Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 106 references

Neutrino sources can extract two-sided bounds on proton-proton and proton-photon cross sections, at energies beyond the reach of Earth-based colliders.

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

2026-08-01 12:55 UTC pith:6PWLECKR

load-bearing objection Good recipe, one bad bound: the TXS 10-year upper bound is an artifact of holding L_CR,min at the flare value. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.19254 v1 pith:6PWLECKR submitted 2026-07-21 hep-ph astro-ph.HEhep-ex

Astrophysical Neutrino Sources as Colliders

Carlos A. Arg\"uelles , P. S. Bhupal Dev , Bhaskar Dutta , Gonzalo Herrera , Nicholas Kamp , Jason Kumar , Stephan A. Meighen-Berger , Mudit Rai
show 1 more author
Ian M. Shoemaker
This is my paper
classification hep-ph astro-ph.HEhep-ex
keywords neutrino astronomyhadronic cross sectionsproton-proton interactionsphotohadronic interactionspoint-source neutrino emissionmulti-messenger constraintsultra-high-energy neutrinosunitarity bound
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 argues that a high-energy neutrino source can be treated as a hadron collider. The recipe: constrain every astrophysical ingredient in the neutrino-luminosity relation—the cosmic-ray power and the target column density—using electromagnetic observations and energy-conservation arguments, so that the inelastic pp or pγ cross section is the only quantity left free. Then the observed neutrino luminosity yields both an upper and a lower bound on that cross section. Applied to a flaring blazar, a nearby active galaxy, the Galactic plane, a stacked sample of Seyfert cores, and a 220 PeV neutrino event, the method gives allowed bands spanning center-of-mass energies from about 1 GeV to 10^5 GeV—beyond the LHC for pp and beyond HERA for pγ—and several of the bounds are stricter than the Froissart–Martin unitarity limit. The Standard Model cross section falls inside every allowed band, a nontrivial consistency check on both the particle physics and the source models.

Core claim

The central claim is that the neutrino luminosity of a source, Lν, is proportional to the product of the cosmic-ray luminosity LCR, the target column density N_eff, and the inelastic cross section σ, once the source is optically thin: Lν ≈ (3 ξν/κ) κ σ N_eff LCR. Since the energy fraction ξν and inelasticity κ are determined by standard production kinematics (computed here with event-level simulation, giving ξν ≈ 0.086–0.099 per flavor), the cross section can be solved for if LCR and N_eff are bounded independently. The paper bounds LCR from below by the power needed to sustain the observed neutrinos and X-rays and from above by the Eddington limit or its relativistic-beaming generalization;

What carries the argument

The carrying identity is the neutrino-luminosity relation Lν ≃ (3ξν/κ) f LCR, together with its optically-thin factorization f ≃ κ σ N_eff. The effective column density N_eff—the number of target protons or photons per unit area along the accelerated-proton path—is the object that must be pinned down by electromagnetic observations; the cosmic-ray luminosity LCR is the other input. Once both are bracketed independently, the observed Lν gives σ_hi and σ_lo from the same equation, making the cross section the only free parameter.

Load-bearing premise

The inversion works only if the source is optically thin and if the cosmic-ray luminosity and target column density can each be bounded independently of the cross section; for the flaring blazar, only an upper bound on the column density exists, so its upper cross-section bound rests on that assumption.

What would settle it

Identify the counterpart of the 220 PeV neutrino event and measure its X-ray column density and beaming-corrected power budget; if the resulting σ_pp band at √s ≈ 50–100 TeV excludes the roughly 100 mb Standard Model prediction, the recipe would be falsified for that source. A cheaper check is the optically-thin criterion: any source whose neutrino luminosity approaches 0.2 of its minimum possible cosmic-ray luminosity cannot be analyzed this way, and showing that a target violates this would invalidate its bounds.

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

If this is right

  • For a nearby active galaxy and the Galactic plane, the allowed σ_pp bands sit at √s ≈ 150–1400 GeV, overlapping collider energies but derived from a completely independent observational chain.
  • A stacked population of Seyfert cores tightens σ_pp to about 2.3–70 mb at √s ≈ 145–790 GeV and gives σ_pγ ≈ 0.08–9 mb, with the Standard Model lying inside the band.
  • A single 220 PeV neutrino event, if its source is identified and its target and power budget measured, would probe σ_pp near √s ≈ 50–100 TeV—beyond the LHC—and σ_pγ at √s ≈ 155–316 GeV, beyond HERA.
  • Several of the derived bands are more stringent than the Froissart–Martin unitarity bound, so a confirmed cross-section measurement above those bands would require a violation of that bound.
  • Projected ultra-high-energy neutrino observations with well-determined photon target fields could narrow σ_pγ to roughly a factor of two around the Standard Model value at √s ≈ 0.5–1.5 TeV.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The paper leaves implicit that the same inversion can be used as a self-consistency diagnostic: fixing σ to the Standard Model converts any future neutrino detection into a measurement of the source's cosmic-ray luminosity, and sources that demand super-Eddington power would flag errors in the assumed beaming or target geometry.
  • A natural extension is to use flare and quiescent epochs of the same source as independent data points; if the beaming and column-density assumptions are right, the two epochs should produce overlapping σ bands despite a large difference in luminosity.
  • Once many sources are catalogued, a global fit treating σ(√s) as one common function—rather than deriving separate bands per source—would break the per-source astrophysical degeneracies and effectively build a cross-section curve from astronomy alone.
  • The method could be inverted for source diagnostics: with the cross section already known, the same two-sided logic would bound target densities or cosmic-ray luminosities for any source, extending the tool beyond particle physics.

