A Warped Scalar Portal To Fermionic Dark Matter: Adrian Carmona, Javier Castellano Ruiz, Matthias Neubert

Eur. Phys. J.
C (2021) 81:58
https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-08851-0
Regular Article - Theoretical Physics
A warped scalar portal to fermionic dark matter

Adrian Carmona1,a , Javier Castellano Ruiz2,b , Matthias Neubert2,3,4,c
1 CAFPE and Departamento de Física Teórica y del Cosmos, Universidad de Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain
2 PRISMA+ Cluster of Excellence and Mainz Institute for Theoretical Physics, Johannes Gutenberg University, 55099 Mainz, Germany
3 Department of Physics and LEPP, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA
4 Department of Physics, Universität Zürich, Winterthurerstrasse 190, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland
Received: 23 November 2020 / Accepted: 8 January 2021 / Published online: 20 January 2021
© The Author(s) 2021
Abstract We argue that extensions of the SM with a warped case, we know for a fact that the SM cannot accommodate
extra dimension, together with a new Z2 -odd scalar sin- some other observed phenomena. One of the most striking
glet, provide a natural explanation not only for the hierarchy examples is the existence of dark matter (DM). We know that
problem but also for the nature of fermion bulk masses and there is no viable DM candidate in the SM, so already this fact
the observed dark matter relic abundance. In particular, the asks for the presence of new physics. Extensions of the SM
Kaluza-Klein excitations of the new scalar particle, which with a warped extra dimension (WED) compactified on an
is required to naturally obtain fermion bulk masses through S1 /Z2 orbifold contain the necessary features for address-
Yukawa-like interactions, can be the leading portal to any ing simultaneously both of these issues, the absence of a
fermion propagating into the bulk of the extra dimension and viable DM candidate and the hierarchy problem. Moreover,
playing the role of dark matter. Moreover, such scalar exci- they can also explain the large hierarchy existing between
tations will necessarily mix with the Higgs boson, leading to the different fermions masses, providing a calculable ver-
modifications of the Higgs couplings and branching ratios, sion of partial compositeness [1–7], which makes them very
and allowing the Higgs to mediate the coannihilation of the attractive extensions of the SM.
fermionic dark matter. We study these effects and explore the Fermion masses in WED compactified on a S1 /Z2 orb-
viability of fermionic dark matter in the presence of these new ifold need to have a dynamical origin, since the five-
heavy scalar mediators both in the usual freeze-out scenario dimensional (5D) bulk masses must be Z2 -odd functions on
and in the case where the freeze-out happens during an early the orbifold [8,9]. Indeed, one can easily see that the 5D
period of matter domination. Dirac fermion bilinear ¯ i i is odd under the orbifold sym-
metry, excluding the presence of a constant mass term. The
most natural solution to this problem is to dynamically gener-
1 Introduction ate these masses with the help of a Z2 -odd bulk scalar field.
Indeed, if such scalar field develops a vacuum expectation
The discovery of the Higgs boson at the LHC represented value (VEV) with a non-trivial profile along the extra dimen-
the last step towards establishing the Standard Model (SM) sion, fermion bulk masses can arise dynamically through
as a solid theory describing the constituents of matter and Yukawa-like interactions. We have explored this possibility
their interactions down to very short distances. However, in detail in [10], studying in particular its phenomenologi-
there are still some questions which do not have an answer cal consequences. In particular, one finds that the VEV has
within the SM. One of the most significant examples is the so- a kink-like profile, approaching the traditional sign function
called hierarchy problem, the question why the Higgs boson for large values of the odd scalar mass, whenever the WED
is much lighter than the characteristic scale of gravity. One is significantly larger than its inverse curvature.
could argue that this problem is merely a by-product of our A natural question which arises in scenarios addressing
theoretical prejudices and that nature did not ask for a dynam- the origin of the fermion bulk masses concerns the possible
ical explanation for this difference of scales. Still, even in this interplay with a bulk Higgs boson. In [10] we have con-
sidered a brane-localized Higgs field, which does not mix
a e-mail: [email protected] (corresponding author) at tree-level with the Z2 -odd scalar field. However, in the
b e-mail: [email protected] more general case of a Higgs boson in the bulk of the extra
c e-mail: [email protected]
123
58 Page 2 of 20 Eur. Phys. J. C (2021) 81:58
dimension [11–17], such a mixing is unavoidable and needs 2 A bulk Higgs in a WED
to be taken into account. Studying the effect of this mixing
is one of the main goals of this work. On the other hand, We consider a Randall–Sundrum (RS) model [21] with the
since the odd scalar field is responsible for all fermion bulk extra dimension compactified on an S1 /Z2 orbifold with two
masses, it represents a unique window into any femionic dark D3-branes localized at the fixed points, an ultraviolet (UV)
sector propagating into the bulk of the WED. Models with brane at tUV = and an infrared (IR) brane at tIR = 1,
WEDs already feature an irreducible mediator between visi- where t is the coordinate describing the extra dimension.
ble and dark sectors, since gravity couples to matter through This coordinate is defined in terms of the usual φ = y/π
the energy-momentum tensor. However, as we will see, when coordinate by t = ekr φ , where = e−kr π ∼ O(10−16 ). In
the DM candidates are fermionic weakly interacting parti- this notation, the metric reads
cles (WIMPs) with masses of O(TeV), the resonances aris-
ing from the 5D Z2 -odd scalar field can provide the most 2 μ ν dt 2
ds = g M N d x d x = 2 ημν d x d x − 2
2 M N
, (1)
important mediators for the DM coannihilation cross sec- t MKK
tion. Moreover, due to the mixing with the bulk Higgs field,
where MKK ≡ k and ημν = diag(1, −1, −1, −1) is the
these fermionic dark sectors are mostly Higgs-mediated for
4D Minkowski metric. It is useful to define the quantity
DM masses below the TeV scale. We examine thoroughly the
L = kr π ∼ 30, which is a measure of the size of the extra
resulting model of scalar-mediated fermionic DM for a large
dimension in natural units. Here k and r are the AdS curvature
range of DM masses. We focus on the case where the DM
and the radius of the S1 . Note that in RS models addressing
particle is a vector-like (VL) fermion, the first Kaluza–Klein
the hierarchy problem implies L 1.
(KK) excitation of a 5D dark fermion. However, most of our
Let us start by reviewing the well-known case where the
results also hold in the case where the DM candidate gets an
Higgs field does not mix at tree-level with the odd bulk scalar
external mass, which can be chiral, VL or even of Majorana
[17,22]. For simplicity, a quartic term is only introduced on
type.
the IR brane in order to induce electroweak symmetry break-
This work is organized as follows: In order to set up the
ing (EWSB). The Higgs action reads
notation, we review the bulk Higgs case (disregarding the

portal coupling) in Sect. 2. In Sect. 3 we solve the coupled 5 √
S = d x g g MN (D M H )† D N H − V (H )
system of field equations obtained after switching on the
portal coupling between both types of bulk scalar fields by (2)
|ĝk |
diagonalizing the resulting 4D mass matrix perturbatively. In − √ V̂ k (H ) δ(t − tk ) ,
g
Sect. 4 we proceed to discuss the phenomenology assuming k=UV,IR
a non-negligible portal coupling and the presence of Nχ dark
where g = det(g M N ), ĝk = det(gμν |t=tk ), and we define the
fermion bulk fields. First, we discuss the impact of the scalar
Higgs doublet in the unitary gauge as
mixing on the SM Higgs couplings. We then continue by
examining the impact of the dark fermions on the Higgs invis- T
t
ible decay width. Then, we discuss the predictions for the DM H (x, t) = 0, √ [ϕ H (t) + h(x, t)] . (3)
2r
coannihilation cross-section mediated by the Higgs field and
the first KK resonance of the Z2 -odd scalar field, comparing For the Higgs field and its VEV we follow the treatment of
these contributions with the ones mediated by KK gravitons. [16]. The bulk and brane-localized potentials for the bulk
We compute the prediction for the DM relic abundance as Higgs field are taken to be of the form
a function of the velocity-averaged coannihilation cross sec- V (H ) = μ2H |H |2 ,
tion in the usual freeze-out scenario as well as in the case
of a matter-dominated universe [18–20]. Finally, we com- V̂ UV = σUV |H |2 , (4)
pute the constraints arising from direct detection using data V̂ IR
= −σIR |H | + ρIR |H | .
2 4
from the Xenon1T experiment, showing that for a O(10 TeV)

fermionic WIMP we can reproduce the observed DM relic The equation of motion (EOM) for the Higgs VEV is
abundance in the scenario of matter domination, without ϕH
t 2 ∂t2 + t∂t − β 2 = 0, β 2 ≡ 4 + μ2H /k 2 , (5)
conflicting with current data from Xenon1T. In the case of t
radiation domination and DM masses of ∼ 15 TeV, these along with boundary conditions (BC) on the UV and IR
scalar mediators can provide a non-negligible fraction of the branes, which read
required coannihilation cross section, even though additional
mediators would be required. ∂t [t ϕ H (t)]t= + = m UV ϕ H (),
2λIR (6)
∂t [t ϕ H (t)]t=1− = m IR ϕ H (1) − 2
ϕ H (1)3 .
MKK
123
Eur. Phys. J. C (2021) 81:58 Page 3 of 20 58
√
The notation + and 1− refers to the orbifold fixed points, with 1 = H and 2 = (1/ 2) denoting the Higgs dou-
approached from the appropriate side. Above we have blet and the (real) odd scalar field, which is a gauge singlet.
defined We consider mixed BCs for the Higgs field, while the odd
σUV σIR ρIR k scalar field satisfies Dirichlet BCs. Such BCs for the bulk
m UV = , m IR = , λIR = . (7) Higgs are a consequence of the brane-localized potentials,
2k 2k 4r
which are forbidden for the odd scalar, since it vanishes on
This set of EOM and BCs leads to the well-known solution
the two branes. In our model, both bulk scalar fields develop
ϕ H (t) = Nv t 1+β − rv t 1−β , (8) a VEV. We can express the 5D odd scalar in terms of its back-
ground configuration ϕ S (t) and its 5D excitation S(x, t) as
where t
2 + β − m UV (x, t) = ϕ S (t) + √ S(x, t). (15)
rv = 2β , r
2 − β − m UV
(9) The bulk potential reads
M 2 (m IR − 2 − β) + rv (m IR − 2 + β)
Nv2 = KK . μ2S 2 λ S 4
2λIR (1 − rv )3 V (H, ) = μ2H |H |2 − + + λ H S |H |2 2 ,
2 4
Note that, unless β is very small or m UV is extremely fine- (16)
tuned to the value 2 − β, it is safe to set rv ∝ 2β → 0.
Then, the Higgs VEV will be peaked towards the IR brane where μ H , μ S are the mass parameters and λ S , λ H S the
and expression (8) simplifies to quartic couplings. The brane-localized potentials for the bulk
Higgs field are the same as those shown in (4).
ϕ H (t) Nv t 1+β = ϕ H (1) t 1+β , (10)
3.1 Background solutions
with
m IR − 2 − β First, we determine the profiles of the two VEVs. From (16),

