Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 46 references

For cascade dark-matter decay through a long-lived mediator, the prompt neutrino line gives the strongest dark-matter lifetime constraint precisely where photon signals are suppressed by mediator propagation.

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 19:12 UTC pith:J5KMMX4D

load-bearing objection The prompt-neutrino-line idea is right and worth publishing, but the flavor-equipartition assumption is load-bearing and untested, so the quantitative dominance maps are shakier than the text suggests. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.17039 v1 pith:J5KMMX4D submitted 2026-07-19 hep-ph

Neutrino lines and photon continua from cascade dark matter decay

Jun Guo , Shi-ying Zhao , Bin Zhu This is my paper
classification hep-ph
keywords dark matter decaylong-lived mediatorneutrino lineaxion-like particledark photonMeV gamma-raymulti-messengerindirect dark matter search
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 in sub-GeV cascade dark-matter decay, χ→X+ν followed by X→γγ or X→3γ, the photon signal depends on how far the mediator travels before decaying, while the neutrino line is emitted promptly and is untouched by mediator propagation. The authors show that when the mediator is long-lived enough to suppress the Galactic and extragalactic photon flux, neutrino-line searches at Borexino, Super-Kamiokande, JUNO, and Hyper-Kamiokande provide the strongest 90% C.L. lower bound on the dark-matter lifetime. They map this neutrino-dominated region for an axion-like mediator in the (k, g_aγγ) plane and for a dark-vector mediator in the (m_A', ε) plane, with the boundary set by τ_ν^best = τ_γ^bench,best. If true, this gives a mediator-propagation-insensitive channel that remains useful when gamma-ray searches are weakened, which matters for probing sub-GeV dark matter in the MeV gap.

Core claim

The central discovery is the asymmetry between the two decay products: the monochromatic neutrino line at Eν0 = mχ/2 (1−1/k²) follows the ordinary line-of-sight integral of the dark-matter density, while the photon flux uses a propagation-suppressed effective D-factor D_eff = ∫dΩ∫ds ρ(r) P_col(Γ_X, s) with P_col = 1−exp(−s/λ_X). In the long-lived limit P_col ≈ s/λ_X, so photon limits weaken roughly linearly with the mediator width, whereas the neutrino limit is independent of the visible coupling. Consequently, in the long-lived parts of the (k, g_aγγ) and (m_A', ε) planes the best neutrino envelope beats the best gamma-ray bound, and the boundary is defined by τ_ν^best = τ_γ^bench,best. The

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is the two-body cascade decay χ→X+ν with a light mediator X that later decays to photons: for the ALP benchmark X=a→γγ with width Γ ∝ g²_aγγ m_a³, and for the dark-vector benchmark X=A'→3γ with loop width Γ ∝ ε² m_{A'}^9/m_e^8. The mass hierarchy k=mχ/mX fixes the neutrino line energy Eν0=(mχ/2)(1−1/k²), the mediator boost γ_X=(k+1/k)/2, and the lab-frame decay length λ_X=β_Xγ_Xτ_X. The Galactic photon signal is built from the collinear decay probability P_col(Γ_X,s)=1−exp(−s/λ_X), which suppresses the effective D-factor when λ_X reaches Galactic scales; the delayed extragalactic component uses a double-redshift convolution with survival probability S_X(z_d,z_p).

Load-bearing premise

The analysis leans on the collinear Galactic benchmark — treating the mediator as emitted along the line of sight with decay probability P_col = 1−exp(−s/λ_X) — which the authors themselves validate only with an isotropic smearing kernel, not full off-axis angular transport; if off-line-of-sight mediators decay inside the observed region more often than this estimate, the photon limits would tighten and the neutrino-dominated regions would shrink.

