PPPC 4 DM ID: a poor particle physicist cookbook for dark matter indirect detection

By Marco Cirelli, G. Corcella, A. Hektor, G. Hutsi, M. Kadastik, P. Panci, M. Raidal, F. Sala, Alessandro Strumia. 2010

982 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We correct a few mistakes of the original version of this work (notably related to the computations of extragalactic gamma rays), while at the same time improving and upgrading other aspects (notably as a consequence of the discovery of the higgs boson at the LHC). A brief list of the main changes is: - We include a higgs boson channel hh with mass mh = 125 GeV. All previous channels hmhm are removed. - We correct the formulae for the computation of extragalactic gamma rays (fixing in particular the redshift dependence) as well as the numerical computations (also including a corrected impact of absorption). - We provide a new version of the Optical Depth function, employing updated models of Extragalactic Background Light (EBL) and fixing the redshift dependence. All these corrections and updates are reflected on the numerical ingredients provided on the website; they correspond to Release 2.0.

Subfields: Nuclear and High Energy Physics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/02e982894291f70cd434978556a69c2ba778426e

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Nuclear and High Energy Physics

Citations in the corpus

Gamma Ray Signals from Dark Matter: Concepts, Status and Prospects (2012, background): “ike DarkSUSY [38, 39] provide user-friendly numerical interpolations of these spectra, based on a large number of Pythiaruns, but there also exist several analytic parameterizations in the literature [10, 40, 41]. Secondary photons show a featureless spectrum with a rather soft cutoﬀ at the kinemati”
Galactic Searches for Dark Matter (2012, background): “and classic bremsstrahlung via interactions with interstellar gas. Theoretical predictions for the corresponding photon uxes, as well as the uxes of electrons, positrons, and protons, are reviewed in Cirelli et al. (2011) and Profumo and Ullio (2010). 6.4. Dark matter decay In Section 7, experiments”
Dark matter and pulsar model constraints from Galactic Center Fermi-LAT gamma-ray observations (2013, background): “1 [39] (C++ version), that software analysis using interpolating functions can overestimate the energy cut-off of the gamma-ray spectra [40], and that not considering electroweak corrections can also create deviations between predicted DM annihilitions spectra [41, 42].”
Sensitivity projections for dark matter searches with the Fermi large area telescope (2016, background): “The electroweak corrections are expected to be important (assuming s-wave annihilation) when the DM mass is heavier than 1 TeV, and for this mass range would alter the spectra substantially for the W+W−, e+e−, μ+μ− and τ+τ− channels, increasing the number of expected γ rays per DM annihilation below”
Limits on dark matter annihilation signals from the Fermi LAT 4-year measurement of the isotropic gamma-ray background (2015, methodology): “We calculate the DM annihilation prompt spectra using the publicly available PPPC4DMID code [67], which takes into account electroweak bremsstrahlung corrections, which are particularly relevant for heavy DM candidates.”
Primordial black holes as dark matter candidates (2021, background): “The numerical expressions for both the energy spectrum dNγ/dE and the optical depth are taken from Reference [251].”
AMS-02 antiprotons, at last! Secondary astrophysical component and immediate implications for Dark Matter (2015, methodology): “4 We also consider two representative DM Galactic profiles: Einasto and Burkert, with the precise functional forms and definitions of the parameters as in [54].”