Paper detail

A Comparative Study of AGN Feedback Algorithms

Modelling AGN feedback in numerical simulations is both technically and theoretically challenging, with numerous approaches having been published in the literature. We present a study of five distinct approaches to modelling AGN feedback within gravitohydrodynamic simulations of major mergers of Milky Way-sized galaxies. To constrain differences to only be between AGN feedback models, all simulations start from the same initial conditions and use the same star formation algorithm. Most AGN feedback algorithms have five key aspects: black hole accretion rate, energy feedback rate and method, particle accretion algorithm, black hole advection algorithm, and black hole merger algorithm. All models follow different accretion histories, with accretion rates that differ by up to three orders of magnitude at any given time. We consider models with either thermal or kinetic feedback, with the associated energy deposited locally around the black hole. Each feedback algorithm modifies the gas properties near the black hole to different extents. The particle accretion algorithms usually (but not always) maintain good agreement between the mass accreted by \dot{M} dt and the mass of gas particles removed from the simulation. The black hole advection algorithms dampen inappropriate dragging of the black holes by two-body interactions. Advecting the black hole a limited distance based upon local mass distributions has many desirably properties. The black holes merge when given criteria are met, and we find a range of merger times for different criteria. Using the M_{BH}-σrelation as a diagnostic of the remnants yields three models that lie within the one-sigma scatter of the observed relation and two that fall below it. The wide variation in accretion behaviours of the models reinforces the fact that there remains much to be learnt about the evolution of galactic nuclei. (abridged)

preprint2013arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.