This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

Dark Photon Dark Matter Produced by Axion Oscillations

Raymond T. Co Leinweber Center for Theoretical Physics, Department of Physics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA    Aaron Pierce Leinweber Center for Theoretical Physics, Department of Physics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA    Zhengkang Zhang Leinweber Center for Theoretical Physics, Department of Physics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA Department of Physics, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA Theoretical Physics Group, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA    Yue Zhao Leinweber Center for Theoretical Physics, Department of Physics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA
(September 24, 2025)
Abstract

Despite growing interest and extensive effort to search for ultralight dark matter in the form of a hypothetical dark photon, how it fits into a consistent cosmology is unclear. Several dark photon dark matter production mechanisms proposed previously are known to have limitations, at least in certain mass regimes of experimental interest. In this letter, we explore a novel mechanism, where a coherently oscillating axion-like field can efficiently transfer its energy density to a dark photon field via a tachyonic instability. The residual axion relic is subsequently depleted via couplings to the visible sector, leaving only the dark photon as dark matter. We ensure that the cosmologies of both the axion and dark photon are consistent with existing constraints. We find that the mechanism works for a broad range of dark photon masses, including those of interest for ongoing experiments and proposed detection techniques.

preprint: LCTP-18-21

Introduction.—The identity of dark matter remains unknown. One candidate is a dark photon AA^{\prime}, a novel gauge boson with an unknown mass and tiny coupling to the Standard Model (SM). Recent years have seen a growing interest in experimental techniques for detecting light dark photon dark matter (DPDM), and many ideas have been studied. These include microwave cavity experiments such as ADMX Wagner:2010mi , a dark matter radio Chaudhuri:2014dla , dish antennas Horns:2012jf ; Jaeckel:2013sqa ; Suzuki:2015sza ; Jaeckel:2015kea ; Dobrich:2015tpa ; Knirck:2018ojz , dielectric haloscopes Baryakhtar:2018doz , absorption in various targets Hochberg:2016ajh ; Hochberg:2016sqx ; Yang:2016zaz ; Bloch:2016sjj ; Bunting:2017net ; Hochberg:2017wce ; Arvanitaki:2017nhi ; Knapen:2017ekk ; Griffin:2018bjn , the use of dark matter detectors as helioscopes An:2013yua , and repurposing of gravitational wave detectors Pierce:2018xmy as well as other accelerometers Graham:2015ifn . All these techniques focus on DPDM with masses \lesssim keV, in which case it must be produced nonthermally to avoid constraints on warm dark matter Irsic:2017ixq ; Lopez-Honorez:2017csg . It is thus important to understand precisely how this could occur.

Several mechanisms for nonthermal production of DPDM have been studied in the literature. One possibility is a misalignment mechanism Nelson:2011sf similar to that of axions: AA^{\prime} is initially displaced from the minimum of its potential, and the energy stored in its oscillations may act as dark matter. It was later pointed out, however, that sufficient production of DPDM via this mechanism is difficult absent a nonminimal coupling of AA^{\prime} to gravity Arias:2012az , which introduces a quadratic divergence for mAm_{A^{\prime}} Graham:2015rva . An alternative approach relying on quantum fluctuations during inflation can realize DPDM with mA>105m_{A^{\prime}}>10^{-5}\,eV Graham:2015rva , but the Stückelberg mass and high scale inflation essential to the mechanism may be in tension with the Weak Gravity Conjecture unless mA>0.3m_{A^{\prime}}>0.3 eV Reece:2018zvv , and the viable mass range may shrink further with improved CMB bounds on the scale of inflation (see however Ref. Craig:2018yld ).

In light of the extensive experimental searches and limitations of these existing mechanisms, it is important to explore alternative ideas of how DPDM may be realized in a consistent cosmology. In this letter we study a novel possibility, in which energy stored in coherent oscillations of an axion-like field ϕ\phi can be efficiently transferred to AA^{\prime} via a so-called tachyonic instability. Explosive particle production via tachyonic instabilities was first studied in the context of preheating Traschen:1990sw ; Kofman:1997yn (for reviews, see Refs. Allahverdi:2010xz ; Amin:2014eta ) and has been discussed as a mechanism to produce vector fields in the context of generating primordial magnetic fields Anber:2006xt ; Fujita:2015iga ; Adshead:2016iae . Axion-like fields are a well-motivated ingredient in many theories beyond the SM and numerous string constructions. While they may be dark matter themselves, their abundance could be easily suppressed in the presence of couplings to hidden sector fields (such as a dark photon) Agrawal:2017eqm ; Kitajima:2017peg . Here we show that even in this case, an axion-like field can be closely tied to the cosmological origin of dark matter in the form of a dark photon. In what follows, we specify the details of our DPDM production mechanism, and discuss possible subsequent thermal histories. A key ingredient is the depletion of the residual ϕ\phi relic that remains after its partial conversion to AA^{\prime}. This is achieved via couplings to the visible sector. We consider two possibilities, where the ϕ\phi relic either comes to dominate the energy density of the universe, or remains subdominant to SM radiation, before being thermalized into the SM bath and eventually depleted. In each case, we find DPDM production consistent with all cosmological constraints for a wide range of ϕ\phi and AA^{\prime} masses. Our findings strengthen the case for DPDM searches.

Tachyonic instability.—We consider an axion-like particle ϕ\phi (referred to as the “axion” hereafter) with a homogeneous initial value ϕi\phi_{i} after inflation and reheating. It starts coherent oscillations when the Hubble rate is comparable to its mass, 3Hmϕ3H\sim m_{\phi}, around

Tosc0.3mϕMPl,T_{\rm osc}\simeq 0.3\sqrt{m_{\phi}M_{\rm Pl}}\,, (1)

assuming an SM radiation-dominated epoch, where MPl=2.4×1018M_{\rm Pl}=2.4\times 10^{18}\,GeV. Our DPDM production mechanism centers around a coupling of ϕ\phi to a dark photon AA^{\prime},

ϕAA=αD8πfDϕFμνF~μν,\mathcal{L}_{\phi A^{\prime}A^{\prime}}=\frac{\alpha_{D}}{8\pi f_{D}}\phi\,F^{\prime}_{\mu\nu}\tilde{F}^{\prime\mu\nu}\,, (2)

with FF^{\prime} being the dark photon field strength tensor and F~μν=ϵαβμνFαβ/2\tilde{F}^{\prime\mu\nu}=\epsilon^{\alpha\beta\mu\nu}{F}^{\prime}_{\alpha\beta}/2. Here, we have introduced a fine structure constant αD\alpha_{D} and axion decay constant fDf_{D} for the dark sector. This interaction affects the dark photon equation of motion, written in Fourier space as Garretson:1992vt

2A±η2+(mA2+kA2±αDkA2πfDϕη)A±=0,\frac{\partial^{2}A_{\pm}^{\prime}}{\partial\eta^{2}}+\left(m_{A^{\prime}}^{2}+k_{A^{\prime}}^{2}\pm\frac{\alpha_{D}k_{A^{\prime}}}{2\pi f_{D}}\frac{\partial\phi}{\partial\eta}\right)A_{\pm}^{\prime}=0\,, (3)

where η\eta is the conformal time, mAm_{A^{\prime}} and kAk_{A^{\prime}} are the mass and momentum of AA^{\prime}, and ±\pm indicates helicity. We have assumed negligible AA^{\prime} self-interactions; this implies important constraints Agrawal:2018vin that we find may be always satisfied in the parameter space of interest.

