Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 263 references

This paper argues that efficient accretion, not heavy seeds, can explain the early supermassive black holes JWST sees, with selection effects producing their overmassive appearance.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-01 00:33 UTC pith:JT2JLBNX

load-bearing objection Solid simulation study; the selection-effects result is robust, but the 'any seed mass' claim depends on hand-set Bondi boosts that are transparently labeled optimistic. the 4 major comments →

arxiv 2607.26177 v1 pith:JT2JLBNX submitted 2026-07-28 astro-ph.GA astro-ph.HE

How to raise a supermassive black hole: interpreting early JWST AGN with the AESOPICA simulations

Sophie Koudmani , Jan Scholtz , Anthony J. Taylor , Ignas Juod\v{z}balis , Debora Sijacki , Rachel S. Somerville , Roberto Maiolino , Emma Curtis-Lake
show 6 more authors
Steven L. Finkelstein Martin A. Bourne Francesco D'Eugenio Sophia Geris Lucy R. Ivey Hannah \"Ubler
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.GA astro-ph.HE
keywords supermassive black hole formationcosmological simulationsblack hole seedingaccretion efficiencysuper-Eddington accretionJWST AGNscaling relationsblack hole mass function
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper tries to settle why JWST finds abundant, seemingly overmassive black holes in the early Universe. Its claim is that most of these objects can be grown from any plausible seed—stellar-remnant light seeds, intermediate cluster seeds, or heavy direct-collapse seeds—as long as accretion is efficient enough to allow brief super-Eddington bursts. It further claims that broad-line selection alone makes the detected population look overmassive relative to the stellar-mass relation, and that the same detected AGN fall on the local velocity-dispersion relation, indicating that black holes assemble before their host stars. If true, the JWST AGN do not require exclusively heavy seeding, and the remaining discriminators are the low-mass end of the black hole mass function and host gas metallicities.

Core claim

The central claim is that the bulk of the high-redshift AGN seen by JWST can be assembled from any seed mass in the 10^2 to 10^5 solar mass range, provided the accretion efficiency is high enough to permit brief super-Eddington episodes. With standard Bondi accretion, only intermediate and heavy seeds reach the observed overmassive locus by z~4, whereas under the most optimistic 'SE-BoostMax' configuration the imprint of the seed mass is erased as early as z~6. Applying a mock broad-line survey to the simulations naturally produces an apparently overmassive detected population that lies on the local black hole mass–stellar velocity dispersion relation, which the authors interpret as evidence

What carries the argument

The argument runs on the Bondi–Hoyle–Lyttleton accretion rate with a multiplicative boost factor alpha and a raised Eddington cap (ten times Eddington), with an 'SE-BoostMax' variant that sets alpha inversely proportional to seed mass so that light seeds start with the same initial Eddington ratio as heavy seeds. The other load-bearing piece is BALMERSOPICA, a mock JWST broad-line survey pipeline that turns simulated black hole masses and luminosities into Balmer-line fluxes and widths, passes them through an exposure calculator, and decides which AGN would be detected for a given grating and exposure time. The boost factor does the work of removing the steep M_BH^2 Bondi bottleneck for low-

Load-bearing premise

The 'any seed mass' result depends on the SE-BoostMax choice of extremely high boost factors for light seeds (alpha = 10^4–10^5), calibrated to give the same initial Eddington ratio as heavy seeds, together with pinning every black hole to its halo's potential minimum; if real galaxies cannot deliver gas to low-mass black holes that efficiently, or if seed wandering suppresses accretion, light seeds will not grow enough.

