Paper detail

Radiatively inefficient accretion disks in Low Luminosity AGN

We study a complete and distance-limited sample of 25 LINERs, 21 of which have been imaged with the Hubble Space Telescope to study their physical properties and to compare their radio and optical properties with those of other samples of local AGNs, namely Seyfert galaxies and low-luminosity radio galaxies (LLRG). Our results show that the LINERs population is not homogeneous, as there are two subclasses: i) the first class is similar to LLRG, as it extends the population of radio-loud nuclei to lower luminosities; ii) the second is similar to Seyferts, and extends the properties of radio-quiet nuclei towards the lowest luminosities. The different nature of the various classes of local AGN are best understood when the fraction of the Eddington luminosity they irradiate L_o/L_Edd is plotted against the nuclear radio-loudness parameter: Seyferts are associated with relatively high radiative efficiencies L_o/L_Edd >~ 10^-4 (and high accretion rates onto low mass black holes); LLRG are associated with low radiative efficiencies (and low accretion rates onto high black hole masses); all LINERs have low radiative efficiency (and accretion rates), and can be radio-loud or radio quiet depending on their black hole mass.

preprint2006arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.