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 proposes a method to use neutrino point-source observations to place two-sided bounds on the inelastic pp and pγ cross sections. The central relation, Eq. (1), connects the all-flavor neutrino luminosity to the cosmic-ray luminosity, target column density, and cross section in the optically-thin limit; Eqs. (4)–(5) then translate allowed ranges of L_CR and N_eff into a band for σ. The method is applied to TXS 0506+056, NGC 1068, the Galactic plane, a stacked Seyfert sample, and the KM3-230213A event, with Pythia 8 used to compute the neutrino energy fraction ξ_ν. The authors conclude that the SM cross sections lie within the inferred bands and that several bounds are more stringent than unitarity limits at center-of-mass energies from ~1 GeV to ~10^5 GeV.

Significance. If the recipe is valid, this is a genuinely novel way to use astrophysical neutrino sources as hadronic colliders, complementing terrestrial measurements at energies that are otherwise hard to access. The paper is transparent about its assumptions, provides source-by-source tables, and includes dedicated Pythia calculations of ξ_ν; these are concrete strengths and make the analysis easy to audit and extend. However, the headline TXS 10-year bound is not robust, and the TXS two-sided claim rests on inputs that are not independently derived in the paper. The central idea remains publishable, but the affected claims need correction.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. II.C, Eq. (4)] The quoted 10-year TXS upper bound σ_pp≈0.5–70 mb uses the flare-derived L_CR,min≈2.6×10^48 erg/s together with L_ν^10yr≈5×10^45 erg/s, a factor ~25 lower. If L_CR,min is an energy-conservation floor, it must scale with L_ν; rescaling gives σ_hi≈L_ν^10yr/(3ξ_ν N_min L_CR,min^10yr)≈1/N_min≈10^4 mb for N_min=10^23 cm^-2, not 70 mb. Thus the claim that the 10-year average yields a tighter bound is an artifact of fixing L_CR,min at the flare value. The authors should either rescale L_CR,min with the time-averaged L_ν or withdraw the 10-year 'tighter' bound.
  2. [Sec. II.C, Table I] For TXS, the effective proton column is given only as an upper bound, N_p≲10^23–10^24 cm^-2, derived from variability and transparency arguments. Eq. (4) shows that an upper limit on σ_pp requires a lower bound N_p,min. The lower endpoint 10^23 cm^-2 is described as 'representative,' not derived. The abstract, Fig. 1, and conclusions nevertheless present a closed two-sided TXS band. This is a load-bearing gap: as written, TXS can rigorously provide only a lower bound on σ_pp unless an independent lower bound on N_p is established.
  3. [Sec. II.C] The stated L_CR,min≈2.6×10^48 erg/s is not what Eq. (1) gives from energy conservation. With L_ν≈1.2×10^47 erg/s and ξ_ν≈0.09, the condition f_pp≤1 requires L_CR,min≥κ L_ν/(3ξ_ν)≈2.2×10^47 erg/s (or L_ν/(3ξ_ν)≈4.4×10^47 erg/s if κ is not included), an order of magnitude below the quoted value. Since this quantity normalizes the TXS bounds, its derivation must be stated explicitly, e.g., if it incorporates X-ray/γ-ray constraints or a different definition of L_CR.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. VII] The sentence beginning 'Inverting the analysis; fixing σ to the SM prediction...' is syntactically broken and should be rewritten.
  2. [Appendix A] The pγ values of ξ_ν are not described consistently: '0.069 near threshold' at √s=2.2 GeV appears later as '0.07–0.11,' while the Δ-resonance value is 0.017 and some source √s bands extend down to 1.4 GeV. Please state how ξ_pγ is assigned or interpolated in the resonance region.
  3. [Table I and Sec. V] For KM3-230213A, the text adopts L_CR/L_ν∼20, while Table I says 'Upper limit from kinematics; CR luminosity uncertain without source association.' Clarify which value is used and how the projection is normalized.
  4. [Abstract and Sec. VI.C] The claim that 'several bounds are more stringent than unitarity limits' is not tied to specific entries in Fig. 1 or Fig. 2. Since other quoted upper bounds lie above the Froissart–Martin inelastic bound, please specify which constraints are meant.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Partial circularity in the TXS 10-year upper bound: the flare-derived L_CR,min is reused with a 25x smaller L_nu, so the 'tighter' 70 mb bound is mostly a luminosity ratio, not an independent cross-section measurement.

specific steps
  1. self definitional [Sec. II.C (TXS 0506+056) and Eq. (4)]
    "The minimum cosmic-ray luminosity is set by energy conservation: sustaining the observed neutrino output requires L_CR,min ≃2.6×10^48 ergs^-1. ... Averaged over the full∼10-year IceCube dataset, the time-integrated neutrino luminosity is L10yrν ≃5×10^45 ergs^-1 ... yielding a tighter two-sided bound σpp ≃0.5–70mb at the same √s range."

