Arxiv:1803.02804V1 [Hep-Ph] 7 Mar 2018 It Must Have Some Rather Speciﬁc Characteristics

FERMILAB-PUB-18-066-A

Severely Constraining Dark Matter Interpretations of the 21-cm Anomaly

Asher Berlina,∗ Dan Hooperb,c,d,† Gordan Krnjaicb,‡ and Samuel D. McDermottb§ aSLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, Menlo Park CA, 94025, USA bFermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Theoretical Astrophysics Group, Batavia, IL, USA cUniversity of Chicago, Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics, Chicago IL, USA and dUniversity of Chicago, Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics, Chicago IL, USA (Dated: March 8, 2018) The EDGES Collaboration has recently reported the detection of a stronger-than-expected absorption feature in the global 21-cm spectrum, centered at a frequency corresponding to a redshift of z ∼ 17. This observation has been interpreted as evidence that the gas was cooled during this era as a result of scattering with dark matter. In this study, we explore this possibility, applying constraints from the cosmic microwave background, light element abundances, Supernova 1987A, and a variety of laboratory experiments. After taking these constraints into account, we ﬁnd that the vast majority of the parameter space capable of generating the observed 21-cm signal is ruled out. The only range of models that remains viable is that in which a small fraction, ∼ 0.3 − 2%, of the dark matter consists of particles with a mass of ∼ 10 − 80 MeV and which couple to the photon through a small electric charge, ∼ 10−6 −10−4. Furthermore, in order to avoid being overproduced in the early universe, such models must be supplemented with an additional depletion mechanism, such as annihilations through a Lµ − Lτ gauge boson or annihilations to a pair of rapidly decaying hidden sector scalars.

I. INTRODUCTION tude of the absorption feature. Velocity-dependent scattering can relax such constraints, however, as the aver- The Experiment to Detect the Global Epoch of reion- age velocities of baryons and dark matter particles were ization Signature (EDGES) Collaboration [1] has re- at approximately their minimum value during the cos- cently reported the measurement of a feature in the ab- mic dark ages (due to higher temperatures and having sorption profile of the sky-averaged radio spectrum, cen- fallen into the gravitational potential of dark matter ha- tered at a frequency of 78 MHz and with an amplitude los at earlier and later times, respectively). With this of 0.5 K. Although such a feature was anticipated to re- in mind, we can maximize the impact of dark matter- sult from the 21-cm transition of atomic hydrogen (at baryon scattering during this era by considering mod- −4 z ∼ 17), the measured amplitude of this signal is signifi- els in which σ(v) ∝ v . In terms of model building, cantly larger than expected, at a confidence level of 3.8σ. this consideration directs us towards models in which the If confirmed, this measurement would indicate that ei- dark matter-baryon interactions are mediated by a parti- ther the gas was much colder during the dark ages than cle that is much lighter than the temperature at z ∼ 17, −3 expected, or that the temperature of the background ra- corresponding to mmed <∼ 10 eV. Experimental con- diation was much hotter. It has been argued [2] that stan- straints on fifth forces are very stringent in this mass dard astrophysical mechanisms [1–7] cannot account for range [10, 11], however, and rule out a new light medi- this discrepancy, and that the only plausible explanations ator with couplings in the range required to explain the for this observation are those which rely on interactions observed absorption feature. Furthermore, such a par- between the primordial gas and light dark matter parti- ticle would invariably contribute to the energy density cles, resulting in a significant cooling of the gas [1, 2, 4] of radiation during recombination at a level well above (see also Refs. [8, 9]). current constraints [12]. In light of these considerations, In order for the dark matter to cool the gas efficiently, the only options available are models in which the dark arXiv:1803.02804v1 [hep-ph] 7 Mar 2018 it must have some rather specific characteristics. Firstly, matter carries a small quantity of electric charge (i.e. a equipartition requires that the dark matter particles be millicharge), and thus couples weakly to the photon [13– fairly light, with masses no larger than a few GeV. Sec- 19]. ondly, if the cross section for dark matter scattering with gas is independent of velocity, a variety of constraints, in- cluding those from observations of the cosmic microwave background (CMB), would restrict the couplings to well below the values required to explain the observed ampli- II. MODEL-INDEPENDENT CONSTRAINTS ON MILLICHARGED DARK MATTER

∗ ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1156-1482 Based on the results presented in Ref. [2], it follows † ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8837-4127 that millicharged dark matter particles could cool the ‡ ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7420-9577 gas at z ∼ 17 to a level consistent with the EDGES § ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5513-1938 measurement (Tb ≈ 4 K) if the following condition is

This manuscript has been authored by Fermi Research Alliance, LLC under Contract No. DE-AC02-07CH11359 with the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of High Energy Physics 2

FIG. 1. Constraints on Dirac fermion millicharged dark matter from Supernova 1987A (grey) [20], the SLAC millicharge experiment (blue) [21], the light element abundances produced during Big Bang Nucleosynthesis (red, labeled ∆Neﬀ ) [22], and on the impact on the cosmic microwave background of dark matter scattering with baryons (pink, labeled CMB, KD) [13] and dark matter annihilations (purple, labeled CMB ann.) [23]. These results are shown for four values of the fraction of the dark matter abundance that consists of millicharged particles, fDM. In each frame, the solid black regions represent the range of parameter values that could explain the amplitude of the observed 21-cm absorption feature as reported by the EDGES Collaboration [2]. The dashed black line denotes where the thermal relic abundance corresponds to quoted value of fDM, assuming only millicharge interactions. The fact that the solid black regions do not coincide with the dashed curves indicates that the dark matter must be depleted in the early universe by another kind of interaction. Although these results are shown for the speciﬁc case of dark matter in the form of a Dirac fermion, most of these constraints would change only very slightly if we were instead to consider a complex scalar. The exception to this are the constraints from dark matter annihilation during the epoch of recombination [23], which are much weaker in the complex scalar case, due to the p-wave suppression of the annihilation cross section.

−2 met [24]: (20 − 40) MeV × (fDM/10 ), above which much larger values of are required. We also note that this expression m 10−2 3/4 ≈ 1.7 × 10−4 χ , (1) applies to millicharged dark matter in either the form of 300 MeV fDM a Dirac fermion or a complex scalar. where ≡ eχ/e is the electric charge of the dark matter, Millicharged dark matter is subject to a wide range mχ is the mass of the millicharged dark matter candidate, of experimental and astrophysical constraints, some of and fDM is the fraction of the dark matter that consists of which we summarize in Fig. 1. Here, we show constraints millicharged particles. This expression is valid for mχ <∼ derived from observation of Supernova 1987A (grey) [20], 3 from the SLAC millicharge experiment (blue) [21], and observed neutrino signal. It is possible that these consid- from the light element abundances produced during Big erations could be used to rule out this range of parame- Bang Nucleosynthesis (BBN), assuming entropy transfer ter space, although no high-resolution numerical studies to electrons and photons (red) [22] (see also Refs. [25, have definitively addressed this issue within this class of 26]). We note that the BBN constraints shift only at scenarios. the tens of percent level if we had instead considered entropy transfers to neutrinos. We also show constraints from measurements of the CMB based on dark matter III. DEPLETING THE DARK MATTER annihilation in the epoch of recombination (purple) [23] ABUNDANCE (see also Ref. [12]), and on dark matter scattering with baryons (pink) [13]. Note that we have modified the con- A major challenge for millicharged dark matter models straint from Ref. [13] by rescaling the limits on by a which can explain the reported amplitude of the observed p factor of fDMΩdm/Ωb. We also note that Ref. [27] 21-cm absorption feature is avoiding overproduction in has recently presented an even more stringent constraint the early universe. The annihilation cross section for a on low-velocity dark matter-baryon scattering. Although pair of millicharged particles is given by: these results are shown for the specific case of dark matter 2 2 2 1/2 2 in the form of a Dirac fermion, most of these constraints πα mf mf σvχχ¯→ff¯ = 2 κ 1 − 2 1 + 2 , (2) would change only very slightly if we were instead to con- mχ mχ 2mχ sider a complex scalar. The exception to this are those constraints from dark matter annihilation during