1. Introduction

Front. Phys.

Frontiers in Physics

Front. Phys.

2296-424X

Frontiers Media S.A.

10.3389/fphy.2017.00053

Physics

Original Research

Multicomponent Dark Matter in Radiative Seesaw Models

Aoki

Mayumi

^* Kaneko

Daiki

Kubo

Jisuke

Institute for Theoretical Physics, Kanazawa University, Kanazawa, Japan

Edited by: Frank Franz Deppisch, University College London, United Kingdom

Reviewed by: Arindam Das, Korea Institute for Advanced Study, South Korea; Michael Duerr, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron (HZ), Germany

*Correspondence: Mayumi Aoki mayumi@hep.s.kanazawa-u.ac.jp

This article was submitted to High-Energy and Astroparticle Physics, a section of the journal Frontiers in Physics

01 11 2017

2017

04 08 2017 10 10 2017

2017

Aoki, Kaneko and Kubo

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

We discuss radiative seesaw models, in which an exact Z2×Z2′ symmetry is imposed. Due to the exact Z2×Z2′ symmetry, neutrino masses are generated at a two-loop level and at least two extra stable electrically neutral particles are predicted. We consider two models: one has a multi-component dark matter system and the other one has a dark radiation in addition to a dark matter. In the multi-component dark matter system, non-standard dark matter annihilation processes exist. We find that they play important roles in determining the relic abundance and also responsible for the monochromatic neutrino lines resulting from the dark matter annihilation process. In the model with the dark radiation, the structure of the Yukawa coupling is considerably constrained and gives an interesting relationship among cosmology, lepton flavor violating decay of the charged leptons and the decay of the inert Higgs bosons.

neutrino mass dark matter radiative seesaw mechanism flavor physics dark radiation

1. Introduction

Neutrino oscillation experiments show that the neutrinos have tiny masses and mix with each other. It is a clear evidence for physics beyond the standard model (SM), since the SM has no mechanism for giving masses to the neutrinos. The global fit [1] shows that the mass-squared differences of the neutrinos are Δm212=7.50-0.17+0.19×10-5 eV² and Δm312=2.524-0.040+0.039 (-2.514-0.041+0.038)×10-3eV2 for normal (inverted) mass hierarchy. The cosmological data, on the other hand, gives the upper bound of the sum of the neutrino masses as Σ_jm_{ν_j} < 0.23 eV [2], a scale twelve orders of magnitudes smaller than the electroweak scale. It is one of the most important problems of particle physics to reveal the origin of the tiny masses for the neutrinos.

Type-I seesaw mechanism [3–6] is one of the attractive way to realize the tiny masses of the neutrinos, where the right-handed neutrinos are introduced to the SM. If the neutrino Yukawa coupling for the Dirac neutrino mass is O(1), the mass of the right-handed neutrino has to be around O(10¹⁵) GeV to obtain eV-scale neutrinos. The mass scale of O(10¹⁵) GeV is obviously beyond the reach of collider experiments. Even for the mass of the right-handed neutrinos around O(1) TeV, the direct search of the right-handed neutrinos would be difficult because of the tiny neutrino Yukawa couplings of O(10⁻⁶).

Another attractive way to give the neutrino masses is a radiative generation (the so-called radiative seesaw model). The original idea of radiatively generating neutrino masses due to TeV-scale physics has been proposed by Zee [7], in which the neutrino masses are induced at the one-loop level because of the addition of an isospin doublet scalar field and a charged singlet field to the SM. Another possibility for generating neutrino masses via the new scalar particles is e.g., the Zee-Babu model [8, 9], in which the neutrino masses arise at the two-loop level.

A further extension with a TeV-scale right-handed neutrino has been proposed in Krauss et al. [10]. In this model the neutrino masses are induced at the three-loop level, where the Dirac neutrino mass at the tree level is forbidden due to an exact Z₂ symmetry. The right-handed neutrino is odd under the Z₂ and becomes a candidate of dark matter (DM). The idea of simultaneous explanation for the neutrino masses via the radiative seesaw mechanism and the stability of DM by introducing an exact discrete symmetry has been discussed in many models (see e.g., [11–46] and the recent review [47] and references therein).

The model proposed by Ma [11] is one of the simplest radiative seesaw model with DM candidates. The model has the Z₂-odd right-handed neutrinos N_k and the inert doublet scalar field η=(η+,ηR0+iηI0)T. The neutrino masses are generated at the one-loop level, in which the Yukawa interactions YikνLiηNk and the scalar interaction (λ₅/2)(H^†η)² contribute to the neutrino mass generation. The mass matrix is expressed as

(Mv)ij=∑kYikνYjkνMk32π2[mηR02mηR02−Mk2ln (mηR0Mk)2 −mηI02mηI02−Mk2ln(mηI0Mk)2],

where M_k is the Majorana mass of the k-th generation of right-handed neutrino, mηR0 and mηI0 are the mass of the ηR0 and ηI0, respectively. In this model, we have two scenarios with respect to the DM candidate; the lightest right-handed neutrino N₁ or the lighter Z₂-odd neutral scalar field (ηR0 or ηI0). The phenomenology of the model is studied in Kubo et al. [48], Bouchand and Merle [49], Merle and Platscher [50], Ma and Raidal [51], Suematsu et al. [52], Aoki and Kanemura [53], Suematsu et al. [54], Schmidt et al. [55], Hehn and Ibarra [56], Toma and Vicente [57], Ibarra et al. [58], Merle et al. [59], Lindner et al. [60], Hessler et al. [61], Aristizabal Sierra et al. [62], Gelmini et al. [63], and Ma [64].

A DM candidate can be made stable by an unbroken symmetry. The simplest possibility of such a symmetry is Z₂ symmetry as in the above models. However, if the DM stabilizing symmetry is larger than Z₂: Z_N (N ≥ 4) or a product of two or more Z₂s, the DM is consisting of stable multi-DM particles (multicomponent DM system). A supersymmetric extension of the radiative seesaw model of Ma [11] is an example [41–46]. Other possibilities with multicomponent DM are widely discussed in Ma and Sarkar [34], Kajiyama et al. [35, 37], Wang and Han [36], Baek et al. [38], Aoki et al. [39, 40], Bhattacharya et al. [65], Berezhiani and Khlopov [66, 67], Hur et al. [68], Zurek [69], Batell [70], Dienes and Thomas [71, 72], Ivanov and Keus [73], Dienes et al. [74], D'Eramo et al. [75], Gu [76], Bhattacharya et al. [77, 78], Geng et al. [79], Boddy et al. [80], Geng et al. [81], Esch et al. [82], Geng et al. [83], Arcadi et al. [84], DiFranzo and Mohlabeng [85], Aoki and Toma [86], and Aoki et al. [87].

In this paper we study two models of the two-loop extension of the model by Ma [11], we call them as “model A” and “model B,” in which due to the Z2×Z2′ symmetry a set of stable particles can exist. Introducing two new scalar fields, the λ₅ term is generated radiatively in the model A [39, 40]. In this model we discuss the three component DM system in which the two new scalar fields and a right-handed neutrino are the DM candidate. Such case has been discussed in Aoki et al. [40], however, we reanalyze the model since the benchmark points studied in Aoki et al. [40], where the masses of both new scalars are several hundred GeV, has been excluded by the recent results of the direct detection DM experiments. In this paper we focus on the case where the mass of one of the scalar DMs is close to the half of the Higgs boson mass to satisfy the constraints from the direct detection. In the model B the right-handed neutrinos have the mass radiatively generated through the one loop of internal new fermion and scalar fields. We identify the lightest right-handed neutrino as dark radiation.

We start in section 2 by writing down a set of the Boltzmann equations of the multicomponent DM system. The model A is discussed in section 3 by following Aoki et al. [40]. In section 4 we discuss the model B and relate dark radiation with the lepton flavor violating decay of the charged leptons and the decay of the inert Higgs bosons. Summery and discussion are given in section 5.

2. Multicomponent dark matter systems

In the case of one-component DM the relic density of DM χ is determined by the Boltzmann equation

(1)n˙χ+3Hnχ=−〈σχχ→XX′v〉(nχ2−n¯χ2),

where n_χ is the DM number density, n̄χ is the equilibrium number density and 〈σχχ→XX′v〉 is the thermally averaged cross section for χχ → XX′. Here X and X′ stand for the SM particles. The Hubble parameter H is given by H=1.66×g*1/2T2/MPL, where g_* is the total number of effective degrees of freedom, T and M_PL are the temperature and the Planck mass, respectively. It is convenient to rewrite the equation in terms of dimensionless quantities; the number per comoving volume Y_χ = n_χ/s and the inverse temperature x = m/T. Here s is the entropy density s=(2π2/45)g*T3 and m is the mass of the DM particle. Using the replacement of dx/dt = H|_{T = m}/x, we obtain

(2)dYχdx=−0.264 g*1/2mMPLx2 〈σχχ→XX′v〉(YχYχ−Y¯χY¯χ).

The thermally averaged cross section 〈σχχ→XX′v〉 of O(10⁻⁹) GeV with a DM mass of 100 GeV gives Yχ≃10-12, which is consistent with the observed value of the relic abundance Ωh² ≃ 0.12 [88].

In the multicomponent DM system three types of processes enter in the Boltzmann equations¹:

(3)χiχi↔XX′ (standard annihilation),

(4)χiχi↔χjχj (DM conversion),

(5)χiχj↔χkX (semi-annihilation).

See Figure 1 for a depiction of three types of processes. Here we assume that none of the DM particles have the same quantum number with respect to the DM stabilizing symmetry. The Boltzmann equations for the DM particle χ_i with mass m_i are

(6)dYidx=−0.264 g*1/2μMPLx2{〈σχiχi→XX′v〉(YiYi−Y¯iY¯i) +∑i>j〈σχiχi→χjχjv〉(YiYi−YjYjY¯jY¯jY¯iY¯i) −∑j>i〈σχjχj→χiχiv〉(YjYj−YiYiY¯iY¯iY¯jY¯j) +∑j,k〈σχiχi→χkXijkv〉(YiYj−YkY¯kY¯iY¯j) −∑j,k〈σχjχk→χkXijkv〉(YjYk−YiY¯iY¯jY¯k)}.

Figure 1

Standard annihilation (Left), DM conversion (Middle) and semi-annihilation (Right).

Here x = μ/T and 1/μ=(∑imi-1) is the reduced mass of the system. The contributions of non-standard annihilations have been discussed in e.g., Aoki et al. [87] for two and three component DM system with a Z2×Z2′ symmetry.

