- 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

Multiparticle scalar dark matter with ZN symmetry

Subhaditya Bhattacharya*, Lipika Kolay†, and Dipankar Pradhan‡

  • *Contact author: subhab@iitg.ac.in
  • †Contact author: klipika@iitg.ac.in
  • ‡Contact author: d.pradhan@iitg.ac.in
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 114, 055005 – Published 4 September, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/yq9j-bh5n

Abstract

More than one dark sector particle transforming under the same symmetry provides one stable dark matter (DM) component, which undergoes coannihilation with the heavier particle(s) decaying to DM. Specific assumptions on the kinematics and on the coupling parameters may render the heavier component(s) stable and contribute as DM. The choices of the charges of the dark sector fields under transformation play a crucial role in the resultant phenomenology. In this paper, we systematically address the possibility of obtaining two scalar DM components under ZN symmetry. We consider both the possibilities of DM being weakly interacting massive particles (WIMPs) or pseudofeebly interacting massive particles (pFIMPs). We elaborate upon the Z3 symmetric model, confronting the relic density-allowed parameter space with the recent most direct and indirect search bounds and prospects. We also highlight the possible distinction of the allowed parameter space in single component and two-component cases as well as between WIMP-WIMP and WIMP-pFIMP scenarios.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (116)

  1. F. Zwicky, Die Rotverschiebung von extragalaktischen nebeln, Helv. Phys. Acta 6, 110 (1933).
  2. F. Zwicky, On the masses of nebulae and of clusters of nebulae, Astrophys. J. 86, 217 (1937).
  3. T. S. van Albada, J. N. Bahcall, K. Begeman, and R. Sancisi, The distribution of dark matter in the spiral galaxy NGC-3198, Astrophys. J. 295, 305 (1985).
  4. V. Trimble, Existence and nature of dark matter in the universe, Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 25, 425 (1987).
  5. Y. Sofue, Y. Tutui, M. Honma, A. Tomita, T. Takamiya, J. Koda, and Y. Takeda, Central rotation curves of spiral galaxies, Astrophys. J. 523, 136 (1999).
  6. Y. Sofue and V. Rubin, Rotation curves of spiral galaxies, Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 39, 137 (2001).
  7. D. Clowe, M. Bradac, A. H. Gonzalez, M. Markevitch, S. W. Randall, C. Jones, C. Jones, and D. Zaritsky, A direct empirical proof of the existence of dark matter, Astrophys. J. Lett. 648, L109 (2006).
  8. M. Girardi, R. Barrena, W. Boschin, and E. Ellingson, Cluster Abell 520: A perspective based on member galaxies. A cluster forming at the crossing of three filaments?, Astron. Astrophys. 491, 379 (2008).
  9. M. Girardi, W. Boschin, F. Gastaldello, G. Giovannini, F. Govoni, M. Murgia, R. Barrena, S. Ettori, M. Trasatti, and V. Vacca, A multiwavelength view of the galaxy cluster Abell 523 and its peculiar diffuse radio source, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 456, 2829 (2016).
  10. T. Dacunha, M. Belyakov, S. Adhikari, T.-h. Shin, S. Goldstein, and B. Jain, Connecting galaxy evolution in clusters with their radial profiles and phase space distribution: Results from the IllustrisTNG hydrodynamical simulations, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 512, 4378 (2022).
  11. V. Springel and G. Farrar, The speed of the bullet in the merging galaxy cluster 1E0657-56, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 380, 911 (2007).
  12. WMAP Science Team Collaboration, Results from the Wilkinson microwave anisotropy probe, Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2014, 6B102 (2014).
  13. Planck Collaboration, Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys. 641, A6 (2020).
  14. D. Clowe, A. Gonzalez, and M. Markevitch, Weak lensing mass reconstruction of the interacting cluster 1E0657-558: Direct evidence for the existence of dark matter, Astrophys. J. 604, 596 (2004).
  15. M. Markevitch, A. H. Gonzalez, D. Clowe, A. Vikhlinin, L. David, W. Forman, C. Jones, S. Murray, and W. Tucker, Direct constraints on the dark matter self-interaction cross-section from the merging galaxy cluster 1E0657-56, Astrophys. J. 606, 819 (2004).
