# Gauge field and brane-localized kinetic terms on the chiral square

## Abstract

Extra dimensions have been used as attempts to explain several phenomena in particle physics. In this paper we investigate the role of brane-localized kinetic terms (BLKT) on thin and thick branes with two flat extra dimensions (ED) compactified on the chiral square, and an abelian gauge field in the bulk. The results for a thin brane have resemblance with the 5-D case, leading to a tower of massive KK particles whose masses depend upon the compactification radius and the BLKT parameter. On the other hand, for the thick brane scenario, there is no solution that satisfy the boundary conditions. Because of this, the mechanism of suppressed couplings due to ED (Landim and Rizzo, in JHEP 06:112, 2019) cannot be extended to 6-D.

## 1 Introduction

Extra dimensions (ED) have been considered over the decades as tools to address a wide range of issues in particle physics, such as the hierarchy [2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7] and flavor problems [8, 9, 10]. Quantum field theory with two ED, for instance, may provide explanations for proton stability [11], origin of electroweak symmetry breaking [12, 13, 14, 15], breaking of grand unified gauge groups [16, 17, 18, 19] and the number of fermion generations [20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25]. The Standard Model (SM) itself might be extended by employing ED, in the so-called Universal Extra Dimension model (UED). In this context, the whole SM content is promoted to fields which propagate in compact ED, having Kaluza–Klein (KK) excitations, in either one [26] or two ED [27, 28, 29, 30]. The zero-mode of each KK tower of states in 4-D is thus identified with the correspondent SM particle and a lowest KK state can be a dark matter (DM) candidate. Current results from LHC [31, 32] impose bounds on the UED compactification radius *R* for one (\(R^{-1}>1.4-1.5\) TeV)^{1} [33, 34, 35] or two ED (\(R^{-1}>900\) GeV) [36].

On the other hand, the 4-D gravity might be an emergent phenomenon from ED, as in the DGP model [37], where the brane-induced term was initially obtained for a massless spin-2 field. Such a mechanism is possible for a spin-1 field as well, in which a brane-localized kinetic term (BLKT) is generated on the brane by radiative corrections due to the interaction of localized matter fields on the brane with the gauge field in the bulk [38], and it holds for infinite-volume, warped and compact ED. The same mechanism also works for two ED [39, 40, 41] and the role of such a term has been investigated in several different scenarios [42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49]. The localization of matter/gauge fields in branes was studied in other contexts, for thin [5, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57] and thick branes [58, 59].

ED can also be employed in order to elucidate the nature of the DM and its possible interaction with the SM. Usually, a DM candidate may couple with the SM through a scalar mediator (or directly through Higgs if DM is a scalar field), via the so-called Higgs portal [60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83], or through a vector mediator, which is introduced by a kinetic-mixing term [84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97]. In both cases, much of the parameter space has been excluded by a diverse set of experiments and observations [93, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134]. The small value of both couplings constants may be explained if we consider a single, flat ED and a thick brane with BLKT spread inside it [1], where inside the ‘fat’ brane the SM fields behaves as in the UED model with one ED.

An obvious generalization of this previous work then would be investigate the possibility of suppressed couplings, along with the presence of BLKT on thin branes, for higher dimensional spacetimes. In this paper we investigate this possibility in 6-D, which is a natural extension since UED has been built for two ED as well. Alongside with this aim, we consider BLKT on thin branes, leading to results that can be compared with the 5-D case [42]. We assume the same compactification of the UED model in 6-D, where the so-called chiral square was chosen because it is the simplest compactification that leads to chiral quarks and leptons in 4-D [27]. For simplicity we will only consider an abelian gauge field in the bulk, although for other fields the results are analogue. The presence of BLKT on thin branes has a similar result as in the 5-D case, where the masses of the 4-D KK tower of states are determined by a transcendental equation. A thick brane with a BLKT, on the other hand, is not allowed by the boundary conditions (BC) at the intersection between the regions thick brane/bulk. Therefore, the mechanism in 5-D can be consistently extended for 6-D only for thin branes.

This paper is organized as follows. Section 2 reviews the 6-D gauge field without any BLKT on the chiral square. In Sect. 3 we introduce thin branes with BLKT and analyze the spectrum of masses while in Sect. 4 a fat brane is considered. Sect. 5 is reserved for conclusions.

## 2 Gauge field in the bulk

We will consider two flat and transverse ED (\(x^4\) and \(x^5\)) compactified on the chiral square. The square has size \(\pi R\) and the adjacent sides are identified \((0,y)\sim (y,0)\) and \((\pi R,y)\sim (y,\pi R)\), with \(y\in [0,\pi R]\), which means the Lagrangians at those points have the same values for any field configuration: \({\mathscr {L}}(x^\mu , 0,y)={\mathscr {L}}(x^\mu ,y,0)\) and \({\mathscr {L}}(x^\mu , \pi R,y)={\mathscr {L}}(x^\mu ,y,\pi R)\).