3. Model A

In the following, by extending the one-loop model in Ma [11] we study two of the two-loop radiative seesaw models with Z2×Z2′ symmetry. We refer to them as “model A” and “model B.” Owing to the Z2×Z2′ symmetry, there exist at least two extra stable electrically neutral particles. The multicomponent DM system is realized in the model A, while one of the stable particles plays as the dark radiation in the model B.

The matter content of the model A is shown in Table 1. In addition to the matter content of the SM model, we introduce the right-handed neutrino N_k, an SU(2)_L doublet scalar η, and two SM singlet scalars χ and ϕ. Note that the lepton number L′ of N is zero. The Z2×Z2′×L′ -invariant Yukawa sector and Majorana mass term for N can be described by

(7)LY=YijeH†LilRjc+YikνLiϵηNk−12MkNkNk+h.c. ,

where i, j, k (= 1, 2, 3) stand for the flavor indices. The scalar potential V is written as V = V_λ+V_m, where

(8)Vλ=λ1(H†H)2+λ2(η†η)2+λ3(H†H)(η†η)+λ4(H†η)(η†H) +γ1χ4+γ2(H†H)χ2+γ3(η†η)χ2+γ4|ϕ|4+γ5(H†H)|ϕ|2 +γ6(η†η)|ϕ|2+γ7χ2|ϕ|2+κ2[(H†η)χϕ+h.c.] ,

(9)Vm=m12H†H+m22η†η+12m32χ2+m42|ϕ|2+12m52[ϕ2 +(ϕ*)2] .

Table 1

The matter content and the corresponding quantum numbers of the model A.

Field	Statistics	SU(2)_L	U(1)_Y	Z₂	Z2′	L′
L = (ν_L, l_L)	F	2	−1/2	+	+	1
lRc	F	1	1	+	+	−1
N	F	1	0	−	+	0
H = (H⁺, H⁰)	B	2	1/2	+	+	0
η = (η⁺, η⁰)	B	2	1/2	−	+	−1
χ	B	1	0	+	−	0
ϕ	B	1	0	−	−	1

The Z2×Z2′ is the unbroken discrete symmetry while the lepton number L′ is softly broken by the last term in the potential V_m, the ϕ mass tem. In the absence of this term, there will be no neutrino mass. Note that the “λ₅ term,” (λ₅/2)(H^†η)², is also forbidden by L′. A small λ₅ of the original model of Ma [11] is “natural” according to 't Hooft [100], because the absence of λ₅ implies an enhancement of symmetry. In fact, if λ₅ is small at some scale, it remains small for other scales as one can explicitly verify [49, 50]. Here we attempt to derive the smallness of λ₅ dynamically, such that the λ₅ term becomes calculable.

The Higgs doublet field H, the inert doublet field η and the singlet scalar ϕ are respectively parameterized as

(10)H=(H+(vh+h+iG)/2) , η=(η+(ηR0+iηI0)/2) ,ϕ=(ϕR+iϕI)/2 ,

where v_h is the vacuum expectation value. The tree-level masses of the scalars are given by

(11)mh2=2λ1vh2 ,

(12)mη±2=m22+λ3vh2/2 ,

(13)mηR02=mηI02=m22+(λ3+λ4)vh2/2 ,

(14)mϕR2=m42+m52+γ5vh2,

(15)mϕR2=m42-m52+γ5vh2,

(16)mχ2=m32+γ2vh2 .

Although the tree-level mass of ηR0 is the same as that of ηI0 as shown in Equation (13), the degeneracy is lifted at the one-loop level via the effective λ₅ term:

(17)λ5eff~−κ2128π2m52mϕR2−mχ2[1−mχ2mϕR2−mχ2lnmϕR2mχ2] for m5≪mϕR .

This correction is embedded into the two-loop diagram to generate the neutrino mass (see Figure 2). The 3 × 3 neutrino mass matrix M_ν can be given by

(18)(Mν)ij=(116π2)2κ2vh216 ∑kYikνYjkνMk ∫0∞dx x(x+mη02)2(x+Mk2) ∫01dzln[zmχ2+(1−z)mϕI2+z(1−z)xzmχ2+(1−z)mϕR2+z(1−z)x],

where we have assumed that mη0=mηR0≃mηI0.

Figure 2

Two-loop radiative neutrino mass of the model A.

Using λ5eff given in Equation (17), the neutrino mass matrix can be approximated as

(19)(Mν)ij~λ5effvh232π2∑kYikνYjkνMkmη02−Mk2[1−Mk2mη02−Mk2lnmη02Mk2].

We see from Equations (17) and (19) that the neutrino mass matrix M_ν is proportional to |Yνκ|2m52. When m_χ, m_{ϕ_R}, mη0, Mk~O(102) GeV, for instance, implies that |Yνκ|m5~O(10-1) GeV to obtain the neutrino mass scale of O(0.1) eV. With the same set of the parameter values we find that λ5eff~10-6, where the smallness λ5eff is a consequence of the radiative generation of this coupling. As we will see, the product |Y^νκ| enters into the semi-annihilation of DM particles which produces monochromatic neutrinos, while the upper bound of |Y^ν| follows from the μ → eγ constraint.

3.1. Multicomponent dark matter system

In the model A there are three type of dark matter candidates ; N₁ (the lightest among N_k's) or ηR0 (or ηI0) with (Z2,Z2′)=(-,+), χ with (Z2,Z2′)=(+,-) and ϕ_R (or ϕ_I) with (Z2,Z2′)=(-,-). For (Z2,Z2′)=(-,+) there are two candidates. In the following discussions we assume that N₁ is a DM candidate [40]. The other possibility, ηR0-DM, is discussed in Aoki et al. [39].

We discuss the three DM system of N₁, ϕ_R, χ. There are three types of DM annihilation process:

(20)Standard annihilation: N1N1→XX′, ϕRϕR→XX′, χχ→XX′,

(21)DM conversion: ϕRϕR→χχ,

(22)Semi-annihilation: N1ϕR→χν, χN1→ϕRν, ϕRχ→N1ν.

Here we have assumed m_{ϕ_R} >m_χ and m_{ϕ_R} + m_χ < M_{2, 3}. Moreover, since the mass difference between ϕ_R and ϕ_I is controlled by the lepton-number breaking mass m₅, which is assumed to be much smaller than m_{ϕ_R}. Then m_{ϕ_R} and m_{ϕ_I} are practically degenerate and the contribution of ϕ_I to the annihilation processes during the decoupling of DMs is nonnegligible. The diagrams for annihilation processes which enter the Boltzmann equation are shown in Figures 3–5. Since the reaction rate of the conversion between ϕ_R and ϕ_I can reach chemical equilibrium during the decoupling of DMs, we can sum up the number densities of ϕ_R and ϕ_I and compute the relic abundance of ΩϕRh2 [40].

Figure 3

The diagrams for the standard annihilation processes.

Figure 4

The diagrams for the DM conversion processes.

Figure 5

The diagrams for semi-annihilation process.

In the multicomponent DM scenario, the effective cross section off the nucleon is given by

(23)σieff=σi(Ωih2Ωtotalh2) .

In our model, only χ and ϕ_R scatter with the nucleus, and the right-handed neutrino N₁ does not interact with nucleus at tree level. So we can neglect the N₁ contribution at the lowest order in perturbation theory. The effective cross sections of ϕ_R and χ are expressed as

(24)σχeff=σχ(Ωχh2Ωtotalh2), σϕReff=σϕR(ΩϕRh2Ωtotalh2),

where σ_χ and σ_{ϕ_R} are the spin independent cross sections and given by

(25)σχ=1π(γ2f^mNmχmh2)2(mNmχmN+mχ)2 ,

(26)σϕR=1π((γ5/2)f^mNmϕRmh2)2(mNmϕRmN+mϕR)2 .

Here f^~0.3 is the usual nucleonic matrix element [101] and m_N is nucleon mass.

The upper bounds on the cross section off the nucleon is obtained by LUX [102] and XENON1T [103]. In the cases of one-component DM system of a real or complex scalar boson, those experimental results give the strong constraint on the masses of those DM particles; the allowed DM mass region is ≃ m_h/2 and ≳1 TeV [104–106]. In the model A with the multicomponent DM system, the constrains on the cross sections off the nucleon for χ and ϕ_R are also relatively severe. As a benchmark we take the mass of χ as m_χ = m_h/2 while vary the mass of ϕ_R in the following analysis².

In the original one-loop neutrino mass model in Ma [11], the relic density of N₁ tends to be larger than the observational value [48]. The additional contributions coming from the semi-annihilation can enhance the annihilation rate for N₁ so that the N₁ DM contribution to the total relic abundance can be suppressed. This situation is realized for M₁ > m_{ϕ_R}, m_χ as can be seen later.

As the benchmark set we take the following values for the parameters.

(27)mχ=62 GeV, M1=300 GeV,

(28)mηR0=mηI0=mη+=mχ+mϕR−10 GeV,

(29)mϕI=mϕR+5 GeV,

(30)γ2=0.004, γ5=0.05, γ7=0.17,

(31)κ=0.4, Yijν=0.01.

The masses of heavier right-handed neutrinos are M₂ = M₃ = 1 TeV. The mass differences between mηR0 and the sum of m_χ and m_{ϕ_R} are so chosen that no resonance appears in the s-channel of the semi-annihilation in Figure 5 (right). The benchmark set satisfies the constraints from the perturbativeness, the stability conditions of the scalar potential [39, 40], the lepton flavor violation (LFV) such as μ → eγ [107] and the electroweak precision measurements [108, 109]. It is noted that κ is bounded as |κ| ≲ 0.4 by the perturbativeness and the stability conditions [39, 40].

Figure 6 shows the relic abundances of Ωχh2, ΩϕRh2, and ΩN1h2 and the total relic abundance Ωtotalh2(=Ωχh2+ΩϕRh2+ΩN1h2) as a function of m_{ϕ_R} for the benchmark set. The horizontal dashed line stands for the observed value Ωobsh2~0.12. It is shown that the relic abundance of the χ is Ω_χ ≃ Ω_obs/2. When ϕ_R is lighter than N₁, the semi-annihilation tends to decrease the relic abundance of N₁. For the benchmark set, the total relic abundance is consistent with the observed value around m_{ϕ_R} ≃ 280 GeV.

Figure 6

Relic abundances Ωχh2, ΩϕRh2, and ΩN1h2 and the total relic abundance Ωtotalh2 as a function of m_{ϕ_R}. The relevant masses and couplings are taken as in Equations (27–31). The horizontal dashed line stands for the observed value Ωobsh2~0.12.

