Seeking dark matter with $\gamma$-ray attenuation
Extracted source text ยท arXiv 2208.13794
\documentclass[aps,prd,twocolumn,superscriptaddress,preprintnumbers,floatfix,nofootinbib,notitlepage,showkeys,showpacs]{revtex4-1}
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{hyperref}
\usepackage{latexsym}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{bbm}
\usepackage{ulem}
\usepackage{pdfsync}
\usepackage{epsfig}
\usepackage{epstopdf}
\usepackage{subfigure}
\usepackage{xcolor}
\usepackage{comment}
\usepackage{slashed}
\long\def\exclude#1{}
\DeclareMathOperator{\cm}{cm}
\DeclareMathOperator{\GeV}{GeV}
\DeclareMathOperator{\eV}{eV}
\DeclareMathOperator{\meV}{meV}
\DeclareMathOperator{\keV}{keV}
\DeclareMathOperator{\MeV}{MeV}
\DeclareMathOperator{\kg}{kg}
\DeclareMathOperator{\TeV}{TeV}
\DeclareMathOperator{\s}{s}
\DeclareMathOperator{\mol}{mol}
\DeclareMathOperator{\tgh}{tgh}
\DeclareMathOperator{\ch}{ch}
\DeclareMathOperator{\sh}{sh}
\DeclareMathOperator{\cn}{cn}
\DeclareMathOperator{\sech}{sech}
\DeclareMathOperator{\Mton}{Mton}
\DeclareMathOperator{\diag}{diag}
\DeclareMathOperator{\erg}{erg}
\DeclareMathOperator{\for}{for}
\DeclareMathOperator{\sinc}{sinc}
\DeclareMathOperator{\km}{km}
\DeclareMathOperator{\m}{m}
\DeclareMathOperator{\kpc}{kpc}
\DeclareMathOperator{\g}{g}
\DeclareMathOperator{\Log}{Log}
%\DeclareMathOperator{\ln}{ln}
\DeclareMathOperator{\kton}{kton}
\DeclareMathOperator{\Mpc}{Mpc}
\DeclareMathOperator{\arctg}{arctg}
\DeclareMathOperator{\y}{y}
\DeclareMathOperator{\tg}{tg}
\DeclareMathOperator{\tr}{tr}
\DeclareMathOperator{\ly}{ly}
\newcommand{\bk}{{\bf k}}
\newcommand{\bl}{{\bf l}}
\newcommand{\bE}{{\bf E}}
\newcommand{\bB}{{\bf B}}
\newcommand{\bA}{{\bf A}}
\newcommand{\bq}{{\bf q}}
\newcommand{\bp}{{\bf p}}
\newcommand{\bP}{{\bf P}}
\newcommand{\bx}{{\bf x}}
\newcommand{\beq}{\begin{equation}}
\newcommand{\eeq}{\end{equation}}
\newcommand{\nsat}{{n_{\rm sat}}}
\newcommand{\wP}{\omega_{\rm p}}
\newcommand{\kS}{k_{\rm s}}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
% JOURNAL KEYS
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\newcommand{\aaps}{{Astron.~Astrophys.~Supp.}}
\newcommand{\physrep}{{Physics~Reports}}
\newcommand{\araa}{{Annu.~Rev.~Astron.~Astrophys.}}
\newcommand{\aap}{{Astron.~Astrophys.}}
\newcommand{\jcap}{{JCAP}}
\newcommand{\apjl}{{Astrophys.~J.~Lett.}}
\newcommand{\apjs}{{Astrophys.~J.~Supp.}}
\newcommand{\aj}{{Astron.~J.}}
\newcommand{\mnras}{{Mon.~Not.~R.~Astron.~Soc.}}
\newcommand{\pasj}{{Publ.~Astron.~Soc.~Japan}}
\newcommand{\pasp}{{Publ.~Astron.~Soc.~Pacific}}
\newcommand{\ssr}{{Space~Science~Rev.}}
\newcommand{\apss}{{Astrophys.~and~Space~Science}}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\allowdisplaybreaks
\setlength{\bibsep}{0cm}
\bibpunct{[}{]}{,}{n}{}{,}
\newcommand{\andrea}[1]{\textcolor{purple}{{\bf Andrea}: #1}}
\newcommand{\JLB}[1]{\textcolor{blue}{[{\bf JLB}: #1]}}
\newcommand{\mk}[1]{\textcolor{red}{#1}}
\newcommand{\lam}{\Lambda}
\newcommand{\dif}{{\rm d}}
\newcommand{\Ham}{{\cal H}}
\begin{document}
%\title{Hinting electronvolt-scale axion-like particles with $\gamma$-ray attenuation}
\title{Seeking dark matter with $\gamma$-ray attenuation}
\author{Jos\'e Luis Bernal}
\affiliation{William H. Miller III Department of Physics and Astronomy, Johns Hopkins University, 3400 North Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21218, United States}
\author{Andrea Caputo}
\affiliation{School of Physics and Astronomy, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv 69978, Israel}\affiliation{ Department of Particle Physics and Astrophysics,
Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot 7610001,Israel}
\author{Gabriela Sato-Polito}
\affiliation{William H. Miller III Department of Physics and Astronomy, Johns Hopkins University, 3400 North Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21218, United States}
\author{Jordan Mirocha}
\affiliation{McGill University, Department of Physics \& McGill Space Institute, 3600 Rue University, Montr\'eal, QC, H3A 2T8}
\author{Marc Kamionkowski}
\affiliation{William H. Miller III Department of Physics and Astronomy, Johns Hopkins University, 3400 North Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21218, United States}
\date{\today}
%==========================
\begin{abstract}
The flux of high-energy astrophysical $\gamma$ rays is attenuated by the production of electron-positron pairs from scattering off of extragalactic background light (EBL). We use the most up-to-date information on galaxy populations to compute their contributions to the pair-production optical depth. We find that the optical depth inferred from $\gamma$-ray measurements exceeds that expected from galaxies at the $\sim2\sigma$ level. If the excess is modeled as a frequency-independent re-scaling of the standard contribution to the EBL from galaxies, then it is detected at the $2.7\sigma$ level (an overall $14-30\%$ increase of the EBL). If the frequency dependence of the excess is instead modeled as a two-photon decay of a dark-matter axion, then the excess is favored over the null hypothesis of no excess at the $2.1\sigma$ confidence level. While we find no evidence for a dark-matter signal, the analysis sets the strongest current bounds on the photon-axion coupling over the $8-25$ eV mass range.
\end{abstract}
\maketitle
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
The extragalactic background light (EBL) is defined as %usually defined as the integrated flux between the far infrared and near ultraviolet,
the integrated flux aggregating all emission over cosmic times~\cite{Cooray_review}. Direct measurements are challenging due to the overwhelming contamination from foregrounds, which makes it necessary to resort to indirect observational or theoretical determinations to get a census of the populations of emitters. In addition to astrophysical emissions, exotic contributions may be present, arising from a potential connection between dark matter and Standard Model particles, for instance.
%there might be exotic contributions from cosmological processes such as potential connections between dark matter and Standard Model particles.
Dark matter is a key component of our understanding of the Universe, but %despite the vast variety of dark-matter candidates~\cite{Bertone_DMreview},
a microscopic model backed by observational and experimental evidence is yet to be found~\cite{Bertone_DMreview}.
%there is yet a microscopic dark matter model backed by observational and experimental evidence to be found~\cite{Bertone_DMreview}.
The axion---a pseudo-Nambu-Goldstone boson initially proposed to solve the strong-CP problem---and axion-like particles (ALPs) are natural dark-matter candidates~\cite{Abbott:1982af, Dine:1982ah,Preskill:1982cy, Weinberg:1977ma, Wilczek:1977pj, Peccei:1977hh, Peccei:1977ur}, with rich phenomenology that enables a variety of search strategies~\cite{Marsh_review,axionDM_snowmass}. The coupling between ALPs and photons causes oscillations
%the oscillations between photons and ALPs
in the presence of magnetic fields, but also allows ALPs to undergo a monochromatic decay into two photons with energy $m_a c^2/2$, where $m_a$ is the ALP mass. The decay rate depends on the ALP-photon effective coupling $g_{a\gamma}$ as $\Gamma_a = (m_a c^2)^3g_{a\gamma}^2/32h$, where $c$ is the speed of light and $h$ is the Planck constant. Searches for signatures of ALP decays span a vast energy range (see e.g.,~\cite{Caputo:2018ljp, Caputo:2018vmy,Gong_IR,Caputo_IR,Caputo:2019djj, Boyarsky:2014ska, Riemer-Sorensen:2014yda, Dessert:2018qih,Cadamuro_axion,Foster_XMM,GeweringPeine_Xraydec, Blanco_gammaray,Cohen_gammaray,NathMaity_Pevdm,Esmaili_pevdm,Ellis_gravitino, Wadekar_LeoTDMheating, Hu_DMSpecD, Chluba_specD,Bolliet_SD,Iocco_BBN,Pospelov_BBN,Poulin_BBNDM,Poulin_decDM,Slatyer_dark,Slatyer_decDM,Lucca_synergy}). Here we seek their contributions to the EBL, focusing on indirect EBL determinations from $\gamma$-ray attenuation.
As $\gamma$-rays propagate through a bath of low-energy photons they are absorbed through electron-positron pair production~\cite{1966Natur.211..472J,Gould:1967zzb}. Joint analyses of the observed blazar spectra allow the attenuation to be determined as function of source redshift and observed $\gamma$-ray energy~\cite{FermiLAT_2012}. Assuming there is no secondary production of $\gamma$-rays due to undeflected cosmic rays in the jet~\cite{Essey:2009ju, Essey:2009zg, Essey:2010er}, %\footnote{\mk{MK: I don't think we need this footnote.} We follow this assumption throughout this work.}
these measurements can be used to infer the EBL intensity between the infrared and near ultraviolet as a function of redshift~\cite{Finke_EBLgray,Fermilat_EBL18,Acciari_EBL,Desai_EBL}. Moreover, using independent determinations of the EBL, they can also be used to constrain the expansion history of the Universe~\cite{Dominguez_H0}, study Pop~III stars~\cite{2012MNRAS.420..800G}, and test fundamental physics~\cite{Bitau_review}, among others. In particular, $\gamma$-ray attenuation measurements are sensitive to axion-photon oscillations: using the EBL as a ``screen'' for a ``light through a wall'' experiment% and searching for excesses in the $\gamma$-ray spectrum
~\cite{Hooper:2007bq, Mirizzi_ALPconversion,Hochmuth_ALPconversion,deAngelis_ALPconversion} yields competitive bounds on the ALP-photon coupling for $10^{-2}-10^2$ neV masses %$0.01\,{\rm neV}\lesssim m_ac^2\lesssim 100\,{\rm neV}$
(see e.g.,~\cite{HESS_ALP,Fermilat_ALP,Li_ALP,Jacobsen_ALP}). Nonetheless, $\gamma$-ray attenuation is also sensitive to multi-electronvolt ALP decays through their contribution to the EBL, as proposed in Refs.~\cite{Kalashev_gray_ALP,Korochkin_bump,Korochkin_axion}.
Revisiting exotic contributions to the EBL is timely. A recent measurement of the cosmic optical background performed by the New Horizons spacecraft yields a $\sim~4\sigma$ significant excess with respect to the expected flux from deep galaxy counts~\cite{NH21,NH22}. Furthermore, indirect determinations of the EBL~\cite{Fermilat_EBL18, Desai_EBL} lie above the inferred EBL from galaxy populations %and spectra
over a much wider frequency range~\cite{SaldanaLopez_EBL}. These excesses may be due to unaccounted for astrophysical contributions, but the New Horizons's excess may also be explained with ALP dark matter~\cite{Bernal_COB}.
