 the $A^2$ coherent scattering enhancement as well as the quark-nucleon form factor for scalar interactions (see [@Belanger:2008sj] for a review). We validated our Monte Carlo pipeline by reproducing analytically known $2\rightarrow2$ results.

[Fig. \[f.DDspectraCDMS\]]{} shows some nuclear recoil spectra for a Silicon and Xenon target. (We henceforth assume an effectively massless $\phi$.) dmDM is compared to standard WIMPs (velocity- and recoil-independent contact-interaction) for different DM masses. An important feature of our model is apparent: a $\sim 50 \gev$ dmDM candidate looks like a $\sim 10 \gev$ $(20 \gev$) WIMP when scattering off Silicon (Xenon). Moreover, the shape of $d \sigma_N/d E_r$ is insensitive to $m_\chi$ unless $m_\chi$ is much smaller than $m_N$ (see Eq. \[eq:recoil\]). This makes it much more difficult to measure the DM mass using the shape of the spectrum. Signals at two detectors with different target materials are required.

![image](DDspectraCDMS){width="15cm"}\
![image](DDspectraLUX){width="15cm"}

[m[6.3cm]{}m[6.3cm]{}]{}![ **Left:** For each dmDM mass $m_\chi = m_{2\rightarrow3}$ this plot shows the WIMP mass $m_\chi = m_{2\rightarrow2}$ which gives the same spectral shape at XENON100 ($S1 > 3$ with 6% light gathering efficiency, dashed red line), LUX ($S1 > 2$ with 14% light gathering efficiency, dash-dotted black line), CDMSII Silicon ($E_r > 7 \kev$, solid blue line), and CDMSlite (Germanium, $Er > 0.2 \kev$, dotted purple line) before selection cuts. **Right:** The ‘observed’ WIMP-nucleon cross section for each dmDM mass $m_{2\to3}$, assuming the best-fit $m_{2\to2}$ from the left. The dmDM parameters are $y_\chi = 1, \Lambda = 45 \tev$. []{data-label="f.compare2to2to2to3
the $ A^2 $ coherent scattering enhancement as well as the quark - nucleon form factor for scalar interaction (examine [ @Belanger:2008sj ] for a review). We validated our Monte Carlo pipeline by reproduce analytically known $ 2\rightarrow2 $ results. 

 [ Fig.   \[f. DDspectraCDMS\ ] ] { } show some nuclear recoil spectrum for a Silicon and Xenon target. (We henceforth bear an effectively massless $ \phi$.) dmDM is compared to standard weakly interacting massive particle (velocity- and recoil - independent contact - interaction) for unlike DM masses. An important feature of our model is apparent: a $ \sim 50 \gev$ dmDM candidate looks like a $ \sim 10 \gev$ $ (20 \gev$) WIMP when scattering off Silicon (Xenon). furthermore, the shape of $ d \sigma_N / d E_r$ is insensitive to $ m_\chi$ unless $ m_\chi$ is much minor than $ m_N$ (see Eq.   \[eq: recoil\ ]). This makes it a lot more difficult to quantify the DM mass using the shape of the spectrum. Signals at two detectors with different prey materials are required. 

! [ image](DDspectraCDMS){width="15cm"}\ 
! [ image](DDspectraLUX){width="15 cm " } 

 [ m[6.3cm]{}m[6.3 cm ] { } ] { }! [ * * Left :* * For each dmDM mass $ m_\chi = m_{2\rightarrow3}$ this plot shows the WIMP mass $ m_\chi = m_{2\rightarrow2}$ which gives the same spectral shape at XENON100 ($ S1 > 3 $ with 6% light gathering efficiency, dashed red line), LUX ($ S1 > 2 $ with 14% light gathering efficiency, hyphen - dot black occupation), CDMSII Silicon ($ E_r > 7 \kev$, upstanding blue line), and CDMSlite (Germanium, $ Er > 0.2 \kev$, dotted empurpled line) before selection cuts. * * Right :* * The ‘ observed ’ WIMP - nucleon cross incision for each dmDM mass $ m_{2\to3}$, assuming the best - fit $ m_{2\to2}$ from the left. The dmDM parameters are $ y_\chi = 1, \Lambda = 45 \tev$. [ ] { data - label="f.compare2to2to2to3
 thf $A^2$ coherent scattering tnhancement as well as tie quari-nucleon form factor for scalar intecactuons (wee [@Belanger:2008sj] for a rdview). We nalidated our Nonte Carlo pipelikz by dcprodbcmng analyticalli known $2\righdarrow2$ results.

