0.047, consistent with Planck at 0.7 sigma.
  • The per-halo median escape fraction in the THESAN simulation shows similarly steep redshift evolution, while luminosity-weighted averages flatten the trend because massive halos dominate at lower redshift.
  • Robustness checks establish that the redshift exponent exceeds 1.0 at greater than 95 percent .
  • Tabulated posterior distributions of f_esc(M_h,z) are supplied for direct use in other reionization simulations.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Future deeper surveys that reach fainter galaxies at z greater than 10 could directly test whether low-mass halos indeed dominate the ionizing output.
  • The strong degeneracy among the three parameters in the full posterior implies that additional independent observables, such as the redshift evolution of the neutral fraction at specific redshifts, would be needed to tighten the constraints further.
  • If the weak mass dependence holds, escape-fraction prescriptions in galaxy-formation simulations can be simplified to depend mainly on redshift rather than on detailed halo properties.
  • The difference between per-halo and luminosity-weighted averages suggests that comparisons between empirical constraints and simulations must specify the averaging method to avoid apparent tension.
  • keywords:[

Load-bearing premise

That a single three-parameter power-law form adequately describes the escape fraction over the full halo-mass and redshift range, together with the accuracy of abundance matching that converts observed UV magnitudes into halo masses.

What would settle it

A direct measurement of the escape fraction for a statistical sample of galaxies at z greater than 10 that shows no increase or a decrease with redshift, or that attributes most ionizing photons to halos above the observational threshold.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.04827 by Huanyuan Shan, Zihan Wang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Mass-dependent escape fraction and population average. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Joint constraints on fesc model parameters. Two-dimensional profile likelihoods in the (f0, αM), (f0, αz), and (αM, αz) planes, profiled (minimised) over the third parameter. White contours: ∆χ 2 = 2.30 (1σ), 6.18 (2σ), 11.83 (3σ) for two parameters. Gold star: grid best fit. Red diamond: THESAN luminosity-weighted mean from public catalogues (Yeh et al. 2023). THESAN lies within the 2σ contour in all proj… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Reionization history and parameter pro￾files. Top left: Neutral fraction ¯xHI(z) at the MCMC me￾dian (blue solid) and THESAN parameters (red dashed), compared with data (black circles with error bars). Blue shaded bands show the 68% and 95% posterior predictive intervals from 100 draws of the MCMC chain. Other panels: One-dimensional profile likelihoods (∆χ 2 minimised over the other two parameters) for f0… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Ionizing emissivity decomposition by halo mass. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The ionizing photon escape fraction $f_{\rm esc}$ governs cosmic reionization yet remains observationally unconstrained as a function of halo mass. We present the first empirical constraints on $f_{\rm esc}(M_{\rm h},z)$ across the epoch of reionization, using a three-parameter power-law model $f_{\rm esc} = f_0\,(M/10^{10}M_\odot)^{\alpha_M}\,[(1{+}z)/10]^{\alpha_z}$, conditioned on HST and JWST UV luminosity functions at $z=5$--12, the Planck Thomson optical depth, seven neutral-fraction measurements, and one high-redshift prior. Using Schechter fits to the latest HST and JWST UV luminosity functions, abundance matching to link $M_{\rm UV}$ to halo mass, and a reionization ODE solver validated against Planck, we constrain the model via a dense grid scan and ensemble MCMC. The profile likelihood yields tight constraints: $f_0=0.061_{-0.023}^{+0.018}$, $\alpha_M=0.18_{-0.30}^{+0.22}$, $\alpha_z=1.98_{-0.42}^{+0.48}$. In contrast, the full marginal posterior is substantially broadened by a strong $f_0$--$\alpha_M$--$\alpha_z$ degeneracy ($\alpha_z = 1.93_{-2.00}^{+2.09}$, $\alpha_M = -0.52_{-0.69}^{+0.69}$). The population-averaged $\langle f_{\rm esc} \rangle(z)$ rises from $\sim$2\% at $z=5$ to $\sim$9\% at $z=12$, with sub-threshold halos contributing $>80\%$ of the ionizing budget at $z\geq10$. Comparing with THESAN, we find that the per-halo median $f_{\rm esc}$ shows steep evolution consistent with our profile result, while luminosity-weighted averaging systematically flattens the trend because massive halos dominate the ionizing budget at $z\lesssim7$. Robustness checks confirm $\alpha_z>1.0$ at $>95\%$ confidence; the steep-evolution model predicts $\tau_e=0.047$, consistent with Planck at $0.7\sigma$. We provide tabulated $f_{\rm esc}(M_{\rm h},z)$ posteriors as empirical inputs for reionization simulations.

