New Directions in Direct DM Searches Paolo Panci the first part is - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
11 December 2014 GDR Terascale@Heidelberg New Directions in Direct DM Searches Paolo Panci the first part is based on: P . Panci, Review in Adv.High Energy.Phys. [arXiv: 1402.1507] the second on: C. Arina, E. Del Nobile, P . Panci,
the first part is based on: P . Panci, Review in Adv.High Energy.Phys. [arXiv: 1402.1507]
11 December 2014 GDR Terascale@Heidelberg
the second on:
. Panci, Published in PRL [arXiv: 1406.5542]
DM signals are very rare events (less then one cpd/kg/keV)
DM r e c
l
χ + N(A, Z)rest → χ + N(A, Z)recoil χ + N(A, Z)rest → χ0 + N(A, Z)recoil
Direct searches aim at detecting the nuclear recoil possibly induced by: Experimental priorities for DM Direct Detection
the detectors must work deeply underground in order to reduce the background of cosmic rays they use active shields and very clean materials against the residual radioactivity in the tunnel ( and neutrons) they must discriminate multiple scattering (DM particles do not scatter twice in the detector)
γ, α com com com
Theoretical differential rate of nuclear recoil in a given detector
dRN dER = NN
Z vesc
vmin(ER)
d3v |⇤ v| f(⇤ v) d⇥ dER
com com com com
: Number of target : DM number density : DM escape velocity (450 - 650 km/s)
vmin(ER) = s mN ER 2 µ2
χN
✓ 1 + µχN δ mN ER ◆ ρ/mχ
: Minimal velocity
vesc NN = Na/AN
DM kinetic energy Kinematics factor
DM local velocity the collision between
threshold velocity
elastic inelastic
scatter angle
χ & N
v0 ∼ 10−3c ⇒
ER = 1 2mχv2 4mχmN (mχ + mN )2 @1 v2
t
2v2
q 1 v2
t
v2 cos θ
2 1 A , ( vt = 0 vt = q
2δ µχN 6= 0
the framework of relativistic quantum field theory is not appropriate
v ⌧ c )
dσ dER (v, ER) = 1 32π 1 m2
χmN
1 v2 |MN |2
Matrix Element (ME) for the DM-nucleus scattering
DM-nucleon relative velocity exchanged momentum nucleon spin ( ) DM spin
Non relativistic (NR) operators framework
|MN| =
12
X
i=1
cN
i (λ, mχ) ONR i
The DM-nucleon ME can be constructed from Galileian invariant combination of d.o.f. functions of the parameters of your favorite theory (e.g. couplings, mixing angles, mediator masses), expressed in terms of NR operators N = (p, n)
the framework of relativistic quantum field theory is not appropriate
v ⌧ c )
dσ dER (v, ER) = 1 32π 1 m2
χmN
1 v2 |MN |2
Matrix Element (ME) for the DM-nucleus scattering
NR d.o.f. for elastic scattering
Olr
1 = 1
q2 ONR
1
, Olr
5 = 1
q2 ONR
5
, Olr
6 = 1
q2 ONR
6
, Olr
11 = 1
q2 ONR
11 .
ONR
1
= , ONR
3
= i⇣ sN · (⇣ q × ⇣ v⊥) , ONR
4
= ⇣ sχ · ⇣ sN , ONR
5
= i⇣ sχ · (⇣ q × ⇣ v⊥) , ONR
6
= (⇣ sχ · ⇣ q)(⇣ sN · ⇣ q) , ONR
7
= ⇣ sN · ⇣ v⊥ , ONR
8
= ⇣ sχ · ⇣ v⊥ , ONR
9
= i⇣ sχ · (⇣ sN × ⇣ q) , ONR
10 = i⇣
sN · ⇣ q , ONR
11 = i⇣
sχ · ⇣ q , ONR
12 = ⇣
v⊥ · (⇣ sχ × ⇣ sN) .
Contact interaction (q << Λ) Long-range interaction (q >> Λ)
DM-nucleon relative velocity exchanged momentum nucleon spin ( ) DM spin
Non relativistic (NR) operators framework
|MN| =
12
X
i=1
cN
i (λ, mχ) ONR i
The DM-nucleon ME can be constructed from Galileian invariant combination of d.o.f. functions of the parameters of your favorite theory (e.g. couplings, mixing angles, mediator masses), expressed in terms of NR operators N = (p, n)
the framework of relativistic quantum field theory is not appropriate
v ⌧ c )
dσ dER (v, ER) = 1 32π 1 m2
χmN
1 v2 |MN |2
Matrix Element (ME) for the DM-nucleus scattering
NR d.o.f. for elastic scattering
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 10-14 10-13 10-12 10-11 10-10 10-9 10-8 10-7 10-6 10-5 10-4 10-3 10-2 10-1 1 10 102 103 104 105 Exchanged Momentum q@GeVD Nuclear Responses
fluorine
Total Hp,pL Hn,nL Hp,nL F1,1
HN,N'L
F6,6
HN,N'L
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 10-14 10-13 10-12 10-11 10-10 10-9 10-8 10-7 10-6 10-5 10-4 10-3 10-2 10-1 1 10 102 103 104 105 Exchanged Momentum q@GeVD Nuclear Responses
iodine
Total Hp,pL Hn,nL Hp,nL F1,1
HN,N'L
F6,6
HN,N'L
|MN |2 = m2
N
m2
N 12
X
i,j=1
X
N,N 0=p,n
cN
i cN 0 j F (N,N 0) i,j
(v, q2)
Olr
1 =
1 q2 ONR
1
, Olr
5 =
1 q2 ONR
5
, Olr
6 =
1 q2 ONR
6
, Olr
11 =
1 q2 ONR
11 .
ONR
1
= , ONR
3
= i⇣ sN · (⇣ q × ⇣ v⊥) , ONR
4
= ⇣ sχ · ⇣ sN , ONR
5
= i⇣ sχ · (⇣ q × ⇣ v⊥) , ONR
6
= (⇣ sχ · ⇣ q)(⇣ sN · ⇣ q) , ONR
7
= ⇣ sN · ⇣ v⊥ , ONR
8
= ⇣ sχ · ⇣ v⊥ , ONR
9
= i⇣ sχ · (⇣ sN × ⇣ q) , ONR
10 = i⇣
sN · ⇣ q , ONR
11 = i⇣
sχ · ⇣ q , ONR
12 = ⇣
v⊥ · (⇣ sχ × ⇣ sN) .
Contact interaction (q << Λ)
Nuclear response
pairs of nucleons pairs of NR
“The Effective Field Theory of Dark Matter Direct Detection”, JCAP 1302 (2013) 004
Nuclear responses for some common target nuclei in Direct Searches
A2
N
A2
N
Long-Range interaction (q >> Λ)
Nucleus is not point-like
There are different Nuclear Responses for any pairs of nucleons & any pairs of NR Operators
Comparison with the Experimental data
dRN dER = NN ρ⇥ mχ 1 32π mN m2
χm2 N 12
X
i,j=1
X
N,N 0=p,n
cN
i cN 0 j
Z vesc
vmin(ER)
d3v 1 v f(v) F (N,N 0)
i,j
(v, q2)
runs over the different species in the detector (e.g. DAMA and CRESST are multiple-target) quenching factor: accounts for the partial recollection of the released energy takes into account the response and energy resolution
exposure
N th
k = wk
Z
∆Ek
dEdet ✏(Edet) Z ∞ dER X
N =Nucleus
KN (qN ER, Edet)dRN dER (ER)
Uncertainties in Direct DM Searches
com com com
Local DM energy Density & Geometry of the Halo (e.g: spherically symmetric halos with isotropic or not velocity dispersion, triaxial models, co-rotating dark disk and so on......) Nature of the interaction & Nuclear Responses (e.g: SI & SD scattering, long-range or point like character of the interaction and so on......) Experimental uncertainties (e.g: detection efficiency close to the lower threshold, energy dependence of the quenching factors, channeling in crystals and so on......)
