Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 101 references

First direct search for light dark matter interactions in a transition-edge sensor

T0 review · 3 major / 5 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 A transition-edge sensor used as both target and sensor sets the first direct limits on sub-MeV dark matter.

desk verdict A competent first demonstration of a TES as both target and sensor for light dark matter; the sub-eV calibration extrapolation is a real but addressable gap, not a fatal flaw. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.18982 v4 pith:XOECO2PY submitted 2025-06-23 physics.ins-det hep-exhep-phquant-ph

Christina Schwemmbauer , Guy Daniel Hadas , Yonit Hochberg , Katharina-Sophie Isleif , Friederike Januschek , Benjamin V. Lehmann , Axel Lindner , Adriana E. Lita
show 4 more authors
Manuel Meyer Gulden Othman Elmeri Rivasto José Alejandro Rubiera Gimeno
This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.ins-dethep-exhep-phquant-ph PACS 95.35.+d85.25.Oj
keywords transition-edgesensorlightdarkmattersub-MeVmatter-electronscatteringmatter-nucleonphotonabsorptionsingle-photondetectorlow-thresholddirectdetection
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

The paper reports the first direct dark matter search in which a transition-edge sensor (TES) serves as both the target material and the readout detector. A 489-hour run with a tungsten TES optimized for 1064 nm photons, with a mass around 0.2 ng and an effective threshold near 0.3 eV, produced new exclusion limits on dark matter scattering off electrons and nucleons and on dark photon absorption for dark matter below the MeV scale. The authors show that TES devices, with their energy-resolving capability, are a complementary platform to superconducting nanowire and kinetic inductance detectors, and that scaled-up arrays could reach new regions of light dark matter parameter space.

What carries the argument

The central object is the transition-edge sensor as a linear calorimeter: a roughly 20 nm tungsten film biased on the edge of its superconducting transition produces voltage pulses whose time integral is proportional to deposited energy, so a dark matter scatter mimics a photon pulse of the same energy. The analysis chain uses the affine calibration $E = (I-1.76\,\mu\mathrm{s\,mV})/(33.53\,\mu\mathrm{s\,mV\,eV}^{-1})$ established with laser photons, pulse-shape cuts on rise time, decay time, and fit quality to reject noise, and a profile-likelihood ratio that treats background rates as unconstrained nuisance parameters to convert 489 h of data into 95% exclusion limits.

What would settle it

A direct sub-eV calibration measurement, for instance coupling a monochromatic source with energy between 0.3 and 0.7 eV into the sensor through a path that bypasses the fiber cutoff, would test the assumed affine relation; if the pulse integral per electronvolt changes slope or becomes nonlinear below 0.756 eV, the new limits at low dark matter masses would need to be re-derived, while an affine result would support the extrapolation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The authors establish, as a proof of principle, that a transition-edge sensor can be operated simultaneously as the dark matter target and as the sensor, and they report the first direct search built on that idea. In a 489 h exposure with a roughly 0.2 ng tungsten device optimized for 1064 nm photons, they lower the effective trigger threshold to about 0.3 eV and use the calorimetric pulse integral, calibrated with 0.756 eV and 1.165 eV laser photons, to measure the spectrum of photon-like pulses. Treating all observed counts as potentially background, they set 95% confidence-level exclusion limits on dark matter-electron scattering, dark matter-nucleon scattering, and dark photon absorption for sub-MeV masses. The key operational claim is that any energy deposit above threshold produces the same pulse shape as a photon of the same energy, so the detector's calorimetric response transfers directly from optical calibration to hypothetical dark matter interactions.

Load-bearing premise

The entire low-energy reach assumes the affine pulse-integral calibration measured with 0.756 eV and 1.165 eV laser photons continues linearly down to the roughly 0.3 eV threshold, because the optical fiber cannot transmit calibration light below about 0.7 eV.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Transition-edge sensors become a third working superconducting platform, alongside nanowires and kinetic inductance detectors, for sub-MeV dark matter direct detection.
  • The same energy-resolution advantage that lets a TES count 1064 nm photons lets it use spectral shape in dark matter limit-setting, not just total counts.
  • Existing TES arrays built for astronomy and quantum optics are immediately relevant as dark matter detectors.
  • Scaling to 16-pixel and kilopixel arrays, as projected in the paper, would extend sensitivity to lower cross sections and lower dark-photon mixing strengths.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the same affine calibration holds for sub-eV deposits, the TES platform could be cross-calibrated with other low-energy sources or used to search for dark matter in even lower threshold configurations; this is a testable extension, not a claim of the paper.
  • Because TES pulses carry spectral energy information, a future array could not only set limits but also examine the shape of an excess to test dark matter hypotheses, something counting-only detectors cannot do.
  • Measuring the actual phonon and vibrational spectrum of the polycrystalline tungsten film would likely extend the nucleon-scattering sensitivity below the masses covered by the conservative nuclear-recoil-only analysis.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper reports the first direct dark-matter search in which a transition-edge sensor (TES) is used simultaneously as the target and as the sensor. A 489 h science run with a ~0.2 ng tungsten TES operated at ~25 mK, with a trigger optimized for sub-eV photon-like pulses, yields 126 events passing loose cuts and 13 events passing tight cuts. Using a profile-likelihood ratio with per-bin background nuisance parameters, the authors place 95% C.L. limits on DM-electron scattering, dark-photon absorption, and DM-nucleon scattering, with the strongest new reach at sub-MeV masses. The DM rate calculations follow published dielectric-response and superconductor formalism with standard halo parameters. The energy calibration of the science run is anchored at 0.756 and 1.165 eV and extrapolated affinely downward to the ~0.3 eV threshold region; this extrapolation is the main unquantified systematic. Projections for 16- and 1000-pixel TES arrays are also presented.

