- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review D

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Constraints on ultralight axions from the DESI DR1 full shape, Planck, and ACT datasets

Francesco Verdiani1,2,3,4,*, Emanuele Castorina5,6,†, Ennio Salvioni7,8,‡, Emiliano Sefusatti2,3,4,§, and Matteo Viel1,2,3,4,∥

  • *Contact author: fverdian@sissa.it
  • †Contact author: emanuele.castorina@unimi.it
  • ‡Contact author: esalvioni@ifae.es
  • §Contact author: emiliano.sefusatti@inaf.it
  • ∥Contact author: viel@sissa.it
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 114, 083506 – Published 5 October, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/pcl1-6qc1

Abstract

We present updated bounds on ultralight axions (ULAs) as a subcomponent of dark matter, derived from the full-shape analysis of the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI) Data Release 1 galaxy power spectra combined with cosmic microwave background (CMB) data from the Atacama Cosmology Telescope and Planck. We focus on the mass window 10−32  eV≤ma≤10−24  eV, employing state-of-the-art analysis methods rooted in the Effective Field Theory of Large Scale Structure. For the smallest masses, our joint analysis with DESI improves over CMB-only constraints by more than a factor of 2, establishing the most stringent limits to date. For instance, for ma∼10−29  eV ULAs are constrained to be a fraction as small as 0.3% of the total matter energy density. The DESI Luminous Red Galaxy sample shows a mild preference for an ULA subcomponent with ma≈10−26  eV, mirroring previous hints from the Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey, but this preference vanishes upon combination with CMB data. Probing the largest masses, ma≳10−25  eV, in future studies will benefit from extending the data analysis to smaller scales, both for galaxy clustering and CMB lensing, but will also require concurrent improvements in the theoretical modeling.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (86)

  1. D. Baumann, A. Nicolis, L. Senatore, and M. Zaldarriaga, Cosmological non-linearities as an effective fluid, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2010) 051.
  2. J. J. M. Carrasco, M. P. Hertzberg, and L. Senatore, The effective field theory of cosmological large scale structures, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2012) 082.
  3. R. D. Peccei and H. R. Quinn, CP conservation in the presence of instantons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 38, 1440 (1977).
  4. S. Weinberg, A new light boson?, Phys. Rev. Lett. 40, 223 (1978).
  5. F. Wilczek, Problem of strong P and T invariance in the presence of instantons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 40, 279 (1978).
  6. P. Svrcek and E. Witten, Axions in string theory, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2006) 051.
  7. A. Arvanitaki, S. Dimopoulos, S. Dubovsky, N. Kaloper, and J. March-Russell, String axiverse, Phys. Rev. D 81, 123530 (2010).
  8. E. Sheridan et al., Fuzzy axions and associated relics, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2025) 016.
  9. M. Jain, E. Sheridan, D. J. E. Marsh, E. Heyes, K. K. Rogers, and A. Schachner, Bayesian inference on Calabi-Yau moduli spaces and the axiverse: Experimental data meets string theory, Phys. Rev. D 114, 026026 (2026).
  10. J. Preskill, M. B. Wise, and F. Wilczek, Cosmology of the invisible axion, Phys. Lett. 120B, 127 (1983).
  11. L. F. Abbott and P. Sikivie, A cosmological bound on the invisible axion, Phys. Lett. 120B, 133 (1983).
  12. M. Dine and W. Fischler, The not so harmless axion, Phys. Lett. 120B, 137 (1983).
  13. W. Hu, R. Barkana, and A. Gruzinov, Cold and fuzzy dark matter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 1158 (2000).
  14. L. Amendola and R. Barbieri, Dark matter from an ultra-light pseudo-Goldstone-boson, Phys. Lett. B 642, 192 (2006).
  15. D. J. E. Marsh and P. G. Ferreira, Ultra-light scalar fields and the growth of structure in the universe, Phys. Rev. D 82, 103528 (2010).
  16. R. Hlozek, D. Grin, D. J. E. Marsh, and P. G. Ferreira, A search for ultralight axions using precision cosmological data, Phys. Rev. D 91, 103512 (2015).
  17. A. G. Adame et al. (DESI Collaboration), The early data release of the dark energy spectroscopic instrument, Astron. J. 168, 58 (2024).
  18. A. G. Adame et al. (DESI Collaboration), DESI 2024 II: Sample definitions, characteristics, and two-point clustering statistics, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2025) 017.
