MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061762764 · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/729/2/85

GROWING MASSIVE BLACK HOLE PAIRS IN MINOR MERGERS OF DISK GALAXIES

2011· article· en· W2061762764 on OpenAlexaff
Simone Callegari, Stelios Kazantzidis, Lucio Mayer, Monica Colpi, Jillian Bellovary, Thomas Quinn, James Wadsley

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsGalaxyMass ratioAccretion (finance)Black hole (networking)Supermassive black holeOrbital decayAstronomyGalaxy formation and evolutionSatellite

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We perform a suite of high-resolution smoothed particle hydrodynamics simulations to investigate the orbital decay and mass evolution of massive black hole (MBH) pairs down to scales of ∼30 pc during minor mergers of disk galaxies. Our simulation set includes star formation and accretion onto the MBHs, as well as feedback from both processes. We consider 1:10 merger events starting at z ∼ 3, with MBH masses in the sensitivity window of the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna , and we follow the coupling between the merger dynamics and the evolution of the MBH mass ratio until the satellite galaxy is tidally disrupted. While the more massive MBH accretes in most cases as if the galaxy were in isolation, the satellite MBH may undergo distinct episodes of enhanced accretion, owing to strong tidal torques acting on its host galaxy and to orbital circularization inside the disk of the primary galaxy. As a consequence, the initial 1:10 mass ratio of the MBHs changes by the time the satellite is disrupted. Depending on the initial fraction of cold gas in the galactic disks and the geometry of the encounter, the mass ratios of the MBH pairs at the time of satellite disruption can stay unchanged or become as large as 1:2. Remarkably, the efficiency of MBH orbital decay correlates with the final mass ratio of the pair itself: MBH pairs that significantly increase their mass ratio are also expected to inspiral more promptly down to nuclear-scale separations. These findings indicate that the mass ratios of MBH pairs in galactic nuclei do not necessarily trace the mass ratios of their merging host galaxies but are determined by the complex interplay between gas accretion and merger dynamics.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.192 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations117
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207