The left panel in Figure 7 shows the contour plot for the m_{ϕ_R} − γ₅ plane where the total relic density of DM can be made consistent with the observed value Ωobsh2~0.12. We take two values, 10 GeV (black line) and 1 GeV (red line), for the mass difference between mηR0 and m_χ+m_{ϕ_R} in Equation (28). The other parameters are taken as the same in Equations (27–31). We can see the scalar coupling γ₅ increases drastically as m_{ϕ_R} increases for m_{ϕ_R} ≳ 290 GeV. It is because the relic density of the N₁ DM, ΩN1h2, becomes significant for m_{ϕ_R} ≳ 290 GeV, so that ΩϕRh2 should be drastically suppressed. The scalar couplings of DM particles with the SM Higgs boson, γ₂ and γ₅, and the DM masses are constrained by the DM direct detection experiments. For the χ DM, the effective cross section off nucleon σχeff in Equation (24) is σχeff~10-47 cm² for the benchmark set. It is an order of magnitude smaller than the current experimental bound. For the ϕ_R DM, the right panel in Figure 7 shows the relation between m_{ϕ_R} and the effective cross section σϕReff for (mχ+mϕR)-mηR0=10 GeV (black line) and 1 GeV (red line), where the DM relic abundance is consistent with the observation. The plot corresponds to the parameter space in the left panel in Figure 7. The dot and dashed lines indicate the upper bounds of LUX and XENON1T, respectively. The hatched region is excluded by perturbativity. Although the scalar coupling γ₅ becomes large for m_{ϕ_R} ≳ 290 GeV and then the cross sections off the nucleon σ_{ϕ_R} becomes large, the effective cross section σϕReff decreases for m_{ϕ_R} ≳ M₁(= 300 GeV), since the abundance of ϕ_R decreases. For the case of (mχ+mϕR)-mηR0= 10 GeV, it can be seen that the mass region 288 GeV ≲ m_{ϕ_R} is excluded by LUX and XENON1T data. On the other hand, there are no constraints from the direct DM search experiments on the mass of ϕ_R for the case of (mχ+mϕR)-mηR0= 1 GeV. This is because the relic abundance of ϕ_R becomes much smaller by the large contribution from the s-channel process of the semi-annihilation. Figure 8 shows the same as in Figure 7 but for M₁ = 500 GeV and γ₇ = 0.28. >From the right panel in Figure 8, we see that 485 (490) GeV ≲ m_{ϕ_R} ≲ 510 (502) GeV is excluded by the direct detection experiments for (mχ+mϕR)-mηR0= 10 (1) GeV.

Figure 7

(Left) Contour plot for the total relic density Ωtotalh2~0.12. (Right) The relation between the m_ϕ and the effective cross sections given in Equation (24). The black dot and dashed lines show the upper limit of the spin independent cross section off the nucleon given by LUX [102] and XENON1T [103], respectively. The hatched region is excluded by perturbativity. In both panels, we take two values, 10 GeV (black line) and 1 GeV (red line), for the mass difference between mηR0 and m_χ+m_{ϕ_R}.

Figure 8

The same as Figure 7 but for M₁ = 500 GeV and γ₇ = 0.28.

Before we go to discuss indirect detection, we summarize the parameter space, in which a correct value of the total relic DM abundance Ωtotalh2 can be obtained without contradicting the constraint from the direct detection experiments. As in the case of the single SM singlet DM, the constraint is in fact very severe: The mass of χ has to be very close to m_h/2, and γ₂ (the Higgs portal coupling) also has to be close to 0.004 for an adequate amount of Ω_χ. However, as for m_{ϕ_R} and γ₅, there exist a certain allowed region. The allowed region in the m_{ϕ_R} − γ₅ plane is controlled by the semi-annihilation [especially, the last diagram in Figure 5, which is sensitive to the mass relation (28)] and the DM conversion (especially the right diagram in Figure 4, which is sensitive to γ₇). If we increase the mass of the right-handed neutrino DM, the mass of ϕ_R increases, but how the allowed range in the m_{ϕ_R}-γ₅ plane emerges remains the same. If we take the larger γ₇, e.g., γ₇ = 0.28, in Figure 7, the allowed region for m_{ϕ_R} becomes narrower as 295 GeV ≲ m_{ϕ_R} ≲ 300 GeV. The smaller m_{ϕ_R} (≲ 295 GeV) is excluded by Ω_total < Ω_obs due to the larger DM conversion i.e., the larger annihilation process of ϕ_Rϕ_R → χχ → XX.

3.2. Indirect detection

For indirect detections of DM the SM particles produced by the annihilation of DM are searched. Because the semi-annihilation produces a SM particle, this process can serve for an indirect detection. In our model, especially, the SM particle from the semi-annihilation process as shown in Figure 5 is neutrino which has a monochromatic energy spectrum. Therefore, we consider below the neutrino flux from the Sun [110–120] as a possibility to detect the semi-annihilation process of DMs.

The DM particles are captured in the Sun losing their kinematic energy through scattering with the nucleus. Then captured DM particles annihilate each other. The time dependence of the number of DM n_i in the Sun is given by Griest and Seckel [114], Ritz and Seckel [115], Bertone et al. [116], Silk et al. [117], Kamionkowski [118], Kamionkowski et al. [119], and Jungman et al. [120]

(32)n˙i=Ci−CA(ii→SM)ni2 −∑mi>mjCA(ii→jj)ni2−CA(ij→kν)ninj ,

where i, j, k = χ, ϕ_R, N₁ and C_i is the capture rates in the Sun:

(33)Cχ≃2.5×1018s−1f(mχ)(f^0.3)2(γ20.004)2(60 GeVmχ)2 (125 GeVmh)4(Ωχh2Ωtotalh2),

(34)CϕR≃6.2×1017s−1f(mϕR)(f^0.3)2(γ50.02)2 (300 GeVmϕR)2(125 GeVmh)4(ΩϕRh2Ωtotalh2),

(35)CN1=0 ,

and C_A's are the annihilation rate:

(36)CA(ij→•)=〈σ(ij→•)v〉Vij ,Vij=5.7×1027(100 GeVμij)3/2cm3 .

Here f(m_i) depends on the form factor of the nucleus, elemental abundance, kinematic suppression of the capture rate, etc., varying O(0.01-1) depending on the DM mass [118–120]. V_ij is an effective volume of the Sun with μ_ij = 2m_im_j/(m_i+m_j) in the non-relativistic limit. In the Equation (32) we have neglected the DM production processes such as jj → ii and jk → iX because the kinetic energy of the produced particle i is much larger than that corresponding to the escape velocity from the Sun, i.e., ~ 10³ km/s [114, 121, 122]. Consequently, the number of the right-hand neutrino DM cannot increase in the Sun, and hence the semi-annihilation process, ϕ_Rχ → N₁ν, is the only neutrino production process³, where its reaction rate as a function of t is given by Γ(ϕ_Rχ → Nν; t) = C_A(ϕ_Rχ → N₁ν)n_{ϕ_R}(t)n_χ(t).

Figure 9 shows the m_{ϕ_R} dependence of the neutrino production rate today Γ(ϕ_Rχ → Nν; t₀), where t0=1.45×1017s is the age of the Sun, for the same parameter space as in Figure 7 (Figure 9, left) and in Figure 8 (Figure 9, right). The hatched region is excluded by perturbativity. Arrows indicate the excluded regions by the direct detection experiments. For m_{ϕ_R} ≳ M₁ where the relic abundance of N₁ dominates that of ϕ_R, the neutrino production rate decreases since the capture rate of the ϕ_R becomes small. As we can see from Figure 5 a resonance effect for the s-channel annihilation process can be achieved if mηR0≃mϕR+mχ. Then the smaller neutrino mass difference mηR0-(mϕR+mχ) gives the larger neutrino production rate. For the case of mηR0-(mϕR+mχ)= 1 GeV, the rate Γ(ϕ_Rχ → Nν; t₀) reaches about 10¹⁸ s⁻¹ at m_{ϕ_R} ≃ 290 GeV for M₁ = 300 GeV and 4 × 10¹⁷ s⁻¹ at m_{ϕ_R} ≃ 490 GeV for M₁ = 500 GeV, respectively.

Figure 9

The neutrino production rate Γ(ν) = Γ(ϕ_Rχ → Nν; t₀) in the Sun against the ϕ_R DM mass for M₁ = 300 GeV (Left) and 500 GeV (Right). The parameter space, as well as the meaning of colors of the lines in the left and right panel, are the same as in Figures 7, 8, respectively. The hatched region is excluded by perturbativity. Arrows indicate the excluded regions by the direct detection experiments.

The upper limits on the DM DM → XX′ from the Sun are given by IceCube experiment [123]. For instance, the upper limit on the annihilation rate of the DM of 250 (500) GeV into W⁺W⁻ is 1.13 × 10²¹ (2.04 × 10²⁰) s⁻¹ and that into τ⁺τ⁻ is 5.99 × 10²⁰ (7.96 × 10¹⁹) s⁻¹, which is at least 10² times larger than the rate Γ(ν) shown in Figure 9. Note however that the energy spectrum of the neutrino flux produced by the W or τ decay is different from the monochromatic neutrino. With an increasing resolution of energy and angle the chance for the observation of the semi-annihilation and hence of a multicomponent nature of DM can increase.

4. Model B

Neutrinos have always played consequential roles in cosmology (see [124], and also [125] and references therein). While they play a role as hot dark matter, the mechanism of their mass generation is directly connected to cosmological problems such as baryon asymmetry of the Universe [126] and dark matter [10–36, 39–48]. Resent cosmological observations with increasing accuracy [88, 127–129] provide useful hints on how to extend the neutrino sector. Here we propose an extension of the neutrino sector such that the tensions among resent different cosmological observations can be alleviated. The tensions have emerged since the first Planck result [88] in the Hubble constant H₀ and in the density variance σ₈ in spheres of radius 8h⁻¹ Mpc: The Planck values of 1/H₀ and σ₈ are slightly larger than those obtained from the observations of the local Universe such as Cepheid variables [128] and the Canada-France- Hawaii Telescope Lensing Survey [130], respectively. The Planck galaxy cluster counts [131] and also the Sloan Digital Sky Survey data [127] yield a smaller σ₈.

It has been recently suggested [131–139] that these tensions can be alleviated if the number N_eff of the relativistic species in the young Universe is slightly larger than the standard value 3.046 and the mass of the extra relativistic specie is of O(0.1) eV [139]. Here we suggest a radiative generation mechanism of the neutrino mass, which is directly connected to the existence of a stable DM particle and also a non-zero ΔN_eff = N_eff − 3.046.