    From Eq. (4), σ_hi = Lν/(3 ξν N_min L_CR,min). The paper sets L_CR,min for TXS by energy conservation from the observed flare neutrino luminosity, i.e., from the same Eq. (1) that is later inverted for σ. It then inserts the 25-times-smaller 10-year Lν into the numerator while keeping the flare-derived L_CR,min in the denominator. The quoted 10-year bound is therefore just 0.04 times the flare bound: the claimed 'tighter' constraint is the ratio of the two measured neutrino luminosities, not an independent determination of σ. If L_CR,min were rescaled to the 10-year energy-conservation floor (∝ Lν), the upper bound would remain ~1/N_min ~ 10^4 mb rather than 70 mb. Thus the headline 'tighter than unitarity' TXS result is constructed from its own input rather than measured.

full rationale

The central inversion is not circular for most of the paper. Eq. (1), together with f_pp = κ σ N_eff in the optically thin limit, algebraically gives Eq. (4), and whether that constitutes a bound depends entirely on whether L_CR and N_eff are independently pinned. For NGC 1068, the Galactic plane, and the Seyfert stack, L_CR is taken from X-ray/bolometric luminosities, supernova energetics, or η_CR L_X, while N_eff comes from Thomson depth, Compton-thick columns, or B/C grammage—none of these are fitted to the neutrino luminosity being bounded. The Pythia-derived ξν is a Monte Carlo input, not a parameter fitted to the IceCube data, so its appearance in both the √s mapping and Eq. (4) is a consistency choice rather than a tautology. No load-bearing uniqueness theorem from the authors is invoked, and the comparison with PDG data and the Froissart–Martin bound is external. The one concrete circularity is the TXS 0506+056 10-year bound: the paper's L_CR,min is justified by the observed (flare) neutrino output, then held fixed while Lν is reduced by a factor ~25. Since σ_hi ∝ Lν/L_CR,min, the resulting 70 mb upper bound is mostly the 10-year/flare luminosity ratio, not an independent cross-section constraint. Rescaling L_CR,min to the 10-year energy-conservation floor would raise the upper bound to ~10^4 mb, erasing the claimed tightening. The paper itself flags the TXS optically-thin caveat (footnote 1) and the upper-bound-only N_eff determination, but those limitations do not address the L_CR,min scaling problem. Because this affects one headline result while the framework's other source-by-source bounds remain independently grounded, the overall circularity score is 4 rather than higher.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

7 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper does not postulate new particles or forces; the free parameters are the astrophysical priors (beaming ceiling, η_CR, τ_T, n_Rg, L_CR/L_ν for the projection) and the Pythia-derived ξ_ν. The central relation L_ν = (3ξ_ν/κ) f L_CR is standard, so the contribution is the inversion of that relation with bounded astrophysical inputs.

free parameters (7)
  • L_iso,CR,max for TXS 0506+056 (beaming-corrected ceiling) = 3.4e49 erg/s (2Γ^2 η L_Edd with Γ=15, η=2)
    Chosen by hand as a 'fiducial' beaming factor for BL Lac jets; the flare luminosity exceeds L_Edd by ~3, so this ceiling is needed to make the upper bound finite. The text acknowledges the CR luminosity is 'uncertain without source association.'
  • Γ_jet = 15, η_jet = 2 (TXS beaming parameters) = Γ_jet=15, η_jet=2
    Fiducial values chosen for the Blandford–Znajek/MAD beaming formula; the paper says Γ_jet ~ 10–20 and η_jet ~ 100–300%, so the choices are mid-range but not data-fitted.
  • η_CR ≡ L_CR/L_intr_X ∈ [1,10] for Seyfert galaxies = η_CR ∈ [1,10]
    Hand-set range relating cosmic-ray luminosity to intrinsic X-ray luminosity; the band width (~30) depends directly on this range.
  • τ_T ∈ [1,3] (coronal Thomson depth for Seyfert stack) = τ_T ∈ [1,3]
    Hand-set range from Fabian et al. [50] and Murase et al. [51]; sets N_p ∈ [1.5,4.5]×10^24 cm^-2.
  • n_Rg ∈ [3,30] (corona size in gravitational radii) = n_Rg ∈ [3,30]
    Hand-set range for the photon column density N_γ = L_X/(4π R c ε_X); directly sets the pγ bounds.
  • L_CR/L_ν = 20 (KM3-230213A standard-candle projection) = L_CR/L_ν = 20
    Assumed for the KM3-230213A band; the paper says 'CR luminosity is uncertain without source association.'
  • Kernel neutrino energy fraction ξ_ν(√s) from Pythia = ξ_pp_ν ≈ 0.086–0.099; ξ_pγ_ν ≈ 0.017–0.108
    Computed by the authors with Pythia 8.3 at 16 energies; used centrally in the √s mapping and in the cross-section bounds. It is a simulation output rather than a fit to data, but its exact settings are not fully specified and its dependence on the chosen tune is not analyzed.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption The relevant sources are optically thin to hadronic interactions (Σ_i σ_i N_i ≪ 1).
    Used in Secs. II and III (e.g., text after Eq. 2) to justify f_pp ≃ κ_pp σ_pp N_p and the linear inversion for σ. The paper argues L_ν ≲ 0.2 L_CR,min rules out the optically-thick limit, but for TXS the flare luminosity exceeds L_Edd before beaming corrections, so the assumption is not uniformly guaranteed.
  • domain assumption Each source's observed neutrino luminosity is produced predominantly by a single channel (pp or pγ).
    Invoked in Secs. II and III; the lower bounds are derived under the assumption that the entire neutrino luminosity is produced by the channel in question. The paper acknowledges this is an O(1) effect that can be weakened if one channel is heavily suppressed.
  • domain assumption The CR injection spectrum and target photon field are such that the luminosity-averaged neutrino energy can be mapped to √s via E_p = E_ν/ξ_ν and standard two-body kinematics.
    Used in Secs. II.B, II.C, Appendix A, and Table I. The paper notes the mean-ξ mapping is approximate and conservative, and quantifies spectral-width and Γ-dependence in Appendix B, so the assumption is explicit and partially validated.
  • domain assumption Pythia 8 minimum-bias event generation accurately describes the neutrino multiplicity and energy fractions for pp and pγ at √s up to 10^5 GeV.
    The ξ_ν values (App. A, Figs. 4–5) are used centrally; Pythia is an established MC generator but is not a machine-checked or fully data-anchored tool at all these energies, and no code is shipped.
  • standard math The Froissart–Martin bound with s0 = m_π and a factor-4 smaller inelastic bound is the correct unitarity ceiling for the comparisons made in Fig. 1 and Sec. VI.C.
    Used to state that several of the derived bounds are 'more stringent than unitarity limits'; standard result, though s0 is convention-dependent.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 26025 in / 10452 out tokens · 75308 ms · 2026-08-01T12:55:09.667955+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

High-energy neutrinos arise from processes at large center-of-mass energies, offering a window to test physics at comparable scales or beyond those accessible in collider experiments on Earth. Here, we present a recipe for extracting two-sided bounds on the inelastic $pp$ and $p\gamma$ cross sections from neutrino point-source data, by independently constraining every astrophysical input (cosmic-ray luminosities and target densities) through electromagnetic observations or theoretical arguments. The cross section is then the only remaining free parameter. Applying this framework to the IceCube associations with TXS~0506+056, NGC~1068, and the Galactic Plane, to a stacked population of eleven X-ray bright Seyfert galaxies, to the ultra-high-energy KM3NeT event KM3-230213A, and to projected observations of ultra-high-energy neutrinos, we obtain constraints that span center-of-mass energies from $\sqrt{s}\sim 1$ GeV to $\sim 10^{5}$ GeV, some of which are well beyond the reach of the LHC and, for the $p\gamma$ channel, beyond HERA. Several of these bounds are more stringent than unitarity limits.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.19254 by Bhaskar Dutta, Carlos A. Arg\"uelles, Gonzalo Herrera, Ian M. Shoemaker, Jason Kumar, Mudit Rai, Nicholas Kamp, P. S. Bhupal Dev, Stephan A. Meighen-Berger.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_7.png] view at source ↗

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

106 extracted references · 72 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    M. G. Aartsenet al.(IceCube), Neutrino emission from the direction of the blazar TXS 0506+056 prior to the IceCube-170922A alert, Science361, 147 (2018), arXiv:1807.08794 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  2. [2]

    Abbasiet al.(IceCube), Evidence for neutrino emis- sion from the nearby active galaxy NGC 1068, Science 378, 538 (2022), arXiv:2211.09972 [astro-ph.HE]

    R. Abbasiet al.(IceCube), Evidence for neutrino emis- sion from the nearby active galaxy NGC 1068, Science 378, 538 (2022), arXiv:2211.09972 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2022

  3. [3]

    Abbasiet al.(IceCube), Evidence for neutrino emis- sion from x-ray bright active galactic nuclei with icecube, Astrophys

    R. Abbasiet al.(IceCube), Evidence for neutrino emis- sion from x-ray bright active galactic nuclei with icecube, Astrophys. J. Lett. (2025), arXiv:2510.13403 [astro- ph.HE]

    arXiv 2025

  4. [4]

    Aielloet al.(KM3NeT), Observation of an ultra-high- energy cosmic neutrino with KM3NeT, Nature638, 376 (2025), [Erratum: Nature 640, E3 (2025)]

    S. Aielloet al.(KM3NeT), Observation of an ultra-high- energy cosmic neutrino with KM3NeT, Nature638, 376 (2025), [Erratum: Nature 640, E3 (2025)]

    2025

  5. [5]

    Adrianiet al.(KM3NeT), Ultrahigh-Energy Event KM3-230213A within the Global Neutrino Landscape, Phys

    O. Adrianiet al.(KM3NeT), Ultrahigh-Energy Event KM3-230213A within the Global Neutrino Landscape, Phys. Rev. X15, 031016 (2025), arXiv:2502.08173 [astro- ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  6. [6]

