Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 101 references

HydroX, a light dark matter search with hydrogen-doped liquid xenon time projection chambers

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper projects that hydrogen doping expands a liquid xenon dark matter detector's reach to masses below 100 MeV, a window current xenon-only detectors cannot probe.

desk verdict A genuinely new and honest concept paper whose headline sensitivity rests on an unmeasured proton-recoil yield in LXe; worth reading and refereeing, but the projections are an R&D roadmap, not a demonstrated reach. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.13402 v1 pith:Q4MKH5HX submitted 2025-05-19 hep-ex physics.ins-det

W.H. Lippincott , H.N. Nelson , D.S. Akerib , C. Amarasinghe , A. Ames , H.M. Araujo , J.W. Bargemann , M.C. Carmona-Benitez
show 25 more authors
R. Coronel C.E. Dahl S. Dey J. Genovesi S.J. Haselschwardt E. Jacquet D. Khaitan D. Kodroff S. Kravitz W. Lorenzon S. Luitz A. Manalaysay C. Maupin M.E. Monzani K.C. Oliver-Mallory E. Perry Y. Qie T. Shutt D.J. Temples M. Trask A. Wang F.L.H. Wolfs D. Woodward R. Zhang T. Zhang
This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-exphysics.ins-det
keywords HydroXlightdarkmatterliquidxenonTPChydrogendopingspin-dependentlow-massWIMPsearchprotonrecoilyieldsub-GeVdirectdetection
topics Dark Matter
open problems Dark Matter
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

HydroX proposes adding about one percent hydrogen to a liquid xenon time projection chamber, making protons the dark matter targets while the xenon acts as the sensor for light and charge signals. The paper argues that a recoiling proton produces roughly five times more detectable light and charge per unit energy than a recoiling xenon atom, because its energy goes mostly into electronic excitation rather than silent atomic collisions. That enhancement lowers the effective energy threshold enough to project sensitivity to dark matter masses below 100 MeV in an ionization-only (S2-only) analysis, and down to about 200 MeV with the standard combined light-and-ionization (S1/S2) analysis. It also gives an unmatched low-mass spin-dependent dark matter-proton channel. If the projection holds, this would open a mass window below 1 GeV that current tonne-scale xenon detectors cannot reach.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the conversion of proton kinetic energy into detectable xenon excitation and ionization. A recoiling proton transfers only about 1.5% of its energy per hard-sphere elastic collision to xenon atoms, so it survives many collisions below the xenon ionization threshold and keeps its energy in electronic stopping, which produces S1 and S2 signals. This is quantified as a fivefold gain in quanta per unit energy relative to a xenon recoil, computed with SRIM and encoded in NEST; that gain sets the low-energy thresholds that carry the whole sensitivity projection.

What would settle it

A calibration measurement of scintillation and ionization yields for single proton recoils in liquid xenon between about 1 and 10 keV would settle the matter: if the true yield is half the assumed five-times enhancement, the effective threshold rises and the claimed sub-100 MeV reach shifts to higher masses.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a liquid xenon TPC loaded with hydrogen at the one-percent level becomes a low-mass dark matter detector with qualitatively new reach. A dark matter particle scattering off a proton in the liquid produces a recoiling proton that, unlike a recoiling xenon atom, loses most of its energy to electronic excitation and ionization rather than to silent elastic collisions with surrounding xenon atoms. Using SRIM-based stopping calculations embedded in NEST, the authors estimate about five times more detectable quanta per unit energy for hydrogen recoils than for xenon recoils. Combined with the LZ detector model, a standard S1/S2 analysis is projected to be competitive down to 200 MeV dark matter mass, and an S2-only analysis extends access well below 100 MeV, with the spin-dependent dark matter-proton sensitivity unmatched at low masses. The authors explicitly state that the projections are indicative, pending measurements of hydrogen recoil yields, hydrogen solubility, and backgrounds.

Load-bearing premise

The projected sensitivity collapses if the simulation-based assumption that hydrogen recoils in liquid xenon produce roughly five times more detectable light and charge than xenon recoils is wrong, because there are no measured data for hydrogen recoil yields in liquid xenon.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • With 1.1% hydrogen loading in an LZ-scale detector, a 500-day run would set spin-independent limits extending to dark matter masses below 100 MeV in the S2-only analysis.
  • The same run would provide the most sensitive spin-dependent dark matter-proton limits at low masses, a channel no current experiment covers.
  • Substituting deuterium for hydrogen gives comparable spin-dependent dark matter-neutron sensitivity, shifted upward in mass by the square root of two, with a factor-of-four better spin-independent sensitivity.
  • Because the low-mass signal spectrum rises steeply at threshold, actual sensitivity depends on exact detector threshold behavior and accidental backgrounds; the paper presents these numbers as indicative.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A direct measurement of proton recoil yields in liquid xenon would not only test HydroX but also inform other proton-in-xenon signatures, such as neutron-induced backgrounds in existing xenon detectors.
  • The claimed hydrogen doping benefits for electron drift and diffusion could be tested in small TPCs independently of any dark matter search; if confirmed, they would improve multiple-scatter rejection for other rare-event physics.
  • The same kinematic argument suggests that hydrogen-doped argon or neon TPCs could also probe sub-GeV dark matter, although their scintillation and ionization properties differ from xenon.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes HydroX, a concept for doping a LZ-scale liquid xenon TPC with molecular hydrogen (1.1% mole fraction) to search for sub-GeV dark matter via proton recoils. The central physics argument (Sec. 2.2) is that a recoiling proton in LXe loses most of its energy to electronic stopping, producing roughly five times more detectable quanta per unit energy than a xenon recoil, and the authors incorporate a SRIM-based hydrogen yield into NEST together with the LZ background model from Ref. [88] to compute trigger efficiencies (Fig. 3) and 500-day WIMP sensitivity projections (Fig. 5). They report that a standard S1/S2 analysis reaches down to about 200 MeV in WIMP mass, while an S2-only analysis could reach well below 100 MeV, and that the spin-dependent proton channel would be uniquely sensitive in that mass range. The paper also discusses H2 solubility in LXe, S1/S2 quenching, tritium backgrounds, PMT permeation, and the cryogenic circulation challenges of introducing a non-condensible gas.

