Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 7 minor 85 references

ALPs that carry dark charges lose every ordinary d=5 coupling and interact with the Standard Model only through two d=6 operators.

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

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

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-14 15:01 UTC pith:PGGVXSEI

load-bearing objection Clean, self-contained EFT paper that kills the entire d=5 ALP Lagrangian once ALPs carry dark charge, isolates two d=6 operators, and maps their distinct collider/DM phenomenology. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.09852 v1 pith:PGGVXSEI submitted 2026-07-10 hep-ph hep-th

Darkly Charged ALPs

Nicol\'as M. Arenaza , Enrique Fern\'andez-Mart\'inez , Bel\'en Gavela , Elizabeth E. Jenkins , Aneesh V. Manohar , Pablo Qu\'ilez , Thomas Steingasser This is my paper
classification hep-ph hep-th
keywords axion-like particlesdark chargeseffective field theoryGoldstone bosonsHiggs portalhypercharge portaldark matterCCWZ
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

Standard axion-like particles are assumed to be singlets under every dark symmetry as well as under the Standard Model. This paper drops that assumption. Once the ALPs transform non-trivially under an unbroken dark group H, charge conservation immediately forbids every linear, dimension-five ALP–SM operator, including the celebrated ALP–photon coupling. The leading shift-symmetric effective theory then starts at dimension six and contains only two operators: a universal Higgs-portal interaction and a single hypercharge-portal interaction that requires an antisymmetric H-invariant. The authors construct the full non-linear chiral Lagrangian for a general G o H breaking, give group-theoretic conditions that guarantee the two operators exist, map the resulting collider, astrophysical and dark-matter phenomenology, and supply concrete ultraviolet completions. The result is a qualitatively different search strategy: look for invisible Higgs and Z decays, monojets, and freeze-in or misalignment dark matter rather than photon signals.

Core claim

When ALPs transform in a non-trivial representation RGB of an unbroken dark symmetry H that contains no H-singlet, every d=5 ALP–SM operator is forbidden by H-invariance, and the lowest-order shift-symmetric Lagrangian consists of precisely two d=6 operators: the universal Higgs portal Sij(H†H)(∂μai)(∂μaj) and the antisymmetric hypercharge portal Aij Bμν(∂μai)(∂νaj).

What carries the argument

The CCWZ chiral Lagrangian for a general coset G/H, together with two group-theoretic conditions: RGB contains no H-singlet (so d=5 operators are absent) and the antisymmetric product of RGB with itself contains an H-singlet (so the Bμν operator is allowed).

Load-bearing premise

The dark symmetry is purely global and any explicit breaking that gives the ALPs a small mass still preserves the unbroken dark group, so the particles remain light and (in the minimal case) mass-degenerate.

What would settle it

An observation of a single ALP decaying to two photons, or a non-zero linear ALP–Higgs or ALP–fermion coupling at dimension five, would immediately rule out the dark-charge premise.

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

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 7 minor

Summary. The paper removes the implicit assumption that axion-like particles (ALPs) are singlets under any dark-sector symmetry. For pseudo-Goldstone bosons transforming in a non-trivial representation RGB of an unbroken dark group H (with no H-singlet), H-invariance forbids every d=5 ALP–SM operator. Using the CCWZ construction for a general G→H breaking, the authors show that the leading shift-symmetric EFT contains precisely two d=6 operators coupling DALPs to the SM: a universal Higgs portal Sij(H†H)(∂μai)(∂μaj) and, when an antisymmetric H-invariant exists, a hypercharge portal Aij Bμν(∂μai)(∂νaj). They reformulate the existence conditions [C1]–[C2] in group-theoretic language, classify higher-dimension operators, give concrete coset examples, compute phenomenological constraints (invisible widths, monojet, SN cooling, direct detection) and relic-density mechanisms (freeze-out, freeze-in, misalignment) for a minimal two-DALP case, and supply perturbative UV completions that generate both operators.

