MadDM

complex scalar DM indirect detection self annihilation problem

Asked by Jun Guo

Hi,
I am using MadDM for studying relic abundance and indirect detection.

In my model, it contains two DM candidate, s1 and s2, both of which are complex scalar and not self-conjugate, and s1 is DM.

The main contribution to relic density is
s1 s1 > s2 h and s1^* s1^* > s2^* h,

but in indirect detection, it only calculate process:
s1 s1^* > SM SM
when I use
MadDM> add indirect_detection s2~ h,
it didn't work!

May I ask how could I add the self annihilation processes to indirect detection? Not only the DM anti-DM process.

Thank you!

Question information

Language:
English Edit question
Status:
Answered
For:
MadDM Edit question
Assignee:
Daniele Massaro Edit question
Last query:
Last reply:

This question was reopened

Revision history for this message
Daniele Massaro (dmassaro) said : 		#1

Hi,

at the moment, this feature is not supported in MadDM.
Only DM anti-DM processes are taken into account for indirect detection.

Cheers.

Daniele

Revision history for this message
Olivier Mattelaer (olivier-mattelaer) said : 		#2

Hi,

In this branch:
lp:~maddm/maddm/question_696371

I've added one option where you can specify by hand process for indirect detection (this was already possible for relic and direct but not yet for indirect detection.
In that version you should be allowed to do

add process s1 s1 > s2 h @ID
add process s1~ s1~ > s2~ h @ID

Now Daniele might comment if this simple hack is enough or not for your particular process since this ONLY change the matrix-element included everything else will stay the same (distribution of energy/....). I will do a merge request and asked him what he thinks about it.

Cheers,

Olivier

Revision history for this message
Jun Guo (junguo) said : 		#3

Hi Olivier

Thank you very much!

It works!

Actually, in MSSM another DM candidate, Sneutrino, also face this situation.

In relic density process, it has processes:
sneu sneu > neutrino neutrino
sneu~ sneu~ > neutrino neutrino

also, these two processes should exsist in indirect detection.

Thank you any way!
Cheers!

Jun

Revision history for this message
Jun Guo (junguo) said : 		#4

Hi Olivier

May I ask you another question on this self-annihilation process?

After I add

 s1 s1 > s2 h

process into indirect detection, I find s2 does not decay, in my model, it should be :
s2 > s1 h
but I find in pythia log file, s2 do not decay at all.

How can I make s2 decay? What flags should I set?

Thank you

Revision history for this message
Olivier Mattelaer (olivier-mattelaer) said : 		#5

Would it not make more sense to let maddm to handle the decay?
add process s1 s1 > s2 h , s2 > s1 h @ID

I do not know how to change the pythia8 configuration file.

Cheers,

Olivier

Revision history for this message
Jun Guo (junguo) said : 		#6

Hi Olivier

It didn't work, afther I add

add process s1 s1 > s2 h , s2 > s1 h @ID

the result becomes the same as the very beginning, indirect process without s1 s1 > s2 h.

Thanks any way.

Cheers.

Jun

Revision history for this message
Olivier Mattelaer (olivier-mattelaer) said : 		#7

Likely an issue with decay chain since those are handle has two independent block and one of the two block is likely not store as a indirect detection bit.

So one solution is likely to use
add process s1 s1 > s2 > s1 h h @ID

Cheers,

Olivier

Can you help with this problem?

Provide an answer of your own, or ask Jun Guo for more information if necessary.

To post a message you must log in.