- 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

Type-III scotogenic model: Inflation, dark matter, and collider phenomenology

Labh Singh1,*, Rahul Srivastava2,†, Surender Verma1,‡, and Sushant Yadav2,§

  • *Contact author: sainilabh5@gmail.com
  • †Contact author: rahul@iiserb.ac.in
  • ‡Contact author: s_7verma@hpcu.ac.in
  • §Contact author: sushant20@iiserb.ac.in
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 112, 095014 – Published 13 November, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/qyjp-fq4l

Abstract

We explore an extension of the type-III scotogenic model through the inclusion of a real scalar singlet, which play the role of the inflaton by virtue of its nonminimal coupling to the Ricci scalar. This scalar field not only drives inflation but also decays into other particles embedded within the type-III scotogenic framework. Within this theoretical structure, both the inert scalar doublet and the fermionic triplet are instrumental in radiatively generating neutrino masses, while also emerging as viable candidates for dark matter component of the Universe. We conduct a detailed analysis of their relic abundance and assess their prospects for direct detection. Additionally, we examine the potential collider signatures associated with this framework, emphasizing avenues for experimental verification in forthcoming high energy physics experiments. Owing to the suppressed production cross section of the fermionic triplet at the LHC, we extend our analysis to the Future Circular Collider in its hadron-hadron mode (FCC-hh). Within this context, we identify the monoleptonic decay channel of the triplet fermion, accompanied by substantial missing transverse energy, as a salient and experimentally distinguishable signature of the model. Furthermore, our study reveals that the leading-order production cross section of low-mass scalar dark matter lies within the prospective sensitivity reach of both leptonic and hadronic collider experiments, thereby offering promising avenues for experimental scrutiny.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (106)

  1. S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Review of particle physics, Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024).
  2. N. Aghanim et al. (Planck Collaboration), Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys. 641, A6 (2020); 652, C4(E) (2021).
  3. P. Hut, Limits on masses and number of neutral weakly interacting particles, Phys. Lett. 69B, 85 (1977).
  4. G. Jungman, M. Kamionkowski, and K. Griest, Supersymmetric dark matter, Phys. Rep. 267, 195 (1996).
  5. G. Bertone, D. Hooper, and J. Silk, Particle dark matter: Evidence, candidates and constraints, Phys. Rep. 405, 279 (2005).
  6. P. Minkowski, μ→eγ at a rate of one out of 109 muon decays?, Phys. Lett. 67B, 421 (1977).
  7. T. Yanagida, Horizontal gauge symmetry and masses of neutrinos, Conf. Proc. C 7902131, 95 (1979).
  8. S. L. Glashow, The future of elementary particle physics, NATO Sci. Ser. B 61, 687 (1980).
  9. M. Gell-Mann, P. Ramond, and R. Slansky, Complex spinors and unified theories, Conf. Proc. C 790927, 315 (1979).
  10. R. N. Mohapatra and G. Senjanovic, Neutrino mass and spontaneous parity nonconservation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 44, 912 (1980).
  11. Z.-j. Tao, Radiative seesaw mechanism at weak scale, Phys. Rev. D 54, 5693 (1996).
  12. E. Ma, Verifiable radiative seesaw mechanism of neutrino mass and dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 73, 077301 (2006).
  13. E. Ma and D. Suematsu, Fermion triplet dark matter and radiative neutrino mass, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 24, 583 (2009).
  14. A. Batra, S. K. A, S. Mandal, H. Prajapati, and R. Srivastava, CDF-II W boson mass anomaly in the canonical scotogenic neutrino-dark matter model, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 38, 2350090 (2023).
  15. J. Kubo, E. Ma, and D. Suematsu, Cold dark matter, radiative neutrino mass, μ→eγ, and neutrinoless double beta decay, Phys. Lett. B 642, 18 (2006).
  16. D. Aristizabal Sierra, J. Kubo, D. Restrepo, D. Suematsu, and O. Zapata, Radiative seesaw: Warm dark matter, collider and lepton flavour violating signals, Phys. Rev. D 79, 013011 (2009).