Significance. If the assumed hydrogen recoil yield and the ER-like S2/S1 partitioning are correct, HydroX would open a new and well-motivated window for sub-GeV dark matter searches using existing tonne-scale infrastructure, with particularly interesting spin-dependent proton sensitivity. The manuscript is valuable as a concept paper: it gives a clear physical motivation, identifies the R&D needed (H2 solubility, tritium removal, distillation, signal quenching), and is explicit about the absence of key measurements. The authors state plainly that there are no data on H recoil yields in LXe (Sec. 2.2), that H2 solubility in LXe is unmeasured (Sec. 2.4), and that S2-only sensitivities should be viewed as speculative because accidental backgrounds are not modeled (Sec. 3.2). These admissions are honest, but they mean that the quantitative reach in Fig. 5 is a scenario under optimistic microphysics assumptions rather than a robust prediction. No reproducible code or machine-checked derivations are provided, so the central value of the paper is the concept and the roadmap, not the precision of the sensitivity curves.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 2.2, Fig. 1 and Fig. 3] The factor-of-five enhancement in hydrogen recoil yield relative to xenon recoils is the load-bearing input for the energy thresholds in Fig. 3 and the sensitivity curves in Fig. 5. This enhancement is based entirely on a SRIM calculation in which all electronic stopping is assumed to produce signal and none of the nuclear stopping does, and the paper itself states 'There are no data measuring yields for H recoils in LXe.' For a few-keV proton in xenon the reduced energy is near the nuclear-stopping maximum, so this assumption is not a minor detail. Because the low-mass WIMP spectrum rises steeply toward threshold, a factor-of-two uncertainty in the H yield can substantially raise the effective threshold and plausibly move the S2-only reach above 100 MeV. The authors acknowledge in general terms that the sensitivity depends critically on the threshold (Sec. 3.2), but they do not propagate any uncertainty band from the yield model into Fig. 5. I request either a quantitative sensitivity band derived from plausible H-yield models or an explicit reframing of the mass-reach claims as conditional on a specific unverified microphysics model.
  2. [Sec. 3.2, Fig. 5] The 'well below 100 MeV' S2-only projection excludes accidental backgrounds, and the text states both that 'this analysis does not include accidental events' and that 'the S2-only sensitivities in particular should be viewed as speculative.' Since S2-only analyses abandon ER/NR discrimination, accidental coincidences are generally the limiting background in this mode, as the paper itself notes by citing the LZ observation of about five accidentals in the relevant energy range. This omission is load-bearing for the headline sub-100 MeV claim. The abstract and conclusion should not present this reach without the accidental-background caveat, and ideally the authors should add at least an order-of-magnitude estimate of the accidental rate for the proposed threshold and drift geometry.
  3. [Sec. 2.2 and Sec. 3.2, Fig. 5] The sensitivity model assumes that the S2/S1 partition of hydrogen recoils is similar to electronic recoils, based on high-energy alpha data, but the only low-energy measurement of a light-ion recoil in LXe (helium recoils, Ref. [40]) shows xenon-like discrimination. The authors acknowledge that if hydrogen recoils are instead xenon-recoil-like, the S1/S2 sensitivity improves by up to a factor of two at low mass but the dominant background becomes 8B neutrino-xenon scattering, which degrades the absolute cross-section sensitivity. This is a second unmeasured microphysics input with a direct effect on both threshold and background discrimination, and it should carry the same prominence in the caveats as the yield uncertainty.
  4. [Sec. 2.4 and Sec. 3.2] The projected sensitivity assumes 0.95 kg of H2 in the fiducial volume (1.1% mole fraction), but the text states that 'no measurements of H2 solubility in LXe currently exist.' Since the sensitivity scales approximately linearly with the amount of H2 (Sec. 3.2), an overestimate of the achievable loading by a factor of two degrades the reach correspondingly. This should be listed explicitly as a major assumption of the sensitivity calculation, not only as a caveat in the solubility subsection.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 1 caption vs. Sec. 2.2] The text in Sec. 2.2 refers to the 'yellow curve' in Fig. 1 for xenon recoils, while the figure caption says the blue curve; the color labeling should be made consistent.
  2. [Sec. 3.2] The phrase 'well below 100 MeV' is used repeatedly but never quantified; stating an approximate lower mass reach for the S2-only curve would help readers understand how close the projection is to the neutrino floor or to the assumed threshold.
  3. [Eq. (1)] The notation ENR is typeset without a subscript in Eq. (1); using E_NR would be clearer, and the sentence 'ENR∼5 keV' could specify the electric field condition under which this threshold applies.
  4. [Fig. 5] The right panel would benefit from a definition of the plotted quantity (e.g., spin-dependent proton cross section) in the caption, and from a note that the SD-neutron curve is shown for comparison at a different coupling.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: HydroX sensitivity projections are derived from external SRIM/NEST/LZ inputs, not fitted to the claimed reach; the paper itself flags the unmeasured H-recoil yield as a limitation.