Significance. If correct, the result opens a qualitatively distinct corner of ALP parameter space in which the paradigmatic aγγ coupling and all other linear d=5 operators are absent by symmetry, while two d=6 portals become the leading signals. The operator classification is model-independent within the stated assumptions (global G, SM fields neutral under G), the group conditions and CCWZ derivation are clean and standard, and the UV matching calculations (including the non-expanded results in App. B obtained with Matchete) are reproducible. The phenomenology yields falsifiable predictions for invisible Higgs/Z widths, monojet rates, and a DM window that extends to surprisingly large masses via misalignment. These strengths make the work a natural and useful extension of the ALP EFT literature.

major comments (2)
  1. Sec. 4 (and Figs. 3–4, 7): the entire phenomenological analysis is performed for a minimal, exactly degenerate two-DALP spectrum. While the authors note that degeneracy follows from an H-preserving explicit G-breaking, the general G→H examples of Sec. 3.5 (e.g. SU(3)→U(1)×U(1)) produce several multiplets with generically different masses and decay constants. The invisible-width formulae (4.1), (4.4), the monojet rates, and the relic-density curves then change. A short paragraph quantifying how the bounds and the DM windows generalize (or stating that they are representative only) is needed for the claim of “model-independent phenomenological implications” to hold beyond the minimal case.
  2. Sec. 4.3: the supernova-cooling window for OBa is obtained by rescaling the fermionic vector-portal bounds of Ref. [76] via averaged production and capture cross sections (4.10)–(4.12). The authors note that bosonic versus fermionic statistics differ by O(1) factors, but the radial averaging and the neglect of possible DALP self-interactions inside the SN introduce a systematic uncertainty that is not quantified. Because this window is competitive with collider bounds in Fig. 4, a brief estimate of that uncertainty (or a statement that the blue region should be regarded as indicative) is required for the exclusion to be robust.
minor comments (7)
  1. Abstract and Sec. 2: the phrase “just two d=6 operators” is accurate for the leading SM portals of mass dimension two, but Table 1 shows that other d=6 structures exist once higher-dimension SM operators are allowed. A clarifying clause (“two operators that start at d=6 with the lowest-dimension SM singlets”) would prevent misreading.
  2. Eq. (2.1) and Fig. 1: the notation Sij versus eSij (kinetic versus portal) is introduced only later; defining both tensors already in Sec. 2 would improve readability for readers who skip Sec. 3.
  3. Sec. 3.5.2, Eq. (3.37): the relation between the three decay constants and the adjoint VEV components is useful; a short remark that the most general Sij need not coincide with the kinetic-term combination would make the subsequent discussion of independent portal coefficients clearer.
  4. Figs. 3, 4 and 7: the gray “EFT breakdown” line is drawn but never defined quantitatively in the text. Stating the criterion used (e.g. fa/√c ≳ ETmax or 4πfa) would help the reader.
  5. Sec. 5.1, Table 3: the present bound on CH□ is quoted from a global SMEFiT fit; a one-sentence reminder that the bound assumes no other new physics would be useful for non-SMEFT readers.
  6. App. A.2: the sufficient condition involving the center of H is elegant; a one-line example showing that it recovers the U(1) factor criterion already stated in Sec. 3.3 would make the appendix self-contained.
  7. References: a few recent multi-axion and dark-pion papers (e.g. on freeze-in of multiple axions) are cited, but the connection of OBa to the operator already noted in Ref. [34] could be flagged more explicitly in Sec. 4.4.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: the two d=6 operators and the forbidding of all d=5 ALP-SM couplings follow directly from CCWZ plus H-invariance of a non-singlet RGB; phenomenology is computed against external data.

full rationale

The load-bearing derivation (Secs. 3.1–3.3 and App. A) constructs the chiral field u_μ from the CCWZ Maurer–Cartan form, imposes H-invariance on RGB (condition [C1]: RGB contains no H-singlet), and requires an antisymmetric H-invariant bilinear for the B_μν portal (condition [C2]). Both conditions are proved group-theoretically without reference to data or to any prior result of the present authors; the resulting LO Lagrangian is exactly the two operators of Eqs. (2.1)–(2.4). Higher-order terms in Table 1 are likewise fixed by the same non-linear realization. The phenomenological curves of Sec. 4 (invisible widths, monojet, SN cooling, freeze-out/freeze-in/misalignment relic densities, direct detection) are obtained by evaluating those operators against external experimental limits and standard cosmological codes; no parameter is fitted to a subset of the same data and then re-presented as a prediction. UV matchings in Sec. 5 are ordinary one-loop calculations that generate the same operators. No self-definitional loop, fitted-input-as-prediction, load-bearing self-citation, or uniqueness theorem imported from the authors appears. The paper is therefore free of circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 4 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard EFT and group-theory tools plus the modeling choice that the dark sector is global and that SM fields are dark-neutral. Free parameters are the usual Wilson coefficients and scales of any EFT analysis; the only invented entity is the DALP multiplet itself, which is defined by the representation theory of G/H.