*j*and

*k*are integers and the parameters \(m_j\) and \(m_k\) are \(m_j=j/R\) and \(m_k=k/R\), for the \(+\) sign in Eq. (14) or \(m_j=(j+1/2)/R\) and \(m_k=(k+1/2)/R\) for the − sign. The physical masses of the scalar fields are \( (M_{4,5}^{(j,k)})^2=(j^2+k^2)/R^2\) while for the tower of states of the 4-D vector field they are given by

## 3 BLKT on thin branes

Applying the same ideas of the last section, we will now consider the effect of BLKT on branes localized at the points (0, 0), \((\pi R,\pi R)\) and \((\pi R,0)\sim (0,\pi R)\). We should recall that preserving KK parity implies that operators at (0, 0) and \((\pi R,\pi R)\) are identical.

### 3.1 BLKT at (0, 0)

^{2}The localized kinetic term is four-dimensional for distances shorter than

*R*, and it is given by [38, 40]

*n*, where we labeled

*n*as being each one of the dashed lines. Each mode is described by the segments in the dashed lines,

*i.e.*, at \(n=0\) (first dashed line) there is one mode \(M_{0,0}\), a massive zero-mode, the second dashed line (\(n=1\)) has three quantized masses \(M_{0,1}\), \(M_{1,0}\) and \(M_{1,1}\) (being the first two degenerate), and so on. The segments in the middle of each dashed line are the levels corresponding to \(M_{j,j}\) and since the curves are symmetric under reflection over the line \(x_j=x_k\), the masses \(M_{j,k}\) and \(M_{k,j}\) are degenerate. These features are the usual behavior of quantum systems in two dimensions. Although there is a continuous set of values \((x_j, x_k)\) in each segment, the whole set represent only one (mass) state, being narrow the range of each state. In Table 1 it is presented the masses \(M_{j,k}\) for the first three curves of Fig. 1. The masses correspondent to each KK level are either increased or decreased in an alternated pattern, when the parameter \(\delta _A\) is increased, as seen in Fig. 2.

Mass range \( M_{j,k}R=\sqrt{x_j^2+x_k^2}\) for the first three curves plotted in Fig. 1

( | \( M_{j,k}R\,\) |
---|---|

(0, 0) | \(0.5-0.6\) |

(1, 1) | \(0.9-1.1\) |

(0, 1) | \(1.1-1.5\) |

(1, 0) | \(1.1-1.5\) |

(2, 2) | 1.8 |

(0, 2) | \(1.8-2.1\) |

(1, 2) | \(2.1-2.5\) |

(2, 0) | \(1.8-2.1\) |

(2, 1) | \(2.1-2.5\) |

### 3.2 BLKT at (0, 0) and (\(\pi R\), \(\pi R\))

### 3.3 BLKT at \((0,\pi R)\)

## 4 BLKT on a thick brane

We consider now the effect of a BLKT on the thick brane, lying between \( \pi r < x^4,x^5 \le \pi R\), with a width \(\pi (R-r)\equiv \pi L\). The thin brane is obtained in the limit \(L\rightarrow 0\). In 5-D, the difference between thin and thick branes leads to the suppressed coupling mechanism [1], existing for branes with a finite thickness. In 6-D, thin branes carry localized operators on the conical singularities at the corners of the square. On the other hand, BLKT are spread inside the thick branes, thus for thin branes the surface terms (5) are non-zero, while for a fat brane the operators are not localized at the conical singularities and there are two regions in the two-dimensional (ED) space, each one having (in principle) vanishing surface terms.

Both wave-functions have this form in order to satisfy the BC (6). The mass parameters, however, should be either \({\overline{m}}_i=m_i=i/R \) (\(+\)) or \({\overline{m}}_i=m_i=(i+1/2)/R\) (−), for \(i=j,k\), in order to satisfy the same BC. This is only possible if \(\delta _A\alpha =0\). Even if we assume that the fields no longer need to satisfy all previous BC, the situation remains the same by the following reason. The wave-function should be continuous at \((y,\pi r)\) and \((\pi r, y)\), as well as its derivative with respect to both ED coordinates \(x^4\) and \(x^5\). Thus \({\overline{v}}_0^{(j,k)}(\pi r,y)=v_0^{(j,k)}(\pi r,y)\) and \(\partial _4 {\overline{v}}_0^{(j,k)}|_{(x^4,x^5)=(\pi r,y)}=\partial _4v_0^{(j,k)}|_{(x^4,x^5)=(\pi r,y)}\) (the continuity conditions at \((y, \pi r)\) give exactly the same expressions). These conditions can be satisfied at a point \(y_c\) on the boundary, but it is not possible to match the functions all along the boundary, being the only possibility \({\overline{m}}_i=m_i\). Therefore the only viable solution is \(\delta _A\alpha =0\), which leads to a thin brane.