full rationale

The derivation chain is linear and non-circular: H-recoil yields are estimated from SRIM electronic stopping under an explicitly stated assumption (Sec. 2.2), the detector response uses the NEST package and the LZ detector model from Ref. [88], and the background model is taken verbatim from Ref. [88]'s Table III. The projected sub-100 MeV S2-only reach (Sec. 3.2) is an output of this model chain, not an input used to define the yield, threshold, or background. The paper does not fit any parameter to the claimed sensitivity; the factor-of-five enhancement and the 50% S1 quenching are externally motivated inputs, and the paper repeatedly labels the projections as indicative and the S2-only sensitivities as speculative. Self-citations to LZ papers and to Ref. [40] supply measured or published detector response and do not function as a uniqueness proof or as a forbidden alternative. The absence of direct H-recoil yield data is a real scientific limitation, but it is explicitly acknowledged and is not a circular reduction of the claimed result to its own inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's sensitivity projections depend on a chain of unvalidated modeling assumptions, most critically the H recoil yield and the S2/S1 partitioning. No direct measurements exist for any of these parameters in liquid xenon; each is either assumed or scaled from other systems. The H2 solubility, S1 quenching, and tritium background are all assumed or extrapolated without dedicated measurements.

free parameters (5)
  • H2 loading mole fraction = 1.1%
    Assumed for sensitivity projections; no direct measurement of H2 solubility in LXe exists (Sec. 2.4). Sensitivity scales linearly with this fraction.
  • S1 signal quenching = 50% loss
    Based on 5.7% H2 mole fraction measurement in high-pressure gaseous xenon (ref [50]); applied to liquid xenon without direct measurement (Sec. 2.3.1).
  • S2 yield (g2) = 240 phd/e
    From Garfield simulation of gas-phase electroluminescence, not measurement (Sec. 2.3.1).
  • H recoil yield model = ~5x quanta per unit energy vs Xe
    From SRIM electronic stopping power, assuming all electronic stopping produces signal; no experimental data for H recoils in LXe (Sec. 2.2, Fig. 1).
  • Analysis thresholds = S1/S2: 3 PMTs; S2-only: 3 or 5 electrons
    Analysis choices from LZ model (Sec. 3.2).
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption SRIM stopping power calculations for H in LXe are valid
    The predicted H recoil yield enhancement relies entirely on SRIM electronic stopping estimates (Sec. 2.2).
  • ad hoc to paper The S2/S1 partitioning of proton recoils is similar to electronic recoils
    Assumed for the projected sensitivity (Sec. 3.2), based on high-energy alpha data; the alternative Xe-like partitioning would degrade sensitivity (Sec. 3.2).
  • domain assumption Henry's law scaling predicts sufficient H2 solubility in LXe
    Extrapolated from LUX measurements of He, Ar, Kr; no direct H2 solubility data exist (Sec. 2.4).
  • domain assumption Tritium can be reduced to <1e-24 relative abundance
    Required to avoid tritium background; distillation or underground sources are proposed but not demonstrated (Sec. 3.1).
  • domain assumption NEST model for xenon recoils is accurate at low energies
    Used as the baseline for Xe recoil thresholds and backgrounds (Sec. 2.2, 2.5).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of HydroX, a light dark matter search with hydrogen-doped liquid xenon time projection chambers." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/Q4MKH5HX

@misc{pith2026250513402,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: HydroX, a light dark matter search with hydrogen-doped liquid xenon time projection chambers},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/Q4MKH5HX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.13402}
}
read the original abstract

Experimental efforts searching for dark matter particles over the last few decades have ruled out many candidates led by the new generation of tonne-scale liquid xenon. For light dark matter, hydrogen could be a better target than xenon as it would offer a better kinematic match to the low mass particles. This article describes the HydroX concept, an idea to expand the dark matter sensitivity reach of large liquid xenon detectors by adding hydrogen to the liquid xenon. We discuss the nature of signal generation in liquid xenon to argue that the signal produced at the interaction site by a dark matter-hydrogen interaction could be significantly enhanced over the same interaction on xenon, increasing the sensitivity to the lightest particles. We discuss the technical implications of adding hydrogen to a xenon detector, as well as some background considerations. Finally, we make projections as to the potential sensitivity of a HydroX implementation and discuss next steps.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

101 extracted references · 26 canonical work pages

  1. [88]

    : Results From the First Use of Low Radioactivity Argon in a Dark Matter Search

    Agnes, P., et al. : Results From the First Use of Low Radioactivity Argon in a Dark Matter Search. Phys. Rev. D 93(8), 081101 (2016) https://doi. org/10.1103/PhysRevD.93.081101 arXiv:1510.00702 [astro-ph.CO]. [Addendum: Phys.Rev.D 95, 069901 (2017)] 21

    arXiv 2016

  2. [40]

    Haselschwardt, S.J., Gibbons, R., Chen, H., Kravitz, S., Manalaysay, A., Xia, Q., Lippincott, W.H., Sorensen, P.: First Measurement of Discrimination between Helium and Electron Recoils in Liquid Xenon for Low-Mass Dark Matter Searches. Phys. Rev. Lett. 132(11), 111801 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.132.111801 arXiv:2308.02430 [hep-ex]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

  3. [1]

    Bertone, G., Hooper, D., Silk, J.: Particle dark matter: Evidence, candidates and constraints. Phys. Rept. 405, 279–390 (2005) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep. 2004.08.031 arXiv:hep-ph/0404175 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2005

  4. [2]

    Feng, J.L.: Dark Matter Candidates from Particle Physics and Methods of Detec- tion. Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 48, 495–545 (2010) https://doi.org/10.1146/ annurev-astro-082708-101659 arXiv:1003.0904 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv 2010

  5. [3]

    Jungman, G., Kamionkowski, M., Griest, K.: Supersymmetric dark matter. Phys. Rept. 267, 195–373 (1996) https://doi.org/10.1016/0370-1573(95)00058-5 arXiv:hep-ph/9506380 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 1996

  6. [4]

    Fitzpatrick, A.L., Haxton, W., Katz, E., Lubbers, N., Xu, Y.: The effective field theory of dark matter direct detection. J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 2013(02), 004 (2013) https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2013/02/004 arXiv:1203.3542 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2013

  7. [5]

