- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review D

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

CMB constraints on dark matter-proton scattering: Investigating prior-volume effects using profile likelihoods

Maria C. Straight1,2,*, Tanvi Karwal3, José Luis Bernal4, and Kimberly K. Boddy2

  • *Contact author: maria.straight@utexas.edu
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 114, 083511 – Published 7 October, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/b8pm-k1sh

Abstract

We present profile-likelihood constraints on velocity-independent dark matter-proton scattering, including cases in which only a fraction of dark matter has such nongravitational interactions. Frequentist profile-likelihood techniques provide prior-independent constraints, circumventing prior-volume effects that we show arise in Bayesian constraints on this model. In the limit where the scattering cross section or the fraction of interacting dark matter approaches zero, the other interacting dark matter model parameters become unconstrained, causing the posterior distribution to favor that region of parameter space. Using Planck 2018 cosmic microwave background anisotropy data, we find a clear impact of prior-volume effects on the posteriors used to place constraints on dark matter scattering. Compared to the frequentist analysis, the Bayesian method consistently overestimates the constraints on the cross section. Given the potentially biased upper limits on models subject to prior-volume effects, such as this one, we recommend supplementing Bayesian constraints with frequentist statistics to better assess the impact of priors.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (76)

  1. N. Aghanim et al. (Planck Collaboration), Planck 2018 results. V. CMB power spectra and likelihoods, Astron. Astrophys. 641, A5 (2020).
  2. H. Miyatake et al., Hyper Suprime-Cam Year 3 results: Cosmology from galaxy clustering and weak lensing with HSC and SDSS using the emulator based halo model, Phys. Rev. D 108, 123517 (2023).
  3. S. Bocquet et al. (SPT, DES Collaborations), SPT clusters with DES and HST weak lensing. II. Cosmological constraints from the abundance of massive halos, Phys. Rev. D 110, 083510 (2024).
  4. E. Calabrese et al. (Atacama Cosmology Telescope Collaboration), The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: DR6 constraints on extended cosmological models, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2025) 063.
  5. A. H. Wright et al., KiDS-Legacy: Cosmological constraints from cosmic shear with the complete Kilo-Degree Survey, Astron. Astrophys. 703, A158 (2025).
  6. T. M. C. Abbott et al. (DES Collaboration), Dark Energy Survey Year 6 results: Cosmological constraints from galaxy clustering and weak lensing, arXiv:2601.14559.
  7. T. M. C. Abbott et al. (DES Collaboration), Dark Energy Survey Year 6 results: Cosmological constraints from cosmic shear, arXiv:2602.10065.
  8. P. Cushman et al., Snowmass CF1 Summary: WIMP dark matter direct detection, arXiv:1310.8327.
  9. E. Aprile et al. (XENON Collaboration), First dark matter search with nuclear recoils from the XENONnT experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 041003 (2023).
  10. Z. Bo et al. (PandaX Collaboration), Dark matter search results from 1.54 tonne·year exposure of PandaX-4T, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 011805 (2025).
  11. J. Aalbers et al. (LZ Collaboration), Dark matter search results from 4.2 tonne-years of exposure of the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 011802 (2025).
  12. T. Emken and C. Kouvaris, DaMaSCUS: The impact of underground scatterings on direct detection of light dark matter, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2017) 031.
