Eugenio Del Nobile - Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory · Eugenio Del Nobile, UCLA September...

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


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


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)



R[E01,E

02](t) =

X

T

⇠T

Z E02

E01


⇥Z 1

0dER

Z

vmin(ER)d3v

⇢ v

mDMf(v, t)

d�T

dER(ER,v)

DM velocity distribution



R[E01,E

02](t) =

X

T

⇠T

Z E02

E01


⇥Z 1

0dER

Z

vmin(ER)d3v

⇢ v

mDMf(v, t)

d�T

dER(ER,v)

DM velocity distributionDM local density



R[E01,E

02](t) =

X

T

⇠T

Z E02

E01


⇥Z 1

0dER

Z

vmin(ER)d3v

⇢ v

mDMf(v, t)

d�T

dER(ER,v)

DM velocity distributionDM local densityDifferential cross section



R[E01,E

02](t) =

X

T

⇠T

Z E02

E01


⇥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



R[E01,E

02](t) =

X

T

⇠T

Z E02

E01


⇥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


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


Algebraic maquillage 1I


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


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


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



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


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



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


s-1 D



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


s-1 D

More involved interactions


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


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


CoGeNTH 0.43-1.11 keVee L

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800vmin @kmêsD


itraryunitL



300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000vmin @kmêsD


itraryunitL


DAMAH 2.0-2.5 keVee L

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800vmin @kmêsD


itraryunitL

Response functions



CDMS-II-SiH 7-9 keV L

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800vmin @kmêsD


itraryunitL



100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800vmin @kmêsD


itraryunitL



300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000vmin @kmêsD


itraryunitL


DAMAH 2.0-2.5 keVee L

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800vmin @kmêsD


itraryunitL

vrmin⌘̃[E01,E

02](vmin) ⌘

R[E01,E

02]R1

0 dvmin v�rminR[E0

1,E02](vmin)

Results for Magnetic DM


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


200 400 600 800 1000

10-25

10-24

10-23

10-22

10-21

vmin @kmêsD

hé@day

s-1 D


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


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


200 400 600 800 1000

10-25

10-24

10-23

10-22

10-21

vmin @kmêsD

hé@day

s-1 D


200 400 600 800 1000

10-25

10-24

10-23

10-22

10-21

vmin @kmêsDhé@day

s-1 D

Conclusions


• 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


• 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


• 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

Date post:	15-Feb-2019
Category:	Documents
Upload:	trinhtruc
View:	215 times
Download:	0 times

Eugenio Del Nobile - Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory · Eugenio Del Nobile, UCLA September...

Documents