  16. S. W. Randall, M. Markevitch, D. Clowe, A. H. Gonzalez, and M. Bradac, Constraints on the self-interaction cross-section of dark matter from numerical simulations of the merging galaxy cluster 1E 0657-56, Astrophys. J. 679, 1173 (2008).
  17. F. Kahlhoefer, K. Schmidt-Hoberg, J. Kummer, and S. Sarkar, On the interpretation of dark matter self-interactions in Abell 3827, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 452, L54 (2015).
  18. P. Gondolo and G. Gelmini, Cosmic abundances of stable particles: Improved analysis, Nucl. Phys. B360, 145 (1991).
  19. C. Balázs, T. Li, and J. L. Newstead, Thermal dark matter implies new physics not far above the weak scale, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2014) 061.
  20. C. E. Yaguna, The singlet scalar as FIMP dark matter, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2011) 060.
  21. H. Baer, K.-Y. Choi, J. E. Kim, and L. Roszkowski, Dark matter production in the early Universe: Beyond the thermal WIMP paradigm, Phys. Rep. 555, 1 (2015).
  22. A. Biswas and A. Gupta, Calculation of momentum distribution function of a non-thermal fermionic dark matter, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 03 (2017) 033.
  23. N. Bernal, M. Heikinheimo, T. Tenkanen, K. Tuominen, and V. Vaskonen, The dawn of FIMP dark matter: A review of models and constraints, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 32, 1730023 (2017).
  24. D. Curtin et al., Long-lived particles at the energy frontier: The MATHUSLA physics case, Rep. Prog. Phys. 82, 116201 (2019).
  25. N. Chakrabarty, P. Konar, R. Roshan and, and S. Show, Thermally corrected masses and freeze-in dark matter: A case study, Phys. Rev. D 107, 035021 (2023).
  26. Y. Hochberg, E. Kuflik, T. Volansky, and J. G. Wacker, Mechanism for thermal relic dark matter of strongly interacting massive particles, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 171301 (2014).
  27. Y. Hochberg, E. Kuflik, H. Murayama, T. Volansky, and J. G. Wacker, Model for thermal relic dark matter of strongly interacting massive particles, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 021301 (2015).
  28. Y. Hochberg, E. Kuflik, and H. Murayama, SIMP spectroscopy, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2016) 090.
  29. S. Tulin and H.-B. Yu, Dark matter self-interactions and small scale structure, Phys. Rep. 730, 1 (2018).
  30. S.-M. Choi, H. M. Lee, P. Ko, and A. Natale, Resolving phenomenological problems with strongly-interacting-massive-particle models with dark vector resonances, Phys. Rev. D 98, 015034 (2018).
  31. S. Bhattacharya, P. Ghosh, and S. Verma, SIMPler realisation of scalar dark matter, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2020) 040.
  32. M. Cirelli, N. Fornengo, B. J. Kavanagh, and E. Pinetti, Integral x-ray constraints on sub-GeV dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 103, 063022 (2021).
  33. B. Barman and N. Bernal, Gravitational SIMPs, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 06 (2021) 011.
  34. A. Kamada, S. Kobayashi, and T. Kuwahara, Perturbative unitarity of strongly interacting massive particle models, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2023) 217.
  35. S. Bhattacharya, P. Poulose, and P. Ghosh, Multipartite interacting scalar dark matter in the light of updated LUX data, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 04 (2017) 043.
  36. A. Dutta Banik, M. Pandey, D. Majumdar, and A. Biswas, Two component WIMP–FImP dark matter model with singlet fermion, scalar and pseudo scalar, Eur. Phys. J. C 77, 657 (2017).
  37. S. Bhattacharya, S. Chakraborti, and D. Pradhan, Electroweak symmetry breaking and WIMP-FIMP dark matter, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2022) 091.
  38. S.-Y. Ho, P. Ko, and C.-T. Lu, Scalar and fermion two-component SIMP dark matter with an accidental Z4 symmetry, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2022) 005.