  13. K. K. Boddy and V. Gluscevic, First cosmological constraint on the effective theory of dark matter-proton interactions, Phys. Rev. D 98, 083510 (2018).
  14. X.-l. Chen, S. Hannestad, and R. J. Scherrer, Cosmic microwave background and large scale structure limits on the interaction between dark matter and baryons, Phys. Rev. D 65, 123515 (2002).
  15. C. Dvorkin, K. Blum, and M. Kamionkowski, Constraining dark matter-baryon scattering with linear cosmology, Phys. Rev. D 89, 023519 (2014).
  16. K. K. Boddy, V. Gluscevic, V. Poulin, E. D. Kovetz, M. Kamionkowski, and R. Barkana, Critical assessment of CMB limits on dark matter-baryon scattering: New treatment of the relative bulk velocity, Phys. Rev. D 98, 123506 (2018).
  17. V. Gluscevic and K. K. Boddy, Constraints on scattering of keV-TeV dark matter with protons in the early universe, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 081301 (2018).
  18. W. L. Xu, C. Dvorkin, and A. Chael, Probing sub-GeV dark matter-baryon scattering with cosmological observables, Phys. Rev. D 97, 103530 (2018).
  19. D. V. Nguyen, D. Sarnaaik, K. K. Boddy, E. O. Nadler, and V. Gluscevic, Observational constraints on dark matter scattering with electrons, Phys. Rev. D 104, 103521 (2021).
  20. M. A. Buen-Abad, R. Essig, D. McKeen, and Y.-M. Zhong, Cosmological constraints on dark matter interactions with ordinary matter, Phys. Rep. 961, 1 (2022).
  21. K. K. Boddy, G. Krnjaic, and S. Moltner, Investigation of CMB constraints for dark matter-helium scattering, Phys. Rev. D 106, 043510 (2022).
  22. Z. Li et al., The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: Limits on dark matter-baryon interactions from DR4 power spectra, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2022) 046.
  23. R. An, K. K. Boddy, and V. Gluscevic, Interacting light thermal-relic dark matter: Self-consistent cosmological bounds, Phys. Rev. D 109, 123522 (2024).
  24. J. B. Muñoz and A. Loeb, Constraints on dark matter-baryon scattering from the temperature evolution of the intergalactic medium, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2017) 043.
  25. J. Ooba, H. Tashiro, and K. Kadota, Cosmological constraints on the velocity-dependent baryon-dark matter coupling, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 09 (2019) 020.
  26. K. K. Rogers, C. Dvorkin, and H. V. Peiris, Limits on the light dark matter–proton cross section from cosmic large-scale structure, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 171301 (2022).
  27. J. B. Muñoz, E. D. Kovetz, and Y. Ali-Haïmoud, Heating of baryons due to scattering with dark matter during the dark ages, Phys. Rev. D 92, 083528 (2015).
  28. T. R. Slatyer and C.-L. Wu, Early-Universe constraints on dark matter-baryon scattering and their implications for a global 21 cm signal, Phys. Rev. D 98, 023013 (2018).
  29. A. Rahimieh, P. Parashari, R. An, T. Driskell, J. Mirocha, and V. Gluscevic, Sensitivity of the global 21-cm signal to dark matter-baryon scattering, arXiv:2505.03148.
  30. A. Rahimieh, P. Parashari, and V. Gluscevic, Forecasting 21-cm power spectrum sensitivity to dark matter-baryon scattering, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 542, 1605 (2025).
  31. E. D. Kovetz, V. Poulin, V. Gluscevic, K. K. Boddy, R. Barkana, and M. Kamionkowski, Tighter limits on dark matter explanations of the anomalous EDGES 21 cm signal, Phys. Rev. D 98, 103529 (2018).
  32. K. Short, J. L. Bernal, K. K. Boddy, V. Gluscevic, and L. Verde, Dark matter-baryon scattering effects on temperature perturbations and implications for cosmic dawn, arXiv:2203.16524.
  33. T. Driskell, E. O. Nadler, J. Mirocha, A. Benson, K. K. Boddy, T. D. Morton, J. Lashner, R. An, and V. Gluscevic, Structure formation and the global 21-cm signal in the presence of Coulomb-like dark matter-baryon interactions, Phys. Rev. D 106, 103525 (2022).
  34. C. Zhang, L. Zu, H.-Z. Chen, Y.-L. S. Tsai, and Y.-Z. Fan, Weak lensing constraints on dark matter-baryon interactions with N-body simulations and machine learning, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 08 (2024) 003.
  35. A. He, M. M. Ivanov, R. An, T. Driskell, and V. Gluscevic, Bounds on velocity-dependent dark matter-baryon scattering from large-scale structure, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2025) 087.
  36. E. O. Nadler, V. Gluscevic, K. K. Boddy, and R. H. Wechsler, Constraints on dark matter microphysics from the milky way satellite population, Astrophys. J. Lett. 878, 32 (2019); 897, L46(E) (2020).
  37. K. Maamari, V. Gluscevic, K. K. Boddy, E. O. Nadler, and R. H. Wechsler, Bounds on velocity-dependent dark matter-proton scattering from Milky Way satellite abundance, Astrophys. J. Lett. 907, L46 (2021).
  38. E. O. Nadler, R. An, V. Gluscevic, A. Benson, and X. Du, COZMIC. I. Cosmological zoom-in simulations with initial conditions beyond cold dark matter, Astrophys. J. 986, 127 (2025).
  39. H. Lazare, E. D. Kovetz, K. K. Boddy, and J. B. Munoz, First galaxy ultraviolet luminosity function limits on dark matter-proton scattering, arXiv:2510.10757.
  40. S. Das, R. Mondol, A. Singh, and R. Laha, Dark secrets of baryons: Illuminating dark matter-baryon interactions with JWST, Phys. Rev. Lett. 137, 011002 (2026).
  41. A. He, M. M. Ivanov, R. An, and V. Gluscevic, S8 tension in the context of dark matter–baryon scattering, Astrophys. J. Lett. 954, L8 (2023).
  42. T. L. Smith, V. Poulin, J. L. Bernal, K. K. Boddy, M. Kamionkowski, and R. Murgia, Early dark energy is not excluded by current large-scale structure data, Phys. Rev. D 103, 123542 (2021).
  43. L. Herold, E. G. M. Ferreira, and E. Komatsu, New constraint on early dark energy from Planck and BOSS data using the profile likelihood, Astrophys. J. Lett. 929, L16 (2022).
  44. L. Herold and E. G. M. Ferreira, Resolving the Hubble tension with early dark energy, Phys. Rev. D 108, 043513 (2023).
  45. T. Karwal, Y. Patel, A. Bartlett, V. Poulin, T. L. Smith, and D. N. Pfeffer, Procoli: Profiles of cosmological likelihoods, arXiv:2401.14225.
  46. E. B. Holm, L. Herold, T. Simon, E. G. M. Ferreira, S. Hannestad, V. Poulin, and T. Tram, Bayesian and frequentist investigation of prior effects in EFT of LSS analyses of full-shape BOSS and eBOSS data, Phys. Rev. D 108, 123514 (2023).
  47. H. Zhang, M. Bonici, G. D’Amico, S. Paradiso, and W. J. Percival, HOD-informed prior for EFT-based full-shape analyses of LSS, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 04 (2024) 041.
  48. A. Chudaykin, M. M. Ivanov, and T. Nishimichi, Priors and scale cuts in EFT-based full-shape analyses, Phys. Rev. D 113, 063524 (2026).
  49. L. F. Secco et al. (DES Collaboration), Dark Energy Survey Year 3 results: Cosmology from cosmic shear and robustness to modeling uncertainty, Phys. Rev. D 105, 023515 (2022).
  50. T. M. C. Abbott et al. (Kilo-Degree Survey, DES Collaborations), DES Y3 + KiDS-1000: Consistent cosmology combining cosmic shear surveys, Open J. Astrophys. 6, 89164 (2023).
  51. G. Aricò, R. E. Angulo, M. Zennaro, S. Contreras, A. Chen, and C. Hernández-Monteagudo, DES Y3 cosmic shear down to small scales: Constraints on cosmology and baryons, Astron. Astrophys. 678, A109 (2023).
  52. A. Fowlie, The Bayes factor surface for searches for new physics, Eur. Phys. J. C 84, 426 (2024).
  53. L. Herold, E. G. M. Ferreira, and L. Heinrich, Profile likelihoods in cosmology: When, why, and how illustrated with ΛCDM, massive neutrinos, and dark energy, Phys. Rev. D 111, 083504 (2025).
