Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 107 references

Dark matter and neutrinos scatter far more weakly than earlier analyses hinted: the high-resolution Lyman-alpha forest now sets the tightest direct upper limit, u_nu_chi ≤ 1.5×10^-8, and rules out previous claims of a signal.

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 · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-02 00:24 UTC pith:KMJ5WDDP

load-bearing objection The first full-hydro Ly-alpha constraint on DM-neutrino scattering is solid and excludes previous hints, but the headline 1.5e-8 sits partly on a T0 prior edge. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.15020 v1 pith:KMJ5WDDP submitted 2026-07-16 astro-ph.CO hep-ph

High resolution Lyman-{α} forest constraints on dark matter-neutrino scattering

Markus R. Mosbech , Olga Garcia-Gallego , Vid Ir\v{s}i\v{c} , Matteo Viel , Julien Lesgourgues This is my paper
classification astro-ph.CO hep-ph
keywords dark matter-neutrino interactionsLyman-alpha forestflux power spectrumhydrodynamical simulationsemulatorMarkov chain Monte Carlosmall-scale structurewarm dark matter
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.

This paper attempts to establish that dark matter–neutrino scattering is effectively absent at the level probed by the high-redshift Lyman-alpha forest. To do so, it runs full hydrodynamical simulations of the interacting dark matter model across four interaction strengths and twelve thermal histories, trains a neural-network emulator on the resulting flux power spectra, and compares to the highest-resolution Lyman-alpha forest measurements in a Monte Carlo Markov Chain. The result is an upper limit on the interaction strength u_nu_chi of 1.5×10^-8 (95% C.L.), which the authors describe as the strongest direct bound to date and which excludes earlier hints of non-zero interactions from Lyman-alpha, CMB and large-scale structure analyses. A secondary finding is that mapping warm-dark-matter limits onto such models overestimates the constraining power, suggesting that dedicated simulations are necessary. If correct, the paper resolves a recent controversy in favour of no detectable interaction and sharpens the small-scale structure test of dark matter microphysics.

Core claim

The claim is that interactions between dark matter and neutrinos are strongly disfavored by the high-resolution Lyman-alpha forest. The authors simulate the full hydrodynamics of models in which a fraction of dark matter scatters with neutrinos, parametrized by the effective strength u_nu_chi, generating 48 simulations spanning interaction strengths chosen to match the suppression scale of warm dark matter between 1.5 and 4 keV together with 12 thermal histories each. The extracted one-dimensional flux power spectra feed an emulator, and an MCMC against the observed flux power spectrum at redshifts 4.2, 4.6 and 5.0, using a CMB-based prior on the reionization optical depth, yields u_nu_chi ≤

What carries the argument

The central object is u_nu_chi, the effective dark matter–neutrino scattering strength, defined so that the scattering rate is proportional to a u_nu_chi rho_chi; larger values suppress the linear matter power spectrum below a collisional damping scale set by the dark decoupling sound horizon. The argument's engine is a suite of full hydrodynamical simulations covering a grid of interaction strengths and thermal histories, a neural-network emulator that interpolates the simulated flux power spectra to arbitrary parameter values, and an MCMC that fits the observed high-resolution Lyman-alpha flux power spectrum. The specific observable is the one-dimensional flux power spectrum, which at smal

Load-bearing premise

The whole limit rests on the assumption that the smallest-scale Lyman-alpha flux power spectrum measurements, the bins at k > 0.1 s/km, are modeled correctly with no underestimated systematics; if that fails, the headline bound loosens by roughly a factor of three, though the exclusion of earlier hints survives.

What would settle it

Measure the same Lyman-alpha forest with an independent high-resolution spectrograph and re-derive the flux power spectrum with a different continuum-fitting and noise-subtraction pipeline; if the two smallest-scale bins shift by more than their quoted errors, the bound drops to about 4×10^-8. A positive detection of small-scale suppression matching u_nu_chi > 1×10^-8 in a dataset free of the assumed systematics would falsify the exclusion.

