Paper detail

The correlations between optical variability and physical parameters of quasars in SDSS Stripe 82

We investigate the optical variability of 7658 quasars from SDSS Stripe 82. Taking advantage of a larger sample and relatively more data points for each quasar, we estimate variability amplitudes and divide the sample into small bins of redshift, rest-frame wavelength, black hole mass, Eddington ratio and bolometric luminosity respectively, to investigate the relationships between variability and these parameters. An anti-correlation between variability and rest-frame wavelength is found. The variability amplitude of radio-quiet quasars shows almost no cosmological evolution, but that of radio-loud ones may weakly anti-correlate with redshift. In addition, variability increases as either luminosity or Eddington ratio decreases. However, the relationship between variability and black hole mass is uncertain; it is negative when the influence of Eddington ratio is excluded, but positive when the influence of luminosity is excluded. The intrinsic distribution of variability amplitudes for radio-loud and radio-quiet quasars are different. Both radio-loud and radio-quiet quasars exhibit a bluer-when-brighter chromatism. Assuming that quasar variability is caused by variations of accretion rate, the Shakura-Sunyaev disk model can reproduce the tendencies of observed correlations between variability and rest-frame wavelength, luminosity as well as Eddington ratio, supporting that changes of accretion rate plays an important role in producing the observed optical variability. However, the predicted positive correlation between variability and black hole mass seems to be inconsistent with the observed negative correlation between them in small bins of Eddington ratio, which suggests that other physical mechanisms may still need to be considered in modifying the simple accretion disk model.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors2 topics

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.