    JCAP 1512(12), 057 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2015/12/057 arXiv:1506.04454 [hep-ph]

    Gluscevic, V., Gresham, M.I., McDermott, S.D., Peter, A.H.G., Zurek, K.M.: Identifying the Theory of Dark Matter with Direct Detection. JCAP 1512(12), 057 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2015/12/057 arXiv:1506.04454 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2015

  8. [6]

    : First Dark Matter Search Results from the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment

    Aalbers, J., et al. : First Dark Matter Search Results from the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment. Phys. Rev. Lett. 131(4), 041002 (2023) https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevLett.131.041002 arXiv:2207.03764 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2023

Show all 101 references
  1. [7]

    : First Dark Matter Search with Nuclear Recoils from the XENONnT Experiment

    Aprile, E., et al. : First Dark Matter Search with Nuclear Recoils from the XENONnT Experiment. Phys. Rev. Lett. 131(4), 041003 (2023) https://doi. org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.041003 arXiv:2303.14729 [hep-ex]

    2023 arXiv

  2. [8]

    : Dark Matter Search Results from the PandaX-4T Commis- sioning Run

    Meng, Y., et al. : Dark Matter Search Results from the PandaX-4T Commis- sioning Run. Phys. Rev. Lett. 127(26), 261802 (2021) https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.127.261802 arXiv:2107.13438 [hep-ex] 14

    2021 arXiv

  3. [9]

    Kozaczuk, J., Profumo, S.: Light NMSSM neutralino dark matter in the wake of CDMS II and a 126 GeV Higgs boson. Phys. Rev. D89(9), 095012 (2014) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.89.095012 arXiv:1308.5705 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  4. [10]

    JCAP 1111, 027 (2011) https://doi.org/10.1088/ 1475-7516/2011/11/027 arXiv:1108.0978 [hep-ph]

    Cerdeno, D.G., Huh, J.-H., Peiro, M., Seto, O.: Very light right-handed sneutrino dark matter in the NMSSM. JCAP 1111, 027 (2011) https://doi.org/10.1088/ 1475-7516/2011/11/027 arXiv:1108.0978 [hep-ph]

    2011 arXiv

  5. [11]

    Lin, T., Yu, H.-B., Zurek, K.M.: On Symmetric and Asymmetric Light Dark Matter. Phys. Rev. D85, 063503 (2012) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.85. 063503 arXiv:1111.0293 [hep-ph]

    2012 arXiv

  6. [12]

    : US Cosmic Visions: New Ideas in Dark Matter 2017: Community Report

    Battaglieri, M., et al. : US Cosmic Visions: New Ideas in Dark Matter 2017: Community Report. In: U.S. Cosmic Visions: New Ideas in Dark Matter, College Park, MD, USA, March 23-25, 2017 (2017)

    2017

  7. [13]

    Department of Energy: Basic Research Needs for Dark Matter Small New Initiatives

    High Energy Physics, U.S. Department of Energy: Basic Research Needs for Dark Matter Small New Initiatives. Technical report, 1000 Independence Ave., SW Washington, DC 20585 (2019)

    2019

  8. [14]

    Cooley, J., et al.: Report of the Topical Group on Particle Dark Matter for Snowmass 2021 (2022) arXiv:2209.07426 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  9. [15]

    : Snowmass2021 cosmic frontier dark matter direct detection to the neutrino fog

    Akerib, D.S., et al. : Snowmass2021 cosmic frontier dark matter direct detection to the neutrino fog. In: Snowmass 2021 (2022)

    2022

  10. [16]

    : Snowmass2021 cosmic frontier: The landscape of low-threshold dark matter direct detection in the next decade

    Essig, R., et al. : Snowmass2021 cosmic frontier: The landscape of low-threshold dark matter direct detection in the next decade. In: Snowmass 2021 (2022)

    2022

  11. [17]

    : First results from the NEWS-G direct dark matter search experiment at the LSM

    Arnaud, Q., et al. : First results from the NEWS-G direct dark matter search experiment at the LSM. Astropart. Phys. 97, 54–62 (2018) https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.astropartphys.2017.10.009 arXiv:1706.04934 [astro-ph.IM]

    2018 arXiv

  12. [18]

    : Constraints on Light Dark Matter Parti- cles Interacting with Electrons from DAMIC at SNOLAB

    Aguilar-Arevalo, A., et al. : Constraints on Light Dark Matter Parti- cles Interacting with Electrons from DAMIC at SNOLAB. Phys. Rev. Lett. 123(18), 181802 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.181802 arXiv:1907.12628 [astro-ph.CO]

    2019 arXiv

  13. [19]

    : SENSEI: Direct-Detection Constraints on Sub-GeV Dark Matter from a Shallow Underground Run Using a Prototype Skipper-CCD

    Abramoff, O., et al. : SENSEI: Direct-Detection Constraints on Sub-GeV Dark Matter from a Shallow Underground Run Using a Prototype Skipper-CCD. Phys. Rev. Lett. 122(16), 161801 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett. 122.161801 arXiv:1901.10478 [hep-ex]

    2019 arXiv

  14. [20]

    : First Dark Matter Constraints from a SuperCDMS Single- Charge Sensitive Detector

    Agnese, R., et al. : First Dark Matter Constraints from a SuperCDMS Single- Charge Sensitive Detector. Phys. Rev. Lett. 121(5), 051301 (2018) https: //doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.069901,10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.051301 arXiv:1804.10697 [hep-ex]. [erratum: Phys. Rev. Lett.122...

