002771846 001__ 2771846
002771846 005__ 20240119050107.0
002771846 0248_ $$aoai:cds.cern.ch:2771846$$pcerncds:FULLTEXT$$pcerncds:CERN:FULLTEXT$$pcerncds:CERN
002771846 0247_ $$2DOI$$9Springer$$a10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09712-6$$qpublication
002771846 037__ $$9arXiv$$aarXiv:2106.02056$$chep-ph
002771846 037__ $$9arXiv:reportnumber$$aADP-21-9/T1156
002771846 035__ $$9arXiv$$aoai:arXiv.org:2106.02056
002771846 037__ $$9arXiv:reportnumber$$aCERN-TH-2021-084
002771846 035__ $$9Inspire$$aoai:inspirehep.net:1867194$$d2024-01-18T12:05:23Z$$h2024-01-19T03:00:44Z$$mmarcxml$$ttrue$$uhttps://inspirehep.net/api/oai2d
002771846 037__ $$9arXiv:reportnumber$$aCP3-21-15
002771846 035__ $$9Inspire$$a1867194
002771846 037__ $$9arXiv:reportnumber$$aP3H-21-038
002771846 037__ $$9arXiv:reportnumber$$aTTK-21-19,
gambit-physics-21
002771846 037__ $$9arXiv:reportnumber$$aTTK-21-19,
gambit-physics-2021
002771846 041__ $$aeng
002771846 100__ $$aAthron, Peter$$tGRID:grid.1002.3$$tGRID:grid.260474.3$$uMonash U.$$uNanjing Normal U.$$vSchool of Physics and Astronomy, Monash University, 3800 Melbourne, VIC, Australia$$vDepartment of Physics and Institute of Theoretical Physics, Nanjing Normal University, 210023 Nanjing, Jiangsu, China
002771846 245__ $$9Springer$$aThermal WIMPs and the Scale of New Physics: Global Fits of Dirac Dark Matter Effective Field Theories
002771846 269__ $$c2021-06-03
002771846 260__ $$c2021-11-11
002771846 300__ $$a37 p
002771846 500__ $$9arXiv$$a37 pages, 11 figures, 5 tables; v2: matches EPJC version
002771846 520__ $$9Springer$$aWe assess the status of a wide class of WIMP dark matter (DM) models in light of the latest experimental results using the global fitting framework GAMBIT. We perform a global analysis of effective field theory (EFT) operators describing the interactions between a gauge-singlet Dirac fermion and the Standard Model quarks, the gluons and the photon. In this bottom-up approach, we simultaneously vary the coefficients of 14 such operators up to dimension 7, along with the DM mass, the scale of new physics and several nuisance parameters. Our likelihood functions include the latest data from Planck, direct and indirect detection experiments, and the LHC. For DM masses below 100 GeV, we find that it is impossible to satisfy all constraints simultaneously while maintaining EFT validity at LHC energies. For new physics scales around 1 TeV, our results are influenced by several small excesses in the LHC data and depend on the prescription that we adopt to ensure EFT validity. Furthermore, we find large regions of viable parameter space where the EFT is valid and the relic density can be reproduced, implying that WIMPs can still account for the DM of the universe while being consistent with the latest data.
002771846 520__ $$9arXiv$$aWe assess the status of a wide class of WIMP dark matter (DM) models in light of the latest experimental results using the global fitting framework $\textsf{GAMBIT}$. We perform a global analysis of effective field theory (EFT) operators describing the interactions between a gauge-singlet Dirac fermion and the Standard Model quarks, the gluons and the photon. In this bottom-up approach, we simultaneously vary the coefficients of 14 such operators up to dimension 7, along with the DM mass, the scale of new physics and several nuisance parameters. Our likelihood functions include the latest data from $\mathit{Planck}$, direct and indirect detection experiments, and the LHC. For DM masses below 100 GeV, we find that it is impossible to satisfy all constraints simultaneously while maintaining EFT validity at LHC energies. For new physics scales around 1 TeV, our results are influenced by several small excesses in the LHC data and depend on the prescription that we adopt to ensure EFT validity. Furthermore, we find large regions of viable parameter space where the EFT is valid and the relic density can be reproduced, implying that WIMPs can still account for the DM of the universe while being consistent with the latest data.
