DYNAMICAL MEASUREMENTS OF BLACK HOLE MASSES IN FOUR BRIGHTEST CLUSTER GALAXIES AT 100 Mpc
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present stellar kinematics and orbit superposition models for the central regions of four brightest cluster galaxies, based upon integral-field spectroscopy at Gemini, Keck, and McDonald Observatories. Our integral-field data span radii from <100 pc to tens of kiloparsecs, comparable to the effective radius of each galaxy. We report black hole masses, M-circle, of 2.1(-1.6)(+1.6) x 10(10) M-circle dot for NGC 4889, 9.7(-2.5)(+3.0) x 10(9) M-circle dot for NGC 3842, and 1.3(-0.4)(+0.5) x 10(9) M-circle dot for NGC 7768, with errors representing 68% confidence limits. For NGC 2832, we report an upper limit of M-circle < 9.0 x 10(9) M-circle dot. Our models of each galaxy include a dark matter halo, and we have tested the dependence of M-circle on the model dark matter profile. Stellar orbits near the center of each galaxy are tangentially biased, on comparable spatial scales to the galaxies' photometric cores. We find possible photometric and kinematic evidence for an eccentric torus of stars in NGC 4889, with a radius of nearly 1 kpc. We compare our measurements of M-circle to the predicted black hole masses from various fits to the relations between M-circle and stellar velocity dispersion (sigma), luminosity (L), or stellar mass (M-star). Still, the black holes in NGC 4889 and NGC 3842 are significantly more massive than all sigma-based predictions and most L-based predictions. The black hole in NGC 7768 is consistent with a broader range of predictions.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".