    C. A. Argüelles, F. Halzen, and N. Kurahashi, From the Dawn of Neutrino Astronomy to a New View of the Extreme Universe, Phys. Rev. X15, 030501 (2025), arXiv:2405.17623 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  7. [7]

    Herrera and K

    G. Herrera and K. Murase, Probing light dark matter through cosmic-ray cooling in active galactic nuclei, Phys. Rev. D110, L011701 (2024), arXiv:2307.09460 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  8. [8]

    R. A. Gustafson, G. Herrera, M. Mukhopadhyay, K. Murase, and I. M. Shoemaker, Cosmic-ray cooling in activegalactic nucleias anew probeof inelasticdark mat- ter, Phys. Rev. D111, L121303 (2025), arXiv:2408.08947 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  9. [9]

    A. G. De Marchi, A. Granelli, J. Nava, and F. Sala, Did IceCube discover dark matter around blazars?, Phys. Rev. D112, 043042 (2025), arXiv:2412.07861 [astro- ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  10. [10]

    A. K. Mishra, N. Liu, and C.-T. Lu, Probing gauged U(1) sub-GeV dark matter via cosmic ray cooling in active galactic nuclei, Phys. Dark Univ.49, 102050 (2025), arXiv:2504.03409 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  11. [11]

    Kantzas, F

    D. Kantzas, F. Calore, and M. Chianese, Cosmic-ray cooling by dark matter in astrophysical jets, (2025), arXiv:2509.18850 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  12. [12]

    Hussein and G

    A. Hussein and G. Herrera, Dark Matter-Electron Inter- actions Alter the Luminosity and Spectral Index of M87, (2025), arXiv:2510.12877 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  13. [13]

    S. A. Meighen-Berger, P. S. B. Dev, and M. Hostert, New Multi-messenger Probe of Dark Matter-Nucleon Interac- tions from Ultra-high Energy Cosmic Ray Acceleration, (2025), arXiv:2512.18093 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  14. [14]

    J.-W. Wang, A. Granelli, and P. Ullio, Direct Detec- tion Constraints on Blazar-Boosted Dark Matter, Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 221104 (2022), arXiv:2111.13644 [astro- ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  15. [15]

    A. G. De Marchi, A. Granelli, J. Nava, and F. Sala, Boosted dark matter versus dark matter-induced neutrinos from single and stacked blazars, (2025), arXiv:2507.12278 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  16. [16]

    R. A. Gustafson, G. Herrera, M. Mukhopadhyay, K. Murase, and I. M. Shoemaker, Cosmic-ray boosted inelastic dark matter from neutrino-emitting active galac- tic nuclei, (2025), arXiv:2508.20984 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  17. [17]

    C. A. Argüelles, A. Kheirandish, and A. C. Vincent, Imaging Galactic Dark Matter with High-Energy Cos- mic Neutrinos, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 201801 (2017), arXiv:1703.00451 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  18. [18]

    Abbasiet al.(IceCube), Searches for connections between dark matter and high-energy neutrinos with IceCube, JCAP10, 003, arXiv:2205.12950 [hep-ex]

    R. Abbasiet al.(IceCube), Searches for connections between dark matter and high-energy neutrinos with IceCube, JCAP10, 003, arXiv:2205.12950 [hep-ex]

    arXiv

  19. [19]

    J. M. Cline, S. Gao, F. Guo, Z. Lin, S. Liu, M. Puel, P. Todd, and T. Xiao, Blazar Constraints on Neutrino- Dark Matter Scattering, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 091402 (2023), arXiv:2209.02713 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  20. [20]

    Ferrer, G

    F. Ferrer, G. Herrera, and A. Ibarra, New constraints on the dark matter-neutrino and dark matter-photon scattering cross sections from TXS 0506+056, JCAP05, 057, arXiv:2209.06339 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  21. [21]

    Fujiwara and G

    M. Fujiwara and G. Herrera, Tidal disruption events and dark matter scatterings with neutrinos and photons, Phys. Lett. B851, 138573 (2024), arXiv:2312.11670 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  22. [22]

    Fujiwara, G

    M. Fujiwara, G. Herrera, and S. Horiuchi, Neu- trino Diffusion within Dark Matter Spikes, (2024), arXiv:2412.00805 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  23. [23]

    G. D. Zapata, J. Jones-Pérez, and A. M. Gago, Bounds on neutrino-DM interactions from TXS 0506+056 neu- trino outburst, JCAP07, 042, arXiv:2503.03823 [hep- ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  24. [24]

    Pompa and M

    F. Pompa and M. Sen, Shedding light on dark matter spikesthroughneutrino-darkmatterinteractions, (2025), arXiv:2508.10983 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  25. [25]

    Tseng and Y.-M

    P.-Y. Tseng and Y.-M. Yeh, Phenomenology of neutrino- dark matter interaction in DSNB and AGN, JCAP08, 038, arXiv:2412.08537 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  26. [26]

    Bertólez-Martínez, G

    T. Bertólez-Martínez, G. Herrera, P. Martínez-Miravé, and J. Terol Calvo, The Highest-Energy Neutrino Event Constrains Dark Matter-Neutrino Interactions, (2025), arXiv:2506.08993 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  27. [27]

    Mondol, S

    R. Mondol, S. Bouri, A. K. Saha, and R. Laha, Road through Darkness: Probing dark matter-neutrino inter- actions using KM3-230213A, (2025), arXiv:2506.19910 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  28. [28]

    Herrera, Plausible Indication of Gamma-Ray Ab- sorption by Dark Matter in NGC 1068, (2025), arXiv:2504.21560 [hep-ph]

    G. Herrera, Plausible Indication of Gamma-Ray Ab- sorption by Dark Matter in NGC 1068, (2025), arXiv:2504.21560 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  29. [29]

    P. S. B. Dev, B. Dutta, A. Karthikeyan, W. Maitra, L. E. Strigari, and A. Verma, ‘Dark’ Matter Effect as a Novel Solution to the KM3-230213A Puzzle, (2025), arXiv:2505.22754 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    Rink and M

    T. Rink and M. Sen, Constraints on pseudo-Dirac neutri- nos using high-energy neutrinos from NGC 1068, Phys. Lett. B851, 138558 (2024), arXiv:2211.16520 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  31. [31]

    Carloni, I

    K. Carloni, I. Martínez-Soler, C. A. Arguelles, K. S. Babu, and P. S. B. Dev, Probing pseudo-Dirac neutrinos 13 with astrophysical sources at IceCube, Phys. Rev. D109, L051702 (2024), arXiv:2212.00737 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  32. [32]

    Dixit, L

    K. Dixit, L. S. Miranda, and S. Razzaque, Searching for pseudo-dirac neutrinos from astrophysical sources in IceCube data, Eur. Phys. J. C85, 1481 (2025), arXiv:2406.06476 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2025

  33. [33]

    Carloni, Y

    K. Carloni, Y. Porto, C. A. Argüelles, P. S. B. Dev, and S. Jana, Signatures of quasi-Dirac neutrinos in dif- fuse high-energy astrophysical neutrino data, (2025), arXiv:2503.19960 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  34. [34]

    MacDonald, K

    M. MacDonald, K. Carloni, C. A. Argüelles, I. Martínez- Soler, and R. Alves Batista, Exploring New Prop- agation Scales With Galactic Neutrinos, (2025), arXiv:2512.10744 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  35. [35]

    Ettengruber and G

    M. Ettengruber and G. Herrera, New Tests of Low-Scale Quantum Gravity with Cosmic-Ray Collisions, (2025), arXiv:2510.11879 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  36. [36]

    Alvarez-Muniz, F

    J. Alvarez-Muniz, F. Halzen, T. Han, and D. Hooper, Phenomenology of high-energy neutrinos in low scale quantum gravity models, Phys. Rev. Lett.88, 021301 (2002), arXiv:hep-ph/0107057

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  37. [37]

    M. G. Aartsenet al.(IceCube), Measurement of the multi-TeV neutrino cross section with IceCube using Earth absorption, Nature551, 596 (2017), arXiv:1711.08119 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  38. [38]

    Bustamante and A

    M. Bustamante and A. Connolly, Extracting the Energy- DependentNeutrino-NucleonCrossSectionabove10TeV Using IceCube Showers, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 041101 (2019), arXiv:1711.11043 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  39. [39]

    Abbasiet al.(IceCube), Measurement of the high-energy all-flavor neutrino-nucleon cross section with IceCube, Phys

    R. Abbasiet al.(IceCube), Measurement of the high-energy all-flavor neutrino-nucleon cross section with IceCube, Phys. Rev. D104, 022001 (2021), arXiv:2011.03560 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2021

  40. [40]

    Y. Bai, K. Xie, and B. Zhou, Large Neutrino ”Collider”, (2025), arXiv:2510.13948 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  41. [41]

    Bertólez-Martínez and D

    T. Bertólez-Martínez and D. Hooper, Constraining The Neutrino-Nucleon Cross Section with the Ultrahigh- Energy KM3NeT Event, (2026), arXiv:2603.28941 [hep- ph]

    arXiv 2026

  42. [42]

    Palmisano, D

    S. Palmisano, D. Redigolo, M. Tammaro, and A. Tesi, The soft volume of ultra-high energy neutrinos experi- ments, (2026), arXiv:2607.13143 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  43. [43]

    S. R. Kelner, F. A. Aharonian, and V. V. Bugayov, Energy spectra of gamma-rays, electrons and neutri- nos produced at proton-proton interactions in the very high energy regime, Phys. Rev. D74, 034018 (2006), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 79, 039901 (2009)], arXiv:astro- ph/0606058

    arXiv 2006

  44. [44]

    Murase, M

    K. Murase, M. Ahlers, and B. C. Lacki, Testing the Hadronuclear Origin of PeV Neutrinos Observed with Ice- Cube, Phys. Rev. D88, 121301 (2013), arXiv:1306.3417 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  45. [45]

    P. Z. Skands, S. Carrazza, and J. Rojo, Tuning PYTHIA 8.1: the Monash 2013 Tune, Eur. Phys. J. C74, 3024 (2014), arXiv:1404.5630 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  46. [46]