    2018 arXiv

  15. [21]

    Aalbers, J., et al.: Search for new physics in low-energy electron recoils from the first LZ exposure. Phys. Rev. D 108(7), 072006 (2023) https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevD.108.072006 arXiv:2307.15753 [hep-ex]

    2023 arXiv

  16. [22]

    : Search for Light Dark Matter Interactions Enhanced by the Migdal Effect or Bremsstrahlung in XENON1T

    Aprile, E., et al. : Search for Light Dark Matter Interactions Enhanced by the Migdal Effect or Bremsstrahlung in XENON1T. Phys. Rev. Lett. 123(24), 241803 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.241803 arXiv:1907.12771 [hep-ex]

    2019 arXiv

  17. [23]

    Agnes, P., et al.: Search for Dark-Matter–Nucleon Interactions via Migdal Effect with DarkSide-50. Phys. Rev. Lett. 130(10), 101001 (2023) https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevLett.130.101001 arXiv:2207.11967 [hep-ex]

    2023

  18. [24]

    : The LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment

    Akerib, D.S., et al. : The LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment. Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A953, 163047 (2020) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2019.163047 arXiv:1910.09124 [physics.ins-det]

    2020

  19. [25]

    : A next-generation liquid xenon observatory for dark matter and neutrino physics

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

    2023

  20. [26]

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

    2024

  21. [27]

    Akerib, D.S., et al.: The LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) radioactivity and cleanliness control programs. Eur. Phys. J. C 80(11), 1044 (2020) https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/ s10052-020-8420-x arXiv:2006.02506 [physics.ins-det]. [Erratum: Eur.Phys.J.C 82, 221 (2022)]

    2020 arXiv

  22. [28]

    Szydagis, M., Barry, N., Kazkaz, K., Mock, J., Stolp, D., Sweany, M., Tripathi, M., Uvarov, S., Walsh, N., Woods, M.: NEST: A Comprehensive Model for Scintillation Yield in Liquid Xenon. J. Instrum. 6, 10002 (2011) https://doi.org/ 10.1088/1748-0221/6/10/P10002 arXiv:1106.1613...

    2011 arXiv

  23. [29]

    Szydagis, M., Fyhrie, A., Thorngren, D., Tripathi, M.: Enhancement of NEST Capabilities for Simulating Low-Energy Recoils in Liquid Xenon. J. Instrum. 8, 10003 (2013) https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-0221/8/10/C10003 arXiv:1307.6601 [physics.ins-det]

    2013 arXiv

  24. [30]

    Zenodo (2019) https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo

    Szydagis, M., Balajthy, J., Brodsky, J., Cutter, J., Huang, J., Kozlova, E., Lenardo, B., Manalaysay, A., McKinsey, D., Mooney, M., Mueller, J., Ni, K., Rischbieter, G., Tripathi, M., Tunnell, C., Velan, V., Zhao, Z.: Noble ele- ment simulation technique v2.0. Zenodo (2019) ht...

    2019 doi

  25. [31]

    Technical Report LADC-225, Los 16 Alamos National Laboratory (1946)

    Fermi, E.: A course in neutron physics, part 1. Technical Report LADC-225, Los 16 Alamos National Laboratory (1946). Notes by I. Halpern

    1946

  26. [32]

    Segr` e, E.: Nuclei and Particles. W.A. Benjamin, Inc., Reading, MA, USA (1977). Section 12-2, pp. 621-626

    1977

  27. [33]

    Krsti´ c, P.S., Schultz, D.R.: Elastic and related transport cross sections for pro- tons scattering from the noble gases he, ne, ar, kr, and xe. Phys. Plasma 13(5), 053501 (2006) https://doi.org/0.1063/1.2199808

    2006

  28. [34]

    Pergamon Press, Inc, Maxwell House, Fairview Park, Elmsford, New York, 10523, USA (1985)

    Zielger, J.F., Biersack, J.P., Littmark, J.: The Stopping and Range of Ions in Solids. Pergamon Press, Inc, Maxwell House, Fairview Park, Elmsford, New York, 10523, USA (1985)

    1985

  29. [35]

    Ziegler, J.F., Ziegler, M.D., Biersack, J.P.: SRIM – The stopping and range of ions in matter (2010). Nucl. Instrum. Meth. B268(11), 1818–1823 (2010) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nimb.2010.02.091 . 19th International Conference on Ion Beam Analysis

    2010 doi

  30. [36]

    PhD thesis, Princeton U

    Dahl, C.E.: The physics of background discrimination in liquid xenon, and first results from Xenon10 in the hunt for WIMP dark matter. PhD thesis, Princeton U. (2009)

    2009

  31. [37]

    PhD thesis, Case Western Reserve U

    Bradley, A.W.: LUX Thermosyphon Cryogenics and Radon-Related Back- grounds for the First WIMP Result. PhD thesis, Case Western Reserve U. (2014)

    2014

  32. [38]

    Presented at CPAD 2018, Uni- versity of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA

    Rischbieter, G.: NEST v2: A Comprehensive Model for Scintillation and Ionization in Noble Elements. Presented at CPAD 2018, Uni- versity of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA. Accessed: 2025-03-31 (2018). https://indico.fnal.gov/event/18104/contributions/45879/attachments/ 28566...

    2018

  33. [39]

    Fermi, E., Teller, E.: The capture of negative mesotrons in matter. Phys. Rev. 72, 399–408 (1947) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.72.399

    1947 doi

  34. [41]

    : A high-pressure hydrogen time projection chamber for the MuCap experiment

    Egger, J., et al. : A high-pressure hydrogen time projection chamber for the MuCap experiment. Eur. Phys. J. A50(10), 163 (2014) https://doi.org/10.1140/ epja/i2014-14163-1 arXiv:1405.2853 [physics.ins-det]

    2014 arXiv

  35. [42]

    Fujii, K., Endo, Y., Torigoe, Y., Nakamura, S., Haruyama, T., Kasami, K., Mihara, S., Saito, K., Sasaki, S., Tawara, H.: High-accuracy measurement of 17 the emission spectrum of liquid xenon in the vacuum ultraviolet region. Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 795, 293–297 (2015) https://d...

