Paper detail

The Activation of Galactic Nuclei and Their Accretion Rates are Linked to the Star Formation Rates and Bulge-types of Their Host Galaxies

We use bulge-type classifications of 809 representative SDSS galaxies by Gadotti (2009) to classify a large sample of galaxies into real bulges (classical or elliptical) and pseudobulges using Random Forest. We use structural and stellar population predictors that can easily be measured without image decomposition. Multiple parameters such as the central mass density with 1 kpc, concentration index, Sérsic index and velocity dispersion do result in accurate bulge classifications when combined together. We classify $\sim 44,500$ face-on galaxies above stellar mass of 10$^{10}$ M$_\odot$ and redshift $ 0.02 < z < 0.07$ into real bulges or pseudobulges with $93 \pm 2$\% accuracy. We show that $\sim 75 - 90\%$ of AGNs identified by the optical line ratio diagnostic are hosted by real bulges. The pseudobulge fraction significantly decreases with AGN signature as the line ratios change from indicating pure star formation ($\sim 54 \pm 4$ \%), to composite of star formation and AGN ($\sim 18 \pm 3$\%), and to AGN-dominated galaxies ($\sim 5 \pm 3$\%). Using the dust-corrected [\ion{O}{3}] luminosity as an AGN accretion indicator, and the stellar mass and radius as proxies for a black hole mass, we find that AGNs in real bulges have lower Eddington ratios than AGNs in pseudobulges. Real bulges have a wide range of AGN and star formation activities, although most of them are weak AGNs. For both bulge-types, their Eddington ratios are correlated with specific star formation rates (SSFR). Real bulges have lower specific accretion rate but higher AGN fraction than pseudobulges do at similar SSFRs.

preprint2019arXivOpen 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.