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

3 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper claims to provide the first empirical constraints on f_esc(M_h, z) across reionization using a three-parameter power-law model f_esc = f_0 (M/10^{10} M_⊙)^{α_M} [(1+z)/10]^{α_z}. The model is fit via profile likelihood and MCMC to HST/JWST UV luminosity functions at z=5--12 (via abundance matching), Planck τ_e, seven neutral-fraction measurements, and one high-z prior. It reports tight profile-likelihood values f_0=0.061_{-0.023}^{+0.018}, α_M=0.18_{-0.30}^{+0.22}, α_z=1.98_{-0.42}^{+0.48}, implying ⟨f_esc⟩ rising from ~2% at z=5 to ~9% at z=12 with sub-threshold halos contributing >80% of the ionizing budget at z≥10. The model is compared to THESAN simulations and robustness checks are presented, with tabulated posteriors provided.

Significance. If the parametric assumptions and abundance-matching procedure hold, the tabulated f_esc(M_h,z) posteriors would supply useful empirical inputs for reionization simulations. The explicit comparison with THESAN (per-halo median vs. luminosity-weighted averaging) is a constructive element that highlights differences in how massive halos contribute at lower z. The use of both profile likelihood and full posterior is noted, though the former drives the headline claims.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The model is conditioned on the Planck Thomson optical depth as an input datum, yet the abstract presents the predicted τ_e=0.047 as consistent with Planck at 0.7σ. This circularity means the consistency statement is not an independent validation and may influence the derived α_z constraint.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: The three-parameter power-law form is assumed to hold over the full halo-mass range, including the low-mass extrapolation required by abundance matching from Schechter UVLFs below the observed M_UV threshold. No validation or comparison against alternative functional forms (e.g., with mass-dependent breaks) is described, which is load-bearing for the claim that sub-threshold halos contribute >80% of the ionizing budget at z≥10.
  3. [Abstract] Abstract: The profile likelihood yields tight constraints (α_z=1.98_{-0.42}^{+0.48}), but the marginal posterior is substantially broader (α_z=1.93_{-2.00}^{+2.09}) due to strong f_0–α_M–α_z degeneracy. The robustness checks claiming α_z>1.0 at >95% confidence must explicitly demonstrate independence from the Planck τ_e conditioning and from the choice to emphasize profile likelihood.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The distinction between the reported profile-likelihood intervals and the broader marginal posterior should be stated more clearly when presenting the headline constraints.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their insightful comments on our manuscript. We address each of the three major comments point by point below, indicating the revisions we will make to strengthen the paper.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The model is conditioned on the Planck Thomson optical depth as an input datum, yet the abstract presents the predicted τ_e=0.047 as consistent with Planck at 0.7σ. This circularity means the consistency statement is not an independent validation and may influence the derived α_z constraint.

    Authors: We agree with the referee that the consistency with Planck τ_e is not an independent validation since the model is conditioned on it. We will revise the abstract to state that the best-fit model yields τ_e=0.047, which is consistent with the input Planck value at 0.7σ, thereby removing any implication of independent validation. This revision will clarify the role of the τ_e constraint without altering the scientific conclusions. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The three-parameter power-law form is assumed to hold over the full halo-mass range, including the low-mass extrapolation required by abundance matching from Schechter UVLFs below the observed M_UV threshold. No validation or comparison against alternative functional forms (e.g., with mass-dependent breaks) is described, which is load-bearing for the claim that sub-threshold halos contribute >80% of the ionizing budget at z≥10.

    Authors: The referee correctly identifies that the power-law assumption is central to the extrapolation and the >80% contribution claim. We did not perform comparisons to alternative forms such as those with mass-dependent breaks, as the three-parameter model was selected for its simplicity given the available data. We will add a dedicated paragraph in the discussion section acknowledging this assumption as a limitation and noting that more complex models could be explored in future work with additional data. This will temper the claim appropriately. revision: partial

  3. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The profile likelihood yields tight constraints (α_z=1.98_{-0.42}^{+0.48}), but the marginal posterior is substantially broader (α_z=1.93_{-2.00}^{+2.09}) due to strong f_0–α_M–α_z degeneracy. The robustness checks claiming α_z>1.0 at >95% confidence must explicitly demonstrate independence from the Planck τ_e conditioning and from the choice to emphasize profile likelihood.