Tachyonic instability refers to an efficient energy transfer from ϕ\phi to AA^{\prime}, which occurs when mA2+kA2±αDkA2πfDϕη<0m_{A^{\prime}}^{2}+k_{A^{\prime}}^{2}\pm\frac{\alpha_{D}k_{A^{\prime}}}{2\pi f_{D}}\frac{\partial\phi}{\partial\eta}<0. This negative quantity can be regarded as a tachyonic effective mass for AA^{\prime} and leads to an exponentially growing solution to Eq. (3). This tachyonic condition can be satisfied only after the axion starts rolling at ToscT_{\rm osc}, i.e. ϕ/η0\partial\phi/\partial\eta\neq 0. At a given time, one of the AA^{\prime} helicities exhibits exponential growth, with a peak momentum kAαD4πfD|ϕη|mAk_{A^{\prime}}\sim\frac{\alpha_{D}}{4\pi f_{D}}\bigl{|}\frac{\partial\phi}{\partial\eta}\bigr{|}\gg m_{A^{\prime}}, obtained from minimizing the tachyonic effective mass. Efficient production via tachyonic instability requires αDϕi2πfD𝒪(10)\frac{\alpha_{D}\phi_{i}}{2\pi f_{D}}\gtrsim\mathcal{O}(10) Agrawal:2017eqm , which can be realized in a variety of setups accommodating ϕifD\phi_{i}\gg f_{D} Agrawal:2018mkd . Tachyonic instability ceases when the produced AA^{\prime} backreacts on the ϕ\phi condensate to excite higher momentum modes so that ϕ\phi is no longer described by a coherently oscillating field. Detailed numerical simulations are needed to accurately determine the final momentum distribution and yield. For the present study, we take pApϕmϕp_{A^{\prime}}\sim p_{\phi}\sim m_{\phi}, nA=nϕmϕϕi2n_{A^{\prime}}=n_{\phi}\sim m_{\phi}\phi_{i}^{2} after backreaction sets in, consistent with the lattice results in Ref. Kitajima:2017peg . The uncertainty in these quantities should not affect our conclusions.

Shortly after the era of tachyonic instability, ρϕ\rho_{\phi} will scale as nonrelativistic matter and quickly dominate over ρA\rho_{A^{\prime}}. In the absence of additional couplings, ϕ\phi would either decay to AA^{\prime} at a later time or survive until today. In the first case, DPDM might be dominantly produced from ϕ\phi decay but tends to be too hot. In the second case, dark matter would be dominantly axions if mϕmAm_{\phi}\gg m_{A^{\prime}} Agrawal:2017eqm . In principle, these two species can coexist as comparable components if mϕmAm_{\phi}\simeq m_{A^{\prime}} Agrawal:2018vin . This comes at the cost of fine-tuning because these masses with wildly different origins can span many decades and have no a priori reason to be close. Here we instead consider the possibility that the residual ϕ\phi is depleted via couplings to the visible sector, so that dark matter is composed of just the AA^{\prime} produced from the tachyonic instability. The remaining sections concentrate on understanding this ϕ\phi depletion, which is largely independent of the AA^{\prime} production mechanism discussed above.

Depletion of the axion relic.—We consider a setup where ϕ\phi couples to the U(1)YU(1)_{Y} hypercharge gauge boson,

ϕBB=αY8πfBϕBμνB~μν,\mathcal{L}_{\phi BB}=\frac{\alpha_{Y}}{8\pi f_{B}}\phi\,B^{\mu\nu}\tilde{B}_{\mu\nu}\,, (4)

induced by Peccei-Quinn (PQ) fermions ψB\psi_{B} charged under U(1)YU(1)_{Y}, where αY102\alpha_{Y}\simeq 10^{-2}. We will treat fBf_{B} and fDf_{D} as independent parameters, keeping in mind that each can be separated from the PQ breaking scale fPQf_{\text{PQ}} Agrawal:2018mkd .

An example of how hierarchical decay constants could be realized is a clockwork theory Choi:2014rja ; Choi:2015fiu ; Kaplan:2015fuy ; Long:2018nsl where PQ fermions charged under different gauge groups reside on different sites. As a result, it is possible to have fPQfB,Dfaf_{\text{PQ}}\lesssim f_{B,D}\ll f_{a} with either ordering of fBf_{B} and fDf_{D}. Here faf_{a} is the inverse axion coupling to a postulated dark QCD sector on the last site, which sets the range of axion field excursions. Meanwhile, small explicit breaking of the clockwork symmetry can give additional contributions to mϕm_{\phi} without spoiling the clockwork mechanism, in which case mϕm_{\phi} is bounded only by fPQf_{\text{PQ}}. In sum, we have

mϕ<fPQfB,Dfaϕi.m_{\phi}<f_{\text{PQ}}\lesssim f_{B,D}\ll f_{a}\sim\phi_{i}\,. (5)

Note that while our discussion assumes the hierarchy of Eq. (5), we do not rely on the specific mechanism (e.g. clockwork) by which this hierarchy is realized.

We now discuss processes mediated by the ϕBB\phi BB coupling of Eq. (4) that may reduce the ϕ\phi abundance by thermalizing ϕ\phi into the SM bath. At high temperatures Tmϕ/αY2T\gtrsim m_{\phi}/\alpha_{Y}^{2}, the axion mass is smaller than the thermal width of BB, and axion dissipation is resonantly enhanced via ϕBB\phi B\to B, with a rate inversely proportional to the thermal width. Adapting the calculations in Refs. Rychkov:2007uq ; Salvio:2013iaa ; Moroi:2014mqa (see also Refs. Yokoyama:2004pf ; Mukaida:2012qn ) to the case of nonrelativistic ϕ\phi, we estimate the rate as

ΓϕBB103mϕ2TfB2(mϕ/αY2<T<mψB).\Gamma_{\phi B\to B}\simeq 10^{-3}\,\frac{m_{\phi}^{2}\,T}{f_{B}^{2}}\qquad(m_{\phi}/\alpha_{Y}^{2}<T<m_{\psi_{B}})\,. (6)

