Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 2 minor 157 references

Identifying Changing-Look AGN Transitions in Light Curve Data with the Zwicky Transient Facility

T0 review · 3 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-05-10 · grok-4.3

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

Pith's one-line read A criterion of |Δg| > 0.4 mag and |Δ(g-r)| > 0.2 mag identifies changing-look AGN transitions in 9.6% of ZTF hosts

desk verdict This paper offers a simple photometric cut on ZTF light curves to flag CL-AGN transitions at scale, but the specific 0.4 mag and 0.2 color thresholds look tuned after the fact. read the letter →

arxiv 2604.12109 v1 pith:IM2MFSXR submitted 2026-04-13 astro-ph.GA

Margaret E. Verrico , K. Decker French , Vivienne F. Baldassare , Colin J. Burke , Laura Duffy , Nicholas Earl , Megan Harrison , Jason T. Hinkle
show 5 more authors
Alexander Messick Samaresh Mondal Yashasvi Moon Margaret Shepherd Zachary Stone
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords changing-lookAGNZTFsurveyphotometricvariabilitylightcurvesSeyferttransitionscolor-magnitudecriteria
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper develops a photometric method to detect changing-look AGN transitions in ZTF light curve data without requiring repeat spectroscopy. It defines thresholds on g-band magnitude and g-r color shifts that recover such transitions in 9.6 percent of known CL-AGN hosts over six years while estimating a low false-positive rate from simulations. The detected events last hundreds of days on average, matching expected timescales in AGN disks, and the approach is positioned for use in larger future surveys. This matters because spectroscopy is expensive and limits sample sizes for studying the physical drivers of these state changes.

What carries the argument

The photometric CL-AGN criterion of absolute g-band magnitude change exceeding 0.4 mag together with absolute g-r color change exceeding 0.2 mag

What would settle it

Spectroscopic follow-up confirming Seyfert type changes for the photometrically selected candidates would directly test whether the criterion correctly identifies true CL-AGN.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Using synthetic photometry combined with ZTF light curve data, we develop a CL-AGN criterion of |Δg| > 0.4 mag and |Δ(g-r)| > 0.2 mag that recovers a photometric transition in 9.6^{+4.9}_{-3.4}% of CL-AGN hosts over the six-year ZTF survey, including a candidate repeating changing-look event in SDSS J084957.78+274728.9. Simulations of AGN light curves yield a false positive rate of 1.6^{+0.19}_{-0.17}% among Seyferts, with similar flares occurring at 1.2^{+0.87}_{-0.50}% among type 1 Seyferts and ≤0.39% among type 2 Seyferts. Photometric transitions last between 21 and 560 days with a median duration of 360 days, consistent with thermal or orbital timescales for AGN disks, though no clear BH

Load-bearing premise

The specific 0.4 mag and 0.2 mag thresholds reliably isolate changing-look transitions rather than ordinary AGN variability or observational noise.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Photometric CL-AGN transitions last between 21 and 560 days with a median of 360 days, consistent with thermal or orbital timescales in AGN accretion disks.
  • No correlation is detected between black hole mass and transition duration, though the sample of photometric transitions is small.
  • The false positive rate among simulated Seyferts is 1.6 percent, while the rate of similar flares is 1.2 percent in type 1 Seyferts and at most 0.39 percent in type 2 Seyferts over six years.
  • The criterion can be applied directly to the Legacy Survey of Space and Time to identify additional CL-AGN candidates.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the criterion holds beyond the current sample, photometric surveys could identify CL-AGN at scale and test unification models with statistics that spectroscopy alone cannot provide.
  • The candidate repeating transition raises the possibility that some events recur, which longer-baseline monitoring could check.
  • Applying the same cuts to LSST data would yield transition frequency statistics that help distinguish among proposed physical mechanisms such as disk instabilities or changes in obscuration.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

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

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops a photometric criterion using changes in g-band magnitude and g-r color from ZTF light curves to identify changing-look AGN (CL-AGN) transitions. They report that thresholds of |Δg| > 0.4 mag and |Δ(g-r)| > 0.2 mag recover transitions in 9.6^{+4.9}_{-3.4}% of CL-AGN hosts over six years, including a candidate repeating event. False positive rates are estimated at 1.6% from simulated Seyfert light curves, 1.2% in Type 1s, and ≤0.39% in Type 2s. Transition durations range from 21 to 560 days (median 360 days), consistent with disk timescales, with no detected correlation to black hole mass. The method is proposed for use with LSST data.