## 5 Conclusions

In this paper we have investigated the implications of BLKT on thin and thick branes, for a model of two ED compactified on the chiral square, when a vector field is present in the bulk. For thin branes the presence of BLKT gives mass to all modes of the KK tower of states, being the masses dependent upon the compactification radius and the BLKT parameter. The roots are roughly the same for branes at different positions, i.e., they have similar values for branes localized at (0, 0), \((0,\pi R)\sim (\pi R,0)\) and \((\pi R,\pi R)\). The transcendental equations and other relations resemble the 5-D case. The model presents the usual behavior of quantum systems in two dimensions, i.e., there are \((2n+1)\) quantized masses for each curve *n*, and each mode is described by the segments in the dashed lines: one massive zero-mode \(M_{0,0}\) at \(n=0\), three quantized masses \(M_{0,1}\), \(M_{1,0}\) and \(M_{1,1}\) at \(n=1\) (being \(M_{0,1}\) and \(M_{1,0}\) degenerate), etc.

The BLKT on thick branes, on the other hand, does not provide a non-trivial result \(\delta _A\alpha \ne 0\) due to the BC. This scenario is similar to the refraction of a wave-function by a two-dimensional step function. Suppose an incident wave-function \(e^{i(k_x x+ k_y y) }\), a refracted wave \(e^{i(q_x x+ q_y y) }\) and a step-function different from zero for \(x>0\). The BC implies that \(k_y=q_y\) and the analogue situation in our problem is therefore \(\bar{m}_i=m_i\). Hence the mechanism of suppressed coupling in 5-D [1] cannot be applied in 6-D.

The results presented here works for different fields in the bulk and can be used in several further proposals, as for instance, in a model of ED with the dark photon as mediator. This model was done in 5-D [48, 49], but an extension might be able with two ED as well, or even its inclusion in the UED model. In both cases, the BLKT breaks the extra \(U(1)_D\) gauge symmetry via BC without adding an extra Higgs-like field, avoiding, in turn, constraints on the Higgs-portal coupling. Potential signatures for such massive spin-1 KK particles depend upon the specific model considered but it usually includes missing energy searches, which might constrain the two parameters in this model.

## Footnotes

## Notes

### Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank Gia Dvali for clarifications and Thomas Rizzo for comments. This work was supported by by CAPES under the process 88881.162206/2017-01 and Alexander von Humboldt Foundation.