free parameters (4)
  • c_Ha / f_a²
    Wilson coefficient of the universal Higgs-portal operator; free in the EFT and scanned in the phenomenological plots.
  • c_Ba / f_a²
    Wilson coefficient of the antisymmetric hypercharge-portal operator; free when the coset admits an antisymmetric invariant.
  • m_a
    Common DALP mass generated by a small explicit G-breaking that preserves H; treated as a free parameter in all exclusion and relic-density plots.
  • T_R
    Reheating temperature that controls freeze-in abundance; scanned as an external cosmological input.
axioms (4)
  • standard math CCWZ non-linear realization of G/H correctly captures all shift-symmetric interactions of the Goldstone bosons.
    Invoked throughout Sec. 3 to build the chiral Lagrangian and higher-order operators.
  • domain assumption SM fields are singlets under the dark group G and DALPs are singlets under the SM gauge group.
    Stated in the abstract and Sec. 1; required for the portal structure of the two d=6 operators.
  • ad hoc to paper The dark symmetry G is purely global (no dark gauge bosons).
    Explicitly restricted in the abstract and Sec. 1; the paper notes that gauging is a possible generalization left for future work.
  • domain assumption Any explicit G-breaking that generates DALP masses preserves the unbroken H, so multiplet members remain degenerate.
    Used in Sec. 3.4 and throughout the phenomenological analysis of Sec. 4 to reduce the parameter space to a single mass m_a.
invented entities (1)
  • Darkly charged ALPs (DALPs) no independent evidence
    purpose: Pseudo-Goldstone bosons transforming in a non-trivial representation of an unbroken dark H, thereby forbidding d=5 operators and generating the two d=6 portals.
    Defined by the representation theory of G/H; no independent experimental evidence is claimed beyond the EFT predictions themselves.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 39345 in / 2718 out tokens · 29703 ms · 2026-07-14T15:01:56.799132+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

The established $d=5$ ALP effective Lagrangian describes the interaction of scalars with approximate shift-symmetry which carry no Standard Model (SM) charges with SM fields. It implicitly assumes that ALPs are not charged under any symmetries of the dark sector. In this paper, we remove this assumption. For ALPs carrying conserved dark charges, no $d=5$ ALP effective interaction to SM particles is possible. We build the effective Lagrangian for these darkly charged ALPs stemming from a general breaking pattern, and we show that the lowest-order shift-symmetric effective Lagrangian contains just two $d=6$ operators coupling ALPs to SM particles. We explore the model-independent phenomenological implications of these interactions, as well as the question of whether the dark matter observed in the Universe may consist of darkly charged ALPs. We identify higher order operators of the effective field theory, and determine which types of dark symmetry groups can seed darkly charged ALPs. Illustrative examples of ultraviolet completions which result in darkly charged ALPs at low-energies are provided as well. The darkly-charged ALP scenario can be generalized by including dark gauge interactions. In this paper, we have considered only the case with no such interactions.

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

85 extracted references · 57 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    R. D. Peccei and H. R. Quinn,CP Conservation in the Presence of Instantons,Phys. Rev. Lett. 38(1977) 1440. 2

    1977

  2. [2]

    R. D. Peccei and H. R. Quinn,Constraints Imposed by CP Conservation in the Presence of Instantons,Phys. Rev. D16(1977) 1791

    1977

  3. [3]

    Weinberg,A New Light Boson?,Phys

    S. Weinberg,A New Light Boson?,Phys. Rev. Lett.40(1978) 223

    1978

  4. [4]

    Wilczek,Problem of StrongPandTInvariance in the Presence of Instantons,Phys

    F. Wilczek,Problem of StrongPandTInvariance in the Presence of Instantons,Phys. Rev. Lett.40(1978) 279. 2

    1978

  5. [5]

    Arkani-Hamed and Y

    N. Arkani-Hamed and Y. Grossman,Light active and sterile neutrinos from compositeness, Phys. Lett. B459(1999) 179 [hep-ph/9806223]. 2

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  6. [6]

    K. R. Dienes, E. Dudas and T. Gherghetta,Invisible axions and large radius compactifications, Phys. Rev. D62(2000) 105023 [hep-ph/9912455]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  7. [7]