002771846 540__ $$3preprint$$aCC BY 4.0$$uhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
002771846 542__ $$3publication$$dThe Author(s)$$g2021
002771846 595__ $$aCERN-TH
002771846 65017 $$2arXiv$$aastro-ph.CO
002771846 65017 $$2SzGeCERN$$aAstrophysics and Astronomy
002771846 65017 $$2arXiv$$ahep-ph
002771846 65017 $$2SzGeCERN$$aParticle Physics - Phenomenology
002771846 693__ $$aGAMBIT
002771846 690C_ $$aCERN
002771846 690C_ $$aARTICLE
002771846 700__ $$aKozar, Neal Avis$$tGRID:grid.511034.2$$tGRID:grid.410356.5$$uCPARC$$uQueen's U., Kingston$$vArthur B. McDonald Canadian Astroparticle Physics Research Institute, K7L 3N6 Kingston, ON, Canada$$vDepartment of Physics, Engineering Physics and Astronomy, Queen’s University, K7L 3N6 Kingston, ON, Canada
002771846 700__ $$aBalázs, Csaba$$tGRID:grid.1002.3$$uMonash U.$$vSchool of Physics and Astronomy, Monash University, 3800 Melbourne, VIC, Australia
002771846 700__ $$aBeniwal, Ankit$$jORCID:0000-0003-4849-0611$$tGRID:grid.7942.8$$uLouvain U., CP3$$vCenter for Cosmology, Particle Physics and Phenomenology, Université catholique de Louvain, 1348 Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
002771846 700__ $$aBloor, Sanjay$$tGRID:grid.7445.2$$tGRID:grid.1003.2$$uImperial Coll., London$$uQueensland U.$$vDepartment of Physics, Blackett Laboratory, Imperial College London, Prince Consort Road, SW7 2AZ London, UK$$vSchool of Mathematics and Physics, The University of Queensland, St. Lucia, 4072 Brisbane, QLD, Australia
002771846 700__ $$aBringmann, Torsten$$tGRID:grid.5510.1$$uOslo U.$$vDepartment of Physics, University of Oslo, 0316 Oslo, Norway
002771846 700__ $$aBrod, Joachim$$tGRID:grid.24827.3b$$uCincinnati U.$$vDepartment of Physics, University of Cincinnati, 45221 Cincinnati, OH, USA
002771846 700__ $$aChang, Christopher$$tGRID:grid.1003.2$$uQueensland U.$$vSchool of Mathematics and Physics, The University of Queensland, St. Lucia, 4072 Brisbane, QLD, Australia
002771846 700__ $$aCornell, Jonathan M.$$tGRID:grid.268072.9$$uWeber State U.$$vDepartment of Physics, Weber State University, 1415 Edvalson St., Dept. 2508, 84408 Ogden, UT, USA
002771846 700__ $$aFarmer, Ben$$tGRID:grid.1527.1$$uASP, Melbourne$$vBureau of Meteorology, 3001 Melbourne, VIC, Australia
002771846 700__ $$aFowlie, Andrew$$tGRID:grid.260474.3$$uNanjing Normal U.$$vDepartment of Physics and Institute of Theoretical Physics, Nanjing Normal University, 210023 Nanjing, Jiangsu, China
002771846 700__ $$aGonzalo, Tomás E.$$tGRID:grid.1002.3$$tGRID:grid.1957.a$$uMonash U.$$uAachen, Tech. Hochsch.$$vSchool of Physics and Astronomy, Monash University, 3800 Melbourne, VIC, Australia$$vInstitute for Theoretical Particle Physics and Cosmology (TTK), RWTH Aachen University, 52056 Aachen, Germany
002771846 700__ $$aHandley, Will$$tGRID:grid.5335.0$$uCambridge U., KICC$$uCambridge U.$$vKavli Institute for Cosmology, University of Cambridge, Madingley Road, CB3 0HA Cambridge, UK$$vCavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, JJ Thomson Avenue, CB3 0HE Cambridge, UK
002771846 700__ $$aKahlhoefer, Felix$$tGRID:grid.1957.a$$uAachen, Tech. Hochsch.$$vInstitute for Theoretical Particle Physics and Cosmology (TTK), RWTH Aachen University, 52056 Aachen, Germany
002771846 700__ $$aKvellestad, Anders$$tGRID:grid.5510.1$$uOslo U.$$vDepartment of Physics, University of Oslo, 0316 Oslo, Norway