recom- where κ = 1 or v2/6 (where v is the relative velocity of bination [23], which are much weaker in the case of a the dark matter particles) for dark matter in the form of a complex scalar, due to the p-wave suppression of the an- Dirac fermion or a complex scalar, respectively. The dark nihilation cross section. matter will be maintained in chemical equilibrium with Analytical constraints on dark matter scattering with the Standard Model bath if its annihilation rate exceeds baryons during recombination were presented in Ref. [13] that associated with Hubble expansion. Performing this for the case of fDM = 1. For fDM & 0.02, these con- comparison at T ∼ mχ (when the rate is approximately straints can be straightforwardly rescaled. For smaller maximal) yields the following condition for equilibrium: values of f , however, one cannot apply this bound, DM 2 2 m2 because the energy density of this component of the dark 3 π α √ χ nχσvχχ¯→ff¯ ∼ mχ 2 κ > 1.66 g∗ , (3) matter is smaller than the difference between the (95% mχ MPl CL) upper limit on the baryon density from CMB [12] and the (95% CL) lower limit on the baryonic density where g∗ is the number of relativistic degrees of freedom based on BBN [28]. In this case, the millicharged parti- in the thermal bath, and MPl is the Planck mass. This cles themselves could contribute to the apparent baryonic in turn implies that if density as derived from the CMB, evading the CMB con- 1/4 g r m 1 m 1/2 1 straint even if tightly coupled to the baryon fluid. For & ∗ χ ∼ 10−8 χ , (4) 1/2 1/2 this reason, the CMB kinetic decoupling bounds do not α mPl κ 10 MeV κ apply for fDM . 0.02. then nχ will reach its equilibrium value in the early uni- The solid black regions in Fig. 1 represent the param- verse, and thus must be depleted through efficient annihi- eter space in which the reported amplitude of the 21-cm lations in order to avoid exceeding the desired density of absorption feature can be explained. For fDM = 1, we millicharged particles, fDMΩCDM. In particular, equilib- take this region as presented in Ref. [2]. For fDM < 1, we rium is reached over the entirety of the parameter space shift these regions in and mχ as found in the numerical for which dark matter can explain the amplitude of the solutions presented in Ref. [24] (see Eq. 1). observed 21-cm absorption feature. In light of the constraints presented in Fig. 1, we are Once equilibrium is reached, the thermal relic abun- forced to consider millicharged dark matter in a relatively dance is determined by the dark matter’s annihilation narrow range of parameter space: mχ ∼ 10 − 80 MeV, cross section. For the cross section given in Eq. 2, −6 −4 ∼ 10 − 10 , and fDM ∼ 0.003 − 0.02. For the this leads to a thermal abundance that makes up the remainder of this paper, we will focus on this range of following fraction of the dark matter density: fDM ≈ −3 2 2 −1 scenarios. We will not assume that the millicharge is 0.04 × (10 /) × (mχ/30 MeV) × κ [30]. In Fig. 1, accompanied by an extremely light dark photon [29]. the dashed black lines indicate the regions of parameter We note that although a millicharged particle with space in which the thermal relic abundance corresponds a mass and coupling in this range could not have free- to quoted value of fDM, assuming only millicharge inter- streamed out of Supernova 1987A, and thus was not actions. The fact that the solid regions do not coincide deemed to be ruled out in Ref. [20], such a particle with the dashed curves in the allowed regions of mil- would be in chemical equilibrium in the proto-neutron licharge parameter space indicates that the dark matter star. By equipartion, this would lower the temperature must be depleted by an interaction other than annihila- of the supernova core, with likely ramifications for the tions through photon exchange. 4

following interactions which lead to p-wave suppressed 10-7 annihilations: µ 5 ¯ µ Lf ⊃ Vµ(gχχγ¯ γ χ + gf fγ f), (5a) 10-8 ∗ ¯ µ Ls ⊃ Vµ(igχχ ∂µχ + gf fγ f + h.c.), (5b) 10-9 where the dark matter candidate, χ, is a scalar or a fermion, respectively. Although for a Dirac fermion it 10-10 is also possible to have p-wave χχ¯ → ff¯ annihilation through scalar s-channel exchange, this possibility is 10-11 strongly excluded in simple models [45]. For the model of Eq. 5a or 5b, we can write the annihilation cross section 10-12 as follows: 2 2 2 2 g gχmχv 10-13 f σv = 2 2 2 , (6) 6π(4mχ − mV ) 10-14 where we have taken the mχ mf limit. In Fig. 2, we plot constraints on models defined as in Eqs. 5a and 5b in which the millicharged dark matter annihilates through a vector mediator that couples FIG. 2. Constraints on a scenario in which millicharged dark universally to all three species