2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2010.07.010
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Diffuse gamma ray constraints on annihilating or decaying Dark Matter after Fermi

Abstract: We consider the diffuse gamma ray data from Fermi first year observations and compare them to the gamma ray fluxes predicted by Dark Matter annihilation or decay (both from prompt emission and from Inverse Compton Scattering), for different observation regions of the sky and a range of Dark Matter masses, annihilation/decay channels and Dark Matter galactic profiles. We find that the data exclude large regions of the Dark Matter parameter space not constrained otherwise and discuss possible directions for futu… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

11
246
5

Year Published

2011
2011
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 201 publications
(263 citation statements)
references
References 91 publications
(109 reference statements)
11
246
5
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, the limits derived by Abazajian & Harding (2012) from the HESS measurements of the Galactic centre (Abramowski et al 2011) vanish if the DM profile is taken to be isothermal. This is in agreement with the conclusions drawn by Cirelli et al (2010). Constraints from Ackermann et al (2014) based on observations of dwarf spheroidal satellites of the Milky Way (see also Geringer-Sameth & Koushiappas 2011;Ackermann et al 2011) depend on the DM profiles assumed for these objects.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 89%
“…For example, the limits derived by Abazajian & Harding (2012) from the HESS measurements of the Galactic centre (Abramowski et al 2011) vanish if the DM profile is taken to be isothermal. This is in agreement with the conclusions drawn by Cirelli et al (2010). Constraints from Ackermann et al (2014) based on observations of dwarf spheroidal satellites of the Milky Way (see also Geringer-Sameth & Koushiappas 2011;Ackermann et al 2011) depend on the DM profiles assumed for these objects.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 89%
“…This may seem contrary to the common intuition (see e.g., [7,106]) that large rates into the τ + τ − final state are easier to detect in γ's because of the relatively stiff π 0 decay spectrum. In figure 23 we display the continuum γ flux spectra from the models in our set that annihilate into the τ + τ − final state > ∼ 99% of the time (red) and from those that annihilate into the final state bb > ∼ 99% of the time (blue).…”
Section: Jhep01(2011)064contrasting
confidence: 66%
“…For the leptonic channels, we also show the regions that allow to fit the Fermi -LAT, PAMELA and H.E.S.S. cosmic-ray measurements [59], with 95% and 99.99% CL: our exclusion curves are factors ∼30 and ∼2 away from constraining those fits, for the µ + µ − and τ + τ − final states and masses m χ = 2.5 TeV and 5 TeV, respectively.…”
Section: Secondary Photons From Final State Standard Model Particlesmentioning
confidence: 98%