The matter content of the model is shown in Table 2. It is a slight modification of the model A: χ in this model is a Majorana fermion. The Z2×Z2′×L′ -invariant Yukawa sector (the quark sector is suppressed) is described by the Lagrangian

(37)LY=YijeH†LilRjc+YijνLiϵηNj+YijχNiχjϕ−12Mχkχkχk+h.c.,

where i, j, k = 1, 2, 3, and we have assumed without loss of generality that the χ mass term is diagonal. We also assume that Yije have only diagonal elements. The most general renormalizable form of the Z2×Z2′×L′-invariant scalar potential is given by

(38)Vλ=λ1(H†H)2+λ2(η†η)2+λ3(H†H)(η†η)+λ4(H†η)(η†H) +λ52[(H†η)2+h.c.] +γ2(H†H)|ϕ|2+γ3(η†η)|ϕ|2+γ4|ϕ|4,

and the mass terms are

(39)Vm=m12H†H+m22η†η+m32|ϕ|2−m422[ϕ2+(ϕ*)2] ,

where the m₄ term in Equation (39) breaks L′ softly. The scalar fields H, η and ϕ are defined in Equation (10). Since we assume that the discrete symmetry Z2×Z2′ is unbroken, the scalar fields above do not mix with other, so that their tree-level masses can be simply expressed:

(40)mη±2=m22+λ3vh2/2 ,

(41)mηR02=m22+(λ3+λ4+λ5)vh2/2 ,

(42)mηI02=m22+(λ3+λ4−λ5)vh2/2 ,

(43)mϕR2=m32−m42+γ2vh2/2 ,

(44)mϕI2=m32+m42+γ2vh2/2 .

The two-loop diagram for the neutrino mass is shown in Figure 10. Because of the soft breaking of the dimension two operator ϕ², the propagator between ϕ and ϕ can exist, generating the mass of N:

(45)(MN)ij=132π2∑k(Yikχ)*(Yikχ)*Mχk[mϕϕR2mϕϕR2−Mχk2ln(mϕϕRMχk)2 −mϕI2mϕI2−Mχk2ln(mϕIMχk)2] .

The 3 × 3 two-loop neutrino mass matrix M_ν is given by

(46)(Mν)ij=1(32π2)2∑l,kYilνYjmν(Ylkχ)*(Ymkχ)*Mχk(mηI02−mηR02) ∫0∞dx 1(x+mηR02)2(x+mηI02) ∫01dzln[zMχk2+(1−z)mϕI2+z(1−z)xzMχk2+(1−z)mϕR2+z(1−z)x].

Table 2

The matter content of the model B and the corresponding quantum numbers.

Field	Statistics	SU(2)_L	U(1)_Y	Z₂	Z2′	L^′
L = (ν_L, l_L)	F	2	−1/2	+	+	1
lRc	F	1	1	+	+	−1
N	F	1	0	−	+	−1
H = (H⁺, H⁰)	B	2	1/2	+	+	0
η = (η⁺, η⁰)	B	2	1/2	−	+	0
χ	F	1	0	+	−	0
ϕ	B	1	0	−	−	1

Figure 10

Two-loop radiative neutrino mass of the model B. The upper cross means the soft breaking mass term m42, which should indicate that there are ϕ_R and ϕ_I loops in the inner one-loop diagram. The lower cross indicates the chirality flip of χ. The result (Equation 46) is obtained by using the exact propagators of ϕs and χs.

We can also use (45) to obtain an approximate formula for the neutrino mass

(47)(Mν)ij~132π2∑kY′ikνY′jkνMklnmηR02mηI02 , Y′jkν=YjlνUlkN,

where U^N is the unitary matrix diagonalizing the mass matrix (_{M_N)ij} with the eigenvalues M_k and the mass eigenstates Nk′, and we have used the fact that Mk≪mηR0≃mηI0. In the following discussions we choose the theory parameters so as to be consistent with the global fit [1]:

(48)Δm212=7.50−0.17+0.19×10−5 eV2, Δm312=2.524−0.040+0.039 (−2.514−0.041+0.038)×10−3 eV2,sin2θ12=0.306±0.012, sin2θ23=0.441−0.021+0.027 (0.587−0.024+0.020),sin2θ13=0.02166±0.00075 (0.02179±0.00076),

where the values in the parenthesis are those for the inverted mass hierarchy.

4.1. Dark radiation

According to the discussion at the beginning of this section, we identify the lightest right-handed neutrino with dark radiation contributing to ΔN_eff ⁴. Without los of generality we may assume it is N1′ with mass ≲ 0.24 eV. The upper bound on the mass is obtained together with 3.10 < N_eff < 3.42 in Feng et al. [139]. To simplify the situation, we require that the heavier right-handed neutrinos N2′ and N3′ decay above the decoupling temperature TNdec of N1′. Their decay widths are given by

(49)〈 Γ(N′2(3)→N′1νν¯)+Γ(N′2(3)→N′¯1νν¯) 〉=13072π3M2(3)5mη04 ∑i,j|Y′i2(3)ν|2|Y′j1ν|2 ,

where we have used mη0=mηR0≃mηI0 and neglected the mass of N1′ and ν_Ls. Therefore, N2′ and N3′ can decay above TNdec if

(50)〈 Γ(N′2(3)→N′1νν¯)+Γ(N′2(3)→N′¯1νν¯) ≳H(TNdec)

is satisfied, where H(T) is the Hubble constant at temperature T, and g_*s(T) is the relativistic degrees of freedom at T. To obtain the effective number of the light relativistic species N_eff [125, 140], we have to compute the energy density of N1′ at the time of the photon decoupling, where we denote the decoupling temperature of γ, ν_L and N1′ by Tγ0,Tνdec and TNdec, respectively. Further, T_ν0 (T_N0) stands for the temperature of νL (N1′) at the decoupling of γ. The most important fact is that the entropy per comoving volume is conserved, so that sa³ is constant, where s is the entropy density, and a is the scale factor. The effective number N_eff follows from ρr(Tγ0)=(π2/15)(1+(7/8)(4/11)4/3Neff)Tγ04 and is given by Kolb and Turner [125], Steigman [140], Anchordoqui and Goldberg [141], Steigman et al. [142], Anderhalden et al. [143, 145], Anchordoqui et al. [144], and Weinberg [146]

(51)Neff=3.046+(g*s(Tνdec)g*s(TNdec))4/3

for N_ν = 3, where ρ_r is the energy density of relativistic species. Since g*s(Tνdec)=(11/2)+(7/4)Nν=10.75, we need to compute the decoupling temperature TNdec to obtain g*s(TNdec) and hence N_eff. For 0.05 ≲ ΔN_eff ≲ 0.38 [139] we find 101≳g*s(TNdec)≳22 and also TNdec≃165 MeV to obtain g*s(TNdec)≃30 (which gives ΔN_eff = 0.25). To estimate TNdec, we compute the annihilation rate Γ_N(T) of N1′ at T, which is given by

(52)ΓN(T)=nN(T) [〈σN′1N′1→νLνLv〉(T)+〈σN′1N¯′1→νLν¯Lv〉(T)] =π59ζ(3)(7120)2∑i,j|Y′i1ν|2|Y′j1ν|2T5(mη0)4 ,

where ζ(3) ≃ 1.202… and n_N(T) is the number density of N1′. Then we calculate TNdec from ΓN(TNdec)=H(TNdec), which can be rewritten as ⁵

(53)(TNdec164.2 MeV)3(29.9g*s(TNdec))12=(mη0200 GeV0.0409Yν)4

with (Yν)2=∑i|Y′i1ν|2.

It turns out that M_{2, 3} ~ O(10) GeV to obtain ΔN_eff ~ 0.25 while satisfying M₁ ≲ 0.24 eV. To see this, we first find that

(54)(mη02∑i|Yi1′v|2)~2.4×107 GeV2 ,

which follows from Equation (53) for ΔN_eff ~ 0.25. Further we can estimate a part of Equation (49) from the neutrino mass Equation (47) with M_ν ~ 0.05 eV:

(55)M2(3)mη02 ∑i|Y′i2(3)ν|2~2.7×10−15|λ5|−1 GeV−1 ,

where we have used mηR02-mηI02≃λ5vh2. Then using Equation (50) with T ≃ 165 MeV (which corresponds to ΔN_eff ≃ 0.25), we obtain

(56)M2,3≲17|λ5|1/4 GeV .

Note that this is an order of magnitude estimate, and indeed M₂₍₃₎ can not be smaller than 10 GeV to satisfy ΔN_eff ≲ 0.38.

Since we require that M₁ ≲ 0.24 eV, there exists a huge hierarchy in the right-handed neutrino mass. This has a consequence on the Yukawa coupling matrix Y′^ν: To obtain realistic neutrino masses with the mixing parameters given in Equation (48),

(57)|Y′i1ν| ≫ |Y′i2(3)ν|

has to be satisfied. Note that only |Y′i1ν| enters into the thermally averaged annihilation cross section of N1′, as we can see from Equation (52). Because of ΔN_eff ≲ 0.38, on the other hand, |Y′i1ν| can not be made arbitrarily large. The hierarchy (Equation 57) has effects on the LFV radiative decays of the type l_i→l_jγ, so that the LFV decays and ΔN_eff are related, as we will see below. In the limit m_j≪m_i, where m_i and m_j stand for the mass of l_i and l_j, respectively, the ratio of the partial decay width B^(li→ljγ)=Γ(li→ljγ)/Γ(li→νieν̄e) can be written as Ma and Raidal [51]

(58)B^(li→ljγ)=(α768πGF2)|∑k(Y′ikν)*Y′jkν|2mη±4.

Here mη± and Yik′v are defined in Equations (40) and (47), respectively, and the current upper bounds on the branching fraction of these processes [107, 148] require

(59)μ→eγ:|∑k(Y′2kν)*Y′1kν|≲2.5×10−4(mη±220GeV)2,

(60)τ→μγ:|∑k(Y′3kν)*Y′2kν|≲8.1×10−2(mη±220GeV)2,

(61)τ→eγ:|∑k(Y′3kν)*Y′1kν|≲7.0×10−2(mη±220GeV)2.

From Equation (59) we find that Y31′v is not constrained by the stringent constraint from μ → eγ, which will be crucial in obtaining a realistic N_eff without having any contradiction with Equations (59–61). Furthermore, if Y31′v is large compared with others and the hierarchy (Equation 57) is satisfied, the ratio R=B^(τ→μγ)B^(τ→eγ)/B^(μ→eγ) is ~ |Y′31ν|2, and from the same reason ΔN_eff depends mostly on Y31′v. A benchmark set of the input parameters is given by

(62)Yij′v=(−0.03822.510×10−53.349×10−50.00129−1.183×10−61.081×10−40.0154−7.723×10−59.334×10−5),

(63)M1=0.147 eV, M2=M3=9.55 GeV,

(64)mη±=220 GeV, mηR0=200 GeV, mηI0=207 GeV,

which yields

(65)sin2θ12=0.305, sin2θ23=0.441, sin2θ13=0.0213,

(66)Δm212=7.50×10−5 GeV2, Δm312=0.00248 GeV2,

(67)B^(μ→eγ)=2.30×10−14, B^(τ→μγ)=3.75×10−15, B^(τ→eγ)=3.31×10−12,

where we have assumed that Y31′v are all real so that there is no CP phase. These values are consistent with Equations (48), (59–61). With the same input parameters we find: The lhs of (50) = 5.46 × 10⁻²¹ (1.78 × 10⁻²⁰) GeV for N₂ (N₃), where the rhs is H = 2.10 × 10⁻²⁰ GeV with TNdec=166.8 MeV and g*s(TNdec)=30.83, and ΔN_eff = 0.245.

