Paper detail

Alleviating the $H_0$ and $σ_8$ anomalies with a decaying dark matter model

The Hubble tension between the $Λ$CDM-model-dependent prediction of the current expansion rate $H_0$ using Planck data and direct, model-independent measurements in the local universe from the SH0ES collaboration disagree at $>3.5σ$. Moreover, there exists a milder $\sim 2σ$ tension between similar predictions for the amplitude $S_8$ of matter fluctuations and its measurement in the local universe. As explanations relying on unresolved systematics have not been found, theorists have been exploring explanations for these anomalies that modify the cosmological model, altering early-universe-based predictions for these parameters. However, new cosmological models that attempt to resolve one tension often worsen the other. In this paper, we investigate a decaying dark matter (DDM) model as a solution to both tensions simultaneously. Here, a fraction of dark matter density decays into dark radiation. The decay rate $Γ$ is proportional to the Hubble rate $H$ through the constant $α_{\rm dr}$, the only additional parameter of this model. Then, this model deviates most from $Λ$CDM in the early universe, with $α_{\rm dr}$ being positively correlated with $H_0$ and negatively with $S_8$. Hence, increasing $α_{\rm dr}$ (and allowing dark matter to decay in this way) can then diminish both tensions simultaneously. When only considering Planck CMB data and the local SH0ES prior on $H_0$, $\sim 1$\% dark matter decays, decreasing the $S_8$ tension to $0.3σ$ and increasing the best-fit $H_0$ by $1.6$ km/s/Mpc. However, the addition of intermediate-redshift data (the JLA supernova dataset and baryon acoustic oscillation data) weakens the effectiveness of this model. Only $\sim 0.5$\% of the dark matter decays bringing the $S_8$ tension back up to $\sim 1.5 σ$ and the increase in the best-fit $H_0$ down to $0.4$ km/s/Mpc.

preprint2019arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.