Significance. If the calibration concern is resolved, this is an important result for the field of light dark matter detection. It demonstrates experimentally that a TES can serve simultaneously as target and sensor, a new operating mode complementary to SNSPDs and KIDs, and it provides a realistic path toward sub-eV thresholds with energy resolution. The analysis has genuine strengths: two independent cut sets, a simulation-based acceptance chain that includes the hardware trigger and pulse finder, a conservative background-agnostic profile-likelihood treatment, and explicit caveats about atmospheric overburden. The projected sensitivity of scaled arrays is plausible and useful for planning. The main value is in establishing the TES platform; the precise numerical limits in Figs. 5–7 are of secondary importance and currently carry an unquantified calibration uncertainty.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section II D, Eq. (3), Fig. 2] The central claim of sensitivity at sub-eV energies rests on an energy calibration that is not verified below 0.756 eV. The DM-science-run calibration uses only the 0.756 eV and 1.165 eV laser lines, and Eq. (3) assumes the affine relation E = (I – 1.76)/(33.53) continues to the ~0.3 eV threshold region where the new limits are set. The paper explicitly states that lower-energy calibration is not possible with the current fiber, but it assigns no systematic uncertainty to this extrapolation. This is not a minor detail: the nonzero intercept means a small absolute error in the baseline or intercept translates into a large relative energy error near threshold, and the acceptance curves of Fig. 4 are computed from simulated photon-like pulses that assume the same affine response. A bend or a slow drift of the E–I relation below 0.756 eV would shift the energy spectrum, the effective threshold, and all three limits in Figs. 5–7. Please quantify this systematic (e.g., from the slope/intercept covariance, an alternate curvature term consistent with the calibration points and simulation, and run-to-run stability checks) and propagate it into the limits, for instance as a band or as a conservatively raised effective threshold.
  2. [Section IV, near Eq. (9)] The justification for neglecting thin-layer geometric corrections is not consistent across the channels presented. The text states that typical momentum transfers are v_DM m_DM ≳ 10^-3 × 30 keV = 30 eV, larger than the ~10 eV inverse film thickness, and therefore geometric corrections are negligible 'for all DM masses we consider.' This is not true for the dark-photon absorption channel of Fig. 6, where m_DM is in the ~0.1–1 eV range and v_DM m_DM is ~10^-4–10^-3 eV, nor exactly true for the lowest DM-electron scattering masses (10^-2 MeV), where v_DM m_DM is ~10 eV. The statement therefore does not cover the absorption analysis, and the neglect of geometric corrections for the Fig. 6 limit needs either a dedicated justification or a quantitative estimate. Please state the mass range to which the 30 eV estimate applies and assess the impact on each of the three channels.
  3. [Section III A, Table I, and Section IV] The acceptance curves used to derive all three limits are obtained from simulated photon-like pulses, and the paper assumes that a DM interaction produces a pulse shape identical to that of a photon. This assumption is especially nontrivial for the DM-nucleon recoil channel in Fig. 7, where the initial energy deposit is a nuclear recoil in the 20 nm tungsten film rather than an electron excitation. The paper cites Refs. [13,37] for this equivalence, but no experimental verification is presented and the pulse-shape cuts in Table I are tuned to photon calibration data. If nuclear recoils produce different rise or decay times, the acceptance in Eq. (2) and the final limits would change. Please provide a quantitative justification or an experimental cross-check that the photon-based acceptance transfers to the nuclear-recoil channel.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section II D, Fig. 2 caption and Eq. (3)] Write the pulse-integral units consistently as µs·mV, and state explicitly in Eq. (3) that the denominator has units of µs·mV/eV.
  2. [Table I] Clarify whether 'Survival [%]' refers to the fraction of all triggered events or of events passing the pulse finder; the two denominators would give very different interpretations.
  3. [Abstract and Section II B] The ~0.3 eV effective threshold is quoted without a definition. Please state the convention (e.g., 50% acceptance point or trigger turn-on) and note that it is derived from the simulated acceptance in Fig. 4.
  4. [Section IV, after Eq. (10)] The text defines f_n as the coupling to DM, but f_n does not appear in Eq. (10); either the formula is missing a factor or the sentence is left over from another definition.
  5. [Abstract] The abstract says 'for dark matter with mass below the MeV scale,' but Figs. 5 and 7 extend to 100 MeV and 1 GeV; please clarify that the sub-MeV statement refers to the low-mass portion of the new limits.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the DM limits are a genuine inversion of the observed spectrum against an independently specified signal model.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain separates cleanly into three independent inputs. (1) The energy calibration, Eq. (3), is fixed by laser calibration measurements at 0.756 and 1.165 eV before the DM science run; it is not fitted to the DM data. (2) The DM signal model, Eqs. (7)-(10), uses published dielectric-response and standard-halo-model formalism, with no DM parameter fitted to the observed counts. (3) The observed spectrum is a 489 h background measurement, and the limits are obtained by a profile-likelihood inversion asking which cross sections are compatible with those counts. None of these steps defines one quantity in terms of the result it is used to derive. The acceptance curves are simulated using the same pulse-shape and calibration framework, but this is detector-response modeling, not a fitted DM prediction; it does not force the DM exclusion. The main experimental weakness, namely extrapolating the affine calibration below 0.756 eV down to the ~0.3 eV threshold region, is explicitly acknowledged in Section II D ('Testing for lower energies is not possible with this setup... We thus extrapolate the observed behavior down to lower energies') and is a systematic-uncertainty concern, not circularity. The self-citations, e.g. Refs. [29,30] for the TES-as-target proposal and Ref. [40] for the TESPASS framework, are normal prior work and are not used to forbid alternatives or to import a uniqueness theorem. The central limits are therefore not equivalent to their inputs by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new particles or entities are introduced. The paper's dark matter signal models are standard sub-MeV DM scenarios (electron scattering, nucleon scattering, dark photon absorption) taken from the literature. The main unknowns are experimental: the extrapolated energy calibration, the noise-triggered threshold, and the unmodeled backgrounds that the analysis treats conservatively.