What would settle it

Measure the black hole mass function at z~4 below about 10^7 solar masses: the light-seed SE-BoostMax runs fall an order of magnitude below the heavy-seed models there, so observed number densities matching heavy-seed predictions would falsify the 'any seed' claim, while matching the light-seed efficient runs would support it. A second independent check: if a statistically large sample of overmassive AGN in hosts with gas metallicity below 0.01 solar is found, the paper's prediction that only heavy seeds produce such systems is falsified.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • If correct, the early seed mass is not the main determinant of the JWST overmassive AGN; efficient, super-Eddington-capable accretion can compensate for seeds as light as 10^2 solar masses.
  • The apparent overmassive population is largely a selection effect: broad-line detectability favours high-mass, high-luminosity AGN, so the detected sample sits above the intrinsic black hole–stellar mass relation, while for efficient accretion models it still traces the intrinsic normalisation.
  • Detected AGN lying on the local black hole–velocity dispersion relation support a 'black hole first' sequence: black holes lock onto the host potential before the stellar mass catches up.
  • The low-mass end of the black hole mass function at z~4–8 and host gas-phase metallicities are the most promising discriminants between seeding channels, with heavy seeds uniquely producing systems with M_BH/M_stellar > 0.1 in hosts below 0.01 solar metallicity.
  • Super-Eddington bursts also explain high-redshift quenched galaxies and dormant overmassive black holes as post-burst phases, with mini-quenching episodes lasting roughly 100–200 Myr.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A testable extension: if the inverse boost factors are a proxy for accretion in a resolved multiphase interstellar medium, then high-resolution zoom simulations of light seeds should show similarly rapid growth without artificial boosting.
  • If 'black hole first' is right, the overmassive offset in the black hole–stellar mass plane should shrink toward z~0 as stellar mass catches up while the black hole–velocity dispersion relation stays fixed; the paper already reports convergence by z~2, so the sharpest signatures should be at intermediate redshifts and low stellar masses.
  • The paper's failure to reproduce the most pristine overmassive AGN suggests that such systems may require either an unresolved dense-gas enrichment channel or non-standard seeding such as primordial black holes; growing the sample of low-metallicity AGN hosts would test this directly.
  • Because the models are degenerate by z~4, a mixed seeding universe would be consistent with current data; future surveys should look for a superposition of light-seed and heavy-seed signatures in the low-mass black hole mass function.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper introduces the AESOPICA suite, twelve FABLE-based cosmological simulations in a 60 Mpc box, varying black hole seed mass (10^2–10^5 Msun), Bondi boost factor, maximum Eddington ratio, and supernova feedback strength. The simulations are post-processed with BALMERSOPICA, a mock JWST broad-line survey pipeline that assigns H-alpha fluxes and FWHMs via local virial relations and applies exposure-time-dependent detectability criteria. The central claim is that the bulk of the JWST AGN population can be assembled from any seed mass provided accretion is efficient, that broad-line selection naturally produces the apparently overmassive population, and that the selected AGN lie on the local M_BH–sigma relation, supporting a 'black hole first' assembly sequence. The paper also identifies the low-mass end of the black hole mass function and gas-phase metallicities as discriminants between seeding channels.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the paper would meaningfully shift the interpretation of early JWST AGN from seed-mass-dominated to accretion-efficiency- and selection-dominated, with concrete predictions for future deep surveys, stacking analyses, and metallicity measurements. The systematic parameter study and the forward-modeling of broad-line selection are valuable contributions, and the public release of BALMERSOPICA is a strength. However, the headline 'any seed mass' result is conditional on strongly optimistic subgrid choices — most importantly the inverse-seed-mass Bondi boost factors and the forced repositioning of black holes to potential minima — and the mock selection relies on virial recipes that are untested at z>4. The selection-effect and M_BH–sigma results are more robust than the light-seed growth branch, but the paper's abstract and conclusions present the light-seed branch as a primary finding.