  17. D. Suematsu, T. Toma, and T. Yoshida, Reconciliation of CDM abundance and mu —> e gamma in a radiative seesaw model, Phys. Rev. D 79, 093004 (2009).
  18. M. Hirsch, R. A. Lineros, S. Morisi, J. Palacio, N. Rojas, and J. W. F. Valle, WIMP dark matter as radiative neutrino mass messenger, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2013) 149.
  19. C. Bonilla, E. Ma, E. Peinado, and J. W. F. Valle, Two-loop Dirac neutrino mass and WIMP dark matter, Phys. Lett. B 762, 214 (2016).
  20. A. Ahriche, A. Jueid, and S. Nasri, Radiative neutrino mass and Majorana dark matter within an inert Higgs doublet model, Phys. Rev. D 97, 095012 (2018).
  21. Y. Cai, J. Herrero-García, M. A. Schmidt, A. Vicente, and R. R. Volkas, From the trees to the forest: A review of radiative neutrino mass models, Front. Phys. 5, 63 (2017).
  22. C. Bonilla, S. Centelles-Chuliá, R. Cepedello, E. Peinado, and R. Srivastava, Dark matter stability and Dirac neutrinos using only standard model symmetries, Phys. Rev. D 101, 033011 (2020).
  23. A. Ahriche, A. Arhrib, A. Jueid, S. Nasri, and A. de La Puente, Mono-Higgs signature in the scotogenic model with Majorana dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 101, 035038 (2020).
  24. I. M. Ávila, V. De Romeri, L. Duarte, and J. W. F. Valle, Phenomenology of scotogenic scalar dark matter, Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 908 (2020).
  25. S. Centelles Chuliá, R. Cepedello, E. Peinado, and R. Srivastava, Scotogenic dark symmetry as a residual subgroup of standard model symmetries, Chin. Phys. C 44, 083110 (2020).
  26. S. Centelles Chuliá, R. Srivastava, and S. Yadav, CDF-II W boson mass in the Dirac scotogenic model, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 38, 2350049 (2023).
  27. Tapender, S. Verma, and S. Kumar, On lepton flavor violation and dark matter in scotogenic model with trimaximal mixing, Eur. Phys. J. Plus 140, 43 (2025).
  28. R. Kumar, N. Nath, and R. Srivastava, Cutting the scotogenic loop: Adding flavor to dark matter, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2024) 036.
  29. S. Centelles Chuliá, R. Srivastava, and S. Yadav, Comprehensive phenomenology of the Dirac scotogenic model: Novel low mass dark matter, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2025) 038.
  30. A. Batra, S. K. A., S. Mandal, and R. Srivastava, W boson mass in singlet-triplet scotogenic dark matter model, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 38, 2340003 (2023).
  31. L. Singh, D. Mahanta, and S. Verma, Low scale leptogenesis in singlet-triplet scotogenic model, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2023) 041.
  32. A. H. Guth, The inflationary universe: A possible solution to the horizon and flatness problems, Phys. Rev. D 23, 347 (1981).
  33. W. Rindler, Visual horizons in world models, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 116, 662 (1956).
  34. H. Bondi and T. Gold, The steady-state theory of the expanding universe, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 108, 252 (1948).
  35. P. A. R. Ade et al. (Planck Collaboration), Planck 2013 results. XXII. Constraints on inflation, Astron. Astrophys. 571, A22 (2014).
  36. P. A. R. Ade et al. (BICEP2, Planck Collaborations), Joint analysis of BICEP2/keckarray and Planck data, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 101301 (2015).
  37. M. Sher, Electroweak Higgs potentials and vacuum stability, Phys. Rep. 179, 273 (1989).
  38. J. L. F. Barbon and J. R. Espinosa, On the naturalness of Higgs inflation, Phys. Rev. D 79, 081302 (2009).
  39. M. P. Hertzberg, On inflation with non-minimal coupling, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2010) 023.
  40. D. I. Kaiser, Conformal transformations with multiple scalar fields, Phys. Rev. D 81, 084044 (2010).
  41. R. N. Lerner and J. McDonald, Unitarity-violation in generalized Higgs inflation models, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2011) 019.