free parameters (2)
  • Calibration intercept and slope = intercept 1.76 mu s mV, slope 33.53 mu s mV/eV
    The affine relation E = (I - 1.76)/(33.53) is fit to laser calibration points at 0.756 eV and 1.165 eV and then assumed to hold down to about 0.1 eV. This is the main fitted input that converts pulse integrals into energies.
  • Trigger level = chosen to give trigger rate < 2 Hz
    The DAQ trigger threshold is set empirically from noise data, and the resulting effective threshold (~0.3 eV) determines the low-energy acceptance. This is a tuned experimental parameter.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The photon-like pulse response measured at 0.756 to 1.409 eV extrapolates linearly to lower energies.
    The calibration is only measured down to 0.756 eV due to fiber cutoff; the DM analysis bins extend to 0.1 eV and the acceptance simulation uses 0.1 to 3.0 eV. See Section II D.
  • domain assumption The dielectric function of the tungsten stack describes DM-electron scattering and absorption rates.
    Rate calculations use published linear response theory (Refs. 53, 14), and the tungsten film is assumed to be well described by a known dielectric function, though the film is polycrystalline alpha and beta phase tungsten. The paper does not measure the dielectric function for this specific film.
  • domain assumption The standard halo model for the local DM velocity distribution and density (0.4 GeV/cm^3).
    Used to compute DM interaction rates, Section IV. This is standard for direct detection limits, though real halo uncertainties affect the limits by order-one factors.
  • domain assumption A DM interaction that deposits energy in the TES produces a pulse identical in shape to a photon pulse of the same energy.
    The analysis selects photon-like pulses using pulse-shape cuts calibrated with lasers and simulations (Section III A). The paper argues from small-signal theory and prior references (13, 37) that this holds, but it is not directly demonstrated for nuclear or electron recoils in this device.
  • domain assumption Background events not originating from DM can be treated as Poissonian and profiled away.
    The profile likelihood procedure assumes the observed counts are drawn from Poisson distributions with unknown means, allowing any subset to be attributed to background. This is conservative but assumes Wilks' theorem applies to the test statistic.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of First direct search for light dark matter interactions in a transition-edge sensor." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XOECO2PY

@misc{pith2026250618982,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: First direct search for light dark matter interactions in a transition-edge sensor},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XOECO2PY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.18982}
}
read the original abstract

We propose the use of transition-edge sensor (TES) single-photon detectors as a simultaneous target and sensor for direct dark matter searches, and report results from the first search of this kind. We perform a 489 h science run with a TES device optimized for the detection of 1064 nm photons, with a mass of ~0.2 ng and an energy threshold of ~0.3 eV, and set new limits on dark matter interactions with both electrons and nucleons for dark matter with mass below the MeV scale. With their excellent energy resolution, TESs enable search strategies that are complementary to recent results from superconducting nanowire single-photon detectors and kinetic inductance detectors. We show that next-generation TES arrays hold promise to probe new regions of light dark matter parameter space.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.18982 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Prototype TES detector [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Calibration measurements [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Example pulses. Example pulses measured with the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: B. Dark counts and constraint procedure Over the course of a 489 h science run, we identify 126 counts passing the loose cuts and 13 counts passing the tight cuts. The energy distribution of these counts is shown in the lower-right panel of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/fu…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. DM-electron scattering. New bound and projections at the 95% C.L. on DM scattering with electrons via a light ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Dark photon DM absorption. New TES limit and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. DM-nucleon scattering. New limits and projections at the 95% C.L. for DM-nucleon scattering. The shaded dark and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

101 extracted references · 5 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    J. L. Feng, Dark Matter Candidates from Particle Physics and Methods of Detection, Ann. Rev. As- tron. Astrophys.48, 495 (2010), arXiv:1003.0904 [astro- ph.CO]

    arXiv 2010

  2. [2]

    Bertone and T

    G. Bertone and T. Tait, M. P., A new era in the search for dark matter, Nature562, 51 (2018), arXiv:1810.01668 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv 2018

  3. [3]

    D. S. Akeribet al., Snowmass2021 Cosmic Frontier Dark Matter Direct Detection to the Neutrino Fog, inSnow- mass 2021(2022) arXiv:2203.08084 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2022

  4. [4]

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

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

    2024

  5. [5]

    Bergstr¨ om, Nonbaryonic dark matter: Observational evidence and detection methods, Rept

    L. Bergstr¨ om, Nonbaryonic dark matter: Observational evidence and detection methods, Rept. Prog. Phys.63, 793 (2000), arXiv:hep-ph/0002126

    arXiv 2000

  6. [6]

    Asadiet al., Early-Universe Model Building, (2022), arXiv:2203.06680 [hep-ph]

    P. Asadiet al., Early-Universe Model Building, (2022), arXiv:2203.06680 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2022

  7. [7]

    Essig, J

    R. Essig, J. Mardon, and T. Volansky, Direct Detec- tion of Sub-GeV Dark Matter, Phys. Rev. D85, 076007 (2012), arXiv:1108.5383 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2012

  8. [8]