Nv ≡ ϕ H (1) MKK . (11) the EOMs are
2λIR

Demanding the normalization for the VEV to be such that μ2 k 4 λ S 2 ϕ 2H
one correctly reproduces the SM mass relations for the W t 2 ∂t2 − 3t∂t + 2S 1 − v 2S − λ̄ 4 t 2
v S (t) = 0,
k μS r MKK (17)
and Z bosons leads to
ϕ H (t)
t 2 ∂t2 + t∂t − β 2 − λ̄v 2S = 0,
2π 1 dt 2 π ϕ 2H (1) t
v42 = ϕ H (t) = + O(), (12)
L t L 1+β where we have defined the dimensionless coupling
where we have used the fact that the zero-mode profiles of μ2S λ H S
the gauge bosons are flat, up to corrections of O(v42 /MKK
2 ), λ̄ ≡ (18)
k 2 λS
[16]. We can then write the VEV of the Higgs field as
and redefined the VEV of the odd field as in [10], i.e.
L μS
ϕ H (t) ≈ v4 (1 + β) t 1+β , (13) ϕ S (t) = √ v S (t). (19)
π λS
where v4 agrees with the SM parameter vSM at leading order In order to obtain an inverted one-dimensional Mexican-hat
in x4 ≡ v4 /MKK . potential for v S and guarantee the existence of non-trivial
solutions, we impose an upper bound on λ̄λ S /r . In practice,
we demand that
3 Bulk Higgs and odd scalar mixing
k 4 λ S 2 ϕ 2H (t)
λ̄ 4 t 2
≤ 1. (20)
μS r MKK t=1
We are now interested in the case where the two bulk scalar
fields – the Higgs and the new Z2 -odd scalar – mix with each Since the Higgs VEV is monotonic in t (at least at leading
other. In this case the action reads order in λ̄), once this condition is fulfilled it will also hold
for t < 1. Plugging in the solution for the Higgs VEV for
⎧ λ̄ = 0 (i.e. for vanishing portal coupling λ H S ), this constraint
⎨
√ translates into
S = d 5 x g g MN (D M i )† D N i − V (1 , 2 )
⎩
i=1,2
λS x4−2 μ 4
⎫ (14) λ̄
S
, (21)
|ĝk | k ⎬ r 10(1 + β) k
− √ V̂ (1 , 2 ) δ(t − tk ) ,
g ⎭ where x4 = v4 /MKK .
k=UV,IR
123
ing a value of the DM coannihilation cross section required

to account for the observed relic abundance demands a large
portal coupling between the different fermion sectors. For
this reason, we consider λ S /r O(100) hereafter. In partic-
ular, in Fig. 1 we choose λ̄λ S /r = 100 to saturate the bound
given by Eq. (21).
3.2 Scalar excitations
We now move on to the study of the scalar KK excitations.

The profiles of these resonances can be computed by inserting
Fig. 1 Effective potential Ṽ (v S ) computed using the leading-order the KK decompositions
solution ϕ H,0 (t), for different values of t and MKK = 5 TeV, k/m Pl =
1/8 and λ̄λ S /r = 100, for β = 2 (blue) and β = 8 (red) ∞

h(x, t) = h n (x)χnh (t),
n=0
∞
(23)
We can solve the coupled system of equations iteratively.
The starting point are the solutions we already know for the S(x, t) = Sn (x)χnS (t)
decoupled equations – v S,0 (t) and ϕ H,0 (t). We thus insert n=1
the solution from the previous iteration for each VEV in the into the action (14) and keeping quadratic terms in the fields.
EOM corresponding to the other one in (17). This method is A possible way of determining the eigenmodes and eigen-
convenient, since the potential for the odd VEV and the strat- values of the mixed system is to diagonalize the 4D mass
egy to solve its EOM is well understood (see [10]). Indeed, matrix resulting after integrating the quadratic terms in the
as we can see from Fig. 1, the potential does not differ much action. Besides the KK scalar masses for the non-mixed case,
from the potential obtained in the decoupled case (zero por- non-diagonal entries arise through the potential, once we
tal coupling). We have checked numerically that the solution integrate the profiles over the fifth dimension, i.e.
obtained for v S (t) fits the one obtained for the decoupled 1
case with high accuracy. √ dt
d 5 x g V (H, ) ⊃ λ̄ d 4 x 3
We display in Fig. 1 the one-dimensional effective poten- t
tial Ṽ (v S ) defined by 2
MKK 2 kr λ S 2 2
× v S (t) h(x, t)2 + t ϕ H (t)S(x, t)2
kr (μ S r )2 r

δ Ṽ (v S ) k 4 λ S 2 ϕ 2H (t) MKK λ S
= 1 − v S − λ̄ 4
2
t vS , (22) +4 t ϕ H (t)v S (t)h(x, t)S(x, t) .
δv S μS r MKK 2
μS r r
(24)
which determines the EOM for v S once ϕ H ≈ ϕ H,0 is used,
see (17). We show this potential for λ̄λ S /r = 100 and differ- Inserting the KK decompositions for h(x, t) and S(x, t), and
ent values of t, μ S and β, in order to explore how its maxima using the profiles for the decoupled case, we can write down
change with increasing t and different values of μ S and β. the mass matrix to first order in λ̄, finding
Note that in the figure we use the leading-order solution for ⎡⎛ ⎞ ⎛ 2 ⎞⎤
the Higgs profile. Here and below we choose MKK = 5 TeV, x h20 0 0 ··· κh 0 κh20 S1 κh20 h 1 ···
⎢⎜ 0 · · ·⎟⎟ ⎜ · · ·⎟ ⎥
x S21 ⎜κ κ2 κ2
2
which is motivated so as to avoid tensions with electroweak ⎢⎜ 0 ⎟⎥ 2
M2 = ⎢⎜ ⎟ + λ̄ ⎜ h20 S1 2S1 h 12S1 ⎟⎥ M .
⎢⎜ 0 0 x h21 · · ·⎟ ⎜κh 0 h 1 κh 1 S1 κh 1 · · ·⎟⎥ KK
precision data (see [10] for more details). Similarly, we take ⎣⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠⎦
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
k = m Pl /8 where m Pl = 2.4·1018 GeV is the reduced Planck . . . . . . . .
mass. This value corresponds to kr ≈ 10.1, or equivalently (25)
π ≡ m Pl e−kr π = 40 TeV. We observe that both maxima
decrease for increasing t. These two maxima would eventu- Here, x h n and x Sn correspond to the unperturbed mass eigen-
ally collapse into the maximum of an inverted parabola, if values in units of MKK of the decoupled system (for λ̄ = 0),
values of λ̄λ S /r larger than the ones given by Eq. (21) were defined as xi2 = m i2 /MKK 2 . Note that only x
h0 1 corre-
considered. In that case, only the trivial solution would exist. sponds to a light zero mode, because the odd scalar field has
In practice, we will never reach such large values due to per- no zero modes. With the mixing switched on, the mass of the
turbativity constraints on the first KK excitation of S, since lightest scalar becomes
the Yukawa couplings of this particle to the different fermions
√
scale with λ S /r , see below. On the other hand, reproduc- m 2h ≈ x h20 + λ̄ κh20 MKK 2
. (26)
123
In order to calculate the O(λ̄) terms we need the unperturbed and will not be considered here.) Therefore, for positive val-
solutions for the profiles. For the Higgs KK modes they are ues of λ̄
given by
0 ≤ λ̄ κh20 ∼ λ̄ 10−3 . (32)

L t Jβ (x h n t) As a result, in this case values of λ̄ larger than 10−3 are not
χn (t) =
h
( , (27)
π J 2 (x ) − J (x )J (x ) allowed, regardless of the value for x h20 .
β hn β+1 hn β−1 hn
One could also entertain the possibility of considering
where Jβ (x) is a Bessel function and the eigenvalues x h n solutions in which both quantities x h20 and κh20 are simul-
satisfy taneously O(1), but they cancel each other out leading to a
light Higgs mass. Since κh20 > 0 by definition, one would
x h n Jβ+1 (x h n )
= 2 (m IR − 2 − β) ≡ 2δ. (28) need to have either x h20 or λ̄ negative. The first possibility
Jβ (x h n ) corresponds to a tachyonic Higgs field (before turning on the
mixing with the odd scalar) and leads to the BC
At zeroth order in λ̄ and for x h20 1 the expression for the
zero-mode profile χ0h (t) is approximately given by x h n Iβ+1 (x h n )
= −2 (m IR − 2 − β) ≡ −2δ (33)
Iβ (x h n )

L on the IR brane, where In (x) are modified Bessel functions.
χ0h (t) (1 + β) t 1+β , (29)
π This condition is similar to that in (28), but with a relative
minus sign. However, such a path leads nowhere since, as can
up to O(x h20 ) corrections.
be proven, this equation is incompatible with the presence of
The contributions to the mass matrix at first order in λ̄ can a Higgs VEV [15,17]. Therefore, the only viable option is to
be read from allow for negative values of λ̄. In that case, Eq. (26) becomes

