Paper detail

CIV emission line properties and uncertainties in black hole mass estimates of z ~ 3.5 quasars

Using a high luminosity ($L_{\rm bol} \sim 10^{47.5} - 10^{48.3}$ erg s$^{-1}$), high redshift ($3.2 < z < 3.8$) quasar sample of 19 quasars with optical and near-infrared spectroscopy, we investigate the reliability of the CIV-based black hole mass estimates ($M_{\rm BH}$). The median logarithm of the CIV- and H$β$-based $M_{\rm BH}$ ratios is 0.110 dex with the scatter of 0.647 dex. The CIV-to-H$β$ BH mass differences are significantly correlated with the CIV FWHMs, blueshifts and asymmetries. Corrections of the CIV FWHM using the blueshift and asymmetry reduce the scatter of the mass differences by $\sim$ 0.04-0.2 dex. Quasars in our sample accrete at the Eddington ratio $R_{\rm EDD}>0.3$ and cover a considerable range of blueshifts, with 18/19 of the quasars showing CIV blueshifts (with the median value of 1126 km s$^{-1}$) and 14/19 of the quasars showing CIV blueshifts larger than 500 km s$^{-1}$. It suggests that not all quasars with high Eddington ratios show large blueshifts. The Baldwin effect between the CIV rest-frame equivalent width (REW) and the continuum luminosity at 1350 $\overset{\lower.5em\circ}{\mathrm{A}}$ is not seen, likely due to the limited luminosity range of our sample. We find a lack of flux in the red wing of the composite spectrum with larger CIV blueshift, and detect a higher ratio of [OIII] quasars with REW$_{\rm [OIII]}>5$ $\overset{\lower.5em\circ}{\mathrm{A}}$ in the subsample with lower CIV blueshift. It is more likely that they are caused by the combination of the Eddington ratio and the orientation effect.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access8 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.