NR spin-dependent Operators
ONR
4
= ~ sχ · ~ sN , ONR
3
= i~ sN · (~ q × ~ v⊥) , ONR
7
= ~ sN · ~ v⊥ , ONR
6
= (~ sχ · ~ q)(~ sN · ~ q) , ONR
10 = i~
sN · ~ q , ONR
9
= i~ sχ · (~ sN × ~ q) , ONR
12 = ~
v⊥ · (~ sχ × ~ sN) . ONR
1
= 1 , ONR
5
= i~ sχ · (~ q × ~ v⊥) , ONR
8
= ~ sχ · ~ v⊥ , ONR
11 = i~
sχ · ~ q ,
NR spin-independent Operators
ONR
1
= , ONR
3
= i⇣ sN · (⇣ q × ⇣ v⊥) , ONR
4
= ⇣ sχ · ⇣ sN , ONR
5
= i⇣ sχ · (⇣ q × ⇣ v⊥) , ONR
6
= (⇣ sχ · ⇣ q)(⇣ sN · ⇣ q) , ONR
7
= ⇣ sN · ⇣ v⊥ , ONR
8
= ⇣ sχ · ⇣ v⊥ , ONR
9
= i⇣ sχ · (⇣ sN × ⇣ q) , ONR
10 = i⇣
sN · ⇣ q , ONR
11 = i⇣
sχ · ⇣ q , ONR
12 = ⇣
v⊥ · (⇣ sχ × ⇣ sN) .
Contact interaction (q << Λ) |MN| =
12
X
i=1
cN
i (λ, mχ) ONR i
DM-nucleon Matrix Element
NR spin-dependent Operators
ONR
4
= ~ sχ · ~ sN , ONR
3
= i~ sN · (~ q × ~ v⊥) , ONR
7
= ~ sN · ~ v⊥ , ONR
6
= (~ sχ · ~ q)(~ sN · ~ q) , ONR
10 = i~
sN · ~ q , ONR
9
= i~ sχ · (~ sN × ~ q) , ONR
12 = ~
v⊥ · (~ sχ × ~ sN) . ONR
1
= 1 , ONR
5
= i~ sχ · (~ q × ~ v⊥) , ONR
8
= ~ sχ · ~ v⊥ , ONR
11 = i~
sχ · ~ q ,
NR spin-independent Operators
ONR
1
= , ONR
3
= i⇣ sN · (⇣ q × ⇣ v⊥) , ONR
4
= ⇣ sχ · ⇣ sN , ONR
5
= i⇣ sχ · (⇣ q × ⇣ v⊥) , ONR
6
= (⇣ sχ · ⇣ q)(⇣ sN · ⇣ q) , ONR
7
= ⇣ sN · ⇣ v⊥ , ONR
8
= ⇣ sχ · ⇣ v⊥ , ONR
9
= i⇣ sχ · (⇣ sN × ⇣ q) , ONR
10 = i⇣
sN · ⇣ q , ONR
11 = i⇣
sχ · ⇣ q , ONR
12 = ⇣
v⊥ · (⇣ sχ × ⇣ sN) .
