Paper detail

Dark Matter interpretation of low energy IceCube MESE excess

The 2-years MESE IceCube events show a slightly excess in the energy range 10-100 TeV with a maximum local statistical significance of 2.3$σ$, once a hard astrophysical power-law is assumed. A spectral index smaller than 2.2 is indeed suggested by multi-messenger studies related to $p$-$p$ sources and by the recent IceCube analysis regarding 6-years up-going muon neutrinos. In the present paper, we propose a two-components scenario where the extraterrestrial neutrinos are explained in terms of an astrophysical power-law and a Dark Matter signal. We consider both decaying and annihilating Dark Matter candidates with different final states (quarks and leptons) and different halo density profiles. We perform a likelihood-ratio analysis that provides a statistical significance up to 3.9$σ$ for a Dark Matter interpretation of the IceCube low energy excess.

preprint2017arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors3 topics

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 map preview

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.