## References

- 1.Ricardo G. Landim, Thomas G. Rizzo, Thick Branes in Extra Dimensions and Suppressed Dark Couplings. JHEP
**06**, 112 (2019)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 2.Ignatios Antoniadis, A Possible new dimension at a few TeV. Phys. Lett. B
**246**, 377–384 (1990)ADSGoogle Scholar - 3.R. Keith, Dienes, Emilian Dudas, Tony Gherghetta, Extra space-time dimensions and unification. Phys. Lett. B
**436**, 55–65 (1998)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 4.Ignatios Antoniadis, Nima Arkani-Hamed, Savas Dimopoulos, G.R. Dvali, New dimensions at a millimeter to a Fermi and superstrings at a TeV. Phys. Lett. B
**436**, 257–263 (1998)Google Scholar - 5.Nima Arkani-Hamed, Savas Dimopoulos, G.R. Dvali, The Hierarchy problem and new dimensions at a millimeter. Phys. Lett. B
**429**, 263–272 (1998)Google Scholar - 6.Lisa Randall, Raman Sundrum, A Large mass hierarchy from a small extra dimension. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**83**, 3370–3373 (1999)ADSMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar - 7.Nima Arkani-Hamed, Timothy Cohen, Raffaele Tito D’Agnolo, Anson Hook, Hyung Do Kim, David Pinner, Solving the Hierarchy Problem at Reheating with a Large Number of Degrees of Freedom. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**117**(25), 251801 (2016)ADSGoogle Scholar - 8.Kaustubh Agashe, Gilad Perez, Amarjit Soni, Flavor structure of warped extra dimension models. Phys. Rev. D
**71**, 016002 (2005)ADSGoogle Scholar - 9.J. Stephan, Huber, Flavor violation and warped geometry. Nucl. Phys. B
**666**, 269–288 (2003)Google Scholar - 10.A. Liam Fitzpatrick, Gilad Perez, Lisa Randall, Flavor anarchy in a Randall-Sundrum model with 5D minimal flavor violation and a low Kaluza-Klein scale. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**100**, 171604 (2008)Google Scholar - 11.Thomas Appelquist, Bogdan A. Dobrescu, Eduardo Ponton, Ho-Ung Yee, Proton stability in six-dimensions. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**87**, 181802 (2001)ADSGoogle Scholar - 12.Nima Arkani-Hamed, Hsin-Chia Cheng, Bogdan A. Dobrescu, Lawrence J. Hall, Selfbreaking of the standard model gauge symmetry. Phys. Rev. D
**62**, 096006 (2000)ADSGoogle Scholar - 13.Michio Hashimoto, Masaharu Tanabashi, Koichi Yamawaki, Top mode standard model with extra dimensions. Phys. Rev. D
**64**, 056003 (2001)ADSGoogle Scholar - 14.Csaba Csaki, Christophe Grojean, Hitoshi Murayama, Standard model Higgs from higher dimensional gauge fields. Phys. Rev. D
**67**, 085012 (2003)ADSGoogle Scholar - 15.C.A. Scrucca, M. Serone, L. Silvestrini, A. Wulzer, Gauge Higgs unification in orbifold models. JHEP
**02**, 049 (2004)ADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 16.Arthur Hebecker, John March-Russell, The structure of GUT breaking by orbifolding. Nucl. Phys. B
**625**, 128–150 (2002)ADSMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar - 17.J. Lawrence, Hall, Yasunori Nomura, Takemichi Okui, David Tucker-Smith, SO(10) unified theories in six-dimensions. Phys. Rev. D
**65**, 035008 (2002)Google Scholar - 18.T. Asaka, W. Buchmuller, L. Covi, Bulk and brane anomalies in six-dimensions. Nucl. Phys. B
**648**, 231–253 (2003)ADSMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar - 19.T. Asaka, W. Buchmuller, L. Covi, Quarks and leptons between branes and bulk. Phys. Lett. B
**563**, 209–216 (2003)ADSzbMATHGoogle Scholar - 20.A. Bogdan, Dobrescu, Erich Poppitz, Number of fermion generations derived from anomaly cancellation. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**87**, 031801 (2001)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 21.M. Fabbrichesi, M. Piai, G. Tasinato, Axion and neutrino physics from anomaly cancellation. Phys. Rev. D
**64**, 116006 (2001)ADSGoogle Scholar - 22.Nicolas Borghini, Yves Gouverneur, Michel H.G. Tytgat, Anomalies and fermion content of grand unified theories in extra dimensions. Phys. Rev. D
**65**, 025017 (2002)Google Scholar - 23.M. Fabbrichesi, R. Percacci, M. Piai, M. Serone, Cancellation of global anomalies in spontaneously broken gauge theories. Phys. Rev. D
**66**, 105028 (2002)ADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 24.J.M. Frere, M.V. Libanov, Sergey V. Troitsky, Neutrino masses with a single generation in the bulk. JHEP
**11**, 025 (2001)Google Scholar - 25.T. Watari, T. Yanagida, Higher dimensional supersymmetry as an origin of the three families for quarks and leptons. Phys. Lett. B
**532**, 252–258 (2002)ADSzbMATHGoogle Scholar - 26.Thomas Appelquist, Hsin-Chia Cheng, Bogdan A. Dobrescu, Bounds