Note the result is independent of αY\alpha_{Y}, since the αY2\alpha_{Y}^{2} from ϕBB\phi BB couplings is canceled by an αY2\alpha_{Y}^{-2} factor from the inverse thermal width. When TT falls below mϕ/αY2m_{\phi}/\alpha_{Y}^{2}, the resonance shuts off, and we instead need to consider ϕBBff¯\phi B\to B^{*}\to f\bar{f}. This process, however, has a rate that decreases more rapidly than the Hubble rate, and thus it cannot thermalize ϕ\phi if ϕ\phi was not thermalized already at higher temperatures. Finally, the decay ϕBB\phi\to BB, thermally blocked at high temperatures, opens up at TmϕT\lesssim m_{\phi},

ΓϕBB=αY2256π3mϕ3fB2(T<mϕ<mψB).\Gamma_{\phi\to BB}=\frac{\alpha_{Y}^{2}}{256\pi^{3}}\frac{m_{\phi}^{3}}{f_{B}^{2}}\qquad(T<m_{\phi}<m_{\psi_{B}})\,. (7)

This would be the whole story if ψB\psi_{B} were sufficiently massive to be decoupled at all times after ToscT_{\text{osc}}. However, since mψBfPQm_{\psi_{B}}\lesssim f_{\text{PQ}} for perturbative Yukawa couplings, decoupling ψB\psi_{B} would require fPQf_{\text{PQ}}, and hence fBf_{B} to be higher than ToscT_{\text{osc}}, making thermalization of the ϕ\phi relic very inefficient. Therefore, in the following we assume mψB<Toscm_{\psi_{B}}<T_{\text{osc}} so that lower fBf_{B} values can be accommodated. We consider a minimal setup with just one species of ψB\psi_{B}, vectorlike under U(1)YU(1)_{Y} with hypercharge ±1\pm 1. A small amount of mixing with SM leptons, consistent with precision electroweak constraints, would allow ψB\psi_{B} to decay fast enough without having dangerous cosmological impact, see, e.g. Ref. Kearney:2012zi and references therein.

In this setup, ψB\psi_{B} itself can play a role in axion thermalization. After DPDM production at ToscT_{\text{osc}}, there is a period when T>mψB,mϕT>m_{\psi_{B}},m_{\phi}, and scattering processes involving the ϕψBψ¯B\phi\psi_{B}\bar{\psi}_{B} coupling,

ϕψBψ¯B=mψBfBϕψ¯Biγ5ψB,\mathcal{L}_{\phi\psi_{B}\bar{\psi}_{B}}=\frac{m_{\psi_{B}}}{f_{B}}\,\phi\,\bar{\psi}_{B}i\gamma^{5}\psi_{B}\,, (8)

are dominant. We estimate the rate from

ΓϕBψBψ¯B102αYmψB2TfB2(T>mψB,mϕ).\Gamma_{\phi B\to\psi_{B}\bar{\psi}_{B}}\simeq 10^{-2}\,\alpha_{Y}\,\frac{m_{\psi_{B}}^{2}T}{f_{B}^{2}}\qquad(T>m_{\psi_{B}},m_{\phi})\,. (9)

Note that unlike the gauge boson case, axion dissipation via the ϕψBψ¯B\phi\psi_{B}\bar{\psi}_{B} coupling cannot be resonantly enhanced because a fermion flips helicity after absorbing a (pseudo)scalar. Subsequently, if TT falls below mψBm_{\psi_{B}} before reaching mϕm_{\phi}, ψB\psi_{B} decouples and the previous discussion around Eqs. (6) and (7) applies. Otherwise if mψB<mϕ/2m_{\psi_{B}}<m_{\phi}/2, Eq. (9) holds until TmϕT\sim m_{\phi}, after which ϕ\phi can decay to ψBψ¯B\psi_{B}\bar{\psi}_{B} with a rate

ΓϕψBψ¯B18πmψB2mϕfB2(mϕ>T, 2mψB).\Gamma_{\phi\to\psi_{B}\bar{\psi}_{B}}\simeq\frac{1}{8\pi}\frac{m_{\psi_{B}}^{2}m_{\phi}}{f_{B}^{2}}\qquad(m_{\phi}>T,\,2m_{\psi_{B}})\,. (10)

Eqs. (6), (7), (9) and (10) above, valid in different temperature regimes and for different mass orderings, allow us to relate fBf_{B} to the thermalization temperature TthT_{\text{th}}, defined as the highest temperature at which Γ(T)=H(T)\Gamma(T)=H(T). Thermalization may happen either after or before the ϕ\phi relic dominates the energy density of the universe, leading to different cosmological histories which we consider in the next two sections. Depending on the choice of parameters, further depletion may be needed after thermalization, which we will also discuss below.

Matter-dominated universe.—We first consider the possibility that ϕ\phi comes to dominate the energy density of the universe and leads to a matter-dominated (MD) era starting at a temperature

TM0.5mϕ1/2ϕi2MPl3/2,T_{M}\simeq 0.5\,\frac{m_{\phi}^{1/2}\phi_{i}^{2}}{M_{\rm Pl}^{3/2}}\,, (11)

before being thermalized at TthT_{\text{th}} and reheating the universe. In this case, TthT_{\text{th}} is fixed just by mϕm_{\phi} and mAm_{A^{\prime}}, independent of the initial field value ϕi\phi_{i}. This is because the ratio nA/nϕn_{A^{\prime}}/n_{\phi}, initially 1\sim 1 after DPDM production, is invariant until TthT_{\text{th}}, at which point ρϕ=mϕnϕ\rho_{\phi}=m_{\phi}n_{\phi} is converted into radiation energy density ρrad\rho_{\text{rad}},

YA=nAs|Tthnϕs|Tth=ρradmϕs|Tth=34Tthmϕ.\displaystyle Y_{A^{\prime}}=\left.\frac{n_{A^{\prime}}}{s}\right|_{T_{\text{th}}}\sim\left.\frac{n_{\phi}}{s}\right|_{T_{\text{th}}}=\left.\frac{\rho_{\text{rad}}}{m_{\phi}s}\right|_{T_{\text{th}}}=\frac{3}{4}\frac{T_{\text{th}}}{m_{\phi}}\,. (12)

Using the observed dark matter abundance ρA/s=mAYA0.44\rho_{A^{\prime}}/s=m_{A^{\prime}}Y_{A^{\prime}}\simeq 0.44 eV, we thus obtain

Tth0.6eVmϕmATR,T_{\text{th}}\simeq 0.6\ {\rm eV}\frac{m_{\phi}}{m_{A^{\prime}}}\equiv T_{R}\,, (13)

where we have introduced the notation TRT_{R} to indicate that TthT_{\text{th}} acts as a reheat temperature in the MD case.

If mψBm_{\psi_{B}} is given in addition to mϕm_{\phi} and mAm_{A^{\prime}}, we would then be able to solve for fBf_{B} from Γ(TR)=H(TR)\Gamma(T_{R})=H(T_{R}). To ensure consistency, we need to check that for the fBf_{B} value determined by Γ(TR)=H(TR)\Gamma(T_{R})=H(T_{R}), Γ(T)<H(T)\Gamma(T)<H(T) at all temperatures T>TRT>T_{R} where different processes may be relevant; otherwise the axion would have been thermalized earlier. When performing this check, we maximize H(T)H(T) by allowing matter domination to begin as early as possible, up to ToscT_{\text{osc}}. This allows us to identify the maximal viable parameter space.

