Paper detail

Active galactic nuclei at z~1.5: II. Black Hole Mass estimation by means of broad emission lines

This is the second in a series of papers aiming to test how the mass ($M_{\rm BH}$), accretion rate ($\dot{M}$) and spin ($a_{*}$) of super massive black holes (SMBHs) determine the observed properties of type-I active galactic nuclei (AGN). Our project utilizes a sample of 39 unobscured AGN at $z\simeq1.55$ observed by VLT/X-shooter, selected to map a large range in $M_{\rm BH}$ and $L/L_{\rm edd}$ and covers the most prominent UV-optical (broad) emission lines, including H$α$, H$β$, MgII, and CIV. This paper focuses on single-epoch, "virial" $M_{\rm BH}$ determinations from broad emission lines and examines the implications of different continuum modeling approaches in line width measurements. We find that using a "local" power-law continuum instead of a physically-motivated thin disk continuum leads to only slight underestimation of the FWHM of the lines and the associated $M_{\rm BH}\left({\rm FWHM}\right)$. However, the line dispersion $σ_{\rm line}$ and associated $M_{\rm BH}\left(σ_{\rm line}\right)$ are strongly affected by the continuum placement and provides less reliable mass estimates than FWHM-based methods. Our analysis shows that H$α$, H$β$ and MgII can be safely used for virial $M_{\rm BH}$ estimation. The CIV line, on the other hand, is not reliable in the majority of the cases, this may indicate that the gas emitting this line is not virialized. While H$α$ and H$β$ show very similar line widths, the mean ${\rm FWHM\left(MgII\right)}$ is about 30% narrower than ${\rm FWHM\left(Hβ\right)}$. We confirm several recent suggestions to improve the accuracy in CIV-based mass estimates, relying on other UV emission lines. Such improvements do not reduce the scatter between CIV-based and Balmer-line-based mass estimates.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors2 topics

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 map preview

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.