SciPost Submission Page
The DAMIC-M Experiment: Status and First Results
by D. Norcini, for the DAMIC-M Collaboration
This is not the latest submitted version.
This Submission thread is now published as
Submission summary
| Authors (as registered SciPost users): | Danielle Norcini |
| Submission information | |
|---|---|
| Preprint Link: | scipost_202210_00052v2 (pdf) |
| Date submitted: | 2022-10-12 13:13 |
| Submitted by: | Norcini, Danielle |
| Submitted to: | SciPost Physics Proceedings |
| Proceedings issue: | 14th International Conference on Identification of Dark Matter (IDM2022) |
| Ontological classification | |
|---|---|
| Academic field: | Physics |
| Specialties: |
|
Abstract
The DAMIC-M (DArk Matter In CCDs at Modane) experiment employs thick, fully de- pleted silicon charged-coupled devices (CCDs) to search for dark matter particles with a target exposure of 1 kg-year. A novel skipper readout implemented in the CCDs provides single electron resolution through multiple non-destructive measurements of the individ- ual pixel charge, pushing the detection threshold to the eV-scale. DAMIC-M will advance by several orders of magnitude the exploration of the dark matter particle hypothesis, in particular of candidates pertaining to the so-called “hidden sector.” A prototype, the Low Background Chamber (LBC), with 20g of low background Skipper CCDs, has been recently installed at Laboratoire Souterrain de Modane and is currently taking data. We will report the status of the DAMIC-M experiment and first results obtained with LBC commissioning data.
Current status:
Reports on this Submission
Report #1 by Anonymous (Referee 3) on 2022-11-17 (Invited Report)
- Cite as: Anonymous, Report on arXiv:scipost_202210_00052v2, delivered 2022-11-17, doi: 10.21468/SciPost.Report.6149
Report
The paper presents preliminary results from the DAMIC-M experiment and derives limits on the dark matter-electron cross section for point-like and light-mediator induced interactions.
The presentation on the DAMIC-M part is sound and clear. However, there is a complete disregard of the many paralleling activities in the field. For example Fig. 3 and 5 show many experimental and theoretical results, but no reference is given to honor those contributions, not even to a community report. It is vexing to see how an entire collaboration can sign off on that. This should be fixed before I can recommend publication.
Author: Danielle Norcini on 2022-11-17 [id 3040]
(in reply to Report 1 on 2022-11-17)Thank you for pointing this out. It was certainly an oversight on our part.
Would it be sufficient to provide a community report where these results can be found? Or should we provided references for all of the limits represented on Fig 3 and 5? Thank you.
Anonymous on 2022-11-18 [id 3047]
(in reply to Danielle Norcini on 2022-11-17 [id 3040])Well, there is no rule, of course and it is up to the authors. But since they ask: a compass can be to honor other (original) contributions as one would like to see oneself cited.