    2015 doi

  36. [43]

    D Van Nostrand Co, Princeton, NJ 08540 (1950)

    Herzberg, G.: Molecular Spectra and Molecular Structure, Vol I: Spectra of Diatomic Molecules, 2nd edn. D Van Nostrand Co, Princeton, NJ 08540 (1950)

    1950

  37. [44]

    Earth System Science Data 5(2), 365–373 (2013) https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-5-365-2013

    Keller-Rudek, H., Moortgat, G.K., Sander, R., Sorensen, R.: The mpi-mainz uv/vis spectral atlas of gaseous molecules of atmospheric interest. Earth System Science Data 5(2), 365–373 (2013) https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-5-365-2013

    2013 doi

  38. [45]

    Astrophys

    Shaw, G., Ferland, G.J., Abel, N.P., Stancil, P.C., Hoof, P.A.M.: Molec- ular hydrogen in star-forming regions: Implementation of its micro-physics in cloudy. Astrophys. J. 624, 794–807 (2005) https://doi.org/10.1086/429215 arXiv:astro-ph/0501485 [astro-ph]

    2005 arXiv

  39. [46]

    : Effects of nitrogen contamination in liquid argon

    Acciarri, R., et al. : Effects of nitrogen contamination in liquid argon. JINST 5, 06003 (2010) https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-0221/5/06/P06003 arXiv:0804.1217 [nucl-ex]

    2010 arXiv

  40. [47]

    Instruments and Experimental Techniques 49, 489–493 (2006) https://doi.org/10.1134/S0020441206040063

    Pushkin, K., Hasebe, N., Tezuka, C., Kobayashi, S., Mimura, M., Hosojima, T., Doke, T., Miyajima, M., Miyachi, T., Shibamura, E., Dmitrenko, V., Ulin, S.: A scintillation response and an ionization yield in pure xenon and mixtures of it with methane. Instruments and Experiment...

    2006 doi

  41. [48]

    Henriques, C.A.O., et al.: Secondary scintillation yield of xenon with sub-percent levels of co2 additive for rare-event detection. Phys. Lett. B773, 663–671 (2017) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2017.09.017 arXiv:1704.01623 [physics.ins- det]

    2017 arXiv

  42. [49]

    In: Programming and Mathematical Techniques in Physics

    Veenhof, R.: Garfield, a drift chamber simulation program. In: Programming and Mathematical Techniques in Physics. Proceedings, International Conference on Programming and Mathematical Methods for Solving Physical Problems, June 14-19, 1993, Dubna, Russia. Conf. Proc., vol. C9...

    1993

  43. [50]

    In: Proceedings, 2004 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference (NSS/MIC 2004): Rome, Italy, October 16-22, 2004, pp

    Tezuka, C., et al.: Electron diffusion and scintillation in xenon doped with hydro- gen for high-pressure xenon time projection chamber. In: Proceedings, 2004 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference (NSS/MIC 2004): Rome, Italy, October 16-22, 2004, pp. 11...

    2004 arXiv

  44. [51]

    Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics 57(1), 015202 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6455/ad1d35 18

    Boyle, G.J., Garland, N.A., McEachran, R.P., Mirihana, K.A., Robson, R.E., Sullivan, J.P., White, R.D.: Electron scattering and transport in simple liquid mixtures. Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics 57(1), 015202 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-64...

    2024 doi

  45. [52]

    personal communication

    Boyle, G.J. personal communication

  46. [53]

    Aalbers, J., et al.: Neutrinoless Double Beta Decay Sensitivity of the XLZD Rare Event Observatory (2024) arXiv:2410.19016 [physics.ins-det]

    2024 arXiv

  47. [54]

    : THE PERFORMANCE OF PHOTOMULTIPLIERS EXPOSED TO HELIUM

    Incandela, J.R., et al. : THE PERFORMANCE OF PHOTOMULTIPLIERS EXPOSED TO HELIUM. Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A269, 237–245 (1988) https: //doi.org/10.1016/0168-9002(88)90885-6

    1988 doi

  48. [55]

    Norton, F.J.: Helium diffusion through glass. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 36(3), 90–96 (1953) https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1151-2916.1953.tb12843.x

    1953

  49. [56]

    Journal of Applied Physics 32(7), 1309–1316 (1961) https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1736226

    Altemose, V.O.: Helium diffusion through glass. Journal of Applied Physics 32(7), 1309–1316 (1961) https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1736226

    1961 doi

  50. [57]

    Swets, D.E., Lee, R.W., Frank, R.C.: Diffusion coefficients of helium in fused quartz. Jour. Chem. Phys. 34(1), 17–22 (1961) https://doi.org/10.1063/1. 1731562

    1961 doi

  51. [58]

    Lee, R.W., Frank, R.C., Swets, D.E.: Diffusion of hydrogen and deuterium in fused quartz. Jour. Chem. Phys. 36(4), 1062–1071 (1962) https://doi.org/10. 1063/1.1732632

    1962

  52. [59]

    Lee, R.W.: Diffusion of hydrogen in natural and synthetic fused quartz. Jour. Chem. Phys. 38(2), 448–455 (1963) https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1733679

    1963 doi

  53. [60]

    Shelby, J.E.: Molecular diffusion and solubility of hydrogen isotopes in vitreous silica. J. Appl. Phys. 48(8), 3387–3394 (1977) https://doi.org/10.1063/1.324180

    1977 doi

  54. [61]

    Williams, G.A., Ferguson, J.B.: The diffusion of hydrogen and helium through silica glass and other glasses. J. Am. Chem. Soc.44(10), 2160–2167 (1922) https: //doi.org/10.1021/ja01431a010

    1922 doi

  55. [62]

    Mehio, N., Dai, S., Jiang, D.-e.: Quantum mechanical basis for kinetic diameters of small gaseous molecules. Jour. Phys. Chem.A118(6), 1150–1154 (2014) https: //doi.org/10.1021/jp412588f

