Paper detail

Testing multiflavored ULDM models with SPARC

We perform maximum likelihood estimates (MLEs) for single and double flavor ultralight dark matter (ULDM) models using the Spitzer Photometry and Accurate Rotation Curves (SPARC) database. These estimates are compared to MLEs for several commonly used cold dark matter (CDM) models. By comparing various CDM models we find, in agreement with previous studies, that the Burkert and Einasto models tend to perform better than other commonly used CDM models. We focus on comparisons between the Einasto and ULDM models and analyze cases for which the ULDM particle masses are: free to vary; and fixed. For each of these analyses, we perform fits assuming the soliton and halo profiles are: summed together; and matched at a given radius. When we let the particle masses vary, we find a negligible preference for any particular range of particle masses, within $10^{-25}\,\text{eV}\leq m\leq10^{-19}\,\text{eV}$, when assuming the summed models. For the matched models, however, we find that almost all galaxies prefer particles masses in the range $10^{-23}\,\text{eV}\lesssim m\lesssim10^{-20}\,\text{eV}$. For both double flavor models we find that most galaxies prefer approximately equal particle masses. We find that the summed models give much larger variances with respect to the soliton-halo (SH) relation than the matched models. When the particle masses are fixed, the matched models give median and mean soliton and halo values that fall within the SH relation bounds, for most masses scanned. When the particle masses are fixed in the fitting procedure, we find the best fit results for the particle mass $m=10^{-20.5}\,\text{eV}$ (for the single flavor models) and $m_1=10^{-20.5}\,\text{eV}$, $m_2=10^{-20.2}\,\text{eV}$ for the double flavor, matched model. We discuss how our study will be furthered using a reinforcement learning algorithm.

preprint2022arXivOpen 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.