    Chang, S

    S. Chang, S. Tazawa and M. Yamaguchi,Axion model in extra dimensions with TeV scale gravity,Phys. Rev. D61(2000) 084005 [hep-ph/9908515]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  8. [8]

    Di Lella, A

    L. Di Lella, A. Pilaftsis, G. Raffelt and K. Zioutas,Search for solar Kaluza-Klein axions in theories of low scale quantum gravity,Phys. Rev. D62(2000) 125011 [hep-ph/0006327]. 2 – 41 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  9. [9]

    Davidson and K

    A. Davidson and K. C. Wali,Minimal Flavor Unification via Multigenerational Peccei-Quinn Symmetry,Phys. Rev. Lett.48(1982) 11. 2

    1982

  10. [10]

    Wilczek,Axions and Family Symmetry Breaking,Phys

    F. Wilczek,Axions and Family Symmetry Breaking,Phys. Rev. Lett.49(1982) 1549

    1982

  11. [11]

    Y. Ema, K. Hamaguchi, T. Moroi and K. Nakayama,Flaxion: a minimal extension to solve puzzles in the standard model,JHEP01(2017) 096 [1612.05492]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  12. [12]

    Calibbi, F

    L. Calibbi, F. Goertz, D. Redigolo, R. Ziegler and J. Zupan,Minimal axion model from flavor, Phys. Rev. D95(2017) 095009 [1612.08040]. 2

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  13. [13]

    L. F. Abbott and P. Sikivie,A Cosmological Bound on the Invisible Axion,Phys. Lett. B120 (1983) 133. 2, 26

    1983

  14. [14]

    Dine and W

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

    1983

  15. [15]

    Preskill, M

    J. Preskill, M. B. Wise and F. Wilczek,Cosmology of the Invisible Axion,Phys. Lett. B120 (1983) 127. 2, 26

    1983

  16. [16]

    G. B. Gelmini and M. Roncadelli,Left-Handed Neutrino Mass Scale and Spontaneously Broken Lepton Number,Phys. Lett. B99(1981) 411. 2

    1981

  17. [17]

    Cicoli,Axion-like Particles from String Compactifications, in9th Patras Workshop on Axions, WIMPs and WISPs, pp

    M. Cicoli,Axion-like Particles from String Compactifications, in9th Patras Workshop on Axions, WIMPs and WISPs, pp. 235–242, 2013, DOI [1309.6988]. 2

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  18. [18]

    J. E. Kim,A Composite Invisible Axion,Phys. Rev. D31(1985) 1733. 2

    1985

  19. [19]

    Choi and J

    K. Choi and J. E. Kim,Dynamical Axion,Phys. Rev. D32(1985) 1828

    1985

  20. [20]

    A. R. Zhitnitsky,On Possible Suppression of the Axion Hadron Interactions. (In Russian),Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.31(1980) 260

    1980

  21. [21]

    M. Dine, W. Fischler and M. Srednicki,A Simple Solution to the Strong CP Problem with a Harmless Axion,Phys. Lett. B104(1981) 199

    1981

  22. [22]

    J. E. Kim,Weak Interaction Singlet and Strong CP Invariance,Phys. Rev. Lett.43(1979) 103

    1979

  23. [23]

    M. A. Shifman, A. I. Vainshtein and V. I. Zakharov,Can Confinement Ensure Natural CP Invariance of Strong Interactions?,Nucl. Phys. B166(1980) 493. 2

    1980

  24. [24]

    Georgi, D

    H. Georgi, D. B. Kaplan and L. Randall,Manifesting the Invisible Axion at Low-energies,Phys. Lett. B169(1986) 73. 2, 6

    1986

  25. [25]

    Gavela, P

    B. Gavela, P. Quílez and M. Ramos,The QCD axion sum rule,JHEP04(2024) 056 [2305.15465]. 2

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  26. [26]

    Chadha-Day,Axion-like particle oscillations,JCAP01(2022) 013 [2107.12813]

    F. Chadha-Day,Axion-like particle oscillations,JCAP01(2022) 013 [2107.12813]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  27. [27]

    de Giorgi, J

    A. de Giorgi, J. Jaeckel, S. Monath and V. Takhistov,Multiple Axions in Laboratory Experiments,2512.16837

    arXiv

  28. [28]

    Murai, F

    K. Murai, F. Takahashi and W. Yin,QCD axion: A unique player in the axiverse with mixings, Phys. Rev. D108(2023) 036020 [2305.18677]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  29. [29]