If a consistent solution for fBf_{B} exists for given (mϕ(m_{\phi}, mAm_{A^{\prime}}, mψB)m_{\psi_{B}}), we then need to check if it satisfies the following constraints. First, since mϕ<fPQm_{\phi}<f_{\text{PQ}}, mψB=yψBfPQ/2<(4π/2)fPQm_{\psi_{B}}=y_{\psi_{B}}f_{\text{PQ}}/\sqrt{2}<(4\pi/\sqrt{2})f_{\text{PQ}} (assuming a perturbative coupling) while fPQfBf_{\text{PQ}}\lesssim f_{B}, we need to impose at least

fB>mϕ,fB>24πmψB.f_{B}>m_{\phi}\,,\qquad f_{B}>\frac{\sqrt{2}}{4\pi}m_{\psi_{B}}\,. (14)

Next, we require that U(1)PQU(1)_{\text{PQ}} should not be restored by the thermal mass of the PQ breaking field, SS, generated by ψB\psi_{B}. At minimum, this condition should be satisfied when ϕ\phi starts to oscillate, i.e. yψB2Tosc2/24+mS2mψB2Tosc2/(12fPQ2)fPQ2<0y_{\psi_{B}}^{2}T_{\rm osc}^{2}/24+m_{S}^{2}\sim m_{\psi_{B}}^{2}T_{\rm osc}^{2}/(12f_{\text{PQ}}^{2})-f_{\text{PQ}}^{2}<0, where mS2fPQ2m_{S}^{2}\sim-f_{\text{PQ}}^{2} for an 𝒪(1){\cal O}(1) quartic coupling. As a result,

fBfPQ105GeV(mϕGeV)14(mψB100GeV)12.f_{B}\gtrsim f_{\text{PQ}}\gtrsim 10^{5}\ {\rm GeV}\left(\frac{m_{\phi}}{{\rm GeV}}\right)^{\scalebox{1.01}{$\frac{1}{4}$}}\left(\frac{m_{\psi_{B}}}{100\ {\rm GeV}}\right)^{\scalebox{1.01}{$\frac{1}{2}$}}\,. (15)

To satisfy astrophysical constraints Ellis:1987pk ; Raffelt:1987yt ; Turner:1987by ; Mayle:1987as ; Raffelt:2006cw , we require

fB>107GeVifmϕ<10MeV.f_{B}>10^{7}\,\text{GeV}\quad\text{if}\;\;m_{\phi}<10\,\text{MeV}\,. (16)

Meanwhile, an upper bound on fBf_{B} may apply if thermalization is not sufficient to deplete the ϕ\phi relic, i.e. if the thermal abundance of ϕ\phi at T=TRT=T_{R} is higher than the dark matter abundance. This happens if TR>mϕT_{R}>m_{\phi}, in which case ϕ\phi acquires a yield 1/g1/g_{*} upon thermalization. We require that this thermal abundance should decay away fast enough so as not to dominate the energy density of the universe again, or to inject energy into the SM bath at late times, which may be subject to constraints from Big Bang Nucleosynthesis (BBN) or the CMB Kawasaki:1994sc ; Fixsen:1996nj ; Redondo:2008ec . This requires mϕ>TBBNm_{\phi}>T_{\text{BBN}} (taken to be 3 MeV), and ΓϕBB or ψBψ¯B>H\Gamma_{\phi\to BB\text{ or }\psi_{B}\bar{\psi}_{B}}>H at T=max(mϕ/g,TBBN)TdminT=\max(m_{\phi}/g_{*},T_{\rm BBN})\equiv T_{\text{d}}^{\min}, which restricts fBf_{B} to be

fB\displaystyle f_{B}\lesssim {2×108GeVmϕGeV(mψBTdmin)(mψB<mϕ2),105GeVmϕGeV(mϕTdmin)(mψB>mϕ2),\displaystyle\left\{\begin{array}[]{ll}2\times 10^{8}\ {\rm GeV}\sqrt{\frac{m_{\phi}}{{\rm GeV}}}\left(\frac{m_{\psi_{B}}}{T_{\text{d}}^{\min}}\right)&(m_{\psi_{B}}<\frac{m_{\phi}}{2})\,,\\ 10^{5}\ {\rm GeV}\sqrt{\frac{m_{\phi}}{{\rm GeV}}}\left(\frac{m_{\phi}}{T_{\text{d}}^{\min}}\right)&(m_{\psi_{B}}>\frac{m_{\phi}}{2})\,,\end{array}\right. (19)
applicable if TR>mϕ.\displaystyle\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\quad\text{applicable if }T_{R}>m_{\phi}\,. (20)

Further constraints on this scenario come from several requirements on ϕi\phi_{i}. First, TM>TRT_{M}>T_{R} implies

ϕi2×1015GeV(mϕGeV)14(meVmA)12.\phi_{i}\gtrsim 2\times 10^{15}\ {\rm GeV}\left(\frac{m_{\phi}}{{\rm GeV}}\right)^{\scalebox{1.01}{$\frac{1}{4}$}}\left(\frac{{\rm meV}}{m_{A^{\prime}}}\right)^{\scalebox{1.01}{$\frac{1}{2}$}}\,. (21)

The second bound comes from the coldness of DPDM. The redshift of the DPDM momentum can be computed using the invariant ratios, kA3/nϕmϕ2/ϕi2k_{A^{\prime}}^{3}/n_{\phi}\sim m_{\phi}^{2}/\phi_{i}^{2} until TRT_{R}, and kA3/sk_{A^{\prime}}^{3}/s after TRT_{R}. Requiring kA<103mAk_{A^{\prime}}<10^{-3}\,m_{A^{\prime}} at T=T=\,eV Irsic:2017ixq ; Lopez-Honorez:2017csg and making use of Eq. (13), we obtain

ϕi4×1010GeV(mϕGeV)(meVmA)2.\phi_{i}\gtrsim 4\times 10^{10}\ {\rm GeV}\left(\frac{m_{\phi}}{{\rm GeV}}\right)\left(\frac{{\rm meV}}{m_{A^{\prime}}}\right)^{2}\,. (22)

Third, requiring that ϕ\phi decay should not overproduce AA^{\prime}, ΓϕAAαD2mϕ3/(256π3fD2)<H(TR)\Gamma_{\phi\rightarrow A^{\prime}A^{\prime}}\simeq\alpha_{D}^{2}m_{\phi}^{3}/(256\pi^{3}f_{D}^{2})<H(T_{R}), we have

