Post on 15-Feb-2019
transcript
Halo Independent Comparison of Direct Dark Matter Detection Data
Eugenio Del Nobile
TAUP2013
Astrophysical uncertainties
Eugenio Del Nobile, UCLA September 10, TAUP 2013
Baushev [1208.0392]Mao, Strigari, Wechsler, Wu, Hahn [1210.2721]
e.g.
Two approaches
Eugenio Del Nobile, UCLA September 10, TAUP 2013
Try to find alternative halo models, either driven by physical arguments or by fitting simulations or observationssee e.g. Freese, Lisanti, Savage [1209.3339] and references therein
Try to factor astrophysics out of your problem as much as you canFox, Liu, Weiner [1011.1915], Frandsen, Kahlhoefer, McCabe, Sarkar, Schmidt-Hoberg [1111.0292][1304.6066], Gondolo, Gelmini [1202.6359] + Del Nobile, Huh [1304.6183][1306.5273],Herrero-Garcia, Schwetz, Zupan [1112.1627][1205.0134] + Bozorgnia [1305.3575] (do not miss her talk tomorrow!)
Direct detection rate
Eugenio Del Nobile, UCLA September 10, TAUP 2013
R[E01,E
02](t) =
X
T
⇠T
Z E02
E01
dE0 ✏(E0)GT (ER, E0)
⇥Z 1
0dER
Z
vmin(ER)d3v
⇢ v
mDMf(v, t)
d�T
dER(ER,v)
Direct detection rate
Eugenio Del Nobile, UCLA September 10, TAUP 2013
R[E01,E
02](t) =
X
T
⇠T
Z E02
E01
dE0 ✏(E0)GT (ER, E0)
⇥Z 1
0dER
Z
vmin(ER)d3v
⇢ v
mDMf(v, t)
d�T
dER(ER,v)
DM velocity distribution
Direct detection rate
Eugenio Del Nobile, UCLA September 10, TAUP 2013
R[E01,E
02](t) =
X
T
⇠T
Z E02
E01
dE0 ✏(E0)GT (ER, E0)
⇥Z 1
0dER
Z
vmin(ER)d3v
⇢ v
mDMf(v, t)
d�T
dER(ER,v)
DM velocity distributionDM local density
Direct detection rate
Eugenio Del Nobile, UCLA September 10, TAUP 2013
R[E01,E
02](t) =
X
T
⇠T
Z E02
E01
dE0 ✏(E0)GT (ER, E0)
⇥Z 1
0dER
Z
vmin(ER)d3v
⇢ v
mDMf(v, t)
d�T
dER(ER,v)
DM velocity distributionDM local densityDifferential cross section
Direct detection rate
Eugenio Del Nobile, UCLA September 10, TAUP 2013
R[E01,E
02](t) =
X
T
⇠T
Z E02
E01
dE0 ✏(E0)GT (ER, E0)
⇥Z 1
0dER
Z
vmin(ER)d3v
⇢ v
mDMf(v, t)
d�T
dER(ER,v)
DM velocity distributionDM local densityDifferential cross sectionSum over all nuclides
Direct detection rate
Eugenio Del Nobile, UCLA September 10, TAUP 2013
R[E01,E
02](t) =
X
T
⇠T
Z E02
E01
dE0 ✏(E0)GT (ER, E0)
⇥Z 1
0dER
Z
vmin(ER)d3v
⇢ v
mDMf(v, t)
d�T
dER(ER,v)
DM velocity distributionDM local densityDifferential cross sectionSum over all nuclidesDetector energy resolution and acceptance
Algebraic maquillage 1
Eugenio Del Nobile, UCLA September 10, TAUP 2013
R[E01,E
02](t) =
Z 1
0d3v
f̃(v, t)
vH[E0
1,E02](v)
f̃(v, t) ⌘ ⇢�ref
mDMf(v, t)
H[E01,E
02](v) ⌘
X
T
⇠T
Z E+R (v)
E�R (v)
dERv2
�ref
d�T
dER(ER,v)
Z E02
E01
dE0 ✏(E0)GT (ER, E0)
Algebraic maquillage 1I
Eugenio Del Nobile, UCLA September 10, TAUP 2013
R[E01,E
02](t) =
Z 1
0dvmin ⌘̃(vmin, t)R[E0
1,E02](vmin)
R[E01,E
02](vmin) ⌘
@H[E01,E
02](vmin)
@vmin
⌘̃(vmin, t) ⌘Z 1
vmin
d3vf̃(v, t)
v
Bounds and fits
Eugenio Del Nobile, UCLA September 10, TAUP 2013
R[E01,E
02](t) =
Z 1
0dvmin ⌘̃(vmin, t)R[E0
1,E02](vmin)
For (conservative) bounds on the unmodulated rate, use
For “fits”, use ⌘̃[E01,E
02](vmin) ⌘
R[E01,E
02]R1