major comments (4)
  1. [§2.1.2, Eq. (1), Table 1] The 'any seed mass' claim is partly built in by construction. Since Mdot_Bondi ∝ M_BH^2 and f_Edd ∝ α M_BH, setting α=10^5 for M_seed=10^2 Msun and α=10^4 for M_seed=10^3 Msun forces α M_seed = 10^7, exactly matching the fiducial heavy-seed value. The text states these values were chosen 'to obtain the same initial Eddington ratio as for the fiducial model with the heavy seeds.' The light-seed growth is therefore not an emergent prediction but an enforced degeneracy. The paper labels the model 'optimistic' and cites physical motivation, but no independent calibration is provided, and Shin et al. (2025) is cited as showing that no simple multiplicative Bondi correction reproduces resolved accretion-disc physics. The central claim should either be reframed as conditional on this specific assumption or supported by a sensitivity test that varies α independently of seed mass.
  2. [§2.1.2, §4.3] The black holes are advected to the halo potential minimum, which the paper itself identifies as optimistic for light seeds, whose wandering may be physical and would suppress accretion in shallow potential wells. This assumption is load-bearing for the very-light-seed branch: it removes a second barrier to growth in exactly the regime where the boosted Bondi model is being stretched. The paper acknowledges this in Section 4.3 but does not quantify the effect or test an alternative. A quantitative estimate of the expected suppression (or a comparison with a run using a dynamical-friction/subgrid wandering prescription) is needed before 'any seed mass' can be stated as robust.
  3. [§2.3, §4.5] The mock selection pipeline assigns broad-line FWHMs and H-alpha fluxes from black hole mass and bolometric luminosity using local virial relations (Greene & Ho 2004; Reines et al. 2013) and a fixed bolometric correction of 130. These recipes are untested at z>4 and are particularly uncertain for super-Eddington sources, which the paper itself notes. Since the conclusion that selection recovers the overmassive population (Figs. 6 and 7) depends directly on this mapping, the paper should demonstrate robustness to plausible variations: e.g. scattering-broadened FWHMs, lower bolometric corrections, or alternative virial calibrations. The current text argues these choices are conservative, but the direction and magnitude of the systematic shift are not quantified for the selection function.
  4. [§3.6, Fig. 9] Even under the most optimistic SE-BoostMax model, the very-light-seed runs fall below the observed black hole mass function at the low-mass end, and the synthetic JADES-stack mass functions for light seeds fall below the Geris et al. constraints. The abstract's phrase 'the bulk of the JWST AGN population can be assembled from any seed mass' is therefore stronger than what the paper's own figures show. The conclusion should state explicitly which observables are matched (bright end, scaling relations) and which are not (low-mass BHMF) for each seed-mass branch, so that the 'any seed mass' claim is not overgeneralized.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract vs §2.1] The abstract gives L=60 Mpc while Section 2.1 states a comoving 40 h^-1 Mpc box. These are consistent for h≈0.677, but the manuscript should say so explicitly to avoid confusion.
  2. [§2.3] The phrase 'bolometric correction of 130' should be written as L_bol = 130 L_Hα, with the assumed uncertainty range stated. This would clarify the conversion used in BALMERSOPICA.
  3. [Table 1] The caption could note that the SE-BoostMax α values for light seeds enforce α M_seed = 10^7, matching the fiducial heavy-seed combination. This is currently only explained in the text.
  4. [Fig. 9] The four panels are described as 'first', 'second', 'third', and 'fourth' in the text and caption; labeling the panels (a)–(d) would make the comparison with the observational constraints easier to follow.
  5. [§3.5] The luminosity functions are described as 'bolometric' but it is not immediately clear whether the slim-disc radiative-efficiency correction described in §3.3.2 is applied in Fig. 8 as well as Fig. 5. The caption should state this explicitly.
  6. [§2.3] The FWHM cut of 750–10,000 km/s is described as following Taylor et al. and Juodžbalis et al., but the rationale for the lower limit (outflow confusion) could be stated in the main text rather than only in a footnote-level remark.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the 'any seed mass' claim is an explicitly conditional simulation outcome, not a fitted prediction.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is conditioned in the abstract on 'provided the accretion efficiency is high,' and Section 2.1.2 makes the corresponding parameter choice explicit: f_Edd is proportional to alpha * M_BH, with alpha set to 10^5 (10^4) for 10^2 (10^3) Msun seeds 'to obtain the same initial Eddington ratio as for the fiducial model with the heavy seeds.' This is a transparent model assumption labeled 'SE-BoostMax' and 'optimistic,' not a parameter fitted to reproduce the JWST abundance. The subsequent comparisons — light seeds failing under fiducial and SE-Boost models, successful assembly under SE-BoostMax, bolometric luminosity functions, black hole mass functions, and the M_BH-sigma relation — are forward simulation outputs checked against external JADES/CEERS/data; the alpha choice does not itself determine whether feedback regulation, selection, and the host potential produce the observed overmassive locus. The paper also flags additional optimistic choices (advection to the potential minimum; Section 4.3) and the unresolved-multiphase-ISM caveat (Section 4.1; Shin et al. 2025), which are robustness/correctness concerns rather than circularity. No load-bearing self-citation chain or renaming of known results is present; self-citations to Koudmani et al. (2021, 2022, 2024) are background methodology and are not the load-bearing justification for the main results.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

6 free parameters · 8 axioms · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are introduced. The headline result is largely determined by hand-chosen boost factors for light seeds; the paper is transparent about this, but the parameter space is wide and optimistic, so the ledger is heavy on free parameters and domain assumptions.

free parameters (6)
  • Black hole seed mass M_seed = 10^2, 10^3, 10^4, 10^5 M_sun
    Chosen by hand to represent Pop III, star-cluster, and direct-collapse channels; a single fixed seed mass per run (Section 2.1.2, Table 1).
  • Bondi boost factor α = 100 (Fiducial), 10^3 (SE-Boost), up to 10^5 for 10^2 M_sun seeds (SE-BoostMax)
    Ad hoc multiplier for unresolved ISM; for light seeds set inversely proportional to seed mass to force the same initial Eddington ratio as heavy seeds (Section 2.1.2).
  • Maximum Eddington ratio f_Edd,max = 1 or 10
    Chosen; the super-Eddington value is motivated by observational hints but is a free model choice (Section 2.1.2).
  • Supernova wind energy factor ε_W,SN = 1.5 (FABLE standard) or 0.5 (reduced)
    Varies stellar feedback strength; reduced value is used to enhance early black hole growth (Section 2.1.1, Table 1).
  • Radiative efficiency ε_r and black hole spin a = ε_r=0.1; slim-disc correction with a=0.7
    Standard assumption; the spin value is chosen following the literature and affects super-Eddington luminosities by up to 0.5 dex (Section 3.3.2).
  • Bolometric correction for Hα = 130
    Used in BALMERSOPICA to convert bolometric luminosity to broad-line flux; a fixed literature value with known uncertainty (Section 2.3).
axioms (8)
  • domain assumption Bondi-Hoyle-Lyttleton accretion with a boost factor (Eq. 1) determines black hole growth.
    Central growth recipe; assumes spherical, unresolved gas and uses α to compensate for missing multiphase structure (Section 2.1.2).
  • domain assumption Black holes are seeded into every halo above 2e9 h^-1 M_sun with no environmental criteria.
    Optimistic for heavy seeds; the authors note direct collapse requires restrictive conditions and would be rarer (Section 2.1.2, Section 4.2).
  • domain assumption Black holes are advected to the halo potential minimum.
    Prevents numerical wandering, but physical wandering of light seeds is likely and would suppress accretion (Section 2.1.2, Section 4.3).
  • domain assumption A single fixed seed mass per run, no mixed seeding.
    Real seed mass spectrum is likely continuous; authors acknowledge this and defer mixed-seeding to future work (Section 4.2).
  • domain assumption FABLE/Illustris subgrid physics (cooling, star formation, kinetic/thermal feedback) remains valid at z>4.
    Inherited without recalibration for the early Universe; authors discuss resolution and multiphase ISM limitations (Section 2.1, Section 4.1).
  • domain assumption Virial black hole mass estimators and fixed bolometric corrections apply at high redshift.
    BALMERSOPICA maps M_BH and L_bol to Hα flux and FWHM via Greene & Ho / Reines relations; authors flag the debate but call the choice conservative (Section 2.3, Section 4.5).
  • ad hoc to paper Broad-line detectability requires S/N>3, FWHM 750–10,000 km/s, and recovered flux/FWHM within a factor of two.
    Reasonable mimic of JWST selection but an upper-limit approach; excludes narrow-component disentangling, obscuration, and Type-2 AGN (Section 2.3).
  • domain assumption Slim-disc radiative correction (Madau+2014) with spin a=0.7 is applied to super-Eddington luminosities.
    Affects the luminosity–mass plane by up to 0.5 dex; spin is not measured (Section 3.3.2).