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

If this is right

  • The interaction strength is bounded by u_nu_chi < 1.5×10^-8 (95% C.L.) with the fiducial thermal prior; a Gaussian T0 prior gives < 2.03×10^-8, and mapping to three 0.06 eV neutrinos gives < 2.0×10^-8.
  • Earlier claims of non-zero dark matter–neutrino interactions from Lyman-alpha, CMB and large-scale structure data are excluded by several orders of magnitude, even in the most conservative variants.
  • The tightest bins (k > 0.1 s/km) are the information carriers: without them the bound weakens from 1.5×10^-8 to 4.1×10^-8, still far stronger than previous bounds.
  • Approximate methods that convert warm-dark-matter constraints into constraints on other suppressed-small-scale-structure models overestimate the constraining power for this model; direct simulations are needed.
  • The dark acoustic oscillations present in linear theory do not survive into the Lyman-alpha flux power spectrum, so interacting dark matter and warm dark matter are observationally degenerate in this probe.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the bound holds, dark matter–neutrino scattering cannot be the mechanism behind the H0 or S8 tensions, because the coupling required to alter clustering is orders of magnitude above the limit.
  • The result suggests that the earlier hints were driven by approximations in linear or semi-analytic treatments; future searches for this interaction should use directly simulated flux power spectra or validate approximate mappings against them.
  • The same direct-simulation-plus-emulator pipeline could be applied to dark matter–photon or dark matter–dark radiation interactions, where WDM mapping has also been used, potentially sharpening or overturning those bounds.
  • Follow-up observations at even smaller scales (higher resolution or lower redshift with similar resolution) would test whether the limit tightens further or whether systematics at the current smallest bins are hiding a signal.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper presents full hydrodynamical simulations of dark matter interacting with massless neutrinos (iDM), spanning four interaction strengths and twelve thermal histories (48 simulations). A neural-network emulator is trained on the resulting Ly-alpha flux power spectra and used in a Cobaya MCMC analysis against the Boera et al. high-resolution HIRES/UVES data at z = 4.2, 4.6, and 5.0. The baseline analysis, using a Gaussian prior on the CMB optical depth tau_CMB, yields u_nu_chi <= 1.5e-8 (95% C.L.); an alternative Gaussian T0 prior gives 2.03e-8, a k-cut removes the smallest-scale bins to give 4.1e-8, and an inflated-noise analysis gives 3.9e-8. The authors conclude that the previous hints of non-zero DM-neutrino scattering are excluded, and that mapping WDM bounds to iDM via equivalent-mass criteria overestimates constraining power.

Significance. If the baseline result is robust, this is the strongest direct Ly-alpha forest constraint on DM-neutrino interactions to date and would rule out the recent hints in CMB/LSS/Ly-alpha data. The paper has notable strengths: the simulation grid is clearly specified, the emulator accuracy is checked, the MCMC setup and priors are stated, and explicit robustness tests (small-scale k-cut, noise inflation, alternative thermal priors) are included. The final comparison of WDM-equivalence criteria against direct WDM simulations is a useful methodological caution. However, the headline limit is explicitly stated to arise because T0 posteriors sit at the lower edge of their priors; this boundary effect is not tested in the same robustness framework, and the stated tau_CMB prior width appears to be a factor-of-ten typo. These issues must be resolved before the central claim can be fully trusted.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 5 (baseline tau_CMB analysis) and Fig. 7] The text states that the anti-correlation between u0 and T0 pushes T0 at z=4.2 and 4.6 to the lower limit of their priors, and that this leads to the tight constraint on u_nu_chi. The robustness checks (k-cut and noise inflation) do not test this prior-boundary truncation. Since the headline 1.5e-8 limit may be truncated rather than data-driven, please (i) rerun the baseline MCMC with the lower T0 prior boundaries extended beyond the current simulated band, (ii) report the resulting 95% upper limit, and (iii) show whether the T0 posteriors again pile up at the new boundary. Without this test, the 'strongest direct bound' claim is not fully supported.
  2. [Sec. 5, first bullet (tau_CMB prior)] The stated prior is tau_CMB = 0.054 +/- 0.0007, but the referenced Planck 2018 result is tau = 0.054 +/- 0.007 (approximately). The stated error is ten times too small. If the analysis used 0.0007, the baseline prior is essentially a delta function and can dominate the posterior; if it is a typographical error, it should be corrected. Because this prior is the proximate cause of the T0 boundary effect, please clarify the actual prior width and confirm that the result is unchanged under the correct width.
  3. [Sec. 6 (massive-neutrino mapping, Fig. 5 left)] The mapping from massless to massive neutrinos is justified only by matching the linear matter power spectrum. The hydrodynamical simulations use massless neutrinos, and no test is shown that the non-linear Ly-alpha flux power response is insensitive to whether the suppression comes from massless or massive neutrinos. Either provide a dedicated simulation test or soften the conclusion that 'the limit can be directly mapped' to a linear-level estimate, explicitly noting that the quoted 1.5e-8 bound applies to the massless case.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 6 and Sec. 1] Typos: 'luminonity function' should be 'luminosity function'; 'deribed' should be 'derived'.
  2. [Refs. [108] and Appendix A] 'Thompson optical depth' should be 'Thomson optical depth'.
  3. [Sec. 5] The statement that patchy-reionization and resolution corrections 'are only likely to change parameter constraints by 5-10%' is attributed to Ref. [87]. Since the present analysis uses a different model and a slightly different data set, please specify which tests in Ref. [87] justify this transfer.
  4. [Fig. 2] The dashed-line legend includes mWDM = 1 keV, but the iDM grid is described as corresponding to WDM masses 1.5, 2, 3, and 4 keV. Please clarify whether the 1 keV WDM model is shown for comparison or is part of the interpolation range.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the u_nu_chi bound is a posterior from external Boera+19 Ly-alpha data; minor self-citations (pipeline Refs [86,87], tau_CMB mapping Ref [108]) are not load-bearing.

