Unexpected particles involved in calculating relic abundance

Hi,

Can you indicate to me for which model this is problematic?
The merging is automatic and required for direct detection.
In principle, it should not add any particle (but if your model does not define the SM spectrum)
and even if it does all the interactions should be vetoed when generating the diagram for the relic density.

Finally, I'm not sure of which file you refer as "model_info.txt", can you give the full (relative) path of that file?

Cheers,

Olivier

> On 27 Aug 2018, at 15:47, Daneng Yang <email address hidden> wrote:
>
> New question #673022 on MadDM:
> https://answers.launchpad.net/maddm/+question/673022
>
> Dear Experts,
>
> I am trying to use maddm to calculate the relic abundance in a new BSM model.
> After launching my UFO model, I found it was automatically combined with the "EffOperators" model which leads to unexpected particles and gives a wrong gstar spectrum ("dof_check.txt").
>
> I tried to turn off the parameters in the "Block effblock" of the param_card.dat and removed the extra particles in the "model_info.txt". The result seems okay now, but could you please help me confirm that the "EffOperators" model has been correctly switched off?
>
> Best regards,
> Daneng
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> You received this question notification because your team maddm is an
> answer contact for MadDM.

Dear Oliver,

Thanks for your prompt answer!

It is a simple dark QED-like model with two species of Dirac fermions and a light massive dark photon. I expected the relativistic d.o.f. at high temperature to be 106.75+3+7/8*(4+4)=116.75 but it turns out 124.96. I uncommented the "call dof_check" line in the "src/maddm.f" in order to check this.

The "model_info.txt" file is under the "include" directory of the output working area. The BSM looks like:

2000.0 4.0 1
2000.0 4.0 1
2000.0 4.0 1
10.0 3.0 0
70.0 2.0 0
70.0 6.0 0

where one of the 2000.0 line and both of the 70.0 lines are unexpected.
After removing these extra lines, the d.o.f.s look okay and the relic density changes.
I checked that the diagrams involving EffOperators have been eliminated automatically and the thermal averaged cross section remains the same.

Best,
Daneng

Hi,

> It is a simple dark QED-like model with two species of Dirac fermions
> and a light massive dark photon.

Is this UFO model public? Is it possible to have it such that I can run with it?
And try to understand what is happening.

Cheers,

Olivier

> On 28 Aug 2018, at 02:37, Daneng Yang <email address hidden> wrote:
>
> Question #673022 on MadDM changed:
> https://answers.launchpad.net/maddm/+question/673022
>
> Status: Answered => Solved
>
> Daneng Yang confirmed that the question is solved:
> Dear Oliver,
>
> Thanks for your prompt answer!
>
> It is a simple dark QED-like model with two species of Dirac fermions
> and a light massive dark photon. I expected the relativistic d.o.f. at
> high temperature to be 106.75+3+7/8*(4+4)=116.75 but it turns out
> 124.96. I uncommented the "call dof_check" line in the "src/maddm.f" in
> order to check this.
>
> The "model_info.txt" file is under the "include" directory of the output
> working area. The BSM looks like:
>
> 2000.0 4.0 1
> 2000.0 4.0 1
> 2000.0 4.0 1
> 10.0 3.0 0
> 70.0 2.0 0
> 70.0 6.0 0
>
> where one of the 2000.0 line and both of the 70.0 lines are unexpected.
> After removing these extra lines, the d.o.f.s look okay and the relic density changes.
> I checked that the diagrams involving EffOperators have been eliminated automatically and the thermal averaged cross section remains the same.
>
> Best,
> Daneng
>
> --
> You received this question notification because your team maddm is an
> answer contact for MadDM.

Hi Oliver,

Sure I can send it to you. It's a model written by myself, please see the
attachment for the UFO model.
Since I didn't find a button for attachment on the website, I'm sending it
directly by email.
I welcome your comments and suggestions.

Best,
Daneng

On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 3:33 AM Olivier Mattelaer <
<email address hidden>> wrote:

> Your question #673022 on MadDM changed:
> https://answers.launchpad.net/maddm/+question/673022
>
> Olivier Mattelaer posted a new comment:
> Hi,
>
> > It is a simple dark QED-like model with two species of Dirac fermions
> > and a light massive dark photon.
>
> Is this UFO model public? Is it possible to have it such that I can run
> with it?
> And try to understand what is happening.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Olivier
>
> > On 28 Aug 2018, at 02:37, Daneng Yang <
> <email address hidden>> wrote:
> >
> > Question #673022 on MadDM changed:
> > https://answers.launchpad.net/maddm/+question/673022
> >
> > Status: Answered => Solved
> >
> > Daneng Yang confirmed that the question is solved:
> > Dear Oliver,
> >
> > Thanks for your prompt answer!
> >
> > It is a simple dark QED-like model with two species of Dirac fermions
> > and a light massive dark photon. I expected the relativistic d.o.f. at
> > high temperature to be 106.75+3+7/8*(4+4)=116.75 but it turns out
> > 124.96. I uncommented the "call dof_check" line in the "src/maddm.f" in
> > order to check this.
> >
> > The "model_info.txt" file is under the "include" directory of the output
> > working area. The BSM looks like:
> >
> > 2000.0 4.0 1
> > 2000.0 4.0 1
> > 2000.0 4.0 1
> > 10.0 3.0 0
> > 70.0 2.0 0
> > 70.0 6.0 0
> >
> > where one of the 2000.0 line and both of the 70.0 lines are unexpected.
> > After removing these extra lines, the d.o.f.s look okay and the relic
> density changes.
> > I checked that the diagrams involving EffOperators have been eliminated
> automatically and the thermal averaged cross section remains the same.
> >
> > Best,
> > Daneng
> >
> > --
> > You received this question notification because your team maddm is an
> > answer contact for MadDM.
>
> --
> You received this question notification because you asked the question.
>