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 50009 in / 13308 out tokens · 129971 ms · 2026-08-01T00:33:43.923909+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

The active black holes uncovered by JWST in the early Universe are highly abundant and seemingly overmassive with respect to local scaling relations, challenging standard models of black hole formation and growth. Yet it remains unclear whether they trace an efficient early growth channel, the observable tail of a broader population, or suffer from systematic uncertainties in mass estimates. We introduce the AESOPICA project, a suite of twelve mid-volume ($L = 60\,\mathrm{Mpc}$) cosmological simulations based on the FABLE galaxy formation model, varying the black hole seed mass across the theoretical formation channels ($M_\mathrm{seed} = 10^{2}$-$10^{5} \, \mathrm{M_{\odot}}$), the accretion efficiency, including super-Eddington bursts, and the supernova feedback strength. We forward-model observational selection with BALMERSOPICA, a mock JWST broad-line survey pipeline that assesses the detectability of each simulated AGN for a given grating and exposure time. We find that the bulk of the JWST AGN population can be assembled from any seed mass provided the accretion efficiency is high, although light seeds require the most favourable accretion conditions explored. Applying broad-line selection naturally recovers the apparently overmassive population, with the detected AGN lying furthest above the intrinsic $M_\mathrm{BH}$-$M_\mathrm{stellar}$ relation for inefficient accretion models. Notably, the selected AGN lie on the local, weakly evolving $M_\mathrm{BH}$-$\sigma_\mathrm{stellar}$ relation, supporting a scenario where black holes assemble before the stellar component is fully established. Since efficient accretion rapidly erases the imprint of the initial seed mass, the low-mass end of the black hole mass function and host gas-phase metallicities offer the most promising discriminants between seeding channels.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.26177 by Anthony J. Taylor, Debora Sijacki, Emma Curtis-Lake, Francesco D'Eugenio, Hannah \"Ubler, Ignas Juod\v{z}balis, Jan Scholtz, Lucy R. Ivey, Martin A. Bourne, Rachel S. Somerville, Roberto Maiolino, Sophia Geris, Sophie Koudmani, Steven L. Finkelstein.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Gas and stellar projection of the whole aesopica simulation box at very high redshift (7 < 𝑧 < 11) and at 𝑧 = 6 and 𝑧 = 4. The markers show the locations of black holes detectable by CEERS (red circles), JADES (medium tier, purple squares) and a hypothetical future survey with a finer grating and deeper exposure (blue triangles), based on the broad line selection criteria for JWST outlined in Section 2.3. … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Redshift evolution of the first infant massive black hole hosted by the most massive halo in the aesopica simulations. The four rows represent the four different seed masses we explore (𝑀seed = 105 M⊙, 104 M⊙, 103 M⊙, 102 M⊙). The line-shading indicates the different accretion models, with light shading representing the fiducial accretion parametrization, whilst medium shading and dark shading correspond t… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Redshift evolution of the stellar mass and gas mass (first column), the star formation rate (second column) and the specific star formation rate (third column) of the most massive halo in the aesopica simulations. The line-shading indicates the different accretion models, with light shading representing the fiducial accretion parametrization, medium shading corresponds to the ‘SE-Boost’ accretion model and… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Black hole – stellar mass scaling relations in aesopica. We show the distributions and mean relations for all four black hole seed masses (see legend) and two accretion prescriptions: the fiducial model (top row) and ‘SE-BoostMax’ accretion model (bottom row). Columns correspond to three redshifts (𝑧 = 6, 4, 0). Observational constraints are overplotted, including high-redshift measurements from Harikane e… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Black hole luminosity versus black hole mass in the aesopica simulations at redshifts 𝑧 = 6 and 𝑧 = 4. We plot these relations for our fiducial (top row) and ‘SE-BoostMax’ accretion prescriptions (bottom row). Observational constraints are overplotted, including high-redshift AGN observations (Harikane et al. 2023; Juodžbalis et al. 2024, 2026; D’Eugenio et al. 2026b) and the JADES AGN stack (Geris et al. … view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Black hole mass – stellar mass scaling relations from the aesopica simulations for the fiducial (top row) and ‘SE-BoostMax’ accretion models (bottom row). Left and right panels show results at 𝑧 = 6 and 𝑧 = 4, respectively. The columns separate light seeds (102 and 103 M⊙, left) from heavy seeds (104 and 105 M⊙, right). We only include simulated active black holes that meet broad-line AGN selection criteri… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Black hole mass – stellar velocity dispersion scaling relations from the aesopica simulations for the fiducial (top row) and ‘SE-BoostMax’ accretion models (bottom row). Left and right panels show results at 𝑧 = 6 and 𝑧 = 4, respectively. The columns separate light seeds (102 and 103 M⊙, left) from heavy seeds (104 and 105 M⊙, right). We only include simulated active black holes that meet broad-line AGN se… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Bolometric AGN luminosity functions from the aesopica simulations at 𝑧 = 5 (left) and 𝑧 = 6 (right). Simulated luminosity functions are shown for all seed masses and three different accretion prescriptions. Line shading denotes the accretion model, with light shading corresponding to the fiducial model, medium shading to boosted accretion with episodic super-Eddington bursts (‘SE-Boost’), whilst the dark s… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Black hole mass functions from the aesopica simulations and JWST surveys at 𝑧 = 4. Simulated black hole mass functions are shown for all seed masses and three different accretion prescriptions. Line shading denotes the accretion model, with light shading corresponding to the fiducial model, medium shading to ‘SE-Boost’, whilst the dark shading represents the ‘SE-BoostMax’ model. The symbols show the differ… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Black hole mass functions from the aesopica simulations at 𝑧 = 8 (first column), 𝑧 = 7 (second column) and 𝑧 = 6 (third column). The top row shows the ‘raw’ black hole mass function and the bottom row shows the black hole mass function that would be observed by a notional DEEP survey with the R2700 grating and 30 hr exposure time. Simulated black hole mass functions are shown for all seed masses and three… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Gas-phase metallicity as a function of black hole mass (left col￾umn) and black hole-to-stellar mass ratio (right column), for our simulation runs with fiducial (top row) and ‘SE-BoostMax’ (bottom row) accretion at 𝑧 = 7. Each panel shows all four seed masses, colour-coded as indicated in the legend. For each run, the population is binned into a 2D histogram on a fixed grid, with the bulk of the distribut… view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

