Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 10 minor 138 references

Community Report from the 2025 SNOLAB Future Projects Workshop

T0 review · 1 major / 10 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This community report argues that experiments proposed for SNOLAB over the next 15 years will exceed the laboratory's underground capacity, forcing a physical expansion of the deepest cleanroom lab in the world.

desk verdict A thorough community roadmap for SNOLAB, useful as a survey of future directions, but its key space-claim conclusion outruns the evidence it assembles. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.11368 v3 pith:DZLVE5NI submitted 2025-07-15 hep-ex physics.ins-det

M. D. Diamond , P. Abbamonte , A. Arvanitaki , D. M. Asner , D. Balut , D. Baxter , C. Blanco , D. Boreham
show 49 more authors
M. Boulay B. Broerman T. Brunner E. Caden A. Chavarria M. Chen J. P. Davis A. Drlica-Wagner J. Estrada N. Fatemighomi J. Foster D. Freedman C. Gao J. Hall S. Hall W. Halperin M. Hirschel N. Hoch Z. Hong A. Ianni C. Jillings D. Johnson Y. Kahn C. B. Krauss T. Laframboise M. Lai M. R. Lapointe B. Lillard W.H. Lippincott H. Ma E. Marrufo Villalpando K. Mistry M. Nguyen J. Oh A. Radick H. Reaume B. Roach J. Schütte-Engel S. Scorza J. W. Scott S. J. Sekula D. Sinclair C. Thome L. Thompson J. Tiffenberg K. J. Vetter A. Williams L. A. Winslow M. Wurm
This is my paper
classification hep-exphysics.ins-det
keywords SNOLABdeepundergroundlaboratorydarkmatterdirectdetectionneutrinolessdoublebetadecayliquidnoblegasdetectorsbiologyquantumsensingscientificinfrastructureplanning
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

SNOLAB asked its user community what the laboratory should host over the next 15 years, and this report collects the answer: a portfolio that runs from gram-scale quantum sensors and underground biology experiments up to a 25,000-tonne hybrid neutrino detector and a 400-tonne liquid argon dark matter machine. The report's central conclusion is that these projects together demand more than the laboratory currently has—more underground space, including an entirely new cavern for kilotonne-scale detectors; new utilities such as cryogenic distillation columns, radon-reduced air, and large-scale noble-liquid storage; and personnel with skills the lab does not yet employ in depth. If the report is right, SNOLAB must physically expand its underground campus and broaden from a dark-matter-and-neutrino site into a multi-disciplinary underground science facility. The practical stakes are where the world's most sensitive rare-event experiments get built in the 2030s and 2040s.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by a structured community-input process. The 2025 Future Projects Workshop posed four guiding questions to every contributor—SNOLAB's role over the next 15 years, where the project fits in the field, its anticipated footprint and timeline, and its construction-versus-operations personnel needs—and the report aggregates the answers into the Section 7 "Summary of Requested Capabilities." That list is the load-bearing object of the paper: each entry is tied to a project section, and the capacity-exceedance statement is the sum over all entries. The implicit arithmetic is that large projects with overlapping schedules—the Cryopit staging of nEXO 2.0, the water-tank reuse for DarkSide-LowMass, the 400-tonne ARGO cryostat, the XLZD observatory, and the Theia cavern—cannot fit inside the current 5000 square metre cleanroom campus, so the laboratory must plan additional drifts, ladder labs, and at least one new cavern.

What would settle it

An itemized space audit would settle the claim: map each project's stated footprint—nEXO 2.0 in the Cryopit, DarkSide-LowMass and ARGOLite inside the DEAP-3600 water tank, ARGO's 400-tonne cryostat with water shield, XLZD's cryostat, Theia's new cavern, plus the Shaft 8 distillation column, noble-liquid storage, and expanded CUTE—against SNOLAB's current 5000 square metres of cleanroom and existing ladder-lab and cube-hall volumes; if everything fits without new excavation, the central conclusion fails. A timeline check works too: if by 2030 the funded project list has not grown beyond the currently committed experiments, the claimed exceedance has not yet materialized.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Section 7 of the report states the claim in one sentence: "The aggregate of the space anticipated in this report for new experiments, new utilities, and new underground capabilities will exceed the current underground capacity." Each project section supplies a concrete footprint that feeds this sum: nEXO 2.0 staged in the Cryopit with a construction start aimed at 2026, DarkSide-LowMass and ARGOLite reusing the decommissioned DEAP-3600 water tank, ARGO as a 400-tonne liquid argon detector with an outer cryostat and water shield, XLZD as a 60–80 tonne liquid xenon observatory whose site decision is expected in 2026, and Theia needing an entirely new detector cavern for 25,000 tonnes of hybrid scintillator. These footprints convert into a requested-capability list: a cryogenic distillation column at Shaft 8 for argon and xenon, radon-reduced air in the Cube Hall, large-scale cryogenic storage and recovery, underground crystal growth and metal fabrication, an additional cryogenic test facility beyond CUTE, a Level-III biology laboratory, and expanded engineering and scientific staff. The report also gathers forward-looking proposals—superradiant detection of the cosmic neutrino background, tellurium in liquid scintillator toward normal-ordering neutrino mass sensitivity, and a superfluid-helium gravitational wave detector—that it argues SNOLAB's low-background environment is uniquely placed to host.

Load-bearing premise

The space and capability projections assume the proposed projects are funded and built on their stated timelines—nEXO 2.0 with a construction start "ideally in 2026," DarkSide-20k commissioned by early 2028, XLZD's site decision in 2026—so a wave of funding shortfalls or schedule slips would leave the capacity-exceedance claim overstated.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • SNOLAB must plan an underground expansion—additional drifts and ladder labs plus at least one new cavern for kilotonne-scale detectors such as Theia—within its 15-year planning horizon.
  • New shared utilities become preconditions for the proposed program: a cryogenic distillation column for argon and xenon, radon-reduced air in the Cube Hall, large-scale noble-liquid storage and recovery, and a second cryogenic testing facility beyond CUTE.
  • The build-out requires new personnel and skills the lab does not currently have in depth, including high-pressure gas expertise, millikelvin cryogenic and low-vibration platforms, and expanded material-screening capacity.
  • Construction schedules will collide unless sequencing is planned: DarkSide-20k commissioning around 2028, nEXO 2.0 aiming for a 2026 construction start, and XLZD moving toward a mid-2030s observatory compete for the same underground space and utilities.
  • SNOLAB's identity shifts from a dark-matter and neutrino laboratory toward a multi-disciplinary underground science campus, with underground biology, quantum sensing, and gravitational wave R&D drawing on the same low-background infrastructure.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The report leaves implicit that its expansion case interacts with a competitive site selection: XLZD plans to choose among SNOLAB, Boulby, LNGS, and SURF in 2026, so the credibility of SNOLAB's expansion plan could itself influence where the flagship xenon observatory is built.
  • The capacity-exceedance claim could be tested quantitatively, but the report does not publish the arithmetic; a floor-area and volume audit summing each project's stated footprint against the current 5000 square metre cleanroom and ladder-lab volume is a natural next step.
  • If both nEXO 2.0 and the xenon-based programs (NEXT, XLZD) come to SNOLAB, their shared needs for xenon storage, recovery, and enrichment could justify one consolidated facility; the report lists these needs project-by-project, so the true utility footprint could shrink with sharing or grow if each project builds its own.
  • Funding delays would rebalance rather than empty the proposed portfolio: because the report advocates a mix of small, mid, and large projects with different timescales, a slip in one flagship would free space and utilities for the smaller program rather than invalidating the expansion argument entirely.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

