Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 39 references

RES-NOVA's archaeological-lead PbWO4 bolometers can serve as a competitive solar-axion detector, with projected sensitivity to the axion-electron coupling within a factor of about 2 of the current best limit despite a background roughly fou

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 07:39 UTC pith:GO6AA7OO

load-bearing objection The measured prototype limit is a genuine first result, but the factor-of-2 projection rests on an unvalidated background model and needs a systematic budget before it is quoted as robust. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.21363 v1 pith:GO6AA7OO submitted 2026-07-23 hep-ex astro-ph.CO

Solar axion searches with RES-NOVA: projected sensitivity and first prototype limit

D. Alloni , G. Benato , P. Carniti , M. Cataldo , L. Chen , M. Clemenza , M. Consonni , G. Croci
show 44 more authors
I. Dafinei F.A. Danevich J. De Miguel C. de Vecchi D. Di Martino R. Elleboro N. Ferreiro Iachellini F. Ferroni F. Filippini V. Fonoll S. Ghislandi A. Giachero M. Giannotti L. Gironi P. Gorla C. Gotti D.L. Helis D.V. Kasperovych V.V. Kobychev A. Lella G. Lucente G. Marcucci A. Melchiorre A. Menegolli S. Nisi M. Musa L. Pagnanini L. Pattavina G. Pessina S. Pirro S. Pozzi M.C. Prata A. Puiu S. Quitadamo M.P. Riccardi M. Rossella R. Rossini E. Sala F. Saliu A. Salvini V.I. Tretyak L. Trombetta D. Trotta H. Yuan
This is my paper
classification hep-ex astro-ph.CO
keywords solar axionsPbWO4 cryogenic bolometersinverse Primakoff effectaxioelectric effectaxion-electron couplingaxion-photon couplingaxion-nucleon couplingarchaeological lead
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.

RES-NOVA, a cryogenic detector of PbWO4 crystals made from archaeological lead and originally built to catch supernova neutrinos, is shown to be a promising solar-axion detector. The paper computes the expected signals from four solar production mechanisms—Primakoff, ABC, longitudinal-plasmon, and the 57Fe nuclear line—and folds them through two absorption channels, the inverse-Primakoff effect and the axioelectric effect. Its central quantitative claim is that a 1 ton·year exposure of the 170 kg demonstrator would exclude axion-electron coupling values only about twice as high as the current best direct limit, even though the background is about 10,000 times larger. The reason is that lead and tungsten have high nuclear charge, which strongly boosts both absorption cross sections, and the detector's sub-keV resolution matches the solar axion spectrum. The paper also reports the first solar-axion limit measured with real data from a 13 g archaeological-lead PbWO4 prototype, obtained with a background-model-independent method. If these projections hold, RES-NOVA becomes a multi-coupling probe that can simultaneously constrain g_ae, g_aγ, and g_aN, helping to distinguish hadronic from non-hadronic axion models.

Core claim

High-density, high-Z PbWO4 absorbers that make RES-NOVA sensitive to coherent neutrino scattering also make it a competitive solar-axion detector through two absorption channels: inverse-Primakoff conversion (a + Ze → γ + Ze) and the axioelectric effect (a + A → e⁻ + A⁺). Both cross sections grow steeply with nuclear charge, so Pb and W dominate, and sub-keV resolution lets the keV-scale axion spectrum be searched on a radiogenic background. For a 1 ton·year exposure, the projected 90% C.L. exclusion in the (g_ae, g_aγ) plane comes within a factor of about 2 of the current best direct bound despite a background roughly four orders of magnitude higher. The paper also reports the first solar-a

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by two absorption channels. The inverse-Primakoff cross section, dσ/dΩ ∝ sin²θ/(1−cosθ)² |Z−F(q)|², is forward-peaked and grows with nuclear charge Z; the axioelectric cross section is proportional to the photoelectric cross section, which scales roughly as Z^4–Z^5 in the keV range. The expected rate is the convolution of solar production fluxes—Primakoff, ABC (atomic recombination and de-excitation, bremsstrahlung, Compton), longitudinal-plasmon, and the 57Fe line—with these cross sections, giving signal terms of order g^4 and g²g² because each coupling can act in both production and detection. For the prototype limit, the optimum-interval method provides a backgroun

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the real background of the 170 kg demonstrator will match the Monte Carlo model's flat plateau of about one count per keV per kg per day, with no systematic uncertainty; if the live background is higher, structured, or drifts over the six-year exposure, the projected exclusion contours and the factor-of-two comparison with the best existing limit degrade.