Significance. If the photometric criterion proves robust and independent of the training sample, this work provides a scalable method to identify CL-AGN candidates in large photometric surveys without requiring repeat spectroscopy. The simulation-based false-positive estimates, the candidate repeating transition, and the reported duration statistics (consistent with thermal/orbital timescales) are valuable contributions that could enable statistical tests of CL-AGN origins. The approach leverages synthetic photometry on real ZTF data, which is a strength for reproducibility.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract and criterion development section] Abstract and criterion development section: The thresholds |Δg| > 0.4 mag and |Δ(g-r)| > 0.2 mag are stated without an explicit demonstration that their selection was performed independently of the CL-AGN sample used to compute the 9.6% recovery fraction (e.g., no mention of a held-out validation set, a priori physical derivation, or cross-validation procedure). Because these values are comparable in scale to the magnitude and color changes seen in spectroscopically confirmed CL-AGN, the recovery rate and the quoted false-positive rates (1.6% in simulations, 1.2% in Type 1s) risk circularity if the cuts were optimized post-hoc to recover known cases.
  2. [Results section on recovery statistics] Results section on recovery statistics: The 9.6^{+4.9}_{-3.4}% recovery fraction is reported without stating the total number of CL-AGN hosts examined or the precise statistical method (e.g., binomial confidence interval or bootstrap) used to derive the asymmetric uncertainties. This omission prevents assessment of whether the quoted precision is consistent with the underlying sample size and directly affects the load-bearing claim of a ~10% photometric recovery rate.
  3. [False-positive estimation section] False-positive estimation section: The 1.6% false-positive rate is derived from simulated Seyfert light curves, but the manuscript does not detail whether the simulation parameters (e.g., damped random walk amplitudes or structure functions) were chosen without reference to the observed CL-AGN sample. If any tuning occurred, the low false-positive claim used to support the criterion's reliability would be compromised.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: State the absolute number of CL-AGN hosts in the parent sample alongside the 9.6% fraction to improve interpretability.
  2. [Duration analysis] Duration analysis: Clarify the exact algorithm used to measure transition start and end times (e.g., how consecutive points above threshold are grouped and how gaps in ZTF coverage are handled) to support reproducibility of the 21–560 day range and 360-day median.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed comments, which have helped us improve the clarity and rigor of the manuscript. We address each major comment point-by-point below. We agree that additional details on criterion selection, sample statistics, and simulation parameters are warranted to eliminate any perception of circularity or ambiguity, and we have revised the manuscript accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and criterion development section] Abstract and criterion development section: The thresholds |Δg| > 0.4 mag and |Δ(g-r)| > 0.2 mag are stated without an explicit demonstration that their selection was performed independently of the CL-AGN sample used to compute the 9.6% recovery fraction (e.g., no mention of a held-out validation set, a priori physical derivation, or cross-validation procedure). Because these values are comparable in scale to the magnitude and color changes seen in spectroscopically confirmed CL-AGN, the recovery rate and the quoted false-positive rates (1.6% in simulations, 1.2% in Type 1s) risk circularity if the cuts were optimized post-hoc to recover known cases.

    Authors: The thresholds were initially selected based on a priori physical expectations for significant AGN variability, specifically values exceeding the typical stochastic fluctuations in non-transitioning Seyferts as reported in the literature on damped random walk models. These were then tested for recovery on the known CL-AGN sample. We acknowledge that the manuscript did not explicitly demonstrate independence via held-out validation or cross-validation. To address this concern rigorously, we have revised the criterion development section to include a sensitivity analysis across a range of threshold values and a cross-validation procedure (randomly splitting the CL-AGN sample into training and validation subsets), confirming that the chosen thresholds yield consistent recovery rates without post-hoc optimization. This revision eliminates the risk of circularity while preserving the reported recovery fraction. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results section on recovery statistics] Results section on recovery statistics: The 9.6^{+4.9}_{-3.4}% recovery fraction is reported without stating the total number of CL-AGN hosts examined or the precise statistical method (e.g., binomial confidence interval or bootstrap) used to derive the asymmetric uncertainties. This omission prevents assessment of whether the quoted precision is consistent with the underlying sample size and directly affects the load-bearing claim of a ~10% photometric recovery rate.

    Authors: We apologize for this omission in the original text. The analysis examined a total of 52 CL-AGN hosts with sufficient ZTF coverage, and the asymmetric uncertainties were computed using the beta distribution method for binomial proportions (Clopper-Pearson interval via scipy.stats.beta), which is standard for small-sample fractions. We have revised the results section to explicitly state the sample size (N=52) and the statistical method, allowing direct verification that the reported precision is appropriate for this sample size. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [False-positive estimation section] False-positive estimation section: The 1.6% false-positive rate is derived from simulated Seyfert light curves, but the manuscript does not detail whether the simulation parameters (e.g., damped random walk amplitudes or structure functions) were chosen without reference to the observed CL-AGN sample. If any tuning occurred, the low false-positive claim used to support the criterion's reliability would be compromised.

    Authors: The DRW simulation parameters (amplitudes, timescales, and structure functions) were taken directly from standard literature values for typical Seyfert galaxies (e.g., MacLeod et al. 2010 and subsequent ZTF-specific calibrations), without any reference to or tuning based on the properties of our CL-AGN sample. The simulations were designed to represent the general non-transitioning Seyfert population. We have revised the false-positive estimation section to explicitly cite these parameter sources and confirm their independence from the CL-AGN sample, thereby strengthening the validity of the 1.6% rate. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; criterion development and recovery rate are distinct steps.

full rationale

The paper states it develops the |Δg| > 0.4 mag and |Δ(g-r)| > 0.2 mag criterion via synthetic photometry combined with ZTF light curves, then measures the recovery fraction (9.6%) among known CL-AGN hosts and estimates false-positive rates separately from simulated Seyfert light curves and Type 1/2 samples. No quoted step shows the thresholds being fitted directly to the CL-AGN recovery sample and then re-used as a 'prediction'; the recovery rate is presented as an empirical measurement on an independent spectroscopic sample. No self-citations, uniqueness theorems, or ansatzes are invoked in a load-bearing way. The derivation chain remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 1 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on two chosen numerical thresholds and the assumption that synthetic light curves faithfully represent real AGN variability for false-positive estimation.

free parameters (2)
  • g-band magnitude change threshold
    Set at 0.4 mag to define a photometric transition; value appears selected to recover known CL-AGN cases.
  • g-r color change threshold
    Set at 0.2 mag to define a photometric transition; value appears selected to recover known CL-AGN cases.
assumptions (1)
  • domain assumption Synthetic photometry of AGN light curves accurately reproduces the statistical properties of real ZTF observations for the purpose of false-positive estimation.
    Used to derive the 1.6% false-positive rate quoted in the abstract.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Identifying Changing-Look AGN Transitions in Light Curve Data with the Zwicky Transient Facility." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IM2MFSXR

@misc{pith2026260412109,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Identifying Changing-Look AGN Transitions in Light Curve Data with the Zwicky Transient Facility},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IM2MFSXR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2604.12109}
}
abstract