    P. W. Graham, D. E. Kaplan, S. Rajendran, and M. T. Walters, Semiconductor Probes of Light Dark Matter, Phys. Dark Univ.1, 32 (2012), arXiv:1203.2531 [hep- ph]

    arXiv 2012

Show all 101 references
  1. [9]

    Essig, M

    R. Essig, M. Fernandez-Serra, J. Mardon, A. Soto, T. Volansky, and T.-T. Yu, Direct Detection of sub- GeV Dark Matter with Semiconductor Targets, JHEP 05, 046, arXiv:1509.01598 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  2. [10]

    Hochberg, Y

    Y. Hochberg, Y. Zhao, and K. M. Zurek, Superconduct- ing Detectors for Superlight Dark Matter, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 011301 (2016), arXiv:1504.07237 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Hochberg, M

    Y. Hochberg, M. Pyle, Y. Zhao, and K. M. Zurek, De- tecting Superlight Dark Matter with Fermi-Degenerate Materials, JHEP08, 057, arXiv:1512.04533 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  4. [12]

    Hochberg, I

    Y. Hochberg, I. Charaev, S.-W. Nam, V. Verma, M. Colangelo, and K. K. Berggren, Detecting Sub-GeV Dark Matter with Superconducting Nanowires, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 151802 (2019), arXiv:1903.05101 [hep- ph]

    2019 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Hochberg, E

    Y. Hochberg, E. D. Kramer, N. Kurinsky, and B. V. Lehmann, Directional detection of light dark matter in superconductors, Phys. Rev. D107, 076015 (2023), arXiv:2109.04473 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Hochberg, B

    Y. Hochberg, B. V. Lehmann, I. Charaev, J. Chiles, M. Colangelo, S. W. Nam, and K. K. Berggren, New constraints on dark matter from superconduct- ing nanowires, Phys. Rev. D106, 112005 (2022), arXiv:2110.01586 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Derenzo, R

    S. Derenzo, R. Essig, A. Massari, A. Soto, and T.- T. Yu, Direct Detection of sub-GeV Dark Matter with Scintillating Targets, Phys. Rev. D96, 016026 (2017), arXiv:1607.01009 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Hochberg, Y

    Y. Hochberg, Y. Kahn, M. Lisanti, C. G. Tully, and K. M. Zurek, Directional detection of dark matter with two-dimensional targets, Phys. Lett. B772, 239 (2017), arXiv:1606.08849 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Hochberg, Y

    Y. Hochberg, Y. Kahn, M. Lisanti, K. M. Zurek, A. G. Grushin, R. Ilan, S. M. Griffin, Z.-F. Liu, S. F. We- 12 ber, and J. B. Neaton, Detection of sub-MeV Dark Mat- ter with Three-Dimensional Dirac Materials, Phys. Rev. D97, 015004 (2018), arXiv:1708.08929 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Cavoto, F

    G. Cavoto, F. Luchetta, and A. Polosa, Sub-GeV Dark Matter Detection with Electron Recoils in Carbon Nan- otubes, Phys. Lett. B776, 338 (2018), arXiv:1706.02487 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  11. [19]

    N. A. Kurinsky, T. C. Yu, Y. Hochberg, and B. Cabr- era, Diamond Detectors for Direct Detection of Sub- GeV Dark Matter, Phys. Rev. D99, 123005 (2019), arXiv:1901.07569 [hep-ex]

    2019 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Blanco, J

    C. Blanco, J. Collar, Y. Kahn, and B. Lillard, Dark Matter-Electron Scattering from Aromatic Or- ganic Targets, Phys. Rev. D101, 056001 (2020), arXiv:1912.02822 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  13. [21]

    S. M. Griffin, Y. Hochberg, K. Inzani, N. Kurinsky, T. Lin, and T. C. Yu, SiC Detectors for Sub-GeV Dark Matter, Phys. Rev. D (2020), arXiv:2008.08560 [hep- ph]

    2020 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Simchonyet al., Diamond and SiC Detectors for Rare Event Searches, J

    A. Simchonyet al., Diamond and SiC Detectors for Rare Event Searches, J. Low Temp. Phys.216, 363 (2024)

    2024

  15. [23]

    Essiget al., Snowmass2021 Cosmic Frontier: The landscape of low-threshold dark matter direct detec- tion in the next decade, inSnowmass 2021(2022) arXiv:2203.08297 [hep-ph]

    R. Essiget al., Snowmass2021 Cosmic Frontier: The landscape of low-threshold dark matter direct detec- tion in the next decade, inSnowmass 2021(2022) arXiv:2203.08297 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  16. [24]

    A. Das, N. Kurinsky, and R. K. Leane, Dark Matter Induced Power in Quantum Devices, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 121801 (2024), arXiv:2210.09313 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  17. [25]

    A. Das, N. Kurinsky, and R. K. Leane, Transmon Qubit constraints on dark matter-nucleon scattering, JHEP 07, 233, arXiv:2405.00112 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  18. [26]

    Hochberg, T

    Y. Hochberg, T. Lin, and K. M. Zurek, Detecting Ultralight Bosonic Dark Matter via Absorption in Superconductors, Phys. Rev. D94, 015019 (2016), arXiv:1604.06800 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Baudiset al.(QROCODILE), A New Bite Into Dark Matter with the SNSPD-Based QROCODILE Experi- ment, (2024), arXiv:2412.16279 [hep-ph]

    L. Baudiset al.(QROCODILE), A New Bite Into Dark Matter with the SNSPD-Based QROCODILE Experi- ment, (2024), arXiv:2412.16279 [hep-ph]

    2024

  20. [28]