Contact interaction (q << Λ)
The coefficients of the spin independent operators are severely constrained by the double-phase xenon experiments (xenon nuclei have a large factor)
|MN| =
12
X
i=1
cN
i (λ, mχ) ONR i
DM-nucleon Matrix Element
A2
NR spin-dependent Operators
ONR
4
= ~ sχ · ~ sN , ONR
3
= i~ sN · (~ q × ~ v⊥) , ONR
7
= ~ sN · ~ v⊥ , ONR
6
= (~ sχ · ~ q)(~ sN · ~ q) , ONR
10 = i~
sN · ~ q , ONR
9
= i~ sχ · (~ sN × ~ q) , ONR
12 = ~
v⊥ · (~ sχ × ~ sN) . ONR
1
= 1 , ONR
5
= i~ sχ · (~ q × ~ v⊥) , ONR
8
= ~ sχ · ~ v⊥ , ONR
11 = i~
sχ · ~ q ,
NR spin-independent Operators
ONR
1
= , ONR
3
= i⇣ sN · (⇣ q × ⇣ v⊥) , ONR
4
= ⇣ sχ · ⇣ sN , ONR
5
= i⇣ sχ · (⇣ q × ⇣ v⊥) , ONR
6
= (⇣ sχ · ⇣ q)(⇣ sN · ⇣ q) , ONR
7
= ⇣ sN · ⇣ v⊥ , ONR
8
= ⇣ sχ · ⇣ v⊥ , ONR
9
= i⇣ sχ · (⇣ sN × ⇣ q) , ONR
10 = i⇣
sN · ⇣ q , ONR
11 = i⇣
sχ · ⇣ q , ONR
12 = ⇣
v⊥ · (⇣ sχ × ⇣ sN) .
Contact interaction (q << Λ)
The coefficients of the spin independent operators are severely constrained by the double-phase xenon experiments (xenon nuclei have a large factor)
|MN| =
12
X
i=1
cN
i (λ, mχ) ONR i
DM-nucleon Matrix Element
The sodium, iodine and fluorine nuclei have unpaired protons in the nuclear shell The xenon and germanium nuclei have unpaired neutrons in the nuclear shell sensitive to the DM-p spin dependent
A2
blind to the DM-p spin dependent
NR spin-dependent Operators
ONR
4
= ~ sχ · ~ sN , ONR
3
= i~ sN · (~ q × ~ v⊥) , ONR
7
= ~ sN · ~ v⊥ , ONR
6
= (~ sχ · ~ q)(~ sN · ~ q) , ONR
10 = i~
sN · ~ q , ONR
9
= i~ sχ · (~ sN × ~ q) , ONR
12 = ~
v⊥ · (~ sχ × ~ sN) . ONR
1
= 1 , ONR
5
= i~ sχ · (~ q × ~ v⊥) , ONR
8
= ~ sχ · ~ v⊥ , ONR
11 = i~
sχ · ~ q ,
NR spin-independent Operators
ONR
1
= , ONR
3
= i⇣ sN · (⇣ q × ⇣ v⊥) , ONR
4
= ⇣ sχ · ⇣ sN , ONR
5
= i⇣ sχ · (⇣ q × ⇣ v⊥) , ONR
6
= (⇣ sχ · ⇣ q)(⇣ sN · ⇣ q) , ONR
7
= ⇣ sN · ⇣ v⊥ , ONR
8
= ⇣ sχ · ⇣ v⊥ , ONR
9
= i⇣ sχ · (⇣ sN × ⇣ q) , ONR
10 = i⇣
sN · ⇣ q , ONR
11 = i⇣
sχ · ⇣ q , ONR
12 = ⇣
v⊥ · (⇣ sχ × ⇣ sN) .
Contact interaction (q << Λ)
The coefficients of the spin independent operators are severely constrained by the double-phase xenon experiments (xenon nuclei have a large factor)
|MN| =
12
X
i=1
cN
i (λ, mχ) ONR i
DM-nucleon Matrix Element
The sodium, iodine and fluorine nuclei have unpaired protons in the nuclear shell The xenon and germanium nuclei have unpaired neutrons in the nuclear shell sensitive to the DM-p spin dependent
A2
blind to the DM-p spin dependent
Bottom line: the complicated experimental puzzle can probably be solved, if in the NR limit a spin- dependent interaction gives rise in which the coupling .
