Paper detail

Systematic Uncertainties In Constraining Dark Matter Annihilation From The Cosmic Microwave Background

Anisotropies of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) have proven to be a very powerful tool to constrain dark matter annihilation at the epoch of recombination. However, CMB constraints are currently derived using a number of reasonable but yet un-tested assumptions that could potentially lead to a misestimation of the true bounds. In this paper we examine the potential impact of these systematic effects. In particular, we separately study the propagation of the secondary particles produced by annihilation in two energy regimes; first following the shower from the initial particle energy to the keV scale, and then tracking the resulting secondary particles from this scale to the absorption of their energy as heat, ionization, or excitation of the medium. We improve both the high and low energy parts of the calculation, in particular finding that our more accurate treatment of losses to sub-10.2 eV photons produced by scattering of high-energy electrons weakens the constraints on particular DM annihilation models by up to a factor of two. On the other hand, we find that the uncertainties we examine for the low energy propagation do not significantly affect the results for current and upcoming CMB data. We include the evaluation of the precise amount of excitation energy, in the form of Lyman-alpha photons, produced by the propagation of the shower, and examine the effects of varying the Helium fraction and Helium ionization fraction. In the recent literature, simple approximations for the fraction of energy absorbed in different channels have often been used to derive CMB constraints: we assess the impact of using accurate versus approximate energy fractions. Finally we check that the choice of recombination code (between RECFAST v1.5 and COSMOREC), to calculate the evolution of the free electron fraction in the presence of dark matter annihilation, introduces negligible differences.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors2 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.