In Figure 11 we plot R^1/2 against ΔN_eff with mη±=240 GeV and mηR0=220 GeV, where we have varied mηI0 between 221 and 227 GeV. In the black region of Figure 11 the differences of the neutrino mass squared and the neutrino mixing angles are consistent with Equation (48) for the normal hierarchy, and the constraints M₁ < 0.24 eV, (Equations 50 and 59–61) are satisfied. If ΔN_eff and R^1/2 would depend on Y31′v only, we would obtain a line in the ΔNeff-R1/2 plane. The Y11′v and Y21′v dependence in R^1/2 cancels, but this is not the case for ΔN_eff. This is the reason why we have an area instead of a line in Figure 11. We see from Figure 11 that the predicted region for ΔN_eff ≲ 0.1 is absent. The main reason is that we have assumed that M₂, M₃ ≲ 16 GeV. This has also a consequence on the difference between mηR02 and mηI02, because the mass difference changes the overall scale of the neutrino mass (47). To obtain a larger M_{2, 3}, we can decrease the mass difference, thereby implying an increase of the degree of fine-tuning. Further, the difference between mηR02 and mηI02 can not be made arbitrarily large, because it requires a smaller M_{2, 3}, which due to H(T)∝T² in turn implies that the decoupling temperature TNdec has to decrease to satisfy the constraint [Equation (50)]. A smaller TNdec, on the other hand, means a larger ΔN_eff which is constrained to be below 0.38. This is why mηI0 is varied only in a small interval in Figure 11.

Figure 11

R^1/2 against ΔN_eff with mη±=240 GeV and mηR0=220 GeV, where mηI0 is varied between 221 and 227 GeV, and R=B^(τ→μγ) B^(τ→eγ)/B^(μ→eγ).

Since the current upper bound on B(μ→eγ)≃B^(μ→eγ) is 4.2 × 10⁻¹³ [107], the model B predicts

(68)[B(τ→μγ)B(τ→eγ)]1/2≃[B^(τ→μγ)0.17 B^(τ→eγ)0.18]1/2 ≲1.2×10−10 ,

which is about two orders of magnitude smaller than the current experimental bounds [148].

Another consequence of the hierarchy (Equation 57) is that the total decay width of η_R depends on ∑i,j|Yij′|2, which is approximately ∑i|Yi1′|2 (we assume that η_R is the lightest among ηs). Therefore, ΔN_eff is basically a function of the decay width. In Figure 12 we show ΔN_eff against ΓηR/mηR0, the decay width of ηR0 over mηR0 , where we have used the same parameters as for Figure 11. ηR0 decays almost 100 percent into neutrinos and dark radiation N1′, which is invisible. In contrast to this, η⁺ can decay into a charged lepton and N1′, and the decay width over mη± is the same as ΓηR/mηR0. Γ_{η_R} should be compared with the decay width for η+→W+* ηR,I0→ff′̄N1′ν, which is ~ 10-8mη± for the same parameter space as for Figure 12, where f and f′ stand for the SM fermions (except the top quark). Therefore, η⁺ decays almost 100 percent into a charged lepton and missing energy. In Aristizabal Sierra [62], a similar hierarchical spectrum of the right-handed neutrinos in the model of Ma [11] has been assumed (the lightest one has been regarded as a warm dark matter) and collider physics has been discussed. How the inert Higgs bosons can be produced via s-channel exchange of a virtual photon and Z boson [149, 150] is the same, but the decay of the inert Higgs bosons is different because of the hierarchy Equation (57) of the Yukawa coupling constants. As it is mentioned above, the η^± decays in the present model almost only into the lightest one N1′ and a charged lepton. Therefore, the cascade decay of the heavier right-handed neutrinos into charged leptons will not be seen at collider experiments, because they can be produced only as a decay product of η^±. The decay width of η^± into an individual charged lepton depends of course on the value of Yi1′v. In the parameter space we have scanned we cannot make any definite conclusion on the difference.

Figure 12

ΔN_eff against ΓηR/mηR0, where we have used the same parameters as for Figure 11.

4.2. Cold dark matter and its direct and indirect detection

Since the lightest N is dark radiation and the masses of the heavier ones are O(10) GeV (as we have seen in the previous subsection), ηR,I0 can not be DM candidates, because they decay into N and ν. So, DM candidates are χ and the lightest component of ϕ⁶. In the case that ηs are lighter than ϕ_R and the lightest component of ϕ (which is assumed to be ϕ_R) is DM, a correct relic abundance ΩϕRh2=0.1204±0.0027 [88] can be easily obtained, because γ₃ for the scalar coupling (η^†η)|ϕ|² is an unconstrained parameter so far. So, in the following discussion we assume that ϕ_R is DM.

Because of the Higgs portal coupling γ₂, the direct detection of ϕ_R is possible. The current experimental bound of XENON1T [103] of the spin-independent cross section σ_SI off the nucleon requires |γ₂| ≲ 0.05 ~ 0.14 form_{ϕ_R} = 250 ~ 500 GeV. Since γ₂ is allowed only below an upper bound (which depends on the DM mass m_{ϕ_R}), γ₃ can vary in a certain interval for a given DM mass.

With this remark, we note that the capture rate of DM in the Sun is proportional to σ_SI, while its annihilation rate in the Sun is proportional to the thermally averaged annihilation cross section, 〈vσ(ϕRϕR→η+η-,ηR0ηR0,ηI0ηI0)〉 [110–120]. If a pair of ϕ_Rs annihilates into ηR0ηR0 and also ηI0ηI0, a pair of ν_L and ν̄L will be produced, which may be observed on the Earth [121, 122]. The signals will look very similar to those coming from W^±, which result from DM annihilation. The annihilation rate as a function of time t is given by Jungman et al. [120]

(69)Γ(ϕRϕR→ηR0ηR0,ηI0ηI0;t)=Γ(ϕRϕR→η0η0;t)=12CϕRCA(η0η0)CA(η+η−)+CA(η0η0)+CA(XX′)tanh2[t(CA(η+η−)+CA(η0η0)+CA(XX′))CϕR],

where C_{ϕ_R} is the capture rate in the Sun,

(70)CϕR≃1.4×1020f(mϕR)(f^0.3)2(γ20.1)2(200 GeVmϕR)2 (125 GeVmh)4 ,

and C_A is given by

(71)CA(•)=(〈σϕRϕR→•v〉5.7×1027cm3)(mϕR100 GeV)3/2 s−1 with •=η+η−, η0η0, and XX′ .

We have used f(250 GeV) ≃ 0.5 and f(500 GeV) ≃ 0.2 [120], and we have assumed that all the ηs have the same mass and therefore CA(η0η0)=CA(η+η-). In Figure 13 we plot the annihilation rate Γ(ϕRϕR→η0η0;t0) today (t0=1.45×1017 s) against σ_SI for m_{ϕ_R} = 250 and 500 GeV with m_η fixed at 230 GeV and 0.117<ΩϕRh2<0.123. The vertical dashed lines are the XENON1T upper bound on σ_SI [103]. The peak of Γ(ϕRϕR→η0η0;t0) for m_{ϕ_R} = 250 (500) GeV appears at σSI=4.2 (4.7)×10-46 cm² and is ≃ 1.7 (0.7) × 10¹⁸ s⁻¹, which is two to three orders of magnitude smaller than the upper bound on the DM annihilation rate into W^± in the Sun [123].

Figure 13

The pair-annihilation rate of ϕ_R into ηR0ηR0 and ηI0ηI0 in the Sun, Γ(η0η0)=Γ(ϕRϕR→η0η0;t0), against σ_SI for m_{ϕ_R} = 250 (black) and 500 (red) GeV, where m_η is fixed at 230 GeV (all ηs have the same mass) and 0.117<ΩϕRh2<0.123. The black (red) vertical dashed line is the XENON1T [103] upper bound on σ_SI for m_{ϕ_R} = 250 (black) and 500 (red) GeV.

5. Conclusion

We have discussed the extensions of the Ma model by imposing a larger unbroken symmetry Z2×Z2′. Thanks to the symmetry, at least two stable particles exit. We have studied two models, model A and model B, where the stable particles form a multicomponent DM system in the model A, while they are a DM and dark radiation in the model B.

The model A is an extension of the model of Ma such that the lepton-number violating “λ₅ coupling,” which is O(10-6) to obtain small neutrino masses for Y^ν ~ 0.01, is radiatively generated. Consequently, the neutrino masses are generated at the two-loop level, where the unbroken Z2×Z2′ symmetry acts to forbid the generation of the one-loop mass. Such larger unbroken symmetry implies that the model involves a multi-component DM system. We have considered the case of the three-component DM system: two of them are SM singlet real scalars and the other one is a right-handed neutrino. The DM conversion and semi-annihilation in addition to the standard annihilation are relevant to the DM annihilation processes. We have found that the non-standard processes have a considerable influence on the DM relic abundance. We also have discussed the monochromatic neutrinos from the Sun as the indirect signal of the semi-annihilation of the DM particles. In the cases of one-component DM system of a real scalar boson or of a Majorana fermion the monochromatic neutrino production by the DM annihilation is strongly suppressed due to the chirality of the left-handed neutrino. However, such suppression is absent when DM is a complex scalar boson or a Dirac fermion. Also in a multicomponent DM system, the neutrino production is unsuppressed if it is an allowed process. We have found that the rate for the monochromatic neutrino production in the model A is very small compared with the current IceCUBE [123] sensitivity. However, the resonant effect in the s-channel process of the semi-annihilation can be expected to enhance the rate.