    2014 doi

  56. [63]

    In: Kakac, S., Bergles, A., Fernandes, E.O

    Jensen, M.K.: Condensation with noncondensables and in multicomponent mix- tures. In: Kakac, S., Bergles, A., Fernandes, E.O. (eds.) Two-Phase Flow Heat Exchangers, pp. 293–324. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1988). Chap

    1988

  57. [64]

    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2790-2

    doi

  58. [65]

    Adhikari, S., Fernando, S.: Hydrogen membrane separation techniques. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 45(3), 875–881 (2006) https://doi.org/10.1021/ie050644l

    2006 doi

  59. [66]

    Nature Catalysis 1(8), 592–600 (2018) 19

    Li, J., Chen, G., Zhu, Y., Liang, Z., Pei, A., Wu, C.-L., Wang, H., Lee, H.R., Liu, K., Chu, S., Cui, Y.: Efficient electrocatalytic co2 reduction on a three-phase interface. Nature Catalysis 1(8), 592–600 (2018) 19

    2018

  60. [67]

    McGraw-Hill, New York (2005)

    McCabe, W.L., Smith, J.C., Harriott, P.: Unit Operations of Chemical Engi- neering, 7th edn. McGraw-Hill, New York (2005)

    2005

  61. [68]

    : DarkSide-50 532-day Dark Matter Search with Low- Radioactivity Argon

    Agnes, P., et al. : DarkSide-50 532-day Dark Matter Search with Low- Radioactivity Argon. Phys. Rev. D98(10), 102006 (2018) https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevD.98.102006 arXiv:1802.07198 [astro-ph.CO]

    2018 arXiv

  62. [69]

    Back, H.O., et al.: First Commissioning of a Cryogenic Distillation Column for Low Radioactivity Underground Argon (2012) arXiv:1204.6061 [astro-ph.IM]

    2012 arXiv

  63. [70]

    : Online 222 Rn removal by cryogenic distillation in the XENON100 experiment

    Aprile, E., et al. : Online 222 Rn removal by cryogenic distillation in the XENON100 experiment. Eur. Phys. J. C 77(6), 358 (2017) https://doi.org/10. 1140/epjc/s10052-017-4902-x arXiv:1702.06942 [physics.ins-det]

    2017 arXiv

  64. [71]

    : Application and modeling of an online distillation method to reduce krypton and argon in XENON1T

    Aprile, E., et al. : Application and modeling of an online distillation method to reduce krypton and argon in XENON1T. PTEP 2022(5), 053–01 (2022) https://doi.org/10.1093/ptep/ptac074 arXiv:2112.12231 [physics.ins-det]

    2022 arXiv

  65. [72]

    an approximation to the entropy of lattice vacancy formation in liquid argon

    Karasz, F.E., Halsey, G.D.: Solubility of helium and neon in liquid argon. an approximation to the entropy of lattice vacancy formation in liquid argon. J. Chem. Phys. 29(1), 173–179 (1958) https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1744419

    1958 doi

  66. [73]

    Volk, H., Halsey, G.D.: Solubility of hydrogen and deuterium in liquid argon. J. Chem. Phys. 33(4), 1132–1139 (1960) https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1731347

    1960 doi

  67. [74]

    Heck, C.K., Hiza, M.J.: Liquid-vapor equilibrium in the system helium-methane. AIChE J. 13(3), 593–599 (1967) https://doi.org/10.1002/aic.690130335

    1967 doi

  68. [75]

    Fluid Phase Equilib

    Shukla, K.P., Lucas, K.: Prediction of gas solubility henry coefficients in simple systems. Fluid Phase Equilib. 28(3), 211–216 (1986) https://doi.org/10.1016/ 0378-3812(86)80028-0

    1986

  69. [76]

    Yoshino, K., Sowada, U., Schmidt, W.F.: Effect of molecular solutes on the electron drift velocity in liquid ar, kr, and xe. Phys. Rev. A A 14 , 438–444 (1976) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.14.438

    1976 doi

  70. [77]

    Science 251(4999), 1323–1330 (1991) https://doi.org/10.1126/science.251.4999.1323

    Pollack, G.L.: Why gases dissolve in liquids. Science 251(4999), 1323–1330 (1991) https://doi.org/10.1126/science.251.4999.1323

    1991

  71. [78]

    Nature 293(5828), 165–166 (1981) https://doi.org/10.1038/293165a0

    Rentzepis, P.M., Douglass, D.C.: Xenon as a solvent. Nature 293(5828), 165–166 (1981) https://doi.org/10.1038/293165a0

    1981 doi

  72. [79]

    Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632 (1986)

    Prausnitz, J.M., Lichtenthaler, R.N., Azevedo, E.G.: Molecular Thermodynam- ics of Fluid-Phase Equilibria, 2nd edn. Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632 (1986)

    1986

  73. [80]

    Le Roy, R.J., Hutson, J.M.: Improved potential energy surfaces for the inter- action of h2 with ar, kr, and xe. J. Chem. Phys. 86(2), 837–853 (1987) https: 20 //doi.org/10.1063/1.452284

    1987 doi

  74. [81]

    Danielson, L.J., Keil, M.: Interatomic potentials for hear, hekr, and hexe from multiproperty fits. J. Chem. Phys. 88(2), 851–870 (1988) https://doi.org/10. 1063/1.454165

    1988

  75. [82]

    (unpublished) (2014)

    Aalseth, C.E., et al.: Maximum Likelihood Signal Extraction Method Applied to 3.4 years of CoGeNT Data. (unpublished) (2014)

    2014

  76. [83]

    Aalseth, C.E., et al.: CoGeNT: A Search for Low-Mass Dark Matter using p-type Point Contact Germanium Detectors. Phys. Rev. D88, 012002 (2013) https: //doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.88.012002 arXiv:1208.5737 [astro-ph.CO]

    2013 arXiv

  77. [84]

    : Measurement of Muon Capture on the Proton to 1% Precision and Determination of the Pseudoscalar Coupling gP

    Andreev, V.A., et al. : Measurement of Muon Capture on the Proton to 1% Precision and Determination of the Pseudoscalar Coupling gP . Phys. Rev. Lett. 110(1), 012504 (2013) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.012504 arXiv:1210.6545 [nucl-ex]

    2013 arXiv

  78. [85]

    Technical Report PNPI-2702, Peters- burg Nuclear Physics Institute, Gatchina 188350, Russia (2006)

    Alekseev, I., et al.: Hydrogen distallation at the deuterium removal unit of mucap experiment. Technical Report PNPI-2702, Peters- burg Nuclear Physics Institute, Gatchina 188350, Russia (2006). https://muon.npl.washington.edu/twiki/pub/MuCap/CryoDestillation/DRU- NHA-manuscript.pdf

    2006

  79. [86]

    Earth-Science Reviews 203, 103140 (2020) https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.earscirev.2020.103140

    Zgonnik, V.: The occurrence and geoscience of natural hydrogen: A comprehen- sive review. Earth-Science Reviews 203, 103140 (2020) https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.earscirev.2020.103140

    2020

  80. [87]

    Physics Letters B422(1), 349–358 (1998) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0370-2693(97)01565-7

    Alimonti, G., Angloher, G., Arpesella, C., Balata, M., Bellini, G., Benziger, J., Bonetti, S., Cadonati, L., Calaprice, F.P., Cecchet, G., Chen, M., Darnton, N., de Bari, A., Deutsch, M., Elisei, F., von Feilitzsch, F., Galbiati, C., Gatti, F., Giammarchi, M.G., Giugni, D., Go...

    1998

  81. [89]

    Akerib, D.S., et al.: Projected WIMP sensitivity of the LUX-ZEPLIN dark mat- ter experiment. Phys. Rev. D 101(5), 052002 (2020) https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevD.101.052002 arXiv:1802.06039 [astro-ph.IM]

    2020 arXiv

  82. [90]

    : A search for light dark matter in XENON10 data

    Angle, J., et al. : A search for light dark matter in XENON10 data. Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 051301 (2011) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.107.051301 arXiv:1104.3088 [astro-ph]. [Erratum: Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 249901 (2013)]

    2011 arXiv

  83. [91]

    : Low-mass dark matter search using ionization signals in XENON100

    Aprile, E., et al. : Low-mass dark matter search using ionization signals in XENON100. Phys. Rev. D94(9), 092001 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevD.94.092001,10.1103/PhysRevD.95.059901 arXiv:1605.06262 [astro- ph.CO]. [Erratum: Phys. Rev. D95, 059901 (2017)]

    2016 arXiv

  84. [92]

    : Low-Mass Dark Matter Search with the DarkSide-50 Experiment

    Agnes, P., et al. : Low-Mass Dark Matter Search with the DarkSide-50 Experiment. Phys. Rev. Lett. 121(8), 081307 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.121.081307 arXiv:1802.06994 [astro-ph.HE]

    2018 arXiv

  85. [93]

    Aprile, E., et al.: Search for Light Dark Matter in Low-Energy Ionization Signals from XENONnT (2024) arXiv:2411.15289 [hep-ex]

    2024 arXiv

  86. [94]

    Bo, Z., et al.: First Measurement of Solar 8B Neutrino Flux through Coher- ent Elastic Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering in PandaX-4T (2024) arXiv:2407.10892 [hep-ex]

    2024 arXiv

  87. [95]

    Aprile, E., et al.: First Measurement of Solar 8B Neutrinos via Coherent Elastic Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering with XENONnT (2024) arXiv:2408.02877 [nucl-ex]

    2024

  88. [96]

    Hertel, S.A., Biekert, A., Lin, J., Velan, V., McKinsey, D.N.: Direct detection of sub-GeV dark matter using a superfluid 4He target. Phys. Rev. D 100(9), 092007 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.100.092007 arXiv:1810.06283 [physics.ins-det]

    2019 arXiv

  89. [97]

    : Projected Sensitivity of the SuperCDMS SNOLAB exper- iment

    Agnese, R., et al. : Projected Sensitivity of the SuperCDMS SNOLAB exper- iment. Phys. Rev. D95(8), 082002 (2017) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD. 95.082002 arXiv:1610.00006 [physics.ins-det]

    2017 arXiv

  90. [98]

    : Dark Matter Search Results from the Complete Exposure of the PICO-60 C 3F8 Bubble Chamber

    Amole, C., et al. : Dark Matter Search Results from the Complete Exposure of the PICO-60 C 3F8 Bubble Chamber. Phys. Rev. D100(2), 022001 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.100.022001 arXiv:1902.04031 [astro-ph.CO]

    2019 arXiv

  91. [99]

    : Final Results of the PICASSO Dark Matter Search Experiment

    Behnke, E., et al. : Final Results of the PICASSO Dark Matter Search Experiment. Astropart. Phys. 90, 85–92 (2017) https://doi.org/10.1016/j. astropartphys.2017.02.005 arXiv:1611.01499 [hep-ex]

    2017 arXiv

  92. [100]

    : Search for neutrinos from annihilation of captured low- mass dark matter particles in the Sun by Super-Kamiokande

    Choi, K., et al. : Search for neutrinos from annihilation of captured low- mass dark matter particles in the Sun by Super-Kamiokande. Phys. Rev. Lett. 114(14), 141301 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.141301 22 arXiv:1503.04858 [hep-ex]

    2015 arXiv

  93. [101]

    Arora, M.M., et al.: Search for light dark matter with NEWS-G at the LSM using a methane target (2024) arXiv:2407.12769 [hep-ex] 23

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.