Hi,

I did not receive your email with the attachement so far.
Note that the email below was not send directly to me but to the website which does not allow attachment for question. (Note that this is allowed for bug report).

So please either send it to me to my email directly, or create a bug report.

Cheers,

Olivier

> On 29 Aug 2018, at 04:22, Daneng Yang <email address hidden> wrote:
>
> Question #673022 on MadDM changed:
> https://answers.launchpad.net/maddm/+question/673022
>
> Daneng Yang posted a new comment:
> Hi Oliver,
>
> Sure I can send it to you. It's a model written by myself, please see the
> attachment for the UFO model.
> Since I didn't find a button for attachment on the website, I'm sending it
> directly by email.
> I welcome your comments and suggestions.
>
> Best,
> Daneng
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 3:33 AM Olivier Mattelaer <
> <email address hidden>> wrote:
>
>> Your question #673022 on MadDM changed:
>> https://answers.launchpad.net/maddm/+question/673022
>>
>> Olivier Mattelaer posted a new comment:
>> Hi,
>>
>>> It is a simple dark QED-like model with two species of Dirac fermions
>>> and a light massive dark photon.
>>
>> Is this UFO model public? Is it possible to have it such that I can run
>> with it?
>> And try to understand what is happening.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Olivier
>>
>>> On 28 Aug 2018, at 02:37, Daneng Yang <
>> <email address hidden>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Question #673022 on MadDM changed:
>>> https://answers.launchpad.net/maddm/+question/673022
>>>
>>> Status: Answered => Solved
>>>
>>> Daneng Yang confirmed that the question is solved:
>>> Dear Oliver,
>>>
>>> Thanks for your prompt answer!
>>>
>>> It is a simple dark QED-like model with two species of Dirac fermions
>>> and a light massive dark photon. I expected the relativistic d.o.f. at
>>> high temperature to be 106.75+3+7/8*(4+4)=116.75 but it turns out
>>> 124.96. I uncommented the "call dof_check" line in the "src/maddm.f" in
>>> order to check this.
>>>
>>> The "model_info.txt" file is under the "include" directory of the output
>>> working area. The BSM looks like:
>>>
>>> 2000.0 4.0 1
>>> 2000.0 4.0 1
>>> 2000.0 4.0 1
>>> 10.0 3.0 0
>>> 70.0 2.0 0
>>> 70.0 6.0 0
>>>
>>> where one of the 2000.0 line and both of the 70.0 lines are unexpected.
>>> After removing these extra lines, the d.o.f.s look okay and the relic
>> density changes.
>>> I checked that the diagrams involving EffOperators have been eliminated
>> automatically and the thermal averaged cross section remains the same.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Daneng
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this question notification because your team maddm is an
>>> answer contact for MadDM.
>>
>> --
>> You received this question notification because you asked the question.
>>
>
> --
> You received this question notification because your team maddm is an
> answer contact for MadDM.

Hi,

I've look at this today and I request help from my collaborators.
When I completly switched off the merging of the EFT operators the relic density did not changed significantly:
(3.07 vs 3.14)

Is it also the number that you get?

Cheers,

Olivier

Thanks, Olivier,

I obtained exactly the same results, there is only a minor change of the
relic density.

Best,
Daneng

On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 9:13 PM Olivier Mattelaer <
<email address hidden>> wrote:

> Your question #673022 on MadDM changed:
> https://answers.launchpad.net/maddm/+question/673022
>
> Olivier Mattelaer posted a new comment:
> Hi,
>
> I've look at this today and I request help from my collaborators.
> When I completly switched off the merging of the EFT operators the relic
> density did not changed significantly:
> (3.07 vs 3.14)
>
> Is it also the number that you get?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Olivier
>
> --
> You received this question notification because you asked the question.
>

Hello,

I realize this is an old post, but was there a resolution to this problem? My model_info.txt also is wrong, but for two reasons. One is the addition of too many particles just as above, and the other is that these numbers are never updated, so after parameters are changed and dependent parameters are updated, the relativistic dof are not changed.

I don't see how it can be updated actually. I see it is written in MGoutput.WriteModelInfo() however I added a log statement that shows me this function is only called when the output directory is first created. When I either update parameters or launch a second run it does not recall the method.

At first I tried to recall the function, but I cannot find where the instance of the class is created and so I cannot figure out how to tell it to recalculate it.

For now I am just replacing model_info.txt with model_info_template.txt which effectively ignores bsm particles.

Best,
Zach

Indeed no update on this so far.

Olivier