cp
i cn i
Lint = −igDM √ 2 a ¯ χγ5χ − ig X
f
gf √ 2a ¯ fγ5f . χ : f : a :
DM fermion with mass SM fermion with mass pseudo-scalar mediator with mass
mDM mf
Particle Content Relativistic Lagrangian at the quark level
ma
Couplings at the quark level
Lint = −igDM √ 2 a ¯ χγ5χ − ig X
f
gf √ 2a ¯ fγ5f . χ : f : a :
DM fermion with mass SM fermion with mass pseudo-scalar mediator with mass
mDM mf
Particle Content Relativistic Lagrangian at the quark level
ma
DM couplings with the mediator SM fermion couplings with the mediator
gDM : g gf :
flavor-universal: higgs-like:
gf = 1 gf = mf/vH
independent on the fermion type proportional to the fermion mass
Couplings at the quark level
Lint = −igDM √ 2 a ¯ χγ5χ − ig X
f
gf √ 2a ¯ fγ5f . χ : f : a :
DM fermion with mass SM fermion with mass pseudo-scalar mediator with mass
mDM mf
Particle Content Relativistic Lagrangian at the quark level
ma
DM couplings with the mediator SM fermion couplings with the mediator
gDM : g gf :
flavor-universal: higgs-like:
gf = 1 gf = mf/vH
independent on the fermion type proportional to the fermion mass
“isoscalar” couplings:
gp = gn
for pseudo-scalar current this is not a natural choice
Couplings at the quark level
Lint = −igDM √ 2 a ¯ χγ5χ − ig X
f
gf √ 2a ¯ fγ5f . χ : f : a :
DM fermion with mass SM fermion with mass pseudo-scalar mediator with mass
mDM mf
Particle Content Relativistic Lagrangian at the quark level
ma
DM couplings with the mediator SM fermion couplings with the mediator
gDM : g gf :
flavor-universal: higgs-like:
gf = 1 gf = mf/vH
independent on the fermion type proportional to the fermion mass
“isoscalar” couplings:
gp = gn
for pseudo-scalar current this is not a natural choice
From Rel. Lagrangian to NR DD Observables
com
Dress up the quark-operators to the nucleon level
com
Reduce to NR limit in order to infer the NR operator and its coefficient
com
Account for the composite structure of the nucleus with the nuclear responses In DD, the DM particles interact with the entire nucleus in deeply NR regime:
com
Write down the DM-nucleon effective Lagrangian
gN = X
q=u,d,s
mN mq gq − X
q0=u,...,t
gq0 ¯ m mq0
q
∆(p)
u
= ∆(n)
d
= +0.84 , ∆(p)
d
= ∆(n)
u
= −0.44 , ∆(p)
s
= ∆(n)
s
= −0.03
Values of quark spin content of the nucleons DM-nucleon effective couplings
Leff = 1 2Λ2
a
X
N=p,n
gN ¯ χγ5χ ¯ Nγ5N , Λa = ma/√g gDM :
Effective Lagrangian for contact interaction
combination of the free parameters of the model (mediator mass and couplings)
Energy Scale of the effective Lagrangian
H.-Y. Cheng and C.-W. Chiang, JHEP 1207 (2012) 009
gN = X
q=u,d,s
mN mq gq − X
q0=u,...,t
gq0 ¯ m mq0
q
∆(p)
u
= ∆(n)
d
= +0.84 , ∆(p)
d
= ∆(n)
u
= −0.44 , ∆(p)
s
= ∆(n)
s
= −0.03 Leff = 1 2Λ2
a
X
N=p,n
gN ¯ χγ5χ ¯ Nγ5N , Λa = ma/√g gDM :
Effective Lagrangian for contact interaction
combination of the free parameters of the model (mediator mass and couplings)
Energy Scale of the effective Lagrangian
H.-Y. Cheng and C.-W. Chiang, JHEP 1207 (2012) 009
“Natural” Isospin Violation
Gross, Treiman, Wilczek, Phys. Rev. D19 2188, (1979)
flavor-universal couplings higgs-like couplings
gp/gn = −16.4 : gp/gn = −4.1 :
com
large isospin violation going from the quark level to the nucleon one
DM-nucleon effective couplings Values of quark spin content of the nucleons
gN = X
q=u,d,s
mN mq gq − X
q0=u,...,t
gq0 ¯ m mq0
q
∆(p)
u
= ∆(n)
d
= +0.84 , ∆(p)
d
= ∆(n)
u
= −0.44 , ∆(p)
s
= ∆(n)
s
= −0.03 Leff = 1 2Λ2
a
X
N=p,n
gN ¯ χγ5χ ¯ Nγ5N , Λa = ma/√g gDM :
Effective Lagrangian for contact interaction
combination of the free parameters of the model (mediator mass and couplings)
Energy Scale of the effective Lagrangian
H.-Y. Cheng and C.-W. Chiang, JHEP 1207 (2012) 009
Important consequences in DD
the pseudo-scalar interaction measures a certain component of the spin content of the nucleus carried by the nucleons.
