Paper detail

Is Mg II 2800 a Reliable Virial Broadening Estimator for Quasars?

[Abridged] Broad MgII 2800 and Hbeta lines have emerged as the most reliable virial estimators of black hole mass in quasars. Which is more reliable? Comparison of MgII 2800 and Hbeta profile measures in the same sources and especially FWHM measures that provide the virial broadening estimator. Identification of 680 bright Sloan Digital Sky Survey DataRelease 7 quasars with spectra showing both MgII 2800 and Hbeta lines, at redshift 0.4 < z < 0.75. The s/n of these spectra are high enough to allow binning in the "four-dimensional (4D) eigenvector 1'' optical plane and construction of high s/n composite spectra. We confirm that MgII 2800 shows a profile that is ~ 20% narrower as suggested in some previous studies. FWHM measures for Population B sources (i.e., with FWHM of Hbeta larger than 4000 km/s) are uncertain because they show complex profiles with at least two broad-line components involving a nearly unshifted broad and redshifted very-broad component. Only the broad component is likely to be a valid virial estimator. If Hbeta and MgII 2800 are not corrected for the very broad component then black hole mass values for Population B sources will be systematically overestimated by up to logM ~ 0.3-0.4 dex. We suggest a simple correction that can be applied to the majority of sources. MgII 2800 is the safer virial estimator for Population B sources because the centroid shifts with respect to rest frame are lower than for Hbeta. In the broad and very broad component profile interpretation this is a consequence of the lower very broad to broad component intensity ratio for MgII 2800. Effective discrimination of black hole mass and Eddington ratio at fixed redshift is not achieved via luminosity binning but rather by binning in a "4D eigenvector 1'' context that reflects different broad line region geometry/kinematics likely driven by Eddington ratio.

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.