  42. A. Linde, Inflationary cosmology after Planck 2013, in Post-Planck Cosmology: Lecture Notes of the Les Houches Summer School (Oxford Academic, Oxford, 2015), pp. 231–316.
  43. O. Lebedev, Y. Mambrini, and J.-H. Yoon, On unitarity in singlet inflation with a non-minimal coupling to gravity, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 08 (2023) 009.
  44. D. Borah, P. S. B. Dev, and A. Kumar, TeV scale leptogenesis, inflaton dark matter and neutrino mass in a scotogenic model, Phys. Rev. D 99, 055012 (2019).
  45. D. Suematsu, Low scale leptogenesis in a hybrid model of the scotogenic type I and III seesaw models, Phys. Rev. D 100, 055008 (2019).
  46. T. Hashimoto and D. Suematsu, Inflation and DM phenomenology in a scotogenic model extended with a real singlet scalar, Phys. Rev. D 102, 115041 (2020).
  47. A. M. Sirunyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), Search for evidence of the type-III seesaw mechanism in multilepton final states in proton-proton collisions at s=13TeV, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 221802 (2017).
  48. A. M. Sirunyan, F. Taghinavaz, and O. Tavakol(CMS Collaboration), Search for physics beyond the standard model in multilepton final states in proton-proton collisions at s=13  TeV, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2019) 051.
  49. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Search for type-III seesaw heavy leptons in dilepton final states in pp collisions at s=13  TeV with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C 81, 218 (2021).
  50. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Search for type-III seesaw heavy leptons in leptonic final states in pp collisions at s=13  TeV with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C 82, 988 (2022).
  51. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Search for long-lived charginos based on a disappearing-track signature using 136  fb−1 of pp collisions at s=13  TeV with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C 82, 606 (2022).
  52. G. Bélanger, S. Choubey, R. M. Godbole, S. Khan, M. Mitra, and A. Roy, WIMP and FIMP dark matter in singlet-triplet fermionic model, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2022) 133.
  53. A. Biswas, M. Chakraborty, and S. Khan, Reviewing the prospect of fermion triplets as dark matter and source of baryon asymmetry in non-standard cosmology, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 08 (2023) 026.
  54. H. Baer et al., The International Linear Collider Technical Design Report—Volume 2: Physics, arXiv:1306.6352.
  55. The Compact Linear Collider (CLIC) - Project Implementation Plan, edited by M. Aicheler, P. N. Burrows, N. Catalan, R. Corsini, M. Draper, J. Osborne,D. Schulte, S. Stapnes, and M. J. Stuart (CERN, Geneva, 2018), Vol. 4.
  56. J. Kalinowski, W. Kotlarski, T. Robens, D. Sokolowska, and A. F. Zarnecki, Benchmarking the Inert Doublet Model for e+e− colliders, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2018) 081.
  57. J. Kalinowski, W. Kotlarski, T. Robens, D. Sokolowska, and A. F. Zarnecki, Exploring Inert scalars at CLIC, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2018) 053.
  58. A. Belyaev, A. Freegard, I. F. Ginzburg, D. Locke, and A. Pukhov, Decoding dark matter at future e+e− colliders, Phys. Rev. D 106, 015016 (2022).
  59. F. von der Pahlen, G. Palacio, D. Restrepo, and O. Zapata, Radiative Type III Seesaw Model and its collider phenomenology, Phys. Rev. D 94, 033005 (2016).
  60. A. Das and S. Mandal, Bounds on the triplet fermions in type-III seesaw and implications for collider searches, Nucl. Phys. B966, 115374 (2021).
  61. A. Das, S. Mandal, and T. Modak, Testing triplet fermions at the electron-positron and electron-proton colliders using fat jet signatures, Phys. Rev. D 102, 033001 (2020).
  62. O. Lebedev, On stability of the electroweak vacuum and the Higgs portal, Eur. Phys. J. C 72, 2058 (2012).
  63. J. McDonald, The 750 GeV resonance as non-minimally coupled inflaton: Unitarity violation and why the resonance is a real singlet scalar, Phys. Lett. B 761, 408 (2016).
  64. R. N. Lerner and J. McDonald, Gauge singlet scalar as inflaton and thermal relic dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 80, 123507 (2009).
  65. R. N. Lerner and J. McDonald, Distinguishing Higgs inflation and its variants, Phys. Rev. D 83, 123522 (2011).
  66. D. Suematsu, Extension of a radiative neutrino mass model based on a cosmological view point, Phys. Rev. D 85, 073008 (2012).
  67. P. A. R. Ade et al. (BICEP2, Keck Array Collaborations), BICEP2/Keck Array x: Constraints on primordial gravitational waves using Planck, WMAP, and new BICEP2/Keck observations through the 2015 Season, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 221301 (2018).
  68. J. A. Casas and A. Ibarra, Oscillating neutrinos and μ→e,γ, Nucl. Phys. B618, 171 (2001).
  69. A. Ibarra and G. G. Ross, Neutrino phenomenology: The Case of two right-handed neutrinos, Phys. Lett. B 591, 285 (2004).
  70. C. Bonilla, L. M. G. de la Vega, J. M. Lamprea, R. A. Lineros, and E. Peinado, Fermion dark matter and radiative neutrino masses from spontaneous lepton number breaking, New J. Phys. 22, 033009 (2020).
  71. V. De Romeri, J. Nava, M. Puerta, and A. Vicente, Dark matter in the scotogenic model with spontaneous lepton number violation, Phys. Rev. D 107, 095019 (2023).
  72. P. Bharadwaj, R. Kumar, H. K. Prajapati, R. Srivastava, and S. Yadav, Dark matter escaping direct detection runs into Higgs mass hierarchy problem, arXiv:2412.13301.
  73. A. Belyaev, G. Cacciapaglia, I. P. Ivanov, F. Rojas-Abatte, and M. Thomas, Anatomy of the inert two Higgs doublet model in the light of the LHC and non-LHC dark matter searches, Phys. Rev. D 97, 035011 (2018).
  74. Q.-H. Cao, E. Ma, and G. Rajasekaran, Observing the dark scalar doublet and its impact on the standard-model Higgs boson at colliders, Phys. Rev. D 76, 095011 (2007).
  75. A. Heister et al. (ALEPH Collaboration), Absolute mass lower limit for the lightest neutralino of the MSSM from e+e− data at s**(1/2) up to 209-GeV, Phys. Lett. B 583, 247 (2004).
  76. J. Abdallah et al. (DELPHI Collaboration), Searches for supersymmetric particles in e+e− collisions up to 208-GeV and interpretation of the results within the MSSM, Eur. Phys. J. C 31, 421 (2003).
  77. M. Acciarri et al. (L3 Collaboration), Search for charginos and neutralinos in e+e− collisions at S=189−GeV, Phys. Lett. B 472, 420 (2000).
  78. M. Cirelli, N. Fornengo, and A. Strumia, Minimal dark matter, Nucl. Phys. B753, 178 (2006).
  79. F. Staub, Exploring new models in all detail with SARAH, Adv. High Energy Phys. 2015, 840780 (2015).
  80. A. Vicente, Computer tools in particle physics, arXiv:1507.06349.
  81. W. Porod and F. Staub, SPheno 3.1: Extensions including flavour, CP-phases and models beyond the MSSM, Comput. Phys. Commun. 183, 2458 (2012).
  82. G. Bélanger, F. Boudjema, A. Pukhov, and A. Semenov, micrOMEGAs4.1: Two dark matter candidates, Comput. Phys. Commun. 192, 322 (2015).
  83. P. F. de Salas, D. V. Forero, S. Gariazzo, P. Martínez-Miravé, O. Mena, C. A. Ternes, M. Tórtola, and J. W. F. Valle, 2020 global reassessment of the neutrino oscillation picture, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2020) 071.
  84. E. Aprile et al. (XENON Collaboration), First dark matter search with nuclear recoils from the XENONnT experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 041003 (2023).
  85. Y. Meng et al. (PandaX-4T Collaboration), Dark matter search results from the PandaX-4T commissioning run, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 261802 (2021).