of charged leptons (for de- matter, χ, annihilates to Standard Model leptons through the tails, see Ref. [46]). In this case, constraints from the exchange of a vector mediator, V , that couples universally to BABAR [31–33] and E137 [32, 34] experiments, along all three generations of charged leptons. The blue band de- with BBN, exclude the entire range of parameter space notes the approximate region of parameter space which can that is capable of generating the reported 21-cm signal explain the amplitude of the observed 21-cm absorption fea- (mχ ∼ 10 − 80 MeV and fDM ∼ 0.003 − 0.02). ture as reported by the EDGES Collaboration. This case We also consider scenarios in which dark matter can is ruled out by constraints from the BABAR [31–33] and annihilate predominantly to neutrinos (as opposed to E137 [32, 34] experiments, along with BBN, over the en- e+e−), with either s- or p-wave annihilation: tire range of parameter space that is capable of generating µ µ the reported 21-cm signal. Also shown as dashed lines are Lf ⊃ Vµ(gχχγ¯ χ + gν ν¯Lγ νL), (7a) the projected constraints of the Belle II [35], BDX [32, 36] L ⊃ V (ig χ∗∂ χ + g ν¯ γµν + h.c.). (7b) and LDMX [35, 37] experiments. Here we have adopted s µ χ µ ν L L mV = 3mχ and gχ = 1. We note that for other choices of this These models have the annihilation cross section, coupling and mass ratio, the constraints are generically more 2 2 2 restrictive than those presented here. gν gχmχκ σv = 2 2 2 , (8) 2π(4mχ − mV ) to a given neutrino flavor where κ = 1 or v2/6 for a To deplete the thermal abundance of millicharged dark fermion or scalar, respectively. A concrete example of matter to an acceptable level, we consider the possibil- this would be a model in which the vector is associ- ities of either annihilations directly to Standard Model ated with the anomaly-free gauge group U(1) and particles or to particles within a hidden sector. In either Lµ−Lτ thus couples to muons, taus, and their respective neu- case, we require such annihilations to take place through trino species [47, 48]. We show in Fig. 3 the parameter p-wave processes, as measurements of the CMB rule out space of such a model for either a fermionic dark mat- dark matter candidates lighter than ∼10 GeV if they ter candidate with interactions as defined in Eq. 7a or a freeze-out primarily through s-wave annihilations (with scalar dark matter candidate with interactions as defined the exception of annihilation to neutrinos) [23]. in Eq. 7b. (If we had included a γ5 in Eq. 7a to make the annihilation p-wave suppressed, the results would be almost indistinguishable from the scalar case.) Because A. Annihilation to Standard Model Fermions this mediator does not directly couple to electrons, the experimental constraints are considerably less restrictive For the case of annihilation directly to Standard Model in this case, potentially allowing the dark matter to be states, we consider two options for p-wave processes: dark sufficiently depleted in the early universe. We note that matter in the form of a scalar or a fermion which anni- in the scalar dark matter case, this model predicts a con- hilates through a new vector, V (fermionic annihilation tribution to the magnetic moment of the muon, (g − 2)µ, through a scalar mediator also leads to p-wave ampli- that is capable of explaining the measured anomaly [39– tudes, but is more constrained). In both of these cases, 42]. The same is true in the fermionic case, but for a the vector must be heavier than the dark matter itself somewhat lower value of gχ. It is anticipated that fu- (in order for annihilations to Standard Model fermions ture measurements by SPS [38] will be sensitive to this to dominate over those to VV ). First, we consider the scenario [49]. 5

FIG. 3. Constraints on a scenario in which millicharged dark matter, χ, annihilates to Standard Model leptons through the exchange of a vector mediator, V , which couples to muon minus tau number, associated with the gauge group U(1)Lµ−Lτ . The blue band denotes the approximate region of parameter space which can explain the amplitude of the observed 21-cm absorption feature as reported by the EDGES Collaboration. Because this mediator does not directly couple to electrons, the experimental constraints are considerably less restrictive in this case, potentially allowing the dark matter to be suﬃciently depleted in the early universe. Future measurements by SPS [38] are expected to be sensitive to this scenario. Also shown are the regions that are capable of explaining the observed value of the muon’s magnetic moment, (g − 2)µ [39–42], as well as those that are ruled out by the CCFR experiment [43, 44]. In each frame, we have adopted mV = 3mχ and gχ = 1.