    Authors: The manuscript already reports both the profile likelihood constraints and the broader marginal posterior, explicitly discussing the degeneracy. The robustness checks for α_z>1.0 at >95% confidence are derived from the profile likelihood, which is appropriate for identifying the best-constrained parameters. We will revise the text to more clearly state that these checks are conditional on the full dataset including Planck τ_e, and note that removing the τ_e constraint would broaden the posterior further. We maintain that the profile likelihood provides the relevant tight constraints for the headline results, but will emphasize the marginal results more prominently in the abstract and conclusions. revision: partial

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Fitted Planck τ_e presented as independent 'prediction' of the model

specific steps
  1. fitted input called prediction [Abstract]
    "conditioned on HST and JWST UV luminosity functions at z=5--12, the Planck Thomson optical depth, seven neutral-fraction measurements, and one high-redshift prior. ... the steep-evolution model predicts τ_e=0.047, consistent with Planck at 0.7σ"

    The model parameters (including α_z) are obtained only after including Planck τ_e in the fit; the subsequent statement that the model 'predicts' a τ_e value consistent with Planck therefore reduces directly to the input datum by construction rather than constituting an independent test.

full rationale

The derivation conditions the three-parameter power-law fit on the Planck optical depth as an explicit constraint in the likelihood, then reports the resulting τ_e=0.047 as a 'prediction' consistent with Planck. This is the only load-bearing reduction that matches a defined circularity pattern; the assumed functional form and abundance-matching extrapolation are modeling choices rather than self-referential by construction, and no self-citation chains or uniqueness theorems are invoked. The central empirical constraints on α_z and sub-threshold contributions therefore retain independent content from the UVLF and x_HI data even after the τ_e tautology is removed.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central result rests on three fitted parameters plus standard cosmological assumptions and an abundance-matching step whose accuracy is not independently verified in the provided abstract.

free parameters (3)
  • f_0
    Normalization of the escape fraction at 10^10 solar masses and z=9; fitted to the combined data set.
  • α_M
    Power-law index of halo-mass dependence; fitted jointly.
  • α_z
    Power-law index of redshift dependence; fitted jointly.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Abundance matching accurately maps observed M_UV to halo mass M_h across z=5–12.
    Invoked to convert luminosity functions into halo-mass functions before applying the f_esc model.
  • standard math The reionization ODE solver reproduces the Planck optical depth when fed the fitted f_esc.
    Used to enforce consistency with τ_e during the grid scan and MCMC.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 6005 in / 1712 out tokens · 22439 ms · 2026-06-28T05:03:33.515739+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

219 extracted references · 198 canonical work pages · 104 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters

    Aghanim, N. and others. Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters. Astron. Astrophys. 2020. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833910. arXiv:1807.06209

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

  2. [2]

    S., & Boylan-Kolchin, M

    Bullock, James S. and Boylan-Kolchin, Michael. Small-Scale Challenges to the CDM Paradigm. Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 2017. doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-091916-055313. arXiv:1707.04256

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-091916-055313 2017

  3. [3]

    A Universal Density Profile from Hierarchical Clustering

    Navarro, Julio F. and Frenk, Carlos S. and White, Simon D. M. A Universal density profile from hierarchical clustering. Astrophys. J. 1997. doi:10.1086/304888. arXiv:astro-ph/9611107

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1086/304888 1997

  4. [4]

    Oh, Se-Heon and Brook, Chris and Governato, Fabio and Brinks, Elias and Mayer, Lucio and de Blok, W. J. G. and Brooks, Alyson and Walter, Fabian. The central slope of dark matter cores in dwarf galaxies: Simulations vs. THINGS. Astron. J. 2011. doi:10.1088/0004-6256/142/1/24. arXiv:1011.2777

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/0004-6256/142/1/24 2011

  5. [5]

    Evidence against dissipationless dark matter from observations of galaxy haloes

    Moore, Ben. Evidence against dissipationless dark matter from observations of galaxy haloes. Nature. 1994. doi:10.1038/370629a0

    work page doi:10.1038/370629a0 1994

  6. [6]

    de Blok, W. J. G. The Core-Cusp Problem. Adv. Astron. 2010. doi:10.1155/2010/789293. arXiv:0910.3538

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1155/2010/789293 2010

  7. [7]

    The unexpected diversity of dwarf galaxy rotation curves

    Oman, Kyle A. and others. The unexpected diversity of dwarf galaxy rotation curves. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2015. doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1504. arXiv:1504.01437

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1504 2015

  8. [8]

    Spreading out and staying sharp - Creating diverse rotation curves via baryonic and self-interaction effects

    Creasey, Peter and Sameie, Omid and Sales, Laura V. and Yu, Hai-Bo and Vogelsberger, Mark and Zavala, Jes \'u s. Spreading out and staying sharp creating diverse rotation curves via baryonic and self-interaction effects. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2017. doi:10.1093/mnras/stx522. arXiv:1612.03903

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/stx522 2017

  9. [9]

    Where are the missing galactic satellites?