ϕi102πfDαD106GeV(mϕGeV)12(mAmeV).\displaystyle\phi_{i}\gtrsim 10\cdot\frac{2\pi f_{D}}{\alpha_{D}}\gtrsim 10^{6}\ {\rm GeV}\left(\frac{m_{\phi}}{{\rm GeV}}\right)^{\scalebox{1.01}{$\frac{1}{2}$}}\left(\frac{m_{A^{\prime}}}{{\rm meV}}\right)\,. (23)

Finally, the isocurvature perturbation constraint from Planck Akrami:2018odb , 𝒫isoA𝒫isoϕ(HIπϕi)28.7×1011\mathcal{P}_{\text{iso}}^{A^{\prime}}\simeq\mathcal{P}_{\text{iso}}^{\phi}\simeq\left(\frac{H_{I}}{\pi\phi_{i}}\right)^{2}\lesssim 8.7\times 10^{-11}, where HIH_{I} is the Hubble rate during inflation, translates into

ϕi3×104HI>104mϕ.\phi_{i}\gtrsim 3\times 10^{4}\,H_{I}>10^{4}\,m_{\phi}\,. (24)

Here we have used 3HI>mϕ3H_{I}>m_{\phi}, which is necessary for ensuring that ϕ\phi starts oscillating only after inflation.

Lastly, we note there can be a contribution to DPDM from inflationary quantum fluctuations Graham:2015rva , estimated as

ΩAinfΩDM1D(mA6×106eV)12(HI1014GeV)2,\frac{\Omega^{\rm inf}_{A^{\prime}}}{\Omega_{\rm DM}}\simeq\frac{1}{D}\left(\frac{m_{A^{\prime}}}{6\times 10^{-6}\ {\rm eV}}\right)^{\scalebox{1.01}{$\frac{1}{2}$}}\left(\frac{H_{I}}{10^{14}\ {\rm GeV}}\right)^{2}\,, (25)

where D=max(1,mA/H(TR))D=\max(1,\sqrt{m_{A^{\prime}}/H(T_{R})}) accounts for dilution from entropy production when ϕ\phi is thermalized. Requiring Eq. (25) to be less than 1, we obtain

mϕ<3HI8×1013GeV(meVmA)14D12.m_{\phi}<3H_{I}\lesssim 8\times 10^{13}\,\text{GeV}\left(\frac{\text{meV}}{m_{A^{\prime}}}\right)^{\scalebox{1.01}{$\frac{1}{4}$}}D^{\scalebox{1.01}{$\frac{1}{2}$}}\,. (26)

The aforementioned constraints are summarized in the (mA,mϕ)(m_{A^{\prime}},m_{\phi}) plane in Fig. 1. The red region is excluded because TR<TBBNT_{R}<T_{\rm BBN}, so the universe would be ϕ\phi-dominated at TBBNT_{\rm BBN}. In the purple region, the minimum ϕi\phi_{i} consistent with Eqs. (21-24) exceeds 2/3MPl\sqrt{2/3}\,M_{\rm Pl}, and the axion energy density would lead to eternal inflation. The blue region violates Eq. (26), so DPDM would be overproduced from inflationary fluctuations.

We scan over mψBm_{\psi_{B}} (restricted to be above 100 GeV to avoid possible tension with collider searches) to find the maximal parameter space allowed by Eqs. (14-19), which excludes the gray regions. The irregular shape of these regions reflects the nature of this optimization procedure, namely adjusting mψBm_{\psi_{B}} to open the least constrained thermalization channel, among a set of options that differs from point to point in the (mA,mϕ)(m_{A^{\prime}},m_{\phi}) plane. For example, for mA0.6m_{A^{\prime}}\gtrsim 0.6\,eV, TR<mϕT_{R}<m_{\phi} by Eq. (13), so we may choose between using Eq. (7) vs. Eq. (10) to thermalize ϕ\phi, while for mA0.6m_{A^{\prime}}\lesssim 0.6\,eV, the options are instead Eqs. (6) and (9). In any case, we also need to ensure that Γ(T)<H(T)\Gamma(T)<H(T) for any T>TRT>T_{R}, which again requires considering different processes for different mψBm_{\psi_{B}}.

The availability of the remaining parameter space depends crucially on the PQ fermion mass. Interestingly, if we are to live in the region below the lower solid (dashed) curve (including the lowest mAm_{A^{\prime}} region our mechanism can accommodate), a concrete prediction would be the existence of a fermion with mass below 1(10)1(10)\,TeV. If a heavy lepton mixes with the SM as discussed above, it can decay to SM gauge bosons and fermions, a signature possibly accessible at the LHC or future colliders. Alternately, discovering a fermion with a sub-TeV mass would exclude all parameter space above the upper solid curve.

Refer to caption
Figure 1: Parameter space of the dark photon and axion masses in the scenario where ϕ\phi is thermalized after dominating the universe’s energy density.

Radiation-dominated universe.—We now consider the second possibility, where the axion is thermalized before TMT_{M}, so the universe remains radiation dominated (RD). In this case, the DPDM relic abundance fixes ϕi\phi_{i} rather than TthT_{\text{th}}. This is because in the absence of entropy production, the AA^{\prime} yield is constant since ToscT_{\rm osc},

YA=nAs|Toscnϕs|Toscmϕϕi2s(Tosc).Y_{A^{\prime}}=\left.\frac{n_{A^{\prime}}}{s}\right|_{T_{\rm osc}}\sim\left.\frac{n_{\phi}}{s}\right|_{T_{\rm osc}}\sim\,\frac{m_{\phi}\phi_{i}^{2}}{s(T_{\rm osc})}\,. (27)

The observed dark matter abundance then determines

ϕi2×1015GeV(mϕGeV)14(meVmA)12ϕ0,\phi_{i}\simeq 2\times 10^{15}\ {\rm GeV}\left(\frac{m_{\phi}}{{\rm GeV}}\right)^{\scalebox{1.01}{$\frac{1}{4}$}}\left(\frac{{\rm meV}}{m_{A^{\prime}}}\right)^{\scalebox{1.01}{$\frac{1}{2}$}}\equiv\phi_{0}\,, (28)

where we have introduced the notation ϕ0\phi_{0} to indicate that ϕi\phi_{i} is fixed (given mϕm_{\phi}, mAm_{A^{\prime}}) in the RD case.