In the model B, the mass of the right-handed neutrinos are produced at the one-loop level. Then the radiative seesaw mechanism works at the two-loop level. Thanks to Z2×Z2′ there exist at least two stable DM particles; a dark radiation N1′ with a mass of O(1) eV and the other one, DM, is the real part of ϕ. The dark radiation contributes to ΔN_eff < 1 such that the tensions in cosmology that exist among the observations in the local Universe (CMB temperature fluctuations and primordial gravitational fluctuations) can be alleviated. Because of the hierarchy M2,3≫TNdec≃O(100) MeV≫MN1 O(1) eV, we are able to relate to the ratio of the lepton flavor violating decays to ΔN_eff. The indirect signal of the neutrino from the Sun has also been discussed. It is found that the predicted annihilation rate of the neutrinos is two to three orders of magnitude smaller than the current bound [123]. We have also expressed ΔN_eff as a function of the decay width of ηR0 (which is assumed to be lightest among ηs). It decays 100 percent into left- and right-handed neutrinos, where the heavier right-handed neutrinos decay further into dark radiation (the lightest among them). Dark radiation appears as a missing energy in collider experiments. We also have found that η⁺ decays 100 percent into a charged lepton and the missing energy. This is a good example in which, through the generation mechanism of the neutrino masses, cosmology and collider physics are closely related.

Author contributions

All authors listed, have made substantial, direct and intellectual contribution to the work, and approved it for publication.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

The work of MA is supported in part by the Japan Society for the Promotion of Sciences Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (Grants No. 16H00864 and No. 17K05412). JK is partially supported by the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C) from the Japan Society for Promotion of Science (Grant No.16K05315).

References 1. Esteban

Gonzalez-Garcia

Maltoni

Martinez-Soler

Schwetz

. Updated fit to three neutrino mixing: exploring the accelerator-reactor complementarity. J High Energy Phys. (2017) 1:087. 10.1007/JHEP01(2017)087 2. Ade

PAR

Aghanim

Arnaud

Ashdown

Aumont

Baccigalupi

Banday

. Planck 2015 results. XIII. Cosmological parameters. Astron Astrophys. (2016) 594:A13. 10.1051/0004-6361/201525830 3. Minkowski

. μ → eγ at a rate of one out of 10⁹ muon decays? Phys Lett. (1977) 67B:421–8. 10.1016/0370-2693(77)90435-X 4. Gell-Mann

Ramond

Slansky

. Complex spinors and unified theories. Conf Proc. (1979) C790927:315–21. 5. Sawada

Sugamoto

(Eds.). Proceedings: Workshop on the Unified Theories and the Baryon Number in the Universe Tsukuba (1979). 6. Mohapatra

Senjanovic

. Neutrino mass and spontaneous parity violation. Phys Rev Lett. (1980) 44:912. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.44.912 7. Zee

. A theory of lepton number violation, neutrino majorana mass, and oscillation. Phys Lett. (1980) 93B:389. 10.1016/0370-2693(80)90349-4 8. Zee

. Quantum numbers of majorana neutrino masses. Nucl Phys. B (1986) 264:99–110. 10.1016/0550-3213(86)90475-X 9. Babu

. Model of ‘calculable’ majorana neutrino masses. Phys Lett. B (1988) 203:132–6. 10. Krauss

Nasri

Trodden

. A model for neutrino masses and dark matter. Phys Rev. D (2003) 67:085002. 10.1103/PhysRevD.67.085002 11. Ma

. Verifiable radiative seesaw mechanism of neutrino mass and dark matter. Phys Rev. D (2006) 73:077301. 10.1103/PhysRevD.73.077301 12. Nasri

Moussa

. Model for small neutrino masses at the TeV scale. Mod Phys Lett. A (2002) 17:771–8. 10.1142/S0217732302007119 13. Ma

. Z(3) dark matter and two-loop neutrino mass. Phys Lett. B (2008) 662:49–52. 10.1016/j.physletb.2008.02.053 14. Aoki

Kanemura

Seto

. Neutrino mass, dark matter and baryon asymmetry via TeV-scale physics without fine-tuning. Phys Rev Lett. (2009) 102:051805. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.051805

19257506

15. March-Russell

McCabe

McCullough

. Neutrino-flavoured sneutrino dark matter. J High Energy Phys. (2010) 03:108. 10.1007/JHEP03(2010)108 16. Aoki

Kanemura

Shindou

Yagyu

. An R-parity conserving radiative neutrino mass model without right-handed neutrinos. J High Energy Phys. (2010) 07:084. 10.1007/JHEP07(2010)08410.1007/JHEP11(2010)049 17. Kanemura

Seto

Shimomura

. Masses of dark matter and neutrino from TeV scale spontaneous U(1)_B−L breaking. Phys Rev. D (2011) 84:016004. 10.1103/PhysRevD.84.016004 18. Kanemura

Nabeshima

Sugiyama

. Neutrino masses from loop-induced dirac yukawa couplings. Phys Lett. B (2011) 703:66–70. 10.1016/j.physletb.2011.07.047 19. Dev

PSB

Pilaftsis

. Minimal radiative neutrino mass mechanism for inverse seesaw models. Phys Rev. D (2012) 86:113001. 10.1103/PhysRevD.86.113001 20. Bhupal Dev

Pilaftsis

. Light and superlight sterile neutrinos in the minimal radiative inverse seesaw model. Phys Rev. D (2013) 87:053007. 10.1103/PhysRevD.87.053007 21. Gustafsson

Rivera

. Predictive model for radiatively induced neutrino masses and mixings with dark matter. Phys Rev Lett. (2013) 110:211802. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.211802

23745861

22. Kajiyama

Okada

Yagyu

. Two loop radiative seesaw model with inert triplet scalar field. Nucl Phys. B (2013) 874:198–216. 10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2013.05.020 23. Law

SSC

McDonald

. A class of inert N-tuplet models with radiative neutrino mass and dark matter. J High Energy Phys. (2013) 09:092. 10.1007/JHEP09(2013)092 24. Hirsch

Lineros

Morisi

Palacio

Rojas

Valle

JWF

. WIMP dark matter as radiative neutrino mass messenger. J High Energy Phys. (2013) 10:149. 10.1007/JHEP10(2013)149 25. Restrepo

Zapata

Yaguna

. Models with radiative neutrino masses and viable dark matter candidates. J High Energy Phys. (2013) 11:011. 10.1007/JHEP11(2013)011 26. Lindner

Schmidt

Watanabe

. Dark matter and U(1)′ symmetry for the right-handed neutrinos. Phys Rev. D (2014) 89:013007. 10.1103/PhysRevD.89.013007 27. Okada

Yagyu

. Radiative generation of lepton masses. Phys Rev. D (2014) 89:053008. 10.1103/PhysRevD.89.053008 28. Baek

Okada

Toma

. Radiative lepton model and dark matter with global U(1)′ symmetry. Phys Lett. B (2014) 732:85–90. 10.1016/j.physletb.2014.03.021 29. Ahriche

Chen

McDonald

Nasri

. Three-loop model of neutrino mass with dark matter. Phys Rev. D (2014) 90:015024. 10.1103/PhysRevD.90.015024 30. Ahriche

McDonald

Nasri

. A model of radiative neutrino mass: with or without dark matter. J High Energy Phys. (2014) 10:167. 10.1007/JHEP10(2014)167 31. Kanemura

Matsui

Sugiyama

. Neutrino mass and dark matter from gauged U(1)_B−L breaking. Phys Rev. D (2014) 90:013001. 10.1103/PhysRevD.90.013001 32. Kanemura

Sakurai

Sugiyama

. Probing models of dirac neutrino masses via the flavor structure of the mass matrix. Phys Lett. B (2016) 758:465–72. 10.1016/j.physletb.2016.05.046 33. Simoes

Wegman

. Radiative two-loop neutrino masses with dark matter. J High Energy Phys. (2017) 04:148. 10.1007/JHEP04(2017)148 34. Ma

Sarkar

. Revelations of the E(6)/U(1)(N) model: two-loop neutrino mass and dark matter. Phys Lett. B (2007) 653:288–91. 10.1016/j.physletb.2007.08.019 35. Kajiyama

Okada

Toma

. New interpretation of the recent result of AMS-02 and multi-component decaying dark matters with non-Abelian discrete flavor symmetry. Eur Phys J. C (2014) 74:2722. 10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-2722-9 36. Wang

Han

. Radiative linear seesaw model, dark matter, and U(1)_B−L. Phys Rev. D (2015) 92:095001. 10.1103/PhysRevD.92.095001 37. Kajiyama

Okada

Toma

. Multicomponent dark matter particles in a two-loop neutrino model. Phys Rev. D (2013) 88:015029. 10.1103/PhysRevD.88.015029 38. Baek

Okada

Toma

. Two loop neutrino model and dark matter particles with global B-L symmetry. J Cosmol Astrop Phys. (2014) 1406:027. 10.1088/1475-7516/2014/06/027 39. Aoki

Kubo

Takano

. Two-loop radiative seesaw mechanism with multicomponent dark matter explaining the possible excess in the Higgs boson decay and at the Fermi LAT. Phys Rev. D (2013) 87:116001. 10.1103/PhysRevD.87.116001 40. Aoki

Kubo

Takano

. Multicomponent dark matter in radiative seesaw model and monochromatic neutrino flux. Phys Rev. D (2014) 90:076011. 10.1103/PhysRevD.90.076011 41. Ma

. Supersymmetric model of radiative seesaw majorana neutrino masses. Ann Fond Broglie (2006) 31:285. 42. Ma

. Supersymmetric U(1) Gauge realization of the dark scalar doublet model of radiative neutrino mass. Mod Phys Lett. A (2008) 23:721–5. 10.1142/S0217732308026753 43. Fukuoka

Kubo

Suematsu

. Anomaly induced dark matter decay and PAMELA/ATIC experiments. Phys Lett. B (2009) 678:401–6. 10.1016/j.physletb.2009.06.048 44. Fukuoka

Suematsu

Toma

. Signals of dark matter in a supersymmetric two dark matter model. J Cosmol Astrop Phys. (2011) 1107:001. 10.1088/1475-7516/2011/07/001 45. Suematsu

Toma

. Dark matter in the supersymmetric radiative seesaw model with an anomalous U(1) symmetry. Nucl Phys. B (2011) 847:567–89. 10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2011.02.007 46. Aoki

Kubo

Okawa

Takano

. Impact of inert higgsino dark matter. Phys Lett. B (2012) 707:107–15. 10.1016/j.physletb.2011.12.012 47. Cai

Herrero-Garca

Schmidt

Vicente

Volkas

. From the trees to the forest: a review of radiative neutrino mass models. (2017). e-Print: arXiv:1706.08524 [hep-ph]. 48. Kubo

Suematsu

. Cold dark matter, radiative neutrino mass, μ → eγ, and neutrinoless double beta decay. Phys Lett. B (2006) 642:18–23. 10.1016/j.physletb.2006.08.085 49. Bouchand

