SciPost logo

SciPost Submission Page

Annual modulation of dark matter signals: Experimental results and new ideas

by Felix Kahlhoefer

This Submission thread is now published as

Submission summary

Authors (as registered SciPost users): Felix Kahlhoefer
Submission information
Preprint Link: scipost_202209_00060v2  (pdf)
Date accepted: 2023-04-28
Date submitted: 2022-12-07 13:41
Submitted by: Kahlhoefer, Felix
Submitted to: SciPost Physics Proceedings
Proceedings issue: 14th International Conference on Identification of Dark Matter (IDM2022)
Ontological classification
Academic field: Physics
Specialties:
  • Gravitation, Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics
  • High-Energy Physics - Phenomenology
Approach: Phenomenological

Abstract

Direct detection experiments searching for the scattering of dark matter particles off nuclei expect an annual modulation in their event rate. In this presentation, I will review the theoretical predictions and the experimental status of the search for annual modulations, with a focus on ongoing and planned experiments using NaI detectors. In particular, I will discuss the interpretation of the DAMA signal and related model-building efforts.

Published as SciPost Phys. Proc. 12, 004 (2023)



Author comments upon resubmission

I am grateful for the various suggestions. I detail below how they have been addressed in the resubmission:

List of changes

page 1 it is written: “… is predicted to switch sign at very low recoil energies (so-called anti-modulation)…”. Actually, once considering the energy resolution of the detectors such a “anti-mod” can be smeared out.
Page 1 discusses the physical recoil spectrum, not the observed one, so the statement about anti-modulation is correct. However, I have added a comment on the possible effect of energy resolution in the context of DAMA on page 2.

page 1, the footnote: The author cites the paper [7]; however, the arguments of [7] have already been confuted by DAMA in ref: 1) Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 114 (2020) 103810 and 2) arXiv:2209.00882 (your ref. [10]) For an unbiased view, these should be cited as well.
The footnote on page 1 makes a very general statement without any reference to the DAMA experiment (which at this point in the text has not even been introduced yet). I believe the statement in the footnote to be factually correct, and no implication regarding DAMA is being made. I therefore find it unnecessary to add further references.

page 2: “… the DAMA collaboration has been observing an annual modulation in their nuclear recoil data…”. Actually, ... in the experimental single-hit data. No selection between electromagnetic and recoil data can be done at low energy.
I agree and have changed the text accordingly.

page 2: it is cited ref [8] for DAMA, however more updated ref is Nucl. Phys. At. Energy 22 (2021) 329 and your ref. [10]. The significance is slightly larger.
I agree and have changed the text accordingly.


Reports on this Submission

Anonymous Report 1 on 2022-12-12 (Invited Report)

Report

The paper can be published as it is now

  • validity: -
  • significance: -
  • originality: -
  • clarity: -
  • formatting: -
  • grammar: -

Login to report or comment