on universal extra dimensions. Phys. Rev. D
**64**, 035002 (2001)ADSGoogle Scholar - 27.Bogdan A. Dobrescu, Eduardo Ponton, Chiral compactification on a square. JHEP
**03**, 071 (2004)Google Scholar - 28.Gustavo Burdman, Bogdan A. Dobrescu, Eduardo Ponton, Six-dimensional gauge theory on the chiral square. JHEP
**02**, 033 (2006)ADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 29.Eduardo Ponton, Lin Wang, Radiative effects on the chiral square. JHEP
**11**, 018 (2006)ADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 30.Gustavo Burdman, Bogdan A. Dobrescu, Eduardo Ponton, Resonances from two universal extra dimensions. Phys. Rev. D
**74**, 075008 (2006)ADSGoogle Scholar - 31.Georges Aad et al., Search for squarks and gluinos in events with isolated leptons, jets and missing transverse momentum at \(\sqrt{s}=8\) TeV with the ATLAS detector. JHEP
**04**, 116 (2015)ADSGoogle Scholar - 32.The ATLAS collaboration. Search for squarks and gluinos in events with isolated leptons, jets and missing transverse momentum at \(\sqrt{s}=8\) TeV with the ATLAS detector. 2013Google Scholar
- 33.Nicolas Deutschmann, Thomas Flacke, and Jong Soo Kim. Current LHC Constraints on Minimal Universal Extra Dimensions.
*Phys. Lett.*, B771:515–520, 2017Google Scholar - 34.Jyotiranjan Beuria, AseshKrishna Datta, Dipsikha Debnath, Konstantin T. Matchev, LHC Collider Phenomenology of Minimal Universal Extra Dimensions. Comput. Phys. Commun.
**226**, 187–205 (2018)ADSGoogle Scholar - 35.M. Tanabashi et al., Review of Particle Physics. Phys. Rev. D
**98**(3), 030001 (2018)ADSGoogle Scholar - 36.G. Burdman, O.J.P. Eboli, D. Spehler, Signals of Two Universal Extra Dimensions at the LHC. Phys. Rev. D
**94**(9), 095004 (2016)ADSGoogle Scholar - 37.G.R. Dvali, Gregory Gabadadze, Massimo Porrati, 4-D gravity on a brane in 5-D Minkowski space. Phys. Lett. B
**485**, 208–214 (2000)ADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 38.G.R. Dvali, Gregory Gabadadze, Mikhail A. Shifman, (Quasi)localized gauge field on a brane: Dissipating cosmic radiation to extra dimensions? Phys. Lett. B
**497**, 271–280 (2001)ADSzbMATHGoogle Scholar - 39.G.R. Dvali, Gregory Gabadadze, Gravity on a brane in infinite volume extra space. Phys. Rev. D
**63**, 065007 (2001)ADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 40.Gia Dvali, Gregory Gabadadze, Xin-rui Hou, Emiliano Sefusatti, Seesaw modification of gravity. Phys. Rev. D
**67**, 044019 (2003)ADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 41.Gia Dvali, Gregory Gabadadze, M. Shifman, Diluting cosmological constant in infinite volume extra dimensions. Phys. Rev. D
**67**, 044020 (2003)Google Scholar - 42.Marcela Carena, Timothy M.P. Tait, C.E.M. Wagner, Branes and orbifolds are opaque. Acta Phys. Polon. B
**33**, 2355 (2002)Google Scholar - 43.Marcela Carena, Eduardo Ponton, Timothy M.P. Tait, C.E.M. Wagner, Opaque Branes in Warped Backgrounds. Phys. Rev. D
**67**, 096006 (2003)Google Scholar - 44.F. del Aguila, M. Perez-Victoria, Jose Santiago, Physics of brane kinetic terms. Acta Phys. Polon. B
**34**, 5511–5522 (2003)ADSGoogle Scholar - 45.F. del Aguila, M. Perez-Victoria, Jose Santiago, Bulk fields with general brane kinetic terms. JHEP
**02**, 051 (2003)Google Scholar - 46.H. Davoudiasl, J.L. Hewett, T.G. Rizzo, Brane localized kinetic terms in the Randall-Sundrum model. Phys. Rev. D
**68**, 045002 (2003)ADSMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar - 47.H. Davoudiasl, J.L. Hewett, T.G. Rizzo, Brane localized curvature for warped gravitons. JHEP
**08**, 034 (2003)ADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 48.G. Thomas, Rizzo, Kinetic mixing, dark photons and an extra dimension. Part I. JHEP
**07**, 118 (2018)Google Scholar - 49.G. Thomas, Rizzo, Kinetic mixing, dark photons and extra dimensions. Part II: fermionic dark matter. JHEP
**10**, 069 (2018)Google Scholar - 50.G.R. Dvali, S.H. Henry Tye, Brane inflation. Phys. Lett. B
**450**, 72–82 (1999)ADSMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar - 51.G. Alencar, R.R. Landim, M.O. Tahim, R.N. Costa Filho, Gauge Field Localization on the Brane Through Geometrical Coupling. Phys. Lett. B
**739**, 125–127 (2014)ADSMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar - 52.G. Alencar, Hidden conformal symmetry in Randall-Sundrum 2 model: Universal fermion localization by torsion. Phys. Lett. B
**773**, 601–603 (2017)ADSzbMATHGoogle Scholar - 53.G. Alencar, R.R. Landim, C.R. Muniz, R.N. Costa Filho, Nonminimal couplings in Randall-Sundrum scenarios. Phys. Rev. D
**92**(6), 066006 (2015)Google Scholar - 54.G. Alencar, C.R. Muniz, R.R. Landim, I.C. Jardim, R.N. Costa Filho, Photon mass as a probe to extra dimensions. Phys. Lett. B
**759**, 138–140 (2016)ADSzbMATHGoogle Scholar - 55.G. Alencar, I.C. Jardim, R.R. Landim, C.R. Muniz, R.N. Costa Filho, Generalized nonminimal couplings in Randall-Sundrum scenarios. Phys. Rev. D
**93**(12), 124064 (2016)Google Scholar - 56.G. Alencar, I.C. Jardim, R.R. Landim, \(p\)-Forms non-minimally coupled to gravity in Randall-Sundrum scenarios. Eur. Phys. J. C
**78**(5), 367 (2018)ADSGoogle Scholar - 57.Luiz F. Freitas, G. Alencar, and R. R. Landim. Universal Aspects of \(U(1)\) Gauge Field Localization on Branes in \(D\)-dimensions.
