Dark Matter distribution in the Milky Way: microlensing and dynamical constraints

By F. Iocco, Miguel Pato, G. Bertone, P. Jetzer. 2011

200 citations recorded by the source corpus.

nd that the most commonly discussed Dark Matter proles ( viz. Navarro-Frenk-White and Einasto) are consistent with microlensing and dynamical observations, while extreme adiabatically compressed proles are robustly ruled out. When a baryonic model that also includes a description of the gas is adopted, our analysis provides a determination of the local Dark Matter density, 0 = 0:20 0:56 GeV/cm 3 at 1 , that is found to be compatible with estimates in the literature based on dierent techniques.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Nuclear and High Energy Physics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3cbd7bb31b414a9c34c4239165f94be4fd37f8e5

How researchers see this paper

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

In Astronomy and Astrophysics

1. A. Helmi
2. Joss Bland-Hawthorn
3. Justin I. Read
4. L. Strigari
5. P. McMillan
6. Hans-Walter Rix
7. Jo Bovy
8. I. Minchev

In Nuclear and High Energy Physics

1. Christoph Weniger
2. L. Strigari
3. I. Cholis
4. Anna Franckowiak
5. F. Calore
6. A. Strong
7. E. Orlando
8. C. McCabe

Citations in the corpus

• Extended gamma-ray emission from Coy Dark Matter (2014, background): “is the local dark matter density [61, 62], 〈σv〉f is the annihilation cross-section to f̄f and”
• Dark Matter through the Higgs portal (2019, unknown): “[279–288] for more details.”
• WIMP dark matter candidates and searches—current status and future prospects (2017, background): “Dynamical and microlensing observations act to constrain the halo profile [235] but there remains significant uncertainty particularly in the GC, see [236, 237] for some recent determinations.”
• A Tentative Gamma-Ray Line from Dark Matter Annihilation at the Fermi Large Area Telescope (2012, background): “3), which are compatible with microlensing and dynamical observations [62].”
• Double-Disk Dark Matter (2013, unknown): “[51].”
• Limits on dark matter annihilation signals from the Fermi LAT 4-year measurement of the isotropic gamma-ray background (2015, methodology): “Observational tracers of the gravitational potential also cannot be used to determine the DM profile within < ∼ 2 kpc from the Galactic center as it is gravitationally dominated by baryons [65, 66].”
• STARS, GAS, AND DARK MATTER IN THE SOLAR NEIGHBORHOOD (2015, unknown): “011 0.005 pcDM 3r = - , and Iocco et al. (2011) found M0.”
• Galactic Searches for Dark Matter (2012, background): “Explicitly including the disk component, the statistical constraints on the dark matter distribution in the Galactic center are extraordinarily weak (Iocco et al., 2011).”
• A new determination of the local dark matter density from the kinematics of K dwarfs (2012, methodology): “For a comparison, we plot the ranges of ρdm at the solar radius obtained by Iocco et al. (2011), combining microlensing and rotation curve measurements, and using different halo models: the blue error bar corresponds to a spherical halo, while the cyan and purple bars correspond to oblates halos…”
• Wino dark matter under siege (2013, methodology): “Microlensing and dynamical observations of the Galaxy appear to be consistent with NFW and Einasto profiles, assuming rs = 20 kpc [66].”
• Gamma Ray Signals from Dark Matter: Concepts, Status and Prospects (2012, background): “ weak at the GC to be compatible with the observations (unless extreme assumptions on the profile are made [267], which however are likely to be in conflict with mic rolensing and dynamical constraints [95]). As already mentioned, there is some evidence for a ∼ 1.5◦ offset of the signal with respect to”
• Constraining the Galaxy's dark halo with RAVE stars (2014, result): “Also most other recent studies that do not rely on the separability assumption find value for ρdm, that are in good agreement with our measurement (Salucci et al. 2010; Iocco et al. 2011; McMillan 2011; Nesti & Salucci 2013).”
• Dark matter annihilations and decays after the AMS-02 positron measurements (2013, unknown): “39 GeV/cm 3 [24–28] with r = 8.”
• Dark matter and pulsar model constraints from Galactic Center Fermi-LAT gamma-ray observations (2013, background): “[34] Fabio Iocco, Miguel Pato, Gianfranco Bertone, and Philippe Jetzer, “Dark Matter distribution in the Milky Way: microlensing and dynamical constraints,” JCAP 1111, 029 (2011), arXiv:1107.”