Paper detail

Spectroscopic properties of radio-loud and radio-quiet quasars

Surveys have shown radio-loud (RL) quasars constitute 10%-15% of the total quasar population and rest are radio-quiet (RQ). However, it is unknown if this radio-loud fraction (RLF) remains consistent among different parameter spaces. This study shows that RLF increases for increasing full width half maximum (FWHM) velocity of the H$β$ broad emission line (z < 0.75). To analyse the reason, we compared bolometric luminosity of RL and RQ quasars sample which have FWHM of H$β$ broad emission line greater than 15000km/s (High Broad Line or HBL) with which have FWHM of H$β$ emission line less than 2500km/s (Low Broad Line or LBL). From the distributions we can conclude for the HBL, RQ and RL quasars are peaking separately and RL quasars are having higher values whereas for the LBL the peaks are almost indistinguishable. We predicted selection effects could be the possible reason but to conclude anything more analysis is needed. Then we compared our result with Wills & Browne (1986) and have shown that some objects from our sample do not follow the pattern of the logR vs FWHM plot where R is the ratio of 5 GHz radio core flux density with the extended radio lobe flux density.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 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.