a large will favor nuclides with a large spin due to their unpaired proton
gp/gn
nuclides with unpaired neutron will be largely disfavored
(e.g. DAMA employs sodium & iodine) (e.g. XENON100 and LUX employ xenon)
“Natural” Isospin Violation
Gross, Treiman, Wilczek, Phys. Rev. D19 2188, (1979)
flavor-universal couplings higgs-like couplings
gp/gn = −16.4 : gp/gn = −4.1 :
com
large isospin violation going from the quark level to the nucleon one
DM-nucleon effective couplings Values of quark spin content of the nucleons
gN = X
q=u,d,s
mN mq gq − X
q0=u,...,t
gq0 ¯ m mq0
q
∆(p)
u
= ∆(n)
d
= +0.84 , ∆(p)
d
= ∆(n)
u
= −0.44 , ∆(p)
s
= ∆(n)
s
= −0.03 Leff = 1 2Λ2
a
X
N=p,n
gN ¯ χγ5χ ¯ Nγ5N , Λa = ma/√g gDM :
Effective Lagrangian for contact interaction
combination of the free parameters of the model (mediator mass and couplings)
Energy Scale of the effective Lagrangian
H.-Y. Cheng and C.-W. Chiang, JHEP 1207 (2012) 009
Important consequences in DD
the pseudo-scalar interaction measures a certain component of the spin content of the nucleus carried by the nucleons.
a large will favor nuclides with a large spin due to their unpaired proton
gp/gn
nuclides with unpaired neutron will be largely disfavored
(e.g. DAMA employs sodium & iodine) (e.g. XENON100 and LUX employ xenon)
“Natural” Isospin Violation
Gross, Treiman, Wilczek, Phys. Rev. D19 2188, (1979)
flavor-universal couplings higgs-like couplings
gp/gn = −16.4 : gp/gn = −4.1 : for flavour-universal, the contribution of the light quarks in cancel out
com
gp/gn = −16.4 : “heavy flavor” couplings gN
DM-nucleon effective couplings Values of quark spin content of the nucleons
gp/gn = −14.6 gp/gn = −4.1 gp = gn
Bottom line: the large enhancement of the DM-p coupling with respect to the DM-n coupling suppresses the LUX (solid orange) and XENON100 (dash green) bounds
Na Na Na I I I
“Not so Coy DM explains DAMA (and the GC excess)”, Published in PRL, arXiv:1406.5542 com
for flavor-universal couplings: part of the I region is compatible at 99% CL with all null results experiments due to the large isospin violation
com
for “isoscalar” couplings (not natural for pseudo-scalar interaction): there is not enhancement and DAMA is largely disfavored (see also e.g. arXiv:1401.3739)
com
for higgs-like couplings: the LUX and XENON100 bounds are less suppressed due to the reduced enhancement, and the bounds disfavored both Na and I regions.