    Murai, Y

    K. Murai, Y. Narita, F. Takahashi and W. Yin,QCD axion dark matter from level crossing with refined adiabatic condition,JHEP04(2025) 124 [2412.10232]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    D. I. Dunsky, C. A. Manzari, P. Quílez, M. Ramos and P. Sørensen,Resonant Landau-Zener conversion in multi-axion systems,JHEP01(2026) 077 [2507.06287]. – 42 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  31. [31]

    Chadha-Day, J

    F. Chadha-Day, J. Maxwell and J. Turner,ALP anarchy,JCAP09(2024) 056 [2311.13658]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  32. [32]

    Baryakhtar, D

    M. Baryakhtar, D. Cyncynates and E. Henry,Axiverse Lampposts,2602.23424

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  33. [33]

    Fernández Navarro, M

    M. Fernández Navarro, M. F. Zamoro, M. Pesut and X. Ponce Díaz,The structure of multi-axion solutions to the strong CP problem,2605.06787

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  34. [34]

    Dessert, S

    C. Dessert, S. Kumar and J. T. Ruderman,Freezing-in the Axiverse,2511.09631. 3, 26

    arXiv

  35. [35]

    Grinstein, C

    B. Grinstein, C. Miró and P. Quílez Lasanta,Counting axions with IAXO,2606.20826. 2

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  36. [36]

    Bhattacharya, B

    S. Bhattacharya, B. Melić and J. Wudka,Pionic Dark Matter,JHEP02(2014) 115 [1307.2647]. 3

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  37. [37]

    Hochberg, E

    Y. Hochberg, E. Kuflik, T. Volansky and J. G. Wacker,Mechanism for Thermal Relic Dark Matter of Strongly Interacting Massive Particles,Phys. Rev. Lett.113(2014) 171301 [1402.5143]. 24

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  38. [38]

    Alexander, H

    S. Alexander, H. Gilmer, T. Manton and E. McDonough,π-axion andπ-axiverse of dark QCD, Phys. Rev. D108(2023) 123014 [2304.11176]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  39. [39]

    García-Cely, G

    C. García-Cely, G. Landini, L. Marsili and Ó. Zapata,Pion dark matter in aθvacuum: a thermal relic with sharp velocity-dependent self-interactions,JHEP02(2026) 105 [2508.21121]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  40. [40]

    X. Chu, M. Nikolic and J. Pradler,Even SIMP miracles are possible,Phys. Rev. Lett.133 (2024) 2 [2401.12283]. 3

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  41. [41]

    Preskill,Subgroup Alignment in Hypercolor Theories,Nucl

    J. Preskill,Subgroup Alignment in Hypercolor Theories,Nucl. Phys. B177(1981) 21. 3

    1981

  42. [42]

    M. E. Peskin,The Alignment of the Vacuum in Theories of Technicolor,Nucl. Phys. B175 (1980) 197. 3

    1980

  43. [43]

    Weinberg,Goldstone Bosons as Fractional Cosmic Neutrinos,Phys

    S. Weinberg,Goldstone Bosons as Fractional Cosmic Neutrinos,Phys. Rev. Lett.110(2013) 241301 [1305.1971]. 4, 5, 24

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  44. [44]

    Bauer, G

    M. Bauer, G. Rostagni and J. Spinner,Axion-Higgs portal,Phys. Rev. D107(2023) 015007 [2207.05762]. 4, 5

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  45. [45]

    V. E. Vileta, B. Gavela, R. Houtz and P. Quilez,Discrete Goldstone bosons,Phys. Rev. D107 (2023) 035009 [2205.09131]. 4

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  46. [46]

    S. R. Coleman, J. Wess and B. Zumino,Structure of phenomenological Lagrangians. 1,Phys. Rev.177(1969) 2239. 5, 6

    1969

  47. [47]

    C. G. Callan, S. R. Coleman, J. Wess and B. Zumino,Structure of phenomenological Lagrangians. 2,Phys. Rev.177(1969) 2247. 5, 6

    1969

  48. [48]

    D. B. Kaplan,Opening the Axion Window,Nucl. Phys. B260(1985) 215. 6

    1985

  49. [49]

    Manohar and H

    A. Manohar and H. Georgi,Chiral Quarks and the Nonrelativistic Quark Model,Nucl. Phys. B 234(1984) 189. 9, 26

    1984

  50. [50]

