Dear participants of "Dark Matter Signatures in the Gamma-ray Sky" workshop: Hope you had a fun and productive day today! Before I go to bed I thought that I would share with y'all what we discussed at the discussion session today, so that we will all remember the "consensus" that we have reached today ;) 1. We all agree with the following statement: "Dark matter masses in the range of 10<~m<~30 GeV have been ruled out for a dark matter particle annihilating into b\bar{b} or \tau^+\tau^-, with the canonical S-wave cross section of ~3x10^{-26} cm^3/s (modulo order-unity, mass-dependent correction to the "canonical" value). They are ruled out by the absence of gamma-rays from dwarf spheroidals and the Milky Way halo. Fornax cluster and anisotropy of the diffuse gamma-ray background can potentially rule this out too, although it needs more (primarily theoretical) work. However, it is not clear what we can learn from this within the context of particle physics (yet). 2. Challenges are: A - statistical [e.g., more photons; more dwarf spheroidals; etc] B - astrophysical [e.g., "J" factor; mess at the Galactic Center; binary stars; etc] C - theoretical [e.g., boost factor; sub-halos; etc] They influence: - Inner Galaxy [B] - Milky Way halo [B] - Line [B, followed by A (for the future mission such as ACT/CTA in the energy greater than 100 GeV)] - Dwarf Spheroidals [B, followed by A] - Clusters [C, followed by B, followed by A] - Isotropic Diffuse Background [A&C] - Individual Sub-halos [A&C] 3. Wish List <> - CTA, to probe energy >> 100 GeV - Fermi-2, to rule out the canonical S-wave WIMP with m~100-500 GeV. What do we need? - 10x better angular resolution than Fermi - 10x better energy resolution than Fermi - ?x more collecting area than Fermi - Is it worth calculating these specifications, to dream a bit about this possibility? - Better characterization of the current Fermi data - do we fully understand the instrumental systematics? <> - Better survey of the Milky Way neighborhood See you tomorrow! Eiichiro