On the other hand, the axion thermalization temperature TthT_{\text{th}} is not fixed, but subject to the following constraints. First, Eq. (28) combined with Eq. (11) fixes TMT_{M}, which sets a lower bound on TthT_{\text{th}},

Tth>TM0.6eVmϕmA.T_{\text{th}}>T_{M}\simeq 0.6\ {\rm eV}\frac{m_{\phi}}{m_{A^{\prime}}}\,. (29)

Another lower bound comes from requiring that the ϕ\phi relic should not decay to AA^{\prime} before thermalization because this would give a potentially large contribution to hot dark matter. From ΓϕAA<H(Tth)\Gamma_{\phi\rightarrow A^{\prime}A^{\prime}}<H(T_{\text{th}}), we have

Tth0.3keV(mϕGeV)54(mAmeV)12,T_{\text{th}}\gtrsim 0.3\,\text{keV}\left(\frac{m_{\phi}}{{\rm GeV}}\right)^{\scalebox{1.01}{$\frac{5}{4}$}}\left(\frac{m_{A^{\prime}}}{{\rm meV}}\right)^{\scalebox{1.01}{$\frac{1}{2}$}}\,, (30)

where we have used αD/(2πfD)10/ϕ0\alpha_{D}/(2\pi f_{D})\gtrsim 10/\phi_{0}. Finally, we require Tth>TBBNT_{\text{th}}>T_{\text{BBN}} to avoid potentially dangerous energy injection after BBN, and Tth<ToscT_{\text{th}}<T_{\text{osc}} so that ϕ\phi is not thermalized when oscillations begin.

Once TthT_{\text{th}} is chosen consistent with the aforementioned bounds, the procedure of determining fBf_{B} and applying constraints on it is identical to the MD case (see Eqs. (14-19)), with an additional constraint from freeze-in (FI) overproduction of AA^{\prime}. Note that for mA𝒪(100eV)m_{A^{\prime}}\gtrsim\mathcal{O}(100\,{\rm eV}), the required dark matter yield is less than the thermal equilibrium value and hence any additional thermal production may result in an overabundance. In the current setup, a thermal abundance of AA^{\prime} can freeze in via ψBψ¯BϕAA\psi_{B}\bar{\psi}_{B}\to\phi^{*}\to A^{\prime}A^{\prime}, which is most effective at the highest temperature TmaxT_{\max}. The FI abundance is computed to be (after using Eq. (28))

ΩAFIΩDM(αDϕ02πfD)2(mAkeV)2(mψBfB)2(TmaxTosc).\displaystyle\frac{\Omega^{\rm FI}_{A^{\prime}}}{\Omega_{\rm DM}}\simeq\left(\frac{\alpha_{D}\phi_{0}}{2\pi f_{D}}\right)^{2}\left(\frac{m_{A^{\prime}}}{\text{keV}}\right)^{2}\left(\frac{m_{\psi_{B}}}{f_{B}}\right)^{2}\left(\frac{T_{\max}}{T_{\text{osc}}}\right)\,. (31)

At least, this ratio should be less than 1 for αDϕ0/(2πfD)=10\alpha_{D}\phi_{0}/(2\pi f_{D})=10 and Tmax=ToscT_{\max}=T_{\text{osc}}. Thus,

fBmψB(mA0.1keV).f_{B}\gtrsim m_{\psi_{B}}\left(\frac{m_{A^{\prime}}}{0.1\,\text{keV}}\right)\,. (32)

This constraint does not apply for the MD case as the FI abundance is sufficiently diluted by entropy production.

In addition, constraints from isocurvature perturbations and inflationary production, Eqs. (24) (with ϕi=ϕ0\phi_{i}=\phi_{0} defined in Eq. (28)) and (26) (with D=1D=1) apply equally here. One last constraint is from the coldness of DPDM, kA<103mAk_{A^{\prime}}<10^{-3}\,m_{A^{\prime}} at T=T=\,eV. The dark photon momentum is estimated using the invariant ratio kA3/smϕ3/s(Tosc)k_{A^{\prime}}^{3}/s\sim m_{\phi}^{3}/s(T_{\rm osc}), and the bound reads

mϕ2×106GeV(mAmeV)2.m_{\phi}\lesssim 2\times 10^{6}\ {\rm GeV}\left(\frac{m_{A^{\prime}}}{{\rm meV}}\right)^{2}\,. (33)

The result of all these constraints for this RD case is shown in Fig. 2, where we scan over both mψBm_{\psi_{B}} and TthT_{\text{th}} to find the maximal allowed parameter space. The additional freedom of adjusting TthT_{\text{th}} opens up more parameter space compared to the MD case.

Refer to caption
Figure 2: Similar to Fig. 1, but for the scenario where ϕ\phi is thermalized in a radiation-dominated universe.

Discussion.—We have shown that dark photon dark matter AA^{\prime} produced by coherent oscillations of an axion-like field ϕ\phi can have a viable cosmology for a broad swath of AA^{\prime} masses, ranging from a few ×108\times 10^{-8}\,eV up to \simGeV. Two key ingredients are a tachyonic instability that leads to explosive production of AA^{\prime} from ϕ\phi, and a mechanism to deplete the residual ϕ\phi relic. For the latter, we have considered a minimal possibility of coupling ϕ\phi to the visible sector as a proof of principle and discussed two possible thermalization histories, mapping out regions in the (mA,mϕ)(m_{A^{\prime}},m_{\phi}) plane consistent with all constraints (see Figs. 1 and 2). Our work shows that to explicitly realize the often-quoted “nonthermal production” of ultralight dark photon dark matter can be nontrivial, and motivates further investigation of the subject in light of the near-future experimental prospects of detecting such a dark matter candidate over a wide range of masses.

While our mechanism does not rely on interactions of AA^{\prime} with the SM, a kinetic mixing ϵ\epsilon with the photon is generically expected to exist, whose value is crucial for the potential detectability of DPDM. Constraints on ϵ\epsilon specific to our mechanism include requiring that the AA^{\prime}-photon mixing should not disturb the momentum coherence necessary for the tachyonic instability, or thermalize the produced AA^{\prime} at any time afterward. These constraints are however rather loose, because ϵ\epsilon is suppressed at high temperatures by the large thermal mass of the SM photon. As a result, the only relevant constraints are those considered in Refs. Arias:2012az ; An:2013yua , from a resonant conversion to SM photons. Experimental searches for DPDM will probe deeper into the (mA,ϵ)(m_{A^{\prime}},\epsilon) parameter space where our mechanism may be realized.

The most promising access to the PQ sector of our setup may be via a PQ fermion ψB\psi_{B} rather than the axion ϕ\phi (which cannot be lighter than 20\sim 20\,MeV and has a photon coupling that is already strongly constrained, see e.g. Eq. (15)). We have seen that the viable parameter space depends on mψBm_{\psi_{B}}, because it affects the thermalization history of ϕ\phi. Interestingly, the lowest mAm_{A^{\prime}} region allowed by our mechanism (which goes beyond the mass range viable for inflationary production) is accompanied by mψBm_{\psi_{B}}\lesssim TeV. Discovery of such a PQ fermion at the LHC or a future collider, combined with positive results from light DPDM searches, may therefore hint toward an intertwined cosmological history of the PQ and dark photon sectors.

Acknowledgments.—The authors thank K. Harigaya, V. Narayan, and B. Safdi for useful discussions. The work of R.C. was supported in part by the DOE Early Career Grant No. DE-SC0019225. The work of A.P., Z.Z. and Y.Z. was supported in part by the DOE under Grant No. DE-SC0007859. Z.Z. was also supported by the Summer Leinweber Research Award, by NSF Grant No. PHY-1638509, and by DOE Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231. Z.Z. thanks the CERN theory group for hospitality during the completion of this work.