    Buchalla, O

    G. Buchalla, O. Catá and C. Krause,On the Power Counting in Effective Field Theories,Phys. Lett. B731(2014) 80 [1312.5624]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  51. [51]

    B. M. Gavela, E. E. Jenkins, A. V. Manohar and L. Merlo,Analysis of General Power Counting Rules in Effective Field Theory,Eur. Phys. J. C76(2016) 485 [1601.07551]. 26 – 43 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  52. [52]

    Brivio, R

    I. Brivio, R. Gröber and K. Schmid,The Art of Counting: a reappraisal of the HEFT expansion,2511.23410. 9

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  53. [53]

    Gasser and H

    J. Gasser and H. Leutwyler,Chiral Perturbation Theory to One Loop,Ann. Phys.158(1984)

    1984

  54. [54]

    Bijnens, G

    J. Bijnens, G. Colangelo and G. Ecker,The Mesonic chiral Lagrangian of orderp6,JHEP02 (1999) 020 [hep-ph/9902437]. 10

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  55. [55]

    Scherer,Introduction to chiral perturbation theory,Adv

    S. Scherer,Introduction to chiral perturbation theory,Adv. Nucl. Phys.27(2003) 277 [hep-ph/0210398]. 14

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  56. [56]

    Alonso, E

    R. Alonso, E. E. Jenkins and A. V. Manohar,Geometry of the Scalar Sector,JHEP08(2016) 101 [1605.03602]. 15 [57]Particle Data Groupcollaboration,Review of particle physics,Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 030001. 18 [58]CMScollaboration,Combined measurements and interpretations of Higgs boson production and decay in proton-proton collisions at√s= 13 TeV,2602.18611. 1...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  57. [57]

    G. J. Feldman and R. D. Cousins,A Unified approach to the classical statistical analysis of small signals,Phys. Rev. D57(1998) 3873 [physics/9711021]. 18, 21 [61]ALEPH, DELPHI, L3, OPAL, SLD, LEP Electroweak Working Group, SLD Electroweak Group, SLD Hea vy Fla vour Groupcollaboration,Precision electroweak measurements on theZresonance,Phys. Rept.427(2006)...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  58. [58]

    Janot and S

    P. Janot and S. Jadach,Improved Bhabha cross section at LEP and the number of light neutrino species,Phys. Lett. B803(2020) 135319 [1912.02067]. 19

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  59. [59]

    de Blas et al.,Physics Briefing Book: Input for the 2026 update of the European Strategy for Particle Physics,2511.03883

    J. de Blas et al.,Physics Briefing Book: Input for the 2026 update of the European Strategy for Particle Physics,2511.03883. 21 [64]ATLAScollaboration,Search for new phenomena in events with an energetic jet and missing transverse momentum inppcollisions at √s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector,Phys. Rev. D 103(2021) 112006 [2102.10874]. 21, 22 [65]CMScollabo...

    arXiv 2026

  60. [60]

    Alwall, R

    J. Alwall, R. Frederix, S. Frixione, V. Hirschi, F. Maltoni, O. Mattelaer et al.,The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations,JHEP07(2014) 079 [1405.0301]. 21

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  61. [61]

    Butterworth et al.,PDF4LHC recommendations for LHC Run II,J

    J. Butterworth et al.,PDF4LHC recommendations for LHC Run II,J. Phys. G43(2016) 023001 [1510.03865]. 21

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  62. [62]

    Sjostrand, S

    T. Sjostrand, S. Mrenna and P. Z. Skands,PYTHIA 6.4 Physics and Manual,JHEP05(2006) 026 [hep-ph/0603175]. 21 – 44 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  63. [63]

    Sjostrand, S

    T. Sjostrand, S. Mrenna and P. Z. Skands,A Brief Introduction to PYTHIA 8.1,Comput. Phys. Commun.178(2008) 852 [0710.3820]. 21 [70]DELPHES 3collaboration,DELPHES 3, A modular framework for fast simulation of a generic collider experiment,JHEP02(2014) 057 [1307.6346]. 21

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  64. [64]

    A. Roy, M. A. Schmidt and G. Valencia,Monojet and direct detection constraints on real scalar dark matter: EFT and a simple UV completion,JHEP02(2026) 167 [2509.14869]. 22 [72]L3collaboration,Single photon and multiphoton events with missing energy ine +e− collisions at LEP,Phys. Lett. B587(2004) 16 [hep-ex/0402002]. 22 [73]DELPHIcollaboration,Photon even...