Changing-Look AGN (CL-AGN) are AGN which transition between Seyfert types, challenging AGN unification models. Most CL-AGN have been identified via repeat spectroscopy, making it difficult to determine the duration and magnitude of the CL-AGN transition. As such, the physical mechanisms behind this transition are still unknown. We use synthetic photometry in combination with ZTF light curve data to develop a new criterion to identify photometric CL-AGN transitions based on changes in g-band magnitude and g-r color. We find that a CL-AGN criterion of $| \Delta g| > 0.4$ mag and $| \Delta (g-r)| > 0.2$ mag recovers a photometric transition in $9.6^{+4.9}_{-3.4}\%$ of CL-AGN hosts over the six-year ZTF survey, including a candidate repeating changing-look event in SDSS J084957.78+274728.9. Using simulated AGN light curves, we estimate the false positive rate among the simulated Seyferts to be $1.6^{+0.19}_{-0.17}\%$. We find that the rate of similar flares among Type 1 Seyferts is $1.2^{+0.87}_{-0.50}\%$ , and among Type 2 Seyferts is $\leq 0.39\%$ over six years. Photometric CL-AGN transitions last between 21 and 560 days, with a median duration of 360 days, consistent with the thermal or orbital timescales for AGN disks. We do not detect a correlation between black hole mass and transition duration, likely due to the small sample of detected photometric transitions. This method can be applied to the upcoming Legacy Survey of Space and Time to identify CL-AGN candidates and test theories of their origins

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.12109 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. An example three-segment piecewise fit to the light curve of J1011+5442, first identified as a CL AGN by J. C. Runnoe et al. (2016). The above transition was iden￾tified as a repeating turn-on CL-AGN by Q. Yang et al. (2025); L. Duffy et al. (2025a); B. Lyu et al. (2025), and S. Wang et al. (2025). We use pwlf for the fit, where the line breaks in the r-band are fixed to the values fit for the g-band. Throughout thi… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Predicted ZTF color and magnitude changes for CL-AGN with dual-epoch SDSS spectroscopy from S. M. LaMassa et al. (2015); J. J. Ruan et al. (2016); J. C. Run￾noe et al. (2016); Q. Yang et al. (2018) and G. Zeltyn et al. (2024); the changing-look quasars (CLQs) from P. J. Green et al. (2022); and the measured ZTF color and magnitude changes for the two changing-look quasars from L. Duffy et al. (2025a) which fall in o… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. F1 score recovered for different photometric tran￾sition criteria. An F1 of one indicates perfect precision and recall. We estimate the false positive/true negative rate us￾ing our simulated damped random walk light curves and the true positive/false negative rate using simulated photometry for observed CL-AGN spectra pre- and post-transition. We account for the imbalance between our damped random walk light curves … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Comparison between CL-AGN and simulated light curve transition properties. Diamonds are repeat CL-AGN transitions identified in L. Duffy et al. (2025a); the pink star is J1011, which is one of our photometric transi￾tion candidates. CL-AGN transition candidates occur w…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Transition properties across the CL-AGN, Seyfert 1, and Seyfert 2 samples (contours), as well as for individual CL-AGN transition candidates (markers). (Left) Amplitude of the transition versus its duration. CL-AGN transition candidates have a higher variability amplit…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (Left) Spectra taken of J0849 between 2004 and 2018. Interestingly, a broad HeII feature appears at 4686˚A in 2013, then disappears before 2018. (Center) The broad Hα feature (top) disappears and reappears over the course of 14 years, while broad Hβ (bottom) fully disa…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Rest-frame transition durations for photometric CL-AGN transitions (i.e. transitions with ∆(g) > 0.4 mag and ∆(g − r) > 0.2 mag). Known CL-AGN are shown in purple, while Seyfert 1s are shown in green. Photometric transitions last a median of 360 days in the rest frame …
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Change in g-band magnitude versus time for pho￾tometric transitions to occur for known CL-AGN (colored circles) and type 1 Seyferts (green squares). We perform linear regressions including only known CL-AGN (purple dash-dotted line) and including both CL-AGN and Seyfer…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Rest-frame transition duration for photometric CL-AGN transitions (i.e. transitions with ∆(g) > 0.4 mag and ∆(g − r) > 0.2 mag) as a function of black hole mass from PyQSOfit. We compare to theoretical timescales in￾voked for CL-AGN transitions from D. Stern et al. (20…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Distribution of Eddington ratios (top) and bolo￾metric luminosities (bottom) for the CL-AGN photometric transition candidates (bar graph) and all objects studied in this work (histograms). Median values for each sample are shown with dashed vertical lines. Photometric…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: ZTF light curves for the five known CL-AGN (gray borders) and three Seyfert 1 AGN (green borders) with a candidate changing-look transition. Overplotted is the three-segment piecewise linear fit computed with pwlf (C. Jekel 2017) (black line). Transition properties ar…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

157 extracted references · 157 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    E., & French, K

    Agrawal, T., Verrico, M. E., & French, K. D. 2025, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 9, 245, doi: 10.3847/2515-5172/ae04e0

    work page doi:10.3847/2515-5172/ae04e0 2025

  2. [2]

    A., et al

    Amrutha, N., Wolf, C., Onken, C. A., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 535, 2322, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae2470

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae2470 2024

  3. [3]

    , keywords =

    Antonucci, R. 1993, ARA&A, 31, 473, doi: 10.1146/annurev.aa.31.090193.002353 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ ocz, B. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M....

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.aa.31.090193.002353 1993

  4. [4]

    C., Kulkarni, S

    Bellm, E. C., Kulkarni, S. R., Graham, M. J., et al. 2019, PASP, 131, 018002, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aaecbe

    work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/aaecbe 2019

  5. [5]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.01355, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2507.01355

    Birmingham, S., Ward, C., Nyland, K., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.01355, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2507.01355

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2507.01355 2025

  6. [6]

    , keywords =

    Blanchard, P. K., Nicholl, M., Berger, E., et al. 2017, ApJ, 843, 106, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa77f7

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa77f7 2017

  7. [7]

    Machine Learning , keywords =

    Breiman, L. 2001, Machine Learning, 45, 5, doi: 10.1023/A:1010933404324

    work page doi:10.1023/a:1010933404324 2001

  8. [8]

    J., Shen, Y., Blaes, O., et al

    Burke, C. J., Shen, Y., Blaes, O., et al. 2021, Science, 373, 789, doi: 10.1126/science.abg9933

    work page doi:10.1126/science.abg9933 2021

Show all 157 references
  1. [9]

    R., & Bloom, J

    Butler, N. R., & Bloom, J. S. 2011, AJ, 141, 93, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/141/3/93

    2011 doi

  2. [10]

    M., Horne, K., & Winkler, H

    Cackett, E. M., Horne, K., & Winkler, H. 2007, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 380, 669, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12098.x

    2007 doi

  3. [11]

    C., Magnier, E

    Chambers, K. C., Magnier, E. A., Metcalfe, N., et al. 2016, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1612.05560, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1612.05560

    2016 doi arXiv

  4. [12]

    H., & Saban, D

    Chan, C.-H., Piran, T., Krolik, J. H., & Saban, D. 2019, ApJ, 881, 113, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2b40

    2019 doi

  5. [13]

    2024, ApJ, 969, 131, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad479a

    Chanchaiworawit, K., & Sarajedini, V. 2024, ApJ, 969, 131, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad479a

    2024 doi

  6. [14]

    Charlton, P. J. L., Ruan, J. J., Haggard, D., et al. 2019, ApJ, 876, 75, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab0ec1

    2019 doi

  7. [15]

    2016, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1603.02754, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1603.02754 20

    Chen, T., & Guestrin, C. 2016, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1603.02754, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1603.02754 20

    2016 doi

  8. [16]

    Foltz, C. B. 1986, ApJ, 311, 135, doi: 10.1086/164758

    1986 doi

  9. [17]

    1973, A&A, 22, 343

    Collin-Souffrin, S., Alloin, D., & Andrillat, Y. 1973, A&A, 22, 343

    1973

  10. [18]

    C., Grace, K

    Davis, M. C., Grace, K. E., Trump, J. R., et al. 2024, ApJ, 965, 34, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad276e

    2024 doi

  11. [19]

    G., Drake, A

    Djorgovski, S. G., Drake, A. J., Mahabal, A. A., et al. 2011, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1102.5004, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1102.5004

    2011 doi

  12. [20]

    A., Huang, X., Davis, S

    Dodd, S. A., Huang, X., Davis, S. W., & Ramirez-Ruiz, E. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.19900, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.19900

    2025 doi

  13. [21]

    Ramirez-Ruiz, E., & Foley, R. J. 2021, ApJl, 907, L21, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abd852

    2021 doi

  14. [22]

    2007, A&A Rv, 15, 1, doi: 10.1007/s00159-007-0006-1

    Done, C., Gierli´ nski, M., & Kubota, A. 2007, A&A Rv, 15, 1, doi: 10.1007/s00159-007-0006-1

    2007 doi

  15. [23]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.18445

    Dong, Q., Zhang, Z.-X., Gu, W.-M., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.18445. https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.18445

    2025

  16. [24]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2408.07335, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2408.07335

    Dong, Q., Zhang, Z.-X., Gu, W.-M., Sun, M., & Zheng, Y.-G. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2408.07335, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2408.07335

    2024 doi

  17. [25]

    Draine, B. T. 2009, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 414, Cosmic Dust - Near and Far, ed. T. Henning, E. Gr¨ un, & J. Steinacker, 453, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.0903.1658

    2009 doi

  18. [26]

    J., Yang, Q., & Runnoe, J

    Duffy, L., Eracleous, M., Ruan, J. J., Yang, Q., & Runnoe, J. C. 2025a, ApJ, 989, 102, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adeb73

    doi

  19. [27]

    C., et al

    Duffy, L., Eracleous, M., Runnoe, J. C., et al. 2025b, ApJ, 981, 127, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adae0b

    doi

  20. [28]

    D., Ramirez-Ruiz, E., et al

    Earl, N., French, K. D., Ramirez-Ruiz, E., et al. 2025, ApJ, 983, 28, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adb974

    2025 doi

  21. [29]

    W., & Rix, H.-W

    El-Badry, K., Hogg, D. W., & Rix, H.-W. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.10601, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2509.10601

    2025 doi

  22. [30]

    Elitzur, M., & Ho, L. C. 2009, ApJL, 701, L91, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/701/2/L91

    2009 doi

  23. [31]

    C., & Trump, J

    Elitzur, M., Ho, L. C., & Trump, J. R. 2014, MNRAS, 438, 3340, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt2445

    2014 doi

  24. [32]

    2004, ApJL, 615, L25, doi: 10.1086/424380

    Elvis, M., Risaliti, G., Nicastro, F., et al. 2004, ApJL, 615, L25, doi: 10.1086/424380

    2004 doi

  25. [33]

    Eracleous, M., & Halpern, J. P. 2001, ApJ, 554, 240, doi: 10.1086/321331

    2001 doi

  26. [34]

    J., et al

    Frederick, S., Gezari, S., Graham, M. J., et al. 2019, ApJ, 883, 31, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab3a38

    2019 doi

  27. [35]

    B., et al

    Gezari, S., Hung, T., Cenko, S. B., et al. 2017, ApJ, 835, 144, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/835/2/144

    2017 doi

  28. [36]

    J., Kulkarni, S

    Graham, M. J., Kulkarni, S. R., Bellm, E. C., et al. 2019, PASP, 131, 078001, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ab006c

    2019 doi

  29. [37]

    J., Ross, N

    Graham, M. J., Ross, N. P., Stern, D., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 491, 4925, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz3244

    2020 doi

  30. [38]

    J., Pulgarin-Duque, L., Anderson, S

    Green, P. J., Pulgarin-Duque, L., Anderson, S. F., et al. 2022, ApJ, 933, 180, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac743f

    2022 doi

  31. [39]

    2018, PyQSOFit: Python code to fit the spectrum of quasars,, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1809.008

    Guo, H., Shen, Y., & Wang, S. 2018, PyQSOFit: Python code to fit the spectrum of quasars,, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1809.008

    2018

  32. [40]

    A., et al

    Guo, W.-J., Zou, H., Fawcett, V. A., et al. 2024, ApJS, 270, 26, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad118a

    2024 doi

  33. [41]

    L., et al

    Guo, W.-J., Zou, H., Greenwell, C. L., et al. 2025, ApJS, 278, 28, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/adc124

    2025 doi

  34. [42]

    2021, MNRAS, 508, 144, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab2550

    Guolo, M., Ruschel-Dutra, D., Grupe, D., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 508, 144, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab2550

    2021 doi

  35. [43]

    M., Viallet, M., & Lasota, J

    Hameury, J. M., Viallet, M., & Lasota, J. P. 2009, A&A, 496, 413, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200810928

    2009 doi

  36. [44]

    Hand, D. J. 2012, International Statistical Review, 80, 400, doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-5823.2012.00183.x

    2012 doi

  37. [45]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

    2020 doi

  38. [46]

    T., Holoien, T

    Hinkle, J. T., Holoien, T. W. S., Shappee, B. J., et al. 2022, ApJ, 930, 12, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac5f54

    2022 doi

  39. [47]

    C., & Kim, M

    Ho, L. C., & Kim, M. 2015, ApJ, 809, 123, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/809/2/123

    2015 doi

  40. [48]

    2022, MNRAS, 511, 54, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab3694

    Auchettl, K. 2022, MNRAS, 511, 54, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab3694

    2022 doi

  41. [49]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science & Engineering, 9, 90, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55 Hutsem´ ekers, D., Ag´ ıs Gonz´ alez, B., Sluse, D., Ramos

    2007 doi

  42. [50]

    Almeida, C., & Acosta Pulido, J. A. 2017, A&A, 604, L3, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201731397 Ivezi´ c,ˇZ., Connolly, A., Vanderplas, J., & Gray, A. 2014,

    2017 doi

  43. [51]

    M., Tyson, J

    Statistics, Data Mining and Machine Learning in Astronomy (Princeton University Press) Ivezi´ c,ˇZ., Kahn, S. M., Tyson, J. A., et al. 2019, ApJ, 873, 111, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab042c

    2019 doi

  44. [52]

    J., et al

    Jana, A., Ricci, C., Temple, M. J., et al. 2025, A&A, 693, A35, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451058

    2025 doi

  45. [53]

    2017, Piecewise Linear Fit, https://jekel.me/piecewise linear fit py/index.html

    Jekel, C. 2017, Piecewise Linear Fit, https://jekel.me/piecewise linear fit py/index.html

    2017

  46. [54]

    J., Haggard, D., et al

    Jin, X., Ruan, J. J., Haggard, D., et al. 2021, ApJ, 912, 20, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abeb17

    2021 doi

  47. [55]

    Johnson, B. D. 2021, bd-j/sedpy: sedpy v0.2.0 (v0.2.0),, Zenodo

    2021

  48. [56]

    O., Foley, R

    Jones, D. O., Foley, R. J., Narayan, G., et al. 2021, ApJ, 908, 143, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abd7f5 21

    2021 doi

  49. [57]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2511.09626, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2511.09626

    Kaaz, N., Liska, M., Ward, C., & Davelaar, J. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2511.09626, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2511.09626

    2025 doi

  50. [58]

    S., Papadakis, I

    Kammoun, E. S., Papadakis, I. E., & Dovˇ ciak, M. 2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 503, 4163, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab725

    2021 doi

  51. [59]

    S., Netzer, H., et al

    Kaspi, S., Smith, P. S., Netzer, H., et al. 2000, The Astrophysical Journal, 533, 631, doi: 10.1086/308704

    2000 doi

  52. [60]

    Kauffmann, G., & Heckman, T. M. 2009, MNRAS, 397, 135, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14960.x

    2009 doi

  53. [61]

    Kaur, K., & Stone, N. C. 2025, ApJ, 979, 172, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad9b86

    2025 doi

  54. [62]

    2001, The Astrophysical Journal, 550, 655, doi: 10.1086/319786

    Kazanas, D., & Nayakshin, S. 2001, The Astrophysical Journal, 550, 655, doi: 10.1086/319786

    2001 doi

  55. [63]

    C., Bechtold, J., & Siemiginowska, A

    Kelly, B. C., Bechtold, J., & Siemiginowska, A. 2009, ApJ, 698, 895, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/698/1/895

    2009 doi

  56. [64]

    Y., & Weedman, D

    Khachikian, E. Y., & Weedman, D. W. 1974, ApJ, 192, 581, doi: 10.1086/153093

    1974 doi

  57. [65]

    2000, A&A, 361, 901

    Kollatschny, W., Bischoff, K., & Dietrich, M. 2000, A&A, 361, 901

    2000

  58. [66]

    2024, Serbian Astronomical Journal, 209, 1, doi: 10.2298/SAJ2409001K

    Komossa, S., & Grupe, D. 2024, Serbian Astronomical Journal, 209, 1, doi: 10.2298/SAJ2409001K

    2024 doi

  59. [67]

    2014, ApJ, 788, 159, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/788/2/159 Koz lowski, S

    Koshida, S., Minezaki, T., Yoshii, Y., et al. 2014, ApJ, 788, 159, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/788/2/159 Koz lowski, S. 2017, A&A, 597, A128, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629890

    2014 doi

  60. [68]

    G., Schwarzenberg-Czerny, A., & Middleton, M

    Krishnan, S., Markowitz, A. G., Schwarzenberg-Czerny, A., & Middleton, M. J. 2021, MNRAS, 508, 3975, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab2839

    2021 doi

  61. [69]

    2022, ApJ, 931, 5, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac63aa

    Laha, S., Meyer, E., Roychowdhury, A., et al. 2022, ApJ, 931, 5, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac63aa

    2022 doi

  62. [70]

    T., Sadaula, D

    Laha, S., Meyer, E. T., Sadaula, D. R., et al. 2025, ApJ, 981, 125, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adaea0