    Klypin, Anatoly A. and Kravtsov, Andrey V. and Valenzuela, Octavio and Prada, Francisco. Where are the missing Galactic satellites?. Astrophys. J. 1999. doi:10.1086/307643. arXiv:astro-ph/9901240

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1086/307643 1999

  10. [10]

    Dark Matter Substructure in Galactic Halos

    Moore, B. and Ghigna, S. and Governato, F. and Lake, G. and Quinn, Thomas R. and Stadel, J. and Tozzi, P. Dark matter substructure within galactic halos. Astrophys. J. Lett. 1999. doi:10.1086/312287. arXiv:astro-ph/9907411

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1086/312287 1999

  11. [11]

    2011, MNRAS, 418, L20, doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2011.01134.x

    Boylan-Kolchin, Michael and Bullock, James S. and Kaplinghat, Manoj. Too big to fail? The puzzling darkness of massive Milky Way subhaloes. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2011. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3933.2011.01074.x. arXiv:1103.0007

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1745-3933.2011.01074.x 2011

  12. [12]

    Too Big to Fail in the Local Group

    Garrison-Kimmel, Shea and Boylan-Kolchin, Michael and Bullock, James S. and Kirby, Evan N. Too Big to Fail in the Local Group. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2014. doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1477. arXiv:1404.5313

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1477 2014

  13. [13]

    Observational evidence for self-interacting cold dark matter

    Spergel, David N. and Steinhardt, Paul J. Observational evidence for selfinteracting cold dark matter. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2000. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.84.3760. arXiv:astro-ph/9909386

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.84.3760 2000

  14. [14]

    Dark Matter Self-interactions and Small Scale Structure

    Tulin, Sean and Yu, Hai-Bo. Dark Matter Self-interactions and Small Scale Structure. Phys. Rept. 2018. doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2017.11.004. arXiv:1705.02358

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2017.11.004 2018

  15. [15]

    Rocha, Miguel and Peter, Annika H. G. and Bullock, James S. and Kaplinghat, Manoj and Garrison-Kimmel, Shea and Onorbe, Jose and Moustakas, Leonidas A. Cosmological Simulations with Self-Interacting Dark Matter I: Constant Density Cores and Substructure. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2013. doi:10.1093/mnras/sts514. arXiv:1208.3025

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/sts514 2013

  16. [16]

    Peter, Annika H. G. and Rocha, Miguel and Bullock, James S. and Kaplinghat, Manoj. Cosmological Simulations with Self-Interacting Dark Matter II: Halo Shapes vs. Observations. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2013. doi:10.1093/mnras/sts535. arXiv:1208.3026

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/sts535 2013

  17. [17]

    How the Self-Interacting Dark Matter Model Explains the Diverse Galactic Rotation Curves

    Kamada, Ayuki and Kaplinghat, Manoj and Pace, Andrew B. and Yu, Hai-Bo. How the Self-Interacting Dark Matter Model Explains the Diverse Galactic Rotation Curves. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2017. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.111102. arXiv:1611.02716

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.119.111102 2017

  18. [18]

    Constraining velocity-dependent self-interacting dark matter with the Milky Way s dwarf spheroidal galaxies

    Correa, Camila A. Constraining velocity-dependent self-interacting dark matter with the Milky Way s dwarf spheroidal galaxies. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2021. doi:10.1093/mnras/stab506. arXiv:2007.02958

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab506 2021

  19. [19]

    Markevitch, Maxim and Gonzalez, A. H. and Clowe, D. and Vikhlinin, A. and David, L. and Forman, W. and Jones, C. and Murray, S. and Tucker, W. Direct constraints on the dark matter self-interaction cross-section from the merging galaxy cluster 1E0657-56. Astrophys. J. 2004. doi:10.1086/383178. arXiv:astro-ph/0309303

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1086/383178 2004

  20. [20]

    Constraints on the Self-Interaction Cross-Section of Dark Matter from Numerical Simulations of the Merging Galaxy Cluster 1E 0657-5

    Randall, Scott W. and Markevitch, Maxim and Clowe, Douglas and Gonzalez, Anthony H. and Bradac, Marusa. Constraints on the Self-Interaction Cross-Section of Dark Matter from Numerical Simulations of the Merging Galaxy Cluster 1E 0657-56. Astrophys. J. 2008. doi:10.1086/587859. arXiv:0704.0261

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1086/587859 2008

  21. [21]

    The non-gravitational interactions of dark matter in colliding galaxy clusters

    Harvey, David and Massey, Richard and Kitching, Thomas and Taylor, Andy and Tittley, Eric. The non-gravitational interactions of dark matter in colliding galaxy clusters. Science. 2015. doi:10.1126/science.1261381. arXiv:1503.07675

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1126/science.1261381 2015

  22. [22]

