4.7 Article

AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH TO MEASURING REVERBERATION LAGS IN ACTIVE GALACTIC NUCLEI

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 735, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0004-637X/735/2/80

关键词

galaxies: active; galaxies: nuclei; galaxies: Seyfert; quasars: general

资金

  1. NSF [AST-0708082, AST-1009756, AST-1008882]
  2. OSU
  3. Division Of Astronomical Sciences
  4. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien [1009756, 1008882] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Motivated by recent progress in the statistical modeling of quasar variability, we develop a new approach to measuring emission-line reverberation lags to estimate the size of broad-line regions (BLRs) in active galactic nuclei. Assuming that all emission-line light curves are scaled, smoothed, and displaced versions of the continuum, this alternative approach fits the light curves directly using a damped random walk model and aligns them to recover the time lag and its statistical confidence limits. We introduce the mathematical formalism of this approach and demonstrate its ability to cope with some of the problems for traditional methods, such as irregular sampling, correlated errors, and seasonal gaps. We redetermine the lags for 87 emission lines in 31 quasars and reassess the BLR size-luminosity relationship using 60 H beta lags. We confirm the general results from the traditional cross-correlation methods, with a few exceptions. Our method, however, also supports a broad range of extensions. In particular, it can simultaneously fit multiple lines and continuum light curves which improves the lag estimate for the lines and provides estimates of the error correlations between them. Determining these correlations is of particular importance for interpreting emission-line velocity-delay maps. We can also include parameters for luminosity-dependent lags or line responses. We use this to detect the scaling of the BLR size with continuum luminosity in NGC 5548.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据