2 kr λ S 1 dt ϕ 2H (t) S
κ S2m = [χm (t)]2 , m 2h ≈ x h20 − |λ̄| κh20 MKK
2
. (34)
(μ S r )2 r t MKK 2
and we can always reproduce the Higgs mass regardless of
4 λS
κh n Sm =
2
the value of λ̄ < 0, by choosing the appropriate value of x h20 .
μS r r
1 At any rate, the mixing between the even and odd bulk
dt ϕ H (t) (30) scalars leads to
× 2 M
v S (t)χnh (t)χmS (t) ,
t KK
2 h 0 (x) = h phys (x) + sin θh S S(x) + sin θh H H(x), (35)
κh n h m =
2
kr where H(x) = h 1 (x) + O(λ̄) and S(x) = S1 (x) + O(λ̄) are
1
dt 2 the profiles of the first KK modes in the limit where λ̄ = 0,
× v (t)χnh (t)χmh (t) ,
3 S
t
and
κh20 S1 κh20 S1
where κh2n ≡ κh2n h n in (25). The different powers of t in the sin θh S = λ̄ ≈ λ̄ ,
denominator result from our particular normalization of the x S21 − x h20 x S21
(36)
VEV of the new scalar field in (15), which differs from the κh20 h 1 κh20 h 1
normalization of the Higgs VEV in (3). sin θh H = λ̄ ≈ λ̄ .
x h21 − x h20 x h21
A priori, both x h 0 and κh 0 are naturally O(1) numbers, so
in order to obtain a 125 GeV Higgs boson one needs to tune In general, the mixing of the lightest Higgs eigenmode with
the first odd excitation can be expressed as
m 2h 0.125 2 1
≈ x h20 + λ̄ κh20 ∼ ∼ 10−3 . (31) λ S x4 kr
2
MKK 5 sin θh S 4λ̄ (1 + β) dt t 2β v S (t)χ1S (t),
r x S2 μ S r
1
This is a well-known feature of bulk Higgs models in WEDs (37)
[11–17]. We can achieve this in two different ways. For posi-
tive values of λ̄, both terms in the sum need to be small simul- and a similar expression can be derived for sin θh H , i.e.,

taneously. In the case of x h20 , this can be achieved by tuning 2λ̄ 1 + β 1
the parameters in the Higgs potential, as it is customary for a sin θh H 2 dt t β−2 v S2 (t)χ1h (t). (38)
xh1 kr
bulk Higgs with no additional scalars (see e.g. [16,17]). For
λ̄ κh20 the only possibility is to make λ̄ small enough, since κh20 As we can see, when λ̄ is positive the constraint set by the
is an O(1) number unless very large values of β are chosen. physical Higgs mass does not allow for a large mixing. Its
(The limit β → ∞ corresponds to a brane-localized Higgs upper bound is saturated when one assumes that the leading
123
Fig. 2 Maximum allowed value for the parameter (sin θh S )max consider the maximum possible values of λ̄ > 0 and λ S /r , whereas we
describing the mixing between the lightest Higgs mode and the first fix λ S /r to 100 in the middle plot, with λ̄ still saturating the resulting
KK resonance of the Z2 -odd scalar as a function of β, for fixed values upper bound. Finally, in the right plot we fix both μ S r and λ S /r and
of MKK and k/m Pl . In the left and middle plots, we show this depen- consider three different negative values of λ̄
dence for different values of μ S r and positive λ̄. In the left plot, we
contribution to the Higgs mass is given by the λ̄ κh20 term in For all these reasons, we find that sin θh S can be much larger
(31). Then than in the case of a positive λ̄.
1 −1 In Fig. 2, we show the different predictions for the max-
x h2 x h2 imum allowed value of the parameter (sin θh S )max , which
λ̄max = 2 = dt t v S (t)
2β−1 2
. (39)
κh 0 2(β + 1) measures the mixing between the lightest Higgs scalar and
the first KK mode of the new Z2 -odd scalar as a function
In this case, plugging in the expression for κh20 S1 and x S21 , we
of β. In the left plot, we show this dependence for different
get
values of μ S r after saturating the upper bounds on λ S /r and
)1
x h2 x4 k λ S dt t 2β v S (t)χ1S (t) λ̄ > 0. In the middle plot, we display the maximum allowed
(sin θh S )max 2 2 )1 , (40) value of sin θh S for the same values of μ S r and a fixed value
x S μS r dt t 2β−1 v 2 (t)

1 S λ S /r = 100, together with λ̄ = λ̄max > 0. Note that for
where λ S /r in the above equation needs to saturate its upper μ S r = 25 and β ∼ 50, λ S /r = 100 takes its maximum
bound value. This explains why, in this case, the line stops before
1 one can reach β = 100. Finally, in the right plot we show
λS μ4 2
≤ 4S dt t 2β−1 v S2 (t), (41) (sin θh S )max for different values of λ̄ < 0 and fixed values
r k kr x42 x h2
μ S r = 25 and λ S /r = 100. In all these plots we assume
which results after inserting (39) into Eq. (21). This leads to MKK = 5 TeV and k = m Pl /8. One can readily see that,
)1 for a given value of λ S /r , the maximum allowed value for
x h 23/2 μ S r dt t 2β v S (t)χ1S (t) sin θh S is much more significant in the case λ̄ < 0, since
(sin θh S )max 2 , (42)
x S1 (kr )3/2 ) 1 dt t 2β−1 v 2 (t) 1/2 larger values of |λ̄| can be taken. In addition, when λ̄ is nega-
S
tive one could also consider bigger values of λ S /r than in the
which only depends on β and μ S r , given that kr ∼ O(10) λ̄ > 0 case. All this results into larger mixing angles when λ̄
in order to solve the hierarchy problem and that the eigen- is negative compared to the λ̄ > 0 case.
values xi and the scalar profiles are determined once these For the Higgs mixing with its first KK mode, parametrized
parameters have been fixed. by sin θh H , we found a monotonic behavior, with sin θh H
When λ̄ is negative, on the other hand, λ S /r is uncon- getting smaller for large values of β independently of the
strained by relation (21). In this case, an upper bound on μ S r parameter. This can be seen in Fig. 3, where we show
λ S /r arises if one wants to prevent the theory from becom- (sin θh H )max as a function of β for MKK = 5 TeV and
ing strongly coupled, since the couplings of the KK scalar
√ k = m Pl /8. In particular, we display on the left panel this
field S to the different fermions are proportional to λ S /r , as functional dependence for three different values of μ S r ,
one can see from Eqs. (A7) and (A8) in the appendix. More- after saturating λ̄ to its upper bound. In the right panel we
over, in this case sizable values of |λ̄| ∼ O(1) are allowed.
123
Fig. 3 Maximum allowed

value for the parameter sin θh H ,
describing the mixing between
the lightest Higgs mode with its
first KK resonance, as a function
of β. In the left figure, we
exhibit three different values of
μ S r for λ̄ = λ̄max > 0, while in
the right panel we consider three
different negative values of λ̄ for
a fixed value of μ S r = 25
exhibit the case where μ S r = 25 is kept fixed, while λ < 0 genuinely five dimensional. Such a connection is unavoid-
takes on different (negative) values. Comparing this panel able and constitutes a defining feature of the model. In the
with the right panel of the previous figure, we can see that presence of a dark fermionic sector, the required Yukawa
(sin θh H )max is a steeper function of β than (sin θh S )max couplings between the odd scalar field and the bulk fermions
when λ̄ < 0. For the choice of parameters at hand, and has two interesting consequences. On the one hand, for light
depending on the value of |λ̄|, sin θh H becomes bigger than enough dark fermion masses, it induces a Higgs invisible
sin θh S for β smaller than values between 1 and 10, depend- decay width, and this in turn implies constraints on the size
ing on the other parameters of the model, whereas the oppo- of the scalar mixing between both 5D scalar fields. We study
site happens when β takes larger values. Henceforth, for prac- this in detail in Sect. 4.2. On the other hand, the dynamical
tical purposes, we will neglect the differences between S and generation of the 5D fermion masses naturally connects the
S1 , as well as between H and h 1 , since they are proportional visible and the invisible sectors via the KK resonances of the
to the small mixing angles sin θh S and sin θh H , respectively. odd scalar field, with S1 giving the leading contribution. In
particular, this introduces an efficient coannihiliation chan-
nel for the lightest dark fermion, which is naturally stable and
4 Phenomenology therefore a good DM candidate. We study this possibility both
in the regular freeze-out scenario and in the case of a matter-
Once the Higgs boson is allowed to propagate into the bulk dominated freeze-out in Sect. 4.3. Finally, in Sect. 4.4 we
of the extra dimension, its mixing with the Z2 -odd scalar study in detail the constraints coming from direct-detection
becomes unavoidable. This mixing will leave its imprint on experiments using recent Xenon1T data [23,24].
different aspects of the phenomenology. In particular, it can
lead to effects on experiments as diverse as high-energy col-
liders, both present and future ones. Moreover, as we will
see, assuming the presence of dark fermions, it can natu-
rally explain the observed DM relic abundance and leave its 4.1 Modified Higgs couplings
imprint on DM direct-detection experiments.
We have seen how the quartic coupling leads to a mass As we have seen in the previous section, the physical Higgs
mixing of the Higgs-boson zero mode with both its first KK boson can be expressed with very good approximation as a
resonance h 1 and the lowest-lying Z2 -odd scalar, S1 . This linear combination of the interaction eigenstates h 0 , h 1 and
mixing induces modifications on the Higgs-boson couplings S1 . Since these interaction eigenstates couple differently to
to SM particles. In Sect. 4.1 we will explore these modifica- the SM particles, this mixing induces modifications of the
tions and study its impact on current and future colliders. SM Higgs couplings. Here, we study the implications of these
A key aspect of our model is that the odd scalar field con- modifications.
stitutes a unique window into dark sectors featuring fermions The 4D effective couplings of the different scalars to the
propagating into the bulk. Indeed, since all the 5D fermion fermions are obtained by integrating the profiles of the differ-
bulk masses are generated through Yukawa-like interactions ent fields over the fifth dimension and a subsequently rotate
with the odd scalar, the scalar KK modes necessarily con- into the mass basis. In particular, the coupling of the Higgs-
nect any dark fermionic sector with the SM if the former is boson zero mode and KK modes to a pair of fermion chiral
123
zero modes, ¯ a b , is given by The quantity f measures the ratio of the Yukawa coupling of
1 the Higgs-boson zero mode relative to that of the SM Higgs
y∗ 2+β
yabh n = √ √ dt f a (t) f b (t)χnh (t) , (43) boson, whereas the parameters f H and f S describe the
kr 2(1 + β) admixtures of the Higgs-boson and Z2 -odd scalar KK modes
where y∗ is defined as a function of the 5D dimensionful into the physical Higgs. Note that we have taken y SM f h equal
Yukawa coupling Y5D [16] to y f L f R h 0 in the denominator of f H and f S , since the
√ difference is O(λ̄ vSM 2 /M 2 ) and thus subleading. On the
KK
k(1 + β) other hand, f is blind at this order to the Higgs mixing with
y∗ = Y5D , (44)
2+β the odd scalar. This is a byproduct of the induced light-heavy
where the latter is defined by (for an up-type quark field Rb , fermion mixing after EWSB and the shift in the 5D Higgs
the Higgs-boson field H must be replaced by H̃ ) VEV. It has been studied e.g. in [17] for the RS case. In
particular, for MKK = 5 TeV, b never exceeds 2.5 · 10−2
√ ¯ La (x, t)H (x, t) Rb (x, t) + h.c. . when 1 ≤ β ≤ 10. In the case of lighter quarks, even smaller
SY ⊃ − d 5 x g Y5D
values are expected. In this work we concentrate on f S and
(45) f H , since they are direct probes of the mixing of the bulk
Higgs field with the Z2 -odd scalar field.
On the other hand, the coupling of two light SM fermions to
Hereafter, we will focus on the bottom quark. The reasons
the scalar S only appears through a mass insertion. Indeed,
for this are twofold. On the one hand, we expect the mod-
before EWSB there is no direct coupling between S and two
ifications of the Yukawa couplings to be larger for heavier
SM-like fermion fields. Such a coupling is only generated
quarks, while on the other hand, the bottom Yukawa cou-
after taking into account the fermion mixing induced by the
pling is among those measured most accurately, having in
Higgs VEV vSM . We will compute the corresponding cou-
addition the most promising prospects. Indeed, existing mea-
pling perturbatively, as it is expected to be suppressed by a
surements of the h → bb̄ signal strength (relative to the SM
factor of O(vSM /MKK ). This coupling arises from the inter-
expectation) lead to μh→bb = 1.01±0.12 (stat.) +0.16 −0.15 (syst.)
actions of the S scalar to the different fermion zero modes
[25]. Assuming SM production this translates into a mea-
and the first KK resonance with opposite chirality, once we phys SM 2
rotate to the fermion mass basis after EWSB. Specifically, surement of (ybh /ybh ) with an uncertainty of about 20%.
the coupling between S, a chiral fermion zero mode a, and However, the expected relative precision to be reached at
its first KK resonance A with opposite chirality, is given by future particle colliders such as the ILC, CLIC and the FCC
1
λS k
ya AS = 2 ca dt f a (t) f AR (t)χ1S (t), or
r μS
1 (46)
λS k
y Aa S = 2 ca dt f A (t) f a (t)χ1 (t),
L S
r μS
depending on the zero-mode chirality, where ca is defined in
appendix A. Then, after rotating the fermion fields to the mass
basis, we induce an interaction term y f S S f¯L f R between the
SM-like chiral fields, f L and f R , and S.
We can write
phys
phys yfh
δy f h ≡1− (1 − f ) + f H + f S , (47)
y SM
fh
phys
where we have defined f = y f L f R h 0 /y SM
f h . Here y f h is the
resulting Higgs Yukawa coupling
1 phys
L ⊃ − √ y f h h f¯L f R + h.c., (48)
2
Fig. 4 bH and bS as functions of β for two different values of
and y SM
f h denotes the corresponding parameter in the SM one. y∗ and fixed values of λ̄, λ S /r , MKK and k/m Pl . For each case, we
Moreover have generated Npoints = 3000 random values of ct R ∈ [−0.6, 0.2] and
yf f h yfS obtained cq 3 and cb R by correctly reproducing the top- and bottom-
f H = sin θh H L R 1 , f S = sin θh S . (49) quark masses
L
y f L f R h0 y f L f R h0
123
is projected to be about 1% for the initial stages, reaching the [16,17]

