A dormant overmassive black hole in the early Universe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Recent observations have found a large number of supermassive black holes already in place in the first few hundred million years after the Big Bang, many of which seem to be overmassive relative to their host galaxy stellar mass when compared with local relation 1–9 . Several different models have been proposed to explain these findings, ranging from heavy seeds to light seeds experiencing bursts of high accretion rate 10–16 . Yet, current datasets are unable to differentiate between these various scenarios. Here we report the detection, from the JADES survey, of broad Hα emission in a galaxy at z = 6.68, which traces a black hole with a mass of about 4 × 10 8 M ⊙ and accreting at a rate of only 0.02 times the Eddington limit. The black hole to host galaxy stellar mass ratio is about 0.4—that is, about 1,000 times above the local relation—whereas the system is closer to the local relations in terms of dynamical mass and velocity dispersion of the host galaxy. This object is most likely an indication of a much larger population of dormant black holes around the epoch of reionization. Its properties are consistent with scenarios in which short bursts of super-Eddington accretion have resulted in black hole overgrowth and massive gas expulsion from the accretion disk; in between bursts, black holes spend most of their life in a dormant state.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".