263 extracted references · 7 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Beckmann, R. S. and Dubois, Y. and Volonteri, M. and Dong-Páez, C. A. and Trebitsch, M. and Devriendt, J. and Kaviraj, S. and Kimm, T. and Peirani, S. , month = aug, year =. Population statistics of intermediate-mass black holes in dwarf galaxies using the. MNRAS , publisher =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1544 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1544

  2. [2]

    arXiv e-prints , author =

    A calibrated model for. arXiv e-prints , author =. 2024 , note =. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2405.08870 , abstract =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2405.08870 2024

  3. [3]

    Rennehan, Douglas and Babul, Arif and Moa, Belaid and Davé, Romeel , month = aug, year =. The. MNRAS , publisher =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1785 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1785

  4. [4]

    and Sijacki, Debora and Bourne, Martin A

    Koudmani, Sophie and Somerville, Rachel S. and Sijacki, Debora and Bourne, Martin A. and Jiang, Yan-Fei and Profit, Kasar , month = jul, year =. A unified accretion disc model for supermassive black holes in galaxy formation simulations: method and implementation , volume =. MNRAS , publisher =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1422 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1422

  5. [5]

    and Brooks, Alyson M

    Sharma, Ray S. and Brooks, Alyson M. and Tremmel, Michael and Bellovary, Jillian and Ricarte, Angelo and Quinn, Thomas R. , month = sep, year =. A. ApJ , publisher =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac8664 , abstract =

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac8664

  6. [6]

    MNRAS , author =

    Introducing the. MNRAS , author =. 2014 , pages =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1536 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1536 2014

  7. [7]

    and Farcy, Marion and Dubois, Yohan and Belokurov, Vasily and Rosdahl, Joakim and Lopez-Rodriguez, Enrique , month = nov, year =

    Martin-Alvarez, Sergio and Sijacki, Debora and Haehnelt, Martin G. and Farcy, Marion and Dubois, Yohan and Belokurov, Vasily and Rosdahl, Joakim and Lopez-Rodriguez, Enrique , month = nov, year =. The. MNRAS , publisher =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stad2559 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stad2559