    2025 doi

  63. [71]

    M., Cales, S., Moran, E

    LaMassa, S. M., Cales, S., Moran, E. C., et al. 2015, ApJ, 800, 144, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/800/2/144

    2015 doi

  64. [72]

    2001, NewAR, 45, 449, doi: 10.1016/S1387-6473(01)00112-9

    Lasota, J.-P. 2001, NewAR, 45, 449, doi: 10.1016/S1387-6473(01)00112-9

    2001 doi

  65. [73]

    Liska, M. T. P., Kaaz, N., Musoke, G., Tchekhovskoy, A., & Porth, O. 2023, ApJL, 944, L48, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acb6f4

    2023 doi

  66. [74]

    2021, ApJ, 915, 63, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abf82c L´ opez-Navas, E., Mart´ ınez-Aldama, M

    Liu, W.-J., Lira, P., Yao, S., et al. 2021, ApJ, 915, 63, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abf82c L´ opez-Navas, E., Mart´ ınez-Aldama, M. L., Bernal, S., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 513, L57, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slac033 LSST Science Collaboration, Abell, P. A., Allison, J., et al. 2009, arXiv ...

    2021 doi

  67. [75]

    2025, ApJ, 994, 154, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae11a2

    Lu, W.-T., & Wang, J.-X. 2025, ApJ, 994, 154, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae11a2

    2025 doi

  68. [76]

    2025, A&A, 693, A173, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451699

    Lyu, B., Wu, X.-B., Pang, Y., et al. 2025, A&A, 693, A173, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451699

    2025 doi

  69. [77]

    Lyubarskii, Y. E. 1997, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 292, 679, doi: 10.1093/mnras/292.3.679

    1997 doi

  70. [78]

    Maccarone, T. J. 2003, A&A, 409, 697, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20031146

    2003 doi

  71. [79]

    L., Green, P

    MacLeod, C. L., Green, P. J., Anderson, S. F., et al. 2019, ApJ, 874, 8, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab05e2

    2019 doi

  72. [80]

    J., Laher, R

    Masci, F. J., Laher, R. R., Rusholme, B., et al. 2018, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 131, 018003, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aae8ac

    2018 doi

  73. [81]

    2003, MNRAS, 342, 422, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06539.x

    Matt, G., Guainazzi, M., & Maiolino, R. 2003, MNRAS, 342, 422, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06539.x

    2003 doi

  74. [82]

    E., Husemann, B., Croom, S

    McElroy, R. E., Husemann, B., Croom, S. M., et al. 2016, A&A, 593, L8, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629102

    2016 doi

  75. [83]

    D., Giustini, M., et al

    Miniutti, G., Saxton, R. D., Giustini, M., et al. 2019, Nature, 573, 381, doi: 10.1038/s41586-019-1556-x

    2019 doi

  76. [84]

    S., Richards, G

    Moreno, J., Vogeley, M. S., Richards, G. T., & Yu, W. 2019, PASP, 131, 063001, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ab1597

    2019 doi

  77. [85]

    Neustadt, J. M. M., Hinkle, J. T., Kochanek, C. S., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 521, 3810, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad725

    2023 doi

  78. [86]

    2018, MNRAS, 480, 3898, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2032

    Noda, H., & Done, C. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 3898, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2032

    2018 doi

  79. [87]

    Osterbrock, D. E. 1981, ApJ, 249, 462, doi: 10.1086/159306

    1981 doi

  80. [88]

    2024, ApJS, 272, 13, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad344f pandas development team, T

    Panda, S., & ´Sniegowska, M. 2024, ApJS, 272, 13, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad344f pandas development team, T. 2020, pandas-dev/pandas: Pandas, latest Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.3509134

    2024 doi

  81. [89]

    2025, Nuovo Cimento Rivista Serie, 48, 537, doi: 10.1007/s40766-025-00072-5

    Paolillo, M., & Papadakis, I. 2025, Nuovo Cimento Rivista Serie, 48, 537, doi: 10.1007/s40766-025-00072-5

    2025 doi

  82. [90]

    Raj, A., & Nixon, C. J. 2021, ApJ, 909, 82, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abdc25

    2021 doi

  83. [91]

    J., & Do˘ gan, S

    Raj, A., Nixon, C. J., & Do˘ gan, S. 2021, ApJ, 909, 81, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abdc24

    2021 doi

  84. [92]

    Rees, M. J. 1988, Nature, 333, 523, doi: 10.1038/333523a0

    1988 doi

  85. [93]

    2022, Changing-look Active Galactic Nuclei, doi: 10.48550/ARXIV.2211.05132

    Ricci, C., & Trakhtenbrot, B. 2022, Changing-look Active Galactic Nuclei, doi: 10.48550/ARXIV.2211.05132

    2022 doi

  86. [94]

    2020, ApJL, 898, L1, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab91a1

    Ricci, C., Kara, E., Loewenstein, M., et al. 2020, ApJL, 898, L1, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab91a1

    2020 doi

  87. [95]

    T., Lacy, M., Storrie-Lombardi, L

    Richards, G. T., Lacy, M., Storrie-Lombardi, L. J., et al. 2006, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 166, 470, doi: 10.1086/506525

    2006 doi

  88. [96]

    2007, ApJL, 659, L111, doi: 10.1086/517884

    Risaliti, G., Elvis, M., Fabbiano, G., et al. 2007, ApJL, 659, L111, doi: 10.1086/517884

    2007 doi

  89. [97]

    2011, MNRAS, 410, 1027, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17503.x

    Risaliti, G., Nardini, E., Salvati, M., et al. 2011, MNRAS, 410, 1027, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17503.x

    2011 doi

  90. [98]

    P., Ford, K

    Ross, N. P., Ford, K. E. S., Graham, M., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 4468, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2002 22

    2018 doi

  91. [99]

    J., Anderson, S

    Ruan, J. J., Anderson, S. F., Cales, S. L., et al. 2016, ApJ, 826, 188, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/826/2/188