    arXiv 2026

  65. [65]

    Bauer, P

    M. Bauer, P. Foldenauer, P. Reimitz and T. Plehn,Light Dark Matter Annihilation and Scattering in LHC Detectors,SciPost Phys.10(2021) 030 [2005.13551]. 22

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  66. [66]

    DeRocco, P

    W. DeRocco, P. W. Graham, D. Kasen, G. Marques-Tavares and S. Rajendran,Supernova signals of light dark matter,Phys. Rev. D100(2019) 075018 [1905.09284]. 22, 23

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  67. [67]

    Fernández-Martínez, M

    E. Fernández-Martínez, M. González-López, J. Hernández-García, M. Hostert and J. López-Pavón,Effective portals to heavy neutral leptons,JHEP09(2023) 001 [2304.06772]. 23

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  68. [68]

    Hochberg, E

    Y. Hochberg, E. Kuflik, H. Murayama, T. Volansky and J. G. Wacker,Model for Thermal Relic Dark Matter of Strongly Interacting Massive Particles,Phys. Rev. Lett.115(2015) 021301 [1411.3727]. 24

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  69. [69]

    Davighi, A

    J. Davighi, A. Greljo and N. Selimovic,Topological Portal to the Dark Sector,Phys. Rev. Lett. 134(2025) 111804 [2401.09528]. 24

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  70. [70]

    Davighi, S

    J. Davighi, S. Moldovsky, H. Murayama, C. Scherb and N. Selimovic,Topological freeze-out by semi-annihilation,JHEP02(2026) 133 [2506.05468]. 24

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  71. [71]

    Belanger, F

    G. Belanger, F. Boudjema, A. Pukhov and A. Semenov,MicrOMEGAs: A Program for calculating the relic density in the MSSM,Comput. Phys. Commun.149(2002) 103 [hep-ph/0112278]. 24

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  72. [72]

    Alguero, G

    G. Alguero, G. Belanger, F. Boudjema, S. Chakraborti, A. Goudelis, S. Kraml et al., micrOMEGAs 6.0: N-component dark matter,Comput. Phys. Commun.299(2024) 109133 [2312.14894]. 24

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  73. [73]

    Blennow, E

    M. Blennow, E. Fernandez-Martinez and B. Zaldivar,Freeze-in through portals,JCAP01 (2014) 003 [1309.7348]. 25

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  74. [74]

    Goudelis, A

    A. Goudelis, A. Lessa, L. M. D. Ramos and T. Reggio,Freeze-in at all couplings,2606.19564. 25

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  75. [75]

    Bernal, S

    N. Bernal, S. Mukherjee and J. Unwin,Minimal freeze-in dark matter: Reviving electroweak doublet dark matter with Boltzmann suppressed freeze-in,Phys. Rev. D113(2026) 115065 [2602.10112]. 25 – 45 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  76. [76]

    Langhoff, N

    K. Langhoff, N. J. Outmezguine and N. L. Rodd,Irreducible Axion Background,Phys. Rev. Lett.129(2022) 241101 [2209.06216]. 26

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  77. [77]

    Arias, D

    P. Arias, D. Cadamuro, M. Goodsell, J. Jaeckel, J. Redondo and A. Ringwald,WISPy Cold Dark Matter,JCAP06(2012) 013 [1201.5902]. 26

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  78. [78]

    Alonso-Álvarez, T

    G. Alonso-Álvarez, T. Hugle and J. Jaeckel,Misalignment & Co.: (Pseudo-)scalar and vector dark matter with curvature couplings,JCAP02(2020) 014 [1905.09836]. 26

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  79. [79]

    Di Luzio, B

    L. Di Luzio, B. Gavela, P. Quilez and A. Ringwald,Dark matter from an even lighter QCD axion: trapped misalignment,JCAP10(2021) 001 [2102.01082]. 26 [90]Planckcollaboration,Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters,Astron. Astrophys. 641(2020) A6 [1807.06209], [Erratum: Astron.Astrophys. 652, C4 (2021)]. 26 [91]LZcollaboration,Dark Matter Search Re...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  80. [80]

    Del Nobile,The Theory of Direct Dark Matter Detection: A Guide to Computations, 2104.12785

    E. Del Nobile,The Theory of Direct Dark Matter Detection: A Guide to Computations, 2104.12785. 28

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

Showing first 80 references.