What would settle it

Run the 170 kg demonstrator for a long exposure and compare the observed energy spectrum below 10 keV with the Monte Carlo background: if the measured rate is substantially above the assumed one count per keV per kg per day, shows unmodeled spectral lines, or drifts over time, the projected g_ae and g_aγ contours in the paper's Figs. 6–7 will shift to weaker couplings and the claim of reaching within a factor of about 2 of XENONnT would fail. A faster check would be a multi-month run of a few kg of the same archaeological-lead PbWO4 to map the low-energy background.

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

If this is right

  • A 1 ton·year run of the 170 kg demonstrator should exclude g_ae ≳ 4×10^-12 for g_aγ ≲ 10^-10 GeV^-1 and g_aγ ≳ 10^-9 GeV^-1 for g_ae ≲ 10^-12, with the g_aγ bound independent of axion mass up to about 1 keV.
  • The 32.4 g·day prototype exposure already excludes g_ae ≳ 7×10^-10 (for g_aγ ≲ 10^-8) and g_aγ ≳ 6×10^-8 (for g_ae ≲ 10^-10), the first such limit from archaeological-lead PbWO4.
  • Sensitivity to the axion-nucleon coupling g_aN comes only through the 14.4 keV 57Fe line, so RES-NOVA cannot constrain g_aN by itself; a nonzero g_ae or g_aγ must supply the absorption channel.
  • Improving the energy resolution from σ = 0.2 keV to 0.02 keV (lowering the threshold from about 1 keV to 100 eV) barely changes the exclusion contours in the (g_ae, g_aγ) plane, because the ABC and Primakoff fluxes peak above 1 keV; the sub-200 eV region is reserved for the longitudinal-plasmon component as a discovery target.
  • The projected sensitivity is background-limited, so reducing the radiogenic background in the crystals translates directly into stronger exclusions, and the future 1.8 t experiment would improve the reach in all three coupling planes.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: Because the inverse-Primakoff bound is mass-independent up to m_a ≲ keV, the same projected g_aγ sensitivity could be extended to heavier axion-like particles in a mass range where magnetic helioscopes lose coherence, making RES-NOVA a complement to existing helioscope searches for sub-MeV ALPs.
  • Editorial inference: The same Z-enhancement logic should transfer to other high-Z cryogenic targets, so the multi-coupling analysis laid out here suggests that similar bolometers could be compared on equal footing rather than only PbWO4.
  • Editorial inference: The prototype's optimum-interval limit remains valid even without a background model; if the demonstrator's background proves hard to model, the same method could yield first limits quickly, at the cost of less statistical power than a profile likelihood.
  • Editorial inference: A dedicated low-threshold run below 200 eV could test the longitudinal-plasmon prediction; a clear spectral feature at the plasma frequency would provide a new probe of the deep solar magnetic field, though the paper treats this only as a future discovery target.

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 assesses RES-NOVA, a PbWO4 cryogenic detector made from archaeological lead, as a solar-axion experiment. It computes solar axion fluxes from Primakoff, ABC, longitudinal-plasmon, and 57Fe channels, and folds them through inverse-Primakoff and axioelectric detection in PbWO4. Projected 90% C.L. sensitivities for a 1 ton·y exposure of the 170 kg demonstrator are derived with a binned Poisson profile-likelihood analysis on an Asimov background-only dataset (Eq. 6.2) in the (g_ae, g_aγ), (g_ae, g_eff_aN), and (g_aγ, g_eff_aN) planes. The same framework is complemented by a measurement: a 13 g archaeological-lead PbWO4 prototype, 32.4 g·day exposure, is analyzed with the background-model-independent Yellin optimum-interval method to obtain the first solar-axion limit with such a detector. The central claim is that the projected g_ae reach is within a factor of about two of XENONnT despite a ~10^4 higher background, and that the inverse-Primakoff channel provides a mass-independent constraint on g_aγ.

Significance. If the projection is robust, RES-NOVA would be an interesting multi-coupling solar-axion probe, complementing helioscopes and xenon direct-detection experiments. The prototype limit is a genuine measured result, obtained in a model-independent way, and is a useful technical milestone for archaeological-lead PbWO4 detectors. The calculation chain from flux to cross section to rate to likelihood is standard and internally consistent. The main weakness is that the projected sensitivity is background-limited and rests on a Monte Carlo background model quoted only as an approximately 1 dru plateau, with no systematic uncertainty budget and no validation against measured data; this is a load-bearing issue for the factor-of-two comparison. The paper should be publishable after the projection robustness is addressed.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 6, Eq. (6.2); Sec. 3] The Asimov projection sets observed counts n_i = B_i, with B_i taken from the Monte Carlo background model of Ref. [21], described only as a plateau of approximately 1 dru. No systematic uncertainty is assigned to this background, and Sec. 7 explicitly states that no reliable background model exists for the prototype. Because the projection is background-limited, a spectrally structured background—lines, a non-flat continuum, or imperfect threshold modeling—can partially mimic or absorb the smooth Primakoff/ABC signal and degrade the likelihood-ratio contours by more than the mild B^(1/8) scaling of a flat normalization error. The factor-of-~2 comparison with XENONnT is therefore not yet robust. I request either validation of the 1 dru background model against prototype or demonstrator data, or a binned nuisance-parameter treatment with a demonstrated insensitivity to background shape, t
  2. [Abstract; Sec. 4.1, Eq. (4.2)] The abstract states that the inverse-Primakoff constraint on g_aγ is 'independent of the axion mass,' but Eq. (4.2) is written in the relativistic limit E_a >> m_a, and the paper considers axion masses up to m_a ≲ T_c ~ 1 keV. At the upper end of this range the mass dependence of the momentum transfer and kinematics is not negligible, and the cross-section is no longer exactly mass-independent. The claim should be qualified to the range where Eq. (4.2) is valid, or the mass-dependent expression should be used and the resulting contours shown. Without this qualification the advertised complementarity with magnetic helioscopes is overstated.
  3. [Sec. 2; Table 1; Eq. (2.3)] The projected contours depend on the central values of external flux calculations: the Table 1 best-fit parameters from Ref. [13], the ABC atomic-line computation of Ref. [27], and the 57Fe normalization of Eq. (2.3). No uncertainties on these inputs are propagated, and the paper does not quantify how the contours in Figs. 6 and 7 would shift under plausible variations. Since the factor-of-two claim is quantitative, the authors should either propagate these uncertainties or provide a sensitivity check showing that the conclusions are stable under their variations.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Eq. (4.6) and Eq. (4.9)] The notation is confusing: Eq. (4.6) uses 'stoichiometric weights' w_i while Eq. (4.9) uses mass fractions w'_i. The units of the photoelectric cross sections from XCOM (per atom versus mass attenuation coefficient in cm^2/g) and the conversion to Eq. (4.10)'s per-molecule cross section should be stated explicitly to avoid unit errors.
  2. [Fig. 6 caption] The sentence 'from the R [40] and R 2 [41] parameters in globular clusters R2' contains a stray 'R2' and should be cleaned for clarity.
  3. [Sec. 5, benchmark resolution] The paper quotes thresholds E_thr ~ 5 σ_E, giving ~1 keV and ~100 eV, but does not state the detection efficiency above threshold or whether E(E) includes any other efficiency factors. This should be clarified.
  4. [Sec. 8.1, LP component] The longitudinal-plasmon component is retained only as a discovery target. For that statement to be quantitative, some indication of the required g_aγ exposure or threshold would be useful, rather than the purely qualitative statement that sub-200 eV is required.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: the derivation chain uses external flux and cross-section inputs, and the prototype limit is a background-independent analysis of real data.

full rationale

I walked the claimed derivation chain and found no step that reduces to its own input. The solar-axion fluxes are taken from external references: the Primakoff and longitudinal-plasmon components from Ref. [13], the ABC flux from Refs. [13,27], and the 57Fe line from Ref. [14]. These are stated inputs with explicit coupling normalizations, not quantities fitted to RES-NOVA data. The detection rates are computed from standard cross-sections: the inverse-Primakoff formula of Ref. [18], form factors from Ref. [33], and photoelectric cross-sections from Refs. [36,37]. The projected sensitivities are then derived from an Asimov likelihood in which the observed counts are set equal to the Monte Carlo background B_i (Sec. 6, Eq. 6.2, quoting Ref. [21]); this is an explicit assumption of a projection, not a prediction obtained by fitting the same data. The prototype limit is obtained from genuinely measured data reported in Ref. [24] using the optimum-interval method (Sec. 7), which is explicitly background-model-independent; the paper itself states that 'a detailed and reliable background model is not available' for the prototype, which is a robustness limitation but not a circular step. The only overlap with the authors' prior work is the use of flux calculations co-authored by M. Giannotti (Refs. [13,14]) and detector/background papers of the RES-NOVA collaboration (Refs. [21,24]); these are external, falsifiable inputs that do not contain the RES-NOVA axion sensitivity as a conclusion. No equation in the paper equates a prediction to a fitted parameter by construction. The advertised factor-of-~2 comparison with XENONnT depends on the assumed ~1 dru plateau and on the external flux normalizations, so an unvalidated or structured background could indeed degrade the projection; that is a correctness/robustness risk, not circularity. Accordingly, the circularity score is 0.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

7 free parameters · 7 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central projected sensitivities rest on imported flux fits (Table 1 from Ref [13], the 57Fe normalization from Ref [14]), the MC background model, and standard atomic cross-section data. No new free parameters are fitted to RES-NOVA data; the items listed are input constants chosen by the cited models or by the detector design.

free parameters (7)
  • Table 1 Primakoff flux fit (C_P, E_P, β_P) = 2.2e8 cm-2 s-1 keV-1, 4.2 keV, 2.5
    Gamma-distribution parameters imported from Ref [13]; set the solar Primakoff spectrum used for all gaγ-dominated projections.
  • Table 1 Bremsstrahlung flux fit (C_B, E_B, β_B) = 3.8e11, 1.6 keV, 0.8
    ABC continuum parameters imported from Ref [13]; drive the g_ae sensitivity.
  • Table 1 Compton flux fit (C_C, E_C, β_C) = 8.8e11, 5.1 keV, 3.0
    ABC continuum parameters imported from Ref [13]; contribute to the g_ae-driven rate.
  • 57Fe line flux normalization = 5.06e23 (geff_aN)^2 cm-2 s-1
    From Ref [14], which shares authors with this paper; sets the only geff_aN sensitivity through the 14.4 keV line.
  • Longitudinal-plasmon average flux = average of Fig. 17 of Ref [13]
    LP spectrum is modeled as an average due to solar magnetic-field uncertainty; does not affect the exclusion limits in this work.
  • MC background plateau = ~1 dru (1 count/keV/kg/day)
    Background model from Ref [21]; central input to the Asimov likelihood projections in Sec. 6.
  • Benchmark energy resolution and threshold = sigma_E=0.2 keV with E_thr~1 keV; sigma_E=0.02 keV with E_thr~100 eV
    Chosen detector benchmarks; efficiency is modeled as a Heaviside step at threshold, ignoring energy-dependent losses.
axioms (7)
  • domain assumption Axion masses in the relevant search range satisfy ma ≲ Tc ~ keV, so the flux parametrizations and relativistic absorption kinematic assumptions of Ref [13] apply.
    Sec. 2 states ma ≲ Tc; all solar flux components and detection cross-section calculations assume this.
  • domain assumption Relativistic Hartree-Fock atomic form factors and NIST XCOM / mass-attenuation photoelectric data describe PbWO4 at keV energies.
    Secs. 4.1-4.2; the inverse-Primakoff and axioelectric cross sections depend on these external tabulated inputs.
  • domain assumption Elastic coherent inverse-Primakoff scattering dominates; neglecting incoherent scattering is conservative.
    Sec. 4.1 and Fig. 3; the authors state the incoherent contribution is comparable at low q and would only increase the rate, making the treatment conservative.
  • domain assumption The Monte Carlo background plateau of ~1 dru is representative of the 170 kg demonstrator over the full exposure.
    Sec. 3 and Eq. (6.2); the Asimov dataset assumes observed counts equal this background model. This is the most fragile input for the projected contours.
  • standard math The profile-likelihood ratio is chi-square distributed with two degrees of freedom, so Lambda <= 4.61 defines 90% C.L.
    Sec. 6; standard asymptotic Wilks approximation, not validated for small signal counts.
  • domain assumption The Yellin optimum-interval method retains nominal coverage when applied to a two-dimensional signal-shape CDF with no background model.
    Sec. 7; the authors note this application to a multi-coupling axion parameter space is novel, but no Monte Carlo coverage study is shown.
  • domain assumption Detection efficiency is unity above threshold and zero below (Heaviside step).
    Eq. (5.2); a simplified detector response with no energy-dependent efficiency curve is used for the projections.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 16425 in / 18055 out tokens · 180171 ms · 2026-08-01T07:39:52.323107+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