Merle

. Running of radiative neutrino masses: the scotogenic model. J High Energy Phys. (2012) 07:084. 10.1007/JHEP07(2012)084 50. Merle

Platscher

. Running of radiative neutrino masses: the scotogenic model − revisited. J High Energy Phys. (2015) 11:148. 10.1007/JHEP11(2015)148 51. Ma

Raidal

. Neutrino mass, muon anomalous magnetic moment, and lepton flavor nonconservation. Phys Rev Lett. (2001) 87:011802. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.87.011802

11461460

52. Suematsu

Toma

Yoshida

. Reconciliation of CDM abundance and μ → eγ in a radiative seesaw model. Phys Rev. D (2009) 79:093004. 10.1103/PhysRevD.79.093004 53. Aoki

Kanemura

. Probing the Majorana nature of TeV-scale radiative seesaw models at collider experiments. Phys Lett. B (2010) 689:28–35. 10.1016/j.physletb.2010.04.024 54. Suematsu

Toma

Yoshida

. Enhancement of the annihilation of dark matter in a radiative seesaw model. Phys Rev. D (2010) 82:013012. 10.1103/PhysRevD.82.013012 55. Schmidt

Schwetz

Toma

. Direct detection of leptophilic dark matter in a model with radiative neutrino masses. Phys Rev. D (2012) 85:073009. 10.1103/PhysRevD.85.073009 56. Hehn

Ibarra

. A radiative model with a naturally mild neutrino mass hierarchy. Phys Lett. B (2013) 718:988–91. 10.1016/j.physletb.2012.11.034 57. Toma

Vicente

. Lepton flavor violation in the scotogenic model. J High Energy Phys. (2014) 01:160. 10.1007/JHEP01(2014)160 58. Ibarra

Yaguna

Zapata

. Direct detection of fermion dark matter in the radiative seesaw model. Phys Rev. D (2016) 93:035012. 10.1103/PhysRevD.93.035012 59. Merle

Platscher

Rojas

Valle

JWF

Vicente

. Consistency of WIMP Dark Matter as radiative neutrino mass messenger. J High Energy Phys. (2016) 07:013. 10.1007/JHEP07(2016)013 60. Lindner

Platscher

Yaguna

Merle

. Fermionic WIMPs and vacuum stability in the scotogenic model. Phys Rev. D (2016) 94:115027. 10.1103/PhysRevD.94.115027 61. Hessler

Ibarra

Molinaro

Vogl

. Probing the scotogenic FIMP at the LHC. J High Energy Phys. (2017) 01:100. 10.1007/JHEP01(2017)100 62. Aristizabal Sierra

Kubo

Restrepo

Suematsu

Zapata

. Radiative seesaw: warm dark matter, collider and lepton flavour violating signals. Phys Rev. D (2009) 79:013011. 10.1103/PhysRevD.79.013011 63. Gelmini

Osoba

Palomares-Ruiz

. Inert-sterile neutrino: cold or warm dark matter candidate. Phys Rev. D (2010) 81:063529. 10.1103/PhysRevD.81.063529 64. Ma

. Radiative scaling neutrino mass and warm dark matter. Phys Lett. B (2012) 717:235–7. 10.1016/j.physletb.2012.09.046 65. Bhattacharya

Poulose

Ghosh

. Multipartite interacting scalar dark matter in the light of updated LUX data. J Cosmol Astrop Phys. (2017) 1704:043. 10.1088/1475-7516/2017/04/043 66. Berezhiani

Khlopov

MYu

. Physics of cosmological dark matter in the theory of broken family symmetry. (In Russian). Sov J Nucl Phys. (1990) 52:60–4. 67. Berezhiani

Khlopov

MYu

. Cosmology of spontaneously broken gauge family symmetry. Z Phys. C (1991) 49:73–8. 68. Hur

Lee

Nasri

. A supersymmetric U(1)-prime model with multiple dark matters. Phys Rev. D (2008) 77:015008. 10.1103/PhysRevD.77.015008 69. Zurek

. Multi-component dark matter. Phys Rev. D (2009) 79:115002. 10.1103/PhysRevD.79.115002 70. Batell

. Dark discrete gauge symmetries. Phys Rev. D (2011) 83:035006. 10.1103/PhysRevD.83.035006 71. Dienes

Thomas

. Dynamical dark matter: I. Theoretical overview. Phys Rev. D (2012) 85:083523. 10.1103/PhysRevD.85.083523 72. Dienes

Thomas

. Dynamical dark matter: II. An explicit model. Phys Rev. D (2012) 85:083524. 10.1103/PhysRevD.85.083524 73. Ivanov

Keus

. Z_p scalar dark matter from multi-Higgs-doublet models. Phys Rev. D (2012) 86:016004. 10.1103/PhysRevD.86.016004 74. Dienes

Thomas

. Distinguishing dynamical dark matter at the LHC. Phys Rev. D (2012) 86:054008. 10.1103/PhysRevD.86.054008 75. D'Eramo

McCullough

Thaler

. Multiple gamma lines from semi-annihilation. J Cosmol Astrop Phys. (2013) 1304:030. 10.1088/1475-7516/2013/04/030 76. Gu

. Multi-component dark matter with magnetic moments for Fermi-LAT gamma-ray line. Phys Dark Univ. (2013) 2:35–40. 10.1016/j.dark.2013.03.001 77. Bhattacharya

Drozd

Grzadkowski

Wudka

. Two-component dark matter. J High Energy Phys. (2013) 10:158. 10.1007/JHEP10(2013)158 78. Bhattacharya

Drozd

Grzadkowski

Wudka

. Constraints on two-component dark matter. Acta Phys Polon. B (2013) 44:2373–9. 10.5506/APhysPolB.44.2373 79. Geng

Huang

Tsai

. Imprint of multicomponent dark matter on AMS-02. Phys Rev. D (2014) 89:055021. 10.1103/PhysRevD.89.055021 80. Boddy

Feng

Kaplinghat

Tait

TMP

. Self-interacting dark matter from a non-abelian hidden sector. Phys Rev. D (2014) 89:115017. 10.1103/PhysRevD.89.115017 81. Geng

Huang

Tsai

. Cosmic ray excesses from multi-component dark matter decays. Mod Phys Lett. A (2014) 29:1440003. 10.1142/S0217732314400033 82. Esch

Klasen

Yaguna

. A minimal model for two-component dark matter. J High Energy Phys. (2014) 09:108. 10.1007/JHEP09(2014)108 83. Geng

Huang

Lai

. Multi-component dark matter. Int J Mod Phys. A (2015) 30:1545009. 10.1142/S0217751X15450098 84. Arcadi

Gross

Lebedev

Mambrini

Pokorski

Toma

. Multicomponent dark matter from gauge symmetry. J High Energy Phys. (2016) 12:081. 10.1007/JHEP12(2016)081 85. DiFranzo

Mohlabeng

. Multi-component dark matter through a radiative higgs portal. J High Energy Phys. (2017) 01:080. 10.1007/JHEP01(2017)080 86. Aoki

Toma

. Implications of two-component dark matter induced by forbidden channels and thermal freeze-out. J Cosmol Astrop Phys. (2017) 1701:042. 10.1088/1475-7516/2017/01/042 87. Aoki

Duerr

Kubo

Takano

. Multi-component dark matter systems and their observation prospects. Phys Rev. D (2012) 86:076015. 10.1103/PhysRevD.86.076015 88. Ade

PAR

Aghanim

Armitage-Caplan

Arnaud

Ashdown

Atrio-Barandela

. Planck 2013 results. XVI. Cosmological parameters. Astron Astrophys. (2014) 571:A16. 10.1051/0004-6361/201321591 89. D'Eramo

Thaler

. Semi-annihilation of dark matter. J High Energy Phys. (2010) 06:109. 10.1007/JHEP06(2010)109 90. Belanger

Kannike

Pukhov

Raidal

. Impact of semi-annihilations on dark matter phenomenology - an example of Z_N symmetric scalar dark matter. J Cosmol Astrop Phys. (2012) 1204:010. 10.1088/1475-7516/2012/04/010 91. Belanger

Kannike

Pukhov

Raidal

. Z₃ scalar singlet dark matter. J Cosmol Astrop Phys. (2013) 1301:022. 10.1088/1475-7516/2013/01/022 92. Ko

Tang

. Self-interacting scalar dark matter with local Z₃ symmetry. J Cosmol Astrop Phys. (2014) 1405:047. 10.1088/1475-7516/2014/05/047 93. Blanger

Kannike

Pukhov

Raidal

. Minimal semi-annihilating ℤ_N scalar dark matter. J Cosmol Astrop Phys. (2014) 1406:021. 10.1088/1475-7516/2014/06/021 94. Aoki

Toma

. Impact of semi-annihilation of ℤ₃ symmetric dark matter with radiative neutrino masses. J Cosmol Astrop Phys. (2014) 1409:016. 10.1088/1475-7516/2014/09/016 95. Ding

Han

Liao

Xie

. Radiative neutrino mass with₃ dark matter: from relic density to LHC signatures. J High Energy Phys. (2016) 05:030. 10.1007/JHEP05(2016)030 96. Hambye

. Hidden vector dark matter. J High Energy Phys. (2009) 01:028. 10.1088/1126-6708/2009/01/028 97. Arina

Hambye

Ibarra

Weniger

. Intense gamma-ray lines from hidden vector dark matter decay. J Cosmol Astrop Phys. (2010) 1003:024. 10.1088/1475-7516/2010/03/024 98. Khoze

McCabe

. Higgs vacuum stability from the dark matter portal. J High Energy Phys. (2014) 08:026. 10.1007/JHEP08(2014)026 99. Boehm

Dolan

McCabe

. A weighty interpretation of the Galactic Centre excess. Phys Rev. D (2014) 90:023531. 10.1103/PhysRevD.90.023531 100. 'tHooft

. Naturalness, chiral symmetry, and spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking. NATO Sci Ser B. (1980) 59:135–57. 101. Ellis

Ferstl

Olive

. Reevaluation of the elastic scattering of supersymmetric dark matter. Phys Lett. B (2000) 481:304–14. 10.1016/S0370-2693(00)00459-7 102. Akerib

Alsum

Araśjo

Bai

Bailey

Balajthy

. Results from a search for dark matter in the complete LUX exposure. Phys Rev Lett. (2017) 118:021303. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.021303

28128598

103. Aprile

Aalbers

Agostini

Alfonsi

Amaro

Anthony

. First dark matter search results from the XENON1T experiment. (2017). e-Print: arXiv:1705.06655 [astro-ph.CO]. 104. Wu

Zheng

. Scalar dark matter: real vs complex. J High Energy Phys. (2017) 03:142. 10.1007/JHEP03(2017)142 105. Arcadi

