Paper detail

CIV Line-Width Anomalies: The Perils of Low S/N Spectra

Comparison of six high-redshift quasar spectra obtained with the Large Binocular Telescope with previous observations from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey shows that failure to correctly identify absorption and other problems with accurate characterization of the CIV emission line profile in low S/N data can severely limit the reliability of single-epoch mass estimates based on the CIV emission line. We combine the analysis of these new high-quality data with a reanalysis of three other samples based on high S/N spectra of the CIV emission line region. We find that a large scatter between the Hbeta- and CIV-based masses remains even for this high S/N sample when using the FWHM to characterize the BLR velocity dispersion and the standard virial assumption to calculate the mass. However, we demonstrate that using high-quality data and the line dispersion to characterize the CIV line width leads to a high level of consistency between CIV- and Hbeta-based masses, with <0.3 dex of observed scatter, and an estimated ~0.2 dex intrinsic scatter, in the mass residuals.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access6 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.