What would settle it

A concrete check: compute the true Galactic photon signal with a full transport simulation that samples mediator production directions and boosted photon angles, and compare the regional D-factors against D_eff^col for λ_X in the 0.03–100 kpc range used in the paper; if the true flux exceeds the collinear benchmark by roughly a factor of two in the long-lived regime, the τ_ν^best = τ_γ^bench,best contours shift and the neutrino-dominated regions contract. Alternatively, a dedicated search for the neutrino line at Eν0 = mχ/2 (1−1/k²) that finds nothing in a predicted neutrino-dominated window w

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

If this is right

  • In long-lived-mediator regions, the combined neutrino-line searches give the leading 90% C.L. lower limit on the dark-matter lifetime, ahead of even the projected AMEGO-X reach.
  • The neutrino limit is independent of g_aγγ (or ε), so it provides a robust floor on the primary decay rate that does not rely on the mediator's visible decay properties.
  • Increasing the mass hierarchy k broadens the photon spectrum and lengthens the mediator decay length, enlarging the neutrino-dominated region; increasing g_aγγ or ε restores prompt decay and shrinks it.
  • The dominance classification survives two robustness checks: replacing the benchmark photon flux with a conservative extragalactic-only flux, and applying an isotropic spatial-smearing correction to the Galactic component.
  • Projected JUNO and Hyper-Kamiokande sensitivities drive the neutrino envelope in the lower-mass range, while current Borexino and Super-Kamiokande data already exclude part of the parameter space.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper, the same prompt-versus-propagated asymmetry should apply to any two-body decay with one invisible primary product; if the mediator is long-lived, the invisible or weakly interacting line generically becomes the leading probe, making the mechanism more general than the ALP and dark-vector benchmarks.
  • Because the dominance boundary is computed with the collinear benchmark plus one AMEGO-X projection, a dedicated likelihood analysis of AMEGO-X or its successor would sharpen or shift the contours; if the real sensitivity is worse than the rescaled extended-source estimate, the neutrino-dominated regions would expand.
  • The Appendix C validation uses only an isotropic exponential smearing kernel; a full Monte Carlo that transports the mediator direction and the boosted photon angles could reveal ROI-dependent corrections beyond the order-unity C_spatial already found, especially for the narrow Galactic-Centre window.

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 manuscript studies two-step dark matter decay χ→X+ν, with X→γγ (ALP) or X→3γ (dark vector), in the sub-GeV mass range. It derives the monochromatic neutrino line from the primary decay and the boosted photon continuum from the mediator, including a Galactic-collinear benchmark and a delayed extragalactic convolution. Using recasts of COMPTEL, INTEGRAL/SPI, AMEGO-X, Borexino, Super-Kamiokande, JUNO, and Hyper-Kamiokande, it derives 90% C.L. lower limits on the DM lifetime τχ and identifies 'neutrino-dominated' regions in the (k, g_aγγ) and (m_A′, ε) planes where the mediator is long-lived. The central claim is that neutrino-line searches provide the leading bound on τχ in these long-lived-mediator regions, because the neutrino line is insensitive to mediator propagation while the photon signal is suppressed.

