MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Calorimetric Dark Matter Detection with Galactic Center Gas Clouds

2018· article· en· W2809170714 on OpenAlexafffund
Amit Bhoonah, Joseph Bramante, Fatemeh Elahi, Sarah Schon

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicDark Matter and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteArthur B. McDonald-Canadian Astroparticle Physics Research InstituteQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueHigh Energy PhysicsMinistero dello Sviluppo EconomicoKavli Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of California, Santa BarbaraIndustry CanadaNational Science FoundationGovernment of CanadaCERNMinistère du Développement Économique, de l’Innovation et de l’ExportationAspen Center for Physics
KeywordsPhysicsGalactic CenterDark matterMilky WayAstrophysicsScalar field dark matterLight dark matterHot dark matterBaryonic dark matterAstronomyGalaxyCosmologyDark energy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We demonstrate that dark matter heating of gas clouds, hundreds of parsecs from the Milky Way Galactic Center, provides a powerful new test of dark matter interactions. To illustrate, we set a new bound on nucleon scattering for 10-100 MeV mass dark matter. We also constrain millicharged dark matter models, including those proposed to match the recent EDGES 21 cm absorption anomaly. For Galactic Center gas clouds, the Galactic fields' magnetic deflection of electromagnetically charged dark matter is mitigated, because the magnetic fields around the Galactic Center are poloidal, as opposed to being aligned parallel to the Milky Way disk. We discuss prospects for detecting dark matter using a population of Galactic Center gas clouds warmed by dark matter.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.167
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.238 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations57
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicDark Matter and Cosmic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207