  19. M. Abdul Karim et al. (DESI Collaboration), Data release 1 of the dark energy spectroscopic instrument, Astron. J. 171, 285 (2026).
  20. F. J. Qu et al. (ACT Collaboration), The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: A measurement of the DR6 CMB lensing power spectrum and its implications for structure growth, Astrophys. J. 962, 112 (2024).
  21. M. S. Madhavacheril et al. (ACT Collaboration), The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: DR6 gravitational lensing map and cosmological parameters, Astrophys. J. 962, 113 (2024).
  22. T. Louis et al. (Atacama Cosmology Telescope Collaboration), The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: DR6 power spectra, likelihoods and ΛCDM parameters, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2025) 062.
  23. E. Calabrese et al. (Atacama Cosmology Telescope Collaboration), The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: DR6 constraints on extended cosmological models, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2025) 063.
  24. S. Alam et al. (eBOSS Collaboration), Completed SDSS-IV extended baryon oscillation spectroscopic survey: Cosmological implications from two decades of spectroscopic surveys at the Apache Point Observatory, Phys. Rev. D 103, 083533 (2021).
  25. F. Verdiani, E. Castorina, E. Salvioni, and E. Sefusatti, The effective field theory of large scale structure for mixed dark matter scenarios, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2025) 047.
  26. A. Laguë, J. R. Bond, R. Hložek, K. K. Rogers, D. J. E. Marsh, and D. Grin, Constraining ultralight axions with galaxy surveys, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2021) 049.
  27. K. K. Rogers, R. Hložek, A. Laguë, M. M. Ivanov, O. H. E. Philcox, G. Cabass, K. Akitsu, and D. J. E. Marsh, Ultra-light axions and the S8 tension: Joint constraints from the cosmic microwave background and galaxy clustering, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 06 (2023) 023.
  28. A. G. Adame et al. (DESI Collaboration), DESI 2024 VII: Cosmological constraints from the full-shape modeling of clustering measurements, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2025) 028.
  29. A. G. Adame et al. (DESI Collaboration), DESI 2024 VI: Cosmological constraints from the measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2025) 021.
  30. A. Chudaykin, M. M. Ivanov, and O. H. E. Philcox, Reanalyzing DESI DR1. 1. ΛCDM constraints from the power spectrum and bispectrum, Phys. Rev. D 113, 063502 (2026).
  31. A. Chudaykin, M. M. Ivanov, and O. H. E. Philcox, Reanalyzing DESI DR1. 2. Constraints on dark energy, spatial curvature, and neutrino masses, Phys. Rev. D 113, 123506 (2026).
  32. A. Chudaykin, M. M. Ivanov, and O. H. E. Philcox, Reanalyzing DESI DR1. 3. Constraints on inflation from galaxy power spectra and bispectra, Phys. Rev. D 113, 063552 (2026).
  33. N. Aghanim et al. (Planck Collaboration), Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys. 641, A6 (2020); (Planck Collaboration)Astron. Astrophys.652, C4(E) (2021).
  34. N. Aghanim et al. (Planck Collaboration), Planck 2018 results. V. CMB power spectra and likelihoods, Astron. Astrophys. 641, A5 (2020).
  35. J. Carron, M. Mirmelstein, and A. Lewis, CMB lensing from Planck PR4 maps, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 09 (2022) 039.
  36. V. Poulin, T. L. Smith, D. Grin, T. Karwal, and M. Kamionkowski, Cosmological implications of ultralight axionlike fields, Phys. Rev. D 98, 083525 (2018).
  37. T. L. Smith, V. Poulin, and M. A. Amin, Oscillating scalar fields and the Hubble tension: A resolution with novel signatures, Phys. Rev. D 101, 063523 (2020).
  38. L. A. Ureña-López and A. X. Gonzalez-Morales, Towards accurate cosmological predictions for rapidly oscillating scalar fields as dark matter, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2015) 048.
  39. T. Cookmeyer, D. Grin, and T. L. Smith, How sound are our ultralight axion approximations?, Phys. Rev. D 101, 023501 (2020).
  40. S. Passaglia and W. Hu, Accurate effective fluid approximation for ultralight axions, Phys. Rev. D 105, 123529 (2022).
  41. M. A. Amin and M. S. Delos, Growth of structure in multi-species wave dark matter, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2025) 071.
  42. N. MacCrann et al. (ACT Collaboration), The atacama cosmology telescope: Mitigating the impact of extragalactic foregrounds for the DR6 cosmic microwave background lensing analysis, Astrophys. J. 966, 138 (2024).