1 major / 10 minor

Summary. This manuscript is the community report of the 2025 SNOLAB Future Projects Workshop held April 29–May 1, 2025, produced in the context of the 15-year planning exercise requested by the Canada Foundation for Innovation. It compiles the status of SNOLAB and peer underground laboratories (CJPL, LNGS, LSM), 23 workshop contributions and additional community input covering small- and mid-scale proposals (underground biology, superfluid-helium resonant-mass detectors, scintillating bubble chambers, cryogenic solid-state detectors, skipper-CCD efforts, light-dark-matter concepts, bolometric detectors) and large-scale proposals (SNO+ tellurium loading, DEAP-3600, DarkSide-20k and DarkSide-LowMass, ARGOLite and ARGO, nEXO 2.0, NEXT, XLZD, Theia), plus forward-looking perspectives on neutrinoless double beta decay and the cosmic neutrino background. Section 7 aggregates the requested capabilities and asserts that the aggregate underground space demanded by the proposed projects will exceed SNOLAB's current underground capacity.

Significance. If the report is used as intended, it is a useful and broadly representative evidence base for SNOLAB's CFI planning exercise. Its strengths are explicit: contributions are attributed to their proponents, the descriptive material is generally consistent with the cited literature, and several key uncertainties are acknowledged in the body (XLZD site selection, nEXO funding dependence, shifting NEXT technology choices, DSLM background unknowns, ARGO design dependence on DS20k results). The forward-looking sensitivity projections are the collaborations' own numbers and are not independently verifiable at this stage; that is appropriate for this genre as long as they are not mistaken for commitments. Credit is also due for the accessible public-facing summary in Section 1 and for the structured summary bullets that let readers match each claim to its cited source. The main weakness is that the report's one quantitative-looking conclusion, the Section 7 capacity claim, is not backed by the footprint inventory the workshop itself solicited, and it sums proposals that are mutually exclusive or uncommitted.

major comments (1)
  1. [Section 7 (with Section 2 and Sections 5.4–5.9)] The skeptic's concern about Section 7 is, in my reading, justified. The central planning claim that the aggregate of the space anticipated for new experiments, utilities, and capabilities will exceed the current underground capacity is asserted without the quantitative basis that would make it a planning result. The workshop guiding questions in Section 2 explicitly solicited footprint information, yet the report contains no footprint table, no comparison against the 5000 m^2 cleanroom and existing cavern volumes given in Section 3.1, and no statement of which projects are assumed to coexist. The projects being summed are largely uncommitted or mutually exclusive: XLZD's site is undecided among four laboratories with a decision expected only in 2026 (Section 5.8); nEXO 2.0 and NEXT both identify the Cryopit as their preferred space (Sections 5.6 and 5.7); DarkSide-LowMass, ARGOLite, and ARGO all plan to reuse the DEAP-3600 water tank (Sections 5.4 and 5.5); ARGO's detector technology and hence its footprint are explicitly design-dependent (Section 5.5); and Theia alone would require an entirely new kilotonne-scale cavern (Section 5.9). Section 5.7 itself concedes that the technology choices and site assignments are in significant flux. I recommend adding a table listing each project's footprint, cavern class, timeline, and commitment status, and then either restricting the aggregate statement to a coherent coexistence scenario or recasting it as conditional, for example: if the projects described here were all realized at SNOLAB, the aggregate demand would exceed current capacity.
minor comments (10)
  1. [Section 3.2] The total volume of CJPL-II is given as about 300 km^3; three hundred cubic kilometres is physically impossible and is inconsistent with the four 14 m x 14 m x 130 m halls described in the same paragraph, so this should presumably read 300,000 m^3.
  2. [Section 3.1] The integrated muon flux at SNOLAB is quoted as about 0.3 m^-2 s^-1, which conflicts with commonly quoted values near 3 x 10^-6 m^-2 s^-1 (or 0.27 m^-2 day^-1) and would place SNOLAB above, not below, CJPL; please check the units and the value against reference [3].
  3. [Section 3.3.2] The sentence beginning 'Thirs if the Enrico Bellotti Ion Beam Facility' contains a typo and should read 'Third is the ...'.
  4. [Section 3.3.4] The first summary bullet describes LNGS as 'the largest in Europe with 1400 of rock overburden'; the units are missing (the main text gives 3,800 m water equivalent) and the summary should match the main text.
  5. [Section 4.3] The phrase 'Thomson scattering backgrounds from the cavern walls' should presumably refer to Compton scattering (or gamma-ray) backgrounds; Thomson scattering of MeV photons is not the relevant process for the stated shielding problem.
  6. [Section 4.5] The sentence 'will be operated in a an existing cryogenic vessel' has a typo; it should read 'in an existing cryogenic vessel'.
  7. [Section 5.4] The word 'decomissioning' should be spelled 'decommissioning'.
  8. [Section 1 vs Section 3.1] The public summary states that SNOLAB hosts 1,200 scientists while Section 3.1 reports a user community of 1,137 researchers; these numbers should be reconciled.
  9. [Section 5.2, Figure 8 caption] The caption statement that the x-axis is plotted as the expected half-life sensitivity weighted by precisely calculable phase space factors is difficult to parse; please rewrite the caption so the plotted quantity is clear.
  10. [Section 6.1] The phrase 'The objective of the this study' contains a typo; it should read 'The objective of this study'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the report is a community-solicitation summary, not a derivation chain, and its few self-citations are descriptive references to published external results.

full rationale

This paper is a community workshop report that explicitly 'collects input from the community' (Abstract) and states that Section 7 is 'a collection of the additional capabilities or facilities, implied or suggested by the authors of this community report.' It makes no first-principles predictions and contains no fitted parameters, no equations whose outputs equal their inputs, and no uniqueness theorem invoked to force a choice. The only notable self-citation is in Section 6.3, where the author cites her own prior work [137] for 'superradiant interactions' of the cosmic neutrino background; that citation points to a peer-reviewed, externally published Physical Review D article, is used descriptively to motivate a quantum-sensing program, and does not bear the weight of the report's conclusions. The Section 7 statement that aggregate requested space 'will exceed the current underground capacity' is qualitative and unsupported by a quantitative footprint inventory, but that is a planning-evidence concern, not a circularity: the conclusion is not defined into existence by the inputs, nor does any derivation reduce to its own assumptions. No self-definitional, fitted-input-as-prediction, self-citation-load-bearing, ansatz-smuggling, or renaming pattern is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 1 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters or invented entities; the report relies on the domain assumption that workshop input is representative, and on the factual claims in cited references.

assumptions (1)
  • domain assumption The community input collected at the 2025 FPW is representative of the broader SNOLAB user community.
    The report uses workshop participation and written contributions to project the future needs of the laboratory; if the attendees are unrepresentative, the capability list in Section 7 may miss key needs.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Community Report from the 2025 SNOLAB Future Projects Workshop." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DZLVE5NI