    Constraining Self-Interacting Dark Matter with the Milky Way's dwarf spheroidals

    Zavala, Jesus and Vogelsberger, Mark and Walker, Matthew G. Constraining Self-Interacting Dark Matter with the Milky Way's dwarf spheroidals. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2013. doi:10.1093/mnrasl/sls053. arXiv:1211.6426

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnrasl/sls053 2013

  23. [23]

    Dark matter self-interactions from the internal dynamics of dwarf spheroidals

    Valli, Mauro and Yu, Hai-Bo. Dark matter self-interactions from the internal dynamics of dwarf spheroidals. Nature Astron. 2018. doi:10.1038/s41550-018-0560-7. arXiv:1711.03502

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1038/s41550-018-0560-7 2018

  24. [24]

    K., & Kaplinghat, M

    Nishikawa, Hiroya and Boddy, Kimberly K. and Kaplinghat, Manoj. Accelerated core collapse in tidally stripped self-interacting dark matter halos. Phys. Rev. D. 2020. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.101.063009. arXiv:1901.00499

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.101.063009 2020

  25. [25]

    Dark Matter Self-Interactions and Light Force Carriers

    Buckley, Matthew R. and Fox, Patrick J. Dark Matter Self-Interactions and Light Force Carriers. Phys. Rev. D. 2010. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.81.083522. arXiv:0911.3898

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.81.083522 2010

  26. [26]

    Beyond Collisionless Dark Matter: Particle Physics Dynamics for Dark Matter Halo Structure

    Tulin, Sean and Yu, Hai-Bo and Zurek, Kathryn M. Beyond Collisionless Dark Matter: Particle Physics Dynamics for Dark Matter Halo Structure. Phys. Rev. D. 2013. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.87.115007. arXiv:1302.3898

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.87.115007 2013

  27. [27]

    Inelastic Dark Matter

    Tucker-Smith, David and Weiner, Neal. Inelastic dark matter. Phys. Rev. D. 2001. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.64.043502. arXiv:hep-ph/0101138

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.64.043502 2001

  28. [28]

    Self-Scattering for Dark Matter with an Excited State

    Schutz, Katelin and Slatyer, Tracy R. Self-Scattering for Dark Matter with an Excited State. JCAP. 2015. doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2015/01/021. arXiv:1409.2867

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2015/01/021 2015

  29. [29]

    Self-interacting inelastic dark matter: A viable solution to the small scale structure problems

    Blennow, Mattias and Clementz, Stefan and Herrero-Garcia, Juan. Self-interacting inelastic dark matter: A viable solution to the small scale structure problems. JCAP. 2017. doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2017/03/048. arXiv:1612.06681

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2017/03/048 2017

  30. [30]

    A Theory of Dark Matter

    Arkani-Hamed, Nima and Finkbeiner, Douglas P. and Slatyer, Tracy R. and Weiner, Neal. A Theory of Dark Matter. Phys. Rev. D. 2009. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.79.015014. arXiv:0810.0713

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.79.015014 2009

  31. [31]

    Asymmetric Dark Matter

    Kaplan, David E. and Luty, Markus A. and Zurek, Kathryn M. Asymmetric Dark Matter. Phys. Rev. D. 2009. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.79.115016. arXiv:0901.4117

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.79.115016 2009

  32. [32]

    Review of asymmetric dark matter

    Petraki, Kalliopi and Volkas, Raymond R. Review of asymmetric dark matter. Int. J. Mod. Phys. A. 2013. doi:10.1142/S0217751X13300287. arXiv:1305.4939

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1142/s0217751x13300287 2013

  33. [33]

    Higgs-field portal into hidden sectors

    Patt, Brian and Wilczek, Frank. Higgs-field portal into hidden sectors. 2006. arXiv:hep-ph/0605188

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  34. [34]

    Majorana Dark Matter with a Coloured Mediator: Collider vs Direct and Indirect Searches

    Garny, Mathias and Ibarra, Alejandro and Rydbeck, Sara and Vogl, Stefan. Majorana Dark Matter with a Coloured Mediator: Collider vs Direct and Indirect Searches. JHEP. 2014. doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2014)169. arXiv:1403.4634

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep06(2014)169 2014

  35. [35]

    Revisiting Big-Bang Nucleosynthesis Constraints on Long-Lived Decaying Particles

    Kawasaki, Masahiro and Kohri, Kazunori and Moroi, Takeo and Takaesu, Yoshitaro. Revisiting Big-Bang Nucleosynthesis Constraints on Long-Lived Decaying Particles. Phys. Rev. D. 2018. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.97.023502. arXiv:1709.01211

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.97.023502 2018

  36. [36]