B. Annihilation to Hidden Sector Particles the range of values allowed by measurements of the light element abundances [28]. On the other hand, if the φ Next we turn our attention to scenarios in which the population is non-relativistic and decays after BBN, this dark matter annihilates to unstable particles that reside will ruin the concordance of the baryon-to-photon ratio within a hidden sector. In light of the p-wave require- as measured during BBN and recombination. ment, we focus on annihilations to a pair of real scalars, In order to evade this constraint, the φ abundance must φ, which we take to be lighter than the dark matter it- be transferred prior to BBN into Standard Model par- self. We motivate this choice by the fact that a real scalar ticles, which then reach equilibrium with both photons leads to the smallest contribution to the energy density and neutrinos, thereby preserving the Standard Model of dark radiation (i.e. the number of effective neutrino prediction Neff = 3.046 [52]. This could be facilitated, for example, through the rapid decay of the φ. Unless we species, Neff ). The dark matter annihilation cross section to a pair of these dark scalars is given by: include additional particle content into our model, the φ population will decay predominantly to a pair of photons 3y4v2 through a χ loop, with a width that is given by: σvχχ¯→φφ = 2 , (9) 128πmχ 2 4 2 3 y α m 2 Γ = φ A (m , m ) , (11) where y is the φχχ¯ yukawa coupling and v is the relative φ→γγ 3 2 1/2 φ χ 256π mχ velocity of the annihilating particles. This cross section leads to a relic abundance equal to the following fraction where of the measured dark matter abundance: 8m2 4m2 m A ≡ χ 1 + 1 − χ arcsin2 φ . (12) 0.034 m 2 0.1 1/2 m2 m2 2m f ≈ 0.008 χ , (10) φ φ χ DM y 30 MeV v2 We find that there is no combination of parameters that where we assume that a thermal relic Dirac fermion at- can account for the observed amplitude of the 21-cm tains the observed abundance with σv ' 6×10−26cm3/s. absorption feature for which this decay will take place The dark matter models under consideration here are prior to BBN (τφ <∼ 1 s). Thus to avoid the stringent strongly constrained by observations of the CMB and constraints from BBN, we must introduce an additional the successful predictions of BBN (see, for example, mechanism to more rapidly deplete the φ abundance, Refs. [50, 51]). If the φ population is relativistic dur- such as through the decay to Standard Model fermions ing BBN, it will contribute ∆Neff = 4/7, in excess of through mixing with the Higgs. Alternatively, we could 6 also consider interactions which deplete the φ abundance straints, we find that the only range of models that could through 3-to-2 processes [53–55]. potentially explain the reported 21-cm signal are those in We have not been entirely exhaustive in consider- which a small fraction ∼ 0.3−2% of the dark matter con- ing the possibilities for depleting the density of mil- sists of particles with a mass of ∼ 10−80 MeV and which licharged dark matter in the early universe. Other couple to the photon through a small electric charge of model building options include annihilation to “forbid- ∼ 10−6 − 10−4. den” [56] or “impeded” [57] final states, which can evade CMB constraints by suppressing annihilation at low- Furthermore, throughout this range of models, the velocities; processes in which the dark matter freezes out dark matter is predicted to have reached thermal equi- through 4-to-2 processes [58]; and scenarios featuring ad- librium with the Standard Model in the early universe, ditional reheating after dark matter freeze-out but prior thus requiring that the model be supplemented with an to BBN [59–63]. additional mechanism to deplete the dark matter abundance to an acceptable level. We consider scenarios in which the dark matter annihilates through a new vector IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS to neutrinos, or to particles within a hidden sector which are themselves depleted through rapid decays or 3-to-2 The recently reported detection by the EDGES Col- processes. Specific possibilities include annihilations to laboration of a feature at 78 MHz in the sky-averaged neutrinos through a U(1)Lµ−Lτ gauge boson, which is radio spectrum marks a potentially momentous occasion expected to be within the reach of future measurements for astrophysics. The possibility that such a signal is not by the SPS experiment. compatible with standard astrophysics is even more ex- ACKNOWLEDGMENTS citing, potentially pointing to a strong coupling between the baryons and dark matter at a redshift of z ∼ 17. This striking possibility merits substantial investigation We would like to thank Kimberly Boddy, Cora and scrutiny. Dvorkin, Rouven Essig, Vera Gluscevic, Wayne Hu and In this paper, we have pointed out several very strin- Marc Kamionkowski for helpful communication. Some of gent constraints on dark matter candidates potentially the results presented in this work utilized PackageX [64]. capable of producing the reported 21-cm feature. Since AB is supported by the U.S. Department of Energy un- a mediator that communicates a new long-range force der Contract No. DEAC02-76SF00515. This manuscript with couplings of the required size is ruled out by both has been authored by Fermi Research Alliance, LLC un- laboratory and cosmological considerations, we are forced der Contract No. DE-AC02-07CH11359 with the U.S. to consider models in which the dark matter itself pos- Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of High sesses a small electric charge. Such models are highly Energy Physics. The United States Government retains constrained, however, by measurements of the cosmic and the publisher, by accepting the article for publica- microwave background, light element abundances, and tion, acknowledges that the United States Government Supernova 1987A. In particular, if such a particle consti- retains a non-exclusive, paid-up, irrevocable, world-wide tutes more than 2% of the dark matter, it would damp license to publish or reproduce the published form of this baryon density perturbations at the time of recombina- manuscript, or allow others to do so, for United States tion to an unacceptable degree. After applying these con- Government purposes.

[1] J. Bowman, A. Rogers, R. Monsalve, T. Mozdzen, and [9] J. B. Mu˜noz, E. D. Kovetz, and Y. Ali-Ha¨ımoud, N. Mahesh, Nature 555, 67 (2018). Phys. Rev. D92, 083528 (2015), arXiv:1509.00029 [astro- [2] R. Barkana, Nature 555, 71 (2018). ph.CO]. [3] A. Cohen, A. Fialkov, R. Barkana, and M. Lotem, [10] E. G. Adelberger, B. R. Heckel, S. A. Hoedl, C. D. Hoyle, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 472, 1915 (2017), D. J. Kapner, and A. Upadhye, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, arXiv:1609.02312 [astro-ph.CO]. 131104 (2007), arXiv:hep-ph/0611223 [hep-ph]. [4] A. Fialkov, R. Barkana, and A. Cohen, (2018), [11] D. J. Kapner, T. S. Cook, E. G. Adelberger, J. H. Gund- arXiv:1802.10577 [astro-ph.CO]. lach, B. R. Heckel, C. D. Hoyle, and H. E. Swan- [5] C. Feng and G. Holder, (2018), arXiv:1802.07432 [astro- son, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 021101 (2007), arXiv:hep- ph.CO]. ph/0611184 [hep-ph]. [6] A. Ewall-Wice, T. C. Chang, J. Lazio, O. Dore, M. Seif- [12] P. A. R. Ade et al. (Planck), Astron. Astrophys. 594, fert, and R. A. Monsalve, (2018), arXiv:1803.01815 A13 (2016), arXiv:1502.01589 [astro-ph.CO]. [astro-ph.CO]. [13] S. D. McDermott, H.-B. Yu, and K. M. Zurek, Phys. [7] J. Mirocha, G. J. A. Harker, and J. O. Burns, Astrophys. Rev. D83, 063509 (2011), arXiv:1011.2907 [hep-ph]. J. 813, 11 (2015), arXiv:1509.07868 [astro-ph.CO]. [14] S. Davidson, S. Hannestad, and G. Raﬀelt, JHEP 05, [8] H. Tashiro, K. Kadota, and J. Silk, Phys. Rev. D90, 003 (2000), arXiv:hep-ph/0001179 [hep-ph]. 083522 (2014), arXiv:1408.2571 [astro-ph.CO]. [15] L. Chuzhoy and E. W. Kolb, JCAP 0907, 014 (2009), 7

arXiv:0809.0436 [astro-ph]. arXiv:1105.3149 [hep-ph]. [16] C. Dvorkin, K. Blum, and M. Kamionkowski, Phys. Rev. [41] M. Davier, A. Hoecker, B. Malaescu, and Z. Zhang, D89, 023519 (2014), arXiv:1311.2937 [astro-ph.CO]. Eur. Phys. J. C71, 1515 (2011), [Erratum: Eur. Phys. [17] A. D. Dolgov, S. L. Dubovsky, G. I. Rubtsov, J.C72,1874(2012)], arXiv:1010.4180 [hep-ph]. and I. I. Tkachev, Phys. Rev. D88, 117701 (2013), [42] F. Jegerlehner and A. Nyffeler, Phys. Rept. 477, 1 (2009), arXiv:1310.2376 [hep-ph]. arXiv:0902.3360 [hep-ph]. [18] S. L. Dubovsky, D. S. Gorbunov, and G. I. Rubtsov, [43] W. Altmannshofer, S. Gori, M. Pospelov, and I. Yavin, JETP Lett. 79, 1 (2004), [Pisma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 091801 (2014), arXiv:1406.2332 Fiz.79,3(2004)], arXiv:hep-ph/0311189 [hep-ph]. [hep-ph]. [19] D. Feldman, Z. Liu, and P. Nath, Phys. Rev. D75, [44] S. R. Mishra et al. (CCFR), Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 3117 115001 (2007), arXiv:hep-ph/0702123 [HEP-PH]. (1991). [20] J. H. Chang, R. Essig, and S. D. McDermott, (2018), [45] G. Krnjaic, Phys. Rev. D94, 073009 (2016), arXiv:1803.00993 [hep-ph]. arXiv:1512.04119 [hep-ph]. [21] A. A. Prinz et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 1175 (1998), [46] E. Izaguirre, G. Krnjaic, P. Schuster, and N. Toro, Phys. arXiv:hep-ex/9804008 [hep-ex]. Rev. Lett. 115, 251301 (2015), arXiv:1505.00011 [hep- [22] C. Boehm, M. J. Dolan, and C. McCabe, JCAP 1308, ph]. 041 (2013), arXiv:1303.6270 [hep-ph]. [47] S. Baek, N. G. Deshpande, X. G. He, and P. Ko, Phys. [23] T. R. Slatyer, Phys. Rev. D93, 023527 (2016), Rev. D64, 055006 (2001), arXiv:hep-ph/0104141 [hep- arXiv:1506.03811 [hep-ph]. ph]. [24] J. B. Muñozand A. Loeb, (2018), arXiv:1802.10094 [48] M. Pospelov, Phys. Rev. D80, 095002 (2009), [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:0811.1030 [hep-ph]. [25] K. M. Nollett and G. Steigman, Phys. Rev. D91, 083505 [49] Y. Kahn, G. Krnjaic, N. Tran, and A. Whitbeck, (2018), (2015), arXiv:1411.6005 [astro-ph.CO]. arXiv:180X.XXXXX [hep-ph]. [26] G. Steigman and K. M. Nollett, Proceedings, 13th Inter- [50] H. Vogel and J. Redondo, JCAP 1402, 029 (2014), national Conference on Topics in Astroparticle and Un- arXiv:1311.2600 [hep-ph]. derground Physics (TAUP 2013): Asilomar, California, [51] C. Brust, D. E. Kaplan, and M. T. Walters, JHEP 12, September 8-13, 2013, Phys. Procedia 61, 179 (2015), 058 (2013), arXiv:1303.5379 [hep-ph]. arXiv:1402.5399 [astro-ph.CO]. [52] G. Mangano, G. Miele, S. Pastor, and M. Peloso, Phys. [27] W. L. Xu, C. Dvorkin, and A. Chael, (2018), Lett. B534, 8 (2002), arXiv:astro-ph/0111408 [astro-ph]. arXiv:1802.06788 [astro-ph.CO]. [53] E. D. Carlson, M. E. Machacek, and L. J. Hall, Astro- [28] R. H. Cyburt, B. D. Fields, K. A. Olive, and T.-H. Yeh, phys. J. 398, 43 (1992). Rev. Mod. Phys. 88, 015004 (2016), arXiv:1505.01076 [54] Y. Hochberg, E. Kuflik, H. Murayama, T. Volansky, [astro-ph.CO]. and J. G. Wacker, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 021301 (2015), [29] E. Izaguirre and I. Yavin, Phys. Rev. D92, 035014 arXiv:1411.3727 [hep-ph]. (2015), arXiv:1506.04760 [hep-ph]. [55] D. Pappadopulo, J. T. Ruderman, and G. Trevisan, [30] G. Steigman, B. Dasgupta, and J. F. Beacom, Phys. Phys. Rev. D94, 035005 (2016), arXiv:1602.04219 [hep- Rev. D86, 023506 (2012), arXiv:1204.3622 [hep-ph]. ph]. [31] J. P. Lees et al. (BaBar), Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 131804 [56] R. T. D’Agnolo and J. T. Ruderman, Phys. Rev. Lett. (2017), arXiv:1702.03327 [hep-ex]. 115, 061301 (2015), arXiv:1505.07107 [hep-ph]. [32] E. Izaguirre, G. Krnjaic, P. Schuster, and N. Toro, Phys. [57] J. Kopp, J. Liu, T. R. Slatyer, X.-P. Wang, and W. Xue, Rev. D88, 114015 (2013), arXiv:1307.6554 [hep-ph]. JHEP 12, 033 (2016), arXiv:1609.02147 [hep-ph]. [33] R. Essig, J. Mardon, M. Papucci, T. Volansky, and Y.-M. [58] J. Herms, A. Ibarra, and T. Toma, (2018), Zhong, JHEP 11, 167 (2013), arXiv:1309.5084 [hep-ph]. arXiv:1802.02973 [hep-ph]. [34] J. D. Bjorken, S. Ecklund, W. R. Nelson, A. Abashian, [59] A. Berlin, D. Hooper, and G. Krnjaic, Phys. Rev. D94, C. Church, B. Lu, L. W. Mo, T. A. Nunamaker, and 095019 (2016), arXiv:1609.02555 [hep-ph]. P. Rassmann, Phys. Rev. D38, 3375 (1988). [60] L. Randall, J. Scholtz, and J. Unwin, JHEP 03, 011 [35] E. Izaguirre, G. Krnjaic, P. Schuster, and N. Toro, Phys. (2016), arXiv:1509.08477 [hep-ph]. Rev. D91, 094026 (2015), arXiv:1411.1404 [hep-ph]. [61] H. Davoudiasl, D. Hooper, and S. D. McDermott, Phys. [36] M. Battaglieri et al. (BDX), (2016), arXiv:1607.01390 Rev. Lett. 116, 031303 (2016), arXiv:1507.08660 [hep- [hep-ex]. ph]. [37] M. Battaglieri et al., (2017), arXiv:1707.04591 [hep-ph]. [62] G. Gelmini, P. Gondolo, A. Soldatenko, and C. E. [38] S. N. Gninenko, N. V. Krasnikov, and V. A. Matveev, Yaguna, Phys. Rev. D74, 083514 (2006), arXiv:hep- Phys. Rev. D91, 095015 (2015), arXiv:1412.1400 [hep- ph/0605016 [hep-ph]. ph]. [63] G. Kane, K. Sinha, and S. Watson, Int. J. Mod. Phys. [39] G. W. Bennett et al. (Muon g-2), Phys. Rev. D73, 072003 D24, 1530022 (2015), arXiv:1502.07746 [hep-th]. (2006), arXiv:hep-ex/0602035 [hep-ex]. [64] H. H. Patel, Comput. Phys. Commun. 197, 276 (2015), [40] K. Hagiwara, R. Liao, A. D. Martin, D. No- arXiv:1503.01469 [hep-ph]. mura, and T. Teubner, J. Phys. G38, 085003 (2011),