  43. N. Hand, Y. Li, Z. Slepian, and U. Seljak, An optimal FFT-based anisotropic power spectrum estimator, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2017) 002.
  44. M. Pinon et al., Mitigation of DESI fiber assignment incompleteness effect on two-point clustering with small angular scale truncated estimators, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2024) 131.
  45. A. G. Adame et al. (DESI Collaboration), DESI 2024 V: Full-Shape galaxy clustering from galaxies and quasars, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 09 (2025) 008; (DESI Collaboration)J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys.02 (2026) E02.
  46. F. Beutler, E. Castorina, and P. Zhang, Interpreting measurements of the anisotropic galaxy power spectrum, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 03 (2018) 040.
  47. R. Hlozek, D. J. E. Marsh, and D. Grin, Using the full power of the cosmic microwave background to probe axion dark matter, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 476, 3063 (2018).
  48. R. Hložek, D. J. E. Marsh, D. Grin, R. Allison, J. Dunkley, and E. Calabrese, Future CMB tests of dark matter: Ultralight axions and massive neutrinos, Phys. Rev. D 95, 123511 (2017).
  49. L. Gaughan, A. M. Green, and A. Moss, Ultra-light axion constraints from Planck and ACT: The role of nonlinear modelling, arXiv:2605.12054.
  50. A. Laguë et al., The atacama cosmology telescope: Probing new signatures of ultralight axions with gravitational lensing, arXiv:2606.06410.
  51. A. Mead, S. Brieden, T. Tröster, and C. Heymans, HMcode-2020: Improved modelling of non-linear cosmological power spectra with baryonic feedback, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 502, 1401 (2021).
  52. S. M. L. Vogt, D. J. E. Marsh, and A. Laguë, Improved mixed dark matter halo model for ultralight axions, Phys. Rev. D 107, 063526 (2023).
  53. T. Dome, S. May, A. Laguë, D. J. E. Marsh, S. Johnston, S. Bose, A. Tocher, and A. Fialkov, Improved halo model calibrations for mixed dark matter models of ultralight axions, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 537, 252 (2025).
  54. S. Foreman and L. Senatore, The EFT of large scale structures at all redshifts: Analytical predictions for lensing, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 04 (2015) 033.
  55. O. H. E. Philcox, D. N. Spergel, and F. Villaescusa-Navarro, Effective halo model: Creating a physical and accurate model of the matter power spectrum and cluster counts, Phys. Rev. D 101, 123520 (2020).
  56. D. P. L. Bragança, M. Lewandowski, D. Sekera, L. Senatore, and R. Sgier, Baryonic effects in the effective field theory of large-scale structure and an analytic recipe for lensing in CMB-S4, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2020) 074.
  57. S.-F. Chen, M. M. Ivanov, O. H. E. Philcox, and L. Wenzl, Suppression without Thawing: Constraining structure formation and dark energy with galaxy clustering, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 231001 (2024).
  58. M. M. Ivanov, J. M. Sullivan, S.-F. Chen, A. Chudaykin, M. Maus, and O. H. E. Philcox, Reanalyzing DESI DR1: 4. Percent-Level cosmological constraints from combined probes and robust evidence for the normal neutrino mass hierarchy, arXiv:2601.16165.
  59. M. Garny and P. Taule, Loop corrections to the power spectrum for massive neutrino cosmologies with full time- and scale-dependence, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2020) 020.
  60. A. Aviles, A. Banerjee, G. Niz, and Z. Slepian, Clustering in massive neutrino cosmologies via eulerian perturbation theory, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2021) 028.
  61. H. E. Noriega, A. Aviles, S. Fromenteau, and M. Vargas-Magaña, Fast computation of non-linear power spectrum in cosmologies with massive neutrinos, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2022) 038.
  62. C. Fidler, J. Lesgourgues, A. Mattes, A. Moradinezhad Dizgah, and S. Neuland, Effective field theory of large scale structure and Newtonian motion gauges, arXiv:2605.05114.
  63. Ş. Çelik and F. Schmidt, Mixed dark matter and galaxy clustering: The importance of relative perturbations, arXiv:2508.21481.
  64. F. Schmidt, Effect of relative velocity and density perturbations between baryons and dark matter on the clustering of galaxies, Phys. Rev. D 94, 063508 (2016).