    Akerib, D. S. and others. The LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment. Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A. 2020. doi:10.1016/j.nima.2019.163047. arXiv:1910.09124

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nima.2019.163047 2020

  37. [37]

    and others

    Aprile, E. and others. The XENONnT dark matter experiment. Eur. Phys. J. C. 2024. doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-12982-5. arXiv:2402.10446

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-12982-5 2024

  38. [38]

    Dark Matter Search Results from the PICO-60 C$_3$F$_8$ Bubble Chamber

    Amole, C. and others. Dark Matter Search Results from the PICO-60 C _3 F _8 Bubble Chamber. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2017. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.251301. arXiv:1702.07666

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.118.251301 2017

  39. [39]

    Abdelhameed, A. H. and others. First results from the CRESST-III low-mass dark matter program. Phys. Rev. D. 2019. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.102002. arXiv:1904.00498

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.100.102002 2019

  40. [40]

    and Tuckler, Douglas

    Krnjaic, Gordan and McKeen, David and Mizuta, Riku and Mohlabeng, Gopolang and Morrissey, David E. and Tuckler, Douglas. X-rays from Inelastic Dark Matter Freeze-in. 2025. arXiv:2509.19428

    arXiv 2025

  41. [41]

    The Sommerfeld enhancement for dark matter with an excited state

    Slatyer, Tracy R. The Sommerfeld enhancement for dark matter with an excited state. JCAP. 2010. doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2010/02/028. arXiv:0910.5713

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2010/02/028 2010

  42. [42]

    Surprises from Complete Vector Portal Theories: New Insights into the Dark Sector and its Interplay with Higgs Physics

    Cui, Yanou and D'Eramo, Francesco. Surprises from complete vector portal theories: New insights into the dark sector and its interplay with Higgs physics. Phys. Rev. D. 2017. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.96.095006. arXiv:1705.03897

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.96.095006 2017

  43. [44]

    and Jeltema, Tesla E

    O'Donnell, Jackson H. and Jeltema, Tesla E. and Roberts, M. Grant and Nightingale, James and Flowers, Abigail and Aldas, Dhruv. A Constraint on Dark Matter Self-Interaction from Combined Strong Lensing and Stellar Kinematics in MACS J0138-2155. 2025. arXiv:2508.20179

    arXiv 2025

  44. [45]

    Light Dark Matter: Models and Constraints

    Knapen, Simon and Lin, Tongyan and Zurek, Kathryn M. Light Dark Matter: Models and Constraints. Phys. Rev. D. 2017. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.96.115021. arXiv:1709.07882

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.96.115021 2017

  45. [46]

    2012, MNRAS, 422, 3285, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20848.x

    Vogelsberger, Mark and Zavala, Jesus and Loeb, Abraham. Subhaloes in Self-Interacting Galactic Dark Matter Haloes. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2012. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21182.x. arXiv:1201.5892

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21182.x 2012

  46. [47]

    Branco, G. C. and Ferreira, P. M. and Lavoura, L. and Rebelo, M. N. and Sher, Marc and Silva, Joao P. Theory and phenomenology of two-Higgs-doublet models. Phys. Rept. 2012. doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2012.02.002. arXiv:1106.0034

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2012.02.002 2012

  47. [48]

    Dark-Matter Electric and Magnetic Dipole Moments

    Sigurdson, Kris and Doran, Michael and Kurylov, Andriy and Caldwell, Robert R. and Kamionkowski, Marc. Dark-matter electric and magnetic dipole moments. Phys. Rev. D. 2004. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.70.083501. arXiv:astro-ph/0406355

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.70.083501 2004

  48. [49]

    Robust cosmological constraints on axion-like particles

    Depta, Paul Frederik and Hufnagel, Marco and Schmidt-Hoberg, Kai. Robust cosmological constraints on axion-like particles. JCAP. 2020. doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2020/05/009. arXiv:2002.08370

    work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2020/05/009 2020

  49. [50]

    Constraints on dark matter annihilation from CMB observations before Planck

    Lopez-Honorez, Laura and Mena, Olga and Palomares-Ruiz, Sergio and Vincent, Aaron C. Constraints on dark matter annihilation from CMB observationsbefore Planck. JCAP. 2013. doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2013/07/046. arXiv:1303.5094

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2013/07/046 2013

  50. [51]

    Indirect Dark Matter Signatures in the Cosmic Dark Ages I. Generalizing the Bound on s-wave Dark Matter Annihilation from Planck

    Slatyer, Tracy R. Indirect dark matter signatures in the cosmic dark ages. I. Generalizing the bound on s-wave dark matter annihilation from Planck results. Phys. Rev. D. 2016. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.023527. arXiv:1506.03811

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.93.023527 2016

  51. [52]

