Interacting galaxies in the IllustrisTNG simulations – VII: the connection between the most luminous active galactic nuclei and galaxy interactions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT We investigate the connection between the most luminous active galactic nuclei (AGN), galaxy pairs, and post-mergers in the IllustrisTNG simulation. We select galaxy pairs and post-mergers with a mass ratio between 1:10 < μ < 1:1 and a redshift between 0 < z < 1. We compare the incidence of luminous AGN in pairs with matched non-pair controls, finding that AGN with luminosity Lbol > 1044 erg s−1 occur in ∼26 per cent of paired galaxies with a companion within 20 kpc, compared with ∼14 per cent in controls (a fractional excess of ∼2). The enhancement of AGN in galaxy pairs is luminosity dependent, with the highest excess (a factor of ∼6 ± 2 at the closest separations) for AGN with Lbol > 1045 erg s−1. Additionally, pairs exhibit a modest yet statistically significant excess of luminous AGN up to ∼150 kpc in separation. For pairs which merge between 0 < z < 1, AGN fractions are elevated between 1.5 Gyr before and after coalescence, with the highest excess closest to coalescence. Our results indicate that pre-coalescence interactions drive excesses of luminous AGN, but that luminous AGN in galaxy pairs are not ubiquitous. Finally, we investigate what fraction of AGN can be associated with an interaction (either having a companion within 100 kpc or a merger within the last 500 Myr). For AGN with Lbol > 1045 erg s−1, ∼55 per cent are interacting, compared with a 30 per cent interaction fraction in AGN with 1044 < Lbol < 1044.5 erg s−1. Our results support a picture in which interactions play a dominant role in (but are not the sole cause of) triggering the most luminous AGN.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".