@misc{pith2026250711368,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Community Report from the 2025 SNOLAB Future Projects Workshop},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DZLVE5NI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.11368}
}
read the original abstract

SNOLAB hosts a biannual Future Projects Workshop (FPW) with the goal of encouraging future project stakeholders to present ideas, concepts, and needs for experiments or programs that could one day be hosted at SNOLAB. The 2025 FPW was held in the larger context of a 15-year planning exercise requested by the Canada Foundation for Innovation. This report collects input from the community, including both contributions to the workshop and contributions that could not be scheduled in the workshop but nonetheless are important to the community.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

138 extracted references · 36 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    rep., SNOLAB (2024)

    SNOLAB, 2023–2024 Annual Report, Tech. rep., SNOLAB (2024). URL https://www.snolab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/ 2023-2024-Annual-Report_Final_RGB-2.pdf

    2024

  2. [2]

    N. J. T. Smith, The SNOLAB deep underground facility, Eur. Phys. J. Plus 127 (2012) 108. doi:10.1140/epjp/i2012-12108-9

    doi:10.1140/epjp/i2012-12108-9 2012

  3. [3]

    Woodley, A

    W. Woodley, A. Fedynitch, M.-C. Piro, Cosmic Ray Muons in Laboratories Deep Underground (2024). arXiv:2406.10339, doi:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.110.063006. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.10339

    arXiv 2024

  4. [4]

    Lawson, Low Background Measurement Program at SNOLAB, PoS TAUP2023 (2024) 303

    I. Lawson, Low Background Measurement Program at SNOLAB, PoS TAUP2023 (2024) 303. doi:10.22323/1.441.0303

    work page doi:10.22323/1.441.0303 2024

  5. [5]

    Camus, et al., CUTE: A Cryogenic Underground TEst facility at SNOLAB, Frontiers in Physics 11 (Jan

    P. Camus, et al., CUTE: A Cryogenic Underground TEst facility at SNOLAB, Frontiers in Physics 11 (Jan. 2024). doi:10.3389/fphy.2023.1319879. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphy.2023.1319879

    arXiv 2024

  6. [6]

    J. P. Cheng, K.-J. Kang, J.-M. Li, J. Li, Y.-J. Li, Q. Yue, Z. Zeng, Y.-H. Chen, S.-Y. Wu, X.-D. Ji, H. T. Wong, The China Jinping Underground Laboratory and Its Early Science, Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science (67) (2017) 231–251. doi:10.1146/annurev-nucl-102115-044842

    doi:10.1146/annurev-nucl-102115-044842 2017

  7. [7]

    doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1468/1/012070

    Ma, Hao and She, Ze and Liu, Zhongzhi and Yang, Litao and Yue, Qian and Zeng, Zhi and Xue, Tao (for CDEX Collaboration), Results of direct dark matter detection with CDEX experiment at CJPL, Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1468 (1) (2020) 012070. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1468/1/012070

    doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1468/1/012070 2020

  8. [8]

    Cui, et al., Dark Matter Results from 54-Ton-Day Exposure of PandaX-II Experiment, Physical Review Letters 119 (18) (2017) 181302

    X. Cui, et al., Dark Matter Results from 54-Ton-Day Exposure of PandaX-II Experiment, Physical Review Letters 119 (18) (2017) 181302. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.181302

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.119.181302 2017

Show all 138 references
  1. [9]

    J. Chen, Z. Zeng, H. Ma, M. Jing, H. Zhong, H. Cao, H. Zhang, J. Li, J. Cheng, Background simulation of a low background gamma ray spectrometer with an array of five germanium detectors, Applied Radiation and Isotopes 220 (2025) 111748. doi:10.1016/j.apradiso.2025.111748

    2025

  2. [10]

    H. Ma, W. Dai, Z. Zeng, T. Xue, L. Yang, Q. Yue, J. Cheng, Status and prospect of China Jinping Underground Laboratory, Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2156 (1) (2021) 012170. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2156/1/012170

    2021 doi

  3. [11]

    Zhang, et al., Dark matter direct search sensitivity of the PandaX-4T experiment, Science China Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy 62 (3) (2018) 31011

    H. Zhang, et al., Dark matter direct search sensitivity of the PandaX-4T experiment, Science China Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy 62 (3) (2018) 31011. doi:10.1007/s11433-018-9259-0. Summer 2025 SNOLAB-STR-2025-006 Page 71 of 83

    2018 doi

  4. [12]

    Planel, J

    G. Planel, J. Soleilhavoup, R. Tixador, F. Croute, G. Richoilley, Demonstration of a stimulating effect of natural ionizing radiation and of very low radiation doses on cell multiplication, in: Biological and environmental effects of low-level radiation, IAEA, 1976

    1976

  5. [13]

    M. R. Lapointe, T. Laframboise, J. Pirkkanen, T. Tai, S. J. Lees, S. R. Santa Maria, S. Tharmalingam, D. R. Boreham, C. Thome, Protracted exposure to a sub-background radiation environment negatively impacts the anhydrobiotic recovery of desiccated yeast sentinels, Health Phys...

    2023

  6. [14]

    Antonelli, M

    F. Antonelli, M. Belli, M. Pinto, O. Sapora, E. Sorrentino, G. Simone, M. Tabocchini, F. Amicarelli, L. C. De Virgiliis, M. Carbone, et al., Pulex: Influence of environment radiation background on biochemistry and biology of cultured cells and on their response to genotoxic ag...

    2008

  7. [15]

    Conter, D

    A. Conter, D. Dupouy, H. Planel, Demonstration of a biological effect of natural ionizing radiations, International Journal of Radiation Biology and Related Studies in Physics, Chemistry and Medicine 43 (4) (1983) 421–432

    1983

  8. [16]

    Castillo, X

    H. Castillo, X. Li, G. B. Smith, Deinococcus radiodurans UWO298 dependence on background radiation for optimal growth, Frontiers in Genetics 12 (2021) 644292

    2021

  9. [17]

    Porrazzo, G

    A. Porrazzo, G. Esposito, D. Grifoni, G. Cenci, P. Morciano, M. A. Tabocchini, Reduced environmental dose rates are responsible for the increased susceptibility to radiation-induced DNA damage in larval neuroblasts of drosophila grown inside the LNGS underground laboratory, In...

    2022

  10. [18]

    Zarubin, A

    M. Zarubin, A. Gangapshev, Y. Gavriljuk, V. Kazalov, E. Kravchenko, First transcriptome profiling of D. melanogaster after development in a deep underground low radiation background laboratory, PLoS One 16 (8) (2021) e0255066

    2021

  11. [19]

    Castillo, D

    H. Castillo, D. Schoderbek, S. Dulal, G. Escobar, J. Wood, R. Nelson, G. Smith, Stress induction in the bacteria Shewanella oneidensis and Deinococcus radiodurans in response to below-background ionizing radiation, International journal of radiation biology 91 (9) (2015) 749–756

    2015

  12. [20]

    Castillo, X

    H. Castillo, X. Li, F. Schilkey, G. B. Smith, Transcriptome analysis reveals a stress response of Shewanella oneidensis deprived of background levels of ionizing radiation, PloS one 13 (5) (2018) e0196472

    2018

  13. [21]

    Fischietti, E

    M. Fischietti, E. Fratini, D. Verzella, D. Vecchiotti, D. Capece, B. Di Francesco, G. Esposito, M. Balata, L. Ioannuci, P. Sykes, et al., Low radiation environment switches the overgrowth-induced cell apoptosis toward autophagy, Frontiers in Public Health 8 (2021) 594789

    2021

  14. [22]

    Kawanishi, K

    M. Kawanishi, K. Okuyama, K. Shiraishi, Y. Matsuda, R. Taniguchi, N. Shiomi, Summer 2025 SNOLAB-STR-2025-006 Page 72 of 83 M. Yonezawa, T. Yagi, Growth retardation of Paramecium and mouse cells by shielding them from background radiation, Journal of radiation research 53 (3) (...