002771846 700__ $$aMahmoudi, Farvah$$tGRID:grid.7849.2$$tGRID:grid.9132.9$$uIP2I, Lyon$$uCERN$$vUniv Lyon, Univ Lyon 1, CNRS/IN2P3, Institut de Physique des 2 Infinis de Lyon, UMR 5822, 69622 Villeurbanne, France$$vTheoretical Physics Department, CERN, 1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland
002771846 700__ $$aPrim, Markus T.$$tGRID:grid.10388.32$$uBonn U.$$vPhysikalisches Institut der Rheinischen Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn, 53115 Bonn, Germany
002771846 700__ $$aRaklev, Are$$tGRID:grid.5510.1$$uOslo U.$$vDepartment of Physics, University of Oslo, 0316 Oslo, Norway
002771846 700__ $$aRenk, Janina J.$$tGRID:grid.7445.2$$tGRID:grid.411313.5$$uImperial Coll., London$$uStockholm U. (main)$$vDepartment of Physics, Blackett Laboratory, Imperial College London, Prince Consort Road, SW7 2AZ London, UK$$vOskar Klein Centre for Cosmoparticle Physics, AlbaNova University Centre, 10691 Stockholm, Sweden
002771846 700__ $$aScaffidi, Andre$$tGRID:grid.1010.0$$tGRID:grid.470222.1$$uARC, CoEPP, Australia$$uAdelaide U.$$uINFN, Turin$$vARC Centre of Excellence for Dark Matter Particle Physics and CSSM, Department of Physics, University of Adelaide, 5005 Adelaide, SA, Australia$$vIstituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, Sezione di Torino, via P. Giuria 1, 10125 Turin, Italy
002771846 700__ $$aScott, Pat$$tGRID:grid.7445.2$$tGRID:grid.1003.2$$uImperial Coll., London$$uQueensland U.$$vDepartment of Physics, Blackett Laboratory, Imperial College London, Prince Consort Road, SW7 2AZ London, UK$$vSchool of Mathematics and Physics, The University of Queensland, St. Lucia, 4072 Brisbane, QLD, Australia
002771846 700__ $$aStöcker, Patrick$$tGRID:grid.1957.a$$uAachen, Tech. Hochsch.$$vInstitute for Theoretical Particle Physics and Cosmology (TTK), RWTH Aachen University, 52056 Aachen, Germany
002771846 700__ $$aVincent, Aaron C.$$tGRID:grid.511034.2$$tGRID:grid.410356.5$$tGRID:grid.420198.6$$uCPARC$$uQueen's U., Kingston$$uPerimeter Inst. Theor. Phys.$$vArthur B. McDonald Canadian Astroparticle Physics Research Institute, K7L 3N6 Kingston, ON, Canada$$vDepartment of Physics, Engineering Physics and Astronomy, Queen’s University, K7L 3N6 Kingston, ON, Canada$$vPerimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics, N2L 2Y5 Waterloo, ON, Canada
002771846 700__ $$aWhite, Martin$$tGRID:grid.1010.0$$uARC, CoEPP, Australia$$uAdelaide U.$$vARC Centre of Excellence for Dark Matter Particle Physics and CSSM, Department of Physics, University of Adelaide, 5005 Adelaide, SA, Australia
002771846 700__ $$aWild, Sebastian$$tGRID:grid.7683.a$$uDESY$$vDESY, Notkestraße 85, 22607 Hamburg, Germany
002771846 700__ $$aZupan, Jure$$tGRID:grid.24827.3b$$uCincinnati U.$$vDepartment of Physics, University of Cincinnati, 45221 Cincinnati, OH, USA
002771846 710__ $$gGAMBIT Collaboration
002771846 773__ $$c992$$mpublication$$n11$$pEur. Phys. J. C$$v81$$xEur. Phys. J. C 81, 992 (2021)$$y2021
002771846 8564_ $$82301331$$s34034$$uhttp://cds.cern.ch/record/2771846/files/Dim_6_7_DMEFT_22_21_like2D_full_hard.png$$y00016 Profile likelihood in the $m_\chi$--$\La$ parameter plane when considering dimension-6 and dimension-7 operators and including the full LHC likelihood. In the left (right) panel, we impose a hard (smooth) cut-off in the predicted missing energy spectrum for $\slashed{E}_T > \La$ (see text for more details).
