- 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

Impact of reactor antineutrinos on the neutrino floor in low-mass WIMP-like dark matter searches

S. Das*, V. K. S. Kashyap, and B. Mohanty

  • *Contact author: sudipta.das@niser.ac.in
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 113, 063046 – Published 23 March, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/v3lh-r6q2

Abstract

The sensitivity of conventional direct dark matter searches for weakly interacting massive particles (WIMPs) is ultimately limited by coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering (CEνNS), which produces nuclear recoils indistinguishable from WIMP signals and defines the so-called neutrino floor. While the effects of solar neutrinos, geoneutrinos, diffuse supernova neutrinos, and atmospheric neutrinos have been extensively studied in this context, the contribution from reactor antineutrinos has received comparatively little attention. We present the first systematic evaluation of how reactor antineutrino fluxes, modeled as a function of reactor-detector distance, modify the neutrino floor for low-mass WIMP searches using SuperCDMS-like high-voltage germanium detectors. Both discovery-limit and opacity-based formulations of the neutrino floor are examined under consistent assumptions. We find that proximity to gigawatt-scale reactors within ∼10  km can raise the neutrino floor by up to a few orders of magnitude, significantly reducing the sensitivity to sub-10  GeV/c2 dark matter. Beyond∼100  km, the reactor contribution becomes negligible. These conclusions hold for both definitions of the neutrino floor and remain stable under reasonable variations in detector quenching, site-dependent geoneutrino flux, and reactor antineutrino flux uncertainties, emphasizing reactor proximity as a critical factor in site selection for future low-threshold dark matter experiments.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (56)

  1. F. Zwicky, Helv. Phys. Acta 6, 110 (1933).
  2. V. C. Rubin and W. K. Ford, Jr., Astrophys. J. 159, 379 (1970).
  3. D. Clowe, M. Bradac, A. H. Gonzalez, M. Markevitch, S. W. Randall, C. Jones, and D. Zaritsky, Astrophys. J. Lett. 648, L109 (2006).
  4. P. A. R. Ade et al. (Planck Collaboration), Astron. Astrophys. 594, A13 (2016).
  5. G. Steigman and M. S. Turner, Nucl. Phys. B253, 375 (1985).
  6. G. Jungman, M. Kamionkowski, and K. Griest, Phys. Rep. 267, 195 (1996).
  7. G. Steigman, B. Dasgupta, and J. F. Beacom, Phys. Rev. D 86, 023506 (2012).
  8. R. Agnese et al. (SuperCDMS Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 99, 062001 (2019).
  9. G. Angloher et al. (CRESST Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 110, 083038 (2024).
  10. J. Aalbers et al. (LZ Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 041002 (2023).
  11. Z. Bo et al. (PandaX Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 011805 (2025).
  12. E. Aprile et al. (XENON Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 221003 (2025).
  13. M. F. Albakry et al., arXiv:2203.08463.
  14. G. Angloher et al., arXiv:2505.01183.
  15. E. Aprile et al. (XENON Collaboration), Eur. Phys. J. C 84, 784 (2024).
  16. D. Z. Freedman, Phys. Rev. D 9, 1389 (1974).
  17. J. Billard, L. Strigari, and E. Figueroa-Feliciano, Phys. Rev. D 89, 023524 (2014).
  18. F. Ruppin, J. Billard, E. Figueroa-Feliciano, and L. Strigari, Phys. Rev. D 90, 083510 (2014).
  19. C. A. J. O’Hare, Phys. Rev. D 102, 063024 (2020).
  20. C. A. J. O’Hare, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 251802 (2021).
  21. Y. Fan, X. Liu, and N. Zhou, Chin. Phys. 49, 103001 (2025).
  22. D. Akimov et al. (COHERENT Collaboration), Science 357, 1123 (2017).
  23. N. Ackermann et al., Nature (London) 643, 1229 (2025).
  24. S. Adamski et al. (COHERENT Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 231801 (2025).
  25. D. Aristizabal Sierra, V. De Romeri, and C. A. Ternes, Phys. Rev. D 109, 115026 (2024).
  26. J. Billard et al., Rep. Prog. Phys. 85, 056201 (2022).
  27. J. D. Lewin and P. F. Smith, Astropart. Phys. 6, 87 (1996).
  28. J. D. Lewin and P. F. Smith, Astropart. Phys. 6, 87 (1996).
  29. P. Luke, J. Beeman, F. Goulding, S. Labov, and E. Silver, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. A 289, 406 (1990).
  30. P. N. Luke, J. Appl. Phys. 64, 6858 (1988).
  31. J. Lindhard, M. Scharff, and H. E. Schiøtt, Range Concepts and Heavy Ion Ranges, Vol. 33 (Munksgaard, Copenhagen, 1963).
  32. N. Ackermann et al., Nature (London) 643, 1229 (2025).
  33. K. Scholberg, Phys. Rev. D 73, 033005 (2006).
  34. G. B. Gelmini, V. Takhistov, and S. J. Witte, Phys. Rev. D 99, 093009 (2019).
  35. O. Smirnov, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. B109, 103712 (2019).
  36. N. Ackermann, S. Armbruster, H. Bonet, C. Buck, K. Fülber, J. Hakenmüller, J. Hempfling, G. Heusser, M. Lindner, W. Maneschg et al., Eur. Phys. J. C 84, 1265 (2024).
  37. C. Zhang, X. Qian, and M. Fallot, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 136, 104106 (2024).
  38. P. Huber, Phys. Rev. C 84, 024617 (2011).
  39. A. Aguilar-Arevalo et al. (CONNIE Collaboration), J. High Enegy Phys. 04 (2020) 054.
  40. H. T. Wong et al. (TEXONO Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 75, 012001 (2007).
  41. F. P. An et al. (Daya Bay Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 251801 (2017).
  42. N. Ackermann et al., Nature (London) 643, 1229 (2025).
  43. G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross, and O. Vitells, Eur. Phys. J. C 71, 1554 (2011).
  44. R. Agnese et al. (SuperCDMS Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 051301 (2018).
  45. M. F. Albakry et al., Phys. Rev. D 112, 092014 (2025).
  46. M. F. Albakry et al. (SuperCDMS Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 113, 032001 (2026).
  47. R. Agnese et al. (SuperCDMS Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 071301 (2016).
  48. E. Armengaud et al. (EDELWEISS Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 99, 082003 (2019).
  49. C. Amole et al. (PICO Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 100, 022001 (2019).
  50. P. Agnes et al. (DarkSide-50 Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 107, 063001 (2023).
  51. A. H. Abdelhameed et al. (CRESST Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 100, 102002 (2019).
  52. C. A. J. O’Hare, A. M. Green, J. Billard, E. Figueroa-Feliciano, and L. E. Strigari, Phys. Rev. D 92, 063518 (2015).
  53. P. Grothaus, M. Fairbairn, and J. Monroe, Phys. Rev. D 90, 055018 (2014).
  54. G. Herrera, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2024) 288.
  55. M. F. Albakry et al. (SuperCDMS Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 107, 112013 (2023).
  56. J. Ashenfelter, A. Balantekin, H. Band, C. Bass, D. Bergeron, D. Berish, N. Bowden, J. Brodsky, C. Bryan, J. Cherwinka et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 251801 (2019).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 113, 063046– Published 23 March, 2026
  • Received 25 November 2025
  • Accepted 25 February 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. Funded by SCOAP3.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation