MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123139451 · doi:10.1086/505646

Black Hole Masses and Eddington Ratios at 0.3 &lt;<i>z</i>&lt; 4

2006· article· en· W2123139451 on OpenAlexaff
Juna A. Kollmeier, Christopher A. Onken, C. S. Kochanek, Andrew Gould, David H. Weinberg, M. Dietrich, Richard J. Cool, Arjun Dey, Daniel J. Eisenstein, Buell T. Jannuzi, E. Le Floc’h, Daniel Stern

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsRedshiftEddington luminosityActive galactic nucleusLuminosityGalaxyBlack hole (networking)Supermassive black holeAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the distribution of Eddington luminosity ratios, L bol / L Edd , of active galactic nuclei (AGNs) discovered in the AGN and Galaxy Evolution Survey (AGES). We combine Hβ, Mg II, and C IV line widths with continuum luminosities to estimate black hole (BH) masses in 407 AGNs, covering the redshift range z ~ 0.3-4 and the bolometric luminosity range L bol ~ 10 45 -10 47 ergs s -1 . The sample consists of X-ray or mid-infrared (24 μm) point sources with optical magnitude R ≤ 21.5 mag and optical emission-line spectra characteristic of AGNs. For the range of luminosity and redshift probed by AGES, the distribution of estimated Eddington ratios is well described as log-normal, with a peak at L bol / L Edd ≃ 1/4 and a dispersion of 0.3 dex. Since additional sources of scatter are minimal, this dispersion must account for contributions from the scatter between estimated and true BH mass and the scatter between estimated and true bolometric luminosity. Therefore, we conclude that (1) neither of these sources of error can contribute more than ~0.3 dex rms, and (2) the true Eddington ratios of optically luminous AGNs are even more sharply peaked. Because the mass estimation errors must be smaller than ~0.3 dex, we can also investigate the distribution of Eddington ratios at fixed BH mass. We show for the first time that the distribution of Eddington ratios at fixed BH mass is peaked, and that the dearth of AGNs at a factor of ~10 below Eddington is real and not an artifact of sample selection. These results provide strong evidence that supermassive BHs gain most of their mass while radiating close to the Eddington limit, and they suggest that the fueling rates in luminous AGNs are ultimately determined by BH self-regulation of the accretion flow rather than galactic-scale dynamical disturbances.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations428
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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