Paper detail

Calibrating CIV-based black hole mass estimators

We present the single-epoch black hole mass estimators based on the CIV (1549 A) broad emission line, using the updated sample of the reverberation-mapped AGNs and high-quality UV spectra. By performing multi-component spectral fitting analysis, we measure the CIV line widths (FWHM_CIV) and line dispersion (sigma_CIV) and the continuum luminosity at 1350 A (L_1350) to calibrate the CIV-based mass estimators. By comparing with the Hbeta reverberation-based masses, we provide new mass estimators with the best-fit relationships, i.e., M_BH \propto L_1350 ^ (0.50+-0.07) sigma_CIV ^2 and M_BH \propto L_1350 ^ (0.52+-0.09) FWHM_CIV ^ (0.56+-0.48). The new CIV-based mass estimators show significant mass-dependent systematic difference compared to the estimators commonly used in the literature. Using the published Sloan Digital Sky Survey QSO catalog, we show that the black hole mass of high-redshift QSOs decreases on average by ~0.25 dex if our recipe is adopted.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors1 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.