    Strong CMB Constraint On P-Wave Annihilating Dark Matter

    An, Haipeng and Wise, Mark B. and Zhang, Yue. Effects of Bound States on Dark Matter Annihilation. Phys. Rev. D. 2016. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.115020. arXiv:1606.02305

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.93.115020 2016

  52. [53]

    Stringent Constraints on Self-Interacting Dark Matter Using Milky-Way Satellite Galaxies Kinematics

    Ando, Shin'ichiro and Hayashi, Kohei and Horigome, Shunichi and Ibe, Masahiro and Shirai, Satoshi. Stringent Constraints on Self-Interacting Dark Matter Using Milky-Way Satellite Galaxies Kinematics. 2025. arXiv:2503.13650

    arXiv 2025

  53. [54]

    Matter Power Spectrum in Hidden Neutrino Interacting Dark Matter Models: A Closer Look at the Collision Term

    Binder, Tobias and Covi, Laura and Kamada, Ayuki and Murai, Kai and Takahashi, Tomo and Yoshida, Naoki. Matter Power Spectrum in Hidden Neutrino Interacting Dark Matter Models: A General Treatment. JCAP. 2016. doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2016/11/043. arXiv:1602.07624

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2016/11/043 2016

  54. [55]

    Constraining Dark Matter candidates from structure formation

    Boehm, C. and Fayet, P. and Schaeffer, R. Constraining dark matter candidates from structure formation. Phys. Lett. B. 2001. doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(01)01060-7. arXiv:astro-ph/0012504

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(01)01060-7 2001

  55. [56]

    Loopy Constraints on Leptophilic Dark Matter and Internal Bremsstrahlung

    Kopp, Joachim and Michaels, Lisa and Smirnov, Juri. Loopy constraints on leptophilic dark matter and internal bremsstrahlung. JCAP. 2014. doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2014/04/022. arXiv:1401.6457

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2014/04/022 2014

  56. [57]

    The Astrophysical Uncertainties Of Dark Matter Direct Detection Experiments

    McCabe, Christopher. The Astrophysical Uncertainties of Inelastic Dark Matter. Phys. Rev. D. 2010. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.82.023530. arXiv:1005.0579

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.82.023530 2010

  57. [58]

    and others

    Barak, L. and others. SENSEI: Direct-Detection Results on sub-GeV Dark Matter from a New Skipper-CCD. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2020. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.171802. arXiv:2004.11378

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.125.171802 2020

  58. [59]

    Particle Physics from Stars

    Raffelt, Georg G. Particle physics from stars. Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 1999. doi:10.1146/annurev.nucl.49.1.163. arXiv:hep-ph/9903472

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1146/annurev.nucl.49.1.163 1999

  59. [60]

    Colloquium: Quantum matter built from nanoscopic lattices of atoms and photons , author =. Rev. Mod. Phys. , volume =. 2018 , month =. doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.90.031002 , url =

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.90.031002 2018

  60. [61]

    Stellar cooling bounds on new light particles: plasma mixing effects

    Hardy, Edward and Lasenby, Robert. Stellar cooling bounds on new light particles: plasma mixing effects. JHEP. 2017. doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2017)033. arXiv:1611.05852

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep02(2017)033 2017

  61. [62]

    Electrophobic Scalar Boson and Muonic Puzzles

    Liu, Yu-Sheng and McKeen, David and Miller, Gerald A. Electrophobic Scalar Boson and Muonic Puzzles. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2016. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.101801. arXiv:1605.04612

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.117.101801 2016

  62. [63]

    Big Bang Nucleosynthesis: 2015

    Cyburt, Richard H. and Fields, Brian D. and Olive, Keith A. and Yeh, Tsung-Han. Big Bang Nucleosynthesis: 2015. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2016. doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.88.015004. arXiv:1505.01076

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/revmodphys.88.015004 2015

  63. [64]

    Probing scalar-neutrino and scalar-dark-matter interactions with PandaX-4T

    Li, Tao and others. Probing scalar-neutrino and scalar-dark-matter interactions with PandaX-4T. 2025. arXiv:2511.13515

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  64. [65]

    Simulating the joint evolution of quasars, galaxies and their large-scale distribution

    Springel, Volker and others. Simulating the joint evolution of quasars, galaxies and their large-scale distribution. Nature. 2005. doi:10.1038/nature03597. arXiv:astro-ph/0504097

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1038/nature03597 2005

  65. [66]

    Explosive Dark Matter Annihilation

    Hisano, Junji and Matsumoto, Shigeki and Nojiri, Mihoko M. Explosive dark matter annihilation. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2004. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.92.031303. arXiv:hep-ph/0307216

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.92.031303 2004

  66. [67]

