MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4391041980 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stae172

Modeling quasar proximity zones in a realistic cosmological environment with a self-consistent light curve

2024· article· en· W4391041980 on OpenAlexafffund
Yihao Zhou, Huanqing Chen, Yueying Ni, Rupert A. C. Croft, Simeon Bird

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNuclear Safety and Security CommissionNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsQuasarLight curveSelf consistentAstrophysicsCosmologyAstronomyStatistical physicsClassical mechanicsGalaxyQuantum electrodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We study quasar proximity zones in a simulation that includes a self-consistent quasar formation model and realistic intergalactic medium (IGM) environments. The quasar host halo is 1013 M⊙ at z = 6, more massive than typical halos studied in previous work. Between 6 < z < 7.5, the quasar luminosity varies rapidly, with a mean magnitude of MUV, mean = −24.8 and the fluctuation reaching up to two orders of magnitude. Using this light curve to post-process the dense environment around the quasar, we find that the proximity zone size (Rp) ranges between 0.5 and 5 pMpc. We show that the light curve variability causes a similar degree of scatter in Rp as does the density fluctuation, both of which result in a standard deviation of ∼0.3 pMpc. The Rp traces the light curve fluctuations closely but with a time delay of ∼104 yr, breaking the correspondence between the Rp and the contemporaneous MUV. This also indicates that we can only infer quasar activity within the past ∼104 yr instead of the integrated lifetime from Rp in the later part of cosmic reionization. Compared with the variable light curve, a constant light curve underestimates the Rp by 13 per cent at the dim end (MUV ∼ −23.5), and overestimates the Rp by 30 per cent at the bright end (MUV ∼ −26). By calculating the Rp generated by a number of quasars, we show that variable light curves predict a wider Rp distribution than lightbulb models, and readily explain the extremely small Rp values that have been observed.

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)0.001
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 score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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