Electronvolt-scale ALPs are hard to probe with current strategies, which motivates the development of new probes. Forthcoming line-intensity mapping experiments are expected to significantly improve sensitivities in this region of the parameter space~\cite{Creque-Sarbinowski:2018ebl,Bernal_limdm, Shirasaki_limlensdm}. Contributing to this endeavor, we present an independent probe for the dark-matter ALP using high-energy $\gamma$-rays. We significantly improve over preliminary attempts~\cite{Korochkin_bump,Korochkin_axion}, performing a systematic analysis of $\gamma$-ray absorption of a considerably larger sample of sources across redshift and observed energies, and confront it with a comprehensive observational and theoretical determination of the astrophysical EBL.
The optical depth is the line-of-sight integral of the inverse of the mean free path $l$ of all the interactions that a $\gamma$-ray encounters as it travels from the source to us: $\tau = c\int_0^{z_{\rm s}}\dif z l^{-1}/\left[H(1+z)\right]$, where $z_{\rm s}$ is the source redshift, and $H$ is the Hubble parameter. %The mean free path depends on the observed $\gamma$-ray energy $E_\gamma$ and the redshift $z_{\rm s}$ of the source.
We refer to observed energies and rest-frame energies at a given redshift as $E$ and $\epsilon\equiv E(1+z)$, respectively.
For a $\gamma$-ray with observed energy $E_\gamma$ in a bath of EBL photons, electron-positron pair production occurs above the EBL photon energy threshold,
\begin{equation}
\epsilon_{\rm min} = \frac{2m_e^2c^4}{E_\gamma(1+z)(1-\mu)}\,,
\end{equation}
where $m_e$ is the electron mass and $\mu$ is the cosine of the angle of incidence between the two photons. The cross section for the process is~\cite{Gould:1967zzb}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\sigma_{\gamma\gamma}(\beta) & =\frac{3\sigma_{\rm T}}{16}\left(1-\beta^2\right)\times\\
& \times\left[2\beta\left(\beta^2-2\right)+\left(3-\beta^4\right)\ln \left(\frac{1+\beta}{1-\beta}\right)\right]\,,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $\sigma_T$ is the Thomson cross-section and $\beta^2=1-2m_e^2c^4/(\epsilon\epsilon_\gamma(1-\mu))$ is the electron velocity in the center-of-mass frame. Assuming an isotropic gas of low-energy background photons with specific number density $\dif n/\dif \epsilon$ in proper coordinates, the inverse of the mean free path is
\begin{equation}
l^{-1} = \int_{0}^{\infty}\dif \epsilon\frac{\dif n}{\dif \epsilon}\int_{-1}^{1}\dif \mu \frac{(1-\mu)}{2}\sigma_{\gamma\gamma}\Theta(\epsilon-\epsilon_{\rm min})\,,
\label{eq:mfp}
\end{equation}
where $\Theta$ is the Heaviside function.\footnote{We further simplify this equation following Ref.~\cite{Biteau_2015}, limiting the energy integral to values above $\epsilon_{\rm min}'$ and computing the angular integral analytically, changing variable from $\mu$ to $\beta$.} %Therefore, we only need the photon density from each source type to compute the corresponding optical depth.
The angular integral peaks as $\epsilon$ tends to $\epsilon'_{\rm min}$, which corresponds to $\epsilon_{\rm min}$ with $\mu=-1$. The number density can also be obtained from the specific intensity per unit energy $I_\epsilon$ in comoving coordinates as $\dif n/\dif \epsilon=4\pi (1+z)^3 I_\epsilon/(c\epsilon)$.\footnote{Note that $\lambda I_\lambda = \epsilon I_\epsilon$.} %We simplify the notation of Eq.~\eqref{eq:mfp} as $l^{-1}\int_{\epsilon'_{\rm min}}^{\infty}\dif\epsilon\mathcal{A}\dif n/\dif \epsilon$, where $\epsilon_{\rm min}'$ corresponds to $\epsilon_{\rm min}$ with $\mu=-1$. $\mathcal{A}$ peaks as . %\andrea{I feel like this change of notation to $\mathcal{A}$ is a bit confusing, and doesn't really add much (we may leave only the footnote in which we say we follow Ref.~\cite{Biteau_2015}).}%You're right, I forgot to remove
As a reference, the minimum energy that ever contributes to the attenuation %of a $\gamma$-ray emitted in a blazar at redshift $z_{\rm s}$
is $\epsilon_{\rm min}'\simeq 1.3\,{\rm eV}\left(100\,{\rm GeV}/E_\gamma\right)\left(2/(1+z_{\rm s})\right)$.
The proper ALP-sourced photon number density per energy interval at a given redshift is the aggregate of all the decays at earlier times that redshift to the energy of interest:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
& \left(\frac{\dif n}{\dif \epsilon}\right)^{\rm dec} = \frac{\Omega_{a}\rho_{\rm c}c^2\Gamma_{a}(1+z)^3}{m_a c^2/2}\times \\
& \qquad \times \int_z^\infty\frac{\dif z'}{H(z')(1+z')}\delta_D\left(\epsilon - \frac{m_a c^2(1+z)}{2(1+z')}\right) = \\
& = \frac{2\Omega_{a}\rho_{\rm c}c^2\Gamma_a(1+z)^3}{m_a c^2\epsilon H(z_*)}\Theta(z_\star-z)\,,
\end{split}
\label{eq:dnde_dm}
\end{equation}
where $\delta_D$ is the Dirac delta function, $\Omega_a$ and $\rho_{\rm c}$ are the ALP density parameter and the critical density today, respectively, and $z_*\equiv m_a c^2(1+z)/(2\epsilon)-1$ is the redshift of decay that contributes to the photon energy and redshift of interest. We assume that ALPs make up all of the dark matter and, for the energies of interest, we can safely %neglect any spectral broadening and
consider that decay photons have a Dirac delta-function profile~\cite{Gong_IR}. The condition $z_\star > z$ %amounts to $\epsilon<m_a c^2/2$, i.e., the photon at redshift $z$ must have less energy than the rest-frame energy. This
is equivalent to setting the rest-frame energy as the upper limit in the integral over $\epsilon$ in Eq.~\eqref{eq:mfp}.
In order to quantitatively determine the contribution from ALP decays to the $\gamma$-ray attenuation we need to budget standard contributions to the EBL from astrophysical sources. The EBL can be directly measured (see e.g., Refs.~\cite{Mattila_17,Matsuura_CIBER,Matsuoka_pioneer,Matsumoto_2018}), though foreground contamination hinders this approach (motivating measurements from the outskirts of the solar system~\cite{Zemcov_NHCOB,NH21,NH22}). Instead, we reconstruct the EBL using observational and theoretical information. We distinguish three components: emission from galaxies at $z<6$, emission from galaxies at $z>6$, and the intra-halo light (IHL)---emission from a faint population of stars tidally removed from galaxies~\cite{Cooray_2012, Zemcov_2014, Matsumoto_19}. The cosmic microwave background photons have energies too low to contribute to the optical depth of the blazars of interest.
%\mk{MK: I'm not sure if these next two sentences are required.} Our description of the EBL spectrum may be incomplete, as there could be more contributions, like energetic sources at very high redshifts such as direct-collapse black holes~\cite{Yue_DCBH}, or a more numerous population of faint compact galaxies~\cite{Conselice_16}. However, there is no observational evidence for any of these contributions to date and we therefore neglect them.
We use the determination of the EBL sourced from galaxies at $z<6$ from Ref.~\cite{SaldanaLopez_EBL}, which is fairly consistent with alternative semianalytic, phenomenological and empirical studies (see e.g., Refs.~\cite{Finke_EBL10,Dominguez_EBL11,Hegalson_EBL12,Gilmore_EBL12,Driver_EBL16}). We reweight specific comoving luminosity densities $j_\nu(z)$ inferred from multiwavelength HST/CANDELS surveys~\cite{Grogin_candels,Koekemoer_candels} to match our fiducial cosmology.\footnote{Full \textit{Planck} data set best-fit parameters assuming $\Lambda$CDM~\cite{Planck:2018vyg}.} We use the code
\textsc{ARES}\footnote{\url{https://github.com/mirochaj/ares}}~\cite{Mirocha:2014faa} to model the contribution from stars at $z>6$, using an empirical model for Pop II star-forming galaxies calibrated with observations of the ultraviolet luminosity function~\cite{Mirocha2017}. We also consider the contribution from Pop III stars, following the modeling from Ref.~\cite{Mirocha:2017xxz}. In each case, we also include X-ray emission representative of high-mass X-ray binary systems, though these sources contribute little to the $\gamma$-ray optical depth. We adopt extreme cases to be conservative regarding uncertainties. Finally, we model the IHL luminosity density with a power-law dependence in mass and redshift~\cite{Cooray_2012}, assuming a spectral energy distribution similar to old elliptical galaxies~\cite{Krick:2007fp}. We take results from Ref.~\cite{Mitchell-Wynne:2015rha} to set the fiducial contribution and its uncertainties. We compute the flux from each astrophysical contribution $i$ in comoving coordinates as function of redshift,
\begin{equation}
\lambda I_{\lambda,i}(\lambda,z) = \frac{c^2}{4\pi\lambda}\int_{z_{0}}^{z_{\rm max}}\dif z'\frac{j_{\nu',i}\left(\frac{\lambda(1+z)}{1+z'},z'\right)}{H(z')(1+z')}\,,
\label{eq:lamIlam}
\end{equation}
where $\lambda$ is the rest-frame wavelength at redshift $z$, $\nu'$ is the rest-frame frequency at $z'$, and $z_0=z\,(6)$ and $z_{\rm max}=6\,(60)$ for the contributions from galaxies at $z<6$ and the IHL (from galaxies at $z>6$). We use the resulting flux as function of redshift to compute the optical depth due to each contribution, propagating the uncertainties accordingly. The interested reader can find more details about the computation of the astrophysical contributions in the Supplementary Material.
In order to provide an idea of the shape and magnitude of each contribution, we compare the various photon number densities at $z=0.5$ and $1.5$, and their corresponding optical depths for $\gamma$-rays with observed energies of 50 and 100 GeV in Fig.~\ref{fig:example}. The ALP-sourced photon density grows with $\epsilon$, contrary to astrophysical photons, since for the same ALP mass lower energies correspond to decays occurring at higher redshifts, for which the time interval, and hence the total flux, is smaller. The dependence on redshift is mostly a small change in amplitude, with an additional small tilt and shift in the astrophysical contributions. As expected, the contribution from galaxies at $z<6$ vastly dominates the EBL. The gap between low and high-energy EBL photons for astrophysical sources at $z>6$ is due to neutral hydrogen absorption. The dependence of the optical depth on source redshift is similar, with a slight shift towards smaller masses for higher source redshifts. %We neglect the absorption of ALP-sourced photons above the Lyman-$\alpha$ energy in this plot for illustration purposes.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{centering}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{example.pdf}
\caption{Photon number density in proper coordinates (top panels) and $\gamma$-ray optical depth for observed energies of 50 and 100 GeV (bottom panels), distinguishing contributions from galaxies at $z<6$, $z>6$, and the IHL (red, orange and blue, respectively, shaded bands denoting the 68\% confidence level uncertainties) and ALP decays for a decay rate of $3\times 10^{-24}\,{\rm s^{-1}}$ (solid lines), similar to the best fit obtained in this work.}
\label{fig:example}
\end{centering}
\end{figure}
We can confront now the predicted optical depth due to ALP decays with attenuation measurements. We take public optical depth measurements obtained from the analysis of 739 blazars observed by FermiLAT~\cite{Fermilat_EBL18} and 38 blazars observed by ground-based Cherenkov observatories~\cite{Desai_EBL}. These amount to optical depth measurements in 12 $z_{\rm s}$ bins for $E_{\gamma}\in\left[10-10^3\right]$ GeV, and in 2 $z_{\rm s}$ bins for $E_{\gamma}\in\left[0.1-20\right]$ TeV. We combine these measurements with the inferred optical depth from astrophysical sources described above and its uncertainty to generate a sample of residual optical depths $\tau_{\rm res}$ to be contributed from ALP decays: we subtract the inferred astrophysical optical depth $\tau_{\rm astro}$ from the measured optical depth $\tau_{\rm meas}$ and add all uncertainties in quadrature. We remove lower-limit measurements from our sample, and consider upper limits as follows: we take $\tau_{\rm res}=0$ and the uncertainty to be $\sigma^2(\tau_{\rm res})=(\sigma(\tau_{\rm meas})-\sum\tau_{\rm astro})^2+\sum\sigma^2_{\rm up}(\tau_{\rm astro})$, where $\sigma_{\rm up}$ denotes the upper value uncertainty. Finally, if $\tau_{\rm res}-\sigma_{\rm low}(\tau_{\rm res})<0$, we turn $\tau_{\rm res}$ into a 68\% confidence level upper limit set at the value for which the cumulative distribution function of a normalized asymmetric Gaussian with only $\tau>0$ is 0.683. We find $\tau_{\rm res}>0$ in some cases, which is consistent with previous results comparing EBL determinations with the EBL inferred from $\gamma$-ray attenuation~\cite{SaldanaLopez_EBL}.
