MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3204058890 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2443

Anomalous broad-line region responses to continuum variability in active galactic nuclei – I. Hβ variability

2021· article· en· W3204058890 on OpenAlexfundno aff
C. M. Gaskell, Kayla Bartel, Julia N. Deffner, Iris Xia

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSwine Innovation PorcUniversity of California, Santa Cruz
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsActive galactic nucleusReverberation mappingLight curveLine-of-sightSpectral lineAstronomyGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT In the standard active galactic nucleus (AGN) reverberation-mapping model, variations in broad-line region (BLR) fluxes are predicted from optical continuum variability (taken as a proxy for the ionizing continuum) convolved with a response function that depends on the geometry. However, it has long been known that BLR variability can deviate from these predictions. We analyse both extensive long-term Hβ and continuum monitoring of NGC 5548 and a large sample of high-quality Hβ light curves of other AGNs to investigate the frequency and characteristics of the anomalous responses of the BLR. We find that anomalies are very common and probably occur in every object. Onsets can be on a time-scale only slightly longer than the light-crossing time and durations are of the order of the characteristic time-scale of variability of the optical continuum to several times longer. Anomalies are larger when NGC 5548 is in a low state, but otherwise there is no correlation with continuum variability. There is abundant evidence for the optical continuum of AGNs varying independently of the higher-energy continua and this is sufficient to explain the anomalous responses of the total BLR flux. There are good reasons for believing that the frequent lack of correlation between spectral regions is due to anisotropic and non-axisymmetric emission. Rapid changes in line profiles and velocity-dependent lags are consistent with this. Motion of compact absorbing clouds across the line of sight is another possible cause of anomalies. The prevalence of anomalies should be considered when planning reverberation-mapping campaigns.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations16
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→