  39. S.-M. Choi, J. Kim, P. Ko, and J. Li, A multi-component SIMP model with U(1)X→Z2×Z3, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2021) 028.
  40. M. Pandey, D. Majumdar, and K. P. Modak, Two component feebly interacting massive particle (FIMP) dark matter, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 06 (2018) 023.
  41. S. Peyman Zakeri, S. Mohammad Moosavi Nejad, M. Zakeri, and S. Yaser Ayazi, A minimal model for two-component FIMP dark matter: A basic search, Chin. Phys. C 42, 073101 (2018).
  42. S. Bhattacharya, D. Pradhan, and J. Lahiri, Dynamics of pseudofeebly interacting massive particles in presence of thermal dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 108, L111702 (2023).
  43. S. Bhattacharya, J. Lahiri, and D. Pradhan, Detection possibility of a pseudo-FIMP in the presence of a thermal WIMP, Phys. Rev. D 109, 095031 (2024).
  44. PandaX Collaboration, Search for dark-matter–nucleon interactions with a dark mediator in PandaX-4T, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 191002 (2023).
  45. XENON Collaboration, First dark matter search with nuclear recoils from the XENONnT experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 041003 (2023).
  46. LZ Collaboration, First dark matter search results from the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 041002 (2023).
  47. L. Baudis, DARWIN/XLZD: A future xenon observatory for dark matter and other rare interactions, Nucl. Phys. B1003, 116473 (2024).
  48. Fermi-LAT Collaboration, Searching for dark matter annihilation from Milky Way dwarf spheroidal galaxies with six years of Fermi large area telescope data, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 231301 (2015).
  49. Fermi-LAT Collaboration, Sensitivity projections for dark matter searches with the Fermi large area telescope, Phys. Rep. 636, 1 (2016).
  50. Fermi-LAT, DES Collaboration, Searching for dark matter annihilation in recently discovered Milky Way satellites with Fermi-LAT, Astrophys. J. 834, 110 (2017).
  51. H.E.S.S. Collaboration, Search for dark matter annihilations towards the inner Galactic halo from 10 years of observations with H.E.S.S, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 111301 (2016).
  52. CTAO Collaboration, Dark matter line searches with the Cherenkov telescope array, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2024) 047.
  53. B. S. Acharya et al. (CTA Consortium Collaboration), Science with the Cherenkov Telescope Array (World Scientific Publishing, Singapore, 2018), 10.1142/10986.
  54. CTA Collaboration, Sensitivity of the Cherenkov telescope array to a dark matter signal from the Galactic Centre, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2021) 057.
  55. H. Silverwood, C. Weniger, P. Scott, and G. Bertone, A realistic assessment of the CTA sensitivity to dark matter annihilation, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 03 (2015) 055.
  56. K. M. Zurek, Multi-component dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 79, 115002 (2009).
  57. S. Profumo, K. Sigurdson, and L. Ubaldi, Can we discover multi-component WIMP dark matter?, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 12 (2009) 016.
  58. M. V. Medvedev, Cosmological simulations of multicomponent cold dark matter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 071303 (2014).
  59. L. Bian, R. Ding, and B. Zhu, Two component Higgs-portal dark matter, Phys. Lett. B 728, 105 (2014).
  60. S. Bhattacharya, A. Drozd, B. Grzadkowski, and J. Wudka, Two-component dark matter, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2013) 158.
  61. S. Esch, M. Klasen, and C. E. Yaguna, A minimal model for two-component dark matter, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2014) 108.
  62. M. Aoki and T. Toma, Implications of two-component dark matter induced by forbidden channels and thermal freeze-out, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2017) 042.
  63. C. E. Yaguna and O. Zapata, Multi-component scalar dark matter from a ZN symmetry: A systematic analysis, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2020) 109.
  64. C. E. Yaguna and O. Zapata, Two-component scalar dark matter in Z2n scenarios, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2021) 185.
  65. C. E. Yaguna and O. Zapata, Fermion and scalar two-component dark matter from a Z4 symmetry, Phys. Rev. D 105, 095026 (2022).
  66. G. Bélanger, A. Pukhov, C. E. Yaguna, and O. Zapata, The Z5 model of two-component dark matter, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2020) 030.
  67. G. Bélanger, K. Kannike, A. Pukhov, and M. Raidal, Minimal semi-annihilating ZN scalar dark matter, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 06 (2014) 021.
  68. X. Qi and H. Sun, Inflation and dark matter in the Z5 model, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2023) 051.
  69. J. McDonald, Gauge singlet scalars as cold dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 50, 3637 (1994).
  70. C. P. Burgess, M. Pospelov, and T. ter Veldhuis, The minimal model of nonbaryonic dark matter: A singlet scalar, Nucl. Phys. B619, 709 (2001).
  71. W.-L. Guo and Y.-L. Wu, The real singlet scalar dark matter model, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2010) 083.
  72. S. Profumo, L. Ubaldi, and C. Wainwright, Singlet scalar dark matter: Monochromatic gamma rays and metastable vacua, Phys. Rev. D 82, 123514 (2010).
  73. A. Djouadi, A. Falkowski, Y. Mambrini, and J. Quevillon, Direct detection of Higgs-portal dark matter at the LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C 73, 2455 (2013).
  74. J. M. Cline, K. Kainulainen, P. Scott, and C. Weniger, Update on scalar singlet dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 88, 055025 (2013).
  75. L. Feng, S. Profumo, and L. Ubaldi, Closing in on singlet scalar dark matter: LUX, invisible Higgs decays and gamma-ray lines, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2015) 045.
  76. M. Duerr, P. Fileviez Perez, and J. Smirnov, Scalar singlet dark matter and gamma lines, Phys. Lett. B 751, 119 (2015).
  77. H. Han and S. Zheng, New constraints on Higgs-portal scalar dark matter, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2015) 044.
  78. GAMBIT Collaboration, Status of the scalar singlet dark matter model, Eur. Phys. J. C 77, 568 (2017).
  79. C. E. Yaguna, Gamma rays from the annihilation of singlet scalar dark matter, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 03 (2009) 003.
  80. A. Goudelis, Y. Mambrini, and C. Yaguna, Antimatter signals of singlet scalar dark matter, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 12 (2009) 008.
  81. M. Gonderinger, Y. Li, H. Patel, and M. J. Ramsey-Musolf, Vacuum stability, perturbativity, and scalar singlet dark matter, J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2010) 053.
  82. S. Bhattacharya, P. Ghosh, T. N. Maity, and T. S. Ray, Mitigating direct detection bounds in non-minimal Higgs portal scalar dark matter models, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2017) 088.
  83. G. Belanger, K. Kannike, A. Pukhov, and M. Raidal, Z3 scalar singlet dark matter, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2013) 022.
  84. P. Athron, J. M. Cornell, F. Kahlhoefer, J. Mckay, P. Scott, and S. Wild, Impact of vacuum stability, perturbativity and XENON1T on global fits of Z2 and Z3 scalar singlet dark matter, Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 830 (2018).
  85. A. Hektor, A. Hryczuk, and K. Kannike, Improved bounds on Z3 singlet dark matter, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2019) 204.
  86. K. Kannike, K. Loos, and M. Raidal, Gravitational wave signals of pseudo-Goldstone dark matter in the Z3 complex singlet model, Phys. Rev. D 101, 035001 (2020).
  87. P. Ko and Y. Tang, Semi-annihilating Z3 dark matter for XENON1T excess, Phys. Lett. B 815, 136181 (2021).
  88. A. Liu, Z.-L. Han, Y. Jin, and H. Li, Sterile neutrino portal dark matter with Z3 symmetry, Phys. Rev. D 108, 075021 (2023).
  89. F. Kahlhoefer, K. Schmidt-Hoberg, T. Schwetz, and S. Vogl, Implications of unitarity and gauge invariance for simplified dark matter models, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2016) 016.
  90. M. D. Goodsell and F. Staub, Unitarity constraints on general scalar couplings with SARAH, Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 649 (2018).
  91. R. N. Lerner and J. McDonald, Gauge singlet scalar as inflaton and thermal relic dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 80, 123507 (2009).