We follow Ref.~\cite{Fermilat_EBL18} and assume a Gaussian likelihood for $\tau_{\rm res}$. We adopt flat priors on $\log_{10}(m_ac^2/{\rm eV})\in [-1,2]$ and $\log_{10}(\Gamma_a/{\rm s^{-1}})\in [-28,-20]$. We evaluate the unnormalized posterior in a fine grid in $\log_{10}(m_ac^2/{\rm eV})$ and $\log_{10}(\Gamma_a/{\rm s^{-1}})$, and derive the posterior from the $\Delta\chi^2$.\footnote{Exploring the parameter space of $\log_{\rm 10}(\Gamma_a/{\rm s^{-1}})$ and $\log_{\rm 10}(g_{a\gamma}/{\rm GeV^{-1}})$ returns the same posterior, since the likelihood $\mathcal{L}(\log_{\rm 10}(g_{a\gamma}/{\rm GeV^{-1}}),\log_{10}(m_ac^2/{\rm eV})) = 2\mathcal{L}(\log_{\rm 10}(\Gamma_a/{\rm s^{-1}}),\log_{10}(m_ac^2/{\rm eV}))$, which yields the same $\Delta\chi^2$.} We neglect neutral hydrogen absorption for ALP masses above 20.4 eV. The absorption of the photons produced in these decays would require higher decay rates to contribute the same to the EBL. However, as shown below, this region of the parameter space is better constrained by other probes, so that this choice does not affect our conclusions.
The excess in optical depth can be explained with ALP decays, with
best fit $m_ac^2=9.1\,{\rm eV}$ and $\Gamma_a=2.5\times 10^{-24}\,{\rm s^{-1}}$, which corresponds to $g_{a\gamma}=2.1\times 10^{-11}\,{\rm GeV^{-1}}$. We find that the contributions from ALP decays are preferred over the null hypothesis (no additional optical depth) at $2.1\sigma$ significance ($p-{\rm value}=0.038$). We show $\tau_{\rm meas}$, $\tau_{\rm res}$ and the predicted contributions from ALPs for the best fit in Fig.~\ref{fig:chi2}. The ALP contributions provide a very good fit for $\tau_{\rm res}$, with the exception of the measurements at $z_{\rm s}=0.033$.
Our results can also easily be rescaled to smaller abundances of ALPs modifying Eq.~\eqref{eq:dnde_dm} accordingly. For the coupling and masses of interest, the correct dark-matter relic abundance can be obtained via the misalignment mechanism~\cite{Preskill:1982cy, Abbott:1982af,Dine:1982ah}, although only in non-standard cosmology scenarios\cite{Blinov:2019rhb, Arias:2012az,Eroncel:2022vjg} or specific photo-philic models where the ALP-photon coupling is enhanced, while keeping a relatively large decay constant~\cite{Farina:2016tgd}.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\begin{centering}
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{chi2_cases.pdf}
\caption{Measured and residual $\gamma$-ray optical depths binned in source redshift and observed $\gamma$-ray energy. We show residual optical depths as we cumulatively subtract astrophysical components. Dark blue dotted lines show the best-fit results for the contributions from ALP decays. We also show the best fit results for the case with additional extragalactic background with red dotted lines.}
\label{fig:chi2}
\end{centering}
\end{figure*}
We also explore a simplified null test. We consider a separate case to explain the optical depth excess with a boosted contribution from galaxies at $z<6$: we multiply such contribution by a constant factor $(1+F_{\rm eEBL})$,\footnote{Note that we only increase the mean contributions and do not vary the errorbars that go into the computation of $\tau_{\rm res}$.} adopting a flat prior on $\log_{10}F_{\rm eEBL}\in \left[-3,1\right]$. We find $F_{\rm eEBL}=0.22\pm 0.08$ at 68\% confidence level, which fits well the first bins in $z_{\rm s}$, but fails for blazars at higher redshift for which $\tau_{\rm res}$ is not an upper limit. $F_{\rm eEBL}>0$ is preferred at $2.7\sigma$ ($p-{\rm value}=6.7\times 10^{-3}$). The $\Delta\chi^2$ between the best fits in this and the ALP cases favors the former with marginal significance. Nonetheless, if the first $z_{\rm s}$ bin is removed we find $\Delta\chi^2=-3.2$, favoring ALP decays, with best fit at $m_ac^2=5.7\,{\rm eV}$ and $\Gamma_a=1.0\times^{-23}\,{\rm s^{-1}}$, but these values are ruled out by spectroscopic observations of the galaxy clusters Abell 2667 and 2390 with VIMOS~\cite{Grin:2006aw}. Further details and null tests %considering that the optical depth excess is due to underestimated uncertainties in the astrophysical EBL determination
can be found in the Supplementary Material.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{centering}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{constraints_zoom_3sigma.pdf}
\caption{68\%, 95\% and 99\% confidence level constraints on the ALP parameters from $\gamma$-ray attenuation (dark blue contours, dashed lines denoting the masses that are affected by neutral hydrogen absorption), along with current strongest 95\% confidence level bounds and preferred region to explain the COB excess, and the QCD axion band. %\mk{MK: I wonder whether we may want to expand this caption a bit to include descriptions of everything shown here.}
}
\label{fig:constraints}
\end{centering}
\end{figure}
We compare our results for the ALP decay case with the current strongest bounds over the relevant mass range in Fig.~\ref{fig:constraints}. In addition to the VIMOS bound mentioned before, we include bounds from the helioscope CAST~\cite{CAST}, spectroscopic observations of the dwarf spheroidal galaxy Leo T with MUSE~\cite{Regis:2020fhw}, the study of the cooling of horizontal branch stars in globular clusters~\cite{Ayala:2014pea}, cosmic microwave background spectral distortions measured with COBE/FIRAS~\cite{Bolliet_SD}, and radiative gas cooling rates of Leo T~\cite{Wadekar_LeoTDMheating}; and forecast sensitivities of line-intensity mapping~\cite{Bernal_limdm}.\footnote{We include forecasts using the voxel intensity distribution (VID, an estimator for the probability distribution function of the line intensity within a voxel), and the power spectrum (PS).} We do not include outdated constraints from observations of the optical and near-infrared background~\cite{Cadamuro:2011fd} and instead add the preferred parameter values to explain the cosmic optical background excess~\cite{Bernal_COB}. The bimodal distribution is produced by the difficulty to fit the local and high $z_{\rm s}$ measurements at the same time (see the Supplementary Material).
The fact that the optical depth excess may also be explained by additional EBL from galaxies at $z<6$ may point to a scenario where both additional components contribute to the EBL. The exploration of this hypothesis requires a more detailed modeling for the additional astrophysical EBL and is left for future work. Therefore, the hint found in this work shall be confirmed by subsequent studies and additional, independent probes of ALP.
In any case, $\gamma$-ray attenuation returns the strongest $3\sigma$ bound to date on the effective ALP-photon coupling on the $8-25$ eV mass range, improving current bounds by up to more than an order of magnitude. These results rule out most of the parameter space that may explain the cosmic optical background excess, leaving a small window at $m_ac^2\sim 8$ eV. However, note that Ref.~\cite{Bernal_COB} does not include contributions from IHL and galaxies at $z>6$, which may push the viable parameter combinations to lower effective couplings, increasing the compatibility with this work.
Our analysis is significantly more sensitive to ALP contributions than the study from Ref.~\cite{Korochkin_axion}, based on fitting a bump feature in the spectrum of a single blazar. This is because we use optical-depth measurements from almost 800 blazars, making our study more robust statistically and regarding uncertainties in the intrinsic spectra of the blazars. We rule out most of the viable favored parameter space reported in Ref.~\cite{Korochkin_axion} and we find preference for lower couplings.
$\gamma$-ray attenuation as a probe for ALPs or other non-standard contributions to the EBL has great potential to improve in the near future. Existing $\gamma$-ray satellites and ground Cherenkov telescopes like Fermi-LAT and HAWC\footnote{\url{https://www.hawc-observatory.org/}}, HESS\footnote{\url{https://www.mpi-hd.mpg.de/hfm/HESS/}}, MAGIC\footnote{\url{https://magic.mpp.mpg.de/}} or VERITAS\footnote{\url{https://veritas.sao.arizona.edu/}} will keep improving the measurements and increasing the sensitivity to the EBL, while forthcoming facilities such as CTA~\cite{CTAConsortium:2017dvg} will bring dramatic improvements. On the other hand, improved observations of the EBL such as a reassessment of HST data~\cite{Windhorst:2022oip} or observations with SPHEREx~\cite{SPHEREx} and JWST\footnote{\url{ https://www.jwst.nasa.gov/}}, will reduce uncertainties in the EBL determination and increase the precision and robustness of analyses like this one. Furthermore, line-intensity mapping observations will distinguish between different potential sources for exotic lines~\cite{Bernal_limdm, Bernal:2021ylz}, while a non detection would imply that any additional contribution must have a broad spectrum, increasing the characterization of any non-accounted for contributions to the EBL and $\gamma$-ray attenuation.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\textit{Acknowledgments.---}%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
JLB is supported by the Allan C.\ and Dorothy H. Davis Fellowship. AC is supported by the Foreign Postdoctoral Fellowship Program of the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities and also acknowledges support from the Israel Science Foundation (Grant 1302/19) and the European Research Council (ERC) under the EU Horizon 2020 Programme (ERC-CoG-2015-Proposal n. 682676 LDMThExp). GSP was supported by the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship under Grant No.\ DGE1746891. MK was supported by NSF Grant No.\ 2112699 and the Simons Foundation. %\JLB{Jordan, can you add your funding/acknowledgments here if needed?}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bibliography{Refs.bib}
\bibliographystyle{utcaps}
\newpage
\onecolumngrid
\appendix
%\clearpage
%%%%%%%%%% Merge with supplemental materials %%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%% Prefix a "S" to all equations, figures, tables and reset the counter %%%%%%%%%%
\setcounter{equation}{0}
\setcounter{figure}{0}
\setcounter{table}{0}
\setcounter{page}{1}
\makeatletter
\renewcommand{\theequation}{S\arabic{equation}}
\renewcommand{\thefigure}{S\arabic{figure}}
\renewcommand{\thepage}{S\arabic{page}}
%\renewcommand{\bibnumfmt}[1]{[S#1]}
%\renewcommand{\citenumfont}[1]{S#1}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{center}
\textbf{\Large Supplemental Material\\[0.5ex]}
\textbf{\large Seeking dark matter with $\gamma$-ray attenuation}
\end{center}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
In this Supplemental Material we provide more details about our analysis. We discuss the astrophysical models used, a more detailed comparison between the ALP and $F_{\rm eEBL}$ cases, and a third null test artificially increasing the uncertainties of the astrophysical EBL determination.
%\bigskip
\twocolumngrid
\section{Astrophysical EBL model}
Here we provide more details on the theoretical models used to determine the contributions to the EBL from galaxies at $z>6$ and the IHL.