  8. [8]

    Resolving flows around black holes: the impact of gas angular momentum , volume =

    Curtis, Michael and Sijacki, Debora , month = nov, year =. Resolving flows around black holes: the impact of gas angular momentum , volume =. MNRAS , publisher =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stw1944 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stw1944

  9. [9]

    Übler, Hannah and Maiolino, Roberto and Pérez-González, Pablo G. and D'Eugenio, Francesco and Perna, Michele and Curti, Mirko and Arribas, Santiago and Bunker, Andrew and Carniani, Stefano and Charlot, Stéphane and Rodríguez Del Pino, Bruno and Baker, William and Böker, Torsten and Cresci, Giovanni and Dunlop, James and Grogin, Norman A. and Jones, Gareth...

  10. [10]

    and Sijacki, Debora and Bourne, Martin A

    Talbot, Rosie Y. and Sijacki, Debora and Bourne, Martin A. , month = mar, year =. Simulations of spin-driven. MNRAS , publisher =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stae392 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stae392

  11. [11]

    Nature , author =

    A small and vigorous black hole in the early. Nature , author =. 2024 , note =. doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07052-5 , abstract =

    doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07052-5 2024

  12. [12]

    2024 , note =

    OJAp , author =. 2024 , note =. doi:10.21105/astro.2309.13115 , abstract =

    arXiv 2024

  13. [13]

    and Narayan, Ramesh and Natarajan, Priyamvada and Su, Kung-Yi and Ricarte, Angelo and Chatterjee, Koushik , month = dec, year =

    Cho, Hyerin and Prather, Ben S. and Narayan, Ramesh and Natarajan, Priyamvada and Su, Kung-Yi and Ricarte, Angelo and Chatterjee, Koushik , month = dec, year =. Bridging. ApJ , publisher =. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad1048 , abstract =

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad1048 2041

  14. [14]

    arXiv e-prints , author =

    A dormant, overmassive black hole in the early. arXiv e-prints , author =. 2024 , note =. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2403.03872 , abstract =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2403.03872 2024

  15. [15]

    and Sijacki, Debora and Costa, Tiago and Laporte, Nicolas and Witten, Callum , month = jan, year =

    Bennett, Jake S. and Sijacki, Debora and Costa, Tiago and Laporte, Nicolas and Witten, Callum , month = jan, year =. The growth of the gargantuan black holes powering high-redshift quasars and their impact on the formation of early galaxies and protoclusters , volume =. MNRAS , publisher =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3179 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3179

  16. [16]

    and Quataert, Eliot and Anglés-Alcázar, Daniel and Feldmann, Robert and Hayward, Christopher C

    Wellons, Sarah and Faucher-Giguère, Claude-André and Hopkins, Philip F. and Quataert, Eliot and Anglés-Alcázar, Daniel and Feldmann, Robert and Hayward, Christopher C. and Kereš, Dušan and Su, Kung-Yi and Wetzel, Andrew , month = apr, year =. Exploring supermassive black hole physics and galaxy quenching across halo mass in. MNRAS , publisher =. doi:10.10...

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stad511

  17. [17]

    ApJ , author =

    Bondi. ApJ , author =. 2005 , note =. doi:10.1086/426051 , abstract =

    doi:10.1086/426051 2005

  18. [18]

    MNRAS , author =

    Winds versus jets: a comparison between black hole feedback modes in simulations of idealized galaxy groups and clusters , volume =. MNRAS , author =. 2024 , note =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3548 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3548 2024

  19. [19]

    2023 , note =

    A&A , author =. 2023 , note =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346137 , abstract =

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346137 2023

  20. [20]

    MNRAS , author =

    Spin-driven jet feedback in idealized simulations of galaxy groups and clusters , volume =. MNRAS , author =. 2022 , note =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2278 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2278 2022

  21. [21]

    ApJ , author =

    A. ApJ , author =. 2023 , note =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad029e , abstract =

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad029e 2023

  22. [22]

    ARA&A , author =

    Intermediate-. ARA&A , author =. 2020 , pages =. doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-032620-021835 , abstract =

    doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-032620-021835 2020

  23. [23]

    MNRAS , author =

    Simulating galaxy formation with the. MNRAS , author =. 2018 , note =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2656 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2656 2018

  24. [24]

    Nature , author =

    Properties of galaxies reproduced by a hydrodynamic simulation , volume =. Nature , author =. 2014 , note =. doi:10.1038/nature13316 , abstract =

    doi:10.1038/nature13316 2014

  25. [25]

    MNRAS , author =

    The. MNRAS , author =. 2015 , note =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stu2058 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stu2058 2015

  26. [26]

    MNRAS , author =

    On spherically symmetrical accretion , volume =. MNRAS , author =. 1952 , note =. doi:10.1093/mnras/112.2.195 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/112.2.195 1952

