Exploring Changes in Quasar Spectral Energy Distributions across C iv Parameter Space
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We examine the UV/X-ray properties of 1378 quasars in order to link empirical correlations to theoretical models of the physical mechanisms dominating quasars as a function of mass and accretion rate. The clarity of these correlations is improved when (1) using C iv broad emission line equivalent width (EQW) and blueshift (relative to systemic) values calculated from high signal-to-noise ratio reconstructions of optical/UV spectra and (2) removing quasars expected to be absorbed based on their UV/X-ray spectral slopes. In addition to using the traditional C iv parameter space measures of C iv EQW and blueshift, we define a “C iv ∥ distance” along a best-fit polynomial curve that incorporates information from both C iv parameters. We find that the C iv ∥ distance is linearly correlated with both the optical-to-X-ray slope, α ox, and broad-line He ii EQW, which are known spectral energy distribution indicators, but does not require X-ray or high spectral resolution UV observations to compute. The C iv ∥ distance may be a better indicator of the mass-weighted accretion rate, parameterized by L/L Edd, than the C iv EQW or blueshift alone, as those relationships are known to break down at the extrema. Conversely, there is only a weak correlation with the X-ray energy index (Γ), an alternate L/L Edd indicator. We find no X-ray or optical trends in the direction perpendicular to the C iv distance that could be used to reveal differences in accretion disk, wind, or corona structure that could be widening the C iv EQW–blueshift distribution. A different parameter (such as metallicity) not traced by these data must come into play.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".