Significance. The core physical observation is well motivated and the quantitative framework is largely sound: the kinematics in Sec. 2, the boosted photon spectra, and the delayed-EG convolution in App. A are internally consistent and reduce to the standard limits. The paper explicitly provides robustness checks (EG-only in App. B, spatial smearing in App. C) and is honest about their limitations. If the neutrino-side normalization is made robust, the identified multi-messenger complementarity would be a useful and non-obvious result for MeV-scale decaying dark matter. However, the central claim rests on an unquantified flavor-equipartition assumption for the neutrino flux, so the 'well-defined regions' in Figs. 4 and 5 are not yet fully robust.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4, Eqs. (4.1), (4.5) and experiment bullets; §5, Eq. (5.1)] The neutrino limits are proportional to fα, the fraction of the total line flux constrained by a given experiment. The paper sets fα=1/6 for the ν̄_e channels (Borexino, SK, JUNO) and fα=1/3 for the ν_e+ν̄_e HK channel, explicitly invoking flavor equipartition at Earth. This is an input assumption, not a consequence of the model: the UV completions in Eqs. (2.7)–(2.9) and (2.16)–(2.19) contain unspecified mixing matrices, so the primary decay can produce a pure mass eigenstate ν_i. In that case the ν̄_e fraction is |U_ei|^2, which can be as low as |U_e3|^2 ≈ 0.02 (and the ν_e+ν̄_e fraction for HK similarly suppressed), i.e., nearly an order of magnitude below 1/6 and 1/3. Since τχ ∝ 1/fα in Eq. (4.5), the neutrino envelope weakens by roughly that factor and the dominance boundary in Eq. (5.1) shifts. The existing robustness checks in Apps. B and C test only the photon side; no scan over
  2. [§3, Eq. (3.9); §5, Fig. 5] The dominance maps in Fig. 5 define the neutrino-dominated regions against the 'strongest photon constraint', and the text states that in practice this is the projected AMEGO-X reach. The AMEGO-X extended-source rescaling in Eq. (3.9), including the (ΔΩ_10/ΔΩ_res)^(1/4) factor and the 1.28/3 threshold adjustment, is an approximate recast rather than a dedicated likelihood. A factor-of-order-unity change in the assumed AMEGO-X sensitivity can move the Eq. (5.1) contours noticeably. Please add a sensitivity variation (e.g., without the 1.28/3 rescaling, or with a factor-two harder/softer projection) or show the current-data-only boundaries, so the reader can quantify the dependence of the neutrino-dominated regions on the AMEGO-X projection.
  3. [App. C, Eqs. (C.1)–(C.5)] The spatial-smearing validation uses an isotropic exponential kernel and, as the authors acknowledge, does not include the full angular–energy transport of the decay products. The concluding sentence states that 'no change in the dominance classification among the conclusive points' is found, but the set of 'conclusive points' is never defined. Since the central claim relies on the photon signal being suppressed by mediator propagation, the smearing validation is a load-bearing robustness check. Please define the conclusive set and report the ROI-by-ROI correction (Fig. 7 shows Cspatial differs from unity at the tens-of-percent level) translated into changes in the derived lifetime limits, or justify in more detail why the omitted angular–energy transport cannot alter the classification.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Eq. (3.3)] The integration upper limit s_max is not defined. Please specify whether it is the distance to the ROI boundary, the halo virial radius, or a numerical cutoff.
  2. [App. B, Eq. (B.5)] The sentence 'the EG-only photon limit equals the Galactic-collinear-only photon limit' is ambiguous; the dotted curve in Fig. 6 appears to be the locus where the two are equal, not an identity. Please rephrase as a curve definition.
  3. [App. C, text after Eq. (C.6)] The phrase 'among the conclusive points' should be replaced with a precise definition of the grid and the criterion for a point being conclusive.
  4. [Throughout] There are several minor grammatical slips, e.g., 'both the Galactic-collinear photon component and the strict delayed EG component is suppressed' in Sec. 5, and inconsistent use of 'Eν0' vs 'E_lineν'. A careful proofread would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: neutrino and photon limits are independently derived from first-principles flux formulas against external experimental data; the stated approximations (collinear benchmark, f_alpha=1/6 equipartition) are inputs and robustness concerns, not fitted outputs; self-citations are contextual only.

full rationale

The derivation chain contains no step that reduces to its own input. The photon flux (Eq. 3.1) is built from the decay-rate normalization, the boosted photon spectrum (Eqs. 2.12–2.14, 2.23–2.25), and the effective D-factor (Eq. 3.3); the propagation suppression uses the standard survival probability P_col(Γ_X,s)=1−exp(−s/λ_X) (Eq. 2.4, from ref. [47], an external kinematics result), whose long-lived limit P≈s/λ_X and Φ∝Γ_X are derived consequences, not assumed outputs. The delayed EG flux (Eq. 3.5) is derived in Appendix A from stated assumptions (redshifted mediator momentum, survival probability S_X, time-dilated decay rate; Eqs. A.4–A.9) and reduces to the standard prompt EG flux in the appropriate limit (Eq. A.12). The neutrino limits (Eqs. 4.1, 4.5) are algebraic inversions of the line flux against published or projected line-flux limits from Borexino, SK, JUNO, and HK (external data); f_alpha=1/6 and 1/3 are explicitly tied to the 'flavor equipartition at Earth' assumption, a stated input whose possible downside (single mass eigenstate, |U_e3|^2~0.022) is a robustness concern the paper does not scan — a correctness risk, not circularity. The dominance boundary (Eq. 5.1) τ_ν^best=τ_γ^bench,best is a comparison of two independently derived limits; no parameter is fitted to make the neutrino-dominated regions appear. Self-citations (refs. [6],[7],[17],[19],[20] and related) appear only in the introduction's 'sub-GeV DM has received increasing attention' sentence and are not load-bearing; no uniqueness theorem from the authors' prior work is imported, and the collinear Galactic benchmark is explicitly flagged as an approximation (Sec. 2, text after Eq. 2.4) and tested in Appendices B and C rather than justified by self-citation. App. C itself states it 'does not include the full angular–energy transport of the photons' and serves only as a normalization check — an acknowledged accuracy limitation, not a circular step.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