0.5% level in later stages of the experiments [26]. 1
Figure 4 shows a scatter plot with values of bH and bS 2π dt h
χ (t)χnh (t) = δmn , (51)
as a function of β, for λ̄ = −0.5 and λ S /r = 100. For both L t m
quantities we display two different scenarios, corresponding
to y∗ = 3 and y∗ = 1.5, where y∗ is taken the same for the gauge bosons only couple to the Higgs-boson zero mode,
both third-generation quarks (i.e., y∗ = y∗t = y∗b ). For each and higher KK modes of the Higgs do not couple to the
case, we have generated random values of ct R ∈ [−0.6, 0.2], gauge-boson zero modes at tree level. For the case of the S1
and obtained cq 3 and cb R by fitting the top- and bottom- scalar, which is a SM singlet, the couplings to electroweak
L
quark masses. One can see that for small values of β the gauge bosons would only appear at the loop level. Therefore,
impact on bH of changing y∗ is magnified. This is expected it will not modify the Higgs couplings to gauge bosons in an
since, for these values of β, the Higgs is less IR-localized noticeable way, since these changes are suppressed by a small
and one expects larger differences between the profiles χ0h mixing angle O(10−2 ) and a loop factor.
and χ1h . Indeed, regardless of the value √of y∗ , the prediction
for the bottom mass m b ≈ v4 yb L b R h 0 / 2 needs to remain 4.2 Invisible Higgs decays
unchanged. Since yb L b R h 0 is proportional to y∗ , see (43),
changes in y∗ have to be compensated by different fermion The mixing between the Higgs and the Z2 -odd bulk scalar
localizations and therefore a different value of the overlap field induces an effective coupling of the Higgs boson to any
integral in that relation, in such a way that yb L b R h 0 remains 5D bulk fermion present in the theory which is not local-
approximately constant. The integral present in yb L b R h 1 will ized on the UV or IR brane. This includes the possibility
change accordingly, but will deviate from the other integral of fermions not charged under the SM group, the so-called
as β decreases. This effect is reversed for bS , since y∗ is dark fermions. Hereafter, we will consider this case and will
not explicitly present in the numerator of (49), with the sole study its potential signatures, including its role in explaining
effect of changing the localization of the profiles of the third- the observed DM relic abundance. We will consider two dif-
generation fermions. Since a smaller value of y∗ requires a ferent scenarios, depending on the origin of the dark fermion
more IR-localized q L3 to reproduce the top-quark mass, one masses. In the first scenario, the dark fermion mass arises
expects a bigger overlap between S and the third-generation purely from orbifolding, i.e., from the compactification of the
left-handed doublet q L3 together with its first KK mode. This WED, and it is thus proportional to its curvature, m χ ∝ MKK .
leads to a larger value of ybS and bS , as one can see in the The simplest possibility is to add a 5D fermion with no zero
√
figure. Note that bS scales with λ S /r , so one can readily mode, whose first KK resonance is automatically stable and
obtain bS for alternative choices of this parameter. More- a good DM candidate. In the case where one of the chirali-
over, to good approximation both quantities scale linearly ties of the corresponding 5D field has a Dirichlet (Neumann)
with λ̄ for small values of λ̄, because sin θh X ∝ λ̄, as can be boundary condition on the UV (IR) brane, the first KK mode
seen from (36). can be parametrically lighter than MKK [30], potentially light
Taking into account the projected sensitivity for the bot- enough to be accessible in Higgs-boson decay. In this case,
tom Yukawa coupling, one can see that we will be able to the DM candidate is VL even though it can have non-trivial
probe sizable values of the scalar portal coupling λ̄ for mod- quantum numbers under a possible new dark group. We thus
erately small values of β. In particular, as can be seen from allow for Nχ copies of such VL fermion. In the second sce-
Fig. 4, for our chosen value λ̄ = −0.5, the predicted mod- nario the fermion mass term connects two zero modes with
ifications bH and bS can be probed as long as β is less opposite chiralities, arising from two different 5D fields. In
than about 4. For smaller values of λ̄, one could only access this scenario, the fermion mass can either come through a
smaller values of β. dark Higgs mechanism or a brane-localized VL mass. If the
The couplings of the Higgs KK modes to the W and Z dark Higgs is localized towards the IR brane, or alternatively
bosons of the SM (corresponding to the zero modes of the the VL mass is localized on the IR brane, the fermion mass is
corresponding bulk gauge fields) are proportional to the inte- proportional to MKK , even though a large hierarchy can arise
grals for UV-localized dark fermions. Either way, in this case S1
1 does not interact directly with these two chiral zero modes
dt
gh nVV ∝ ϕ H (t)χnh (t) , (50) (in the same way S1 does not couple directly to b L and b R ,
t as discussed previously), since they are zero modes of two
where we have used that to a good approximation the zero- different 5D fields. Such a coupling can, however, be gener-
mode profiles for of the W and Z states are flat along the ated after a mass insertion through the mediation of the heavy
extra dimension [27–29]. Since ϕ H (t) v4 χ0h (t), and the KK modes (whether the mass comes from the spontaneous
orthogonality condition for the scalar profiles is given by breaking of the dark gauge group or a VL mass is irrelevant
123
χ1 χ0 analogously to (46) but involving two KK profiles instead of

χ1 one,
h S1 h S1 1
λS k
yχ S = 2 cχ L
dt f 1,χ (t) f 1,χ
R
(t)χ1S (t), (52)
r μS
χ̄1 χ̄0
as a function of cχ for different values of μ S r . In both panels
Fig. 5 Diagrams responsible for the generation of the Higgs coupling we have set MKK = 5 TeV, k = m Pl /8 and λ S /r = 100. We
to DM in the two main scenarios discussed in the text. The left figure can see that, for large values of m χ , sizable values of yχ S
corresponds to the case where the DM candidate is the first KK mode are expected. Note that the VL fermions could also have a
of a single 5D fermion field. The right figure corresponds to the case
contribution to their mass coming from the dark sector (for
where the different chiralities of the DM candidate are zero modes of
different 5D fields and the mediation via heavy KK modes is required instance an IR-localized Majorana mass term), however this
would not affect their coupling to the scalar S.
The decay width of the Higgs boson into dark fermions is
to this discussion). We also assume a possible multiplicity of given by
dark fermions given by Nχ as before. 3/2
We illustrate these two scenarios in Fig. 5. Note that in the yχ2 h Nχ 4m 2χ
(h → χ̄χ) = mh 1 − 2 , (53)
second case we expect the coupling of the Higgs boson to 8π mh
the dark fermion to be O(m χ /MKK ) suppressed. Moreover,
its calculation is rather model dependent. Alternatively, one where we have defined
could leave the nature of the dark fermion mass unspecified yχ h ≡ yχ S sin θh S , (54)
and define an effective Yukawa coupling, taking into account
the mixing of the heavy modes with the zero mode. the coupling of the physical Higgs boson to the first dark KK
There is an additional instance, which can be thought of fermion.
as an intermediate scenario between the previous two cases. Using that B(H → inv) < 0.33 at 95% CL [31] and
There one adds a 5D gauge-singlet fermion field with no H ≈ 4 MeV, we can set an upper limit on the effective
SM
additional flavor quantum numbers, which has a chiral zero coupling of the Higgs boson to dark fermions.
We find the
mode and a Majorana mass term localized on the IR brane. upper bound on yχ h to be yχ h 0.02/ Nχ for DM candi-
The coupling of this field to S is generated analogously to the dates with mass m χ < m h /2. Note that this constraint does
second case described above, via the involvement of a heavy not apply to heavier fermions.
KK mode and a mass insertion. Therefore, at the end of the
day, this case is rather similar to the previous one, besides 4.3 Scalar-mediated fermionic dark matter
the difference in the multiplicities of fermionic degrees of
freedom for a Majorana field. As discussed in the previous section, the Z2 -odd scalar field
We have computed the mass of the first KK mode for a 5D will couple to any fermion field propagating in the bulk of
field with mixed boundary conditions, as described in the first the WED. This provides a robust bridge between the SM
case above. This result is well known for non-dynamical bulk and any dark sector having fermions arising from 5D bulk
masses but has never been explored when these are generated fermion fields. In the case where these dark fermions are
by the VEV of a Z2 -odd scalar. We show in the left panel of stable and make for a viable DM candidate, the KK excita-
Fig. 6 the ratio x1 = m 1 /MKK as a function of the usual tions of the odd scalar field thus constitute efficient mediators
dimensionless bulk-mass parameter c in both scenarios. In for DM coannihilation into SM particles. Moreover, as we
the model at hand, where the different fermion bulk masses have already seen, the mixing between both scalar bulk fields
are generated by the VEV of the odd scalar field, = induces a Higgs coupling to dark fermions, thereby turning
ϕ S , this parameter takes the form given in Eq. (A4). We the Higgs boson into an additional scalar mediator.
also consider for comparison, the non-dynamical case where For the sake of concreteness, we will focus on the first sce-
such bulk fermion masses are introduced by hand and read nario discussed in the previous section, i.e., of Nχ copies of a
c = m/k, with m the 5D bulk mass. In this scenario the first 5D dark fermion field, having potentially parametrically light
KK mass m 1 can be made arbitrarily light by adjusting the KK modes. These potentially light KK modes – the lightest
c parameter [30]. However, in our model a lower bound on dark particles – are stable and a viable DM candidate. In this
the mass value arises due to behavior of ϕ S close to the two case, both the mass of the DM candidate m χ and its couplings
branes, where it vanishes. We find this bound to be x1 ∼ to the physical Higgs and the Z2 -odd scalar, yχ h and yχ S ,
6 · 10−3 , corresponding to 30 GeV for our reference value respectively, depend only on a single c parameter (in addi-
MKK = 5 TeV. We also show in the right panel of Fig. 6 tion to other model parameters such as e.g. MKK , kr , λ S /r or
the coupling of the VL fermions to the scalar S, defined μ S r ), see Fig. 6. Considering the alternative scenario where
123
Fig. 6 Left panel: mass fraction x1 = m 1 /MKK of the first fermion KK 5D Lagrangian along with a sign function, as it is usual in RS models.
mode in terms of the 5D dimensionless bulk-mass parameter cχ for the We also show the value for which m χ = m h /2 with a dashed gray
case of a left-handed chirality, with Dirichlet and Neumann boundary line. Higgs decays into a pair of DM particles χ1 χ̄1 are kinematically
conditions on the UV and the IR brane, respectively, for two differ- allowed only if x1 falls below this line. Right panel: value of yχ S as a
ent values of μ S r . The yellow line corresponds to the case where the function of cχ for the same choice of boundary conditions and values
fermion bulk masses do not have a dynamical origin, but appear in the of μ S r
the interaction of S to the dark fermions requires a mass inser-