    J. Gao, Y. Hochberg, B. V. Lehmann, S. W. Nam, P. Szypryt, M. R. Vissers, and T. Xu, Detecting Light Dark Matter with Kinetic Inductance Detectors, (2024), arXiv:2403.19739 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Schwemmbauer, Y

    C. Schwemmbauer, Y. Hochberg, K.-S. Isleif, F. Januschek, B. V. Lehmann, A. Lindner, M. Meyer, G. Othman, and J. A. Rubiera Gimeno, Simulations for direct dark matter searches using ALPS II’s TES de- tection system, PoSCOSMICWISPers, 055 (2024), arXiv:2407.02954 [hep-ex]

    2024 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Schwemmbaueret al., Direct dark matter searches using ALPS II’s TES detection system, PoSEPS- HEP2023, 120 (2024)

    C. Schwemmbaueret al., Direct dark matter searches using ALPS II’s TES detection system, PoSEPS- HEP2023, 120 (2024)

    2024

  23. [31]

    W. S. Hollandet al., SCUBA-2: The 10000 pixel bolometer camera on the James Clerk Maxwell Tele- scope, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.430, 2513 (2013), arXiv:1301.3650 [astro-ph.IM]

    2013 arXiv

  24. [32]

    C. L. Changet al., SPT-SZ: a Sunyaev-ZePdovich sur- vey for galaxy clusters, inThe Thirteenth International Workshop on Low Temperature Detectors - LTD13, American Institute of Physics Conference Series, Vol. 1185, edited by B. Young, B. Cabrera, and A. Miller (AIP, 2009) pp. 475–477

    2009

  25. [33]

    Gerrits, N

    T. Gerrits, N. Thomas-Peter, J. C. Gates, A. E. Lita, B. J. Metcalf, B. Calkins, N. A. Tomlin, A. E. Fox, A. L. Linares, J. B. Spring, N. K. Lang- ford, R. P. Mirin, P. G. R. Smith, I. A. Walmsley, and S. W. Nam, On-chip, photon-number-resolving, telecommunication-band detecto...

    2011 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Gascon, Dark matter direct detection searches, PoS ICHEP2010, 539 (2010)

    J. Gascon, Dark matter direct detection searches, PoS ICHEP2010, 539 (2010)

    2010

  27. [35]

    M. F. Albakryet al.(SuperCDMS), A Strategy for Low- Mass Dark Matter Searches with Cryogenic Detectors in the SuperCDMS SNOLAB Facility, inSnowmass 2021 (2022) arXiv:2203.08463 [physics.ins-det]

    2022 arXiv

  28. [36]

    C. L. Changet al.(TESSERACT), First Limits on Light Dark Matter Interactions in a Low Threshold Two Channel Athermal Phonon Detector from the TESSER- ACT Collaboration, (2025), arXiv:2503.03683 [hep-ex]

    2025 arXiv

  29. [37]

    S. M. Griffin, G. D. Hadas, Y. Hochberg, K. In- zani, and B. V. Lehmann, Dark Matter-Electron De- tectors for Dark Matter-Nucleon Interactions, (2024), arXiv:2412.16283 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  30. [38]

    J. A. R. Gimeno, F. Januschek, K.-S. Isleif, A. Lindner, M. Meyer, G. Othman, C. Schwemmbauer, and R. Shah, A TES system for ALPS II - Status and Prospects, PoS EPS-HEP2023, 567 (2024)

    2024

  31. [39]

    K. D. Irwin and G. C. Hilton, Transition-Edge Sen- sors, inCryogenic Particle Detection, Vol. 99, edited by C. Enss (2005) p. 63

    2005

  32. [40]

    J. A. Rubiera Gimeno,Optimizing a Transition Edge Sensor detector system for low flux infrared photon mea- surements at the ALPS II experiment, Ph.D. thesis, Hamburg U., Hamburg (2024)

    2024

  33. [41]

    Bastidon,The cryogenic photon detection system for the ALPS II experiment: characterization, optimiza- tion and background rejection, Ph.D

    N. Bastidon,The cryogenic photon detection system for the ALPS II experiment: characterization, optimiza- tion and background rejection, Ph.D. thesis, Universit¨ at Hamburg (2016)

    2016

  34. [42]

    Dreyling-Eschweiler, N

    J. Dreyling-Eschweiler, N. Bastidon, B. D¨ obrich, D. Horns, F. Januschek, and A. Lindner, Characteri- zation, 1064 nm photon signals and background events of a tungsten TES detector for the ALPS experi- ment, J. Mod. Opt.62, 1132 (2015), arXiv:1502.07878 [physics.ins-det]

    2015 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Shah,A TES detector for ALPS II : characterising a cryogenic, low-background, low energy single photon detector, Ph.D

    R. Shah,A TES detector for ALPS II : characterising a cryogenic, low-background, low energy single photon detector, Ph.D. thesis, Mainz U., Mainz U. (2023)

    2023

  36. [44]

    A. E. Lita, B. Calkins, L. A. Pellouchoud, A. J. Miller, and S. Nam, Superconducting transition-edge sensors optimized for high-efficiency photon-number resolving detectors, inAdvanced Photon Counting Techniques IV, Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engi- neers (SPIE) C...

