Assessing the discovery potential of directional detection of Dark Matter
J. Billard (1), F. Mayet (1), D. Santos (1) ((1) LPSC Grenoble)

TL;DR
This paper evaluates the potential of directional dark matter detectors to identify WIMPs using a statistical approach, accounting for uncertainties, and estimates the sensitivity achievable with a 30 kg.year CF4 experiment.
Contribution
It introduces a frequentist profile likelihood method to assess the discovery potential of directional dark matter detectors, incorporating astrophysical and experimental uncertainties.
Findings
A 30 kg.year CF4 detector can reach 3σ sensitivity at 90% C.L. for cross sections as low as 10^{-5} pb.
The method estimates the significance of detection considering uncertainties, improving reliability.
Optimistic and pessimistic scenarios show sensitivity ranges from 10^{-5} to 3.10^{-4} pb.
Abstract
There is a worldwide effort toward the development of a large TPC (Time Projection Chamber) devoted to directional Dark Matter detection. All current projects are being designed to fulfill a unique goal : identifying weakly interacting massive particle (WIMP) as such by taking advantage of the expected direction dependence of WIMP-induced events toward the constellation Cygnus. However such proof of discovery requires a careful statistical data treatment. In this paper, the discovery potential of forthcoming directional detectors is adressed by using a frequentist approach based on the profile likelihood ratio test statistic. This allows us to estimate the expected significance of a Dark Matter detection. Moreover, using this powerful test statistic, it is possible to propagate astrophysical and experimental uncertainties in the determination of the discovery potential of a given…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