    Keivaniet al., A Multimessenger Picture of the Flar- ing Blazar TXS 0506+056: implications for High-Energy Neutrino Emission and Cosmic Ray Acceleration, Astro- phys

    A. Keivaniet al., A Multimessenger Picture of the Flar- ing Blazar TXS 0506+056: implications for High-Energy Neutrino Emission and Cosmic Ray Acceleration, Astro- phys. J.864, 84 (2018), arXiv:1807.04537 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  47. [47]

    Murase, Hidden Hearts of Neutrino Active Galaxies, Astrophys

    K. Murase, Hidden Hearts of Neutrino Active Galaxies, Astrophys. J. Lett.941, L17 (2022), arXiv:2211.04460 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  48. [48]

    Inoue, D

    Y. Inoue, D. Khangulyan, and A. Doi, On the Origin of High-energy Neutrinos from NGC 1068: The Role of Nonthermal Coronal Activity, Astrophys. J. Lett.891, L33 (2020), arXiv:1909.02239 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  49. [49]

    M. Aguilaret al.(AMS), Precision Measurement of the Boron to Carbon Flux Ratio in Cosmic Rays from 1.9 GV to 2.6 TV with the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer on the International Space Station, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 231102 (2016)

    2016

  50. [50]

    A. C. Fabian, A. M. Lohfink, E. Kara, M. L. Parker, R. V. Vasudevan, and C. S. Reynolds, Properties of agn coronae in the nustar era, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 451, 4375 (2015)

    2015

  51. [51]

    Murase, S

    K. Murase, S. S. Kimura, and P. Mészáros, Hidden cores of active galactic nuclei as the origin of medium- energy neutrinos: Critical tests with the mev gamma- ray connection, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 011101 (2020), arXiv:1904.04226 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  52. [52]

    Sjöstrand, S

    T. Sjöstrand, S. Ask, J. R. Christiansen, R. Corke, N. De- sai, P. Ilten, S. Mrenna, S. Prestel, C. O. Rasmussen, and P. Z. Skands, An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2, Com- put. Phys. Commun.191, 159 (2015), arXiv:1410.3012 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  53. [53]

    Navaset al.(Particle Data Group), Review of particle physics, Phys

    S. Navaset al.(Particle Data Group), Review of particle physics, Phys. Rev. D110, 030001 (2024)

    2024

  54. [54]

    Martin, The Froissart bound for inelastic cross-sections, Phys

    A. Martin, The Froissart bound for inelastic cross-sections, Phys. Rev. D80, 065013 (2009), arXiv:0904.3724 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  55. [55]

    M. J. Kosset al., Bass. xxi. the data release 2 overview, Astrophys. J. Suppl.261, 1 (2022), arXiv:2207.12428 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  56. [56]

    C. M. Urry and P. Padovani, Unified schemes for radio- loud active galactic nuclei, Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac.107, 803 (1995), arXiv:astro-ph/9506063

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  57. [57]

    R. D. Blandford and R. L. Znajek, Electromagnetic extractions of energy from Kerr black holes, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.179, 433 (1977)

    1977

  58. [58]

    Tchekhovskoy, R

    A. Tchekhovskoy, R. Narayan, and J. C. McKinney, Efficient generation of jets from magnetically arrested accretion on rapidly spinning black holes, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.418, L79 (2011), arXiv:1108.0412 [astro- ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  59. [59]

    Ghisellini, F

    G. Ghisellini, F. Tavecchio, L. Maraschi, A. Celotti, and T. Sbarrato, The power of relativistic jets is larger than the luminosity of their accretion disks, Nature515, 376 (2014), arXiv:1411.5368 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  60. [60]

    Cerruti, A

    M. Cerruti, A. Zech, C. Boisson, G. Emery, S. In- oue, and J.-P. Lenain, Leptohadronic single-zone models for the electromagnetic and neutrino emission of TXS 0506+056, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.483, L12 (2019), arXiv:1807.04335 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  61. [61]

    Murase, F

    K. Murase, F. Oikonomou, and M. Petropoulou, Blazar Flares as an Origin of High-Energy Cosmic Neutrinos?, Astrophys. J.865, 124 (2018), arXiv:1807.04748 [astro- ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  62. [62]

    Celotti and G

    A. Celotti and G. Ghisellini, The power of blazar jets, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.385, 283 (2008), arXiv:0711.4112 [astro-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  63. [63]

    Marinucciet al., NuSTAR catches the unveiling nu- cleus of NGC 1068, Mon

    A. Marinucciet al., NuSTAR catches the unveiling nu- cleus of NGC 1068, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.456, L94 (2016), arXiv:1511.03503 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  64. [64]

    F. E. Baueret al., NuSTAR Spectroscopy of Multi- Component X-ray Reflection from NGC 1068, Astrophys. J.812, 116 (2015), arXiv:1411.0670 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  65. [65]

    Abbasiet al.(IceCube), Observation of high-energy neutrinos from the Galactic plane, Science380, adc9818 14 (2023), arXiv:2307.04427 [astro-ph.HE]

    R. Abbasiet al.(IceCube), Observation of high-energy neutrinos from the Galactic plane, Science380, adc9818 14 (2023), arXiv:2307.04427 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2023