0 dvmin R[E01,E
02](vmin)
⌘̃unmod
(v0
) > ⌘̃0
✓(v0
� v)
Spin-independent interaction
Eugenio Del Nobile, UCLA September 10, TAUP 2013
CoGeNT0 highCoGeNT0 med.CoGeNT0 lowCRESST-IISIMPLEXENON10XENON100CDMS-II-GeCDMS-II-Si H2013Lm=9GeVêc2 fnê fp=-0.7
200 400 600 800 100010-25
10-24
10-23
10-22
10-21
vmin @kmêsDhrspc2êm@day
s-1 D
CoGeNT0 highCoGeNT0 med.CoGeNT0 lowCRESST-IISIMPLEXENON10XENON100CDMS-II-GeCDMS-II-Si H2013Lm=9GeVêc2 fnê fp=1
200 400 600 800 100010-27
10-26
10-25
10-24
vmin @kmêsD
hrspc2êm@day
s-1 D
Spin-independent interaction
Eugenio Del Nobile, UCLA September 10, TAUP 2013
CoGeNT1SIMPLEXENON10XENON100DAMA1 HQNa=0.30LCDMS-II mod. limitCDMS-II-GeCDMS-II-Si H2013Lm=9GeVêc2 fnê fp=-0.7
200 400 600 800 100010-25
10-24
10-23
10-22
10-21
vmin @kmêsDhrspc2êm@day
s-1 D
CoGeNT1SIMPLEXENON10XENON100DAMA1 HQNa=0.30LCDMS-II mod. limitCDMS-II-GeCDMS-II-Si H2013Lm=9GeVêc2 fnê fp=1
200 400 600 800 100010-27
10-26
10-25
10-24
vmin @kmêsD
hrspc2êm@day
s-1 D
Spin-independent interaction
Eugenio Del Nobile, UCLA September 10, TAUP 2013
CoGeNT1XENON10XENON100DAMA1HQNa=.30LCDMS-II mod. limitCDMS-II-GeCDMS-II-Si H2013Lm=9GeVêc2 fnê fp=1
200 400 600 800 100010-27
10-26
10-25
10-24
vmin @kmêsD
hrspc2êm@day
s-1 D
CoGeNT1XENON10XENON100DAMA1HQNa=.30LCDMS-II mod. limitCDMS-II-GeCDMS-II-Si H2013Lm=9GeVêc2 fnê fp=-0.7
200 400 600 800 100010-25
10-24
10-23
10-22
10-21
vmin @kmêsDhrspc2êm@day
s-1 D
Spin-independent interaction
Eugenio Del Nobile, UCLA September 10, TAUP 2013
CoGeNT0 highCoGeNT0 med.CoGeNT0 lowCoGeNT1CRESST-IISIMPLEXENON10XENON100DAMA1HQNa=0.30LCDMS-II mod. limitCDMS-II-GeCDMS-II-Si H2013Lm=6GeVêc2 fnê fp=1
200 400 600 800 100010-27
10-26
10-25
10-24
vmin @kmêsD
hrspc2êm@day
s-1 D
CoGeNT1XENON10XENON100DAMA1HQNa,CollarLCDMS-II mod. limitCDMS-II-GeCDMS-II-Si H2013Lm=9GeVêc2 fnê fp=1
200 400 600 800 100010-27
10-26
10-25
10-24
vmin @kmêsDhrspc2êm@day
s-1 D
More involved interactions
Eugenio Del Nobile, UCLA September 10, TAUP 2013
E.g., a WIMP with a magnetic moment
Lint =��
2�̄�µ⌫�Fµ⌫ () Hint = ��� ~� · ~B
d�T
dER= ↵�2
�
⇢Z2T
1
ER� 1
v2
✓2mT +m�
2mTm�
◆�F 2SI,T (ER)
+�̂2T
v2mT
m2p
✓JT + 1
3JT
◆F 2M,T (ER)
�
Response functions
Eugenio Del Nobile, UCLA September 10, TAUP 2013
RSI HvminLR HvminLR HvminL ê vmin3R HvminL ê vmin10
CDMS-II-SiH 7-9 keV L
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800vmin @kmêsD
ResponsefunctionHarb
itraryunitL
RSI HvminLR HvminLR HvminL ê vmin3R HvminL ê vmin10
CoGeNTH 0.43-1.11 keVee L
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800vmin @kmêsD
ResponsefunctionHarb
itraryunitL
RSI HvminLR HvminLR HvminL ê vmin3R HvminL ê vmin10
CoGeNTH 2.49-3.18 keVee L
300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000vmin @kmêsD
ResponsefunctionHarb
itraryunitL
RSI HvminLR HvminLR HvminL ê vmin3R HvminL ê vmin10
DAMAH 2.0-2.5 keVee L
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800vmin @kmêsD
ResponsefunctionHarb
itraryunitL
Response functions
Eugenio Del Nobile, UCLA September 10, TAUP 2013