  92. K. Kannike, Vacuum stability conditions from copositivity criteria, Eur. Phys. J. C 72, 2093 (2012).
  93. K. Kannike, Vacuum stability of a general scalar potential of a few fields, Eur. Phys. J. C 76, 324 (2016).
  94. Y. Cai and A. P. Spray, The galactic center excess from Z3 scalar semi-annihilations, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2016) 156.
  95. ATLAS Collaboration, Combination of searches for invisible decays of the Higgs boson using 139  fb−1 of proton-proton collision data at s=13  TeV collected with the ATLAS experiment, Phys. Lett. B 842, 137963 (2023).
  96. CMS Collaboration, A search for decays of the Higgs boson to invisible particles in events with a top-antitop quark pair or a vector boson in proton-proton collisions at s=13TeV, Eur. Phys. J. C 83, 933 (2023).
  97. Z. Kang, P. Ko, and T. Matsui, Strong first order EWPT & strong gravitational waves in Z3-symmetric singlet scalar extension, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2018) 115.
  98. G. Bélanger, A. Pukhov, C. E. Yaguna, and O. Zapata, The Z7 model of three-component scalar dark matter, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2023) 100.
  99. G. Bélanger, F. Boudjema, A. Goudelis, A. Pukhov, and B. Zaldivar, micrOMEGAs5.0: Freeze-in, Comput. Phys. Commun. 231, 173 (2018).
  100. N. D. Christensen and C. Duhr, feynrules-Feynman rules made easy, Comput. Phys. Commun. 180, 1614 (2009).
  101. MAGIC and Fermi-LAT Collaborations, Limits to dark matter annihilation cross-section from a combined analysis of MAGIC and Fermi-LAT observations of dwarf satellite galaxies, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2016) 039.
  102. T. Abe and R. Sato, Quantum corrections to the spin-independent cross section of the inert doublet dark matter, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2015) 109.
  103. K. Schmitz, Kinetic mixing in field theory (2009), https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:251310605.
  104. J. Bijnens, J. Oredsson, and J. Rathsman, Scalar kinetic mixing and the renormalization group, Phys. Lett. B 792, 238 (2019).
  105. D. Boyanovsky and J. Chen, Kinetic mixing between a Higgs boson and a nearly degenerate dark scalar: Oscillations and displaced vertices, Phys. Rev. D 96, 096007 (2017).
  106. O. Lebedev and H. M. Lee, Higgs portal inflation, Eur. Phys. J. C 71, 1821 (2011).
  107. Y. Ema, Higgs scalaron mixed inflation, Phys. Lett. B 770, 403 (2017).
  108. C. van de Bruck and J. M. Weller, Quintessence dynamics with two scalar fields and mixed kinetic terms, Phys. Rev. D 80, 123014 (2009).
  109. P. B. Pal, An Introductory Course of Particle Physics (CRC Press, 2014), 10.1201/b17199.
  110. Particle Data Group, Review of particle physics, Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2022, 083C01 (2022).
  111. V. Ilisie, Concepts in Quantum Field Theory. A Practitioner’s Toolkit, UNITEXT for Physics (Springer, New York, 2016), 10.1007/978-3-319-22966-9.
  112. T. Han, Collider phenomenology: Basic knowledge and techniques, in Theoretical Advanced Study Institute in Elementary Particle Physics : Physics inD≧4 (2005), pp. 407–454, 10.1142/9789812773579_0008.
  113. B. W. Lee, C. Quigg, and H. B. Thacker, Weak interactions at very high-energies: The role of the Higgs boson mass, Phys. Rev. D 16, 1519 (1977).
  114. S. Kanemura and K. Yagyu, Unitarity bound in the most general two Higgs doublet model, Phys. Lett. B 751, 289 (2015).
  115. S. De Curtis, S. Moretti, K. Yagyu, and E. Yildirim, Perturbative unitarity bounds in composite two-Higgs doublet models, Phys. Rev. D 94, 055017 (2016).
  116. M. P. Bento, J. C. Romão, and J. P. Silva, Unitarity bounds for all symmetry-constrained 3HDMs, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2022) 273.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 114, 055005– Published 4 September, 2026
  • Received 7 May 2025
  • Accepted 29 June 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