full rationale

The central derivation is an MCMC likelihood evaluation: linear iDM power spectra from modified CLASS set the initial conditions for P-Gadget3 hydrodynamical simulations; flux power spectra from 5000 LOS are emulated with a neural network; Cobaya then samples u_nu_chi and astrophysical nuisances against the HIRES/UVES flux power spectra of Boera et al. [102]. The headline limit u_nu_chi < 1.5e-8 is therefore read off an external dataset, not baked into the model: the prior is u_nu_chi in [0,2.4e-7], and the posterior peaks at a vanishingly small value (best fit 1.8e-11). No equation defines u_nu_chi in terms of P_F or vice versa, and no fitted quantity is relabelled as a prediction. Reuse of the authors' own validated pipeline (Refs [86,87]) and of the companion tau_CMB-to-(u0,T0) mapping (Ref [108]) is a self-citation burden, but it is not load-bearing: the tau_CMB prior is anchored to the external Planck value 0.054 +/- 0.0007, and switching to the independent Gaussian-T0 priors from Refs [109,110] only loosens the limit to 2.03e-8, while removing k > 0.1 s/km or inflating noise gives 4.1e-8 and 3.9e-8; all still exclude the previously hinted values. The one explicitly flagged caveat is the statement in Section 5 that the tau_CMB prior pushes (T0^4.2, T0^4.6) to the lower prior edge and that this 'leads to tight constraints'. This is a prior-edge sensitivity, not a circular construction: the posterior is still evaluated against the external flux-power data, and the same data with different priors/robustness cuts yields the same qualitative exclusion. No circular step meeting the quote-and-reduction standard was found.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 6 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim is an inference on one physical parameter (u_nu_chi) with many nuisance parameters and inherited modeling choices. No new particles or forces are introduced; the model is the standard DM-neutrino scattering parameterization. The main burdens are the reliability of high-k Ly-alpha data, the massless-neutrino approximation, and the self-cited tau_CMB prior mapping.

free parameters (4)
  • u_nu_chi (DM-neutrino interaction strength) = 95% C.L. limit 1.5e-8 (tau_CMB prior); 2.03e-8 (T0 prior); sampled over [0, 2.4e-7]
    Target parameter of the inference, not an ad hoc hidden fit; included because the quoted bound is a fitted upper limit.
  • IGM nuisance parameters per redshift bin (T0, gamma, u0, tau_eff) = Posterior ranges in Fig. 7; priors from Refs [86,87] and Ref [108]
    Marginalized astrophysical parameters; their degeneracy with u_nu_chi is the main lever on the quoted limit.
  • Neural-network emulator hyperparameters = 3-layer [60,60,60], lr=1e-3, batch size 12
    Hand-chosen training settings; reported emulator accuracy <1.5%, so they affect the likelihood evaluation but not the physics.
  • Thermal-history grid (z_end_rei and photo-heating rescaling) = 12 histories per interaction model, Table 1 of Ref [86]
    Defines the simulated (T0,u0) band and thus the priors; chosen by hand from observational constraints.
axioms (6)
  • domain assumption The linear DM-neutrino perturbation equations (Eqs. 2.3) correctly describe the coupled neutrino-DM fluid before decoupling.
    Taken from Refs [30,43-47]; provides initial conditions for simulations; if the hierarchy is wrong, all derived constraints are wrong.
  • domain assumption Massless-neutrino approximation is adequate; massive-neutrino bounds are recovered by matching linear P(k) (Section 6, Fig. 5).
    Hydro simulations use massless neutrinos; the paper argues the mapping is nearly perfect at linear level but does not run massive-neutrino simulations.
  • domain assumption Dark acoustic oscillations are washed out in the non-linear flux power spectrum (Section 5, Fig. 2).
    If oscillations survived in the Ly-alpha flux, the smooth emulator parameterization could miss iDM-specific signatures; the paper's own simulations support washing-out.
  • domain assumption The Boera+19 Ly-alpha data and their high-k systematics are reliable (Section 4).
    The headline constraint is driven by k>0.1 s/km bins; this is the weakest empirical premise (see weakest_assumption).
  • domain assumption The tau_CMB-based thermal prior mapping (Ref [108]) correctly translates Planck tau_CMB into constraints on (u0^5.0, T0^5.0).
    Baseline analysis uses this self-cited mapping; the alternative T0 prior gives a somewhat weaker limit, so the central exclusion does not rest on it alone.
  • domain assumption P-Gadget3/Sherwood-Relics hydrodynamics accurately reproduce the IGM thermal state and Ly-alpha flux statistics.
    Standard simulation framework in this subfield; only one CDM validation run against Ref [87] is done, so run-to-run reproducibility is assumed.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 16448 in / 16154 out tokens · 180619 ms · 2026-08-02T00:24:03.745140+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We present new constraints on models of dark matter interacting with neutrino, based on high-resolution Lyman-$\alpha$ forest data. We perform a suite of full hydrodynamical simulations of these models, spanning a range of interaction strengths and thermal histories. We train an emulator on the simulation results. A Monte Carlo Markov Chain analysis yields an upper limit on the interaction strength of $u_{\nu\chi} \leq1.5\times10^{-8}$ (95% C.L.), which is the strongest direct bound to date on such interactions. Our results exclude previous hints of non-zero interactions presented in the literature. We furthermore compare our results to those obtained by mapping warm dark matter constraints to other models with suppressed small-scale structure, and find that these methods would overestimate the constraining power for this model.

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

107 extracted references · 101 linked inside Pith

  1. [2]

    Rev.95(2022) 101659, [arXiv:2105.05208]

    Leandros Perivolaropoulos and Foteini Skara,Challenges forΛCDM: An update,New Astron. Rev.95(2022) 101659, [arXiv:2105.05208]. – 10 – [3]DESICollaboration, A. G. Adame et al.,DESI 2024 VI: cosmological constraints from the measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations,JCAP02(2025) 021, [arXiv:2404.03002]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  2. [4]

    Liddle,Interpreting DESI’s evidence for evolving dark energy, JCAP12(2024) 007, [arXiv:2404.08056]

    Marina Cortˆ es and Andrew R. Liddle,Interpreting DESI’s evidence for evolving dark energy, JCAP12(2024) 007, [arXiv:2404.08056]. [5]DESICollaboration, Gan Gu et al.,Dynamical dark energy in light of the DESI DR2 baryonic acoustic oscillations measurements,Nature Astron.9(2025), no. 12 1879–1889, [arXiv:2504.06118]. [Erratum: Nature Astron. 9, 1898 (2025)]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  3. [6]

    Ivanov, and Oliver H

    Anton Chudaykin, Mikhail M. Ivanov, and Oliver H. E. Philcox,Reanalyzing DESI DR1: 2. Constraints on Dark Energy, Spatial Curvature, and Neutrino Masses,arXiv:2511.20757

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  4. [7]

    Lars Bergstr¨ om,Nonbaryonic dark matter: Observational evidence and detection methods, Rept. Prog. Phys.63(2000) 793, [hep-ph/0002126]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  5. [8]

    Rept.405(2005) 279–390, [hep-ph/0404175]

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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  6. [9]

    Gianfranco Bertone and Dan Hooper,History of dark matter,Rev. Mod. Phys.90(2018), no. 4 045002, [arXiv:1605.04909]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  7. [10]

    Antel et al.,Feebly-interacting particles: FIPs 2022 Workshop Report,Eur

    C. Antel et al.,Feebly-interacting particles: FIPs 2022 Workshop Report,Eur. Phys. J. C83 (2023), no. 12 1122, [arXiv:2305.01715]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  8. [11]

    David J. E. Marsh, David Ellis, and Viraf M. Mehta,Dark Matter: Evidence, Theory, and Constraints. Princeton University Press, 9, 2024. [12]CASTCollaboration, V. Anastassopoulos et al.,New CAST Limit on the Axion-Photon Interaction,Nature Phys.13(2017) 584–590, [arXiv:1705.02290]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  9. [13]

    Julien Billard et al.,Direct detection of dark matter—APPEC committee report*,Rept. Prog. Phys.85(2022), no. 5 056201, [arXiv:2104.07634]. [14]LZCollaboration, J. Aalbers et al.,Dark Matter Search Results from 4.2 Tonne-Years of Exposure of the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment,Phys. Rev. Lett.135(2025), no. 1 011802, [arXiv:2410.17036]. [15]XENONCollaboration, ...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  10. [17]

    Ciaran A. J. O’Hare,Cosmology of axion dark matter,PoSCOSMICWISPers(2024) 040, [arXiv:2403.17697]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  11. [18]

    Boehm, Pierre Fayet, and R

    C. Boehm, Pierre Fayet, and R. Schaeffer,Constraining dark matter candidates from structure formation,Phys. Lett.B518(2001) 8–14, [astro-ph/0012504]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  12. [19]

    Scherrer,Cosmic microwave background and large scale structure limits on the interaction between dark matter and baryons,Phys

    Xue-lei Chen, Steen Hannestad, and Robert J. Scherrer,Cosmic microwave background and large scale structure limits on the interaction between dark matter and baryons,Phys. Rev. D65(2002) 123515, [astro-ph/0202496]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  13. [20]

    Astrophys.438(2005) 419–442, [astro-ph/0410591]

    Celine Boehm and Richard Schaeffer,Constraints on dark matter interactions from structure formation: Damping lengths,Astron. Astrophys.438(2005) 419–442, [astro-ph/0410591]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  14. [21]

    Rev.D89(2014), no

    Cora Dvorkin, Kfir Blum, and Marc Kamionkowski,Constraining Dark Matter-Baryon Scattering with Linear Cosmology,Phys. Rev.D89(2014), no. 2 023519, [arXiv:1311.2937]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  15. [22]

    A. D. Dolgov, S. L. Dubovsky, G. I. Rubtsov, and I. I. Tkachev,Constraints on millicharged particles from Planck data,Phys. Rev.D88(2013), no. 11 117701, [arXiv:1310.2376]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  16. [23]

    Francis-Yan Cyr-Racine and Kris Sigurdson,Cosmology of atomic dark matter,Phys. Rev. D87(2013), no. 10 103515, [arXiv:1209.5752]. – 11 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  17. [24]

    A. A. Prinz et al.,Search for millicharged particles at SLAC,Phys. Rev. Lett.81(1998) 1175–1178, [hep-ex/9804008]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  18. [25]

    Boddy and Vera Gluscevic,First Cosmological Constraint on the Effective Theory of Dark Matter-Proton Interactions,Phys

    Kimberly K. Boddy and Vera Gluscevic,First Cosmological Constraint on the Effective Theory of Dark Matter-Proton Interactions,Phys. Rev. D98(2018), no. 8 083510, [arXiv:1801.08609]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  19. [26]

    Slatyer and Chih-Liang Wu,Early-Universe constraints on dark matter-baryon scattering and their implications for a global 21 cm signal,Phys

    Tracy R. Slatyer and Chih-Liang Wu,Early-Universe constraints on dark matter-baryon scattering and their implications for a global 21 cm signal,Phys. Rev. D98(2018), no. 2 023013, [arXiv:1803.09734]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  20. [27]

    Weishuang Linda Xu, Cora Dvorkin, and Andrew Chael,Probing sub-GeV Dark Matter-Baryon Scattering with Cosmological Observables,Phys. Rev. D97(2018), no. 10 103530, [arXiv:1802.06788]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  21. [28]

    Boddy, Vera Gluscevic, Vivian Poulin, et al.,Critical assessment of CMB limits on dark matter-baryon scattering: New treatment of the relative bulk velocity,Phys

    Kimberly K. Boddy, Vera Gluscevic, Vivian Poulin, et al.,Critical assessment of CMB limits on dark matter-baryon scattering: New treatment of the relative bulk velocity,Phys. Rev. D98 (2018), no. 12 123506, [arXiv:1808.00001]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  22. [29]

    Hooper, Felix Kahlhoefer, Julien Lesgourgues, and Nils Sch¨ oneberg, Cosmological constraints on multi-interacting dark matter,JCAP02(2021) 019, [arXiv:2010.04074]

    Niklas Becker, Deanna C. Hooper, Felix Kahlhoefer, Julien Lesgourgues, and Nils Sch¨ oneberg, Cosmological constraints on multi-interacting dark matter,JCAP02(2021) 019, [arXiv:2010.04074]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  23. [30]

    Hansen, and Richard Schaeffer,Interacting dark matter disguised as warm dark matter,Phys

    Celine Boehm, Alain Riazuelo, Steen H. Hansen, and Richard Schaeffer,Interacting dark matter disguised as warm dark matter,Phys. Rev. D66(2002) 083505, [astro-ph/0112522]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  24. [31]

    Caldwell, and Marc Kamionkowski,Dark-matter electric and magnetic dipole moments,Phys

    Kris Sigurdson, Michael Doran, Andriy Kurylov, Robert R. Caldwell, and Marc Kamionkowski,Dark-matter electric and magnetic dipole moments,Phys. Rev.D70(2004) 083501, [astro-ph/0406355]. [Erratum: Phys. Rev.D73,089903(2006)]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  25. [32]

    McDermott, Hai-Bo Yu, and Kathryn M

    Samuel D. McDermott, Hai-Bo Yu, and Kathryn M. Zurek,Turning off the Lights: How Dark is Dark Matter?,Phys. Rev.D83(2011) 063509, [arXiv:1011.2907]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  26. [33]

    Wilkinson, Julien Lesgourgues, and C´ eline Boehm,Using the CMB angular power spectrum to study Dark Matter-photon interactions,JCAP1404(2014) 026, [arXiv:1309.7588]

    Ryan J. Wilkinson, Julien Lesgourgues, and C´ eline Boehm,Using the CMB angular power spectrum to study Dark Matter-photon interactions,JCAP1404(2014) 026, [arXiv:1309.7588]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  27. [34]

    Boehm, J

    C. Boehm, J. A. Schewtschenko, R. J. Wilkinson, C. M. Baugh, and S. Pascoli,Using the Milky Way satellites to study interactions between cold dark matter and radiation,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.445(2014) L31–L35, [arXiv:1404.7012]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  28. [35]

    J. A. Schewtschenko, R. J. Wilkinson, C. M. Baugh, C. Bœhm, and S. Pascoli,Dark matter–radiation interactions: the impact on dark matter haloes,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 449(2015), no. 4 3587–3596, [arXiv:1412.4905]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  29. [36]

    J. A. Schewtschenko, C. M. Baugh, R. J. Wilkinson, et al.,Dark matter–radiation interactions: the structure of Milky Way satellite galaxies,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.461 (2016), no. 3 2282–2287, [arXiv:1512.06774]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  30. [37]

    Yacine Ali-Ha ¨ ımoud, Jens Chluba, and Marc Kamionkowski,Constraints on Dark Matter Interactions with Standard Model Particles from Cosmic Microwave Background Spectral Distortions,Phys. Rev. Lett.115(2015), no. 7 071304, [arXiv:1506.04745]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  31. [38]

    Vincent, Ryan J

    Miguel Escudero, Olga Mena, Aaron C. Vincent, Ryan J. Wilkinson, and C´ eline Bœhm, Exploring dark matter microphysics with galaxy surveys,JCAP1509(2015), no. 09 034, [arXiv:1505.06735]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  32. [39]

    James A. D. Diacoumis and Yvonne Y. Y. Wong,Using CMB spectral distortions to distinguish between dark matter solutions to the small-scale crisis,JCAP1709(2017), no. 09 011, [arXiv:1707.07050]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  33. [40]

    10 009, [arXiv:1802.06589]

    Julia Stadler and C´ eline Bœhm,Constraints onγ-CDM interactions matching the Planck data precision,JCAP1810(2018), no. 10 009, [arXiv:1802.06589]. – 12 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  34. [41]

    Julia Stadler, Celine Bœhm, and Olga Mena,Is it Mixed dark matter or neutrino masses?, JCAP01(2020) 039, [arXiv:1807.10034]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  35. [42]

    Laura Lopez-Honorez, Olga Mena, and Pablo Villanueva-Domingo,Dark matter microphysics and 21 cm observations,Phys. Rev. D99(2019), no. 2 023522, [arXiv:1811.02716]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  36. [43]

    Rev.D74 (2006) 043517, [astro-ph/0606190]

    Gianpiero Mangano, Alessandro Melchiorri, Paolo Serra, Asantha Cooray, and Marc Kamionkowski,Cosmological bounds on dark matter-neutrino interactions,Phys. Rev.D74 (2006) 043517, [astro-ph/0606190]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  37. [44]

    Paolo Serra, Federico Zalamea, Asantha Cooray, Gianpiero Mangano, and Alessandro Melchiorri,Constraints on neutrino – dark matter interactions from cosmic microwave background and large scale structure data,Phys. Rev. D81(2010) 043507, [arXiv:0911.4411]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  38. [45]

    Wilkinson, Celine Boehm, and Julien Lesgourgues,Constraining Dark Matter-Neutrino Interactions using the CMB and Large-Scale Structure,JCAP05(2014) 011, [arXiv:1401.7597]

    Ryan J. Wilkinson, Celine Boehm, and Julien Lesgourgues,Constraining Dark Matter-Neutrino Interactions using the CMB and Large-Scale Structure,JCAP05(2014) 011, [arXiv:1401.7597]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  39. [46]

    Bouchet,Reducing theH0 andσ 8 tensions with Dark Matter-neutrino interactions,Phys

    Eleonora Di Valentino, C´ eline Bœhm, Eric Hivon, and Fran¸ cois R. Bouchet,Reducing theH0 andσ 8 tensions with Dark Matter-neutrino interactions,Phys. Rev. D97(2018), no. 4 043513, [arXiv:1710.02559]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  40. [47]

    Julia Stadler, C´ eline Bœhm, and Olga Mena,Comprehensive Study of Neutrino-Dark Matter Mixed Damping,JCAP08(2019) 014, [arXiv:1903.00540]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  41. [48]

    Mosbech, Celine Boehm, Steen Hannestad, et al.,The full Boltzmann hierarchy for dark matter-massive neutrino interactions,JCAP03(2021) 066, [arXiv:2011.04206]

    Markus R. Mosbech, Celine Boehm, Steen Hannestad, et al.,The full Boltzmann hierarchy for dark matter-massive neutrino interactions,JCAP03(2021) 066, [arXiv:2011.04206]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  42. [49]

    Hooper and Matteo Lucca,Hints of dark matter-neutrino interactions in Lyman-α data,Phys

    Deanna C. Hooper and Matteo Lucca,Hints of dark matter-neutrino interactions in Lyman-α data,Phys. Rev. D105(2022), no. 10 103504, [arXiv:2110.04024]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  43. [50]

    Kensuke Akita and Shin’ichiro Ando,Constraints on dark matter-neutrino scattering from the Milky-Way satellites and subhalo modeling for dark acoustic oscillations,JCAP11(2023) 037, [arXiv:2305.01913]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  44. [51]

    Philippe Brax, Carsten van de Bruck, Eleonora Di Valentino, William Giar` e, and Sebastian Trojanowski,New insights onν–DM interactions,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.527(2023), no. 1 L122–L126, [arXiv:2303.16895]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  45. [52]

    William Giar` e, Adri` a G´ omez-Valent, Eleonora Di Valentino, and Carsten van de Bruck,Hints of neutrino dark matter scattering in the CMB? Constraints from the marginalized and profile distributions,Phys. Rev. D109(2024), no. 6 063516, [arXiv:2311.09116]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  46. [53]

    Mosbech, Santiago Casas, Julien Lesgourgues, et al.,DESI forecast for dark matter-neutrino interactions using EFTofLSS,JCAP05(2025) 040, [arXiv:2410.08163]

    Markus R. Mosbech, Santiago Casas, Julien Lesgourgues, et al.,DESI forecast for dark matter-neutrino interactions using EFTofLSS,JCAP05(2025) 040, [arXiv:2410.08163]

    arXiv 2025

  47. [54]

    3 457–465, [arXiv:2501.13785]

    Lei Zu, William Giar` e, Chi Zhang, et al.,A solution to the S 8 tension through neutrino–dark matter interactions,Nature Astron.10(2026), no. 3 457–465, [arXiv:2501.13785]

    arXiv 2026

  48. [55]