    2012

  15. [23]

    Carbone, M

    M. Carbone, M. Pinto, F. Antonelli, F. Amicarelli, M. Balata, M. Belli, L. Conti Devirgiliis, L. Ioannucci, S. Nisi, O. Sapora, et al., The Cosmic Silence experiment: on the putative adaptive role of environmental ionizing radiation, Radiation and Environmental Biophysics 48 (...

    2009

  16. [24]

    Satta, F

    L. Satta, F. Antonelli, M. Belli, O. Sapora, G. Simone, E. Sorrentino, M. Tabocchini, F. Amicarelli, C. Ara, M. Cer` u, et al., Influence of a low background radiation environment on biochemical and biological responses in V79 cells, Radiation and environmental biophysics 41 (...

    2002

  17. [25]

    G. B. Smith, Y. Grof, A. Navarrette, R. A. Guilmette, Exploring biological effects of low level radiation from the other side of background, Health physics 100 (3) (2011) 263–265

    2011

  18. [26]

    Planel, J

    H. Planel, J. Soleilhavoup, R. Tixador, G. Richoilley, A. Conter, F. Croute, C. Caratero, Y. Gaubin, Influence on cell proliferation of background radiation or exposure to very low, chronic gamma radiation, Health physics 52 (5) (1987) 571–578

    1987

  19. [27]

    Morciano, F

    P. Morciano, F. Cipressa, A. Porrazzo, G. Esposito, M. A. Tabocchini, G. Cenci, Fruit flies provide new insights in low-radiation background biology at the INFN Underground Gran Sasso National Laboratory (LNGS), Radiation Research 190 (3) (2018) 217–225

    2018

  20. [28]

    W. A. Van Voorhies, H. A. Castillo, C. N. Thawng, G. B. Smith, The phenotypic and transcriptomic response of the caenorhabditis elegans nematode to background and below-background radiation levels, Frontiers in Public Health 8 (2020) 581796

    2020

  21. [29]

    Fratini, C

    E. Fratini, C. Carbone, D. Capece, G. Esposito, G. Simone, M. Tabocchini, M. Tomasi, M. Belli, L. Satta, Low-radiation environment affects the development of protection mechanisms in V79 cells, Radiation and Environmental Biophysics 54 (2015) 183–194

    2015

  22. [30]

    Satta, G

    L. Satta, G. Augusti-Tocco, R. Ceccarelli, A. Esposito, M. Fiore, P. Paggi, I. Poggesi, R. Ricordy, G. Scarsella, E. Cundari, Low environmental radiation background impairs biological defence of the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae to chemical radiomimetic agents, Mutation Resea...

    1995

  23. [31]

    T. D. Luckey, Ionizing radiation promotes protozoan reproduction, Radiation research 108 (2) (1986) 215–221

    1986

  24. [32]

    O. D. Aguiar, Past, present and future of the Resonant-Mass gravitational wave detectors, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics 11 (1) (2011) 1. Summer 2025 SNOLAB-STR-2025-006 Page 73 of 83

    2011

  25. [33]

    Weber, Detection and generation of gravitational waves, Phys

    J. Weber, Detection and generation of gravitational waves, Phys. Rev. 117 (1) (1960) 306

    1960

  26. [34]

    B. P. Abbott, et al., Observation of gravitational waves from a binary black hole merger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (6) (2016) 061102

    2016

  27. [35]

    Singh, L

    S. Singh, L. De Lorenzo, I. Pikovski, K. Schwab, Detecting continuous gravitational waves with superfluid 4he, New J. Phys. 19 (7) (2017) 073023

    2017

  28. [36]

    Manley, D

    J. Manley, D. J. Wilson, R. Stump, D. Grin, S. Singh, Searching for scalar dark matter with compact mechanical resonators, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124 (2020) 151301. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.151301. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.151301

    2020 doi

  29. [37]

    L. A. De Lorenzo, K. C. Schwab, Ultra-high Q acoustic resonance in superfluid 4He, J. Low Temp. Phys. 186 (2017) 233–240. URL https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10909-016-1674-x

    2017 doi

  30. [38]

    B. M. Abraham, Y. Eckstein, J. B. Ketterson, M. Kuchnir, P. R. Roach, Velocity of sound, density, and Gr¨ uneisen constant in liquid4He, Phys. Rev. A 1 (1970) 250–257. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.1.250. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.1.250

    1970 doi

  31. [39]

    S. M. Vermeulen, et al., Direct limits for scalar field dark matter from a gravitational-wave detector, Nature 600 (7889) (2021) 424–428. URL https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-04031-y

    2021

  32. [40]

    Abbott, R. et al. (LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration and KAGRA Collaboration), Constraints on dark photon dark matter using data from LIGO’s and Virgo’s third observing run, Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022) 063030. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.105.063030. URL https://link.a...

    2022 doi

  33. [41]

    Antypas, A

    D. Antypas, A. Banerjee, C. Bartram, M. Baryakhtar, J. Betz, J. J. Bollinger, C. Boutan, D. Bowring, D. Budker, D. Carney, et al., New horizons: Scalar and vector ultralight dark matter (2022). arXiv:2203.14915. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.14915

    2022

  34. [42]

    Derevianko, Detecting dark-matter waves with a network of precision-measurement tools, Phys

    A. Derevianko, Detecting dark-matter waves with a network of precision-measurement tools, Phys. Rev. A 97 (2018) 042506. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.97.042506. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.97.042506

    2018 doi

  35. [43]

    Arvanitaki, S

    A. Arvanitaki, S. Dimopoulos, K. Van Tilburg, Sound of dark matter: Searching for light scalars with resonant-mass detectors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016) 031102. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.031102. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.031102 Summer 2025 SNOLAB-...

    2016 doi

  36. [44]

    Manley, M

    J. Manley, M. D. Chowdhury, D. Grin, S. Singh, D. J. Wilson, Searching for vector dark matter with an optomechanical accelerometer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126 (2021) 061301. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.061301. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.061301

    2021 doi

  37. [45]

    Hirschel, V

    M. Hirschel, V. Vadakkumbatt, N. Baker, F. Schweizer, J. Sankey, S. Singh, J. Davis, Superfluid helium ultralight dark matter detector, Physical Review D 109 (9) (2024) 095011. doi:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.109.095011. URL https://journals.aps.org/prd/abstract/10.1103/P...