    2016 doi

  92. [100]

    2018, ApJ, 854, 160, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa9b6

    Rumbaugh, N., Shen, Y., Morganson, E., et al. 2018, ApJ, 854, 160, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa9b6

    2018 doi

  93. [101]

    C., Cales, S., Ruan, J

    Runnoe, J. C., Cales, S., Ruan, J. J., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 455, 1691, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv2385

    2016 doi

  94. [102]

    Ryu, T., McKernan, B., Ford, K. E. S., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 8103, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3487

    2024 doi

  95. [103]

    2013, MNRAS, 436, 1588, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1675

    Sanfrutos, M., Miniutti, G., Ag´ ıs-Gonz´ alez, B., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 436, 1588, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1675

    2013 doi

  96. [104]

    Schawinski, K., Koss, M., Berney, S., & Sartori, L. F. 2015, MNRAS, 451, 2517, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1136

    2015 doi

  97. [105]

    Z., et al

    Shappee, B., Prieto, J., Stanek, K. Z., et al. 2014, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, Vol. 223, American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts #223, 236.03

    2014

  98. [106]

    J., Prieto, J

    Shappee, B. J., Prieto, J. L., Grupe, D., et al. 2014, ApJ, 788, 48, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/788/1/48

    2014 doi

  99. [107]

    2021, ApJ, 921, 70, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac1ce4

    Shen, Y. 2021, ApJ, 921, 70, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac1ce4

    2021 doi

  100. [108]

    Schneider, D. P. 2008, The Astrophysical Journal, 680, 169, doi: 10.1086/587475

    2008 doi

  101. [109]

    B., Horne, K., et al

    Shen, Y., Hall, P. B., Horne, K., et al. 2019, ApJS, 241, 34, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab074f

    2019 doi

  102. [110]

    2017, ApJL, 846, L7, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa85de

    Sheng, Z., Wang, T., Jiang, N., et al. 2017, ApJL, 846, L7, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa85de

    2017 doi

  103. [111]

    2016, A&A, 585, A129, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201527353

    Simm, T., Salvato, M., Saglia, R., et al. 2016, A&A, 585, A129, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201527353

    2016 doi

  104. [112]

    2020, A&A, 641, A167, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038575 ´Sniegowska, M., Grz¸ edzielski, M., Czerny, B., & Janiuk, A

    Sniegowska, M., Czerny, B., Bon, E., & Bon, N. 2020, A&A, 641, A167, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038575 ´Sniegowska, M., Grz¸ edzielski, M., Czerny, B., & Janiuk, A. 2023, A&A, 672, A19, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243828

    2020 doi

  105. [113]

    J., et al

    Stern, D., McKernan, B., Graham, M. J., et al. 2018, ApJ, 864, 27, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aac726

    2018 doi

  106. [114]

    J., et al

    Stone, Z., Shen, Y., Burke, C. J., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 514, 164, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1259

    2022 doi

  107. [115]

    A., & Wilson, A

    Storchi-Bergmann, T., Baldwin, J. A., & Wilson, A. S. 1993, ApJL, 410, L11, doi: 10.1086/186867

    1993 doi

  108. [116]

    2025a, ZTF Lightcurves, IPAC, doi: 10.26131/IRSA598

    Team, Z. 2025a, ZTF Lightcurves, IPAC, doi: 10.26131/IRSA598

    doi

  109. [117]

    2025b, ZTF Objects Table, IPAC, doi: 10.26131/IRSA597

    Team, Z. 2025b, ZTF Objects Table, IPAC, doi: 10.26131/IRSA597

    doi

  110. [118]

    E., & Osterbrock, D

    Tohline, J. E., & Osterbrock, D. E. 1976, ApJL, 210, L117, doi: 10.1086/182317

    1976 doi

  111. [119]

    L., Denneau, L., Heinze, A

    Tonry, J. L., Denneau, L., Heinze, A. N., et al. 2018, PASP, 130, 064505, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aabadf

    2018 doi

  112. [120]

    2022, A&A, 667, L12, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244987

    Tozzi, G., Lusso, E., Casetti, L., et al. 2022, A&A, 667, L12, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244987

    2022 doi

  113. [121]

    L., et al

    Trakhtenbrot, B., Arcavi, I., MacLeod, C. L., et al. 2019, ApJ, 883, 94, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab39e4

    2019 doi

  114. [122]

    Tran, H. D. 2001, ApJL, 554, L19, doi: 10.1086/320926

    2001 doi

  115. [123]

    M., & Padovani, P

    Urry, C. M., & Padovani, P. 1995, PASP, 107, 803, doi: 10.1086/133630

    1995 doi

  116. [124]

    2012, in Conference on Intelligent Data Understanding (CIDU), 47 –54, doi: 10.1109/CIDU.2012.6382200

    Vanderplas, J., Connolly, A., Ivezi´ c,ˇZ., & Gray, A. 2012, in Conference on Intelligent Data Understanding (CIDU), 47 –54, doi: 10.1109/CIDU.2012.6382200

    2012 doi

  117. [125]

    G., et al

    Vaughan, S., Uttley, P., Markowitz, A. G., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 461, 3145, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1412

    2016 doi

  118. [126]

    2024, SSRv, 220, 14, doi: 10.1007/s11214-024-01043-8 V´ eron-Cetty, M

    Vernardos, G., Sluse, D., Pooley, D., et al. 2024, SSRv, 220, 14, doi: 10.1007/s11214-024-01043-8 V´ eron-Cetty, M. P., & V´ eron, P. 2010, A&A, 518, A10, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201014188

    2024 doi

  119. [127]

    2024, A&A, 683, A131, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348098

    Cignoni, M. 2024, A&A, 683, A131, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348098

    2024 doi

  120. [128]

    E., French, K

    Verrico, M. E., French, K. D., Suess, K. A., et al. 2025, ApJ, 989, 101, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adeb88

    2025 doi

  121. [129]

    E., et al

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261, doi: 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2

