Paper detail

The cosmic $e^\pm$ anomaly

Via a Bayesian likelihood analysis using 219 recent cosmic ray spectral data points we extract the anomalous part of the cosmic $e^\pm$ flux. First we show that a significant tension exists between the $e^\pm$ related and the rest of the fluxes. Interpreting this tension as the presence of an anomalous component in the $e^\pm$ related data, we then infer the values of selected cosmic ray propagation parameters excluding the anomalous data sample from the analysis. Based on these values we calculate background predictions with theoretical uncertainties for PAMELA and Fermi-LAT. We find a statistically significant deviation between the Fermi-LAT $e^-+e^+$ data and the predicted background even when (systematic) uncertainties are taken into account. Identifying this deviation as an anomalous $e^\pm$ contribution, we make an attempt to distinguish between various sources that may be responsible for the anomalous $e^\pm$ flux.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 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.