    2024 doi

  38. [46]

    Vadakkumbatt, M

    V. Vadakkumbatt, M. Hirschel, J. Manley, T. J. Clark, S. Singh, J. P. Davis, Prototype superfluid gravitational wave detector, Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) 082001. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.104.082001. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevD.104.082001

    2021 doi

  39. [47]

    Carney, G

    D. Carney, G. Krnjaic, D. C. Moore, C. A. Regal, G. Afek, S. Bhave, B. Brubaker, T. Corbitt, J. Cripe, N. Crisosto, et al., Mechanical quantum sensing in the search for dark matter, Quantum Science and Technology 6 (2) (2021) 024002

    2021

  40. [48]

    Aggarwal, et al., Challenges and Opportunities of Gravitational Wave Searches at MHz to GHz Frequencies, arXiv:2011.12414 (2020)

    N. Aggarwal, et al., Challenges and Opportunities of Gravitational Wave Searches at MHz to GHz Frequencies, arXiv:2011.12414 (2020)

    2020 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Clark, Bubble Chambers for Dark Matter Detection, JAIS 2024 (2024) 498

    K. Clark, Bubble Chambers for Dark Matter Detection, JAIS 2024 (2024) 498. doi:10.31526/jais.2024.498

    2024 doi

  42. [50]

    Alfonso-Pita et al

    E. Alfonso-Pita et al. (SBC collaboration), Low-threshold response of a scintillating xenon bubble chamber to nuclear and electronic recoils, Phys. Rev. D 111 (3) (2025) 032002. arXiv:2410.07241, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.111.032002

    2025 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Bressler, P

    M. Bressler, P. Campion, V. S. Cushman, A. Morrese, J. M. Wagner, S. Zerbo, R. Neilson, M. Crisler, C. E. Dahl, A buffer-free concept bubble chamber for PICO dark matter searches, Journal of Instrumentation 14 (08) (2019) P08019

    2019

  44. [52]

    Alfonso-Pita et al

    E. Alfonso-Pita et al. (SBC collaboration), Scintillating Bubble Chambers for Rare Event Searches, Universe 9 (8) (2023) 346. doi:10.3390/universe9080346

    2023 doi

  45. [53]

    Alfonso-Pita et al

    E. Alfonso-Pita et al. (SBC collaboration), Snowmass 2021 Scintillating Bubble Chambers: Liquid-noble Bubble Chambers for Dark Matter and CE νNS Detection, in: Snowmass 2021, 2022. arXiv:2207.12400

    2021 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Broerman, New ideas for tonne-scale bubble chambers and a search for superheavy dark matter with PICO-60, Ph.D

    B. Broerman, New ideas for tonne-scale bubble chambers and a search for superheavy dark matter with PICO-60, Ph.D. thesis, Queen’s U., Kingston (2022)

    2022

  47. [55]

    SuperCDMS Collaboration, Projected sensitivity of the SuperCDMS SNOLAB experiment, Physical Review D 95 (8) (Apr. 2017). doi:10.1103/physrevd.95.082002. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.95.082002 Summer 2025 SNOLAB-STR-2025-006 Page 75 of 83

    2017 doi

  48. [56]

    arXiv:2203.08463

    SuperCDMS Collaboration, A Strategy for Low-Mass Dark Matter Searches with Cryogenic Detectors in the SuperCDMS SNOLAB Facility (2023). arXiv:2203.08463. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.08463

    2023 arXiv

  49. [57]

    SuperCDMS Collaboration, Investigating the sources of low-energy events in a SuperCDMS-HVeV detector, Physical Review D 105 (11) (Jun. 2022). doi:10.1103/physrevd.105.112006. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.105.112006

    2022 doi

  50. [58]

    Kennard, UCLA Dark Matter 2025: Overview of the SuperCDMS-HVeV Program (2025)

    K. Kennard, UCLA Dark Matter 2025: Overview of the SuperCDMS-HVeV Program (2025)

    2025

  51. [59]

    Anczarski, et al., Two-Stage Cryogenic HEMT-Based Amplifier for Low-Temperature Detectors, Journal of Low Temperature Physics 214 (3–4) (2024) 256–262

    J. Anczarski, et al., Two-Stage Cryogenic HEMT-Based Amplifier for Low-Temperature Detectors, Journal of Low Temperature Physics 214 (3–4) (2024) 256–262. doi:10.1007/s10909-023-03046-1. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10909-023-03046-1

    2024 doi

  52. [60]

    et al., Results on Low-Mass Weakly Interacting Massive Particles from an 11 kg d Target Exposure of DAMIC at SNOLAB, Phys

    DAMIC Collaboration and Aguilar-Arevalo, A. et al., Results on Low-Mass Weakly Interacting Massive Particles from an 11 kg d Target Exposure of DAMIC at SNOLAB, Phys. Rev. Lett.125 (24) (2020) 241803. arXiv:2007.15622, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.241803

    2020 arXiv

  53. [61]

    and SENSEI Collaborations and Aguilar-Arevalo, A

    DAMIC, DAMIC-M. and SENSEI Collaborations and Aguilar-Arevalo, A. et al., Confirmation of the spectral excess in DAMIC at SNOLAB with skipper CCDs, Phys. Rev. D109 (6) (2024) 062007. arXiv:2306.01717, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.062007

    2024 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Adari, et al., First Direct-Detection Results on Sub-GeV Dark Matter Using the SENSEI Detector at SNOLAB, Phys

    P. Adari, et al., First Direct-Detection Results on Sub-GeV Dark Matter Using the SENSEI Detector at SNOLAB, Phys. Rev. Lett.134 (1) (2025) 011804. arXiv:2312.13342, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.134.011804

    2025 arXiv

  55. [63]

    (SENSEI Collaboration), First Direct-Detection Results on Sub-GeV Dark Matter Using the SENSEI Detector at SNOLAB, Phys

    Adari, P., et al. (SENSEI Collaboration), First Direct-Detection Results on Sub-GeV Dark Matter Using the SENSEI Detector at SNOLAB, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134 (2025) 011804. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.134.011804. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.134.011804

    2025 doi

  56. [64]

    Aggarwal et al., Probing Benchmark Models of Hidden-Sector Dark Matter with DAMIC-M (2025)

    DAMIC-M Collaboration and K. Aggarwal et al., Probing Benchmark Models of Hidden-Sector Dark Matter with DAMIC-M (2025). arXiv:2503.14617. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.14617

    2025 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Aguilar-Arevalo, et al., The Oscura Experiment (2022)

    A. Aguilar-Arevalo, et al., The Oscura Experiment (2022). arXiv:2202.10518. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2202.10518

    2022 arXiv

  58. [66]

    B. A. Cervantes-Vergara, et al., Skipper-CCD sensors for the Oscura experiment: requirements and preliminary tests, Journal of Instrumentation 18 (8) (2023) P08016. arXiv:2304.04401, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/18/08/P08016. Summer 2025 SNOLAB-STR-2025-006 Page 76 of 83

    2023 arXiv

  59. [67]

    K. J. McGuire, et al., Nuclear recoil identification in a scientific charge-coupled device, Phys. Rev. D 110 (4) (2024) 043008. arXiv:2309.07869, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.043008

    2024 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Perez, et al., Searching for millicharged particles with 1 kg of Skipper-CCDs using the NuMI beam at Fermilab, Journal of High Energy Physics 2024 (2) (2024) 72