    2010

  37. [45]

    Drung, C

    D. Drung, C. Abmann, J. Beyer, A. Kirste, M. Peters, F. Ruede, and T. Schurig, Highly sensitive and easy-to- use squid sensors, IEEE Transactions on Applied Super- conductivity17, 699 (2007)

    2007

  38. [46]

    Schmidt, M

    M. Schmidt, M. von Helversen, M. L´ opez, F. Gericke, E. Schlottmann, T. Heindel, S. K¨ uck, S. Reitzenstein, and J. Beyer, Photon-Number-Resolving Transition- Edge Sensors for the Metrology of Quantum Light Sources, Journal of Low Temperature Physics193, 1243 (2018)

    2018

  39. [47]

    Shah, K.-S

    R. Shah, K.-S. Isleif, F. Januschek, A. Lindner, and M. Schott, TES Detector for ALPS II, PoSEPS- HEP2021, 801 (2022), arXiv:2110.10654 [physics.ins- det]. 13

    2022 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Meyer, K

    M. Meyer, K. Isleif, F. Januschek, A. Lindner, G. Oth- man, J. A. Rubiera Gimeno, C. Schwemmbauer, M. Schott, and R. Shah (ALPS), A First Application of Machine and Deep Learning for Background Rejec- tion in the ALPS II TES Detector, Annalen Phys.536, 2200545 (2024), arXiv:23...

    2024 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Manentiet al., Dark counts in optical superconduct- ing transition-edge sensors for rare-event searches, Phys

    L. Manentiet al., Dark counts in optical superconduct- ing transition-edge sensors for rare-event searches, Phys. Rev. Applied22, 024051 (2024), arXiv:2402.03073 [physics.ins-det]

    2024

  42. [50]

    J. A. Jay, An overview of macrobending and microbend- ing of optical fibers, Corning, Inc. (2010)

    2010

  43. [51]

    J. A. Rubiera Gimeno, F. Januschek, A. Lindner, C. Schwemmbauer, K.-S. Isleif, M. Meyer, E. Rivasto, G. Othman, and R. Shah, Simulation and measurement of blackbody radiation background in a transition edge sensor, Phys. Rev. D112, 032001 (2025)

    2025

  44. [52]

    J. A. Rubiera Gimeno, K.-S. Isleif, F. Januschek, A. Lindner, M. Meyer, G. Othman, M. Schott, R. Shah, and L. Sohl, The TES detector of the ALPS II experi- ment, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A1046, 167588 (2023)

    2023

  45. [53]

    Hochberg, Y

    Y. Hochberg, Y. Kahn, N. Kurinsky, B. V. Lehmann, T. C. Yu, and K. K. Berggren, Determining Dark- Matter–Electron Scattering Rates from the Dielec- tric Function, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 151802 (2021), arXiv:2101.08263 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  46. [54]

    J. D. Lewin and P. F. Smith, Review of mathemat- ics, numerical factors, and corrections for dark matter experiments based on elastic nuclear recoil, Astropart. Phys.6, 87 (1996)

    1996

  47. [55]

    Lasenby and A

    R. Lasenby and A. Prabhu, Dark matter–electron scat- tering in materials: Sum rules and heterostructures, Phys. Rev. D105, 095009 (2022), arXiv:2110.01587 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Trickle, Z

    T. Trickle, Z. Zhang, K. M. Zurek, K. Inzani, and S. M. Griffin, Multi-Channel Direct Detection of Light Dark Matter: Theoretical Framework, JHEP03, 036, arXiv:1910.08092 [hep-ph]

    1910 arXiv

  49. [57]

    R. H. Helm, Inelastic and Elastic Scattering of 187-Mev Electrons from Selected Even-Even Nuclei, Phys. Rev. 104, 1466 (1956)

    1956

  50. [58]

    Baraket al.(SENSEI), SENSEI: Direct-Detection Results on sub-GeV Dark Matter from a New Skipper-CCD, Phys

    L. Baraket al.(SENSEI), SENSEI: Direct-Detection Results on sub-GeV Dark Matter from a New Skipper-CCD, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 171802 (2020), arXiv:2004.11378 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Amaralet al.(SuperCDMS), Constraints on low- mass, relic dark matter candidates from a surface- operated SuperCDMS single-charge sensitive detector, Phys

    D. Amaralet al.(SuperCDMS), Constraints on low- mass, relic dark matter candidates from a surface- operated SuperCDMS single-charge sensitive detector, Phys. Rev. D102, 091101 (2020), arXiv:2005.14067 [hep-ex]

    2020 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Aguilar-Arevaloet al.(DAMIC), Constraints on Light Dark Matter Particles Interacting with Elec- trons from DAMIC at SNOLAB, Phys

    A. Aguilar-Arevaloet al.(DAMIC), Constraints on Light Dark Matter Particles Interacting with Elec- trons from DAMIC at SNOLAB, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 181802 (2019), arXiv:1907.12628 [astro-ph.CO]

    2019 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Essig, T

    R. Essig, T. Volansky, and T.-T. Yu, New Constraints and Prospects for sub-GeV Dark Matter Scattering off Electrons in Xenon, Phys. Rev. D96, 043017 (2017), arXiv:1703.00910 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Agneset al.(DarkSide), Constraints on Sub-GeV Dark-Matter–Electron Scattering from the DarkSide- 50 Experiment, Phys

    P. Agneset al.(DarkSide), Constraints on Sub-GeV Dark-Matter–Electron Scattering from the DarkSide- 50 Experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 111303 (2018), arXiv:1802.06998 [astro-ph.CO]

    2018 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Aprileet al.(XENON), Light Dark Matter Search with Ionization Signals in XENON1T, Phys

    E. Aprileet al.(XENON), Light Dark Matter Search with Ionization Signals in XENON1T, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 251801 (2019), arXiv:1907.11485 [hep-ex]

    2019 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Hattori, T

    K. Hattori, T. Konno, Y. Miura, S. Takasu, and D. Fukuda, An optical transition-edge sensor with high energy resolution, Supercond. Sci. Technol.35, 095002 (2022), arXiv:2204.01903 [physics.ins-det]

    2022 arXiv

  57. [65]