  27. [28]

    MNRAS , author =

    The. MNRAS , author =. 2018 , pages =. doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1780 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1780 2018

  28. [29]

    ARA&A , author =

    The. ARA&A , author =. 2020 , note =. doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-120419-014455 , abstract =

    doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-120419-014455 2020

  29. [31]

    MNRAS , author =

    A model for cosmological simulations of galaxy formation physics , volume =. MNRAS , author =. 2013 , pages =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stt1789 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stt1789 2013

  30. [32]

    MNRAS , author =

    Modelling feedback from stars and black holes in galaxy mergers , volume =. MNRAS , author =. 2005 , note =. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09238.x , abstract =

    arXiv 2005

  31. [34]

    MNRAS , author =

    On the. MNRAS , author =. 1944 , pages =. doi:10.1093/mnras/104.5.273 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/104.5.273 1944

  32. [35]

    MNRAS , author =

    The. MNRAS , author =. 2015 , pages =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1340 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1340 2015

  33. [36]

    MNRAS , author =

    Fast and energetic. MNRAS , author =. 2019 , keywords =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stz097 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stz097 2019

  34. [37]

    MNRAS , author =

    A little. MNRAS , author =. 2021 , keywords =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stab677 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stab677 2021

  35. [38]

    2009 , pages =

    ApJ , author =. 2009 , pages =. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/707/2/L184 , abstract =

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/707/2/l184 2009

  36. [39]

    The effect of interstellar matter on climatic variation , volume =. Math. Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. , author =. 1939 , pages =. doi:10.1017/S0305004100021150 , abstract =

    doi:10.1017/s0305004100021150 1939

  37. [40]

    2015 , pages =

    ApJ , author =. 2015 , pages =. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/813/2/82 , abstract =

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/813/2/82 2015

  38. [41]

    2016 , pages =

    A&A , author =. 2016 , pages =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201525830 , language =

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201525830 2016

  39. [42]

    ApJ , author =

    Cosmological. ApJ , author =. 2021 , note =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac09e8 , abstract =

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac09e8 2021

  40. [43]

    A&A , author =

    How the super-. A&A , author =. 2023 , note =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244874 , abstract =

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244874 2023

  41. [44]

    MNRAS , author =

    The accretion disc particle method for simulations of black hole feeding and feedback , volume =. MNRAS , author =. 2011 , note =. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17901.x , abstract =

    arXiv 2011

  42. [45]

    ApJ , author =

    Toward. ApJ , author =. 2023 , note =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acb81e , abstract =

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acb81e 2023

  43. [46]

    MNRAS , author =

    Spin evolution and feedback of supermassive black holes in cosmological simulations , volume =. MNRAS , author =. 2019 , note =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2836 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2836 2019

  44. [47]

    MNRAS , author =

    Black hole evolution -. MNRAS , author =. 2014 , note =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stu425 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stu425 2014

  45. [48]

    MNRAS , author =

    The impact of angular momentum on black hole accretion rates in simulations of galaxy formation , volume =. MNRAS , author =. 2015 , note =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2056 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2056 2015

  46. [49]

    A&A , author =

    Dense gas formation and destruction in a simulated. A&A , author =. 2019 , note =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936188 , abstract =

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936188 2019

  47. [51]

    MNRAS , author =

    Two can play at that game: constraining the role of supernova and. MNRAS , author =. 2022 , note =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2252 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2252 2022

  48. [52]

    MNRAS , author =

    The resolution bias: low-resolution feedback simulations are better at destroying galaxies , volume =. MNRAS , author =. 2015 , note =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1730 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1730 2015

  49. [53]

    MNRAS , author =

    Gravitational torque-driven black hole growth and feedback in cosmological simulations , volume =. MNRAS , author =. 2017 , note =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2565 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2565 2017

  50. [54]

    MNRAS , author =

    An analytic model of angular momentum transport by gravitational torques: from galaxies to massive black holes , volume =. MNRAS , author =. 2011 , note =. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18542.x , abstract =

    arXiv 2011

  51. [55]

    MNRAS , author =

    Seeds don't sink: even massive black hole 'seeds' cannot migrate to galaxy centres efficiently , volume =. MNRAS , author =. 2021 , note =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2713 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2713 2021

  52. [56]

    MNRAS , author =

    The erratic dynamical life of black hole seeds in high-redshift galaxies , volume =. MNRAS , author =. 2019 , note =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stz822 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stz822 2019

  53. [57]

    MNRAS , author =

    Cosmological smoothed particle hydrodynamics simulations: a hybrid multiphase model for star formation , volume =. MNRAS , author =. 2003 , note =. doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06206.x , abstract =

    arXiv 2003

  54. [58]

    MNRAS , author =

    Resolving flows around black holes: numerical technique and applications , volume =. MNRAS , author =. 2015 , note =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2246 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2246 2015

  55. [59]

