Paper detail

Type 2 Active Galactic Nuclei with Double-Peaked [OIII] Lines. II. Single AGNs with Complex Narrow-Line Region Kinematics are More Common than Binary AGNs

(Abridged) Approximately 1% of low redshift (z<0.3) optically-selected type 2 AGNs show a double-peaked [OIII] narrow emission line profile in their spatially-integrated spectra. Such features are usually interpreted as due either to kinematics, such as biconical outflows and/or disk rotation of the narrow line region (NLR) around single black holes, or to the relative motion of two distinct NLRs in a merging pair of AGNs. Here we report follow-up near infrared (NIR) imaging and optical slit spectroscopy of 31 double-peaked [OIII] type 2 AGNs drawn from the SDSS parent sample presented in Liu et al (2010). These data reveal a mixture of origins for the double-peaked feature. Roughly 10% of our objects are best explained by binary AGNs at (projected) kpc-scale separations, where two stellar components with spatially coincident NLRs are seen. ~ 50% of our objects have [OIII] emission offset by a few kpc, corresponding to the two velocity components seen in the SDSS spectra, but there are no corresponding double stellar components seen in the NIR imaging. For those objects with sufficiently high quality slit spectra, we see velocity and/or velocity dispersion gradients in [OIII] emission, suggestive of the kinematic signatures of a single NLR. The remaining ~40% of our objects are ambiguous, and will need higher spatial resolution observations to distinguish between the two scenarios. Our observations therefore favor the kinematics scenario with a single AGN for the majority of these double-peaked [OIII] type 2 AGNs. We emphasize the importance of combining imaging and slit spectroscopy in identifying kpc binary AGNs, i.e., in no cases does one of these alone allow an unambiguous identification. We estimate that ~ 0.5-2.5% of the z<0.3 type 2 AGNs are kpc-scale binary AGNs of comparable luminosities, with a relative orbital velocity >~150 km/s.

preprint2011arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 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.