  86. J. Aalbers et al. (LZ Collaboration), First dark matter search results from the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 041002 (2023).
  87. L. Lopez Honorez, E. Nezri, J. F. Oliver, and M. H. G. Tytgat, The inert doublet model: An archetype for dark matter, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2006) 028.
  88. E. Lundstrom, M. Gustafsson, and J. Edsjo, The inert doublet model and LEP II limits, Phys. Rev. D 79, 035013 (2009).
  89. E. Dolle, X. Miao, S. Su, and B. Thomas, Dilepton signals in the inert doublet model, Phys. Rev. D 81, 035003 (2010).
  90. E. M. Dolle and S. Su, The inert dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 80, 055012 (2009).
  91. L. Lopez Honorez and C. E. Yaguna, The inert doublet model of dark matter revisited, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2010) 046.
  92. X. Miao, S. Su, and B. Thomas, Trilepton signals in the inert doublet model, Phys. Rev. D 82, 035009 (2010).
  93. M. Gustafsson, S. Rydbeck, L. Lopez-Honorez, and E. Lundstrom, Status of the inert doublet model and the role of multileptons at the LHC, Phys. Rev. D 86, 075019 (2012).
  94. A. Arhrib, R. Benbrik, and N. Gaur, H→γγ in Inert Higgs doublet model, Phys. Rev. D 85, 095021 (2012).
  95. B. Swiezewska and M. Krawczyk, Diphoton rate in the inert doublet model with a 125 GeV Higgs boson, Phys. Rev. D 88, 035019 (2013).
  96. A. Arhrib, Y.-L. S. Tsai, Q. Yuan, and T.-C. Yuan, An updated analysis of inert Higgs doublet model in light of the recent results from LUX, PLANCK, AMS-02 and LHC, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 06 (2013) 030.
  97. M. Krawczyk, D. Sokolowska, P. Swaczyna, and B. Swiezewska, Constraining inert dark matter by Rγγ and WMAP data, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2013) 055.
  98. G. Belanger, B. Dumont, A. Goudelis, B. Herrmann, S. Kraml, and D. Sengupta, Dilepton constraints in the inert doublet model from run 1 of the LHC, Phys. Rev. D 91, 115011 (2015).
  99. P. Poulose, S. Sahoo, and K. Sridhar, Exploring the inert doublet model through the dijet plus missing transverse energy channel at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B 765, 300 (2017).
  100. A. Datta, N. Ganguly, N. Khan, and S. Rakshit, Exploring collider signatures of the inert Higgs doublet model, Phys. Rev. D 95, 015017 (2017).
  101. A. Belyaev, T. R. Fernandez Perez Tomei, P. G. Mercadante, C. S. Moon, S. Moretti, S. F. Novaes, L. Panizzi, F. Rojas, and M. Thomas, Advancing LHC probes of dark matter from the inert two-Higgs-doublet model with the monojet signal, Phys. Rev. D 99, 015011 (2019).
  102. T. Behnke et al., The International Linear Collider Technical Design Report—Volume 1: Executive summary, arXiv:1306.6327.
  103. J. Alwall, R. Frederix, S. Frixione, V. Hirschi, F. Maltoni, O. Mattelaer, H. S. Shao, T. Stelzer, P. Torrielli, and M. Zaro, The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2014) 079.
  104. A. Abada et al. (FCC Collaboration), FCC-hh: The Hadron Collider: Future Circular Collider Conceptual Design Report Volume 3, Eur. Phys. J. Special Topics 228, 755 (2019).
  105. K. Afanaciev et al. (MEG II Collaboration), A search for μ+→e+γ with the first dataset of the MEG II experiment, Eur. Phys. J. C 84, 216 (2024); 84, 1042(E) (2024).
  106. A. M. Baldini et al. (MEG II Collaboration), The search for μ+→e+γ with 10−14 sensitivity: The upgrade of the MEG experiment, Symmetry 13, 1591 (2021).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 112, 095014– Published 13 November, 2025
  • Received 29 June 2025
  • Accepted 28 October 2025
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. Funded by SCOAP3.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation