- 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

Comprehensive study of WIMP models explaining the Fermi-LAT Galactic Center excess

Chuiyang Kong1,* and Mattia Di Mauro2,†

  • *Contact author: chuiyang_kong@brown.edu
  • †Contact author: dimauro.mattia@gmail.com
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 113, 043031 – Published 17 February, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/v9vr-9skd

Abstract

The Galactic Center excess (GCE) of GeV γ rays may hint at dark matter (DM), yet its origin remains debated. Motivated by this, we survey weakly interacting massive particle (WIMP) models that can fit the GCE while satisfying relic-density, direct-detection (DD), and indirect-detection (ID) bounds. We group candidates into hadronic (Higgs portals; simplified scalar/vector mediators), leptonic [U(1)Li−Lj], and mixed [U(1)B−L, Z-portal] classes. Across all cases, present DD and dwarf-spheroidal γ-ray limits exclude wide regions, leaving mainly narrow resonant funnels with mDM≃mmed/2 and portal couplings ≪1. In hadronic setups, scalar and vector Higgs portals survive only in a thin strip near mh/2≃62.5  GeV with portal couplings ∼10−4, while the Dirac Higgs and Z portals are essentially excluded. The UV-complete vector Higgs portal retains resonant bands whose viable portal strength depends on the mixing angle. Simplified scalars allow small windows for complex-scalar or vector DM; Dirac DM is strongly disfavored, whereas a pseudoscalar with Dirac DM remains viable over a broader parameter range. For a simplified Z′ mediator, a pure vector coupling leaves only a marginal region, while pure axial is excluded by DD/ID bounds. In leptonic scenarios, inverse-Compton emission is essential: Lμ−Le (and, to a lesser extent, B−L) fits the GCE with near-thermal cross sections, while Lμ−Lτ is disfavored. Overall, viable WIMP explanations are constrained to the finely tuned resonant regime, with leptophilic vectors and pseudoscalar portals emerging as the most robust options.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (92)

  1. J. Silk et al., Particle Dark Matter: Observations, Models and Searches, edited by G. Bertone (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 2010).
  2. G. Bertone and D. Hooper, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 045002 (2018).
  3. M. Cirelli, A. Strumia, and J. Zupan, arXiv:2406.01705.
  4. N. Aghanim et al. (Planck Collaboration), Astron. Astrophys. 641, A6 (2020); 652, C4(E) (2021).
  5. M. Schumann, J. Phys. G 46, 103003 (2019).
  6. A. Boveia and C. Doglioni, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 68, 429 (2018).
  7. J. M. Gaskins, Contemp. Phys. 57, 496 (2016).
  8. L. Pieri, J. Lavalle, G. Bertone, and E. Branchini, Phys. Rev. D 83, 023518 (2011).
  9. L. Goodenough and D. Hooper, arXiv:0910.2998.
  10. D. Hooper and L. Goodenough, Phys. Lett. B 697, 412 (2011).
  11. A. Boyarsky, D. Malyshev, and O. Ruchayskiy, Phys. Lett. B 705, 165 (2011).
  12. D. Hooper and T. Linden, Phys. Rev. D 84, 123005 (2011).
  13. K. N. Abazajian and M. Kaplinghat, Phys. Rev. D 86, 083511 (2012); 87, 129902(E) (2013).
  14. C. Gordon and O. Macias, Phys. Rev. D 88, 083521 (2013); 89, 049901(E) (2014).
  15. K. N. Abazajian, N. Canac, S. Horiuchi, and M. Kaplinghat, Phys. Rev. D 90, 023526 (2014).
  16. T. Daylan, D. P. Finkbeiner, D. Hooper, T. Linden, S. K. N. Portillo, N. L. Rodd, and T. R. Slatyer, Phys. Dark Universe 12, 1 (2016).
  17. F. Calore, I. Cholis, C. McCabe, and C. Weniger, Phys. Rev. D 91, 063003 (2015).
  18. F. Calore, I. Cholis, and C. Weniger, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 03 (2015) 038.
  19. M. Ajello et al. (Fermi-LAT Collaboration), Astrophys. J. 819, 44 (2016).
  20. M. Ackermann et al. (Fermi-LAT Collaboration), Astrophys. J. 840, 43 (2017).
  21. M. Di Mauro, X. Hou, C. Eckner, G. Zaharijas, and E. Charles, Phys. Rev. D 99, 123027 (2019).
  22. M. Di Mauro, Phys. Rev. D 103, 063029 (2021).
  23. I. Cholis, Y.-M. Zhong, S. D. McDermott, and J. P. Surdutovich, Phys. Rev. D 105, 103023 (2022).
  24. M. Di Mauro and M. W. Winkler, Phys. Rev. D 103, 123005 (2021).
  25. J. Koechler and M. Di Mauro, Phys. Rev. D 112, 115016 (2025).
  26. R. Bartels, S. Krishnamurthy, and C. Weniger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 051102 (2016).
  27. S. K. Lee, M. Lisanti, B. R. Safdi, T. R. Slatyer, and W. Xue, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 051103 (2016).
  28. O. Macias, C. Gordon, R. M. Crocker, B. Coleman, D. Paterson, S. Horiuchi, and M. Pohl, Nat. Astron. 2, 387 (2018).
  29. R. Bartels, E. Storm, C. Weniger, and F. Calore, Nat. Astron. 2, 819 (2018).
  30. S. Manconi, F. Calore, and F. Donato, Phys. Rev. D 109, 123042 (2024).
  31. R. K. Leane and T. R. Slatyer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 241101 (2019).
  32. L. J. Chang, S. Mishra-Sharma, M. Lisanti, M. Buschmann, N. L. Rodd, and B. R. Safdi, Phys. Rev. D 101, 023014 (2020).
  33. Y.-M. Zhong, S. D. McDermott, I. Cholis, and P. J. Fox, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 231103 (2020).
  34. F. Calore, F. Donato, and S. Manconi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 161102 (2021).
  35. F. List, Y. Park, N. L. Rodd, E. Schoen, and F. Wolf, arXiv:2507.17804.
  36. J. Aalbers et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 041002 (2023).
  37. E. Aprile et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 041003 (2023).
  38. J. Aalbers et al. (LZ Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 011802 (2025).
  39. G. Arcadi, M. Dutra, P. Ghosh, M. Lindner, Y. Mambrini, M. Pierre, S. Profumo, and F. S. Queiroz, Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 203 (2018).
  40. G. Arcadi, A. Djouadi, and M. Raidal, Phys. Rep. 842, 1 (2020).
  41. M. Di Mauro, C. Arina, N. Fornengo, J. Heisig, and D. Massaro, Phys. Rev. D 108, 095008 (2023).
  42. G. Arcadi, D. Cabo-Almeida, M. Dutra, P. Ghosh, M. Lindner, Y. Mambrini, J. P. Neto, M. Pierre, S. Profumo, and F. S. Queiroz, Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 152 (2025).
  43. M. Di Mauro and B. Xie, Phys. Rev. D 113, 015034 (2026).
  44. M. Pospelov, A. Ritz, and M. B. Voloshin, Phys. Lett. B 662, 53 (2008).
  45. M. Pospelov and A. Ritz, Phys. Lett. B 671, 391 (2009).
  46. M. Di Mauro and Y. Wang, arXiv:2510.23771.
  47. M. Di Mauro, arXiv:2511.19622.
  48. A. McDaniel, M. Ajello, C. M. Karwin, M. Di Mauro, A. Drlica-Wagner, and M. A. Sánchez-Conde, Phys. Rev. D 109, 063024 (2024).
  49. J. Abdallah et al., Phys. Dark Universe 9–10, 8 (2015).
  50. C. Arina, Front. Astron. Space Sci. 5, 30 (2018).