5 free parameters · 8 axioms · 0 invented entities

The model parameters mχ, k, gaγγ, ε, mA′ are scanned benchmarks rather than fitted values; the paper's limits are functions of them. The principal inputs are the halo profile choice, visible-decay dominance assumption, Galactic-collinear photon approximation, flavor-equipartition fractions, and the approximate AMEGO-X rescaling. No new particle, force, or conserved quantity is introduced.

free parameters (5)
  • mχ (DM mass)
    Scanned over [1,300] MeV; sets neutrino line energy and photon endpoints.
  • k = mχ/mX (mass hierarchy)
    Scanned for the ALP benchmark (1.5–10) or fixed by mA′ for the dark vector; controls neutrino line energy and mediator boost.
  • gaγγ (ALP-photon coupling)
    Scanned benchmark; controls ALP decay length and photon flux normalization.
  • ε (kinetic mixing)
    Scanned benchmark; controls the A′→3γ width and decay length.
  • mA′ (dark vector mass)
    Scanned in the [0.1,1] MeV region; enters the width formula and the boost factor.
axioms (8)
  • domain assumption gNFW halo profile with γ=1.2, ρ_s=0.25 GeV/cm^3, r_s=20 kpc, local density 0.4 GeV/cm^3
    Used in D-factors for both photon and neutrino channels (Sec. 3); profile uncertainties are not propagated.
  • domain assumption Visible-decay dominance: Br(X→γ)=1 for both ALP and dark-vector mediators
    Assumes invisible channels are kinematically closed or subdominant (Secs. 2.1–2.2); if violated, photon flux rescales by the branching ratio.
  • domain assumption Galactic-collinear benchmark for the photon signal (Eq. 3.3)
    Mediator assumed emitted along the line of sight and weighted by P_col; full nonlocal angular redistribution is not computed (App. C).
  • domain assumption Photon attenuation factor e^{-τγγ} set to 1 in the MeV range
    Stated in Sec. 3/Eq. (3.5); standard for MeV energies.
  • domain assumption Flavor equipartition at Earth with f_α=1/6 for \barν_e experiments and 1/3 for HK ν_e+\barν_e
    Needed to convert line-flux limits into lifetime limits (Sec. 4).
  • domain assumption One-sided binned Gaussian recast for gamma-ray limits (Eq. 3.7) with n=1.28
    Background-agnostic recast; not a full likelihood fit to the diffuse background.
  • ad hoc to paper AMEGO-X extended-source rescaling (Eq. 3.9) with 1.28/3 threshold adjustment
    Projected reach depends on this prescription from [55]; an approximation rather than a dedicated AMEGO-X likelihood.
  • domain assumption Homogeneous EG treatment: free mediator propagation, no DM depletion, momentum redshifts only with expansion
    Assumptions of App. A; requires τ_χ >> t_0 and no attenuation.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 19464 in / 17348 out tokens · 155558 ms · 2026-08-01T19:12:09.981321+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We investigate the two-body decay of fermionic dark matter, $\chi(\bar{\chi})\to X+\nu(\bar{\nu})$, where the light mediator $X$ subsequently decays into photons. We consider two benchmark models: an axion-like particle with $a\to\gamma\gamma$, and a kinetically mixed dark vector with $A'\to3\gamma$. This decay topology produces a monochromatic neutrino line from the primary decay together with a broad secondary photon continuum. A key feature of the scenario is that the photon signal depends on the mediator decay length, whereas the neutrino line is produced promptly and is insensitive to the subsequent propagation of $X$. We derive dark matter lifetime limits from current and projected MeV gamma-ray and neutrino searches, including both Galactic and delayed extragalactic photon contributions. We find that photon constraints generally dominate for short-lived mediators, while neutrino-line searches can become competitive or provide the leading sensitivity in regions where mediator propagation substantially suppresses the photon signal. This conclusion remains stable under conservative extragalactic-only limits and a simplified treatment of Galactic spatial smearing.