tion on a dark fermion line, it would just lead to a different
shape of the curve yχ S = F(m χ ) and, by virtue of (54), also
the value of yχ h = sin θh S yχ S (modulo a different count
of degrees of freedom, in the case of Majorana fermions).
We illustrate in Fig. 7 the diagrams relevant for the coanni-
hilation χ̄ χ → f¯ f in these two cases, with and without a
“dark mass insertion”, as discussed in the previous section.
We represent by a blue blob the heavy-light mass mixing
induced after EWSB in the visible sector, whereas the pos-
sible light-heavy mass mixing in the dark sector is depicted
by a pink blob. Hereafter, for the sake of concreteness, we Fig. 7 Diagrams contributing to the DM coannihilation cross section
focus on the case of parametrically light KK fermions, for with fermions in the final state. The diagrams shown in the first line
which there is no need of specifying any further dynamics in correspond to the case where the DM candidate is a (potentially light)
KK fermion χ1 , whereas the diagrams in the second line correspond
the dark sector. to the case where a mass insertion on a dark fermion line is needed in
For Higgs-mediated processes, the dominant coannihila- order to generate an effective interaction S1 χ̄0 χ0
tion final state will be t t¯, if kinematically accessible (i.e. for
m χ > m t ), or bb̄, together with the vector final states W + W −
and Z Z . In the case of diagrams mediated by S1 , t t¯ or bb̄ are
the dominant coannihilation channels for moderately small where χ h 2 = 0.120 ± 0.001 [34]. Here, gS (T f ) denotes
values of m χ . However, for larger values of m χ , coannihi- the effective number of degrees of freedom in entropy as
lation into a SM fermion and its first KK resonance is also function of the freeze-out temperature T f , and we have
possible and can be the dominant coannihilation channel by defined a parameter x f = m χ /T f to be determined below.
far. σ v is the velocity-averaged cross section at the freeze-out
The relic abundance for a radiation-dominated freeze-out temperature, which can be calculated as [18]
regime can be computed using [18] (see also e.g. [32,33])
1
σ v =
8m 4χ T f K 22 (m χ /T f )
∞ √ (56)
xf 10−9 GeV−2 √
χ h 2 , (55) × ds σ (s) s − 4m 2χ s K 1 ( s/T f ),
2 gS (m χ /x f ) σ v 4m 2χ
123
where K n (x) are modified Bessel functions. The parameter does not have a dramatic impact on cq 3 and cb R , which remain
L
x f in (55) is obtained by solving the implicit equation almost unchanged. Therefore, the increase of the coannihi-
lation cross section is mostly due to a larger St L t R coupling,
mχ 45 which is indeed the leading one for DM masses below about
x f = ln gχ 3 m Pl σ v , (57)
2π 8x f gS (m χ /x f ) 10 TeV. Such a larger coupling is the consequence of a big-
ger overlap with S and the increase in the Yukawa coupling
where gχ = 4Nχ is the number of DM degrees of freedom. Y coming with c. In the case of y∗ = 1.5, on the contrary,
Alternatively, one can also consider that DM freeze-out changes in |ct R | do have a dramatic impact on cq 3 , since the
L
happens in an early period of matter domination, as proposed RH top can not account for the top mass alone, requiring
in [19,20]. Indeed, nothing prevents this from happening if a fairly IR-localized third-generation quark doublet. There-
radiation becomes dominant again before big-bang nucle- fore, the contribution to St L t R coming from the mixing of
osynthesis. The fact that DM decoupling happens during both top chiralites are similar, which leads to bigger changes
matter domination changes the freeze-out dynamics, since in the cross section in the region of DM masses between 1 and
the Hubble rate has a different parametric dependence com- 4 TeV as one can see from Fig. 8 top-right panel. On the other
pared to the usual case, H ∝ T 3/2 versus H ∝ T 2 . We hand, bigger values of β lead in general to a larger mixing
do not elaborate here in detail on the dynamics behind this between fermion-zero modes and their KK resonances after
scenario, which is not crucial for our current analysis. One EWSB, increasing the effective coupling y f S after diagonal-
possibility would be to have a scalar field φ localized on the ization. Therefore, in general, one expects a larger coannihi-
UV brane, which starts behaving like matter at a critical tem- lation cross section for m χ 10 TeV and increasing values
perature T ∼ m φ that we assume to be much larger than of β. Changing β also affects the St L t R coupling indirectly,
MKK . If φ is sufficiently long-lived, its contribution to the since reproducing the observed quark masses results in dif-
energy density grows until it ultimately dominates the total ferent values of the mass parameters c. This explains why the
energy density regardless of its initial contribution (1 − τ ) at dashed blue line in the top-right panel of Fig. 8 is below the
T , where τ ∈ [0, 1] denotes the fraction of energy in radi- other ones, since cq3L accidentally gets close to zero and thus
ation at T = T . Following [19,20] we will take τ = 0.99 reduces the left-handed doublet contribution to the St L t R
as a benchmark value. Freeze-out happens at a temperature coupling, as can be seen in Eq. (46). Finally, note that the
T f , in a matter-dominated universe, before φ instantaneously abrupt deep around m χ ∼ 8 TeV is due to the zero in yχ S
decays at T < T f < T , reheating the bath to TRH and fur- shown in Fig. 6. Indeed, the cross section should exactly van-
ther diluting the DM freeze-out abundance. Hereafter we will ish at this point, but our numerical scan is unable to capture
assume TRH ∼ 1 GeV. We refer the reader to appendix C for such an steep behavior.
more details. In the bottom panels of Fig. 8, on the other hand, we show
We show in Fig. 8 the velocity averaged coannihilation σ v for different values of λ S /r as a function of m χ . In both
cross section σ v at the freeze-out temperature as a func- bottom panels, we fix β = 2, y∗ = 3 for both third-generation
tion of m χ , for Nχ = 1, MKK = 5 TeV and k = m Pl /8. In the quark sectors, as well as ct R = −0.2. The left-bottom panel
top panels, we consider benchmarks with different values of corresponds to the choice sin θh S = 10−5 , whereas for the
β, y∗ as well as ct R (the parameter fixing the localization of bottom-right one we take sin θh S = 10−6 . By reducing the
the RH top). In both top panels, we consider sin θh S = 10−5 mixing, one effectively suppress the Higgs mediated contri-
and λ S /r = 75, as well as two different values of β and bution to the coannihilation cross section, which is mostly
ct R . In particular, we show β = 2 (pink), β = 10 (blue), relevant for small DM masses and, in particular, around
ct R = −0.2 (dashed line) and ct R = −0.4 (solid line). In m χ ≈ m h /2. This will have an impact on direct detection as
the top-left panel we fix y∗ = 3 for both the up and the we will see later, since the Higgs provides the leading con-
down third-generation quark sector, with cq 3 and cb R being tribution to such experiments, and larger values of sin θh S
L
determined by reproducing the top and bottom quark masses will typically lead to more severe bounds from these exper-
for a given choice of ct R . The same is done in the top-right iments. The parameter λ S /r controls the effective Yukawa
panel but for y∗ = 1.5. In both cases, for the sake of sim- coupling of the S scalar to fermions yχ S , see Eqs. (46) and
plicity, light quark masses are reproduced with UV localized (52). We consider λ S /r = 50 (red), λ S /r = 100 (pink) and
fermions with identical bulk mass parameters (modulo a sign λ S /r = 150 (blue). Increasing λ S /r has the effect of increas-
difference between opposite chiralities) and different values ing the coannihilation cross section in general, besides for
of y∗ with y∗s = 1/2 (for our purposes, such a not-so-refined values of m χ m S /2 where the rise in the coupling is off-
study is more than enough). We can see that increasing the IR set by the increase of its decay width. One should note that the
localization of the RH top, i.e. having bigger values of |ct R |, resonant-like peak starting around 7–8 TeV is not only due
leads to a bigger cross section for most DM masses when to the S resonance but also to the fact that new heavy-light
y∗ = 3. Since y∗ is large enough in this case, changes in ct R final states become kinematically accessible in the coanni-
123
Fig. 8 Velocity-averaged annihilation cross section σ v at the freeze- first KK graviton. We also show the velocity averaged cross section
out temperature as a function of the DM mass m χ , for Nχ = 1, reproducing the relic density experimental value from Planck in dashed
MKK = 5 TeV and k = m Pl /8. In the top panels, we fix sin θh S and black, and the equivalent for a matter dominated freeze out in gray, for
λ S /r and consider two different values of y∗ . In both cases, we take two different values of TRH , after using T = 105 GeV and τ = 0.99.
two different values of β and ct R . In the bottom panels, we fix β, y∗ For these lines the section in dot-dashed gray corresponds to predic-
and ct R and consider different values of λ S /r for sin θh S = 10−5 (left) tions for which x f < 3, and therefore in this regime the DM decouples
and sin θh S = 10−6 (right). In all four panels, we also show in dashed relativistically [19,20]
gray the σ v prediction for diagrams mediated by the exchange of the
hilation. They consist of a first KK fermion resonance of eventually include the decays of S to a pair of low-lying KK
mass ∼ 15 TeV together with a SM-like fermion. We do not fermions, which will make S much wider of what is sensible
show values of m χ beyond ∼ 15 TeV since the DM mass in a perturbative theory.
can not be made heavier than this value for MKK = 5 TeV. In addition, we display for comparison the contribution
One could entertain the possibility of adding brane-localized due to diagrams mediated by the first KK graviton, which
masses or kinetic terms for this to happen, but for the sake are also irreducible in models with WEDs (see e.g. [33,35]
of concreteness we do not explore such possibilities here. for useful expressions). We can see that, for the chosen val-
At any rate, for such large values of m χ , one would need to ues of MKK and k/m Pl , corresponding to MKK = 5 TeV
123
and π = m Pl e−kπr = 40 TeV, the contribution of the odd independent cross section
scalar resonance S dominates over the KK graviton one. In 4 2 * +2 4
particular, this happens for all values of m χ , with the excep- σχ N ≈ μχ N Z f p + (A − Z ) f n μ2χ N A2 f n2 , (58)
π π
tion of the small region where the coupling yχ S goes to zero.
with Z and A the atomic number and atomic mass of the
The relative importance of each contribution and the loca-
target nucleus, respectively, and μχ N the reduced mass of
tion of the graviton peak can be changed by modifying the
the DM and nucleus system [32,33,38]. In order to compute
ratio π /MKK and/or by including brane kinetic terms [36].
such cross section we use following effective Lagrangian
We will not explore such possibilities, being our aim here to
show that the scalar contribution can naturally be the leading Leff = f p (χ̄χ)( p̄ p) + f n (χ̄ χ )(n̄n). (59)
one, as one can readily see from the figure. In addition to the
The terms f p and f n are effective coupling constants and
KK-graviton contribution, one also expects a contribution to
can be written as
the coannihilation cross section arising from the exchange of
f p,n ( p,n) αq 2 ( p,n) αq
the radion. This contribution is rather model dependent, since = fT q + f , (60)
the radion mass is subject to the specifics of the stabilization m p,n mq 27 T g mq
q=u,d,s q=c,b,t
mechanism. A natural expectation is that the radion is much
where αq stands for the effective four-fermion interac-
lighter that the first KK graviton. This case was considered
tion vertex, obtained by considering the scalar t–channel
e.g. in [37], where the authors considered a light radion inter-
exchange. In our model αq has the following form
acting with IR-localized matter and found the radion contri-
, -
bution to be mostly irrelevant. A similar result is expected yq S yqh sin θh S
here, for a light radion not mixing with the other bulk scalars. αq = yχ S + . (61)
m 2S m 2h
The interesting case where the stabilizing scalar mixes with
both the Higgs and the Z2 -odd scalar would require a fairly ( p,n)
Finally, f T g
is defined as
extensive case study, which is beyond of the scope of this
( p,n) ( p,n)
paper. fT g =1− fT q , (62)
Finally, we also show the values of the velocity averaged q=u,d,s
cross section for which the observed DM relic abundance q q
and the values for f p and f n are [33,39]
is reproduced, both in the usual scenario and in the case
of an early period of matter domination. In particular, we f pu = (20.8 ± 1.5) · 10−3 , f pd = (41.1 ± 2.8) · 10−3 ,
show in dashed black the values of σ v for which a value of
f nu = (18.9 ± 1.4) · 10−3 , f nd = (45.1 ± 2.7) · 10−3 ,(63)
χ h 2 = 0.12 is reproduced, in the case of a regular freeze-
out mechanism, and in the scenario of matter domination f ps = f ns = 0.043 ± 0.011.
in gray, for τ = 0.99, T = 105 GeV and two values of One can compare the contribution of each scalar to the
TRH , 1 and 102 GeV, respectively. The lines in dot-dashed direct detection cross section by computing the ratio between
gray correspond to regions where x f < 3, where the DM the terms appearing in Eq. (61). We find that the channel
is expected to decouple relativistically and the current treat- mediated by the Higgs boson is dominant provided that
ment loses validity, see [19,20] for more details. We can see
m 2h yq S
that the observed relic abundance can be reproduced in the sin θh S > ∼ 10−7 , (64)
case of matter domination for masses m χ ∼ 8–10 TeV. In m 2S yqh
the usual case of radiation domination, σ v can be a non- i.e. we expect the Higgs mediated interaction to be the leading
negligible fraction of the one which is required to reproduce contribution for sin θh S > 10−7 . This tells us in particular
the observed relic abundance for m χ ∼ 15 TeV, which is in that we can relax the constraints coming from direct detec-
the ballpark of the naturally expected fermion masses. tion by making the mixing smaller, while keeping the same
coupling yχ S to the DM fermions. However, this is only
4.4 Direct detection possible up to the point when the odd scalar contribution
becomes dominant,
Direct detection experiments can also set very important con- yχ S yq S
straints on the parameter space in scalar-mediated models of (αq )min ≈ . (65)
m 2S
DM. Indeed, they constraint all the parameter space in the
case of Higgs-mediated DM, with the exception of a small We show in Fig. 9 the constraints coming from direct
region around the Higgs resonance, see e.g. [34]. We study detection and invisible Higgs decays for the velocity aver-
here the constraints from direct detection experiments in our aged coannihilation cross section σ v as a function of m χ .
model. In particular we will compare our predictions with We used Nχ = 1, MKK = 5 TeV, k = m Pl /8 and different
results from Xenon1T [23,24]. We are interested in the spin- mixing values between the odd scalar and the Higgs boson,
123
Fig. 9 Velocity averaged coannihilation cross section at the freeze-out in gray and the limits from Xenon1T in purple. We show the velocity
temperature for different values of the mixing between the odd scalar averaged cross section reproducing the relic density experimental value
and the Higgs boson, sin θh S = {10−3 , 10−4 , 10−5 , 10−6 }, from top from Planck in dashed black, and the equivalent for a matter domi-
left to bottom right. The first two cases correspond to negative values nated freeze out in gray, for two different values of TRH , where we used
of λ̄. We have set Nχ = 1, MKK = 5 TeV and k = m Pl /8. We show in T = 105 GeV and τ = 0.99. For these lines the section in dot-dashed
yellow the predictions for two different benchmarks with different val- gray corresponds to predictions for which x f < 3, and therefore in this
ues of y∗ and λ S /r . In both cases, we have fixed ct R = −0.2 and β = 2. regime the DM decouples relativistically [19,20]
We show the constraints coming from the Higgs invisible decay width
sin θh S = {10−3 , 10−4 , 10−5 , 10−6 }, from top left to bottom ues of y∗ , starting with y∗s = 1/2). In both cases, we have
right. The first two mixing angles can only be achieved for set β = 2 and ct R = −0.2, while λ S /r has been chosen
λ̄ < 0, whereas the last two can be obtained for positive and in such a way that S /m S ≈ 0.7. More specifically, we
negative values of λ̄. We display in each figure two differ- have taken λ S /r = 120 and λ S /r = 65, for y∗ = 3 and
ent benchmarks, corresponding to the choices y∗ = 3 (solid y∗ = 1.5, respectively. Since the width is mostly given by
line) and y∗ = 1.5 (dashed line) for the third generation the decay of S into a third generation quark and its first
quarks t and b (as before, light generations have identical KK resonance, such assignment ensures that the overall cou-
bulk mass parameters in absolute value and different val- pling of the odd scalar field to the visible sector is roughly
123
the same in both cases. However, the smaller value of y∗ matter domination, being the values of σ v corresponding
in the benchmark {y∗ = 1.5, λ S /r = 65} leads to a more to the top of the resonant peak excluded by direct detec-
IR-localized third-generation left-handed doublet q L3 and to tion bounds. For even smaller values of sin θh S like 10−5 or
a much larger coupling of S to b̄ L b R and q̄ L3 plus its first KK 10−6 , the data from Xenon1T never constrains the predic-
resonance, even with a smaller value of λ S /r . At the end of tions for the coannihilation cross section obtained in both
the day, however, the solid lines are above the dashed ones benchmarks, since the Higgs coupling to DM yχ h becomes
for most values of m χ , since the DM coupling yχ S is smaller too small. Therefore, by assuming an early period of matter
√
by a factor 120/65 ∼ 1.4, which makes up for the small domination, we are able to explain the observed DM relic
differences existing among the couplings to the visible sec- abundance for moderately small values of sin θh S without
tor. The differences between both benchmarks are magnified conflicting current direct detection experiments. Even in the
once the purely S-mediated channel, corresponding to the case of radiation domination, we can get to values of σ v
right column of Fig. 7, is the most dominant one. This hap- relatively close to the ballpark of what is needed, expecting S
pens in particular for large DM masses and/or small values to be a non-negligible fraction of the required coannihilation
of sin θh S , as one can readily see by comparing the different cross section, even though additional mediators accounting
panels in Fig. 9. for most of the coannihilation are certainly needed.
The gray region shows the area excluded by the LHC
experimental limits on the Higgs invisible decay width, and in
purple we show the Xenon1T constraints. The latter are found
by plotting the velocity averaged coannihilation cross sec- 5 Summary
tion obtained after rescaling yχ S such that σχ N saturates the
Xenon1T experimental bound, σ vXenon1T . For the values We have demonstrated that the addition of a Z2 -odd scalar
of sin θh S shown in this figure, the leading contribution to the field developing a VEV in extra-dimensional models can not
DM-nucleon cross section is by far the one arising from the t- only account for the origin of the 5D fermion masses, but
channel exchange of a Higgs boson, with the exception of the also provide a unique window into any 5D fermionic dark
last case where sin θh S = 10−6 and the S contribution, while sector. Indeed, since such a scalar field generates dynami-
still subleading, starts to be relevant. This explains why the cally fermion bulk masses through Yukawa-like interactions
Xenon1T bound for the {y∗ = 3, λ S /r = 120} benchmark is with the different 5D fermions, it will also irrevocably con-
weaker than the limit obtained for {y∗ = 1.5, λ S /r = 65}, nect the SM with any possible dark sector featuring bulk
whenever the coannihilation cross section is dominated by fermions. Moreover, in realistic models the Higgs scalar field
the S contribution. Indeed, in the former case, the couplings propagates into the bulk of the WED, and thus a mixing
of S to the visible sector are slightly larger. This leads to with the new scalar field is unavoidable. In this work, we
a larger value of σ vXenon1T after rescaling yχ S and to a have studied in detail the phenomenological consequences
weaker bound from direct detection. When σ v is domi- of such a portal, showing that the lightest KK dark fermion
nated by the Higgs exchange, direct detection bounds become is stable and can coannihilate efficiently thanks to the media-
indistinguishable for both benchmarks, since the Higgs cou- tion of the odd-scalar resonances as well as the Higgs boson.
plings to the SM quarks are mostly fixed and SM-like. Indeed, we have demonstrated that it is possible to repro-
We also show the velocity averaged cross section reproduce the observed DM relic abundance for an O(10) TeV
ducing the observed relic density both in the usual freeze-out KK dark fermion assuming that freeze-out occurs during an
scenario (dashed black) and in the case of an early period early period of matter domination, without conflicting with
of matter domination, for values of TRH = 102 GeV (dark current data from direct-detection experiments. Even in the
gray) and 1 GeV (light gray). For both gray lines, we used regular case of a radiation dominated freeze-out, this irre-
T = 105 GeV and τ = 0.99. Similarly to Fig. 8, lines in dot- ducible contribution to the coannihilation cross-section can
dashed gray correspond to regions where x f < 3 and the DM account for a non-negligible part of the required value when
is expected to decouple relativistically. We can see that for the DM mass is ∼ 15 TeV. We have also shown that these
sin θh S = 10−3 , one can not explain the observed relic abun- scalar contributions to the coannihilation cross section can be
dance without exceeding the bounds from Xenon1T. How- more important than those arising from the exchange of KK
ever, this is not the case in the matter dominated scenario gravitons. The bounds arising from direct detection are only
with TRH = 1 GeV, where the required coannihilation cross relevant when the parameter sin θh S controlling the mixing
section to explain the DM relic abundance does not exceed between the SM-like Higgs boson and the first KK resonance
the Xenon1T bound for y∗ = 3. In the case of y∗ = 1.5, the S of the Z2 -odd scalar field is 10−4 . For smaller values,
required cross section is excluded by the Xenon1T bound. the contribution to the direct-detection cross section given by
In the case of sin θh S = 10−4 we can reproduce the correct t-channel Higgs exchange becomes less and less important,
amount of DM for both values of TRH , in the scenario of to the point of becoming of the same order as the one from
123
the t-channel exchange of the S resonance, which is beyond ons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

the reach of current direct detection experiments. Funded by SCOAP3 .
We have also studied the impact of the scalar mixing on
precision measurements of Higgs couplings. In particular,
we have computed the modifications of the Higgs couplings Appendix A: Fermion equations of motion
to electroweak gauge bosons and the bottom quark as a con-
sequence of the mixing between the SM-like Higgs boson The Yukawa interaction between the odd bulk scalar S1 and
and the first KK resonances of both bulk fields, H and S. We a ¯ a A pair, corresponding to a fermion zero mode (a) and
have demonstrated that planned future colliders could probe a first KK mode (A), comes from the term generating the
the induced modifications on the b-quark Yukawa in the case different fermion bulk masses
where β 4, values for which the Higgs boson has a strong
presence into the bulk. We have also studied the constraints √ ¯ a A .
S ⊃ − d 5 x g Ya (A1)
on the Higgs effective Yukawa coupling to DM when its mass
is light enough to allow for the Higgs boson to decay into a
In this case, the EOM for a fermion field with a 5D bulk mass
pair of DM particles. We conclude that the effective
Yukawa
generated dynamically reads
coupling to the dark fermions yχ h 0.02/ Nχ , with Nχ
being the multiplicity of the 5D dark fermion. L ,R
[±t∂t − ca v S (t)] f 0,a (t) = 0, (A2)
In summary, we have shown that models with a WED natu-
rally feature a compelling explanation for the observed relic
for the zero mode and
abundance of DM, consisting of an O(10) TeV fermionic
WIMP coupled to the SM by a heavy scalar mediator S with t 2 ∂t2 + xn2 t 2 ∓ ca t v S (t)
mass m S ∼ 30 TeV. All this is possible without conflict- (A3)
L ,R
ing with current data from colliders, flavor experiments and + ca v S (t) (±1 − ca v S (t)) f n,A (t) = 0,
cosmology and while still providing natural solutions to the
hierarchy problem and the flavor puzzle, which are arguably for the n-th KK mode [10], where ca is the usual dimen-
two of the most important theoretical problems in particle sionless 5D mass. In the scenario at hand, it is defined by
physics. [10]
Acknowledgements We would like to thank Miki Chala and Aqeel
6 μS
Ahmed for useful comments on the manuscript, as well as Lukas ca ≡ Ya . (A4)
Mittnacht and Eric Madge for helpful discussions. M.N. thanks Gino λS k
Isidori, the particle theory group at Zurich University and the Pauli Cen-
ter for hospitality during a sabbatical stay. A.C. acknowledges fund- Here, we have used the following KK decomposition for the
ing from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innova-
tion programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement fermions
No. 754446 and UGR Research and Knowledge Transfer Found – Athe-
nea3i. The research of J.C. and M.N. is supported by the Cluster of t 2
= n (x) MKK f n (t), (A5)
Excellence Precision Physics, Fundamental Interactions and Structure
of Matter (PRISMA+ – EXC 2118/1) within the German Excellence n=0
Strategy (project ID 39083149) and under Grant 05H18UMCA1 of the
German Federal Ministry for Education and Research (BMBF). satisfying
Data Availability Statement This manuscript has no associated data 1

or the data will not be deposited. [Authors’ comment: This article deals 2 f mA∗ (t) f nB (t) = δmn . (A6)
with aspects of theoretical high-energy physics. Therefore, there is no
associated data to be deposited.]
The 5D Yukawa interaction leads to the effective 4D vertex
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attri- ¯ a A , with effective Yukawa
S1
bution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation,
distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you
λS k 1
give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, pro- ya AS = 2 ca dt f a (t) f A (t)χ1S (t). (A7)
vide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes r μS
were made. The images or other third party material in this article
are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indi- The coupling to a VL fermion χ , corresponding to the first
cated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not KK resonance of some 5D fermion, is given by
included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended
use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permit-
ted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copy- λS k 1
yχ S = 2 ca L
dt f 1,χ (t) f 1,χ
R
(t)χ1S (t). (A8)
right holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecomm r μS
123
Appendix B: Cross section expressions Using the Friedmann equation
The different coannihilation cross sections of χ̄ χ into a pair 1 * +

H2 = ρ R + ρχ + ρφ (C2)
of SM particles are given by (see e.g. [20]) 2
3m Pl
3/2 1/2
N f yχ2 S 4m 2f 4m 2χ and defining H = H (T ) we obtain
σ (χ̄ χ → f¯ f ) = s 1− 1−

g∗ τ a 4 a 3
16π s s

y 2f h sin2 θh S y 2f S H 2 = H2 + (1 − τ )
2 y f h y f S sin θh S g∗ + gχ a a
× . /2 + . /2 + . /. / ,
s − m 2h s − m 2S s − m 2S s − m 2h gχ τ a 4
1/2 1/2 + , (C3)
yχ2 S
g∗ + gχ a
4m 2h 4m 2χ
σ (χ̄ χ → hh) = 1− 1−
32π s s where g∗ is the effective number of relativistic degrees of
freedom of the visible sector of the extra-dimensional theory.
9 sin2 θh S m 4h sin θh S x S1 MKK
2 4 4
× . / + . /2 Assuming that the entropy is conserved in this sector and
2
v42 s − m 2h v42 s − m 2S taking into account that g∗ gχ , we can write

6 m 2h sin2 θh S x S21 MKK x 3/2 r x 1/2
2
+ 2. /. / , (B1) √
v4 s − m 2S s − m 2h H = H 1 − τ +1 , (C4)
x 1−τ x
1/2
δV yχ2 S sin2 θh S 4m 2V where we have defined x = m χ /T and x = x(T ).
σ (χ̄ χ → V V ) = 1−
8π s The annihilation rate ann can be written as
1/2
4m 2χ m 4V (s − 2m 2V )2 gχ m 3χ
× 1− . /2 2 + , ann = e−x σ v (C5)
s v2 s − m 2 4m 4V (2π x)3/2
4 h
NQ yχ2 S y Qq
2
s where σ v is the velocity-averaged coannihilation cross sec-
σ (χ̄ χ → Q̄q) = . /2 tion. In our scenario of scalar mediated fermionic DM, after
16π s − m 2S
3/2 1/2 Taylor expanding (σ v) with respect to vr2 , we can write
m 2Q 4m 2χ
× 1− 1− , (σ v) a + bvr2 = bvr2 , (C6)
s s
since a = 0 as we have seen in the previous section. There-
with δV = 1, 1/2 for V = W ± , Z . fore, one can write the velocity-averaged coannihilation cross
section as
6b
σ v , (C7)
Appendix C: Matter dominated freeze-out x
which leads to
We review here the relevant formulae for the calculation
of the current DM relic abundance after freeze-out during gχ m 3χ 6b
an early period of matter domination (see [19,20] for more ann = e−x . (C8)
(2π )3/2 x 5/2
details).
We assume the presence of a long-lived heavy scalar field We can define the freeze-out temperature by asking H (x f ) =
φ, localized on the UV brane, which starts behaving like ann (x f ), with x f = m χ /T f . This leads to
matter at a critical temperature T ∼ m φ , which we assumme
to be much larger than MKK , i.e., T MKK . If φ is long- gχ m 3χ 6b
lived enough, its contribution to the energy density ρφ will x f = log (1 − τ )−1/2
(2π )3/2 H x3/2
grow until ultimately monopolize the total energy density (C9)
1/2
regardless of its initial contribution at T , given by (1 − τ ), r x
× xf + 2
xf .
with τ ∈ [0, 1] 1−τ

ρ R + ρχ The yield Y = n χ /s, with s the entropy density, is given
τ= , (C1)
ρ R + ρχ + ρφ T =T at freeze-out by
−1
and ρχ , ρ R , the energy density of DM and the visible sector
∞ τ x −1/2 −7/2
Yf = λ dx 1 + x , (C10)
of the extra-dimensional theory. xf 1−τ x
123
where 7. T. Gherghetta, A Holographic View of Beyond the Standard