Note added.—During the preparation of this work, we became aware of Refs. Agrawal:2018vin ; Bastero-Gil:2018uel ; Dror:2018pdh which also consider new production mechanisms for light vector dark matter.

References

  • (1) A. Wagner et al. [ADMX Collaboration], “A Search for Hidden Sector Photons with ADMX,” Phys. Rev. Lett.  105, 171801 (2010) [arXiv:1007.3766 [hep-ex]].
  • (2) S. Chaudhuri, P. W. Graham, K. Irwin, J. Mardon, S. Rajendran and Y. Zhao, “Radio for hidden-photon dark matter detection,” Phys. Rev. D 92, no. 7, 075012 (2015) [arXiv:1411.7382 [hep-ph]].
  • (3) D. Horns, J. Jaeckel, A. Lindner, A. Lobanov, J. Redondo and A. Ringwald, “Searching for WISPy Cold Dark Matter with a Dish Antenna,” JCAP 1304, 016 (2013) [arXiv:1212.2970 [hep-ph]].
  • (4) J. Jaeckel and J. Redondo, “An antenna for directional detection of WISPy dark matter,” JCAP 1311, 016 (2013) [arXiv:1307.7181 [hep-ph]].
  • (5) J. Suzuki, T. Horie, Y. Inoue and M. Minowa, “Experimental Search for Hidden Photon CDM in the eV mass range with a Dish Antenna,” JCAP 1509, no. 09, 042 (2015) [arXiv:1504.00118 [hep-ex]].
  • (6) J. Jaeckel and S. Knirck, “Directional Resolution of Dish Antenna Experiments to Search for WISPy Dark Matter,” JCAP 1601, 005 (2016) [arXiv:1509.00371 [hep-ph]].
  • (7) B. Dobrich et al., “The FUNK search for Hidden Photon Dark Matter in the eV range,” arXiv:1510.05869 [physics.ins-det].
  • (8) S. Knirck, T. Yamazaki, Y. Okesaku, S. Asai, T. Idehara and T. Inada, “First results from a hidden photon dark matter search in the meV sector using a plane-parabolic mirror system,” arXiv:1806.05120 [hep-ex].
  • (9) M. Baryakhtar, J. Huang and R. Lasenby, “Axion and hidden photon dark matter detection with multilayer optical haloscopes,” Phys. Rev. D 98, no. 3, 035006 (2018) [arXiv:1803.11455 [hep-ph]].
  • (10) Y. Hochberg, T. Lin and K. M. Zurek, “Detecting Ultralight Bosonic Dark Matter via Absorption in Superconductors,” Phys. Rev. D 94, no. 1, 015019 (2016) [arXiv:1604.06800 [hep-ph]].
  • (11) Y. Hochberg, T. Lin and K. M. Zurek, “Absorption of light dark matter in semiconductors,” Phys. Rev. D 95, no. 2, 023013 (2017) [arXiv:1608.01994 [hep-ph]].
  • (12) Q. Yang and H. Di, “Vector Dark Matter Detection using the Quantum Jump of Atoms,” Phys. Lett. B 780, 622 (2018) [arXiv:1606.01492 [hep-ph]].
  • (13) I. M. Bloch, R. Essig, K. Tobioka, T. Volansky and T. T. Yu, “Searching for Dark Absorption with Direct Detection Experiments,” JHEP 1706, 087 (2017) [arXiv:1608.02123 [hep-ph]].
  • (14) P. C. Bunting, G. Gratta, T. Melia and S. Rajendran, “Magnetic Bubble Chambers and Sub-GeV Dark Matter Direct Detection,” Phys. Rev. D 95, no. 9, 095001 (2017) [arXiv:1701.06566 [hep-ph]].
  • (15) Y. Hochberg et al., “Detection of sub-MeV Dark Matter with Three-Dimensional Dirac Materials,” Phys. Rev. D 97, no. 1, 015004 (2018) [arXiv:1708.08929 [hep-ph]].
  • (16) A. Arvanitaki, S. Dimopoulos and K. Van Tilburg, “Resonant absorption of bosonic dark matter in molecules,” Phys. Rev. X 8, no. 4, 041001 (2018) [arXiv:1709.05354 [hep-ph]].
  • (17) S. Knapen, T. Lin, M. Pyle and K. M. Zurek, “Detection of Light Dark Matter With Optical Phonons in Polar Materials,” Phys. Lett. B 785, 386 (2018) [arXiv:1712.06598 [hep-ph]].
  • (18) S. Griffin, S. Knapen, T. Lin and K. M. Zurek, “Directional Detection of Light Dark Matter with Polar Materials,” arXiv:1807.10291 [hep-ph].
  • (19) H. An, M. Pospelov and J. Pradler, “Dark Matter Detectors as Dark Photon Helioscopes,” Phys. Rev. Lett.  111, 041302 (2013) [arXiv:1304.3461 [hep-ph]].
  • (20) A. Pierce, K. Riles and Y. Zhao, “Searching for Dark Photon Dark Matter with Gravitational Wave Detectors,” Phys. Rev. Lett.  121, no. 6, 061102 (2018) [arXiv:1801.10161 [hep-ph]].
  • (21) P. W. Graham, D. E. Kaplan, J. Mardon, S. Rajendran and W. A. Terrano, “Dark Matter Direct Detection with Accelerometers,” Phys. Rev. D 93, no. 7, 075029 (2016) [arXiv:1512.06165 [hep-ph]].
  • (22) V. Irsˇ\check{\rm s}icˇ\check{\rm c} et al., “New Constraints on the free-streaming of warm dark matter from intermediate and small scale Lyman-α\alpha forest data,” Phys. Rev. D 96, no. 2, 023522 (2017) [arXiv:1702.01764 [astro-ph.CO]].
  • (23) L. Lopez-Honorez, O. Mena, S. Palomares-Ruiz and P. V. Domingo, “Constraints on warm dark matter from the ionization history of the Universe,” arXiv:1703.02302 [astro-ph.CO].
  • (24) A. E. Nelson and J. Scholtz, “Dark Light, Dark Matter and the Misalignment Mechanism,” Phys. Rev. D 84, 103501 (2011) [arXiv:1105.2812 [hep-ph]].
  • (25) P. Arias, D. Cadamuro, M. Goodsell, J. Jaeckel, J. Redondo and A. Ringwald, “WISPy Cold Dark Matter,” JCAP 1206, 013 (2012) [arXiv:1201.5902 [hep-ph]].
  • (26) P. W. Graham, J. Mardon and S. Rajendran, “Vector Dark Matter from Inflationary Fluctuations,” Phys. Rev. D 93, no. 10, 103520 (2016) [arXiv:1504.02102 [hep-ph]].
  • (27) M. Reece, “Photon Masses in the Landscape and the Swampland,” arXiv:1808.09966 [hep-th].
  • (28) N. Craig and I. Garcia Garcia, “Rescuing Massive Photons from the Swampland,” arXiv:1810.05647 [hep-th].