\subsection{Galaxies at $z>6$}
\label{sec:ares}
Our model for the contribution to the EBL from galaxies at $z>6$ has two components. In order to be conservative, we adopt two extreme cases, and take the envelope of the resulting minimum and maximum EBL as our lower and higher value uncertainties
First, we include an empirically-calibrated model for Pop~II star-forming galaxies \cite{Mirocha2017}, which relates the star-formation rate to the accretion rate of dark matter halos, and infers the star formation efficiency through fits to high-$z$ galaxy luminosity functions from \cite{Bouwens2015}. We use the \textsc{BPASS} version 1.0 single-star models \cite{Eldridge2009} to generate our model galaxy spectrum, assuming solar metallicity, no attenuation from dust, and that stars have been forming at a constant rate for 100 Myr. This is a reasonable approximation for the rest-ultraviolet portion of high-$z$ galaxy spectra, which is the most relevant for the $\gamma$-ray opacity from the EBL.
We also include a contribution from Pop~III stars, which form in low-mass ``minihalos'' with virial temperatures below the atomic cooling threshold. We either do not account for contributions from Pop III stars or assume that Pop~III stars dominate the cosmic star-formation rate density until $z \simeq 15$ and are extinct by $z \simeq 10$. This scenario is achieved assuming a simple parameterization~\cite{Mirocha:2017xxz}, in which each halo forms Pop~III stars for 250 Myr before transitioning to Pop~II star formation. Pop~III stars are assumed to be massive, $\gtrsim 100 \ M_{\odot}$ stars with hard spectra, comparable to a black body at $10^5$ K~\cite{Schaerer2003}. Such model will be testable with forthcoming observations by SPHEREx~\cite{Sun2021}.
In addition, we assume that each stellar source population described above is also accompanied by high-mass X-ray binaries, which contribute to the X-ray background. For these sources, we assume a multi-colour disk spectrum~\cite{Mitsuda1984}, with no intrinsic attenuation. We consider cases in which the relationship between X-ray emission and the star-formation rate is similar to the local relation~\cite{Mineo2012}, as well as a case where it is boosted by a factor $10^3$ with respect to the local relation. In both cases, the contribution to the opacity from the EBL is negligible, since the range of energies of the redshfited X-ray photons do not annihilate $\gamma$-ray photons efficiently.
We model these high-$z$ sources and their contribution to the EBL using the publicly-available \textsc{ARES} code~\cite{Mirocha:2014faa}. Note that the lowest energy of the $z>6$ contribution is set by the lowest energy considered within \textsc{ARES}, which is the minimum photon included in the BPASS library $\simeq 0.4$ eV. Nevertheless, this energy is always below $\epsilon'_{\rm min}$, hence not affecting the results.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\subsection{Intra-halo light}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Diffuse intra-halo emission, usually referred to as intra-halo light (IHL), may come from tidally stripped stars during galaxy mergers, with aggregated surface brightness low enough to challenge resolved observations~\cite{Conroy:2007cv}. The fraction of stripped stellar mass depends on the halo mass, with heavier halos expected to host larger fractions of diffuse intra-halo emission than their lighter counterparts. %On galaxy clusters scales, in particular, the IHL contribution is expected to be significant\cite{Lin:2004hw, Purcell:2007tr}.
We follow the parametric model from Refs.~\cite{Mitchell-Wynne:2015rha, Cooray12}. The specific luminosity density at redshift z and rest-frame wavelength $\lambda$ can be computed using the halo mass function $\dif n_{\rm h}/\dif M$ as
\begin{equation}
j_{\lambda,{{\rm IHL}}}(\lambda,z) = \int_{M_{\rm min}}^{M_{\rm max}} \dif M \frac{\dif n_{\rm h}}{\dif M}L_{\lambda,{\rm IHL}}(M,z),
\end{equation}
where we use the halo mass function from Ref.~\cite{Tinker:2008ff}, we assume $M_{\rm min}=10^9\, M_\odot/h$ and $M_{\rm max}=10^{13}\,M_\odot/h$, where $h=H_0/(100\,{\rm km/s/Mpc})$ in this context, and $L_{\lambda,{\rm IHL}}$ is the intra-halo light specific luminosity emitted by a halo of mass $M$, given by
\begin{equation}
L_{\lambda,{\rm IHL}}(M,z)=f_{\rm IHL}(M)L_{2.2}(M)(1+z)^{\alpha}S_{\lambda, 2.2}(\lambda),
\label{Eq:LumiMassRelation}
\end{equation}
where $L_{2.2}\equiv L_0/(2.2\,\mu{\rm m})$ is the total halo luminosity at 2.2 $\mu$m at $z=0$, with $L_0$ given by~\cite{Lin:2004ak}
\begin{equation}
L_0 = 5.64\times 10^{12} h_{70}^{-2} \left(\frac{M}{2.7 \times 10^{14}h_{70}^{-1}M_{\odot}}\right)^{0.72}L_{\odot}\,,
\end{equation}
where $h_{70}=H_0/(70\,{\rm km/s/Mpc})$. In Eq.~\eqref{Eq:LumiMassRelation}, $\alpha$ controls the redshift evolution of the luminosity and $f_{\rm IHL}$ is the fraction of the total halo luminosity coming from IHL. We parametrize $f_{\rm IHL}$ with a power law in mass
\begin{equation}
f_{\rm IHL} = A_{\rm IHL} \left(\frac{M}{10^{12}M_{\odot}}\right)^{\beta}\,.
\end{equation}
Finally, $S_{\lambda,2.2}\equiv S_\lambda/S_{2.2}$ is the spectral energy distribution of the IHL normalized to be 1 at 2.2 $\mu$m. We assume $S_\lambda$ to be similar to old elliptical galaxies, comprised of red stars~\cite{Krick:2007fp}. In practice, we use the template for an elliptical galaxy of age 13 Gyr from the \textit{SWIRE} library~\cite{Polletta:2007ut}. Once we have computed $j_\lambda$, we transform it to $j_\nu$ and compute the contributions to the EBL using Eq.~\eqref{eq:lamIlam}.
%,\footnote{We use the template for an elliptical galaxy formed when the Universe was 5 Gyr old from the \textit{SWIRE} library~\cite{Polletta:2007ut}.} with an amplitude that has a power-law dependence in mass and redshift~\cite{Cooray_2012}.
%and $f_{\lambda}$ is the spectral energy distribution (SED) of the IHL. The total luminosity as a function of halo-mass at $z=0$, $L(M,z=0)$, taken from the measurements of galaxy groups and clusters~\cite{Lin:2004ak} at $\lambda = 2.2 \rm \, \mu m$, is given by
%\begin{equation}
% L(M,z=0) = 5.64 \times 10^{12} h_{70}^{-2} \Big(\frac{M}{2.7 \times 10^{14}h_{70}^{-1}M_{\odot}}\Big)^{0.72}L_{\odot}
%\end{equation}
%and extended to lower masses using the same power-law slope. The IHL SED is taken to be the same as the SED of old elliptical galaxies, normalized such that $f_{\lambda} = 1$ for $\lambda = 2.2 \rm \, \mu m$ at $z=0$, and
We follow the results of Ref.~\cite{Mitchell-Wynne:2015rha}, which assumes a fixed index for the mass power law to 0.1 (in agreement with the best fit to the near-infrared background power spectrum, $\beta = 0.094 \pm 0.005$~\cite{Cooray_2012}), and finds the index of the redshift power law and the $\log_{10}A_{\rm IHL}$ completely anticorrelated, and fairly uncorrelated with other contributions. We set $\log_{\rm 10} A_{\rm IHL} = \left\lbrace -3.35,\, -3.23,\, -3.09 \right\rbrace$ and $\alpha = \left\lbrace 0.1,\, 1,\, 1.5 \right\rbrace$ as the low, mean and high values for our estimation, according to the reported 68\% confidence level constraints in Ref.~\cite{Mitchell-Wynne:2015rha}.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\section{Null tests}
Here we provide further comparison between the ALP case (the main case of study considered in this work) and two null tests. We focus on the EBL from galaxies at $z<6$ since it is by far the dominant contribution. We consider \textit{a}) an overall boost of the astrophysical EBL from galaxies at $z<6$, multiplying the standard contribution by $(1+F_{\rm eEBL})$ factor; and \textit{b}) a potential underestimation of the EBL uncertainties, boosting the uncertainties of the contribution from galaxies at $z<6$ by a constant factor.
\subsection{ALPs vs $F_{\rm eEBL}$}
We have shown in the main text that an overall $14-30\%$ increase of the EBL can explain the optical depth excess with similar preference over the null hypothesis than ALP decays. Here we extend the comparison between the two hypothesis. In order to compare how well each case fit $\tau_{\rm res}$ we compare their $\chi^2$ values for their best fit, defining a $\Delta\chi^2_{a-{\rm eEBL}}\equiv\chi^2_{a,{\rm bf}}-\chi^2_{\rm eEBL, bf}$; $\Delta\chi^2_{a-{\rm eEBL}}>0$ denotes preference for the $F_{\rm eEBL}$ hypothesis and viceversa.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{centering}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Dchi2_cases.pdf}
\caption{Comparison of the individual $\chi^2$ values for the best-fit cases in the ALP and $F_{\rm eEBL}$ scenarios.}
\label{fig:Dchi2_individual}
\end{centering}
\end{figure}
The results shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:chi2} seem to indicate that $F_{\rm eEBL}$ and ALP decays fit better the more local and more distant blazars, respectively. We confirm this in Fig.~\ref{fig:Dchi2_individual}, where we show $\Delta\chi^2_{a-{\rm eEBL}}$ for each bin in $z_{\rm s}$ and $E_{\gamma}$. While for most cases the two models perform similarly, there is a clear preference for ALPs at intermediate redshifts, while measurements at low redshifts and energies favor $F_{\rm eEBL}$. More quantitatively, we find $\Delta\chi^2_{a-{\rm eEBL}} ) = 0.79$ when considering all cases, which shifts to $-3.2$ if the first $z_{\rm s}$ bin is not considered for this sum.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{centering}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{constraints_3sigma_noz1.pdf}
\caption{Same as Fig.~\ref{fig:constraints} but removing the first $z_{\rm s}$ bin from the analysis and only showing 68\% and 95\% confidence level constraints.}
\label{fig:no_zs1}
\end{centering}
\end{figure}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:no_zs1} we show how the preferred ALP parameters in the case in which we remove the first $z_{\rm s}$ bin are ruled out by VIMOS result. In this case, the best fit $F_{\rm eEBL}=0.24$, is preferred over the null hypothesis at $2.9\sigma$ significance $p-{\rm value}=4.3\times 10^{-3}$. Surprisingly, ALP decays are preferred over the null hypothesis by $4.0\sigma$ ($p-{\rm value}=7.7\times 10^{-5}$), which explains the %secondary peaks
bimodal distribution in Fig.~\ref{fig:constraints}. These results further support the scenario in which, if there are actually contributions from ALP decays, they may be accompanied by additional astrophysical EBL to accomplish a good fit to both local and distant blazars.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{centering}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{constraints_boosterrors.pdf}
\caption{95\% confidence level bounds on the ALP-photon effective coupling as function of mass from $\gamma$-ray attenuation for the extremely conservative scenario discussed in App.~\ref{sec:boosted} (dark blue line, dashed lines denoting the masses that are affected by neutral hydrogen absorption), along with current strongest 95\% confidence level bounds and preferred region to explain the COB excess, and the QCD axion band.}
\label{fig:constraints_boost}
\end{centering}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Increasing EBL uncertainties}
\label{sec:boosted}
We carry out a final null test. In this case, we boost the uncertainties of the astrophysical EBL from galaxies at $z<6$ by a constant factor until $\tau_{\rm res}$ becomes an upper limit for all $z_{\rm s}$ and $E_{\gamma}$ bins considered in the analysis. We find that the required factor is 14.36. By construction, in this case we do not find any preference for contributions from ALPs over the null hypothesis. However, we can set extremely conservative bounds on the ALP-photon effective coupling. We show the corresponding 95\% confidence level bounds in Fig.~\ref{fig:constraints_boost}. Even under these extremely conservative assumptions we find that the $\gamma$-ray attenuation significantly improves over current upper bounds by up to an order of magnitude. This result further motivates the study of $\gamma$-ray attenuation as a very promising probe of ALP and other exotic contributions to the EBL.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%\section{~Description of datasets}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%As mentioned in the main body of the work, we considered the optical depth measurements obtained from the analysis of 739 blazars observed by FermiLAT~\cite{Fermilat_EBL18} and 38 blazars observed by ground-based Cherenkov observatories~\cite{Desai_EBL}.
