NO EVIDENCE OF OBSCURED, ACCRETING BLACK HOLES IN MOST <i>z</i> = 6 STAR-FORMING GALAXIES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has been claimed that there is a large population of obscured, accreting black holes at high-redshift and that the integrated black hole density at z=6 as inferred from X-ray observations is ~100 times greater than inferred from optical quasars. I have performed a stacking analysis of very deep Chandra X-ray data at the positions of photometrically-selected z=6 galaxy candidates. It is found that there is no evidence for a stacked X-ray signal in either the soft (0.5-2 keV) or hard (2-8 keV) X-ray bands. Previous work which reported a significant signal is affected by an incorrect method of background subtraction which underestimates the true background within the target aperture. The puzzle remains of why the z=6 black hole mass function has such a flat slope and a low normalization compared to the stellar mass function.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".