  65. S.-F. Chen, E. Castorina, and M. White, Biased tracers of two fluids in the Lagrangian picture, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 06 (2019) 006.
  66. S. Bottaro, E. Castorina, M. Costa, D. Redigolo, and E. Salvioni, Unveiling dark forces with measurements of the large scale structure of the universe, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 201002 (2024).
  67. P. W. Graham, D. Green, and J. Meyers, New interpretations of the cosmological preference for a negative neutrino mass, Phys. Rev. D 113, 043514 (2026).
  68. M. M. Ivanov, O. H. E. Philcox, M. Simonović, M. Zaldarriaga, T. Nischimichi, and M. Takada, Cosmological constraints without nonlinear redshift-space distortions, Phys. Rev. D 105, 043531 (2022).
  69. G. D’Amico, L. Senatore, P. Zhang, and T. Nishimichi, Taming redshift-space distortion effects in the EFTofLSS and its application to data, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2021) 037.
  70. E. Castorina, C. Carbone, J. Bel, E. Sefusatti, and K. Dolag, DEMNUni: The clustering of large-scale structures in the presence of massive neutrinos, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2015) 043.
  71. F. Villaescusa-Navarro, A. Banerjee, N. Dalal, E. Castorina, R. Scoccimarro, R. Angulo, and D. N. Spergel, The imprint of neutrinos on clustering in redshift-space, Astrophys. J. 861, 53 (2018).
  72. F. Verdiani, E. Bellini, C. Moretti, E. Sefusatti, C. Carbone, and M. Viel, Redshift-space distortions in massive neutrinos cosmologies, Phys. Rev. D 112, 043545 (2025).
  73. T. Kobayashi, R. Murgia, A. De Simone, V. Iršič, and M. Viel, Lyman-α constraints on ultralight scalar dark matter: Implications for the early and late universe, Phys. Rev. D 96, 123514 (2017).
  74. O. Garcia-Gallego, V. Iršič, M. G. Haehnelt, M. Viel, and J. S. Bolton, Constraining mixed dark matter models with high-redshift Lyman-Alpha Forest data, Phys. Rev. D 112, 043502 (2025).
  75. K. K. Rogers and H. V. Peiris, Strong bound on canonical ultralight axion dark matter from the Lyman-Alpha forest, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 071302 (2021).
  76. V. Iršič, M. Viel, M. G. Haehnelt, J. S. Bolton, and G. D. Becker, First constraints on fuzzy dark matter from Lyman-α Forest data and hydrodynamical simulations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 031302 (2017).
  77. M. Nori, R. Murgia, V. Iršič, M. Baldi, and M. Viel, Lyman α forest and non-linear structure characterization in Fuzzy dark matter cosmologies, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 482, 3227 (2019).
  78. V. Iršič, H. Xiao, and M. McQuinn, Early structure formation constraints on the ultralight axion in the postinflation scenario, Phys. Rev. D 101, 123518 (2020).
  79. H. Winch, K. K. Rogers, R. Hložek, and D. J. E. Marsh, High-redshift, Small-scale tests of ultralight axion dark matter using Hubble and Webb Galaxy UV luminosities, Astrophys. J. 976, 40 (2024).
  80. J. Sipple, A. Lidz, D. Grin, and G. Sun, Fuzzy dark matter constraints from the Hubble frontier fields, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 538, 1830 (2025).
  81. https://www.desi.lbl.gov/collaborating-institutions/.
  82. M. Lewandowski, L. Senatore, F. Prada, C. Zhao, and C.-H. Chuang, EFT of large scale structures in redshift space, Phys. Rev. D 97, 063526 (2018).
  83. C.-H. Chuang, F.-S. Kitaura, F. Prada, C. Zhao, and G. Yepes, EZmocks: Extending the Zel’dovich approximation to generate Mock galaxy catalogues with accurate clustering statistics, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 446, 2621 (2015).
  84. C. Moretti, M. Tsedrik, P. Carrilho, and A. Pourtsidou, Modified gravity and massive neutrinos: Constraints from the full shape analysis of BOSS galaxies and forecasts for stage IV surveys, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 12 (2023) 025.
  85. J. Torrado and A. Lewis, cobaya: Code for Bayesian analysis of hierarchical physical models, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2020) 057.
  86. J. U. Lange, Nautilus: Boosting Bayesian importance nested sampling with deep learning, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 525, 3181 (2023).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 114, 083506– Published 5 October, 2026
  • Received 29 July 2026
  • Accepted 4 September 2026
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation