COSMIC EVOLUTION OF BLACK HOLES AND SPHEROIDS. IV. THE<i>M</i><sub>BH</sub>-<i>L</i><sub>sph</sub>RELATION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
From high-resolution images of 23 Seyfert-1 galaxies at z=0.36 and z=0.57\nobtained with the Near Infrared Camera and Multi-Object Spectrometer on board\nthe Hubble Space Telescope (HST), we determine host-galaxy morphology, nuclear\nluminosity, total host-galaxy luminosity and spheroid luminosity. Keck\nspectroscopy is used to estimate black hole mass (M_BH). We study the cosmic\nevolution of the M_BH-spheroid luminosity (L_sph) relation. In combination with\nour previous work, totaling 40 Seyfert-1 galaxies, the covered range in BH mass\nis substantially increased, allowing us to determine for the first time\nintrinsic scatter and correct evolutionary trends for selection effects. We\nre-analyze archival HST images of 19 local reverberation-mapped active galaxies\nto match the procedure adopted at intermediate redshift. Correcting spheroid\nluminosity for passive luminosity evolution and taking into account selection\neffects, we determine that at fixed present-day V-band spheroid luminosity,\nM_BH/L_sph \\propto (1+z)^(2.8+/-1.2). When including a sample of 44 quasars out\nto z=4.5 taken from the literature, with luminosity and BH mass corrected to a\nself-consistent calibration, we extend the BH mass range to over two orders of\nmagnitude, resulting in M_BH/L_sph \\propto (1+z)^(1.4+/-0.2). The intrinsic\nscatter of the relation, assumed constant with redshift, is 0.3+/-0.1 dex (&lt;0.6\ndex at 95% CL). The evolutionary trend suggests that BH growth precedes\nspheroid assembly. Interestingly, the M_BH-total host-galaxy luminosity\nrelation is apparently non-evolving. It hints at either a more fundamental\nrelation or that the spheroid grows by a redistribution of stars. However, the\nhigh-z sample does not follow this relation, indicating that major mergers may\nplay the dominant role in growing spheroids above z~1.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".