MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

New Constraints on Dark Photon Dark Matter with Superconducting Nanowire Detectors in an Optical Haloscope

2022· article· en· W4281697054 on OpenAlexafffund
Jeff Chiles, Ilya Charaev, Robert Lasenby, Masha Baryakhtar, Junwu Huang, Alexana Roshko, G. Burton, Marco Colangelo, Ken Van Tilburg, Asimina Arvanitaki, Sae Woo Nam, Karl K. Berggren

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicDark Matter and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersOffice of ScienceEnergy Frontier Research CentersGovernment of CanadaMinistry of Colleges and UniversitiesBasic Energy SciencesInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueInnovation, Science and Economic Development CanadaStanford Research Computing Center, Stanford UniversityStanford UniversityNational Science FoundationUniversity of WashingtonGordon and Betty Moore FoundationU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsPhysicsDark matterDark photonLight dark matterPhotonAxionUniverseParticle physicsWeakly interacting massive particlesScalar field dark matterAstrophysicsDark energyCosmologyOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Uncovering the nature of dark matter is one of the most important goals of particle physics. Light bosonic particles, such as the dark photon, are well-motivated candidates: they are generally long-lived, weakly interacting, and naturally produced in the early universe. In this work, we report on Light ${A}^{\ensuremath{'}}$ Multilayer Periodic Optical SNSPD Target, a proof-of-concept experiment searching for dark photon dark matter in the eV mass range, via coherent absorption in a multilayer dielectric haloscope. Using a superconducting nanowire single-photon detector (SNSPD), we achieve efficient photon detection with a dark count rate of $\ensuremath{\sim}6\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{10}^{\ensuremath{-}6}\text{ }\text{ }\mathrm{counts}/\mathrm{s}$. We find no evidence for dark photon dark matter in the mass range of $\ensuremath{\sim}0.7--0.8\text{ }\text{ }\mathrm{eV}$ with kinetic mixing $\ensuremath{\epsilon}\ensuremath{\gtrsim}{10}^{\ensuremath{-}12}$, improving existing limits in $\ensuremath{\epsilon}$ by up to a factor of 2. With future improvements to SNSPDs, our architecture could probe significant new parameter space for dark photon and axion dark matter in the meV to 10 eV mass range.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations150
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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