  54. C.-P. Ma and E. Bertschinger, Cosmological perturbation theory in the synchronous and conformal Newtonian gauges, Astrophys. J. 455, 7 (1995).
  55. Y. Ali-Haïmoud, S. S. Gandhi, and T. L. Smith, Exact treatment of weak dark matter-baryon scattering for linear-cosmology observables, Phys. Rev. D 109, 083523 (2024).
  56. J. Neyman, Outline of a theory of statistical estimation based on the classical theory of probability, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 236, 333 (1937).
  57. S. S. Wilks, The large-sample distribution of the likelihood ratio for testing composite hypotheses, Ann. Math. Stat. 9, 60 (1938).
  58. G. J. Feldman and R. D. Cousins, A unified approach to the classical statistical analysis of small signals, Phys. Rev. D 57, 3873 (1998).
  59. D. Blas, J. Lesgourgues, and T. Tram, The Cosmic Linear Anisotropy Solving System (CLASS) II: Approximation schemes, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2011) 034.
  60. J. Torrado and A. Lewis, Cobaya: Code for Bayesian analysis of hierarchical physical models, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2020) 057.
  61. T. Brinckmann and J. Lesgourgues, montepython 3: Boosted MCMC sampler and other features, arXiv:1804.07261.
  62. T. Karwal and M. Kamionkowski, Dark energy at early times, the Hubble parameter, and the string axiverse, Phys. Rev. D 94, 103523 (2016).
  63. V. Poulin, T. L. Smith, T. Karwal, and M. Kamionkowski, Early dark energy can resolve the Hubble tension, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 221301 (2019).
  64. V. Poulin, T. L. Smith, and T. Karwal, The ups and downs of early dark energy solutions to the Hubble tension: A review of models, hints and constraints circa 2023, Phys. Dark Universe 42, 101348 (2023).
  65. M. Kamionkowski and A. G. Riess, The Hubble tension and early dark energy, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 73, 153 (2023).
  66. A. R. Khalife et al. (SPT-3G Collaboration), SPT-3G D1: Axion early dark energy with CMB experiments and DESI, arXiv:2507.23355.
  67. C. R. Harris et al., Array programming with numpy, Nature (London) 585, 357 (2020).
  68. P. Virtanen et al. (scipy 1.0 Contributors), scipy1.0: Fundamental algorithms for scientific computing in python, Nat. Med. 17, 261 (2020).
  69. A. Lewis, getdist: A python package for analysing Monte Carlo samples, arXiv:1910.13970.
  70. J. D. Hunter, matplotlib: A 2D graphics environment, Comput. Sci. Eng. 9, 90 (2007).
  71. G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross, and O. Vitells, Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics, Eur. Phys. J. C 71, 1554 (2011); 73, 2501(E) (2013).
  72. C. B. Salucci, H. B. Reiersrud, A. L. Read, A. Kvellestad, and R. De Bin, The asymptotic distribution of the likelihood ratio test statistic in two-peak discovery experiments, arXiv:2512.19333.
  73. H. Chernoff, On the distribution of the likelihood ratio, Ann. Math. Stat. 25, 573 (1954).
  74. D. Naredo-Tuero, M. Escudero, E. Fernández-Martínez, X. Marcano, and V. Poulin, Critical look at the cosmological neutrino mass bound, Phys. Rev. D 110, 123537 (2024).
  75. D. Chebat et al., Cosmological neutrino mass: A frequentist overview in light of DESI, 10.5281/zenodo.15878410 (2025).
  76. S. G. Self and K.-Y. Liang, Asymptotic properties of maximum likelihood estimators and likelihood ratio tests under nonstandard conditions, J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 82, 398 (1987).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 114, 083511– Published 7 October, 2026
  • Received 3 April 2026
  • Accepted 14 September 2026
Article part of CHORUS
Crossmark - Check for updates button

© 2026 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation