Cosmic-ray positron fraction measurement from 1 to 30 GeV with AMS-01

Aguilar, M.; Alcaraz, J.; Allaby, J.; Alpat, B.; Ambrosi, G.; Anderhub, H.; Ao, L.; Arefiev, A.; Azzarello, P.; Baldini, Luca; Basile, M.; Barancourt, D.; Barão, F.; Barbier, G.; Barreira, G.; Battiston, R.; Becker, R. H.; Becker, U.; Bellagamba, L.; Béné, P.; Berdugo, J.; Berges, P.; Bertucci, B.; Biland, A.; Blasko, S.; Boella, G.; Boschini, M.; Bourquin, M.; Brocco, L.; Bruni, G.; Buénerd, M.; Burger, J. D.; Burger, W. J.; Cai, Xudong; Camps, C.; Cannarsa, Piermarco; Capell, M.; Cardano, F.; Casadei, D.; Casaus, J.; Castellini, G.; Chang, Y. H.; Chen, H.F.; Chen, H.S.; Chen, Z.G.; Chernoplekov, N. A.; Chiueh, Tzihong; Cho, K.; Choi, M. J.; Choi, Young-Jun; Cindolo, F.; Commichau, V.; Contin, A.; Gil, E. Cortina; Cristinziani, M.; Dai, T.; Mendez, C. Delgado; Difalco, S.; Djambazov, L.; D’Antone, I.; Dong, Zhiwen; Emonet, P.; Engelberg, J.; Eppling, F. J.; Eronen, T.; Esposito, G.; Extermann, P.; Favier, Jean; Fiandrini, E.; Fisher, P. H.; Flügge, G.; Fouque, N.; Galaktionov, Yu.; Gast, H.; Gervasi, M.; Giusti, P.; Grandi, D.; Grimm, O.; Gu, W.; Hangarter, K.; Hasan, A.; Hermel, V.; Hofer, H.; Hungerford, W.; Jongmanns, M.; Karlamaa, K.; Karpiński, W.; Kenney, G.; Kim, D.H.; Kim, G.N.; Kim, K.S.; Kim, M.Y.; Klimentov, A.; Kossakowski, R.; Kounine, A.; Koutsenko, V.; Kraeber, M.; Laborie, G.; Laitinen, Timo; Lamanna, G.; Lanciotti, E.; Laurenti, G.; Lebedev, A.; Lechanoine‐Leluc, C.; Lee, M.W.; Lee, S.C.; Levi, G.; Liu, C.L.; Liu, H.T.; Lu, Gangcheng; Lu, Yao; Lübelsmeyer, K.; Luckey, D.; Lustermann, W.; Mañá, C.; Margotti, A.; Mayet, F.; McNeil, R. R.; Meillon, Brigitte; Menichelli, M.; Mihul, A.; Mujunen, Ari; Oliva, A.; Olzem, J.; Palmonari, F.; Park, H.B.; Park, W.H.; Pauluzzi, M.; Pauß, F.; Perrin, E.; Pesci, A.; Pevsner, A.; Pilo, F.; Pimenta, M.; Plyaskin, V.; Pojidaev, V.; Pohl, M.; Produit, N.; Rancoita, P.G.; Rapin, D.; Raupach, F.; Ren, D.; Ren, Zhiyuan; Ribordy, M.; Richeux, J.P.; Riihonen, E.; Ritakari, Jouko; Ro, S. R.; Roeser, U.; Rossin, C.; Sagdeev, R. Z.; Santos, D.; Sartorelli, G.; Sbarra, C.; Schael, S.; Dratzig, A. Schultz von; Schwering, G.; Seo, E. S.; Shin, Jaejin; Shoumilov, E.; Shoutko, V.; Siedenburg, T.; Siedling, R.; Son, D. C.; Song, Tao; Spinella, F.; Steuer, M.; Sun, G.S.; Suter, H.; Tang, X.; Ting, Samuel C.C.; Ting, S. M.; Tornikoski, M.; Torsti, J.; Trümper, J.; Ulbricht, J.; Urpo, S.; Валтонен, Э.; Vandenhirtz, J.; Velikhov, E. P.; Verlaat, B.; Vetlitsky, I.; Vezzu, F.; Vialle, J. P.; Viertel, G.; Vitè, Davide; Gunten, H. von; Wicki, S. Waldmeier; Wallraff, W.; Wang, B.C.; Wang, J.Z.; Wiik, K.; Williams, C.; Wu, S. X.; Xia, Pan; Xu, Shui; Yan, J.L.; Yan, L.G.; Yang, Changgen; Yang, J.; Yang, Min; Ye, S.W.; Xu, Zun-Lei; Zhang, H.Y.; Zhang, Z.P.; Zhao, D.X.; Zhou, Y.; Zhu, G.Y.; Zhu, Wei; Zhuang, H. L.; Zichichi, A.; Zimmermann, B.; Zuccon, P.

doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2007.01.024

Cited by 298 publications

(254 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

193

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Especially the PAMELA data confirm the hint of excess of positron fraction previously discovered by HEAT [7,8] and AMS [9]. Many theoretical models have been proposed to explain these phenomena in past years, among which a class of leptonic dark matter (DM) annihilation models is of particular interest (e.g., [10,11] or see the review [12]).…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 60%

Leptonic dark matter annihilation in the evolving universe: constraints and implications

Yuan

Yue

et al. 2010

J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 60%

Leptonic dark matter annihilation in the evolving universe: constraints and implications

Yuan

Yue

et al. 2010

J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since τ E determines the positron propagation scale, the related Table 1. Data are taken from CAPRICE (Boezio et al 2000), HEAT (Barwick et al 1997), AMS (Aguilar et al 2007;Alcaraz et al 2000) and MASS (Grimani et al 2002). uncertainties should have a far stronger effect on the primary contributions with a far greater spatial (or time) dependency, such as for instance nearby astrophysical or exotic point sources.…”

Section: Energy Lossesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Positrons are drifted away from the Galaxy and their flux at the Earth is depleted. We note that diffusive reacceleration and Galactic convection were included separately by Lionetto et al (2005) in (Boezio et al 2000), HEAT (Barwick et al 1997), AMS (Aguilar et al 2007;Alcaraz et al 2000) and MASS (Grimani et al 2002). their prediction of the positron spectrum, with the net result of either overshooting (diffusive reacceleration) or undershooting (galactic convection) the data. If we now incorporate both processes and add the various energy-loss mechanisms, we derive the dotted curve, which also contains a bump, although of far smaller amplitude.…”

Section: Diffusive Reacceleration and Full Energy Lossesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Galactic secondary positron flux at the Earth

Delahaye

Lineros²,

Donato³

et al. 2009

A&A

218

308

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context. Secondary positrons are produced by spallation of cosmic rays within the interstellar gas. Measurements have been typically expressed in terms of the positron fraction, which exhibits an increase above 10 GeV. Many scenarios have been proposed to explain this feature, among them some additional primary positrons originating from dark matter annihilation in the Galaxy. Aims. The PAMELA satellite has provided high quality data that has enabled high accuracy statistical analyses to be made, showing that the increase in the positron fraction extends up to about 100 GeV. It is therefore of paramount importance to constrain theoretically the expected secondary positron flux to interpret the observations in an accurate way. Methods. We focus on calculating the secondary positron flux by using and comparing different up-to-date nuclear cross-sections and by considering an independent model of cosmic ray propagation. We carefully study the origins of the theoretical uncertainties in the positron flux. Results. We find the secondary positron flux to be reproduced well by the available observations, and to have theoretical uncertainties that we quantify to be as large as about one order of magnitude. We also discuss the positron fraction issue and find that our predictions may be consistent with the data taken before PAMELA. For PAMELA data, we find that an excess is probably present after considering uncertainties in the positron flux, although its amplitude depends strongly on the assumptions made in relation to the electron flux. By fitting the current electron data, we show that when considering a soft electron spectrum, the amplitude of the excess might be far lower than usually claimed. Conclusions. We provide fresh insights that may help to explain the positron data with or without new physical model ingredients. PAMELA observations and the forthcoming AMS-02 mission will allow stronger constraints to be aplaced on the cosmic-ray transport parameters, and are likely to reduce drastically the theoretical uncertainties.

show abstract

“…A number of recent measurements of cosmic ray electrons and positrons have been interpreted as possible evidence for dark matter [1][2][3][4][5][6]. In particular, it has been suggested that the features of the e þ e À spectrum and positron fraction reported by PAMELA [1], ATIC [2], PPB-BETS [3], the Fermi Gamma Ray Space Telescope (FGST) [4], HEAT [5], and AMS-01 [6] may originate from either DM annihilations [7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21] or decays [22][23][24][25][26][27] taking place in the Galactic Halo.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

High-energy neutrino signatures of dark matter

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It has been suggested that the excesses of high-energy cosmic ray electrons and positrons seen by PAMELA and the Fermi Gamma Ray Space Telescope are evidence of dark matter annihilation or decay in the Galactic halo. To accommodate these signals however, the final states must be predominantly muons or taus. These leptonic final states will produce neutrinos, which are potentially detectable with the IceCube neutrino observatory. We find that with five years of data, IceCube (supplemented by DeepCore) can significantly constrain the relevant parameter space for both annihilating or decaying dark matter, and may be capable of discovering leptophilic dark matter in the halo of the Milky Way.

show abstract

Cosmic-ray positron fraction measurement from 1 to 30 GeV with AMS-01

Cited by 298 publications

References 15 publications

Leptonic dark matter annihilation in the evolving universe: constraints and implications

Leptonic dark matter annihilation in the evolving universe: constraints and implications

Galactic secondary positron flux at the Earth

High-energy neutrino signatures of dark matter

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About