    Ren-Peng Zhou and Da Huang,Cosmological Constraints on Temperature-Dependent Interaction between Dark Matter and Neutrinos,arXiv:2602.18311

    arXiv

  49. [56]

    Kaplan, Gordan Z

    David E. Kaplan, Gordan Z. Krnjaic, Keith R. Rehermann, and Christopher M. Wells, Atomic Dark Matter,JCAP1005(2010) 021, [arXiv:0909.0753]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  50. [57]

    Rev.D85(2012) 063510, [arXiv:1012.4458]

    Subinoy Das and Kris Sigurdson,Cosmological Limits on Hidden Sector Dark Matter,Phys. Rev.D85(2012) 063510, [arXiv:1012.4458]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  51. [58]

    Rev.D87(2013), no

    Roberta Diamanti, Elena Giusarma, Olga Mena, Maria Archidiacono, and Alessandro Melchiorri,Dark Radiation and interacting scenarios,Phys. Rev.D87(2013), no. 6 063509, [arXiv:1212.6007]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  52. [59]

    Buen-Abad, Gustavo Marques-Tavares, and Martin Schmaltz,Non-Abelian dark matter and dark radiation,Phys

    Manuel A. Buen-Abad, Gustavo Marques-Tavares, and Martin Schmaltz,Non-Abelian dark matter and dark radiation,Phys. Rev.D92(2015), no. 2 023531, [arXiv:1505.03542]. – 13 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  53. [60]

    02 037, [arXiv:1507.04351]

    Julien Lesgourgues, Gustavo Marques-Tavares, and Martin Schmaltz,Evidence for dark matter interactions in cosmological precision data?,JCAP1602(2016), no. 02 037, [arXiv:1507.04351]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  54. [61]

    Subinoy Das, Rajesh Mondal, Vikram Rentala, and Srikanth Suresh,On dark matter - dark radiation interaction and cosmic reionization,JCAP08(2018) 045, [arXiv:1712.03976]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  55. [62]

    Ko, Natsumi Nagata, and Yong Tang,Hidden Charged Dark Matter and Chiral Dark Radiation,Phys

    P. Ko, Natsumi Nagata, and Yong Tang,Hidden Charged Dark Matter and Chiral Dark Radiation,Phys. Lett.B773(2017) 513–520, [arXiv:1706.05605]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  56. [63]

    06 007, [arXiv:1803.08427]

    Miguel Escudero, Laura Lopez-Honorez, Olga Mena, Sergio Palomares-Ruiz, and Pablo Villanueva Domingo,A fresh look into the interacting dark matter scenario,JCAP1806 (2018), no. 06 007, [arXiv:1803.08427]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  57. [64]

    Hooper, Riccardo Murgia, et al.,Constraining Dark Matter – Dark Radiation interactions with CMB, BAO, and Lyman-α,JCAP1910(2019), no

    Maria Archidiacono, Deanna C. Hooper, Riccardo Murgia, et al.,Constraining Dark Matter – Dark Radiation interactions with CMB, BAO, and Lyman-α,JCAP1910(2019), no. 10 055, [arXiv:1907.01496]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  58. [65]

    Hugo Plombat, Th´ eo Simon, Jordan Flitter, and Vivian Poulin,Probing dark relativistic species and their interactions with dark matter through CMB and 21 cm surveys,JCAP01 (2025) 071, [arXiv:2410.01486]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  59. [66]

    Carlson, Marie E

    Eric D. Carlson, Marie E. Machacek, and Lawrence J. Hall,Self-interacting dark matter, Astrophys. J.398(1992) 43–52

    1992

  60. [67]

    de Laix, Robert J

    Andrew A. de Laix, Robert J. Scherrer, and Robert K. Schaefer,Constraints of selfinteracting dark matter,Astrophys. J.452(1995) 495, [astro-ph/9502087]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  61. [68]

    Spergel and Paul J

    David N. Spergel and Paul J. Steinhardt,Observational evidence for selfinteracting cold dark matter,Phys. Rev. Lett.84(2000) 3760–3763, [astro-ph/9909386]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  62. [69]

    Spergel, Paul J

    Romeel Dave, David N. Spergel, Paul J. Steinhardt, and Benjamin D. Wandelt,Halo properties in cosmological simulations of selfinteracting cold dark matter,Astrophys. J.547 (2001) 574–589, [astro-ph/0006218]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  63. [70]

    Sales, et al.,Spreading out and staying sharp – creating diverse rotation curves via baryonic and self-interaction effects,Mon

    Peter Creasey, Omid Sameie, Laura V. Sales, et al.,Spreading out and staying sharp – creating diverse rotation curves via baryonic and self-interaction effects,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.468(2017), no. 2 2283–2295, [arXiv:1612.03903]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  64. [71]

    Miguel Rocha, Annika H. G. Peter, James S. Bullock, et al.,Cosmological Simulations with Self-Interacting Dark Matter I: Constant Density Cores and Substructure,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.430(2013) 81–104, [arXiv:1208.3025]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  65. [72]