gp/gn
' 480 MeV ' 31 GeV
the energy scale of the effective
gives
“The Characterization of the gamma-ray signal from the Central Milky Way”, arXiv:1402.6703
Energy Spectrum of the excess DM Interpretation of the excess
fl a v
n i v e r s a l h i g g s
i k e
unlike DD, the gamma-rays fluxes are different if the DM particles couple “democratically” with all quarks or just with the heavy ones. is a Dirac Fermions
χ
Relativistic Lagrangian at the quark-level Comparison with the theoretical prediction can annihilate to quarks via s-channel exchange
χ χ χ a
com com
Lint = −igDM √ 2 a ¯ χγ5χ − ig X
q
gq √ 2a ¯ qγ5q
hσviqq ' X
q
3g2
q
8π g2g2
DM
16m2
DM
s 1 m2
q
m2
DM
Best fit values adjusted for our DM model
mbest
DM
hσvibest Universal (democratic) 22 GeV 2.2 ⇥ 10−26 cm3/s Universal (heavy-flavors) 31 GeV 2.8 ⇥ 10−26 cm3/s Higgs-like 33 GeV 3.2 ⇥ 10−26 cm3/s
Λa = ma/pg gDM ⌧ mDM
the requirement of fitting the excess can be used to disentangle from the product in .
Λa ma g gDM
q q
Allowed regions (Majorana DM)
“The Characterization of the gamma-ray signal from the Central Milky Way”, arXiv:1402.6703
Energy Spectrum of the excess DM Interpretation of the excess
fl a v
n i v e r s a l h i g g s
i k e
unlike DD, the gamma-rays fluxes are different if the DM particles couple “democratically” with all quarks or just with the heavy ones. is a Dirac Fermions
χ
Relativistic Lagrangian at the quark-level Theoretical prediction for the Relic Abundance
χ χ a
com com
Lint = −igDM √ 2 a ¯ χγ5χ − ig X
q
gq √ 2a ¯ qγ5q χ χ a a
hσviqq ' X
q
3g2
q
8π g2g2
DM
16m2
DM
s 1 m2
q
m2
DM
Best fit values adjusted for our DM model
mbest
DM
hσvibest Universal (democratic) 22 GeV 2.2 ⇥ 10−26 cm3/s Universal (heavy-flavors) 31 GeV 2.8 ⇥ 10−26 cm3/s Higgs-like 33 GeV 3.2 ⇥ 10−26 cm3/s
Allowed regions (Majorana DM)
hσviΩ = hσviqq + hσviaa(x) + O(x−2)
s-wave into quarks: independent on p-wave into pseudo-scalars:
hσviaa ' 3 2x · 1 96π g4
DM
16m2
DM
s 1 m2
a
m2
DM
q q breaks the degeneracy between
mDM ∼ T x = mDM/T
g & gDM ΩDM ' 0.27
Lint = −igDM √ 2 a ¯ χγ5χ − ig X
q
gq √ 2a ¯ qγ5q
com com com
I-region of DAMA GC excess in Correct Relic Density (mDM, Λa) g & gDM (mDM, g gDM)
Λa = ma/√g gDM : energy scale of the EO
Bottom line: from the three
the free parameters of the model
γ − rays Interpretation of the GC excess in gamma-rays
mbest
DM
hσvibest Universal (democratic) 22 GeV 2.2 ⇥ 10−26 cm3/s Universal (heavy-flavors) 31 GeV 2.8 ⇥ 10−26 cm3/s Higgs-like 33 GeV 3.2 ⇥ 10−26 cm3/s
Interpretation of the DAMA results Correct Relic Density
Na
I
' 480 MeV ' 31 GeV
1
2 3
gp/gn = −14.6
Na
I
gp/gn = −4.1
com
universal (democratic): favored by DD, however is outside the 99% CL of the DAMA I-region
Determination of the free parameters of the relativistic Lagrangian
g gq ' 7.7 ⇥ 10−3 , gDM ' 0.64 , ma ' 35 MeV .