[Xie. \[f.BDspectraCDMS\]]{} shows some nuclear recjil spevtga for a Silicjn amq Xehon target. (We henceforth assume an effectpvely massless $\pho$.) dmDM is compared to stanfard WIMPs (velocity- anf recoil-indglenqwnt contact-ivteraction) for differeht DM masses. An important featufe of our model iw aokarent: a $\sim 50 \gev$ dmDM candidate lookv like s $\sim 10 \gev$ $(20 \gey$) WIM' whwn scattering off Silmcon (Xenon). Moreover, jhe shape mf $d \sigma_N/d E_r$ is unwensijive do $m_\zyi$ jnltss $m_\dhi$ is murh smaller fhan $m_N$ (see Eq. \[eq:recoil\]). This malef it much more diffisujt to measure the DM mass using the shake of the spectrum. Signals ar two detectors with fifferent target materials are required.

![image](DDspectraCDMS){whdth="15cj"}\
![kmayc](QAwpfctraLUX){width="15cm"}

[m[6.3cm]{}m[6.3cm]{}]{}![ **Left:** For each dmDM mass $j_\cni = m_{2\rightarrow3}$ bhis plot shows thr AIKK mass $m_\chi = m_{2\tightarxkw2}$ which gives the swme spestral shape at XENPN100 ($S1 > 3$ with 6% light gatherint efficiency, eashed red line), LUR ($S1 > 2$ with 14% uighj gathrring efficiency, dash-docted bmack line), CFMSII Siljzon ($E_r > 7 \kev$, solkd nlua line), and CDMSlite (Germanyum, $Er > 0.2 \jev$, botted pjrplg line) fefore selfctiok cuts. **Right:** The ‘obderveb’ WIM[-nucleon cgoss section for each dmDM mass $m_{2\to3}$, assuming jhe bevt-fit $m_{2\tj2}$ frok the left. Thq dmDM parametgrs are $y_\ehi = 1, \Uambda = 45 \tvv$. []{data-lauel="f.compare2tj2to2to3
the $A^2$ coherent scattering enhancement as well quark-nucleon factor for interactions (see [@Belanger:2008sj] our Carlo pipeline by analytically known $2\rightarrow2$ [Fig. \[f.DDspectraCDMS\]]{} shows some nuclear recoil for a Silicon and Xenon target. (We henceforth assume an effectively massless $\phi$.) is compared to standard WIMPs (velocity- and recoil-independent contact-interaction) for different DM masses. important of model apparent: a $\sim 50 \gev$ dmDM candidate looks like a $\sim 10 \gev$ $(20 \gev$) WIMP scattering off Silicon (Xenon). Moreover, the shape of \sigma_N/d E_r$ is insensitive $m_\chi$ unless $m_\chi$ is much than (see Eq. This it more difficult to the DM mass using the shape of the spectrum. Signals at two detectors with different target materials required. ![image](DDspectraCDMS){width="15cm"}\ **Left:** For dmDM $m_\chi m_{2\rightarrow3}$ this plot WIMP mass $m_\chi = m_{2\rightarrow2}$ which spectral shape at XENON100 ($S1 > 3$ with light gathering dashed red line), LUX ($S1 > with 14% light gathering efficiency, dash-dotted black line), Silicon ($E_r > 7 \kev$, solid blue line), and CDMSlite (Germanium, $Er > 0.2 \kev$, line) before selection cuts. The ‘observed’ WIMP-nucleon section each mass assuming the $m_{2\to2}$ from the left. The dmDM parameters are $y_\chi = 1, = 45 \tev$. []{data-label="f.compare2to2to2to3
 the $A^2$ coherent scattering enhAncement as Well aS thE quArK-nucLeon Form factor for sCAlar Interactions (see [@BelangeR:2008sj] foR a REvieW). we ValidAted our mOnTE carLo PiPelInE By ReproDucIng analYtically knOwn $2\RiGhtarrow2$ resuLTs.

