MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6947928810 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2112.08127

A Suzaku sample of unabsorbed narrow-line and broad-line Seyfert 1 galaxies: II. Iron emission and absorption

2021· preprint· en· W6947928810 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBanana Cultivation and Research
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmission spectrumAbsorption (acoustics)Line (geometry)TorusSpectral lineLuminosityAbsorption spectroscopy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A sample of 22 narrow-line Seyfert 1 (NLS1) and 47 broad-line Seyfert 1 (BLS1) galaxies observed with Suzaku is used to examine the Fe K band properties of each group. Three different models are used to examine the presence of: narrow neutral Fe Ka line at 6.4 keV and ionised Fe xxv and Fe xxvi emission lines (model A); a broad emission feature at around 6 - 7 keV (model B); and an absorption edge at 7.1 keV (model C). In all three models, the neutral Fe Ka line is weaker (lower luminosity and equivalent width) in NLS1s than in BLS1s. Model (B) also finds a more significant broad component (larger equivalent width) in NLS1s than in BLS1s. The feature does not appear to be an artefact of steeper spectra in NLS1s, but rather an intrinsic property of these sources. From model (C), the optical depth of the absorption edge appears comparable between the two samples. When comparing the absorption with the emission line properties, NLS1s seem to exhibit a lower ratio of emission-to-absorption of iron than BLS1s, and than expected based on the fluorescence yield. The observed differences may arise from different torus geometries (e.g. larger opening angle in NLS1s), and/or additional sources of Fe K emission and absorption in NLS1s beyond pure fluorescence (e.g. originating in the disc and broad line region).

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.679
Threshold uncertainty score0.397

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.123 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicBanana Cultivation and ResearchFrench-language works237,207