com
universal (heavy-flavors): best case scenario; is fully compatible with the DAMA I-region
com
higgs-like: is compatible with DAMA I-region which is however excluded at 99% CL by DD g gq ' 1.8 ⇥ 10−2 , gDM ' 0.72 , ma ' 56 MeV . g gq ' 1.15 mq/vH , gDM ' 0.69 , ma ' 52 MeV . mbest
DM
mbest
DM
mbest
DM
Lint = −igDM √ 2 a ¯ χγ5χ − ig X
q
gq √ 2a ¯ qγ5q
com com com
I-region of DAMA GC excess in Correct Relic Density (mDM, Λa) g & gDM (mDM, g gDM)
Λa = ma/√g gDM : energy scale of the EO
Bottom line: from the three
the free parameters of the model
γ − rays Interpretation of the GC excess in gamma-rays
mbest
DM
hσvibest Universal (democratic) 22 GeV 2.2 ⇥ 10−26 cm3/s Universal (heavy-flavors) 31 GeV 2.8 ⇥ 10−26 cm3/s Higgs-like 33 GeV 3.2 ⇥ 10−26 cm3/s
Interpretation of the DAMA results Correct Relic Density
Na
I
' 480 MeV ' 31 GeV
1
2 3
gp/gn = −14.6
Na
I
gp/gn = −4.1
I have described the phenomenology of a model in which the DM particles interact with the SM fermions via the exchange of a pseudo-scalar mediator The best fit of both direct and indirect signals is obtained when the mediator is much lighter than the DM mass and has universal coupling with heavy quarks
com
this is a viable model that signal
com
Furthermore, it gamma-rays and at the same time
with respect to neutrons, occurring for natural choices of the pseudo-scalar coupling with quarks
Free parameters Best fit values g gq (g gq)best ' 1.8 ⇥ 10−2 gDM gbest
DM ' 0.72
mDM mbest
DM ' 31 GeV
ma mbest
a
' 56 MeV
Lint = −igDM √ 2 a ¯ χγ5χ − ig X
q
gq √ 2a ¯ qγ5q
Relativistic Lagrangian
I have described the phenomenology of a model in which the DM particles interact with the SM fermions via the exchange of a pseudo-scalar mediator The best fit of both direct and indirect signals is obtained when the mediator is much lighter than the DM mass and has universal coupling with heavy quarks
com
this is a viable model that can accommodates the DAMA modulated signal while being compatible with all null direct DM searches
com
Furthermore, it gamma-rays and at the same time
with respect to neutrons, occurring for natural choices of the pseudo-scalar coupling with quarks
Free parameters Best fit values g gq (g gq)best ' 1.8 ⇥ 10−2 gDM gbest
DM ' 0.72
mDM mbest
DM ' 31 GeV
ma mbest
a
' 56 MeV
Lint = −igDM √ 2 a ¯ χγ5χ − ig X
q
gq √ 2a ¯ qγ5q
Relativistic Lagrangian
I have described the phenomenology of a model in which the DM particles interact with the SM fermions via the exchange of a pseudo-scalar mediator
com
this is a viable model that can accommodates the DAMA modulated signal while being compatible with all null direct DM searches
com
Furthermore, it can provide a DM explanation of the GC excess in gamma-rays and at the same time achieve the correct relic density The best fit of both direct and indirect signals is obtained when the mediator is much lighter than the DM mass and has universal coupling with heavy quarks
with respect to neutrons, occurring for natural choices of the pseudo-scalar coupling with quarks
Free parameters Best fit values g gq (g gq)best ' 1.8 ⇥ 10−2 gDM gbest
DM ' 0.72
mDM mbest
DM ' 31 GeV
ma mbest
a
' 56 MeV
Lint = −igDM √ 2 a ¯ χγ5χ − ig X
q
gq √ 2a ¯ qγ5q
Relativistic Lagrangian