    H. An, M. Pospelov, and J. Pradler, Dark Matter De- tectors as Dark Photon Helioscopes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 041302 (2013), arXiv:1304.3461 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  58. [66]

    H. An, M. Pospelov, J. Pradler, and A. Ritz, Direct Detection Constraints on Dark Photon Dark Matter, Phys. Lett.B747, 331 (2015), arXiv:1412.8378 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  59. [67]

    H. An, M. Pospelov, J. Pradler, and A. Ritz, New limits on dark photons from solar emission and keV scale dark matter, Phys. Rev. D102, 115022 (2020), arXiv:2006.13929 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Armengaudet al.(EDELWEISS), Searching for low- mass dark matter particles with a massive Ge bolome- ter operated above-ground, Phys

    E. Armengaudet al.(EDELWEISS), Searching for low- mass dark matter particles with a massive Ge bolome- ter operated above-ground, Phys. Rev. D99, 082003 (2019), arXiv:1901.03588 [astro-ph.GA]

    2019 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Armengaudet al.(EDELWEISS), Search for sub- GeV dark matter via the Migdal effect with an EDEL- WEISS germanium detector with NbSi transition- edge sensors, Phys

    E. Armengaudet al.(EDELWEISS), Search for sub- GeV dark matter via the Migdal effect with an EDEL- WEISS germanium detector with NbSi transition- edge sensors, Phys. Rev. D106, 062004 (2022), arXiv:2203.03993 [astro-ph.GA]

    2022 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Agneset al.(DarkSide-50), Search for low-mass dark matter WIMPs with 12˜ton-day exposure of DarkSide- 50, Phys

    P. Agneset al.(DarkSide-50), Search for low-mass dark matter WIMPs with 12˜ton-day exposure of DarkSide- 50, Phys. Rev. D107, 063001 (2023), arXiv:2207.11966 [hep-ex]

    2023

  63. [71]

    Franco (DarkSide-50), Light dark matter search with DarkSide-50, in57th Rencontres de Moriond on Electroweak Interactions and Unified Theories(2023) arXiv:2306.12151 [hep-ex]

    D. Franco (DarkSide-50), Light dark matter search with DarkSide-50, in57th Rencontres de Moriond on Electroweak Interactions and Unified Theories(2023) arXiv:2306.12151 [hep-ex]

    2023 arXiv

  64. [72]

    Alkhatibet al.(SuperCDMS), Light Dark Matter Search with a High-Resolution Athermal Phonon De- tector Operated Above Ground, Phys

    I. Alkhatibet al.(SuperCDMS), Light Dark Matter Search with a High-Resolution Athermal Phonon De- tector Operated Above Ground, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 061801 (2021), arXiv:2007.14289 [hep-ex]

    2021 arXiv

  65. [73]

    M. F. Albakryet al.(SuperCDMS), Search for low- mass dark matter via bremsstrahlung radiation and the Migdal effect in SuperCDMS, Phys. Rev. D107, 112013 (2023), arXiv:2302.09115 [hep-ex]

    2023 arXiv

  66. [74]

    A. H. Abdelhameedet al.(CRESST), First results from the CRESST-III low-mass dark matter program, Phys. Rev. D100, 102002 (2019), arXiv:1904.00498 [astro- ph.CO]

    2019 arXiv

  67. [75]

    Adariet al.(SENSEI), SENSEI: First Direct- Detection Results on sub-GeV Dark Matter from SEN- SEI at SNOLAB, (2023), arXiv:2312.13342 [astro- ph.CO]

    P. Adariet al.(SENSEI), SENSEI: First Direct- Detection Results on sub-GeV Dark Matter from SEN- SEI at SNOLAB, (2023), arXiv:2312.13342 [astro- ph.CO]

    2023 arXiv

  68. [76]

    Huanget al.(PandaX), Search for Dark- Matter–Nucleon Interactions with a Dark Mediator in PandaX-4T, Phys

    D. Huanget al.(PandaX), Search for Dark- Matter–Nucleon Interactions with a Dark Mediator in PandaX-4T, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 191002 (2023), arXiv:2308.01540 [hep-ex]

    2023 arXiv

  69. [77]

    D. S. Akeribet al.(LUX), Results of a Search for Sub-GeV Dark Matter Using 2013 LUX Data, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 131301 (2019), arXiv:1811.11241 [astro- ph.CO]

    2019 arXiv

  70. [78]

    Essig, J

    R. Essig, J. Pradler, M. Sholapurkar, and T.-T. Yu, Relation between the Migdal Effect and Dark Matter-Electron Scattering in Isolated Atoms and Semi- conductors, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 021801 (2020), arXiv:1908.10881 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  71. [79]

    Agneseet al.(SuperCDMS), First Dark Matter Con- straints from a SuperCDMS Single-Charge Sensitive De- tector, Phys

    R. Agneseet al.(SuperCDMS), First Dark Matter Con- straints from a SuperCDMS Single-Charge Sensitive De- tector, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 051301 (2018), [Erratum: 14 Phys.Rev.Lett. 122, 069901 (2019)], arXiv:1804.10697 [hep-ex]

    2018 arXiv

  72. [80]

    Arnaudet al.(EDELWEISS), First germanium- based constraints on sub-MeV Dark Matter with the EDELWEISS experiment, Phys

    Q. Arnaudet al.(EDELWEISS), First germanium- based constraints on sub-MeV Dark Matter with the EDELWEISS experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 141301 (2020), arXiv:2003.01046 [astro-ph.GA]

    2020 arXiv

  73. [81]