002771846 8564_ $$82301332$$s34185$$uhttp://cds.cern.ch/record/2771846/files/Dim_6_DMEFT_22_21_like2D_full_prof_RF_1.png$$y00015 Same as Fig. \ref{fig:dim_6_full_main} but requiring the DM relic abundance to match the total observed DM abundance.
002771846 8564_ $$82301333$$s8243$$uhttp://cds.cern.ch/record/2771846/files/EFT_illustration.png$$y00000 Illustration of our approach for studying DM EFTs compared to a more naive approach, in which one only uses the experiment that yields the strongest bound on $C / \La^2$. The resulting exclusion is indicated by the red shaded region. By independently varying $\La$, we can include additional information from experiments that give weaker bounds on $C / \La^2$ but for which the EFT has a larger range of validity. The additional exclusion obtained in this way is indicated by the blue shaded region. The region of parameter space that corresponds to the non-perturbative values of Wilson coefficient $C$ is excluded in either approach (shaded brown).
002771846 8564_ $$82301334$$s32147$$uhttp://cds.cern.ch/record/2771846/files/Dim_6_DMEFT_22_21_like2D_full_hard_RF_1.png$$y00014 Same as Fig. \ref{fig:dim_6_full_main} but requiring the DM relic abundance to match the total observed DM abundance.
002771846 8564_ $$82301335$$s43907$$uhttp://cds.cern.ch/record/2771846/files/Dim_6_DMEFT_22_37_like2D_capped_hard_RF_1.png$$y00009 Profile likelihood in terms of $m_\chi$ and the predicted number of signal events in the LZ experiment when $\chi$ accounts for all of the observed DM abundance (as in Fig.~\ref{fig:dim_6_capped_RF1}).
002771846 8564_ $$82301336$$s35040$$uhttp://cds.cern.ch/record/2771846/files/Dim_6_7_DMEFT_22_21_like2D_full_prof.png$$y00017 Profile likelihood in the $m_\chi$--$\La$ parameter plane when considering dimension-6 and dimension-7 operators and including the full LHC likelihood. In the left (right) panel, we impose a hard (smooth) cut-off in the predicted missing energy spectrum for $\slashed{E}_T > \La$ (see text for more details).
002771846 8564_ $$82301337$$s31938$$uhttp://cds.cern.ch/record/2771846/files/Dim_6_DMEFT_22_21_like2D_capped_hard_RF_1.png$$y00008 Same as the right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:dim_6_capped_main} but requiring the DM relic density to be saturated (rather than imposing an upper bound only).