*JHEP*, 02:035, 2019Google Scholar - 58.A. De Rujula, A. Donini, M.B. Gavela, S. Rigolin, Fat brane phenomena. Phys. Lett.
**B482**, 195–204 (2000)ADSGoogle Scholar - 59.Howard Georgi, Aaron K. Grant, Girma Hailu, Chiral fermions, orbifolds, scalars and fat branes. Phys. Rev. D
**63**, 064027 (2001)ADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 60.V. Silveira, A. Zee, Scalar Phantoms. Phys. Lett.
**161B**, 136–140 (1985)ADSGoogle Scholar - 61.J. McDonald, Gauge singlet scalars as cold dark matter. Phys. Rev. D
**50**, 3637–3649 (1994)ADSGoogle Scholar - 62.C.P. Burgess, M. Pospelov, T. ter Veldhuis, The Minimal model of nonbaryonic dark matter: A Singlet scalar. Nucl. Phys. B
**619**, 709–728 (2001)ADSGoogle Scholar - 63.M.C. Bento, O. Bertolami, R. Rosenfeld, L. Teodoro, Selfinteracting dark matter and invisibly decaying Higgs. Phys. Rev. D
**62**, 041302 (2000)ADSGoogle Scholar - 64.O. Bertolami, R. Rosenfeld, The Higgs portal and an unified model for dark energy and dark matter. Int. J. Mod. Phys. A
**23**, 4817–4827 (2008)ADSzbMATHGoogle Scholar - 65.M.C. Bento, O. Bertolami, R. Rosenfeld, Cosmological constraints on an invisibly decaying Higgs boson. Phys. Lett. B
**518**, 276–281 (2001)ADSGoogle Scholar - 66.J. March-Russell, S.M. West, D. Cumberbatch, D. Hooper, Heavy Dark Matter Through the Higgs Portal. JHEP
**07**, 058 (2008)ADSGoogle Scholar - 67.A. Biswas, D. Majumdar, The Real Gauge Singlet Scalar Extension of Standard Model: A Possible Candidate of Cold Dark Matter. Pramana
**80**, 539–557 (2013)ADSGoogle Scholar - 68.R. Costa, A.P. Morais, M.O.P. Sampaio, R. Santos, Two-loop stability of a complex singlet extended Standard Model. Phys. Rev. D
**92**, 025024 (2015)ADSGoogle Scholar - 69.A. Eichhorn, M.M. Scherer, Planck scale, Higgs mass, and scalar dark matter. Phys. Rev. D
**90**(2), 025023 (2014)ADSGoogle Scholar - 70.N. Khan, S. Rakshit, Study of electroweak vacuum metastability with a singlet scalar dark matter. Phys. Rev. D
**90**(11), 113008 (2014)ADSGoogle Scholar - 71.F.S. Queiroz, K. Sinha, The Poker Face of the Majoron Dark Matter Model: LUX to keV Line. Phys. Lett. B
**735**, 69–74 (2014)ADSGoogle Scholar - 72.C. Kouvaris, I.M. Shoemaker, K. Tuominen, Self-Interacting Dark Matter through the Higgs Portal. Phys. Rev. D
**91**(4), 043519 (2015)ADSGoogle Scholar - 73.S. Bhattacharya, S. Jana, S. Nandi, Neutrino Masses and Scalar Singlet Dark Matter. Phys. Rev. D
**95**(5), 055003 (2017)ADSGoogle Scholar - 74.O. Bertolami, C. Cosme, J.G. Rosa, Scalar field dark matter and the Higgs field. Phys. Lett. B
**759**, 1–8 (2016)ADSGoogle Scholar - 75.R. Campbell, S. Godfrey, H.E. Logan, A. Poulin, Real singlet scalar dark matter extension of the Georgi-Machacek model. Phys. Rev. D
**95**(1), 016005 (2017)ADSGoogle Scholar - 76.M. Heikinheimo, T. Tenkanen, K. Tuominen, V Vaskonen. Observational Constraints on Decoupled Hidden Sectors.
*Phys. Rev.*,**D94**(6):063506, (2016). [Erratum: Phys. Rev.D96,no.10,109902(2017)]Google Scholar - 77.K. Kainulainen, S. Nurmi, T. Tenkanen, K. Tuominen, V. Vaskonen, Isocurvature Constraints on Portal Couplings. JCAP
**1606**(06), 022 (2016)Google Scholar - 78.S. Nurmi, T. Tenkanen, K. Tuominen, Inflationary Imprints on Dark Matter. JCAP
**1511**(11), 001 (2015)Google Scholar - 79.T. Tenkanen, Feebly Interacting Dark Matter Particle as the Inflaton. JHEP
**09**, 049 (2016)ADSGoogle Scholar - 80.J.A. Casas, D.G. Cerdeño, J.M. Moreno, J. Quilis, Reopening the Higgs portal for single scalar dark matter. JHEP
**05**, 036 (2017)ADSzbMATHGoogle Scholar - 81.Catarina Cosme, João G. Rosa, O. Bertolami, Scalar field dark matter with spontaneous symmetry breaking and the \(3.5\) keV line. Phys. Lett. B
**781**, 639–644 (2018)Google Scholar - 82.M. Heikinheimo, T. Tenkanen, K. Tuominen, WIMP miracle of the second kind. Phys. Rev. D
**96**(2), 023001 (2017)ADSGoogle Scholar - 83.G. Ricardo, Landim, Dark energy, scalar singlet dark matter and the Higgs portal. Mod. Phys. Lett. A
**33**(15), 1850087 (2018)Google Scholar - 84.Bob Holdom, Two U(1)’s and Epsilon Charge Shifts. Phys. Lett.
