4.7 Article

Understanding extreme quasar optical variability with CRTS - I. Major AGN flares

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 470, Issue 4, Pages 4112-4132

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stx1456

Keywords

methods: data analysis; techniques: photometric; surveys; quasars: general

Funding

  1. NSF [AST-1413600, AST-1518308]
  2. Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
  3. National Science Foundation
  4. U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science
  5. NASA
  6. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien
  7. Division Of Astronomical Sciences [1518308] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  8. Division Of Astronomical Sciences
  9. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien [1413600] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

There is a large degree of variety in the optical variability of quasars and it is unclear whether this is all attributable to a single (set of) physical mechanism(s). We present the results of a systematic search for major flares in active galactic nucleus (AGN) in the Catalina Real-time Transient Survey as part of a broader study into extreme quasar variability. Such flares are defined in a quantitative manner as being atop of the normal, stochastic variability of quasars. We have identified 51 events from over 900 000 known quasars and high-probability quasar candidates, typically lasting 900 d and with a median peak amplitude of Delta m = 1.25 mag. Characterizing the flare profile with a Weibull distribution, we find that nine of the sources are well described by a single-point single-lens model. This supports the proposal by Lawrence et al. that microlensing is a plausible physical mechanism for extreme variability. However, we attribute the majority of our events to explosive stellar-related activity in the accretion disc: superluminous supernovae, tidal disruption events and mergers of stellar mass black holes.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available