  • (29) J. H. Traschen and R. H. Brandenberger, “Particle Production During Out-of-equilibrium Phase Transitions,” Phys. Rev. D 42, 2491 (1990).
  • (30) L. Kofman, A. D. Linde and A. A. Starobinsky, “Towards the theory of reheating after inflation,” Phys. Rev. D 56, 3258 (1997) [hep-ph/9704452].
  • (31) R. Allahverdi, R. Brandenberger, F. Y. Cyr-Racine and A. Mazumdar, “Reheating in Inflationary Cosmology: Theory and Applications,” Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.  60, 27 (2010) [arXiv:1001.2600 [hep-th]].
  • (32) M. A. Amin, M. P. Hertzberg, D. I. Kaiser and J. Karouby, “Nonperturbative Dynamics Of Reheating After Inflation: A Review,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 24, 1530003 (2014) [arXiv:1410.3808 [hep-ph]].
  • (33) M. M. Anber and L. Sorbo, “N-flationary magnetic fields,” JCAP 0610, 018 (2006) [astro-ph/0606534].
  • (34) T. Fujita, R. Namba, Y. Tada, N. Takeda and H. Tashiro, “Consistent generation of magnetic fields in axion inflation models,” JCAP 1505, no. 05, 054 (2015) [arXiv:1503.05802 [astro-ph.CO]].
  • (35) P. Adshead, J. T. Giblin, T. R. Scully and E. I. Sfakianakis, “Magnetogenesis from axion inflation,” JCAP 1610, 039 (2016) [arXiv:1606.08474 [astro-ph.CO]].
  • (36) P. Agrawal, G. Marques-Tavares and W. Xue, “Opening up the QCD axion window,” JHEP 1803, 049 (2018) [arXiv:1708.05008 [hep-ph]].
  • (37) N. Kitajima, T. Sekiguchi and F. Takahashi, “Cosmological abundance of the QCD axion coupled to hidden photons,” Phys. Lett. B 781, 684 (2018) [arXiv:1711.06590 [hep-ph]].
  • (38) W. D. Garretson, G. B. Field and S. M. Carroll, “Primordial magnetic fields from pseudoGoldstone bosons,” Phys. Rev. D 46, 5346 (1992) [hep-ph/9209238].
  • (39) P. Agrawal, N. Kitajima, M. Reece, T. Sekiguchi and F. Takahashi, “Relic Abundance of Dark Photon Dark Matter,” arXiv:1810.07188 [hep-ph].
  • (40) P. Agrawal, J. Fan and M. Reece, “Clockwork Axions in Cosmology: Is Chromonatural Inflation Chrononatural?,” arXiv:1806.09621 [hep-th].
  • (41) K. Choi, H. Kim and S. Yun, “Natural inflation with multiple sub-Planckian axions,” Phys. Rev. D 90, 023545 (2014) [arXiv:1404.6209 [hep-th]].
  • (42) K. Choi and S. H. Im, “Realizing the relaxion from multiple axions and its UV completion with high scale supersymmetry,” JHEP 1601, 149 (2016) [arXiv:1511.00132 [hep-ph]].
  • (43) D. E. Kaplan and R. Rattazzi, “Large field excursions and approximate discrete symmetries from a clockwork axion,” Phys. Rev. D 93, no. 8, 085007 (2016) [arXiv:1511.01827 [hep-ph]].
  • (44) A. J. Long, “Cosmological Aspects of the Clockwork Axion,” JHEP 1807, 066 (2018) [arXiv:1803.07086 [hep-ph]].
  • (45) V. S. Rychkov and A. Strumia, “Thermal production of gravitinos,” Phys. Rev. D 75, 075011 (2007) [hep-ph/0701104].
  • (46) A. Salvio, A. Strumia and W. Xue, “Thermal axion production,” JCAP 1401, 011 (2014) [arXiv:1310.6982 [hep-ph]].
  • (47) T. Moroi, K. Mukaida, K. Nakayama and M. Takimoto, “Axion Models with High Scale Inflation,” JHEP 1411, 151 (2014) [arXiv:1407.7465 [hep-ph]].
  • (48) J. Yokoyama, “Fate of oscillating scalar fields in the thermal bath and their cosmological implications,” Phys. Rev. D 70, 103511 (2004) [hep-ph/0406072].
  • (49) K. Mukaida and K. Nakayama, “Dynamics of oscillating scalar field in thermal environment,” JCAP 1301, 017 (2013) [arXiv:1208.3399 [hep-ph]].
  • (50) J. Kearney, A. Pierce and N. Weiner, “Vectorlike Fermions and Higgs Couplings,” Phys. Rev. D 86, 113005 (2012) [arXiv:1207.7062 [hep-ph]].
  • (51) J. R. Ellis and K. A. Olive, “Constraints on Light Particles From Supernova Sn1987a,” Phys. Lett. B 193, 525 (1987)
  • (52) G. Raffelt and D. Seckel, “Bounds on Exotic Particle Interactions from SN 1987a,” Phys. Rev. Lett.  60, 1793 (1988).
  • (53) M. S. Turner, “Axions from SN 1987a,” Phys. Rev. Lett.  60, 1797 (1988).
  • (54) R. Mayle, J. R. Wilson, J. R. Ellis, K. A. Olive, D. N. Schramm and G. Steigman, “Constraints on Axions from SN 1987a,” Phys. Lett. B 203, 188 (1988).
  • (55) G. G. Raffelt, “Astrophysical axion bounds,” Lect. Notes Phys.  741, 51 (2008) [hep-ph/0611350].
  • (56) M. Kawasaki and T. Moroi, “Electromagnetic cascade in the early universe and its application to the big bang nucleosynthesis,” Astrophys. J.  452, 506 (1995) [astro-ph/9412055].
  • (57) D. J. Fixsen, E. S. Cheng, J. M. Gales, J. C. Mather, R. A. Shafer and E. L. Wright, “The Cosmic Microwave Background spectrum from the full COBE FIRAS data set,” Astrophys. J.  473, 576 (1996) [astro-ph/9605054].
  • (58) J. Redondo and M. Postma, “Massive hidden photons as lukewarm dark matter,” JCAP 0902, 005 (2009) [arXiv:0811.0326 [hep-ph]].
  • (59) Y. Akrami et al. [Planck Collaboration], “Planck 2018 results. X. Constraints on inflation,” arXiv:1807.06211 [astro-ph.CO].
  • (60) M. Bastero-Gil, J. Santiago, L. Ubaldi and R. Vega-Morales, “Vector dark matter production at the end of inflation,” arXiv:1810.07208 [hep-ph].
  • (61) J. A. Dror, K. Harigaya and V. Narayan, “Parametric Resonance Production of Ultralight Vector Dark Matter,” arXiv:1810.07195 [hep-ph].