**166B**, 196–198 (1986)ADSGoogle Scholar - 85.Bob Holdom, Searching for \(\epsilon \) Charges and a New U(1). Phys. Lett. B
**178**, 65–70 (1986)ADSGoogle Scholar - 86.Keith R. Dienes, Christopher F. Kolda, John March-Russell, Kinetic mixing and the supersymmetric gauge hierarchy. Nucl. Phys. B
**492**, 104–118 (1997)ADSGoogle Scholar - 87.F. Del Aguila, The Physics of z-prime bosons. Acta Phys. Polon. B
**25**, 1317–1336 (1994)Google Scholar - 88.K.S. Babu, Christopher F. Kolda, John March-Russell, Leptophobic U(1) \(s\) and the R(\(b\)) - R(\(c\)) crisis. Phys. Rev. D
**54**, 4635–4647 (1996)ADSGoogle Scholar - 89.G. Thomas, Rizzo, Gauge kinetic mixing and leptophobic \(Z^\prime \) in E(6) and SO(10). Phys. Rev. D
**59**, 015020 (1998)Google Scholar - 90.Daniel Feldman, Boris Kors, Pran Nath, Extra-weakly Interacting Dark Matter, Phys. Rev. D
**75**, 023503 (2007)ADSGoogle Scholar - 91.Daniel Feldman, Zuowei Liu, Pran Nath, The Stueckelberg Z-prime Extension with Kinetic Mixing and Milli-Charged Dark Matter From the Hidden Sector. Phys. Rev. D
**75**, 115001 (2007)ADSGoogle Scholar - 92.Maxim Pospelov, Adam Ritz, Mikhail B. Voloshin, Secluded WIMP Dark Matter. Phys. Lett.
**B662**, 53–61 (2008)ADSGoogle Scholar - 93.Maxim Pospelov, Secluded U(1) below the weak scale. Phys. Rev. D
**80**, 095002 (2009)ADSGoogle Scholar - 94.Hooman Davoudiasl, Hye-Sung Lee, William J. Marciano, Muon Anomaly and Dark Parity Violation. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**109**, 031802 (2012)ADSGoogle Scholar - 95.Hooman Davoudiasl, Hye-Sung Lee, William J. Marciano, ’Dark’ Z implications for Parity Violation, Rare Meson Decays, and Higgs Physics. Phys. Rev. D
**85**, 115019 (2012)ADSGoogle Scholar - 96.Essig, Rouven et al: Working Group Report: New Light Weakly Coupled Particles. In: Proceedings, 2013 Community Summer Study on the Future of U.S. Particle Physics: Snowmass on the Mississippi (CSS2013): Minneapolis, MN, USA, July 29-August 6, 2013, (2013)Google Scholar
- 97.Eder Izaguirre, Gordan Krnjaic, Philip Schuster, Natalia Toro, Analyzing the Discovery Potential for Light Dark Matter. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**115**(25), 251301 (2015)ADSGoogle Scholar - 98.Michael Duerr, Pavel Fileviez Pérez, Juri Smirnov, Scalar Dark Matter: Direct vs. Indirect Detection. JHEP
**06**, 152 (2016)Google Scholar - 99.P. Athron et al., Status of the scalar singlet dark matter model. Eur. Phys. J. C
**77**(8), 568 (2017)ADSGoogle Scholar - 100.A. Djouadi, O. Lebedev, Y. Mambrini, J. Quevillon, Implications of LHC searches for Higgs-portal dark matter. Phys. Lett. B
**709**, 65–69 (2012)ADSGoogle Scholar - 101.K. Cheung, Y.-L.S. Tsai, P.-Y. Tseng, T.-C. Yuan, A. Zee, Global Study of the Simplest Scalar Phantom Dark Matter Model. JCAP
**1210**, 042 (2012)ADSGoogle Scholar - 102.A. Djouadi, A. Falkowski, Y. Mambrini, J. Quevillon, Direct Detection of Higgs-Portal Dark Matter at the LHC. Eur. Phys. J. C
**73**(6), 2455 (2013)ADSGoogle Scholar - 103.Cline, J.M., Kainulainen, K., Scott, P., Weniger, C.: Update on scalar singlet dark matter. Phys. Rev.,
**D88**:055025, (2013). [Erratum: Phys. Rev.D92,no.3,039906(2015)]Google Scholar - 104.M. Endo, Y. Takaesu, Heavy WIMP through Higgs portal at the LHC. Phys. Lett. B
**743**, 228–234 (2015)ADSGoogle Scholar - 105.A. Goudelis, Y. Mambrini, C. Yaguna, Antimatter signals of singlet scalar dark matter. JCAP
**0912**, 008 (2009)ADSGoogle Scholar - 106.A. Urbano, W. Xue, Constraining the Higgs portal with antiprotons. JHEP
**03**, 133 (2015)Google Scholar - 107.D.S. Akerib et al., Improved Limits on Scattering of Weakly Interacting Massive Particles from Reanalysis of 2013 LUX Data. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**116**(16), 161301 (2016)ADSGoogle Scholar - 108.X.-G. He, J. Tandean, New LUX and PandaX-II Results Illuminating the Simplest Higgs-Portal Dark Matter Models. JHEP
**12**, 074 (2016)ADSGoogle Scholar - 109.M. Escudero, A. Berlin, D. Hooper, M.-X. Lin, Toward (Finally!) Ruling Out Z and Higgs Mediated Dark Matter Models. JCAP
**1612**, 029 (2016)ADSGoogle Scholar - 110.P.A.R. Ade et al., Planck 2015 results. XIII. Cosmological parameters. Astron. Astrophys.
