Selection bias in dynamically-measured super-massive black hole samples: its consequences and the quest for the most fundamental relation
Francesco Shankar (1), Mariangela Bernardi (2), Ravi K. Sheth (2),, Laura Ferrarese (3), Alister W. Graham (4), Giulia Savorgnan (4), Viola, Allevato (5), Alessandro Marconi (6), Ronald Laesker (7), Andrea Lapi (8), ((1) University of Southampton, (2) University of Pennsylvania

TL;DR
This study investigates the selection bias in samples of super-massive black holes with dynamical measurements, revealing it inflates scaling relations and emphasizing the fundamental role of velocity dispersion in black hole-galaxy correlations.
Contribution
The paper demonstrates that selection bias significantly affects black hole scaling relations and identifies velocity dispersion as the most fundamental parameter.
Findings
Bias inflates the Mbh-sigma relation by at least a factor of 3
The Mbh-Mstar relation is heavily biased and largely derived from other relations
Correcting bias suggests lower black hole masses and smaller gravitational wave signals
Abstract
We compare the set of local galaxies having dynamically measured black holes with a large, unbiased sample of galaxies extracted from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey. We confirm earlier work showing that the majority of black hole hosts have significantly higher velocity dispersions sigma than local galaxies of similar stellar mass. We use Monte-Carlo simulations to illustrate the effect on black hole scaling relations if this bias arises from the requirement that the black hole sphere of influence must be resolved to measure black hole masses with spatially resolved kinematics. We find that this selection effect artificially increases the normalization of the Mbh-sigma relation by a factor of at least ~3; the bias for the Mbh-Mstar relation is even larger. Our Monte Carlo simulations and analysis of the residuals from scaling relations both indicate that sigma is more fundamental than…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
