PRECISE BLACK HOLE MASSES FROM MEGAMASER DISKS: BLACK HOLE-BULGE RELATIONS AT LOW MASS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The black hole (BH)–bulge correlations have greatly influenced the last decade of efforts to understand galaxy evolution. Current knowledge of these correlations is limited predominantly to high BH masses ( M BH ≳10 8 M ☉ ) that can be measured using direct stellar, gas, and maser kinematics. These objects, however, do not represent the demographics of more typical L < L * galaxies. This study transcends prior limitations to probe BHs that are an order of magnitude lower in mass, using BH mass measurements derived from the dynamics of H 2 O megamasers in circumnuclear disks. The masers trace the Keplerian rotation of circumnuclear molecular disks starting at radii of a few tenths of a pc from the central BH. Modeling of the rotation curves, presented by Kuo et al., yields BH masses with exquisite precision. We present stellar velocity dispersion measurements for a sample of nine megamaser disk galaxies based on long-slit observations using the B&C spectrograph on the Dupont telescope and the Dual Imaging Spectrograph on the 3.5 m telescope at Apache Point. We also perform bulge-to-disk decomposition of a subset of five of these galaxies with Sloan Digital Sky Survey imaging. The maser galaxies as a group fall below the M BH –σ * relation defined by elliptical galaxies. We show, now with very precise BH mass measurements, that the low-scatter power-law relation between M BH and σ * seen in elliptical galaxies is not universal. The elliptical galaxy M BH –σ * relation cannot be used to derive the BH mass function at low mass or the zero point for active BH masses. The processes (perhaps BH self-regulation or minor merging) that operate at higher mass have not effectively established an M BH –σ * relation in this low-mass regime.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".