RSI HvminLR HvminLR HvminL ê vmin3R HvminL ê vmin10
CDMS-II-SiH 7-9 keV L
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800vmin @kmêsD
ResponsefunctionHarb
itraryunitL
RSI HvminLR HvminLR HvminL ê vmin3R HvminL ê vmin10
CoGeNTH 0.43-1.11 keVee L
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800vmin @kmêsD
ResponsefunctionHarb
itraryunitL
RSI HvminLR HvminLR HvminL ê vmin3R HvminL ê vmin10
CoGeNTH 2.49-3.18 keVee L
300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000vmin @kmêsD
ResponsefunctionHarb
itraryunitL
RSI HvminLR HvminLR HvminL ê vmin3R HvminL ê vmin10
DAMAH 2.0-2.5 keVee L
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800vmin @kmêsD
ResponsefunctionHarb
itraryunitL
vrmin⌘̃[E01,E
02](vmin) ⌘
R[E01,E
02]R1
0 dvmin v�rminR[E0
1,E02](vmin)
Results for Magnetic DM
Eugenio Del Nobile, UCLA September 10, TAUP 2013
CoGeNT1DAMA1CDMS mod. limitCDMS-II-SiCDMS-II-GeXENON10XENON100m=6GeVêc2
200 400 600 800 1000
10-25
10-24
10-23
10-22
10-21
vmin @kmêsD
hé@day
s-1 D
CoGeNT1DAMA1CDMS mod. limitCDMS-II-SiCDMS-II-GeXENON10XENON100m=9GeVêc2
200 400 600 800 1000
10-25
10-24
10-23
10-22
10-21
vmin @kmêsD
hé@day
s-1 D
CoGeNT1DAMA1CDMS mod. limitCDMS-II-SiCDMS-II-GeXENON10XENON100m=15GeVêc2
200 400 600 800 1000
10-25
10-24
10-23
10-22
10-21
vmin @kmêsDhé@day
s-1 D
Results for Magnetic DM
Eugenio Del Nobile, UCLA September 10, TAUP 2013
CoGeNT0CoGeNT1DAMA1CDMS-II-SiCDMS-II-GeCDMS mod. limitXENON10XENON100m=6GeVêc2
200 400 600 800 1000
10-25
10-24
10-23
10-22
10-21
vmin @kmêsD
hé@day
s-1 D
CoGeNT0CoGeNT1DAMA1CDMS-II-SiCDMS-II-GeCDMS mod. limitXENON10XENON100m=9GeVêc2
200 400 600 800 1000
10-25
10-24
10-23
10-22
10-21
vmin @kmêsD
hé@day
s-1 D
CoGeNT0CoGeNT1DAMA1CDMS-II-SiCDMS-II-GeCDMS mod. limitXENON10XENON100m=15GeVêc2
200 400 600 800 1000
10-25
10-24
10-23
10-22
10-21
vmin @kmêsDhé@day
s-1 D
Conclusions
Eugenio Del Nobile, UCLA September 10, TAUP 2013
• Promising framework to compare different direct detection experiments in a halo-independent way
• Allows to “compare spectra” of different experiments
• Allows to ~fit the DM velocity distribution
• Quite solid in making (conservative) bounds
• So far it looks like astrophysical uncertainties alone cannot accommodate the discrepancies between different experiments
Drawbacks
Eugenio Del Nobile, UCLA September 10, TAUP 2013
• Non straightforward interpretation of the “crosses”
• Crosses lack a precise statistical meaning
• Difficult mapping of the rate onto vmin-space for experiments with different nuclei, as DAMA (Na-I) and CRESST (Ca-W-O)
• No information on how compatible unmodulated and modulated signals are
Directions of future improvement
Eugenio Del Nobile, UCLA September 10, TAUP 2013
• Non straightforward interpretation of the “crosses”
• Crosses lack a precise statistical meaning
• Difficult mapping of the rate onto vmin-space for experiments with different nuclei, as DAMA (Na-I) and CRESST (Ca-W-O)
• No information on how compatible unmodulated and modulated signals are