[fig. \[f.DDspecTracDMS\]]{} shows somE nuClear rEcOil SPectrA foR a SilIcon anD xenon tArget. (We heNcEForth aSSume an eFFEcTiveLy massless $\phi$.) dmDM IS cOMpared to standaRd WIMPS (vELoCITy- aNd rEcoil-indepEnDent cONtact-inTErACTIon) FOr different DM Masses. An impORtaNt featUrE of OUr modeL is apPaREnt: A $\sim 50 \gev$ dmDM CandIdate lookS like a $\SIm 10 \gev$ $(20 \geV$) wIMP wheN scattEriNg oFf SiLIcOn (xenOn). mOreOVeR, thE ShaPe of $d \sigMa_n/d e_r$ is iNsenSITIVe to $M_\chI$ unlEss $m_\cHi$ is much smallEr tHan $m_n$ (See eq. \[eq:rEcoil\]). this MaKes it Much moRe difFiCult to measure thE DM mAss using tHe sHaPe oF tHe speCTrum. SiGnaLs aT two detEctors wITh dIfFEREnT target materials arE rEQUiRed.

![image](dDspecTRacDms){width="15cm"}\
![ImAge](dDspECTraLUx){widTH="15cM"}

[m[6.3cm]{}m[6.3cm]{}]{}![ **LEft:** For EAcH dMDM mass $M_\cHi = m_{2\rigHtArrOw3}$ tHis plOT shoWs the WiMP mass $m_\Chi = m_{2\rIGhtarrow2}$ which gIVes the same speCTrAL ShAPe at xENoN100 ($S1 > 3$ with 6% lighT gatHErinG effICiEncY, DasheD red lInE), lUx ($s1 > 2$ with 14% light gathering EfFicienCy, dasH-dotted black lIne), CDMSII SILICon ($E_r > 7 \kev$, SoliD BlUE line), and CDMSliTe (GerManium, $Er > 0.2 \keV$, Dotted puRple lIne) beforE selectioN CUts. **Right:** the ‘ObsErvEd’ Wimp-nUcleon cross seCTIon fOr Each dmDm maSs $m_{2\to3}$, asSumIng The BesT-fIt $m_{2\to2}$ from The left. THe DmdM PaRamEters ARe $y_\chi = 1, \LaMbDa = 45 \tEv$. []{DatA-labeL="F.compaRe2to2tO2to3
 the $A^2$ coherent scatte ring enhan cemen t a s w el l as  the  quark-nucleon form  factor for scalar int eract io n s (s e e[@Bel anger:2 0 08 s j ] f or  a  re vi e w) . Weval idatedour MonteCar lo  pipeline by re producingana lytically kn own  $2\ri gh tar r ow2$res ults. 

[Fig .  \[f.D DspectraC DM S \]]{}s hows so m e  n ucle ar recoil spectra fo r  a Silicon and  Xenon  t a rg e t . ( Wehenceforth  a ssume an effe c ti v e l y m a ssless $\phi$ .) dmDM isc omp ared t osta n dard W IMPs(v e loc ity- and re coil -independ ent co n tact-in t eractio n) for  di ffe rent DM  m ass es .  An im por t ant  feature  o four m odel i s appa ren t: a  $\si m 50 \gev$ dm DMcand i dat e loo ks li ke a  $ \sim10 \ge v$ $( 20  \gev$) WIMP wh en s cattering  of fSil ic on (X e non).Mor eov er, the  shapeo f $ d\ s i gm a_N/d E_r$ is inse ns i t iv e to $m_ \chi$u nl es s  $m_\chi $ismuch s malle r th a n$m_N$ (s ee Eq. \[ eq :recoil \] ). Thi smak esit mu c h mo re dif ficult t o mea s ure the DM mas s  using the sh a pe o ft he s pec trum. Signa ls a t  two  det e ct ors withdiffe re n tt arget materials are  r equire d.

! [image](DDspe ctraCDMS){ w i d th="15cm "}\! [i m age](DDspectra LUX){ width="15c m "}

[m[6 .3cm] {}m[6.3c m]{}]{}![ * *Left:**  Fo r e ach  dm D M  m ass $m_\chi = m _{2\ ri ghtarro w3} $ thisplo t s how s t he  WIMP mas s $m_\ch i=m_ {2 \ri ghtar r ow2}$ wh ic h g iv esthe s a me spe ctral  sha pe  a t  XE NON100( $S 1 > 3$  w it h 6%  li gh t gat heri n g e fficien cy, dashe d r e d li ne ),  LUX ($ S1 > 2$ with14 % light ga th eri ng eff i c iency, d ash-dotted black line), CDMSIISil icon($E_ r > 7 \ke v$,  solid  bl u e line ), and  CDMS li te( G erman i u m,  $E r> 0.2 \kev $ ,  do ttedpu rple  line)before selection c u ts.  **Right:** T he‘obs e r ve d’W IM P -nu cl e onc r oss section for  each dmDM  m a ss  $m_{2\to3 } $,as sumingthe bes t-fit $m_{2\t o2}$ from  the left .Thed m DMparameters  are $y_ \chi = 1, \Lamb d a= 45\te v$. [] {d ata -labe l="f.c o mpa re2to 2to2to 3
 the_$A^2$ coherent_scattering enhancement as well_as the_quark-nucleon_form factor_for_scalar interactions (see_[@Belanger:2008sj] for a_review). We validated our_Monte Carlo pipeline_by_reproducing analytically known $2\rightarrow2$ results.

[Fig. \[f.DDspectraCDMS\]]{} shows some nuclear recoil spectra for a Silicon and_Xenon_target. (We_henceforth_assume_an effectively massless $\phi$.) dmDM_is compared to standard WIMPs_(velocity- and_recoil-independent contact-interaction) for different DM masses. An important_feature_of our model_is apparent: a $\sim 50 \gev$ dmDM candidate looks_like a $\sim 10 \gev$ $(20_\gev$) WIMP when_scattering_off_Silicon (Xenon). Moreover, the_shape of $d \sigma_N/d E_r$ is_insensitive to $m_\chi$ unless $m_\chi$ is_much smaller than $m_N$ (see Eq. \[eq:recoil\]). This_makes it much more difficult to_measure the DM mass using_the shape_of the spectrum. Signals at_two detectors with_different target_materials are required.

![image](DDspectraCDMS){width="15cm"}\
![image](DDspectraLUX){width="15cm"}

[m[6.3cm]{}m[6.3cm]{}]{}![_**Left:** For each dmDM mass $m_\chi_= m_{2\rightarrow3}$ this_plot shows the WIMP mass $m_\chi_=_m_{2\rightarrow2}$ which gives_the_same_spectral shape_at XENON100 ($S1_>_3$ with_6%_light gathering efficiency, dashed red line),_LUX_($S1 > 2$ with 14% light gathering_efficiency, dash-dotted black line),_CDMSII_Silicon ($E_r > 7_\kev$, solid blue line), and_CDMSlite (Germanium, $Er > 0.2 \kev$,_dotted purple_line) before_selection cuts. **Right:** The ‘observed’ WIMP-nucleon cross section for each dmDM_mass $m_{2\to3}$, assuming the best-fit $m_{2\to2}$_from the left. The_dmDM parameters_are_$y_\chi = 1,_\Lambda_= 45_\tev$. []{data-label="f.compare2to2to2to3