  66. [66]

    A. W. Strong, T. A. Porter, S. W. Digel, G. Jóhannes- son, P. Martin, I. V. Moskalenko, E. J. Murphy, and E. Orlando, Global Cosmic-Ray-Related Luminosity and Energy Budget of the Milky Way, Astrophys. J. Lett. 722, L58 (2010)

    2010

  67. [67]

    Adrianiet al.(CALET), Measurement of the Cosmic- Ray Boron-to-Carbon Flux Ratio with CALET on the In- ternational Space Station, Phys

    O. Adrianiet al.(CALET), Measurement of the Cosmic- Ray Boron-to-Carbon Flux Ratio with CALET on the In- ternational Space Station, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 251103 (2022)

    2022

  68. [68]

    Mucke, J

    A. Mucke, J. P. Rachen, R. Engel, R. J. Protheroe, and T. Stanev, On photohadronic processes in astrophysical environments, Publ. Astron. Soc. Austral.16, 160 (1999), arXiv:astro-ph/9808279

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  69. [69]

    W. H. Baumgartner, J. Tueller, C. B. Markwardt, G. K. Skinner, S. Barthelmy, R. F. Mushotzky, P. A. Evans, and N. Gehrels, The 70 month swift-bat all-sky hard x-ray survey, Astrophys. J. Suppl.207, 19 (2013), arXiv:1212.3336 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  70. [70]

    M. G. Aartsenet al.(IceCube-Gen2), IceCube-Gen2: the window to the extreme Universe, J. Phys. G48, 060501 (2021), arXiv:2008.04323 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2021

  71. [71]

    Alvarez-Munizet al.(GRAND), The Giant Radio Array for Neutrino Detection (GRAND): Science and De- sign, Sci

    J. Alvarez-Munizet al.(GRAND), The Giant Radio Array for Neutrino Detection (GRAND): Science and De- sign, Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron.63, 219501 (2020), arXiv:1810.09994 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  72. [72]

    A. N. Otte, Trinity: An Air-Shower Imaging System for the Detection of Ultrahigh Energy Neutrinos, Phys. Rev. D99, 083012 (2019), arXiv:1811.09287 [astro-ph.IM]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  73. [73]

    D. J. Fixsen, The temperature of the cosmic microwave background, The Astrophysical Journal707, 916–920 (2009)

    2009

  74. [74]

    V. A. Acciariet al.(MAGIC), Measurement of the extra- galactic background light using MAGIC and Fermi-LAT gamma-ray observations of blazars up to z = 1, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.486, 4233 (2019), arXiv:1904.00134 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  75. [75]

    Domínguez, J

    A. Domínguez, J. R. Primack, D. J. Rosario, F. Prada, R. C. Gilmore, S. M. Faber, D. C. Koo, R. S. Somerville, M. A. Pérez-Torres, P. Pérez-González, J.-S. Huang, M. Davis, P. Guhathakurta, P. Barmby, C. J. Con- selice, M. Lozano, J. A. Newman, and M. C. Cooper, Extragalactic background light inferred from AEGIS galaxy-SED-type fractions, Mon. Not. R. Ast...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  76. [76]

    Amaldiet al.(CERN-Pisa-Rome-Stony Brook), New Measurements of Proton Proton Total Cross-Section at the CERN Intersecting Storage Rings, Phys

    U. Amaldiet al.(CERN-Pisa-Rome-Stony Brook), New Measurements of Proton Proton Total Cross-Section at the CERN Intersecting Storage Rings, Phys. Lett. B62, 460 (1976)

    1976

  77. [77]

    Avilaet al.(E811), A Measurement of the proton- antiproton total cross-section at√s = 1.8-TeV, Phys

    C. Avilaet al.(E811), A Measurement of the proton- antiproton total cross-section at√s = 1.8-TeV, Phys. Lett. B445, 419 (1999)

    1999

  78. [78]

    Aaboudet al.(ATLAS), Measurement of the Inelastic Proton-Proton Cross Section at√s = 13TeV with the ATLAS Detector at the LHC, Phys

    M. Aaboudet al.(ATLAS), Measurement of the Inelastic Proton-Proton Cross Section at√s = 13TeV with the ATLAS Detector at the LHC, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 182002 (2016), arXiv:1606.02625 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  79. [79]

    Chatrchyanet al.(CMS), Measurement of the inelastic proton-proton cross section at√s = 7TeV, Phys

    S. Chatrchyanet al.(CMS), Measurement of the inelastic proton-proton cross section at√s = 7TeV, Phys. Lett. B722, 5 (2013), arXiv:1210.6718 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  80. [80]

    Antchevet al.(TOTEM), First measurement of elas- tic, inelastic and total cross-section at√s = 13TeV by TOTEM and overview of cross-section data at LHC en- ergies, Eur

    G. Antchevet al.(TOTEM), First measurement of elas- tic, inelastic and total cross-section at√s = 13TeV by TOTEM and overview of cross-section data at LHC en- ergies, Eur. Phys. J. C79, 103 (2019), arXiv:1712.06153 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

Showing first 80 references.