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

46 extracted references · 43 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Bertone, D

    G. Bertone, D. Hooper and J. Silk,Particle dark matter: Evidence, candidates and constraints,Phys. Rept.405(2005) 279 [hep-ph/0404175]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  2. [2]

    Boehm and P

    C. Boehm and P. Fayet,Scalar dark matter candidates,Nucl. Phys. B683(2004) 219 [hep-ph/0305261]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  3. [3]

    Boehm, P

    C. Boehm, P. Fayet and J. Silk,Light and heavy dark matter particles,Phys. Rev. D69 (2004) 101302 [hep-ph/0311143]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  4. [4]

    Essig et al.,Working Group Report: New Light Weakly Coupled Particles, inSnowmass 2013: Snowmass on the Mississippi, 10, 2013 [1311.0029]

    R. Essig et al.,Working Group Report: New Light Weakly Coupled Particles, inSnowmass 2013: Snowmass on the Mississippi, 10, 2013 [1311.0029]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  5. [5]

    Yi et al.,Direct observation of the Migdal effect induced by neutron bombardment,Nature 649(2026) 580

    D. Yi et al.,Direct observation of the Migdal effect induced by neutron bombardment,Nature 649(2026) 580

    2026

  6. [6]

    J. Guo, L. Wu and B. Zhu,Halo-dependent anharmonic effects in collective excitation for light dark matter direct detection,Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron.68(2025) 280404 [2412.18330]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  7. [7]

    J. Guo, L. Wu and B. Zhu,MeV gamma-ray constraints for light dark matter from semi-annihilation,Phys. Lett. B840(2023) 137853 [2302.06159]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  8. [8]

    Liang, L

    Z.-L. Liang, L. Su, L. Wu and B. Zhu,Plasmon-enhanced Direct Detection of sub-MeV Dark Matter,Phys. Rev. Lett.134(2025) 071001 [2401.11971]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  9. [9]

    Yin et al.,First Result for Dark Matter Search by WINERED,Phys

    W. Yin et al.,First Result for Dark Matter Search by WINERED,Phys. Rev. Lett.134 (2025) 051004 [2402.07976]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  10. [10]

    Ruz et al.,NuSTAR as an Axion Helioscope,Phys

    J. Ruz et al.,NuSTAR as an Axion Helioscope,Phys. Rev. Lett.135(2025) 141001 [2407.03828]

    arXiv 2025

  11. [11]

    S. Roy, C. Blanco, C. Dessert, A. Prabhu and T. Temim,Sensitivity of JWST to eV-Scale Decaying Axion Dark Matter,Phys. Rev. Lett.134(2025) 071003 [2311.04987]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  12. [12]

    Langhoff, N.J

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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  13. [13]

    E. Iles, S. Heeba and K. Schutz,Dark Matter Direct Detection Experiments Are Sensitive to the Millicharged Background,Phys. Rev. Lett.134(2025) 121002 [2407.21096]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  14. [14]

    P. Du, R. Essig, B.J. Rauscher and H. Xu,Direct Constraints on Strongly Interacting Dark Matter from the James Webb Space Telescope,Phys. Rev. Lett.135(2025) 051002 [2412.13131]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  15. [15]

    Y.-X. Chen, L. Lei, Z.-Q. Xia, Z. Wang, Y.-L.S. Tsai and Y.-Z. Fan,Searching for Axionlike Particles with X-Ray Observations of Alpha Centauri,Phys. Rev. Lett.134(2025) 241001 [2410.16065]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  16. [16]

    Guo, Y.-L.S

    Z.-Q. Guo, Y.-L.S. Tsai, L. Wu and Z.-Q. Xia,Constraints on axionlike particles from 16.5 years of Fermi-LAT data and prospects for VLAST,Phys. Rev. D112(2025) 075008 [2507.07786]

    arXiv 2025

  17. [17]

    J.-W. Sun, L. Wu, Y.-H. Xu and B. Zhu,Probing supernova neutrino boosted dark matter with collective excitations,Phys. Rev. D112(2025) 015014 [2501.07591]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  18. [18]

    C.-T. Lu, J. Tu and L. Wu,Probing inelastic dark matter at the LHC, F ASER, and STCF, Phys. Rev. D109(2024) 015018 [2309.00271]. – 24 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  19. [19]

    S.-Y. Guo, M. Khlopov, X. Liu, L. Wu, Y. Wu and B. Zhu,Footprints of axion-like particle in pulsar timing array data and James Webb Space Telescope observations,Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron.67(2024) 111011 [2306.17022]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  20. [20]

    L. Su, L. Wu and B. Zhu,An improved bound on accelerated light dark matter,Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron.67(2024) 221012 [2308.02204]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  21. [21]

    Akita, G

    K. Akita, G. Lambiase, M. Niibo and M. Yamaguchi,Neutrino lines from MeV dark matter annihilation and decay in JUNO,JCAP10(2022) 097 [2206.06755]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  22. [22]

    Ibarra, D

    A. Ibarra, D. Tran and C. Weniger,Indirect Searches for Decaying Dark Matter,Int. J. Mod. Phys. A28(2013) 1330040 [1307.6434]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  23. [23]

    Palomares-Ruiz,Model-independent bound on the dark matter lifetime,Phys

    S. Palomares-Ruiz,Model-independent bound on the dark matter lifetime,Phys. Lett. B665 (2008) 50 [0712.1937]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  24. [24]

    Strong, H

    A.W. Strong, H. Bloemen, R. Diehl, W. Hermsen and V. Schoenfelder,Comptel skymapping: A New approach using parallel computing,Astrophys. Lett. Commun.39(1999) 209 [astro-ph/9811211]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  25. [25]

    Essig, E

    R. Essig, E. Kuflik, S.D. McDermott, T. Volansky and K.M. Zurek,Constraining Light Dark Matter with Diffuse X-Ray and Gamma-Ray Observations,JHEP11(2013) 193 [1309.4091]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  26. [26]

    Siegert, J

    T. Siegert, J. Berteaud, F. Calore, P.D. Serpico and C. Weinberger,Diffuse Galactic emission spectrum between 0.5 and 8.0 MeV,Astron. Astrophys.660(2022) A130 [2202.04574]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  27. [27]

    Berteaud, F

    J. Berteaud, F. Calore, J. Iguaz, P.D. Serpico and T. Siegert,Strong constraints on primordial black hole dark matter from 16 years of INTEGRAL/SPI observations,Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 023030 [2202.07483]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  28. [28]

    O’Donnell and T.R

    K.E. O’Donnell and T.R. Slatyer,Constraints on dark matter with future MeV gamma-ray telescopes,Phys. Rev. D111(2025) 083037 [2411.00087]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  29. [29]

    Caputo, M

    A. Caputo, M. Negro, M. Regis and M. Taoso,Dark matter prospects with COSI: ALPs, PBHs and sub-GeV dark matter,JCAP02(2023) 006 [2210.09310]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  30. [30]

    Adams et al.,Axion Dark Matter, inSnowmass 2021, 3, 2022 [2203.14923]

    C.B. Adams et al.,Axion Dark Matter, inSnowmass 2021, 3, 2022 [2203.14923]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  31. [31]

    Janish and E

    R. Janish and E. Pinetti,Hunting Dark Matter Lines in the Infrared Background with the James Webb Space Telescope,Phys. Rev. Lett.134(2025) 071002 [2310.15395]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  32. [32]

    Fabbrichesi, E

    M. Fabbrichesi, E. Gabrielli and G. Lanfranchi,The Dark Photon,2005.01515

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  33. [33]

