MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4306751669 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.106.083515

Numerical solution of the exact background collisional Boltzmann equation for dark matter-baryon scattering

2022· article· en· W4306751669 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Suroor Seher Gandhi, Yacine Ali-Haïmoud

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsBaryonBoltzmann equationDark matterScatteringElastic scatteringQuantum electrodynamicsStatistical physicsQuantum mechanicsParticle physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Linear cosmological observables can be used to probe elastic scattering of dark matter (DM) with baryons. Availability of high-precision data requires a critical reassessment of any assumptions that may impact the accuracy of constraints. The standard formalism for constraining DM-baryon scattering prerecombination is based on assuming a Maxwell-Boltzmann (MB) velocity distribution for DM. This assumption is not always physically justified, and does not allow for probing DM self-interactions simultaneously with its interactions with baryons. Lifting the MB assumption requires solving the full collisional Boltzmann equation (CBE), which is highly nontrivial. Earlier work proposed a more tractable Fokker-Planck (FP) approximation to the CBE, but its accuracy remained unknown. In this paper, we numerically solve the exact CBE for the first time, in a homogeneous expanding background. We consider DM-baryon scattering cross sections that are positive power-laws of relative velocity. We derive analytical expressions for the collision operator in the case of isotropic differential scattering cross sections. We then solve the background CBE numerically, and use our solution for the DM velocity distribution to compute the DM-baryon heat-exchange rate, which we compare against those obtained with the MB assumption and FP approximation. Over a broad range of DM-to-baryon mass ratios, we find that the FP approximation leads to a maximum error of 17%, significantly better than the up to 160% error introduced by the MB assumption. While our results strictly apply only to the background evolution, the accuracy of the FP approximation is likely to carry over to perturbations. This motivates its implementation into cosmological Boltzmann codes, where it can supersede the much less accurate MB assumption, and allow for a more general exploration of DM interactions with baryons and with itself.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.370 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D.→Same topicCosmology and Gravitation Theories→French-language works237,207→