    Kim, Annika H

    Stacy Y. Kim, Annika H. G. Peter, and David Wittman,In the Wake of Dark Giants: New Signatures of Dark Matter Self Interactions in Equal Mass Mergers of Galaxy Clusters,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.469(2017), no. 2 1414–1444, [arXiv:1608.08630]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  66. [73]

    Ran Huo, Manoj Kaplinghat, Zhen Pan, and Hai-Bo Yu,Signatures of Self-Interacting Dark Matter in the Matter Power Spectrum and the CMB,Phys. Lett. B783(2018) 76–81, [arXiv:1709.09717]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  67. [74]

    Maxim Markevitch, A. H. Gonzalez, D. Clowe, et al.,Direct constraints on the dark matter self-interaction cross-section from the merging galaxy cluster 1E0657-56,Astrophys. J.606 (2004) 819–824, [astro-ph/0309303]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  68. [75]

    Randall, Maxim Markevitch, Douglas Clowe, Anthony H

    Scott W. Randall, Maxim Markevitch, Douglas Clowe, Anthony H. Gonzalez, and Marusa Bradac,Constraints on the Self-Interaction Cross-Section of Dark Matter from Numerical Simulations of the Merging Galaxy Cluster 1E 0657-56,Astrophys. J.679(2008) 1173–1180, [arXiv:0704.0261]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  69. [76]

    Widrow,Sterile-neutrinos as dark matter,Phys

    Scott Dodelson and Lawrence M. Widrow,Sterile-neutrinos as dark matter,Phys. Rev. Lett. 72(1994) 17–20, [hep-ph/9303287]. – 14 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  70. [77]

    Ostriker, and Neil Turok,Halo formation in warm dark matter models,Astrophys

    Paul Bode, Jeremiah P. Ostriker, and Neil Turok,Halo formation in warm dark matter models,Astrophys. J.556(2001) 93–107, [astro-ph/0010389]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  71. [78]

    Hansen, Julien Lesgourgues, Sergio Pastor, and Joseph Silk,Constraining the window on sterile neutrinos as warm dark matter,Mon

    Steen H. Hansen, Julien Lesgourgues, Sergio Pastor, and Joseph Silk,Constraining the window on sterile neutrinos as warm dark matter,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.333(2002) 544–546, [astro-ph/0106108]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  72. [79]

    Takehiko Asaka, Steve Blanchet, and Mikhail Shaposhnikov,The nuMSM, dark matter and neutrino masses,Phys. Lett. B631(2005) 151–156, [hep-ph/0503065]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  73. [80]

    Haehnelt, Sabino Matarrese, and Antonio Riotto, Constraining warm dark matter candidates including sterile neutrinos and light gravitinos with WMAP and the Lyman-alpha forest,Phys

    Matteo Viel, Julien Lesgourgues, Martin G. Haehnelt, Sabino Matarrese, and Antonio Riotto, Constraining warm dark matter candidates including sterile neutrinos and light gravitinos with WMAP and the Lyman-alpha forest,Phys. Rev. D71(2005) 063534, [astro-ph/0501562]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  74. [81]

    Alexey Boyarsky, Oleg Ruchayskiy, and Mikhail Shaposhnikov,The Role of sterile neutrinos in cosmology and astrophysics,Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.59(2009) 191–214, [arXiv:0901.0011]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  75. [82]

    Becker, James S

    Matteo Viel, George D. Becker, James S. Bolton, and Martin G. Haehnelt,Warm dark matter as a solution to the small scale crisis: New constraints from high redshift Lyman-αforest data,Phys. Rev. D88(2013) 043502, [arXiv:1306.2314]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  76. [83]

    Fuller, and Mitesh Patel,Sterile neutrino hot, warm, and cold dark matter,Phys

    Kevork Abazajian, George M. Fuller, and Mitesh Patel,Sterile neutrino hot, warm, and cold dark matter,Phys. Rev. D64(2001) 023501, [astro-ph/0101524]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  77. [84]

    Alexey Boyarsky, Julien Lesgourgues, Oleg Ruchayskiy, and Matteo Viel,Lyman-alpha constraints on warm and on warm-plus-cold dark matter models,JCAP05(2009) 012, [arXiv:0812.0010]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  78. [85]

    Dolgov and S.H

    A.D. Dolgov and S.H. Hansen,Massive sterile neutrinos as warm dark matter,Astropart. Phys.16(2002) 339–344, [hep-ph/0009083]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  79. [86]

    Vid Irˇ siˇ c et al.,Unveiling dark matter free streaming at the smallest scales with the high redshift Lyman-alpha forest,Phys. Rev. D109(2024), no. 4 043511, [arXiv:2309.04533]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  80. [87]

    Haehnelt, Matteo Viel, and James S

    Olga Garcia-Gallego, Vid Irˇ siˇ c, Martin G. Haehnelt, Matteo Viel, and James S. Bolton, Constraining mixed dark matter models with high-redshift Lyman-alpha forest data,Phys. Rev. D112(2025), no. 4 043502, [arXiv:2504.06367]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

Showing first 80 references.