    S. Perez, et al., Searching for millicharged particles with 1 kg of Skipper-CCDs using the NuMI beam at Fermilab, Journal of High Energy Physics 2024 (2) (2024) 72. arXiv:2304.08625, doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2024)072

    2024 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Blanco, Y

    C. Blanco, Y. Kahn, B. Lillard, S. D. McDermott, Dark Matter Daily Modulation With Anisotropic Organic Crystals, Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) 036011. arXiv:2103.08601, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.104.036011

    2021 arXiv

  62. [70]

    D. F. Jackson Kimball, et al., Overview of the Cosmic Axion Spin Precession Experiment (CASPEr), Springer Proc. Phys. 245 (2020) 105–121. arXiv:1711.08999, doi:10.1007/978-3-030-43761-9_13

    2020 arXiv

  63. [71]

    C. Gao, W. Halperin, Y. Kahn, M. Nguyen, J. Sch¨ utte-Engel, J. W. Scott, Axion Wind Detection with the Homogeneous Precession Domain of Superfluid Helium-3, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129 (21) (2022) 211801. arXiv:2208.14454, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.129.211801

    2022 arXiv

  64. [72]

    J. W. Foster, C. Gao, W. Halperin, Y. Kahn, A. Mande, M. Nguyen, J. Sch¨ utte-Engel, J. W. Scott, Statistics and sensitivity of axion wind detection with the homogeneous precession domain of superfluid helium-3, Phys. Rev. D 110 (11) (2024) 115020. arXiv:2310.07791, doi:10.110...

    2024 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Y. M. Bunkov, G. E. Volovik, Spin superfluidity and magnon BEC (2012). arXiv:1003.4889

    2012 arXiv

  66. [74]

    Naghiloo, A

    M. Naghiloo, A. Jordan, K. Murch, Achieving optimal quantum acceleration of frequency estimation using adaptive coherent control, Physical Review Letters 119 (18) (2017) 180801

    2017

  67. [75]

    Berlin, Y

    A. Berlin, Y. Kahn, New Technologies for Axion and Dark Photon Searches (12 2024). arXiv:2412.08704, doi:10.1146/annurev-nucl-121423-101015

    2024 arXiv

  68. [76]

    Adams et al

    D.Q. Adams et al. (CUORE Collaboration), Search for Majorana neutrinos exploiting millikelvin cryogenics with CUORE, Nature 604 (7904) (2022) 53–58

    2022

  69. [77]

    Alfonso et al

    K. Alfonso et al. (CUPID Collaboration), CUPID: the next-generation neutrinoless double beta decay experiment, Journal of low temperature physics 211 (5) (2023) 375–383

    2023

  70. [78]

    Augier, others (CUPID-Mo Collaboration), Final results on the 0 νββ decay half-life limit of 100Mo from the CUPID-Mo experiment, The European Physical Journal C 82 (11) (2022) 1033

    C. Augier, others (CUPID-Mo Collaboration), Final results on the 0 νββ decay half-life limit of 100Mo from the CUPID-Mo experiment, The European Physical Journal C 82 (11) (2022) 1033. Summer 2025 SNOLAB-STR-2025-006 Page 77 of 83

    2022

  71. [79]

    Agrawal, et al., Improved Limit on Neutrinoless Double Beta Decay of 100Mo from AMoRE-I, Physical Review Letters 134 (8) (2025) 082501

    A. Agrawal, et al., Improved Limit on Neutrinoless Double Beta Decay of 100Mo from AMoRE-I, Physical Review Letters 134 (8) (2025) 082501

    2025

  72. [80]

    CUPID Collaboration, Toward CUPID-1T, arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.08386 (2022)

    2022 arXiv

  73. [81]

    Singh, M

    V. Singh, M. Beretta, E. Hansen, K. Vetter, G. Benato, L. Marini, C. Capelli, B. Fujikawa, B. Schmidt, C. Chang, et al., Large-area photon calorimeter with Ir-Pt bilayer transition-edge sensor for the CUPID experiment, Physical Review Applied 20 (6) (2023) 064017

    2023

  74. [82]

    Bratrud, et al., First demonstration of a TES based cryogenic Li 2MoO4 detector for neutrinoless double beta decay search, The European Physical Journal C 85 (2) (2025) 1–14

    G. Bratrud, et al., First demonstration of a TES based cryogenic Li 2MoO4 detector for neutrinoless double beta decay search, The European Physical Journal C 85 (2) (2025) 1–14

    2025

  75. [83]

    Chang, C.L. et al. (TESSARACT Collaboration), First Limits on Light Dark Matter Interactions in a Low Threshold Two Channel Athermal Phonon Detector from the TESSERACT Collaboration, arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.03683 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  76. [84]

    M. Borghesi, et al., An updated overview of the HOLMES status, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment 1051 (2023) 168205

    2023

  77. [85]

    L. Pagnanini, et al., Simultaneous Measurement of the Half-Life and Spectral Shape of 115In β Decay with an Indium Iodide Cryogenic Calorimeter, Physical Review Letters 133 (12) (2024) 122501

    2024

  78. [86]

    Leder, et al., Determining g A/gV with high-resolution spectral measurements using a LiInSe2 bolometer, Physical Review Letters 129 (23) (2022) 232502

    A. Leder, et al., Determining g A/gV with high-resolution spectral measurements using a LiInSe2 bolometer, Physical Review Letters 129 (23) (2022) 232502

    2022

  79. [87]

    Aartsen, M. G. et al. (IceCube-Gen2 Collaboration), IceCube-Gen2: the window to the extreme Universe, J. Phys. G 48 (6) (2021) 060501. arXiv:2008.04323, doi:10.1088/1361-6471/abbd48

    2021

  80. [88]

    (KM3NeT Collaboration), Observation of an ultra-high-energy cosmic neutrino with KM3NeT, Nature 638 (8050) (2025) 376–382

    Aiello, S., et al. (KM3NeT Collaboration), Observation of an ultra-high-energy cosmic neutrino with KM3NeT, Nature 638 (8050) (2025) 376–382. doi:10.1038/s41586-024-08543-1. URL https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-08543-1

    2025 doi

  81. [89]

    Agostini, et al., The Pacific Ocean Neutrino Experiment, Nature Astronomy 4 (10) (2020) 913–915

    M. Agostini, et al., The Pacific Ocean Neutrino Experiment, Nature Astronomy 4 (10) (2020) 913–915. doi:10.1038/s41550-020-1182-4. URL https://doi.org/10.1038/s41550-020-1182-4

    2020 doi

  82. [90]

    Bailly, et al., Two-year optical site characterization for the Pacific Ocean Neutrino Experiment (P-ONE) in the Cascadia Basin, The European Physical Journal C 81 (12) (2021) 1071

    N. Bailly, et al., Two-year optical site characterization for the Pacific Ocean Neutrino Experiment (P-ONE) in the Cascadia Basin, The European Physical Journal C 81 (12) (2021) 1071. doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09872-5. URL https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09872-5

    2021 doi

  83. [91]

    Amaudruz, P. -A. et al. (DEAP-3600 Collaboration), Design and Construction of the Summer 2025 SNOLAB-STR-2025-006 Page 78 of 83 DEAP-3600 Dark Matter Detector, Astropart. Phys. 108 (2019) 1–23. arXiv:1712.01982, doi:10.1016/j.astropartphys.2018.09.006