%The FermiLAT data consist of optical depth measurements, over 9 years of operations, as a function of observed energy in 12 source redshift bins for $10$ - $10^3$ GeV. For every blazar,the collaboration performed a fit below an energy at which $\gamma$-ray attenuation should be negligible, yielding the intrinsic, unabsorbed blazar spectrum. This latter is described with a simple -- empirically determined -- log-parabola~\cite{Tramacere:2011qw}
%\begin{equation}
% \Big(\frac{dN}{dE}\Big)_{\rm int} = N_0 \Big(\frac{E}{E_b}\Big)^{-\alpha + \beta \rm log(E/E_b)},
%\end{equation}
%where the normalization $N_0$, the photon index $\alpha$, the curvature $\beta$ are free parameters, while $E_b$ is a scaling energy. An exponential power law was also tested, but it was never found to describe a better fit to blazar intrinsic spectrum in the energy range of interest. The analysis was also first tested and optimized on Monte Carlo simulation of synthetic blazar spectral-energy distributions from physical models that included synchrotron
%and synchrotron self-Compton emissions. Furthermore, given that blazars are intrinsically variables objects, a time-resolved analysis was also performed for all sources found variable. For a given source time-resolved spectra can be treated as
%independent observations, and they were therefore added to the final fitting procedure to determine the optical depths.
%After having determined the intrinsic spectrum, a possible absorption is added to the fitted spectra
%\begin{equation}
%\Big(\frac{dN}{dE}\Big)_{\rm obs} = \Big(\frac{dN}{dE}\Big)_{\rm int} \times e^{- \tau_{\gamma \gamma}(E,z)},
%\end{equation}
%where $\Big(\frac{dN}{dE}\Big)_{\rm obs}$ is the observed blazar spectrum, while $\tau_{\gamma \gamma}(E,z)$ is the optical depth. The FermiLAT collaboration detected attenuation in the blazars spectrum at more than $\sim 16$ standard deviations.
%, and in 2 source redshift bins for $0.1$ - $20$ TeV.
\end{document}
\providecommand{\href}[2]{#2}\begingroup\raggedright\begin{thebibliography}{100}
\bibitem{Cooray_review}
A.~{Cooray}, ``{Extragalactic background light measurements and
applications},'' \href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.150555}{{\em Royal
Society Open Science} {\bfseries 3} no.~3, (Mar., 2016) 150555},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1602.03512}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1602.03512
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Bertone_DMreview}
G.~{Bertone}, D.~{Hooper}, and J.~{Silk}, ``{Particle dark matter: evidence,
candidates and constraints},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2004.08.031}{{\em \physrep}
{\bfseries 405} no.~5-6, (Jan., 2005) 279--390},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0404175}{{\ttfamily arXiv:hep-ph/0404175
[hep-ph]}}.
\bibitem{Abbott:1982af}
L.~Abbott and P.~Sikivie, ``{A Cosmological Bound on the Invisible Axion},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(83)90638-X}{{\em Phys. Lett. B}
{\bfseries 120} (1983) 133--136}.
\bibitem{Dine:1982ah}
M.~Dine and W.~Fischler, ``{The Not So Harmless Axion},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(83)90639-1}{{\em Phys. Lett. B}
{\bfseries 120} (1983) 137--141}.
\bibitem{Preskill:1982cy}
J.~Preskill, M.~B. Wise, and F.~Wilczek, ``{Cosmology of the Invisible
Axion},'' \href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(83)90637-8}{{\em Phys.
Lett.} {\bfseries B120} (1983) 127--132}.
[,URL(1982)].
%%CITATION = PHLTA,B120,127;%%.
\bibitem{Weinberg:1977ma}
S.~Weinberg, ``{A New Light Boson?},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.40.223}{{\em Phys. Rev. Lett.}
{\bfseries 40} (1978) 223--226}.
%%CITATION = PRLTA,40,223;%%.
\bibitem{Wilczek:1977pj}
F.~Wilczek, ``{Problem of Strong p and t Invariance in the Presence of
Instantons},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.40.279}{{\em Phys. Rev. Lett.}
{\bfseries 40} (1978) 279--282}.
%%CITATION = PRLTA,40,279;%%.
\bibitem{Peccei:1977hh}
R.~D. Peccei and H.~R. Quinn, ``{CP Conservation in the Presence of
Instantons},'' \href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.38.1440}{{\em
Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bfseries 38} (1977) 1440--1443}.
[,328(1977)].
%%CITATION = PRLTA,38,1440;%%.
\bibitem{Peccei:1977ur}
R.~D. Peccei and H.~R. Quinn, ``{Constraints Imposed by CP Conservation in the
Presence of Instantons},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.16.1791}{{\em Phys. Rev.} {\bfseries
D16} (1977) 1791--1797}.
%%CITATION = PHRVA,D16,1791;%%.
\bibitem{Marsh_review}
D.~J.~E. {Marsh}, ``{Axion cosmology},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2016.06.005}{{\em \physrep}
{\bfseries 643} (July, 2016) 1--79},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1510.07633}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1510.07633
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{axionDM_snowmass}
J.~{Jaeckel}, G.~{Rybka}, and L.~{Winslow}, ``{Axion Dark Matter},'' {\em arXiv
e-prints} (Mar., 2022) arXiv:2203.14923,
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/2203.14923}{{\ttfamily arXiv:2203.14923
[hep-ex]}}.
\bibitem{Caputo:2018ljp}
A.~Caputo, C.~P. Garay, and S.~J. Witte, ``{Looking for Axion Dark Matter in
Dwarf Spheroidals},'' \href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.99.089901,
10.1103/PhysRevD.98.083024}{{\em \prd} {\bfseries 98} no.~8, (2018) 083024},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1805.08780}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1805.08780
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
[Erratum: Phys. Rev.D99,no.8,089901(2019)].
%%CITATION = ARXIV:1805.08780;%%.
\bibitem{Caputo:2018vmy}
A.~Caputo, M.~Regis, M.~Taoso, and S.~J. Witte, ``{Detecting the Stimulated
Decay of Axions at RadioFrequencies},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2019/03/027}{{\em \jcap} {\bfseries
1903} no.~03, (2019) 027},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1811.08436}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1811.08436 [hep-ph]}}.
%%CITATION = ARXIV:1811.08436;%%.
\bibitem{Gong_IR}
Y.~{Gong}, A.~{Cooray}, K.~{Mitchell-Wynne}, X.~{Chen}, M.~{Zemcov}, and
J.~{Smidt}, ``{Axion Decay and Anisotropy of Near-IR Extragalactic Background
Light},'' \href{http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/0004-637X/825/2/104}{{\em \apj}
{\bfseries 825} no.~2, (July, 2016) 104},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1511.01577}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1511.01577
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Caputo_IR}
A.~{Caputo}, A.~{Vittino}, N.~{Fornengo}, M.~{Regis}, and M.~{Taoso},
``{Searching for axion-like particle decay in the near-infrared background:
an updated analysis},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2021/05/046}{{\em \jcap} {\bfseries
2021} no.~5, (May, 2021) 046},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/2012.09179}{{\ttfamily arXiv:2012.09179
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Caputo:2019djj}
A.~Caputo, M.~Regis, and M.~Taoso, ``{Searching for Sterile Neutrino with X-ray
Intensity Mapping},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2020/03/001}{{\em JCAP} {\bfseries
03} (2020) 001}, \href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1911.09120}{{\ttfamily
arXiv:1911.09120 [astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Boyarsky:2014ska}
A.~Boyarsky, J.~Franse, D.~Iakubovskyi, and O.~Ruchayskiy, ``{Checking the Dark
Matter Origin of a 3.53 keV Line with the Milky Way Center},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.161301}{{\em Phys. Rev.
Lett.} {\bfseries 115} (2015) 161301},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1408.2503}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1408.2503
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Riemer-Sorensen:2014yda}
S.~Riemer-S\o{}rensen, ``{Constraints on the presence of a 3.5 keV dark matter
emission line from Chandra observations of the Galactic centre},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201527278}{{\em Astron. Astrophys.}
{\bfseries 590} (2016) A71}, \href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1405.7943}{{\ttfamily
arXiv:1405.7943 [astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Dessert:2018qih}
C.~Dessert, N.~L. Rodd, and B.~R. Safdi, ``{The dark matter interpretation of
the 3.5-keV line is inconsistent with blank-sky observations},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.aaw3772}{{\em Science} {\bfseries
367} (2020) 1465}, \href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1812.06976}{{\ttfamily
arXiv:1812.06976 [astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Cadamuro_axion}
D.~{Cadamuro} and J.~{Redondo}, ``{Cosmological bounds on pseudo
Nambu-Goldstone bosons},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2012/02/032}{{\em \jcap} {\bfseries
2012} no.~2, (Feb., 2012) 032},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1110.2895}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1110.2895 [hep-ph]}}.
\bibitem{Foster_XMM}
J.~W. {Foster}, M.~{Kongsore}, C.~{Dessert}, Y.~{Park}, N.~L. {Rodd},
K.~{Cranmer}, and B.~R. {Safdi}, ``{Deep Search for Decaying Dark Matter with
XMM-Newton Blank-Sky Observations},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.051101}{{\em \prl} {\bfseries
127} no.~5, (July, 2021) 051101},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/2102.02207}{{\ttfamily arXiv:2102.02207
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{GeweringPeine_Xraydec}
A.~{Gewering-Peine}, D.~{Horns}, and J.~H.~M.~M. {Schmitt}, ``{A sensitive
search for unknown spectral emission lines in the diffuse X-ray background
with XMM-Newton},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2017/06/036}{{\em \jcap} {\bfseries
2017} no.~6, (June, 2017) 036},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1611.01733}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1611.01733
[astro-ph.HE]}}.
\bibitem{Blanco_gammaray}
C.~{Blanco} and D.~{Hooper}, ``{Constraints on decaying dark matter from the
isotropic gamma-ray background},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2019/03/019}{{\em \jcap} {\bfseries
2019} no.~3, (Mar., 2019) 019},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1811.05988}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1811.05988
[astro-ph.HE]}}.
\bibitem{Cohen_gammaray}
T.~{Cohen}, K.~{Murase}, N.~L. {Rodd}, B.~R. {Safdi}, and Y.~{Soreq},
``{{\ensuremath{\gamma}} -ray Constraints on Decaying Dark Matter and
Implications for IceCube},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.021102}{{\em \prl} {\bfseries
119} no.~2, (July, 2017) 021102},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1612.05638}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1612.05638
[hep-ph]}}.
\bibitem{NathMaity_Pevdm}
T.~{Nath Maity}, A.~K. {Saha}, A.~{Dubey}, and R.~{Laha}, ``{Search for dark
matter using sub-PeV $\boldsymbol{\gamma}$-rays observed by Tibet
AS$_{\boldsymbol{\gamma}}$},'' {\em arXiv e-prints} (May, 2021)
arXiv:2105.05680, \href{http://arxiv.org/abs/2105.05680}{{\ttfamily
arXiv:2105.05680 [hep-ph]}}.
\bibitem{Esmaili_pevdm}
A.~{Esmaili} and P.~D. {Serpico}, ``{First implications of Tibet
AS$_{{\ensuremath{\gamma}}}$ data for heavy dark matter},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.104.L021301}{{\em \prd} {\bfseries
104} no.~2, (July, 2021) L021301},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/2105.01826}{{\ttfamily arXiv:2105.01826
[hep-ph]}}.
\bibitem{Ellis_gravitino}
J.~{Ellis}, J.~E. {Kim}, and D.~V. {Nanopoulos}, ``{Cosmological gravitino
regeneration and decay},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(84)90334-4}{{\em Physics Letters B}
{\bfseries 145} no.~3-4, (Sept., 1984) 181--186}.