RES-NOVA is a cryogenic experiment based on PbWO4 scintillating bolometers produced from archaeological lead, originally designed to detect coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering (CEvNS) from galactic core-collapse supernovae. We show that the same high-density, high-Z absorbers and sub-keV energy resolution make RES-NOVA an appealing probe of solar axions. We compute the expected signal from the Primakoff, ABC (atomic recombination and de-excitation, Bremsstrahlung, Compton), longitudinal-plasmon (LP), and 57Fe nuclear-line components of the solar axion flux, folded through the inverse-Primakoff and axioelectric detection channels in PbWO4, which probe the axion couplings to photons (g_a-gamma), electrons (g_ae), and nucleons (g_aN), respectively. We derive projected sensitivities for a 1 ton*y exposure of the RES-NOVA demonstrator in the (g_ae,g_a-gamma), (g_ae,g_aN), and (g_a-gamma,g_aN) planes. The projected reach in g_ae approaches that of XENONnT to within a factor of ~2, despite a background roughly four orders of magnitude higher, thanks to the large target mass, the high-Z enhancement of the axioelectric and inverse-Primakoff cross sections, and the sub-keV energy resolution. Because the inverse-Primakoff constraint on g_a-gamma relies on absorption rather than coherent conversion, it is independent of the axion mass, unlike bounds from magnetic helioscopes. We complement these projections with the first solar-axion exclusion limit obtained on real data with a 13 g PbWO4 prototype grown from archaeological lead, using a background-model-independent optimum-interval analysis. These results establish RES-NOVA as a promising multi-coupling probe of solar axions, with simultaneous sensitivity to g_ae, g_a-gamma and g_aN that is complementary to existing helioscope and direct-detection searches.

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

39 extracted references · 22 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Peccei and H.R

    R.D. Peccei and H.R. Quinn,CPconservation in the presence of pseudoparticles,Phys. Rev. Lett.38(1977) 1440

    1977

  2. [2]

    Weinberg,A New Light Boson?,Phys

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

    1978

  3. [3]

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

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

    1978

  4. [4]

    Di Luzio, M

    L. Di Luzio, M. Giannotti, E. Nardi and L. Visinelli,The landscape of QCD axion models, Phys. Rept.870(2020) 1 [2003.01100]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  5. [5]

    Cicoli et al.,Axions at the meV Crossroads: Theory, Cosmology, Astrophysics, and Experiments,2603.18167

    M. Cicoli et al.,Axions at the meV Crossroads: Theory, Cosmology, Astrophysics, and Experiments,2603.18167

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  6. [6]

    Adams et al.,Axion Dark Matter,2203.14923

    C.B. Adams et al.,Axion Dark Matter,2203.14923

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  7. [7]

    Giannotti,Status and Perspectives on Axion searches,PoSCOSMICWISPers2024 (2025) 033 [2412.08733]

    M. Giannotti,Status and Perspectives on Axion searches,PoSCOSMICWISPers2024 (2025) 033 [2412.08733]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  8. [8]

    Arza et al.,The COSMIC WISPers White Paper: The physics case for Weakly Interacting Slim Particles,2603.03433

    A. Arza et al.,The COSMIC WISPers White Paper: The physics case for Weakly Interacting Slim Particles,2603.03433

    arXiv

  9. [9]

    Kim,Weak Interaction Singlet and Strong CP Invariance,Phys

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

    1979

  10. [10]

    Shifman, A.I

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

    1980

  11. [11]

    Zhitnitsky,On Possible Suppression of the Axion Hadron Interactions,Sov

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

    1980

  12. [12]