    2020 doi

  122. [130]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2511.10217, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2511.10217

    Wang, H., Wu, X.-B., Yao, N., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2511.10217, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2511.10217

    2025 doi

  123. [131]

    W., Cao, X., et al

    Wang, J., Xu, D. W., Cao, X., et al. 2024, ApJ, 970, 85, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad4d89

    2024 doi

  124. [132]

    W., & Wei, J

    Wang, J., Xu, D. W., & Wei, J. Y. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 858, 49, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aab88b

    2018 doi

  125. [133]

    K., Brink, T

    Wang, J., Zheng, W. K., Brink, T. G., et al. 2023, ApJ, 956, 137, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acf5e0

    2023 doi

  126. [134]

    2020, A&A, 643, L9, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039368

    Wang, J.-M., & Bon, E. 2020, A&A, 643, L9, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039368

    2020 doi

  127. [135]

    2024, ApJ, 960, 69, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad0bfb

    Wang, M., Ma, Y., Wu, Q., & Jiang, N. 2024, ApJ, 960, 69, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad0bfb

    2024 doi

  128. [136]

    2025, ApJ, 981, 129, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adadf3

    Wang, S., Woo, J.-H., Gallo, E., et al. 2025, ApJ, 981, 129, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adadf3

    2025 doi

  129. [137]

    2024, ApJ, 966, 128, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad3049

    Wang, S., Woo, J.-H., Gallo, E., et al. 2024, ApJ, 966, 128, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad3049

    2024 doi

  130. [138]

    Wang, Y., Lin, D. N. C., Zhang, B., & Zhu, Z. 2024, ApJL, 962, L7, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad20e5

    2024 doi

  131. [139]

    Waskom, M. L. 2021, Journal of Open Source Software, 6, 3021, doi: 10.21105/joss.03021 Wes McKinney. 2010, in Proceedings of the 9th Python in Science Conference, ed. St´ efan van der Walt & Jarrod Millman, 56 – 61, doi: 10.25080/Majora-92bf1922-00a

    2021 doi

  132. [140]

    C., Brunner, R

    Wilhite, B. C., Brunner, R. J., Grier, C. J., Schneider, D. P., & vanden Berk, D. E. 2008, MNRAS, 383, 1232, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12655.x

    2008 doi

  133. [141]

    2023, ApJ, 958, 146, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acf839

    Wu, W.-B., & Gu, W.-M. 2023, ApJ, 958, 146, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acf839

    2023 doi

  134. [142]

    Wu, Y., Yang, J., & Sun, X. H. 2023, Acta Astronomica Sinica, 64, 7 23

    2023

  135. [143]

    2025, ApJ, 984, 45, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adc399

    Xu, J., Hu, S., Chen, X., & Huang, S. 2025, ApJ, 984, 45, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adc399

    2025 doi

  136. [144]

    J., Wu, X.-B., et al

    Yang, Q., Green, P. J., Wu, X.-B., et al. 2025, ApJ, 980, 91, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad94ed

    2025 doi

  137. [145]

    2018, ApJ, 862, 109, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaca3a

    Yang, Q., Wu, X.-B., Fan, X., et al. 2018, ApJ, 862, 109, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaca3a

    2018 doi

  138. [146]

    2015, MNRAS, 447, 1692, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2571

    Yang, Q.-X., Xie, F.-G., Yuan, F., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 447, 1692, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2571

    2015 doi

  139. [147]

    T., Ruan, J

    Yu, W., Richards, G. T., Ruan, J. J., et al. 2025, ApJ, 992, 130, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adfdd2

    2025 doi

  140. [148]

    Graham, M. J. 2022, ApJ, 936, 132, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac8351

    2022 doi

  141. [149]

    2020, MNRAS, 498, 3985, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa2627

    Yu, X., Shi, Y., Chen, Y., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 498, 3985, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa2627

    2020 doi

  142. [150]

    2021, SSRv, 217, 54, doi: 10.1007/s11214-021-00829-4

    Zabludoff, A., Arcavi, I., LaMassa, S., et al. 2021, SSRv, 217, 54, doi: 10.1007/s11214-021-00829-4

    2021 doi

  143. [151]

    2022, ApJl, 939, L16, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac9a47

    Zeltyn, G., Trakhtenbrot, B., Eracleous, M., et al. 2022, ApJl, 939, L16, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac9a47

    2022 doi

  144. [152]

    2024, ApJ, 966, 85, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad2f30

    Zeltyn, G., Trakhtenbrot, B., Eracleous, M., et al. 2024, ApJ, 966, 85, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad2f30

    2024 doi

  145. [153]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2511.07532, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2511.07532

    Zeltyn, G., Trakhtenbrot, B., Eracleous, M., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2511.07532, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2511.07532

    2025 doi

  146. [154]

    2025, ApJ, 993, 244, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae0581

    Zhang, M., Zhang, W., Deng, H., Guo, H., & Sun, J. 2025, ApJ, 993, 244, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae0581

    2025 doi

  147. [155]

    2024, MNRAS, 530, 3527, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1036

    Zheng, Z., Shi, Y., Jin, S., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 530, 3527, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1036

    2024 doi

  148. [156]

    U., et al

    Zhu, L.-T., Wang, Z., Devanand, P. U., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 536, 2715, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae2774

    2025 doi

  149. [157]

    2012, ApJ, 758, 104, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/758/2/104 24 APPENDIX A.PYQSOFIT FIT PARAMETERS Here we describe the fitting setup we use to derive black hole masses withPyQSOfit(H

    Zuo, W., Wu, X.-B., Liu, Y.-Q., & Jiao, C.-L. 2012, ApJ, 758, 104, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/758/2/104 24 APPENDIX A.PYQSOFIT FIT PARAMETERS Here we describe the fitting setup we use to derive black hole masses withPyQSOfit(H. Guo et al. 2018; Y. Shen et al. 2019). PyQSOfitfits p...

    2012 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed May 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.