Paper detail

Low-z MgII Broad Absorption-Line Quasars from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey

We present a sample of 68 low-z MgII low-ionization broad absorption-line (loBAL) quasars. The sample is uniformly selected from the SDSS5 according to the following criteria: (1) 0.4<z<0.8, (2) median S/N>7, and (3) MgII absorption-line width > 1600 \kms. The last criterion is a trade-off between the completeness and consistency with respect to the canonical definition of BAL quasars that have the `balnicity index' BI>0 in CIV BAL. We adopted such a criterion to ensure that ~90% of our sample are classical BAL quasars and the completeness is ~80%, based on extensive tests using high-z quasar samples with measurements of both CIV and MgII BALs. We found (1) MgII BAL is more frequently detected in quasars with narrower Hbeta emission-line, weaker [OIII] emission-line, stronger optical FeII multiplets and higher luminosity. In term of fundamental physical parameters of a black hole accretion system, loBAL fraction is significantly higher in quasars with a higher Eddington ratio than those with a lower Eddington ratio. The fraction is not dependent on the black hole mass in the range concerned. The overall fraction distribution is broad, suggesting a large range of covering factor of the absorption material. (2) [OIII]-weak loBAL quasars averagely show undetected [NeV] emission line and a very small line ratio of [NeV] to [OIII]. However, the line ratio in non-BAL quasars, which is much larger than that in [OIII]-weak loBAL quasars, is independent of the strength of the [OIII] line. (3) loBAL and non-loBAL quasars have similar colors in near-infrared to optical band but different colors in ultraviolet. (4) Quasars with MgII absorption lines of intermediate width are indistinguishable from the non-loBAL quasars in optical emission line properties but their colors are similar to loBAL quasars, redder than non-BAL quasars. We also discuss the implication of these results.

preprint2010arXivOpen 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.