  51. C. Chang, P. Scott, T. E. Gonzalo, F. Kahlhoefer, A. Kvellestad, and M. White, Eur. Phys. J. C 83, 249 (2023).
  52. C. Chang, P. Scott, T. E. Gonzalo, F. Kahlhoefer, and M. White, Eur. Phys. J. C 83, 692 (2023); 83, 768(E) (2023).
  53. J. M. Cline, K. Kainulainen, P. Scott, and C. Weniger, Phys. Rev. D 88, 055025 (2013); 92, 039906(E) (2015).
  54. A. Beniwal, F. Rajec, C. Savage, P. Scott, C. Weniger, M. White, and A. G. Williams, Phys. Rev. D 93, 115016 (2016).
  55. Y. Farzan and A. R. Akbarieh, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2012) 026.
  56. P. Ko, W.-I. Park, and Y. Tang, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 09 (2014) 013.
  57. S. Baek, P. Ko, W.-I. Park, and Y. Tang, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 06 (2014) 046.
  58. M. Duch, B. Grzadkowski, and M. McGarrie, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2015) 162.
  59. G. Arcadi, A. Djouadi, and M. Kado, Phys. Lett. B 805, 135427 (2020).
  60. G. Arcadi, Y. Mambrini, and F. Richard, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 03 (2015) 018.
  61. R. Foot, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 06, 527 (1991).
  62. X. G. He, G. C. Joshi, H. Lew, and R. R. Volkas, Phys. Rev. D 43, R22 (1991).
  63. J. Heeck and W. Rodejohann, Phys. Rev. D 84, 075007 (2011).
  64. M. Bauer, P. Foldenauer, and J. Jaeckel, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2018) 094.
  65. A. Alloul, N. D. Christensen, C. Degrande, C. Duhr, and B. Fuks, Comput. Phys. Commun. 185, 2250 (2014).
  66. C. Degrande, C. Duhr, B. Fuks, D. Grellscheid, O. Mattelaer, and T. Reiter, Comput. Phys. Commun. 183, 1201 (2012).
  67. A. Belyaev, N. D. Christensen, and A. Pukhov, Comput. Phys. Commun. 184, 1729 (2013).
  68. M. Backovic, K. Kong, and M. McCaskey, Phys. Dark Universe 5–6, 18 (2014).
  69. F. Ambrogi, C. Arina, M. Backovic, J. Heisig, F. Maltoni, L. Mantani, O. Mattelaer, and G. Mohlabeng, Phys. Dark Universe 24, 100249 (2019).
  70. C. Arina, J. Heisig, F. Maltoni, D. Massaro, and O. Mattelaer, Eur. Phys. J. C 83, 241 (2023).
  71. G. Belanger, F. Boudjema, A. Pukhov, and A. Semenov, Comput. Phys. Commun. 176, 367 (2007).
  72. G. Belanger, F. Boudjema, A. Pukhov, and A. Semenov, Comput. Phys. Commun. 185, 960 (2014).
  73. G. Bélanger, F. Boudjema, A. Goudelis, A. Pukhov, and B. Zaldivar, Comput. Phys. Commun. 231, 173 (2018).
  74. G. Alguero, G. Belanger, F. Boudjema, S. Chakraborti, A. Goudelis, S. Kraml, A. Mjallal, and A. Pukhov, Comput. Phys. Commun. 299, 109133 (2024).
  75. A. L. Fitzpatrick, W. Haxton, E. Katz, N. Lubbers, and Y. Xu, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2013) 004.
  76. C. Arina, E. Del Nobile, and P. Panci, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 011301 (2015).
  77. M. J. Dolan, F. Kahlhoefer, C. McCabe, and K. Schmidt-Hoberg, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2015) 171; 07 (2015) 103(E).
  78. T. Abe, M. Fujiwara, and J. Hisano, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2019) 028.
  79. F. Ertas and F. Kahlhoefer, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2019) 052.
  80. V. Silveira and A. Zee, Phys. Lett. 161B, 136 (1985).
  81. ATLAS Collaboration, Search for invisible Higgs boson decays with vector boson fusion signatures with the ATLAS detector using an integrated luminosity of 139  fb−1, Tech. Rep., (CERN, Geneva, 2020, all figures including auxiliary figures are available at https://atlas.web.cern.ch/Atlas/GROUPS/PHYSICS/ CONFNOTES/ATLAS-CONF-2020-008.
  82. A. M. Sirunyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B 793, 520 (2019).
  83. C. Burgess, C. de Rham, D. Hoover, and A. J. Tolley, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2008) 033.
  84. J. A. Evans, S. Gori, and J. Shelton, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2018) 100.
  85. G. Arcadi, T. Hugle, and F. S. Queiroz, Phys. Lett. B 784, 151 (2018).
  86. R. H. Helm, Phys. Rev. 104, 1466 (1956).
  87. G. Duda, A. Kemper, and P. Gondolo, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 04 (2007) 012.
  88. N. Aghanim et al. (Planck Collaboration), Astron. Astrophys. 641, A6 (2020); 652, C4(E) (2021).
  89. L. Baudis, Nucl. Phys. B1003, 116473 (2024).
  90. G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Eur. Phys. J. C 84, 1102 (2024).
  91. https://github.com/ KK-cloudhub/GCE_analysis.
  92. https://github.com/KK-cloudhub/GCE_analysis.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 113, 043031– Published 17 February, 2026
  • Received 3 December 2025
  • Accepted 21 January 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