\bibitem{Wadekar_LeoTDMheating}
D.~{Wadekar} and Z.~{Wang}, ``{Strong constraints on decay and annihilation of
dark matter from heating of gas-rich dwarf galaxies},'' {\em arXiv e-prints}
(Nov., 2021) arXiv:2111.08025,
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/2111.08025}{{\ttfamily arXiv:2111.08025
[hep-ph]}}.
\bibitem{Hu_DMSpecD}
W.~{Hu} and J.~{Silk}, ``{Thermalization constraints and spectral distortions
for massive unstable relic particles},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.70.2661}{{\em \prl} {\bfseries
70} no.~18, (May, 1993) 2661--2664}.
\bibitem{Chluba_specD}
J.~{Chluba} and R.~A. {Sunyaev}, ``{The evolution of CMB spectral distortions
in the early Universe},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19786.x}{{\em \mnras}
{\bfseries 419} no.~2, (Jan., 2012) 1294--1314},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1109.6552}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1109.6552
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Bolliet_SD}
B.~{Bolliet}, J.~{Chluba}, and R.~{Battye}, ``{Spectral distortion constraints
on photon injection from low-mass decaying particles},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stab1997}{{\em \mnras} {\bfseries 507}
no.~3, (Nov., 2021) 3148--3178},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/2012.07292}{{\ttfamily arXiv:2012.07292
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Iocco_BBN}
F.~{Iocco}, G.~{Mangano}, G.~{Miele}, O.~{Pisanti}, and P.~D. {Serpico},
``{Primordial nucleosynthesis: From precision cosmology to fundamental
physics},'' \href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2009.02.002}{{\em
\physrep} {\bfseries 472} no.~1-6, (Mar., 2009) 1--76},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/0809.0631}{{\ttfamily arXiv:0809.0631
[astro-ph]}}.
\bibitem{Pospelov_BBN}
M.~{Pospelov} and J.~{Pradler}, ``{Big Bang Nucleosynthesis as a Probe of New
Physics},'' \href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.nucl.012809.104521}{{\em
Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science} {\bfseries 60} (Nov., 2010)
539--568}, \href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1011.1054}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1011.1054
[hep-ph]}}.
\bibitem{Poulin_BBNDM}
V.~{Poulin} and P.~D. {Serpico}, ``{Nonuniversal BBN bounds on
electromagnetically decaying particles},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.91.103007}{{\em \prd} {\bfseries 91}
no.~10, (May, 2015) 103007},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1503.04852}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1503.04852
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Poulin_decDM}
V.~{Poulin}, P.~D. {Serpico}, and J.~{Lesgourgues}, ``{A fresh look at linear
cosmological constraints on a decaying Dark Matter component},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2016/08/036}{{\em \jcap} {\bfseries
2016} no.~8, (Aug., 2016) 036},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1606.02073}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1606.02073
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Slatyer_dark}
T.~R. {Slatyer}, ``{Indirect dark matter signatures in the cosmic dark ages.
II. Ionization, heating, and photon production from arbitrary energy
injections},'' \href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.93.023521}{{\em \prd}
{\bfseries 93} no.~2, (Jan., 2016) 023521},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1506.03812}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1506.03812
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Slatyer_decDM}
T.~R. {Slatyer} and C.-L. {Wu}, ``{General constraints on dark matter decay
from the cosmic microwave background},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.95.023010}{{\em \prd} {\bfseries 95}
no.~2, (Jan., 2017) 023010},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1610.06933}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1610.06933
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Lucca_synergy}
M.~{Lucca}, N.~{Sch{\"o}neberg}, D.~C. {Hooper}, J.~{Lesgourgues}, and
J.~{Chluba}, ``{The synergy between CMB spectral distortions and
anisotropies},'' \href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2020/02/026}{{\em
\jcap} {\bfseries 2020} no.~2, (Feb., 2020) 026},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1910.04619}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1910.04619
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{1966Natur.211..472J}
J.~V. {Jelley}, ``{Absorption of High-energy Gamma-rays within Quasars and
other Radio Sources},'' \href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/211472a0}{{\em \nat}
{\bfseries 211} no.~5048, (July, 1966) 472--475}.
\bibitem{Gould:1967zzb}
R.~J. Gould and G.~P. Schreder, ``{Pair Production in Photon-Photon
Collisions},'' \href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.155.1404}{{\em Phys.
Rev.} {\bfseries 155} (1967) 1404--1407}.
\bibitem{FermiLAT_2012}
M.~{Ackermann}, M.~{Ajello}, A.~{Allafort}, P.~{Schady}, L.~{Baldini},
J.~{Ballet}, {\em et~al.}, ``{The Imprint of the Extragalactic Background
Light in the Gamma-Ray Spectra of Blazars},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1227160}{{\em Science} {\bfseries
338} no.~6111, (Nov., 2012) 1190},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1211.1671}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1211.1671
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Essey:2009ju}
W.~Essey, O.~E. Kalashev, A.~Kusenko, and J.~F. Beacom, ``{Secondary photons
and neutrinos from cosmic rays produced by distant blazars},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.141102}{{\em Phys. Rev.
Lett.} {\bfseries 104} (2010) 141102},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/0912.3976}{{\ttfamily arXiv:0912.3976
[astro-ph.HE]}}.
\bibitem{Essey:2009zg}
W.~Essey and A.~Kusenko, ``{A new interpretation of the gamma-ray observations
of active galactic nuclei},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.astropartphys.2009.11.007}{{\em Astropart.
Phys.} {\bfseries 33} (2010) 81--85},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/0905.1162}{{\ttfamily arXiv:0905.1162
[astro-ph.HE]}}.
\bibitem{Essey:2010er}
W.~Essey, O.~Kalashev, A.~Kusenko, and J.~F. Beacom, ``{Role of line-of-sight
cosmic ray interactions in forming the spectra of distant blazars in TeV
gamma rays and high-energy neutrinos},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/731/1/51}{{\em Astrophys. J.}
{\bfseries 731} (2011) 51}, \href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1011.6340}{{\ttfamily
arXiv:1011.6340 [astro-ph.HE]}}.
\bibitem{Finke_EBLgray}
J.~D. {Finke} and S.~{Razzaque}, ``{Constraints on the Extragalactic Background
Light from very High Energy Gamma-Ray Observations of Blazars},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/698/2/1761}{{\em \apj} {\bfseries
698} no.~2, (June, 2009) 1761--1766},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/0904.2583}{{\ttfamily arXiv:0904.2583
[astro-ph.HE]}}.
\bibitem{Fermilat_EBL18}
{Fermi-LAT Collaboration}, S.~{Abdollahi}, M.~{Ackermann}, M.~{Ajello}, W.~B.
{Atwood}, L.~{Baldini}, {\em et~al.}, ``{A gamma-ray determination of the
Universe's star formation history},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.aat8123}{{\em Science} {\bfseries
362} no.~6418, (Nov., 2018) 1031--1034},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1812.01031}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1812.01031
[astro-ph.HE]}}.
\bibitem{Acciari_EBL}
V.~A. {Acciari}, S.~{Ansoldi}, L.~A. {Antonelli}, A.~{Arbet Engels},
D.~{Baack}, {Babi{\'c}}, {\em et~al.}, ``{Measurement of the extragalactic
background light using MAGIC and Fermi-LAT gamma-ray observations of blazars
up to z = 1},'' \href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stz943}{{\em \mnras}
{\bfseries 486} no.~3, (July, 2019) 4233--4251},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1904.00134}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1904.00134
[astro-ph.HE]}}.
\bibitem{Desai_EBL}
A.~{Desai}, K.~{Helgason}, M.~{Ajello}, V.~{Paliya}, A.~{Dom{\'\i}nguez},
J.~{Finke}, and D.~{Hartmann}, ``{A GeV-TeV Measurement of the Extragalactic
Background Light},'' \href{http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/ab0c10}{{\em
\apjl} {\bfseries 874} no.~1, (Mar., 2019) L7},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1903.03126}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1903.03126
[astro-ph.HE]}}.
\bibitem{Dominguez_H0}
A.~{Dom{\'\i}nguez}, R.~{Wojtak}, J.~{Finke}, M.~{Ajello}, K.~{Helgason},
F.~{Prada}, {\em et~al.}, ``{A New Measurement of the Hubble Constant and
Matter Content of the Universe Using Extragalactic Background Light
{\ensuremath{\gamma}}-Ray Attenuation},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/ab4a0e}{{\em \apj} {\bfseries 885}
no.~2, (Nov., 2019) 137}, \href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1903.12097}{{\ttfamily
arXiv:1903.12097 [astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{2012MNRAS.420..800G}
R.~C. {Gilmore}, ``{Constraining the near-infrared background light from
Population III stars using high-redshift gamma-ray sources},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.20092.x}{{\em \mnras}
{\bfseries 420} no.~1, (Feb., 2012) 800--809},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1109.0592}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1109.0592
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Bitau_review}
J.~{Biteau} and M.~{Meyer}, ``{Gamma-Ray Cosmology and Tests of Fundamental
Physics},'' \href{http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/galaxies10020039}{{\em Galaxies}
{\bfseries 10} no.~2, (Feb., 2022) 39},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/2202.00523}{{\ttfamily arXiv:2202.00523
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Hooper:2007bq}
D.~Hooper and P.~D. Serpico, ``{Detecting Axion-Like Particles With Gamma Ray
Telescopes},'' \href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.231102}{{\em
Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bfseries 99} (2007) 231102},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/0706.3203}{{\ttfamily arXiv:0706.3203 [hep-ph]}}.
\bibitem{Mirizzi_ALPconversion}
A.~{Mirizzi}, G.~G. {Raffelt}, and P.~D. {Serpico}, ``{Signatures of axionlike
particles in the spectra of TeV gamma-ray sources},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.76.023001}{{\em \prd} {\bfseries 76}
no.~2, (July, 2007) 023001}, \href{http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.3044}{{\ttfamily
arXiv:0704.3044 [astro-ph]}}.
\bibitem{Hochmuth_ALPconversion}
K.~A. {Hochmuth} and G.~{Sigl}, ``{Effects of axion-photon mixing on gamma-ray
spectra from magnetized astrophysical sources},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.76.123011}{{\em \prd} {\bfseries 76}
no.~12, (Dec., 2007) 123011},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/0708.1144}{{\ttfamily arXiv:0708.1144
[astro-ph]}}.
\bibitem{deAngelis_ALPconversion}
A.~{de Angelis}, M.~{Roncadelli}, and O.~{Mansutti}, ``{Evidence for a new
light spin-zero boson from cosmological gamma-ray propagation?},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.76.121301}{{\em \prd} {\bfseries 76}
no.~12, (Dec., 2007) 121301},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/0707.4312}{{\ttfamily arXiv:0707.4312
[astro-ph]}}.
\bibitem{HESS_ALP}
A.~{Abramowski}, F.~{Acero}, F.~{Aharonian}, F.~{Ait Benkhali}, A.~G.
{Akhperjanian}, E.~{Ang{\"u}ner}, {\em et~al.}, ``{Constraints on axionlike
particles with H.E.S.S. from the irregularity of the PKS 2155-304 energy
spectrum},'' \href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.88.102003}{{\em \prd}
{\bfseries 88} no.~10, (Nov., 2013) 102003},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1311.3148}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1311.3148
[astro-ph.HE]}}.
\bibitem{Fermilat_ALP}
M.~{Ajello}, A.~{Albert}, B.~{Anderson}, L.~{Baldini}, G.~{Barbiellini},
D.~{Bastieri}, {\em et~al.}, ``{Search for Spectral Irregularities due to
Photon-Axionlike-Particle Oscillations with the Fermi Large Area
Telescope},'' \href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.161101}{{\em
\prl} {\bfseries 116} no.~16, (Apr., 2016) 161101},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1603.06978}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1603.06978
[astro-ph.HE]}}.
\bibitem{Li_ALP}
H.-J. {Li}, J.-G. {Guo}, X.-J. {Bi}, S.-J. {Lin}, and P.-F. {Yin}, ``{Limits on
axionlike particles from Mrk 421 with 4.5-year period observations by
ARGO-YBJ and Fermi-LAT},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.103.083003}{{\em \prd} {\bfseries
103} no.~8, (Apr., 2021) 083003},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/2008.09464}{{\ttfamily arXiv:2008.09464
[astro-ph.HE]}}.
\bibitem{Jacobsen_ALP}
S.~{Jacobsen}, T.~{Linden}, and K.~{Freese}, ``{Constraining Axion-Like
Particles with HAWC Observations of TeV Blazars},'' {\em arXiv e-prints}
(Mar., 2022) arXiv:2203.04332,
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/2203.04332}{{\ttfamily arXiv:2203.04332
[hep-ph]}}.
\bibitem{Kalashev_gray_ALP}
O.~E. {Kalashev}, A.~{Kusenko}, and E.~{Vitagliano}, ``{Cosmic infrared
background excess from axionlike particles and implications for
multimessenger observations of blazars},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.99.023002}{{\em \prd} {\bfseries 99}
no.~2, (Jan., 2019) 023002},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1808.05613}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1808.05613
[hep-ph]}}.
\bibitem{Korochkin_bump}
A.~{Korochkin}, A.~{Neronov}, and D.~{Semikoz}, ``{Search for spectral features
in extragalactic background light with gamma-ray telescopes},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201936262}{{\em \aap} {\bfseries
633} (Jan., 2020) A74}, \href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1906.12168}{{\ttfamily
arXiv:1906.12168 [astro-ph.HE]}}.
\bibitem{Korochkin_axion}
A.~{Korochkin}, A.~{Neronov}, and D.~{Semikoz}, ``{Search for decaying eV-mass
axion-like particles using gamma-ray signal from blazars},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2020/03/064}{{\em \jcap} {\bfseries
2020} no.~3, (Mar., 2020) 064},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1911.13291}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1911.13291
[hep-ph]}}.
\bibitem{NH21}
T.~R. {Lauer}, M.~{Postman}, H.~A. {Weaver}, J.~R. {Spencer}, S.~A. {Stern},
M.~W. {Buie}, {\em et~al.}, ``{New Horizons Observations of the Cosmic
Optical Background},'' \href{http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/abc881}{{\em
\apj} {\bfseries 906} no.~2, (Jan., 2021) 77},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/2011.03052}{{\ttfamily arXiv:2011.03052
[astro-ph.GA]}}.
\bibitem{NH22}
T.~R. {Lauer}, M.~{Postman}, J.~R. {Spencer}, H.~A. {Weaver}, S.~A. {Stern},
G.~R. {Gladstone}, {\em et~al.}, ``{Anomalous Flux in the Cosmic Optical
Background Detected With New Horizons Observations},'' {\em arXiv e-prints}
(Feb., 2022) arXiv:2202.04273,
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/2202.04273}{{\ttfamily arXiv:2202.04273
[astro-ph.GA]}}.
\bibitem{SaldanaLopez_EBL}
A.~{Saldana-Lopez}, A.~{Dom{\'\i}nguez}, P.~G. {P{\'e}rez-Gonz{\'a}lez},
J.~{Finke}, M.~{Ajello}, J.~R. {Primack}, {\em et~al.}, ``{An observational
determination of the evolving extragalactic background light from the
multiwavelength HST/CANDELS survey in the Fermi and CTA era},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stab2393}{{\em \mnras} {\bfseries 507}
no.~4, (Nov., 2021) 5144--5160},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/2012.03035}{{\ttfamily arXiv:2012.03035
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Bernal_COB}
J.~L. {Bernal}, G.~{Sato-Polito}, and M.~{Kamionkowski}, ``{The cosmic optical
background excess, dark matter, and line-intensity mapping},'' {\em arXiv
e-prints} (Mar., 2022) arXiv:2203.11236,
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/2203.11236}{{\ttfamily arXiv:2203.11236
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Creque-Sarbinowski:2018ebl}
C.~Creque-Sarbinowski and M.~Kamionkowski, ``{Searching for Decaying and
Annihilating Dark Matter with Line Intensity Mapping},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.98.063524}{{\em Phys. Rev. D}
{\bfseries 98} no.~6, (2018) 063524},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1806.11119}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1806.11119
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Bernal_limdm}
J.~L. {Bernal}, A.~{Caputo}, and M.~{Kamionkowski}, ``{Strategies to detect
dark-matter decays with line-intensity mapping},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.103.063523}{{\em \prd} {\bfseries
103} no.~6, (Mar., 2021) 063523},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/2012.00771}{{\ttfamily arXiv:2012.00771
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Shirasaki_limlensdm}
M.~{Shirasaki}, ``{Searching for eV-mass axionlike particles with cross
correlations between line intensity and weak lensing maps},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.103.103014}{{\em \prd} {\bfseries
103} no.~10, (May, 2021) 103014},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/2102.00580}{{\ttfamily arXiv:2102.00580
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Biteau_2015}
J.~{Biteau} and D.~A. {Williams}, ``{The Extragalactic Background Light, the
Hubble Constant, and Anomalies: Conclusions from 20 Years of TeV Gamma-ray
Observations},'' \href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/812/1/60}{{\em
\apj} {\bfseries 812} no.~1, (Oct., 2015) 60},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1502.04166}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1502.04166
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Mattila_17}
K.~{Mattila}, P.~{V{\"a}is{\"a}nen}, K.~{Lehtinen}, G.~{von Appen-Schnur}, and
C.~{Leinert}, ``{Extragalactic background light: a measurement at 400 nm
using dark cloud shadow - II. Spectroscopic separation of the dark cloud's
light, and results$^{\star}$},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stx1296}{{\em \mnras} {\bfseries 470}
no.~2, (Sept., 2017) 2152--2169},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1705.10790}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1705.10790
[astro-ph.GA]}}.
\bibitem{Matsuura_CIBER}
S.~{Matsuura}, T.~{Arai}, J.~J. {Bock}, A.~{Cooray}, P.~M. {Korngut}, M.~G.
{Kim}, {\em et~al.}, ``{New Spectral Evidence of an Unaccounted Component of
the Near-infrared Extragalactic Background Light from the CIBER},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/aa6843}{{\em \apj} {\bfseries 839}
no.~1, (Apr., 2017) 7}, \href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1704.07166}{{\ttfamily
arXiv:1704.07166 [astro-ph.GA]}}.
\bibitem{Matsuoka_pioneer}
Y.~{Matsuoka}, N.~{Ienaka}, K.~{Kawara}, and S.~{Oyabu}, ``{Cosmic Optical
Background: The View from Pioneer 10/11},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/736/2/119}{{\em \apj} {\bfseries
736} no.~2, (Aug., 2011) 119},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1106.4413}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1106.4413
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Matsumoto_2018}
T.~{Matsumoto}, K.~{Tsumura}, Y.~{Matsuoka}, and J.~{Pyo}, ``{Zodiacal Light
Beyond Earth Orbit Observed with Pioneer 10},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-3881/aad0f0}{{\em \aj} {\bfseries 156}
no.~3, (Sept., 2018) 86}, \href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1808.03759}{{\ttfamily
arXiv:1808.03759 [astro-ph.EP]}}.
\bibitem{Zemcov_NHCOB}
M.~{Zemcov}, P.~{Immel}, C.~{Nguyen}, A.~{Cooray}, C.~M. {Lisse}, and A.~R.
{Poppe}, ``{Measurement of the cosmic optical background using the long range
reconnaissance imager on New Horizons},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ncomms15003}{{\em Nature Communications}
{\bfseries 8} (Apr., 2017) 15003},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1704.02989}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1704.02989
[astro-ph.IM]}}.
\bibitem{Cooray_2012}
A.~{Cooray}, J.~{Smidt}, F.~{de Bernardis}, Y.~{Gong}, D.~{Stern}, M.~L.~N.
{Ashby}, {\em et~al.}, ``{Near-infrared background anisotropies from diffuse
intrahalo light of galaxies},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature11474}{{\em \nat} {\bfseries 490}
no.~7421, (Oct., 2012) 514--516}.
\bibitem{Zemcov_2014}
M.~{Zemcov}, J.~{Smidt}, T.~{Arai}, J.~{Bock}, A.~{Cooray}, Y.~{Gong}, {\em
et~al.}, ``{On the origin of near-infrared extragalactic background light
anisotropy},'' \href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1258168}{{\em Science}
{\bfseries 346} no.~6210, (Nov., 2014) 732--735},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1411.1411}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1411.1411
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Matsumoto_19}
T.~{Matsumoto} and K.~{Tsumura}, ``{Fluctuation of the background sky in the
Hubble Extremely Deep Field (XDF) and its origin},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/pasj/psz070}{{\em \pasj} {\bfseries 71}
no.~5, (Oct., 2019) 88}, \href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1906.01443}{{\ttfamily
arXiv:1906.01443 [astro-ph.GA]}}.
\bibitem{Finke_EBL10}
J.~D. {Finke}, S.~{Razzaque}, and C.~D. {Dermer}, ``{Modeling the Extragalactic
Background Light from Stars and Dust},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/712/1/238}{{\em \apj} {\bfseries
712} no.~1, (Mar., 2010) 238--249},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/0905.1115}{{\ttfamily arXiv:0905.1115
[astro-ph.HE]}}.
\bibitem{Dominguez_EBL11}
A.~{Dom{\'\i}nguez}, J.~R. {Primack}, D.~J. {Rosario}, F.~{Prada}, R.~C.
{Gilmore}, S.~M. {Faber}, {\em et~al.}, ``{Extragalactic background light
inferred from AEGIS galaxy-SED-type fractions},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17631.x}{{\em \mnras}
{\bfseries 410} no.~4, (Feb., 2011) 2556--2578},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1007.1459}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1007.1459
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Hegalson_EBL12}
K.~{Helgason} and A.~{Kashlinsky}, ``{Reconstructing the
{\ensuremath{\gamma}}-Ray Photon Optical Depth of the Universe to z
\raisebox{-0.5ex}\textasciitilde 4 from Multiwavelength Galaxy Survey
Data},'' \href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/2041-8205/758/1/L13}{{\em \apjl}
{\bfseries 758} no.~1, (Oct., 2012) L13},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1208.4364}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1208.4364
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Gilmore_EBL12}
R.~C. {Gilmore}, R.~S. {Somerville}, J.~R. {Primack}, and A.~{Dom{\'\i}nguez},
``{Semi-analytic modelling of the extragalactic background light and
consequences for extragalactic gamma-ray spectra},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20841.x}{{\em \mnras}
{\bfseries 422} no.~4, (June, 2012) 3189--3207},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1104.0671}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1104.0671
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Driver_EBL16}
S.~P. {Driver}, S.~K. {Andrews}, L.~J. {Davies}, A.~S.~G. {Robotham}, A.~H.
{Wright}, R.~A. {Windhorst}, {\em et~al.}, ``{Measurements of Extragalactic
Background Light from the Far UV to the Far IR from Deep Ground- and
Space-based Galaxy Counts},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/0004-637X/827/2/108}{{\em \apj} {\bfseries
827} no.~2, (Aug., 2016) 108},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1605.01523}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1605.01523
[astro-ph.GA]}}.
\bibitem{Grogin_candels}
N.~A. {Grogin}, D.~D. {Kocevski}, S.~M. {Faber}, H.~C. {Ferguson}, A.~M.
{Koekemoer}, A.~G. {Riess}, {\em et~al.}, ``{CANDELS: The Cosmic Assembly
Near-infrared Deep Extragalactic Legacy Survey},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0067-0049/197/2/35}{{\em \apjs} {\bfseries
197} no.~2, (Dec., 2011) 35},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1105.3753}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1105.3753
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Koekemoer_candels}
A.~M. {Koekemoer}, S.~M. {Faber}, H.~C. {Ferguson}, N.~A. {Grogin}, D.~D.