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

    1981

  13. [13]

    Carenza, M

    P. Carenza, M. Giannotti, J. Isern, A. Mirizzi and O. Straniero,Axion astrophysics,Phys. Rept.1117(2025) 1 [2411.02492]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  14. [17]

    Derevianko, V.A

    A. Derevianko, V.A. Dzuba, V.V. Flambaum and M. Pospelov,Axio-electric effect,Phys. Rev. D82(2010) 065006

    2010

  15. [18]

    T. Abe, K. Hamaguchi and N. Nagata,Atomic Form Factors and Inverse Primakoff Scattering of Axion,Phys. Lett. B815(2021) 136174 [2012.02508]. [19]XENONcollaboration,Search for New Physics in Electronic Recoil Data from XENONnT, Phys. Rev. Lett.129(2022) 161805 [2207.11330]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  16. [20]

    Pattavina, N

    L. Pattavina, N. Ferreiro Iachellini and I. Tamborra,Neutrino observatory based on archaeological lead,Phys. Rev. D102(2020) 063001 [2004.06936]. [21](RES-NOV A Collaboration)‡, RES-NOV Acollaboration,New dark matter direct search based on archaeological Pb,Phys. Rev. D111(2025) 103050 [2501.12409]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  17. [22]

    Ferreiro Iachellini et al.,Operation of an Archaeological Lead PbWO4 Crystal to Search for Neutrinos from Astrophysical Sources with a Transition Edge Sensor,J

    N. Ferreiro Iachellini et al.,Operation of an Archaeological Lead PbWO4 Crystal to Search for Neutrinos from Astrophysical Sources with a Transition Edge Sensor,J. Low Temp. Phys.209 (2022) 872 [2111.07638]. – 17 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  18. [23]

    O’Hare, A

    C.A.J. O’Hare, A. Caputo, A.J. Millar and E. Vitagliano,Axion helioscopes as solar magnetometers,Phys. Rev. D102(2020) 043019 [2006.10415]. [24]RES-NOV Acollaboration,Probing dark matter interactions with a RES-NOVA prototype cryogenic detector,2601.16251

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  19. [25]

    Guarini, P

    E. Guarini, P. Carenza, J. Galan, M. Giannotti and A. Mirizzi,Production of axionlike particles from photon conversions in large-scale solar magnetic fields,Phys. Rev. D102(2020) 123024 [2010.06601]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  20. [26]

    Caputo, A.J

    A. Caputo, A.J. Millar and E. Vitagliano,Revisiting longitudinal plasmon-axion conversion in external magnetic fields,Phys. Rev. D101(2020) 123004 [2005.00078]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  21. [27]

    Redondo,Solar axion flux from the axion-electron coupling,JCAP12(2013) 008 [1310.0823]

    J. Redondo,Solar axion flux from the axion-electron coupling,JCAP12(2013) 008 [1310.0823]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  22. [28]

    Haxton and K.Y

    W.C. Haxton and K.Y. Lee,Red giant evolution, metallicity and new bounds on hadronic axions,Phys. Rev. Lett.66(1991) 2557

    1991

  23. [29]

    Avignone, R.J

    F.T. Avignone, R.J. Creswick, J.D. Vergados, P. Pirinen, P.C. Srivastava and J. Suhonen, Estimating the flux of the 14.4 keV solar axions,JCAP01(2018) 021 [1711.06979]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  24. [30]

    Beeman and et al

    J.W. Beeman and et al. (RES-NOVA Coll.),Radiopurity of a kg-scale PbWO4 cryogenic detector produced from archaeological pb for the RES-NOVA experiment,Eur. Phys. J. C82 (2022) 692

    2022

  25. [31]

    Bellini et al.,Cosmic-muon flux and annual modulation in borexino at 3800 m water-equivalent depth,JCAP2012(2012) 015

    G. Bellini et al.,Cosmic-muon flux and annual modulation in borexino at 3800 m water-equivalent depth,JCAP2012(2012) 015

    2012

  26. [32]

    Beeman et al.,New experimental limits on the alpha decays of lead isotopes,Eur

    J.W. Beeman et al.,New experimental limits on the alpha decays of lead isotopes,Eur. Phys. J. A49(2013) 50 [1212.2422]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  27. [33]