002771846 8564_ $$82301338$$s40002$$uhttp://cds.cern.ch/record/2771846/files/Dim_6_DMEFT_22_200_like2D_capped_hard_ext.png$$y00004 Profile likelihood in terms of the DM mass, the relic density and the rescaled annihilation cross-section. As in Fig.~\ref{fig:dim_6_capped_main}, we consider only dimension-6 operators and cap the LHC likelihood at the value of the background-only hypothesis. The solid red line in the middle panel denotes the ``initial construction'' projection sensitivity of Cherenkov Telescope Array (CTA) towards the Galactic Centre (GC) for the $b\bar{b}$ final state~\cite{Acharyya:2020sbj}.
002771846 8564_ $$82301339$$s34564$$uhttp://cds.cern.ch/record/2771846/files/Dim_6_DMEFT_22_21_like2D_full_prof.png$$y00013 Profile likelihood in the $m_\chi$--$\La$ parameter plane when considering only dimension-6 operators and including the full LHC likelihood. In the left (right) panel, we impose a hard (smooth) cut-off in the predicted missing energy spectrum for $\slashed{E}_T > \La$ (see text for details).
002771846 8564_ $$82301340$$s29178$$uhttp://cds.cern.ch/record/2771846/files/Dim_6_DMEFT_22_21_like2D_capped_hard_ext.png$$y00001 Profile likelihood in the $m_\chi$--$\La$ plane when considering only dimension-6 operators and capping the LHC likelihood at the value of the background-only hypothesis. The white contours indicate the $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ confidence regions and the best-fit point is indicated by the white star. The shaded region (corresponding to $\La \leq 2 m_\chi$) is excluded by the EFT validity requirement. In the right panel, the parameter ranges have been restricted to the most interesting region. Note that the position of the best-fit points in the two panels is somewhat arbitrary, as there is a degeneracy between $\La$ and $\mathcal{C}_{3,4}^{(6)}$ and hence the likelihood is essentially constant across the entire yellow region (see also Fig.~\ref{fig:dim_6_capped_coefficients}).
002771846 8564_ $$82301341$$s34331$$uhttp://cds.cern.ch/record/2771846/files/Dim_6_DMEFT_22_39_like2D_capped_hard_ext.png$$y00003 Profile likelihood in terms of the DM mass, the relic density and the rescaled annihilation cross-section. As in Fig.~\ref{fig:dim_6_capped_main}, we consider only dimension-6 operators and cap the LHC likelihood at the value of the background-only hypothesis. The solid red line in the middle panel denotes the ``initial construction'' projection sensitivity of Cherenkov Telescope Array (CTA) towards the Galactic Centre (GC) for the $b\bar{b}$ final state~\cite{Acharyya:2020sbj}.
002771846 8564_ $$82301342$$s26759$$uhttp://cds.cern.ch/record/2771846/files/Dim_6_DMEFT_39_200_like2D_capped_hard_ext.png$$y00005 Profile likelihood in terms of the DM mass, the relic density and the rescaled annihilation cross-section. As in Fig.~\ref{fig:dim_6_capped_main}, we consider only dimension-6 operators and cap the LHC likelihood at the value of the background-only hypothesis. The solid red line in the middle panel denotes the ``initial construction'' projection sensitivity of Cherenkov Telescope Array (CTA) towards the Galactic Centre (GC) for the $b\bar{b}$ final state~\cite{Acharyya:2020sbj}.
002771846 8564_ $$82301343$$s22667$$uhttp://cds.cern.ch/record/2771846/files/Dim_6_DMEFT_21_9_like2D_capped_hard.png$$y00007 Profile likelihood in the $\La$--$\mathcal{C}^{(6)}_4$ plane (left) and the $\La$--$\mathcal{C}^{(6)}_3$ plane (right) for the restricted parameter ranges. As in Fig.~\ref{fig:dim_6_capped_main}, we only consider dimension-6 operators and cap the LHC likelihood at the value of the background-only hypothesis. The contour lines show the $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ confidence regions. Note that the position of the best-fit points (white stars) in the two panels is somewhat arbitrary, as there is a degeneracy between $\La$ and $\mathcal{C}_{3,4}^{(6)}$ and hence the likelihood is essentially constant across the entire yellow region.