Model Physics, in Physics of the large and the small, TASI
2π 2 g∗S m 3χ 6b 09, proceedings of the Theoretical Advanced Study Institute
λ= 3/2
, (C11)
45H x in Elementary Particle Physics, Boulder, Colorado, USA, 1–
26 June 2009, pp. 165–232 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1142/
where g∗S is the number of effective entropic degrees of 9789814327183_0004. arXiv:1008.2570
freedom. More explicitly, it reads 8. Y. Grossman, M. Neubert, Neutrino masses and mixings in non-
factorizable geometry. Phys. Lett. B 474, 361 (2000). https://doi.
1 π 2 g∗S m 3χ σ v 1 − τ 5/2 org/10.1016/S0370-2693(00)00054-X. arXiv:hep-ph/9912408
≈ 9. T. Gherghetta, A. Pomarol, Bulk fields and supersymmetry in a
Yf 90H x4 τ slice of AdS. Nucl. Phys. B 586, 141 (2000). https://doi.org/10.

x τ 1016/S0550-3213(00)00392-8. arXiv:hep-ph/0003129
× 3x f sinh−1 10. A. Ahmed, A. Carmona, J. Castellano Ruiz, Y. Chung, M. Neu-
x f (1 − τ )
(C12) bert, Dynamical origin of fermion bulk masses in a warped
3/2
x τ x τ extra dimension. JHEP 08, 045 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/
+ 1+ JHEP08(2019)045. arXiv:1905.09833
xf 1−τ x f (1 − τ ) 11. H. Davoudiasl, B. Lillie, T.G. Rizzo, Off-the-wall Higgs in the

(1 − τ ) universal Randall–Sundrum model. JHEP 08, 042 (2006). https://
× 2x − 3x f , doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2006/08/042. arXiv:hep-ph/0508279
τ 12. G. Cacciapaglia, C. Csaki, G. Marandella, J. Terning, The Gauge-
where we have approximated σ v ≈ 6b/x f . Finally, the phobic Higgs. JHEP 02, 036 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1088/
1126-6708/2007/02/036. arXiv:hep-ph/0611358
prediction for the DM relic abundance, assuming a matter 13. A. Azatov, M. Toharia, L. Zhu, Higgs Mediated FCNC’s in Warped
dominated universe during freeze-out, reads Extra Dimensions. Phys. Rev. D 80, 035016 (2009). https://doi.org/
s0 m χ Y f 10.1103/PhysRevD.80.035016. arXiv:0906.1990
χ h 2 = ζ , (C13) 14. L. Vecchi, A Natural Hierarchy and a low New Physics scale
ρcritical from a Bulk Higgs. JHEP 11, 102 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/
JHEP11(2011)102. arXiv:1012.3742
where ρcritical = 8.13 · 10−47 GeV4 , s0 2.29 · 10−38 GeV3 . 15. P.R. Archer, The fermion mass hierarchy in models with warped
In the above equation, ζ parametrizes the dilution of the DM extra dimensions and a bulk Higgs. JHEP 09, 095 (2012). https://
abundance after freeze-out due to the decays of φ and the doi.org/10.1007/JHEP09(2012)095. arXiv:1204.4730
subsequent entropy injection 16. R. Malm, M. Neubert, K. Novotny, C. Schmell, 5D perspective on
Higgs production at the boundary of a warped extra dimension.
JHEP 01, 173 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2014)173.
sbefore χ
ζ = = f, (C14) arXiv:1303.5702
safter χ 17. P.R. Archer, M. Carena, A. Carmona, M. Neubert, Higgs pro-
duction and decay in models of a warped extra dimension with
which can be expressed with good approximation as follows a bulk higgs. JHEP 01, 060 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/
JHEP01(2015)060. arXiv:1408.5406
45 1 TRH 18. P. Gondolo, G. Gelmini, Cosmic abundances of stable particles:
ζ ≈ . (C15)
4π 3 (1 − τ )g∗ T improved analysis. Nucl. Phys. B 360, 145 (1991). https://doi.org/
10.1016/0550-3213(91)90438-4
19. S. Hamdan, J. Unwin, Dark matter freeze-out during matter domi-
nation. Mod. Phys. Lett. A 33, 1850181 (2018). https://doi.org/10.
References 1142/S021773231850181X. arXiv:1710.03758
20. P. Chanda, S. Hamdan, J. Unwin, Reviving Z and Higgs medi-
1. J.M. Maldacena, The Large N limit of superconformal field ated dark matter models in matter dominated freeze-out. JCAP
theories and supergravity. Int. J. Theor. Phys. 38, 1113 01, 034 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2020/01/034.
(1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026654312961. https://doi. arXiv:1911.02616
org/10.4310/ATMP.1998.v2.n2.a1. arXiv:hep-th/9711200 21. L. Randall, R. Sundrum, A large mass hierarchy from a small extra
2. S.S. Gubser, I.R. Klebanov, A.M. Polyakov, Gauge theory dimension. Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 3370 (1999). https://doi.org/10.
correlators from noncritical string theory. Phys. Lett. B 428, 1103/PhysRevLett.83.3370. arXiv:hep-ph/9905221
105 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0370-2693(98)00377-3. 22. F. Mahmoudi, U. Maitra, N. Manglani, K. Sridhar, A Higgs in the
arXiv:hep-th/9802109 Warped Bulk and LHC signals. JHEP 11, 075 (2016). https://doi.
3. N. Arkani-Hamed, M. Porrati, L. Randall, Holography and org/10.1007/JHEP11(2016)075. arXiv:1608.07407
phenomenology. JHEP 08, 017 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1088/ 23. XENON collaboration, First dark matter search results of the
1126-6708/2001/08/017. arXiv:hep-th/0012148 XENON1T experiment. Nuovo Cim. C 41, 109 (2018). https://
4. R. Rattazzi, A. Zaffaroni, Comments on the holographic picture doi.org/10.1393/ncc/i2018-18109-5
of the Randall-Sundrum model. JHEP 04, 021 (2001). https://doi. 24. XENON collaboration, Dark matter search results from a
org/10.1088/1126-6708/2001/04/021. arXiv:hep-th/0012248 one ton-year exposure of XENON1T. Phys. Rev. Lett. 121,
5. M. Perez-Victoria, Randall–Sundrum models and the regularized 111302 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.111302.
AdS / CFT correspondence. JHEP 05, 064 (2001). https://doi.org/ arXiv:1805.12562
10.1088/1126-6708/2001/05/064. arXiv:hep-th/0105048 25. M. Aaboud, G. Aad, B. Abbott, O. Abdinov, B. Abeloos, D.
6. R. Contino, A. Pomarol, Holography for fermions. JHEP Abhayasinghe et al., Observation of H → bb̄ decays and V H
11, 058 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2004/11/058. production with the ATLAS detector. Phys. Lett. B 786, 59 (2018).
arXiv:hep-th/0406257 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2018.09.013
123
26. J. de Blas et al., Higgs Boson studies at future particle colliders. 34. Planck collaboration, Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological
JHEP 01, 139 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2020)139. parameters. arXiv:1807.06209
arXiv:1905.03764 35. H.M. Lee, M. Park, V. Sanz, Gravity-mediated (or Composite) Dark
27. H. Davoudiasl, J. Hewett, T. Rizzo, Bulk gauge fields in the Matter. Eur. Phys. J. C 74, 2715 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1140/
Randall–Sundrum model. Phys. Lett. B 473, 43 (2000). https:// epjc/s10052-014-2715-8. arXiv:1306.4107
doi.org/10.1016/S0370-2693(99)01430-6. arXiv:hep-ph/9911262 36. H. Davoudiasl, J. Hewett, T. Rizzo, Brane localized curvature for
28. A. Pomarol, Gauge bosons in a five-dimensional theory with local- warped gravitons. JHEP 08, 034 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1088/
ized gravity. Phys. Lett. B 486, 153 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1016/ 1126-6708/2003/08/034. arXiv:hep-ph/0305086
S0370-2693(00)00737-1. arXiv:hep-ph/9911294 37. M.G. Folgado, A. Donini, N. Rius, Spin-dependence of
29. S. Casagrande, F. Goertz, U. Haisch, M. Neubert, T. Pfoh, Flavor Gravity-mediated Dark Matter in Warped Extra-Dimensions.
Physics in the Randall-Sundrum Model: I. Theoretical Setup and arXiv:2006.02239
Electroweak Precision Tests, JHEP 10, 094 (2008). https://doi.org/ 38. S. Kanemura, S. Matsumoto, T. Nabeshima, N. Okada, Can WIMP
10.1088/1126-6708/2008/10/094. arXiv:0807.4937 Dark Matter overcome the Nightmare Scenario? Phys. Rev. D
30. K. Agashe, G. Servant, Warped unification, proton stability and 82, 055026 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.82.055026.
dark matter. Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 231805 (2004). https://doi.org/ arXiv:1005.5651
10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.231805. arXiv:hep-ph/0403143 39. M. Hoferichter, J. Ruiz de Elvira, B. Kubis, U.-G. Meißner, High-
31. CMS collaboration, Search for invisible decays of a Higgs boson Precision Determination of the Pion-Nucleon σ Term from Roy-
produced
√ through vector boson fusion in proton-proton collisions Steiner Equations. Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 092301 (2015). https://doi.
at s = 13 TeV. Phys. Lett. B 793, 520 (2019). https://doi.org/10. org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.092301. arXiv:1506.04142
1016/j.physletb.2019.04.025. arXiv:1809.05937
32. Y.G. Kim, K.Y. Lee, The Minimal model of fermionic dark mat-
ter. Phys. Rev. D 75, 115012 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1103/
PhysRevD.75.115012. arXiv:hep-ph/0611069
33. G. Arcadi, A. Djouadi, M. Raidal, Dark Matter through the
Higgs portal. Phys. Rept. 842, 1 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
physrep.2019.11.003. arXiv:1903.03616
123

A Warped Scalar Portal To Fermionic Dark Matter: Adrian Carmona, Javier Castellano Ruiz, Matthias Neubert

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Warped Scalar Portal To Fermionic Dark Matter: Adrian Carmona, Javier Castellano Ruiz, Matthias Neubert

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Warped Scalar Portal To Fermionic Dark Matter: Adrian Carmona, Javier Castellano Ruiz, Matthias Neubert

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Eur. Phys. J.

Regular Article - Theoretical Physics

A warped scalar portal to fermionic dark matter

from the Xenon1T experiment, showing that for a O(10 TeV)

m IR − 2 − β First, we determine the profiles of the two VEVs. From (16),

ing a value of the DM coannihilation cross section required

3.2 Scalar excitations

We now move on to the study of the scalar KK excitations.

Fig. 3 Maximum allowed

is projected to be about 1% for the initial stages, reaching the [16,17]

χ1 χ0 analogously to (46) but involving two KK profiles instead of

the interaction of S to the dark fermions requires a mass inser-

the t-channel exchange of the S resonance, which is beyond ons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Data Availability Statement This manuscript has no associated data 1

Appendix B: Cross section expressions Using the Friedmann equation

The different coannihilation cross sections of χ̄ χ into a pair 1 * +

where 7. T. Gherghetta, A Holographic View of Beyond the Standard

You might also like