    MNRAS , author =

    Galactic nuclei evolution with spinning black holes: method and implementation , volume =. MNRAS , author =. 2018 , note =. doi:10.1093/mnras/sty893 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/sty893 2018

  56. [60]

    MNRAS , author =

    Dancing in the dark: galactic properties trace spin swings along the cosmic web , volume =. MNRAS , author =. 2014 , note =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1227 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1227 2014

  57. [61]

    MNRAS , author =

    Black hole mergers from dwarf to massive galaxies with the. MNRAS , author =. 2020 , note =. doi:10.1093/mnras/staa2384 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/staa2384 2020

  58. [62]

    MNRAS , author =

    The origins of off-centre massive black holes in dwarf galaxies , volume =. MNRAS , author =. 2021 , note =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1665 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1665 2021

  59. [63]

    ApJ , author =

    Dwarf. ApJ , author =. 2013 , note =. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/775/2/116 , abstract =

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/775/2/116 2013

  60. [64]

    ApJ , author =

    Active. ApJ , author =. 2004 , note =. doi:10.1086/421719 , abstract =

    doi:10.1086/421719 2004

  61. [65]

    ApJ , author =

    A. ApJ , author =. 2007 , note =. doi:10.1086/522082 , abstract =

    doi:10.1086/522082 2007

  62. [66]

    MNRAS , author =

    The bolometric quasar luminosity function at z = 0-7 , volume =. MNRAS , author =. 2020 , note =. doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1381 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1381 2020

  63. [67]

    ApJ , author =

    Exploring the. ApJ , author =. 2011 , note =. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/739/1/28 , abstract =

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/739/1/28 2011

  64. [68]

    ARA&A , author =

    Coevolution (. ARA&A , author =. 2013 , pages =. doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-082708-101811 , abstract =

    doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-082708-101811 2013

  65. [69]

    2018 , note =

    MNRAS , author =. 2018 , note =. doi:10.1093/mnras/sty655 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/sty655 2018

  66. [70]

    MNRAS , author =

    The redshift evolution of. MNRAS , author =. 2019 , note =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2301 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2301 2019

  67. [71]

    MNRAS , author =

    The baryon content of groups and clusters of galaxies in the. MNRAS , author =. 2020 , note =. doi:10.1093/mnras/staa2235 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/staa2235 2020

  68. [72]

    ApJS , author =

    Cosmological. ApJS , author =. 1996 , note =. doi:10.1086/192305 , abstract =

    doi:10.1086/192305 1996

  69. [73]

    MNRAS , author =

    The effect of photoionization on the cooling rates of enriched, astrophysical plasmas , volume =. MNRAS , author =. 2009 , note =. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14191.x , abstract =

    arXiv 2009

  70. [75]

    arXiv e-prints , author =

    Signatures of. arXiv e-prints , author =. 2025 , note =. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2506.17476 , abstract =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.17476 2025

  71. [76]

    MNRAS , author =

    Chaotic cold accretion on to black holes , volume =. MNRAS , author =. 2013 , note =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stt692 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stt692 2013

  72. [77]

    MNRAS , author =

    The formation of disc galaxies in high-resolution moving-mesh cosmological simulations , volume =. MNRAS , author =. 2014 , note =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stt2003 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stt2003 2014

  73. [78]

    MNRAS , author =

    A unified model for. MNRAS , author =. 2007 , note =. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12153.x , abstract =

    arXiv 2007

  74. [79]

    and Charlot, Stéphane and Chevallard, Jacopo and Eisenstein, Daniel J

    Maiolino, Roberto and Scholtz, Jan and Curtis-Lake, Emma and Carniani, Stefano and Baker, William and de Graaff, Anna and Tacchella, Sandro and Übler, Hannah and D'Eugenio, Francesco and Witstok, Joris and Curti, Mirko and Arribas, Santiago and Bunker, Andrew J. and Charlot, Stéphane and Chevallard, Jacopo and Eisenstein, Daniel J. and Egami, Eiichi and J...

  75. [80]

    Nature , author =

    Energy input from quasars regulates the growth and activity of black holes and their host galaxies , volume =. Nature , author =. 2005 , note =. doi:10.1038/nature03335 , abstract =

    doi:10.1038/nature03335 2005

  76. [81]

    ApJ , author =

    Feedback from. ApJ , author =. 2010 , note =. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/717/2/708 , abstract =

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/717/2/708 2010

  77. [82]

    MNRAS , author =

    An instability of feedback-regulated star formation in galactic nuclei , volume =. MNRAS , author =. 2017 , note =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stx254 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stx254 2017

  78. [83]

    MNRAS , author =

    Quenching star formation with quasar outflows launched by trapped. MNRAS , author =. 2018 , note =. doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1514 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1514 2018

  79. [84]

    ARA&A , author =

    Heating. ARA&A , author =. 2007 , note =. doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.45.051806.110625 , abstract =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  80. [85]

    ARA&A , author =

    Observational. ARA&A , author =. 2012 , note =. doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125521 , abstract =

    doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125521 2012

Showing first 80 references.