002771846 8564_ $$82301344$$s38930$$uhttp://cds.cern.ch/record/2771846/files/Dim_6_DMEFT_21_10_like2D_capped_hard.png$$y00006 Profile likelihood in the $\La$--$\mathcal{C}^{(6)}_4$ plane (left) and the $\La$--$\mathcal{C}^{(6)}_3$ plane (right) for the restricted parameter ranges. As in Fig.~\ref{fig:dim_6_capped_main}, we only consider dimension-6 operators and cap the LHC likelihood at the value of the background-only hypothesis. The contour lines show the $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ confidence regions. Note that the position of the best-fit points (white stars) in the two panels is somewhat arbitrary, as there is a degeneracy between $\La$ and $\mathcal{C}_{3,4}^{(6)}$ and hence the likelihood is essentially constant across the entire yellow region.
002771846 8564_ $$82301345$$s8284427$$uhttp://cds.cern.ch/record/2771846/files/2106.02056.pdf$$yFulltext
002771846 8564_ $$82301346$$s31168$$uhttp://cds.cern.ch/record/2771846/files/Dim_6_7_DMEFT_22_21_like2D_capped_hard.png$$y00010 Profile likelihood in the $m_\chi$--$\La$ plane (left) and in terms of $m_\chi$ and the predicted relic density (right) when considering all dimension-6 and dimension-7 operators, and capping the LHC likelihood at the value of the background-only hypothesis. The white contours show the $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ confidence regions and the white star marks the best-fit point. For comparison, we also show the $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ confidence region contours (dashed grey lines) and best-fit point (grey star) for the case of dimension-6 operators only in the right panel (see also Fig.~\ref{fig:dim_6_capped_relic}).
002771846 8564_ $$82301347$$s35013$$uhttp://cds.cern.ch/record/2771846/files/Dim_6_DMEFT_22_21_like2D_full_hard.png$$y00012 Profile likelihood in the $m_\chi$--$\La$ parameter plane when considering only dimension-6 operators and including the full LHC likelihood. In the left (right) panel, we impose a hard (smooth) cut-off in the predicted missing energy spectrum for $\slashed{E}_T > \La$ (see text for details).
002771846 8564_ $$82301348$$s37176$$uhttp://cds.cern.ch/record/2771846/files/Dim_6_7_DMEFT_22_39_like2D_capped_hard.png$$y00011 Profile likelihood in the $m_\chi$--$\La$ plane (left) and in terms of $m_\chi$ and the predicted relic density (right) when considering all dimension-6 and dimension-7 operators, and capping the LHC likelihood at the value of the background-only hypothesis. The white contours show the $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ confidence regions and the white star marks the best-fit point. For comparison, we also show the $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ confidence region contours (dashed grey lines) and best-fit point (grey star) for the case of dimension-6 operators only in the right panel (see also Fig.~\ref{fig:dim_6_capped_relic}).
002771846 8564_ $$82301349$$s30544$$uhttp://cds.cern.ch/record/2771846/files/Dim_6_DMEFT_22_21_like2D_capped_hard.png$$y00002 Profile likelihood in the $m_\chi$--$\La$ plane when considering only dimension-6 operators and capping the LHC likelihood at the value of the background-only hypothesis. The white contours indicate the $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ confidence regions and the best-fit point is indicated by the white star. The shaded region (corresponding to $\La \leq 2 m_\chi$) is excluded by the EFT validity requirement. In the right panel, the parameter ranges have been restricted to the most interesting region. Note that the position of the best-fit points in the two panels is somewhat arbitrary, as there is a degeneracy between $\La$ and $\mathcal{C}_{3,4}^{(6)}$ and hence the likelihood is essentially constant across the entire yellow region (see also Fig.~\ref{fig:dim_6_capped_coefficients}).
002771846 8564_ $$82337041$$s3801013$$uhttp://cds.cern.ch/record/2771846/files/document.pdf$$yFulltext
002771846 960__ $$a13
002771846 980__ $$aARTICLE