    2019 arXiv

  84. [92]

    Adhikari, P. et al. (DEAP Collaboration), First Direct Detection Constraints on Planck-Scale Mass Dark Matter with Multiple-Scatter Signatures Using the DEAP-3600 Detector, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128 (1) (2022) 011801. arXiv:2108.09405, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.128.011801

    2022 arXiv

  85. [93]

    Adhikari, P. et al. (DEAP Collaboration), Precision measurement of the specific activity of 39Ar in atmospheric argon with the DEAP-3600 detector, Eur. Phys. J. C 83 (7) (2023) 642. arXiv:2302.14639, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-023-11678-6

    2023 arXiv

  86. [94]

    Adhikari, P. et al. (DEAP Collaboration), Direct Measurement of the 39Ar Half-life from 3.4 Years of Data with the DEAP-3600 Detector (1 2025). arXiv:2501.13196

    2025 arXiv

  87. [95]

    Adhikari, P. et al. (DEAP Collaboration), Relative measurement and extrapolation of the scintillation quenching factor of α-particles in liquid argon using DEAP-3600 data, Eur. Phys. J. C 85 (1) (2025) 87. arXiv:2406.18597, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-13518-7

    2025

  88. [96]

    Ajaj, R. et al. (DEAP Collaboration), Search for dark matter with a 231-day exposure of liquid argon using DEAP-3600 at SNOLAB, Phys. Rev. D 100 (2) (2019) 022004. arXiv:1902.04048, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.022004

    2019 arXiv

  89. [97]

    Gallacher, et al., Development and characterization of a slow wavelength shifting coating for background rejection in liquid argon detectors, Nucl

    D. Gallacher, et al., Development and characterization of a slow wavelength shifting coating for background rejection in liquid argon detectors, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 1034 (2022) 166683. arXiv:2109.06819, doi:10.1016/j.nima.2022.166683

    2022 arXiv

  90. [98]

    Agnes, P. et al. (DarkSide-50 Collaboration), Search for low-mass dark matter WIMPs with 12 ton-day exposure of DarkSide-50, Phys. Rev. D 107 (6) (2023) 063001. arXiv:2207.11966, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.107.063001

    2023

  91. [99]

    Agnes, P. et al. (Global Argon Dark Matter Collaboration), Sensitivity projections for a dual-phase argon TPC optimized for light dark matter searches through the ionization channel, Phys. Rev. D 107 (11) (2023) 112006. arXiv:2209.01177, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.107.112006

    2023 arXiv

  92. [100]

    Agnes, P. et al. (Global Argon Dark Matter Collaboration), The underground argon project: procurement and purification of argon for dark matter searches and beyond, Front. in Phys. 12 (2024) 1387069. doi:10.3389/fphy.2024.1387069

    2024

  93. [101]

    Segreto, Properties of liquid argon scintillation light emission, Phys

    E. Segreto, Properties of liquid argon scintillation light emission, Phys. Rev. D 103 (2021) 043001. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.103.043001. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevD.103.043001

    2021 doi

  94. [102]

    Galbiati, X

    C. Galbiati, X. Li, J. Luo, D. R. Marlow, H. Wang, Y. Wang, Pulse shape study of the fast scintillation light emitted from xenon-doped liquid argon using silicon Summer 2025 SNOLAB-STR-2025-006 Page 79 of 83 photomultipliers, JINST 16 (02) (2021) P02015. arXiv:2009.06238, doi:...

    2021 arXiv

  95. [103]

    Soto-Oton, Impact of xenon doping in the scintillation light in a large liquid-argon TPC, J

    J. Soto-Oton, Impact of xenon doping in the scintillation light in a large liquid-argon TPC, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2374 (1) (2022) 012164. arXiv:2109.05858, doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2374/1/012164

    2022 arXiv

  96. [104]

    D. F. Anderson, The Effects of Photosensitive Dopants on Electron Mobility in Liquid Argon, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 313 (1992) 151–154. doi:10.1016/0168-9002(92)90091-H

    1992 doi

  97. [105]

    Hawley Herrera, Update on the Scintillating Bubble Chamber (SBC) collaboration, PoS TAUP2023 (2024) 337

    H. Hawley Herrera, Update on the Scintillating Bubble Chamber (SBC) collaboration, PoS TAUP2023 (2024) 337. doi:10.22323/1.441.0337

    2024 doi

  98. [106]

    Agnes, P. et al. (DarkSide-20k Collaboration), Sensitivity of future liquid argon dark matter search experiments to core-collapse supernova neutrinos, JCAP 03 (2021) 043. arXiv:2011.07819, doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2021/03/043

    2021 arXiv

  99. [107]

    (Global Argon Dark Matter Collaboration), Production, Purification and Assay of Underground Argon for DarkSide-20k, PoS ICHEP2024 (2025) 743

    Gahan, Devidutta et al. (Global Argon Dark Matter Collaboration), Production, Purification and Assay of Underground Argon for DarkSide-20k, PoS ICHEP2024 (2025) 743. doi:10.22323/1.476.0743

    2025 doi

  100. [108]

    Pratte, F

    J.-F. Pratte, F. Nolet, S. Parent, F. Vachon, N. Roy, T. Rossignol, K. Deslandes, H. Dautet, R. Fontaine, S. A. Charlebois, 3D Photon-To-Digital Converter for Radiation Instrumentation: Motivation and Future Works, Sensors 21 (2) (2021) 598. doi:10.3390/s21020598

    2021 doi

  101. [109]

    Rossignol, N

    T. Rossignol, N. Roy, S. Parent, K. Deslandes, F. Nolet, S. A. Charlebois, J. F. Pratte, A 3D photon-to-digital converter readout for low-power and large-area applications, JINST 19 (09) (2024) P09017. doi:10.1088/1748-0221/19/09/P09017

    2024 doi

  102. [110]

    Adhikari, P. et al. (DEAP Collaboration), Pulse-shape discrimination against low-energy Ar-39 beta decays in liquid argon with 4.5 tonne-years of DEAP-3600 data, Eur. Phys. J. C 81 (9) (2021) 823. arXiv:2103.12202, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09514-w

    2021 arXiv

  103. [111]

    et al., (DarkSide-20k Collaboration), Separating 39Ar from 40Ar by cryogenic distillation with Aria for dark-matter searches, Eur

    Agnes, P. et al., (DarkSide-20k Collaboration), Separating 39Ar from 40Ar by cryogenic distillation with Aria for dark-matter searches, Eur. Phys. J. C 81 (4) (2021) 359. arXiv:2101.08686, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09121-9

    2021 arXiv

  104. [112]

    Adams, C. et al. (NEXT Collaboration), The NEXT-100 Detector, Preprint (May 2025). arXiv:2505.17848. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.17848

    2025

  105. [113]

    ´Alvarez, V. et al. (NEXT Collaboration), The NEXT-100 experiment for neutrinoless double beta decay searches (Conceptual Design Report), Preprint (June 2011). Summer 2025 SNOLAB-STR-2025-006 Page 80 of 83 arXiv:1106.3630. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1106.3630

    2011 arXiv

  106. [114]

    Adams, et al., Sensitivity of a tonne-scale NEXT detector for neutrinoless double-beta decay searches, Journal of High Energy Physics 2021 (8) (2021) 164

    C. Adams, et al., Sensitivity of a tonne-scale NEXT detector for neutrinoless double-beta decay searches, Journal of High Energy Physics 2021 (8) (2021) 164. doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2021)164. URL https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP08(2021)164

    2021 doi

  107. [115]

    Jones, A

    B. Jones, A. McDonald, D. Nygren, Single molecule fluorescence imaging as a technique for barium tagging in neutrinoless double beta decay, Journal of Instrumentation 11 (12) (2016) P12011

    2016

  108. [116]

    McDonald, B

    A. McDonald, B. Jones, D. Nygren, C. Adams, V. ´Alvarez, C. Azevedo, J. Benlloch-Rodr´ ıguez, F. Borges, A. Botas, S. C´ arcel, et al., Demonstration of single-barium-ion sensitivity for neutrinoless double-beta decay using single-molecule fluorescence imaging, Physical Review...

    2018

  109. [117]

    Dey, et al., Ion Transport on Phased Radiofrequency Carpets in Xenon Gas (2025)

    E. Dey, et al., Ion Transport on Phased Radiofrequency Carpets in Xenon Gas (2025). arXiv:2501.18690. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.18690

    2025 arXiv

  110. [118]

    A. I. Aranburu, et al., Iridium-Based Time-Resolved Luminescent Sensor for Ba 2+ Detection, ACS Sensors 10 (4) (2025) 2487–2498. doi:10.1021/acssensors.5c00000. URL https://doi.org/10.1021/acssensors.5c00000

    2025 doi

  111. [119]

    Aalbers, J. et al. (XLZD Collaboration), The XLZD Design Book: Towards the Next-Generation Liquid Xenon Observatory for Dark Matter and Neutrino Physics (10 2024). arXiv:2410.17137

    2024

  112. [120]

    Aalbers, J. et al. (LZ Collaboration), Dark Matter Search Results from 4.2 Tonne-Years of Exposure of the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment (10 2024). arXiv:2410.17036

    2024 arXiv

  113. [121]

    Aprile, E. et al. (XENON Collaboration), WIMP Dark Matter Search using a 3.1 tonne× year Exposure of the XENONnT Experiment (2 2025). arXiv:2502.18005

    2025

  114. [122]

    Aalbers, J. et al. (DARWIN Collaboration), DARWIN: towards the ultimate dark matter detector, JCAP 11 (2016) 017. arXiv:1606.07001, doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2016/11/017

    2016 arXiv

  115. [123]

    (PandaX Collaboration), Dark Matter Search Results from 1.54 Tonne·Year Exposure of PandaX-4T, Phys

    Bo, Zihao et al. (PandaX Collaboration), Dark Matter Search Results from 1.54 Tonne·Year Exposure of PandaX-4T, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134 (1) (2025) 011805. arXiv:2408.00664, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.134.011805

    2025 arXiv

  116. [124]

    Akerib, D. S. et al. (LUX Collaboration), Improved Limits on Scattering of Weakly Interacting Massive Particles from Reanalysis of 2013 LUX Data, Phys. Rev. Lett. Summer 2025 SNOLAB-STR-2025-006 Page 81 of 83 116 (16) (2016) 161301. arXiv:1512.03506, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.161301

    2016 arXiv

  117. [125]

    Agostini, G

    M. Agostini, G. Benato, J. A. Detwiler, J. Men´ endez, F. Vissani, Toward the discovery of matter creation with neutrinoless ββ decay, Rev. Mod. Phys. 95 (2) (2023) 025002. arXiv:2202.01787, doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.95.025002

    2023 arXiv

  118. [126]

    Adhikari, G. et al. (nEXO Collaboration), nEXO: neutrinoless double beta decay search beyond 10 28 year half-life sensitivity, J. Phys. G 49 (1) (2022) 015104. arXiv:2106.16243, doi:10.1088/1361-6471/ac3631

    2022 arXiv

  119. [127]

    Adams, C. et al. (NEXT Collaboration), Sensitivity of a tonne-scale NEXT detector for neutrinoless double beta decay searches, JHEP 2021 (08) (2021) 164. arXiv:2005.06467, doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2021)164

    2021 arXiv

  120. [128]

    Aalbers, J. et al. (XLZD Collaboration), Neutrinoless double beta decay sensitivity of the XLZD rare event observatory, J. Phys. G 52 (4) (2025) 045102. arXiv:2410.19016, doi:10.1088/1361-6471/adb900

    2025 arXiv

  121. [129]

    Aalbers, et al., A next-generation liquid xenon observatory for dark matter and neutrino physics, J

    J. Aalbers, et al., A next-generation liquid xenon observatory for dark matter and neutrino physics, J. Phys. G 50 (1) (2023) 013001. arXiv:2203.02309, doi:10.1088/1361-6471/ac841a

    2023

  122. [130]

    Askins, M. et al. (Theia Collaboration), THEIA: an advanced optical neutrino detector, Eur. Phys. J. C 80 (5) (2020) 416. arXiv:1911.03501, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-7977-8

    2020 arXiv

  123. [131]

    KATRIN Collaboration, M. Aker, D. Batzler, A. Beglarian, J. Behrens, J. Beisenk¨ otter, M. Biassoni, B. Bieringer, Y. Biondi, F. Block, et al., Direct neutrino-mass measurement based on 259 days of KATRIN data, Science 388 (6743) (2025) 180–185

    2025

  124. [132]

    Al et al

    Kharusi, S. Al et al. (nEXO Collaboration), nEXO Pre-Conceptual Design Report (5 2018). arXiv:1805.11142

    2018 arXiv

  125. [133]

    Aprile, A

    E. Aprile, A. E. Bolotnikov, A. I. Bolozdynya, T. Doke, Noble Gas Detectors, Wiley, 2007

    2007

  126. [134]

    Anton, G. et al. (EXO-200 Collaboration), Search for neutrinoless double- β decay with the complete EXO-200 dataset, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123 (2019) 161802. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.161802. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.161802

    2019 doi

  127. [135]

    T. Doke, A. Hitachi, S. Kubota, A. Nakamoto, T. Takahashi, Estimation of Fano factors in liquid argon, krypton, xenon and xenon-doped liquid argon, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. 134 (1976) 353–357. doi:10.1016/0029-554X(76)90292-5

    1976 doi

  128. [136]

    C. J. Martoff, D. P. Snowden-Ifft, T. Ohnuki, N. Spooner, M. Lehner, Suppressing Summer 2025 SNOLAB-STR-2025-006 Page 82 of 83 drift chamber diffusion without magnetic field, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 440 (2000) 355–359. doi:10.1016/S0168-9002(99)00955-9

    2000 doi

  129. [137]

    Arvanitaki, S

    A. Arvanitaki, S. Dimopoulos, M. Galanis, Superradiant interactions of the cosmic neutrino background, axions, dark matter, and reactor neutrinos, Phys. Rev. D 111 (5) (2025) 055015. arXiv:2408.04021, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.111.055015

    2025 arXiv

  130. [138]

    R. H. Dicke, Coherence in Spontaneous Radiation Processes, Phys. Rev. 93 (1954) 99–110. doi:10.1103/PhysRev.93.99. Summer 2025 SNOLAB-STR-2025-006 Page 83 of 83

    1954 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.