Dutra

Ghosh

Lindner

Mambrini

Pierre

. The waning of the WIMP? A review of models, searches, and constraints. (2017). e-Print: arXiv:1703.07364 [hep-ph]. 106. Athron

Balzs

Bringmann

Buckley

Chrzaszcz

Conrad

. Status of the scalar singlet dark matter model. Eur Phys J. C (2017) 77:568. 10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-5113-1 107. Baldini

Bao

Baracchini

Bemporad

Berg

Biasotti

. Search for the lepton flavour violating decay μ⁺→e⁺γ with the full dataset of the MEG experiment. Eur Phys J. C (2016) 76:434. 10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-4271-x 108. Barbieri

Hall

Rychkov

. Improved naturalness with a heavy Higgs: an Alternative road to LHC physics. Phys Rev. D (2006) 74:015007. 10.1103/PhysRevD.74.015007 109. Baak

Cth

Haller

Hoecker

Kogler

Mnig

. The global electroweak fit at NNLO and prospects for the LHC and ILC. Eur Phys J. C (2014) 74:3046. 10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-3046-5 110. Silk

Olive

Srednicki

. The photino, the sun and high-energy neutrinos. Phys Rev Lett. (1985) 55:257–9. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.55.257

10032042

111. Krauss

Srednicki

Wilczek

. Solar system constraints and signatures for dark matter candidates. Phys Rev. D (1986) 33:2079–83. 10.1103/PhysRevD.33.2079

9956878

112. Freese

. Can scalar neutrinos or massive dirac neutrinos be the missing mass? Phys Lett. (1986) 167B:295–300. 10.1016/0370-2693(86)90349-7 113. Gaisser

Steigman

Tilav

. Limits on cold dark matter candidates from deep underground detectors. Phys Rev. D (1986) 34:2206. 10.1103/PhysRevD.34.2206

9957408

114. Griest

Seckel

. Cosmic asymmetry, neutrinos and the sun. Nucl Phys. B (1987) 283:681–705. 10.1016/0550-3213(87)90293-8 115. Ritz

Seckel

. Detailed neutrino spectra from cold dark matter annihilations in the sun. Nucl Phys. B (1988) 304:877–908. 10.1016/0550-3213(88)90660-8 116. Bertone

Hooper

Silk

. Particle dark matter: evidence, candidates and constraints. Phys Rept. (2005) 405:279–390. 10.1016/j.physrep.2004.08.031 117. Silk

Moore

Diemand

Bullock

Kaplinghat

Strigari

. Particle Dark Matter: Observations, Models and Searches. Bertone

editor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (2010). Available online at: http://www.cambridge.org/uk/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=9780521763684 118. Kamionkowski

. Energetic neutrinos from heavy neutralino annihilation in the sun. Phys Rev. D (1991) 44:3021–42. 10.1103/PhysRevD.44.3021

10013757

119. Kamionkowski

Griest

Jungman

Sadoulet

. Model independent comparison of direct versus indirect detection of supersymmetric dark matter. Phys Rev Lett. (1995) 74:5174–7. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.74.5174

10058701

120. Jungman

Kamionkowski

Griest

. Supersymmetric dark matter. Phys Rept. (1996) 267:195–373. 10.1016/0370-1573(95)00058-5 121. Agrawal

Dolle

Krenke

. Signals of inert doublet dark matter in neutrino telescopes. Phys Rev. D (2009) 79:015015. 10.1103/PhysRevD.79.015015 122. Andreas

Tytgat

MHG

Swillens

. Neutrinos from inert doublet dark matter. J Cosmol Astrop Phys. (2009) 0904:004. 10.1088/1475-7516/2009/04/004 123. Aartsen

Ackermann

Adams

Aguilar

Ahlers

Ahrens

. Search for annihilating dark matter in the Sun with 3 years of IceCube data. Eur Phys J. C (2017) 77:146. 10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-4689-9 124. Lee

Weinberg

. Cosmological lower bound on heavy neutrino masses. Phys Rev Lett. (1977) 39:165–8. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.39.165 125. Kolb

Turner

. The early universe. Front Phys. (1990) 69:1–547. 126. Fukugita

Yanagida

. Baryogenesis without grand unification. Phys Lett. B (1986) 174:45–7. 10.1016/0370-2693(86)91126-3 127. Rozo

Wechsler

Rykoff

Annis

Becker

Evrard

. Cosmological constraints from the SDSS maxBCG cluster catalog. Astrophys J. (2010) 708:645–60. 10.1088/0004-637X/708/1/645 128. Riess

Macri

Casertano

Lampeitl

Ferguson

Filippenko

. A 3% solution: determination of the hubble constant with the hubble space telescope and wide field camera 3. Astrophys J. (2011) 730:119. 10.1088/0004-637X/730/2/119 129. Heymans

Grocutt

Heavens

Kilbinger

Kitching

Simpson

. CFHTLenS tomographic weak lensing cosmological parameter constraints: mitigating the impact of intrinsic galaxy alignments. Mon Not R Astron Soc. (2013) 432:2433. 10.1093/mnras/stt601 130. Benjamin

Van Waerbeke

Heymans

Kilbinger

Erben

Hildebrandt

. CFHTLenS tomographic weak lensing: quantifying accurate redshift distributions. Mon Not R Astron Soc. (2013) 431:1547. 10.1093/mnras/stt276 131. Ade

PAR

Aghanim

Armitage-Caplan

Arnaud

Ashdown

Atrio-Barandela

. Planck 2013 results. XX. Cosmology from Sunyaev−Zeldovich cluster counts. Astron Astrophys. (2014) 571:A20. 10.1051/0004-6361/201321521 132. Hamann

Hasenkamp

. A new life for sterile neutrinos: resolving inconsistencies using hot dark matter. J Cosmol Astrop Phys. (2013) 1310:044. 10.1088/1475-7516/2013/10/044 133. Wyman

Rudd

Vanderveld

. Neutrinos help reconcile planck measurements with the local universe. Phys Rev Lett. (2014) 112:051302. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.051302

24580585

134. Battye

Moss

. Evidence for massive neutrinos from cosmic microwave background and lensing observations. Phys Rev Lett. (2014) 112:051303. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.051303

24580586

135. Dvorkin

Wyman

Rudd

. Neutrinos help reconcile Planck measurements with both the early and local Universe. Phys Rev. D (2014) 90:083503. 10.1103/PhysRevD.90.083503 136. Archidiacono

Fornengo

Gariazzo

Giunti

Hannestad

Laveder

. Light sterile neutrinos after BICEP-2. J Cosmol Astrop Phys. (2014) 1406:031. 10.1088/1475-7516/2014/06/031 137. Zhang

Zhang

. Sterile neutrinos help reconcile the observational results of primordial gravitational waves from Planck and BICEP2. Phys Lett. B (2015) 740:359–63. 10.1016/j.physletb.2014.12.012 138. Battye

Charnock

Moss

. Tension between the power spectrum of density perturbations measured on large and small scales. Phys Rev. D (2015) 91:103508. 10.1103/PhysRevD.91.103508 139. Feng

Zhang

. A search for sterile neutrinos with the latest cosmological observations. Eur Phys J. C (2017) 77:418. 10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-4986-3 140. Steigman

. Neutrinos and big bang nucleosynthesis. Adv High Energy Phys. (2012) 2012:268321. 10.1155/2012/268321 141. Anchordoqui

Goldberg

. Neutrino cosmology after WMAP 7-Year data and LHC first Z' bounds. Phys Rev Lett. (2012) 108:081805. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.081805

22463521

142. Steigman

Dasgupta

Beacom

. Precise relic WIMP abundance and its impact on searches for dark matter annihilation. Phys Rev. D (2012) 86:023506. 10.1103/PhysRevD.86.023506 143. Anderhalden

Diemand

Bertone

Maccio

Schneider

. The galactic halo in mixed dark matter cosmologies. J Cosmol Astrop Phys. (2012) 1210:047. 10.1088/1475-7516/2012/10/047 144. Anchordoqui

Goldberg

Steigman

. Right-handed neutrinos as the dark radiation: status and forecasts for the LHC. Phys Lett. B (2013) 718:1162–5. 10.1016/j.physletb.2012.12.019 145. Anderhalden

Schneider

Maccio

Diemand

Bertone

. Hints on the nature of dark matter from the properties of milky way satellites. J Cosmol Astrop Phys. (2013) 1303:014. 10.1088/1475-7516/2013/03/014 146. Weinberg

. Goldstone bosons as fractional cosmic neutrinos. Phys Rev Lett. (2013) 110:241301. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.241301

25165907

147. Husdal

. On effective degrees of freedom in the early universe. Galaxies (2016) 4:78. 10.3390/galaxies4040078 148. Patrignani

Agashe

Aielli

Amsler

Antonelli

Asner

. Review of particle physics. Chin Phys. C (2016) 40:100001. 10.1088/1674-1137/40/10/100001 149. Djouadi

. The anatomy of electro-weak symmetry breaking. II. The Higgs bosons in the minimal supersymmetric model. Phys Rept. (2008) 459:1–241. 10.1016/j.physrep.2007.10.005 150. Cao

Rajasekaran

. Observing the dark scalar doublet and its impact on the standard-model higgs boson at colliders. Phys Rev. D (2007) 76:095011. 10.1103/PhysRevD.76.095011

¹Semi-annihilation processes also exist in one-component DM systems when DM is a Z₃ charged particle [89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95] or a vector boson [96, 97, 98, 99].

²Two singlet scalar DM scenario in Z2×Z2′ model has been explored in detail in Bhattacharya et al. [65].

³There are also neutrinos having continuous energy spectrum from the decay of SM particles produced by the standard annihilation. The upper bounds for the production rates of the SM particles are given in Agrawal et al. [121], Andreas et al. [122], and Aartsen et al. [123].

⁴Within a similar framework of radiative seesaw mechanism, the lightest right-handed neutrino has been regarded as stable warm dark matter in Aristizabal Sierra et al. [62]. In the models proposed in Kajiyama et al. [37] and Baek et al. [38], the topology of the two loop to generate the neutrino mass is basically the same as that of Figure 10. But the matter content of our model is much simpler; we have only two additional extra fields compared with the one-loop model of Ma [11], while in these papers five and four additional ones have to be introduced. Apart from this difference, they have not considered the lightest right-handed neutrino as dark radiation. In Baek et al. [38], however, the Nambu-Goldstone boson associated with the spontaneous breaking of U(1)_B−L is regarded as dark radiation.

⁵We use the relation between T and g_*s given in Husdal [147] to solve Equation (53) for TNdec.

⁶Both together can not be DM, because the heavier one decays into N1′+lighter one.