{Kocevski}, D.~C. {Koo}, {\em et~al.}, ``{CANDELS: The Cosmic Assembly
Near-infrared Deep Extragalactic Legacy Survey{\textemdash}The Hubble Space
Telescope Observations, Imaging Data Products, and Mosaics},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0067-0049/197/2/36}{{\em \apjs} {\bfseries
197} no.~2, (Dec., 2011) 36},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1105.3754}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1105.3754
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Planck:2018vyg}
{\bfseries Planck} Collaboration, N.~Aghanim {\em et~al.}, ``{Planck 2018
results. VI. Cosmological parameters},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201833910}{{\em Astron. Astrophys.}
{\bfseries 641} (2020) A6}, \href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1807.06209}{{\ttfamily
arXiv:1807.06209 [astro-ph.CO]}}. [Erratum: Astron.Astrophys. 652, C4
(2021)].
\bibitem{Mirocha:2014faa}
J.~Mirocha, ``{Decoding the X-ray Properties of Pre-Reionization Era
Sources},'' \href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stu1193}{{\em Mon. Not.
Roy. Astron. Soc.} {\bfseries 443} no.~2, (2014) 1211--1223},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1406.4120}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1406.4120
[astro-ph.GA]}}.
\bibitem{Mirocha2017}
J.~{Mirocha}, S.~R. {Furlanetto}, and G.~{Sun}, ``{The global 21-cm signal in
the context of the high- z galaxy luminosity function},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stw2412}{{\em \mnras} {\bfseries 464}
no.~2, (Jan., 2017) 1365--1379},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1607.00386}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1607.00386
[astro-ph.GA]}}.
\bibitem{Mirocha:2017xxz}
J.~Mirocha, R.~H. Mebane, S.~R. Furlanetto, K.~Singal, and D.~Trinh, ``{Unique
signatures of Population III stars in the global 21-cm signal},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mnras/sty1388}{{\em Mon. Not. Roy. Astron.
Soc.} {\bfseries 478} no.~4, (2018) 5591--5606},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1710.02530}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1710.02530
[astro-ph.GA]}}.
\bibitem{Krick:2007fp}
J.~E. Krick and R.~A. Bernstein, ``{Diffuse Optical Light in Galaxy Clusters
II: Correlations with Cluster Properties},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/518787}{{\em Astron. J.} {\bfseries 134}
(2007) 466--493}, \href{http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.1664}{{\ttfamily
arXiv:0704.1664 [astro-ph]}}.
\bibitem{Mitchell-Wynne:2015rha}
K.~Mitchell-Wynne {\em et~al.}, ``{Ultraviolet Luminosity Density of the
Universe During the Epoch of Reionization},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/NCOMMS8945}{{\em Nature Commun.} {\bfseries
6} (2015) 7945}, \href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1509.02935}{{\ttfamily
arXiv:1509.02935 [astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Blinov:2019rhb}
N.~Blinov, M.~J. Dolan, P.~Draper, and J.~Kozaczuk, ``{Dark matter targets for
axionlike particle searches},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.100.015049}{{\em Phys. Rev. D}
{\bfseries 100} no.~1, (2019) 015049},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1905.06952}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1905.06952
[hep-ph]}}.
\bibitem{Arias:2012az}
P.~Arias, D.~Cadamuro, M.~Goodsell, J.~Jaeckel, J.~Redondo, and A.~Ringwald,
``{WISPy Cold Dark Matter},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2012/06/013}{{\em JCAP} {\bfseries
06} (2012) 013}, \href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1201.5902}{{\ttfamily
arXiv:1201.5902 [hep-ph]}}.
\bibitem{Eroncel:2022vjg}
C.~Er\"oncel, R.~Sato, G.~Servant, and P.~S\o{}rensen, ``{ALP Dark Matter from
Kinetic Fragmentation: Opening up the Parameter Window},''
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/2206.14259}{{\ttfamily arXiv:2206.14259
[hep-ph]}}.
\bibitem{Farina:2016tgd}
M.~Farina, D.~Pappadopulo, F.~Rompineve, and A.~Tesi, ``{The photo-philic QCD
axion},'' \href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2017)095}{{\em JHEP}
{\bfseries 01} (2017) 095}, \href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1611.09855}{{\ttfamily
arXiv:1611.09855 [hep-ph]}}.
\bibitem{Grin:2006aw}
D.~Grin, G.~Covone, J.-P. Kneib, M.~Kamionkowski, A.~Blain, and E.~Jullo, ``{A
Telescope Search for Decaying Relic Axions},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.75.105018}{{\em Phys. Rev. D}
{\bfseries 75} (2007) 105018},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0611502}{{\ttfamily
arXiv:astro-ph/0611502}}.
\bibitem{CAST}
{\bfseries CAST} Collaboration, V.~Anastassopoulos {\em et~al.}, ``{New CAST
Limit on the Axion-Photon Interaction},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nphys4109}{{\em Nature Phys.} {\bfseries 13}
(2017) 584--590}, \href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1705.02290}{{\ttfamily
arXiv:1705.02290 [hep-ex]}}.
\bibitem{Regis:2020fhw}
M.~Regis, M.~Taoso, D.~Vaz, J.~Brinchmann, S.~L. Zoutendijk, N.~Bouch\'e, and
M.~Steinmetz, ``{Searching for Light in the Darkness: Bounds on ALP Dark
Matter with the optical MUSE-Faint survey},''
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/2009.01310}{{\ttfamily arXiv:2009.01310
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Ayala:2014pea}
A.~Ayala, I.~Dom\'\i{}nguez, M.~Giannotti, A.~Mirizzi, and O.~Straniero,
``{Revisiting the bound on axion-photon coupling from Globular Clusters},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.191302}{{\em Phys. Rev.
Lett.} {\bfseries 113} no.~19, (2014) 191302},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1406.6053}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1406.6053
[astro-ph.SR]}}.
\bibitem{Cadamuro:2011fd}
D.~Cadamuro and J.~Redondo, ``{Cosmological bounds on pseudo Nambu-Goldstone
bosons},'' \href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2012/02/032}{{\em JCAP}
{\bfseries 02} (2012) 032}, \href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1110.2895}{{\ttfamily
arXiv:1110.2895 [hep-ph]}}.
\bibitem{CTAConsortium:2017dvg}
{\bfseries CTA Consortium} Collaboration, B.~S. Acharya {\em et~al.},
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/10986}{{\em {Science with the Cherenkov
Telescope Array}}}.
\newblock WSP, 11, 2018.
\newblock \href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1709.07997}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1709.07997
[astro-ph.IM]}}.
\bibitem{Windhorst:2022oip}
R.~A. Windhorst {\em et~al.}, ``{SKYSURF: Constraints on Zodiacal Light and
Extragalactic Background Light through Panchromatic HST All-Sky
Surface-Brightness Measurements: I. Survey Overview and Methods},''
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/2205.06214}{{\ttfamily arXiv:2205.06214
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{SPHEREx}
O.~{Dor{\'e}}, J.~{Bock}, M.~{Ashby}, P.~{Capak}, A.~{Cooray}, {\em et~al.},
``{Cosmology with the SPHEREX All-Sky Spectral Survey},'' {\em arXiv
e-prints} (Dec, 2014) arXiv:1412.4872,
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1412.4872}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1412.4872
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Bernal:2021ylz}
J.~L. Bernal, A.~Caputo, F.~Villaescusa-Navarro, and M.~Kamionkowski,
``{Searching for the Radiative Decay of the Cosmic Neutrino Background with
Line-Intensity Mapping},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.131102}{{\em Phys. Rev.
Lett.} {\bfseries 127} no.~13, (2021) 131102},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/2103.12099}{{\ttfamily arXiv:2103.12099
[hep-ph]}}.
\bibitem{Bouwens2015}
R.~J. {Bouwens}, G.~D. {Illingworth}, P.~A. {Oesch}, M.~{Trenti},
I.~{Labb{\'e}}, L.~{Bradley}, {\em et~al.}, ``{UV Luminosity Functions at
Redshifts z {\ensuremath{\sim}} 4 to z {\ensuremath{\sim}} 10: 10,000
Galaxies from HST Legacy Fields},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/803/1/34}{{\em \apj} {\bfseries
803} no.~1, (Apr., 2015) 34},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1403.4295}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1403.4295
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Eldridge2009}
J.~J. {Eldridge} and E.~R. {Stanway}, ``{Spectral population synthesis
including massive binaries},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15514.x}{{\em \mnras}
{\bfseries 400} no.~2, (Dec., 2009) 1019--1028},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/0908.1386}{{\ttfamily arXiv:0908.1386
[astro-ph.CO]}}.
\bibitem{Schaerer2003}
D.~{Schaerer}, ``{The transition from Population III to normal galaxies:
Lyalpha and He II emission and the ionising properties of high redshift
starburst galaxies},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361:20021525}{{\em \aap} {\bfseries
397} (Jan., 2003) 527--538},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0210462}{{\ttfamily
arXiv:astro-ph/0210462 [astro-ph]}}.
\bibitem{Sun2021}
G.~{Sun}, J.~{Mirocha}, R.~H. {Mebane}, and S.~R. {Furlanetto}, ``{Revealing
the formation histories of the first stars with the cosmic near-infrared
background},'' \href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stab2697}{{\em \mnras}
{\bfseries 508} no.~2, (Dec., 2021) 1954--1972},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/2107.09324}{{\ttfamily arXiv:2107.09324
[astro-ph.GA]}}.
\bibitem{Mitsuda1984}
K.~{Mitsuda}, H.~{Inoue}, K.~{Koyama}, K.~{Makishima}, M.~{Matsuoka},
Y.~{Ogawara}, {\em et~al.}, ``{Energy spectra of low-mass binary X-ray
sources observed from Tenma.},'' {\em \pasj} {\bfseries 36} (Jan., 1984)
741--759.
\bibitem{Mineo2012}
S.~{Mineo}, M.~{Gilfanov}, and R.~{Sunyaev}, ``{X-ray emission from
star-forming galaxies - I. High-mass X-ray binaries},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19862.x}{{\em \mnras}
{\bfseries 419} no.~3, (Jan., 2012) 2095--2115},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1105.4610}{{\ttfamily arXiv:1105.4610
[astro-ph.HE]}}.
\bibitem{Conroy:2007cv}
C.~Conroy, R.~H. Wechsler, and A.~V. Kravtsov, ``{The Hierarchical Build-Up of
Massive Galaxies and the Intracluster Light since z=1},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/521425}{{\em Astrophys. J.} {\bfseries 668}
(2007) 826}, \href{http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0703374}{{\ttfamily
arXiv:astro-ph/0703374}}.
\bibitem{Cooray12}
A.~Cooray, J.~Smidt, F.~De~Bernardis, Y.~Gong, D.~Stern, M.~L.~N. Ashby, {\em
et~al.}, ``A measurement of the intrahalo light fraction with near-infrared
background anisotropies,''. \url{https://arxiv.org/abs/1210.6031}.
\bibitem{Tinker:2008ff}
J.~L. Tinker, A.~V. Kravtsov, A.~Klypin, K.~Abazajian, M.~S. Warren, G.~Yepes,
{\em et~al.}, ``{Toward a halo mass function for precision cosmology: The
Limits of universality},'' \href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/591439}{{\em
Astrophys. J.} {\bfseries 688} (2008) 709--728},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/0803.2706}{{\ttfamily arXiv:0803.2706
[astro-ph]}}.
\bibitem{Lin:2004ak}
Y.-T. Lin, J.~J. Mohr, and S.~A. Stanford, ``{K-band properties of galaxy
clusters and groups: Luminosity function, radial distribution and halo
occupation number},'' \href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/421714}{{\em Astrophys.
J.} {\bfseries 610} (2004) 745--761},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0402308}{{\ttfamily
arXiv:astro-ph/0402308}}.
\bibitem{Polletta:2007ut}
M.~Polletta {\em et~al.}, ``{Spectral Energy Distributions of Hard X-ray
selected AGNs in the XMDS Survey},''
\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/518113}{{\em Astrophys. J.} {\bfseries 663}
(2007) 81--102}, \href{http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0703255}{{\ttfamily
arXiv:astro-ph/0703255}}.
\end{thebibliography}\endgroup