    A. Andrianavalomahefaet al.(FUNK Experiment), Limits from the Funk Experiment on the Mixing Strength of Hidden-Photon Dark Matter in the Visible and Near-Ultraviolet Wavelength Range, Phys. Rev. D 102, 042001 (2020), arXiv:2003.13144 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  74. [82]

    M. Ibe, W. Nakano, Y. Shoji, and K. Suzuki, Migdal Effect in Dark Matter Direct Detection Experiments, JHEP03, 194, arXiv:1707.07258 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  75. [83]

    Campbell-Deem, S

    B. Campbell-Deem, S. Knapen, T. Lin, and E. Vil- larama, Dark matter direct detection from the single phonon to the nuclear recoil regime, Phys. Rev. D106, 036019 (2022), arXiv:2205.02250 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  76. [84]

    Emken, C

    T. Emken, C. Kouvaris, and I. M. Shoemaker, Terrestrial Effects on Dark Matter-Electron Scatter- ing Experiments, Phys. Rev. D96, 015018 (2017), arXiv:1702.07750 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  77. [85]

    Emken and C

    T. Emken and C. Kouvaris, DaMaSCUS: The Impact of Underground Scatterings on Direct Detection of Light Dark Matter, JCAP10, 031, arXiv:1706.02249 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  78. [86]

    Emken and C

    T. Emken and C. Kouvaris, How blind are underground and surface detectors to strongly interacting Dark Mat- ter?, Phys. Rev. D97, 115047 (2018), arXiv:1802.04764 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  79. [87]

    Emken, R

    T. Emken, R. Essig, C. Kouvaris, and M. Shola- purkar, Direct Detection of Strongly Interacting Sub- GeV Dark Matter via Electron Recoils, JCAP09, 070, arXiv:1905.06348 [hep-ph]

    1905 arXiv

  80. [88]

    J. A. Rubiera Gimeno, F. Januschek, K.-S. Isleif, A. Lindner, M. Meyer, G. Othman, C. Schwemmbauer, and R. Shah, A TES system for ALPS II - Status and Prospects, PoSEPS-HEP2023, 567 (2023)

    2023

  81. [89]

    A. Lita, D. Rosenberg, S. Nam, A. Miller, D. Balzar, L. Kaatz, and R. Schwall, Tuning of tungsten thin film superconducting transition temperature for fabrication of photon number resolving detectors, Applied Super- conductivity, IEEE Transactions on15, 3528 (2005)

    2005

  82. [90]

    K. M. Morgan, C. G. Pappas, D. A. Bennett, J. D. Gard, J. P. Hays-Wehle, G. C. Hilton, C. D. Reintsema, D. R. Schmidt, J. N. Ullom, and D. S. Swetz, Dependence of transition width on current and critical current in transition-edge sensors, Applied Physics Letters110, 212602 (2017)

    2017

  83. [91]

    Szyprytet al., Toward multiplexed kinetic inductance current sensor arrays, 21st International Conference on Low Temperature Detectors-LTD2025, Santa Fe, NM, USA (June 1-6 2025)

    P. Szyprytet al., Toward multiplexed kinetic inductance current sensor arrays, 21st International Conference on Low Temperature Detectors-LTD2025, Santa Fe, NM, USA (June 1-6 2025)

    2025

  84. [92]

    Szyprytet al., Kinetic inductance current sen- sor for visible to near-infrared wavelength transition- edge sensor readout, Commun

    P. Szyprytet al., Kinetic inductance current sen- sor for visible to near-infrared wavelength transition- edge sensor readout, Commun. Eng.3, 160 (2024), arXiv:2405.15017 [physics.ins-det]

    2024 arXiv

  85. [93]

    L. J. Hall, K. Jedamzik, J. March-Russell, and S. M. West, Freeze-In Production of FIMP Dark Matter, JHEP03, 080, arXiv:0911.1120 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  86. [94]

    Elahi, C

    F. Elahi, C. Kolda, and J. Unwin, UltraViolet Freeze-in, JHEP03, 048, arXiv:1410.6157 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  87. [95]

    Dvorkin, T

    C. Dvorkin, T. Lin, and K. Schutz, Making dark matter out of light: freeze-in from plasma effects, Phys. Rev. D 99, 115009 (2019), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 105, 119901 (2022)], arXiv:1902.08623 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  88. [96]

    K. M. Zurek, Asymmetric Dark Matter: Theories, Sig- natures, and Constraints, Phys. Rept.537, 91 (2014), arXiv:1308.0338 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  89. [97]

    Hochberg, E

    Y. Hochberg, E. Kuflik, T. Volansky, and J. G. Wacker, Mechanism for Thermal Relic Dark Matter of Strongly Interacting Massive Particles, Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 171301 (2014), arXiv:1402.5143 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  90. [98]

    Hochberg, E

    Y. Hochberg, E. Kuflik, H. Murayama, T. Volansky, and J. G. Wacker, Model for Thermal Relic Dark Matter of Strongly Interacting Massive Particles, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 021301 (2015), arXiv:1411.3727 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  91. [99]

    Kuflik, M

    E. Kuflik, M. Perelstein, N. R.-L. Lorier, and Y.-D. Tsai, Elastically Decoupling Dark Matter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 221302 (2016), arXiv:1512.04545 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  92. [100]

    Kuflik, M

    E. Kuflik, M. Perelstein, N. R.-L. Lorier, and Y.-D. Tsai, Phenomenology of ELDER Dark Matter, JHEP08, 078, arXiv:1706.05381 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  93. [101]

    M. Chen, V. Takhistov, K. Nakayama, and K. Hattori, Light Dark Matter Detection with Sub-eV Transition- Edge Sensors, (2025), arXiv:2506.10070 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

Pith tools

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