    Radiative bound-state-formation cross-sections for dark matter interacting via a Yukawa potential

    Petraki, Kalliopi and Postma, Marieke and de Vries, Jordy. Radiative bound-state-formation cross-sections for dark matter interacting via a Yukawa potential. JHEP. 2017. doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2017)077. arXiv:1611.01394

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep04(2017)077 2017

  67. [68]

    and others

    Beacham, J. and others. Physics Beyond Colliders at CERN: Beyond the Standard Model Working Group Report. J. Phys. G. 2020. doi:10.1088/1361-6471/ab4cd2. arXiv:1901.09966

    work page doi:10.1088/1361-6471/ab4cd2 2020

  68. [69]

    Scalar Dark Matter candidates

    Boehm, C. and Fayet, Pierre. Scalar dark matter candidates. Nucl. Phys. B. 2004. doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2004.01.015. arXiv:hep-ph/0305261

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2004.01.015 2004

  69. [70]

    Supernova 1987A Constraints on Sub-GeV Dark Sectors, Millicharged Particles, the QCD Axion, and an Axion-like Particle

    Chang, Jae Hyeok and Essig, Rouven and McDermott, Samuel D. Supernova 1987A Constraints on Sub-GeV Dark Sectors, Millicharged Particles, the QCD Axion, and an Axion-like Particle. JHEP. 2018. doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2018)051. arXiv:1803.00993

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep09(2018)051 2018

  70. [71]

    , keywords =

    Chluba, J. and Sunyaev, R. A. The evolution of CMB spectral distortions in the early Universe. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 2012. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19786.x. arXiv:1109.6552

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19786.x 2012

  71. [72]

    Cosmological constraints on exotic injection of electromagnetic energy

    Poulin, Vivian and Lesgourgues, Julien and Serpico, Pasquale D. Cosmological constraints on exotic injection of electromagnetic energy. JCAP. 2017. doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2017/03/043. arXiv:1610.10051

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2017/03/043 2017

  72. [73]

    Detection of low-energy electrons with transition-edge sensors

    Pepe, Carlo and others. Detection of low-energy electrons with transition-edge sensors. Phys. Rev. Applied. 2024. doi:10.1103/PhysRevApplied.22.L041007. arXiv:2405.19475

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevapplied.22.l041007 2024

  73. [74]

    and Maity, Tarak Nath and O'Hare, Ciaran A

    Carew, Ben and Caddell, Ashlee R. and Maity, Tarak Nath and O'Hare, Ciaran A. J. Neutrino fog for dark matter-electron scattering experiments. Phys. Rev. D. 2024. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.083016. arXiv:2312.04303

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.109.083016 2024

  74. [75]

    Internal Bremsstrahlung Signature of Real Scalar Dark Matter and Consistency with Thermal Relic Density

    Toma, Takashi. Internal Bremsstrahlung Signature of Real Scalar Dark Matter and Consistency with Thermal Relic Density. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2013. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.111.091301. arXiv:1307.6181

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.111.091301 2013

  75. [76]

    Self-consistent Calculation of the Sommerfeld Enhancement

    Blum, Kfir and Sato, Ryosuke and Slatyer, Tracy R. Self-consistent Calculation of the Sommerfeld Enhancement. JCAP. 2016. doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2016/06/021. arXiv:1603.01383

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2016/06/021 2016

  76. [77]

    Magnetic Inelastic Dark Matter

    Chang, Spencer and Weiner, Neal and Yavin, Itay. Magnetic Inelastic Dark Matter. Phys. Rev. D. 2010. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.82.125011. arXiv:1007.4200

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.82.125011 2010

  77. [78]

    The Effective Field Theory of Dark Matter Direct Detection

    Fitzpatrick, A. Liam and Haxton, Wick and Katz, Emanuel and Lubbers, Nicholas and Xu, Yiming. The Effective Field Theory of Dark Matter Direct Detection. JCAP. 2013. doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2013/02/004. arXiv:1203.3542

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2013/02/004 2013

  78. [79]

    Regulating Sommerfeld resonances for multi-state systems and higher partial waves

    Parikh, Aditya and Sato, Ryosuke and Slatyer, Tracy R. Regulating Sommerfeld resonances for multi-state systems and higher partial waves. JHEP. 2025. doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2025)025. arXiv:2410.18168

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep12(2025)025 2025

  79. [80]

    Raffelt, G. G. Stars as laboratories for fundamental physics : The astrophysics of neutrinos, axions, and other weakly interacting particles. 1996

    1996

  80. [81]

    Lees, J. P. and others. Search for a Dark Photon in e^+e^- Collisions at BaBar. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2014. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.201801. arXiv:1406.2980

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.113.201801 2014

Showing first 80 references.