MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406367809 · doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/01/053

Resonant or asymmetric: the status of sub-GeV dark matter

2025· article· en· W4406367809 on OpenAlexafffund
Sowmiya Balan, Csaba Balázs, Torsten Bringmann, Christopher V. Cappiello, Riccardo Catena, Timón Emken, Tomás E. Gonzalo, Taylor R. Gray, Will Handley, Quan Huynh, Felix Kahlhoefer, Aaron C. Vincent

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicDark Matter and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityArthur B. McDonald-Canadian Astroparticle Physics Research InstitutePerimeter Institute
FundersScience and Technology Facilities CouncilInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueGovernment of CanadaVetenskapsrådetChalmers Tekniska HögskolaDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftKnut och Alice Wallenbergs Stiftelse
KeywordsPhysicsDark matterParticle physicsParameter spaceScalar (mathematics)Frequentist inferenceAnnihilationDark energyDark photonAsymmetryBayesian probabilityCosmologyBayesian inferenceAstrophysicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Sub-GeV dark matter (DM) particles produced via thermal freeze-out evade many of the strong constraints on heavier DM candidates but at the same time face a multitude of new constraints from laboratory experiments, astrophysical observations and cosmological data. In this work we combine all of these constraints in order to perform frequentist and Bayesian global analyses of fermionic and scalar sub-GeV DM coupled to a dark photon with kinetic mixing. For fermionic DM, we find viable parameter regions close to the dark photon resonance, which expand significantly when including a particle-antiparticle asymmetry. For scalar DM, the velocity-dependent annihilation cross section evades the strongest constraints even in the symmetric case. Using Bayesian model comparison, we show that both asymmetric fermionic DM and symmetric scalar DM are preferred over symmetric fermionic DM due to the reduced fine-tuning penalty. Finally, we explore the discovery prospects of near-future experiments both in the full parameter space and for specific benchmark points. We find that the most commonly used benchmark scenarios are already in tension with existing constraints and propose a new benchmark point that can be targeted with future searches.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.680
Threshold uncertainty score0.247

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.245 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations29
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle PhysicsSame topicDark Matter and Cosmic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207