Paper detail

Are Outflows Biasing Single-Epoch CIV Black Hole Mass Estimates?

We use a combination of reverberation mapping data and single-epoch spectra of the CIV emission line in a sample of both low and high-redshift active galactic nuclei (AGNs) to investigate sources of the discrepancies between CIV- and Hbeta-based single-epoch black hole mass estimates. We find that for all reverberation mapped sources, there is a component of the line profile that does not reverberate, and the velocity characteristics of this component vary from object-to-object. The differing strength and properties of this non-variable component are responsible for much of the scatter in CIV-based black hole masses compared to Hbeta masses. The CIV mass bias introduced by this non-variable component is correlated with the shape of the CIV line, allowing us to make an empirical correction to the black hole mass estimates. Using this correction and accounting for other sources of scatter such as poor data quality and data inhomogeneity reduces the scatter between the CIV and Hbeta masses in our sample by a factor of ~2, to only ~0.2 dex. We discuss the possibility that this non-variable CIV component originates in an orientation-dependent outflow from either the proposed broad line region (BLR) disk-wind or the intermediate line region (ILR), a high-velocity inner extension of the narrow line region (NLR).

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author1 topic

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.