    Caputo, A.J

    A. Caputo, A.J. Millar, C.A.J. O’Hare and E. Vitagliano,Dark photon limits: A handbook, Phys. Rev. D104(2021) 095029 [2105.04565]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  34. [34]

    Linden, T.T.Q

    T. Linden, T.T.Q. Nguyen and T.M.P. Tait,X-ray constraints on dark photon tridents,Phys. Rev. D112(2025) 023026 [2406.19445]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  35. [35]

    Rizzo,Kinetic mixing, dark photons and an extra dimension

    T.G. Rizzo,Kinetic mixing, dark photons and an extra dimension. Part I,JHEP07(2018) 118 [1801.08525]. [36]Borexinocollaboration,The Borexino detector at the Laboratori Nazionali del Gran Sasso, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A600(2009) 568 [0806.2400]. [37]Borexinocollaboration,Observation of Geo-Neutrinos,Phys. Lett. B687(2010) 299 [1003.0284]. [38]Borexinocollabo...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  36. [43]

    Linyan,Experimental Studies on Low Energy Electron Antineutrinos and Related Physics, Ph.D

    W. Linyan,Experimental Studies on Low Energy Electron Antineutrinos and Related Physics, Ph.D. thesis, Tsinghua University, dec, 2018. [44]JUNOcollaboration,Neutrino Physics with JUNO,J. Phys. G43(2016) 030401 [1507.05613]. [45]Hyper-Kamiokandecollaboration,Hyper-Kamiokande Design Report,1805.04163

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  37. [46]

    Bell, M.J

    N.F. Bell, M.J. Dolan and S. Robles,Searching for Sub-GeV Dark Matter in the Galactic Centre using Hyper-Kamiokande,JCAP09(2020) 019 [2005.01950]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  38. [47]

    Agashe, J.H

    K. Agashe, J.H. Chang, S.J. Clark, B. Dutta, Y. Tsai and T. Xu,Detecting axionlike particles with primordial black holes,Phys. Rev. D108(2023) 023014 [2212.11980]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  39. [48]

    Cadamuro and J

    D. Cadamuro and J. Redondo,Cosmological bounds on pseudo Nambu-Goldstone bosons, JCAP02(2012) 032 [1110.2895]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  40. [49]

    Pospelov, A

    M. Pospelov, A. Ritz and M.B. Voloshin,Bosonic super-WIMPs as keV-scale dark matter, Phys. Rev. D78(2008) 115012 [0807.3279]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  41. [50]

    McDermott, H.H

    S.D. McDermott, H.H. Patel and H. Ramani,Dark Photon Decay Beyond The Euler-Heisenberg Limit,Phys. Rev. D97(2018) 073005 [1705.00619]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  42. [51]

    Q. He, H. Li, R. Li, C.S. Frenk, M. Schaller, D. Barnes et al.,Constraining the inner density slope of massive galaxy clusters,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.496(2020) 4717 [1907.01680]. [52]Fermi-LATcollaboration,The Fermi Galactic Center GeV Excess and Implications for Dark Matter,Astrophys. J.840(2017) 43 [1704.03910]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  43. [53]

    Caputo et al.,All-sky Medium Energy Gamma-ray Observatory eXplorer mission concept, J

    R. Caputo et al.,All-sky Medium Energy Gamma-ray Observatory eXplorer mission concept, J. Astron. Telesc. Instrum. Syst.8(2022) 044003 [2208.04990]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  44. [54]

    Arg¨ uelles, A

    C.A. Arg¨ uelles, A. Diaz, A. Kheirandish, A. Olivares-Del-Campo, I. Safa and A.C. Vincent, Dark matter annihilation to neutrinos,Rev. Mod. Phys.93(2021) 035007 [1912.09486]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  45. [55]

    Dutra, C

    M. Dutra, C. Siqueira and T.M. Venters,Constraining light dark matter in vector-scalar portals with COSI and AMEGO-X,JHEP04(2026) 209 [2508.15891]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  46. [56]

    X. Chu, S. Kulkarni and P. Salati,Dark matter indirect signals with long-lived mediators, JCAP11(2017) 023 [1706.08543]. – 26 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017