    Maslen, A.G

    E.N. Maslen, A.G. Fox and M.A. O’Keefe,Intensity of diffused scattering, inInternational Tables for Crystallography, Volume C: Mathematical, physical and chemical tables, E. Prince, ed., (Dordrecht), pp. 554–595, Kluwer Academic Publishers (2004), DOI

    2004

  28. [34]

    Hubbell, W.J

    J.H. Hubbell, W.J. Veigele, E.A. Briggs, R.T. Brown, D.T. Cromer and R.J. Howerton,Atomic form factors, incoherent scattering functions, and photon scattering cross sections,J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data4(1975) 471 [https://pubs.aip.org/aip/jpr/article-pdf/4/3/471/12168110/471_1_online.pdf]

    1975

  29. [35]

    Pospelov, A

    M. Pospelov, A. Ritz and M. Voloshin,Bosonic super-wimps as kev-scale dark matter,Phys. Rev. D78(2008) 115012

    2008

  30. [36]

    XCOM: Photon Cross Sections Database, NIST Standard Reference Database 8 (ver. 1.5)

    M.J. Berger, J.H. Hubbell, S.M. Seltzer, J. Chang, J.S. Coursey, R. Sukumar et al., “XCOM: Photon Cross Sections Database, NIST Standard Reference Database 8 (ver. 1.5).” https://www.nist.gov/pml/xcom-photon-cross-sections-database, 2010

    2010

  31. [37]

    Tables of X-Ray Mass Attenuation Coefficients and Mass Energy-Absorption Coefficients (version 1.4)

    J.H. Hubbell and S.M. Seltzer, “Tables of X-Ray Mass Attenuation Coefficients and Mass Energy-Absorption Coefficients (version 1.4).” https://www.nist.gov/pml/x-ray-mass-attenuation-coefficients, 2004. [38]RES-NOV Acollaboration,Probing large mass-splitting inelastic Dark Matter with RES-NOVA,2607.18378

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  32. [39]

    Yellin,Finding an upper limit in the presence of unknown background,Phys

    S. Yellin,Finding an upper limit in the presence of unknown background,Phys. Rev. D66 (2002) 032005 [physics/0203002]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  33. [40]

    Ayala, I

    A. Ayala, I. Domí nguez, M. Giannotti, A. Mirizzi and O. Straniero,Revisiting the bound on axion-photon coupling from Globular Clusters,Phys. Rev. Lett.113(2014) 191302 [1406.6053]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  34. [41]

    Dolan, F.J

    M.J. Dolan, F.J. Hiskens and R.R. Volkas,Advancing globular cluster constraints on the axion-photon coupling,JCAP10(2022) 096 [2207.03102]. – 18 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  35. [42]

    Fleury, A

    L. Fleury, A. Obertas, H. Richer and J. Heyl,Axion Constraints from White Dwarf Cooling in 47 Tucanae,2511.21676. [43]XENONcollaboration,Light Dark Matter Search with Ionization Signals in XENON1T,Phys. Rev. Lett.123(2019) 251801 [1907.11485]

    arXiv 2019

  36. [44]

    Lella, P

    A. Lella, P. Carenza, G. Lucente, M. Giannotti and A. Mirizzi,Protoneutron stars as cosmic factories for massive axionlike particles,Phys. Rev. D107(2023) 103017 [2211.13760]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  37. [45]

    Lella, P

    A. Lella, P. Carenza, G. Co’, G. Lucente, M. Giannotti, A. Mirizzi et al.,Getting the most on supernova axions,Phys. Rev. D109(2024) 023001 [2306.01048]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  38. [46]

    Buschmann, C

    M. Buschmann, C. Dessert, J.W. Foster, A.J. Long and B.R. Safdi,Upper Limit on the QCD Axion Mass from Isolated Neutron Star Cooling,Phys. Rev. Lett.128(2022) 091102 [2111.09892]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  39. [47]

    Di Luzio, J

    L. Di Luzio, J. Galan, M. Giannotti, I.G. Irastorza, J. Jaeckel, A. Lindner et al.,Probing the axion-nucleon coupling with the next generation of axion helioscopes,Eur. Phys. J. C82 (2022) 120 [2111.06407]. – 19 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022