**594**, A13 (2016)Google Scholar - 111.Cline, J.M., Scott, P.: Dark Matter CMB Constraints and Likelihoods for Poor Particle Physicists. JCAP,
**1303**:044, (2013). [Erratum: JCAP1305,E01(2013)]Google Scholar - 112.T.R. Slatyer, Indirect dark matter signatures in the cosmic dark ages. I. Generalizing the bound on s-wave dark matter annihilation from Planck results. Phys. Rev. D
**93**(2), 023527 (2016)Google Scholar - 113.M. Ackermann et al., Searching for Dark Matter Annihilation from Milky Way Dwarf Spheroidal Galaxies with Six Years of Fermi Large Area Telescope Data. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**115**(23), 231301 (2015)ADSGoogle Scholar - 114.D.S. Akerib et al., Results from a search for dark matter in the complete LUX exposure. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**118**(2), 021303 (2017)ADSGoogle Scholar - 115.A. Tan et al., Dark Matter Results from First 98.7 Days of Data from the PandaX-II Experiment. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**117**(12), 121303 (2016)Google Scholar - 116.R. Agnese et al., Search for Low-Mass Weakly Interacting Massive Particles with SuperCDMS. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**112**(24), 241302 (2014)ADSGoogle Scholar - 117.E. Aprile et al., Dark Matter Results from 225 Live Days of XENON100 Data. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**109**, 181301 (2012)ADSGoogle Scholar - 118.M.G. Aartsen et al., Search for dark matter annihilations in the Sun with the 79-string IceCube detector. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**110**(13), 131302 (2013)ADSGoogle Scholar - 119.M.G. Aartsen et al., Improved limits on dark matter annihilation in the Sun with the 79-string IceCube detector and implications for supersymmetry. JCAP
**1604**(04), 022 (2016)ADSGoogle Scholar - 120.Battaglieri, Marco et al.: US Cosmic Visions: New Ideas in Dark Matter 2017: Community Report. In: U.S. Cosmic Visions: New Ideas in Dark Matter College Park, MD, USA, March 23-25, 2017, (2017)Google Scholar
- 121.E.M. Riordan et al., A Search for Short Lived Axions in an Electron Beam Dump Experiment. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**59**, 755 (1987)ADSGoogle Scholar - 122.J.D. Bjorken, S. Ecklund, W.R. Nelson, A. Abashian, C. Church, B. Lu, L.W. Mo, T.A. Nunamaker, P. Rassmann, Search for Neutral Metastable Penetrating Particles Produced in the SLAC Beam Dump. Phys. Rev. D
**38**, 3375 (1988)ADSGoogle Scholar - 123.A. Bross, M. Crisler, Stephen H. Pordes, J. Volk, S. Errede, J. Wrbanek, A Search for Shortlived Particles Produced in an Electron Beam Dump. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**67**, 2942–2945 (1991)ADSGoogle Scholar - 124.D. James, Bjorken, Rouven Essig, Philip Schuster, Natalia Toro, New Fixed-Target Experiments to Search for Dark Gauge Forces. Phys. Rev. D
**80**, 075018 (2009)Google Scholar - 125.Hooman Davoudiasl, Hye-Sung Lee, William J. Marciano, Dark Side of Higgs Diphoton Decays and Muon g-2. Phys. Rev. D
**86**, 095009 (2012)ADSGoogle Scholar - 126.Motoi Endo, Koichi Hamaguchi, Go Mishima, Constraints on Hidden Photon Models from Electron g-2 and Hydrogen Spectroscopy. Phys. Rev. D
**86**, 095029 (2012)ADSGoogle Scholar - 127.D. Babusci et al., Limit on the production of a light vector gauge boson in phi meson decays with the KLOE detector. Phys. Lett. B
**720**, 111–115 (2013)ADSGoogle Scholar - 128.F. Archilli et al., Search for a vector gauge boson in \(\phi \) meson decays with the KLOE detector. Phys. Lett. B
**706**, 251–255 (2012)ADSGoogle Scholar - 129.P. Adlarson et al., Search for a dark photon in the \(\pi ^0 \rightarrow e^+e^-\gamma \) decay. Phys. Lett. B
**726**, 187–193 (2013)ADSGoogle Scholar - 130.S. Abrahamyan et al., Search for a New Gauge Boson in Electron-Nucleus Fixed-Target Scattering by the APEX Experiment. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**107**, 191804 (2011)ADSGoogle Scholar - 131.H. Merkel et al., Search for Light Gauge Bosons of the Dark Sector at the Mainz Microtron. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**106**, 251802 (2011)ADSGoogle Scholar - 132.Matthew Reece, Lian-Tao Wang, Searching for the light dark gauge boson in GeV-scale experiments. JHEP
**07**, 051 (2009)ADSGoogle Scholar - 133.Bernard Aubert et al., Search for Dimuon Decays of a Light Scalar Boson in Radiative Transitions Upsilon \(\rightarrow \) gamma A0. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**103**, 081803 (2009)ADSGoogle Scholar - 134.K. Herbert, Dreiner, Jean-François Fortin, Christoph Hanhart, Lorenzo Ubaldi, Supernova constraints on MeV dark sectors from \(e^+e^-\) annihilations. Phys. Rev. D
**89**(10), 105015 (2014)Google Scholar

## Copyright information

**Open Access**This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Funded by SCOAP^{3}