adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Gas-rich, Field Ultra-diffuse Galaxies Host Few Gobular Clusters
Authors: Michael G. Jones, Ananthan Karunakaran, Paul Bennet, David J. Sand, Kristine Spekkens, Burçin Mutlu-Pakdil, Denija Crnojević, Steven Janowiecki, Lukas Leisman, Catherine E. Fielder
Figure caption: False color F555W+F814W WFC3 images of the target galaxies, AGC 100288, AGC 102375, AGC 103435, and AGC 114959 (top left to bottom right). The large green dashed circles show the regions used to select GCCs, twice the half-light radius. Small red circles highlight GCCs that meet all selection criteria (Section 3). (a) Top left to bottom right: AGCs 115292, 124634, 181474, and 189298. (b) Top left to bottom right: AGCs 191708, 198686, 201993, and 258471. (c) Left to right: AGCs 312297 and 749387. Note that the late-type galaxy projected next to AGC 749387 is in the background at cz ≈ 20,000 km s−1 (Adelman-McCarthy et al. 2008).
Paper: Gas-rich, Field Ultra-diffuse Galaxies Host Few Gobular Clusters
Authors: Michael G. Jones, Ananthan Karunakaran, Paul Bennet, David J. Sand, Kristine Spekkens, Burçin Mutlu-Pakdil, Denija Crnojević, Steven Janowiecki, Lukas Leisman, Catherine E. Fielder
Figure caption: The CMDs of all point-like sources meeting the selection criteria (Section 3), with S/N > 5 and falling within 2 r eff of the center of each target galaxy. Points (red or black) indicate sources that meet the concentration index criterion and black crosses are those that fail it. The gray rectangular outline shows the color–magnitude parameter space used to select GCCs, and red points are those sources that meet all the criteria.
Paper: Live to Die Another Day: The Rebrightening of AT 2018fyk as a Repeating Partial Tidal Disruption Event
Authors: T. Wevers, E. R. Coughlin, D. R. Pasham, M. Guolo, Y. Sun, S. Wen, P. G. Jonker, A. Zabludoff, A. Malyali, R. Arcodia, Z. Liu, A. Merloni, A. Rau, I. Grotova, P. Short, Z. Cao
Figure caption: Multipanel schematic indicating the various phases in the evolution of AT 2018fyk. Time is indicated in the top left corner. The various components (SMBH, star, accretion flow) are not to scale. Following panel (f), future observations will show whether the returning core was fully disrupted or if a third dimming and rebrightening cycle occurs.
Paper: Live to Die Another Day: The Rebrightening of AT 2018fyk as a Repeating Partial Tidal Disruption Event
Authors: T. Wevers, E. R. Coughlin, D. R. Pasham, M. Guolo, Y. Sun, S. Wen, P. G. Jonker, A. Zabludoff, A. Malyali, R. Arcodia, Z. Liu, A. Merloni, A. Rau, I. Grotova, P. Short, Z. Cao
Figure caption: Top left: full X-ray (black; 0.3–10 keV) and Swift/UVW1 (green) light curve of AT 2018fyk. Black crosses indicate eROSITA nondetections. Different source states are labeled A–F. Top right: α ox vs. Eddington ratio, color coded by accretion state. The latest data are shown as green stars to distinguish them from the previous hard state. The observed behavior is consistent with a softening as the Eddington ratio decreases, which is also implied by the lower limits in the quiescent state. The black cross indicates the typical data uncertainty. Bottom: NICER/XTI light curve, overlaid on the Swift late-time data (left) and the XMM4 EPIC/PN (right) light curve (red triangles indicate the background rate). The NICER light curve was extracted on a per-GTI basis, while the XMM light curve has a bin size of 150 s.(The data used to create this figure are available.)
Paper: Live to Die Another Day: The Rebrightening of AT 2018fyk as a Repeating Partial Tidal Disruption Event
Authors: T. Wevers, E. R. Coughlin, D. R. Pasham, M. Guolo, Y. Sun, S. Wen, P. G. Jonker, A. Zabludoff, A. Malyali, R. Arcodia, Z. Liu, A. Merloni, A. Rau, I. Grotova, P. Short, Z. Cao
Figure caption: Observed UV/optical and X-ray SED at late times. The XMM-Newton data are shown as orange circles, with the best-fit X-ray model (solid line: absorbed; dotted line: unabsorbed) overplotted in blue. The UV/optical data are shown as black diamonds, with the red best-fit blackbody overlaid. Due to the lack of observational constraints in the extreme-ultraviolet part of the SED, the bolometric emission (used to calculate the total radiated energy) is uncertain; for example, L bol is calculated from the unabsorbed X-ray spectral model extrapolated to 10 eV (∼1200 Å).
Paper: Live to Die Another Day: The Rebrightening of AT 2018fyk as a Repeating Partial Tidal Disruption Event
Authors: T. Wevers, E. R. Coughlin, D. R. Pasham, M. Guolo, Y. Sun, S. Wen, P. G. Jonker, A. Zabludoff, A. Malyali, R. Arcodia, Z. Liu, A. Merloni, A. Rau, I. Grotova, P. Short, Z. Cao
Figure caption: The X-shooter spectrum (black), resampled to the native resolution of the MILES stellar template library. The best-fit template is shown in blue, and the residuals (offset by +0.4 for clarity) are shown in orange. Weak narrow emission lines appear after template subtraction. Balmer lines are indicated by vertical solid lines, and other emission lines measured for the diagnostic diagrams are marked by dotted lines. The discontinuity between 5300 and 5400 Å is due to the stitching of the two arms.
Paper: Live to Die Another Day: The Rebrightening of AT 2018fyk as a Repeating Partial Tidal Disruption Event
Authors: T. Wevers, E. R. Coughlin, D. R. Pasham, M. Guolo, Y. Sun, S. Wen, P. G. Jonker, A. Zabludoff, A. Malyali, R. Arcodia, Z. Liu, A. Merloni, A. Rau, I. Grotova, P. Short, Z. Cao
Figure caption: Top: BPT diagram, with values measured from the template-subtracted spectrum; AT 2018fyk is located in the composite/LINER region. Bottom: WHAN diagram, locating AT 2018fyk’s host among the retired galaxy population.
Paper: Live to Die Another Day: The Rebrightening of AT 2018fyk as a Repeating Partial Tidal Disruption Event
Authors: T. Wevers, E. R. Coughlin, D. R. Pasham, M. Guolo, Y. Sun, S. Wen, P. G. Jonker, A. Zabludoff, A. Malyali, R. Arcodia, Z. Liu, A. Merloni, A. Rau, I. Grotova, P. Short, Z. Cao
Figure caption: MUSE stellar continuum-subtracted emission line maps.
Paper: Constraints on the Hosts of UHECR Accelerators
Authors: Marco Stein Muzio, Glennys R. Farrar
Figure caption: Left: the gray regions show the posterior probability distribution as a function of effective size L and magnetic field strength B of the source environment, using SIBYLL2.3C and taking a blackbody spectrum, n 0 = 1. The shaded regions give the 1σ, 2σ, and 3σ uncertainty bands (darkest to lightest gray, respectively) of the joint posterior distribution. The peak of the distribution is indicated by the gold star. For n 0 ≠ 1, the posterior distribution shifts according to B = n 0 B BB and L = L BB/n 0. The solid black diagonal line shows, for reference, B acc vs. L acc in the accelerator such that the Hillas criterion is satisfied for particles emerging from the accelerator at the median rigidity of the posterior distribution; the dashed lines show the same for the 16th/84th percentiles. The red lines demarcate regions where synchrotron losses become significant; see Appendix D for details. The approximate range of size and magnetic field strength of various potential source types are indicated in shaded boxes as a guide. Recent multimessenger candidate sources of neutrinos are shown by dashed boxes, as more examples are needed for the correlation to be substantiated. Right: the joint posterior probability distribution for BL and ﹩{{Ln}}_{{\rm{g}}}﹩, the surface number density of gas in the source environment. These products are independent of the value of n 0 so this joint posterior distribution is unaffected by the value of n 0.
Paper: Constraints on the Hosts of UHECR Accelerators
Authors: Marco Stein Muzio, Glennys R. Farrar
Figure caption: Ranges for some key model and astrophysical parameters derived from this analysis, reporting results for L, λ c, n g, and B for a blackbody (n 0 = 1) photon field; the conversion for other n 0 values is given in the text. Central values indicate the median of the posterior distributions while error bars indicate the 16th and 84th percentiles (i.e., these are not best-fit values and error bars on the parameters of a particular model). The results for the SIBYLL2.3C and EPOS-LHC hadronic interaction models are shown in blue and orange, respectively. Due to correlations between parameters, certain combinations are better constrained than the overall allowed range of individual parameters might suggest, as can be seen from the corner plots showing the joint probability distribution of pairs of parameters in Appendix F.
Paper: Constraints on the Hosts of UHECR Accelerators
Authors: Marco Stein Muzio, Glennys R. Farrar
Figure caption: Comparison of model and astrophysical parameters fitting CR data alone (squares), rejecting models violating EHE neutrino bounds (upward triangles), and simultaneously fitting astrophysical neutrino data (downward triangles) using the SIBYLL2.3C (blue) or EPOS-LHC (orange) HIMs. Central values indicate the median while error bars indicate the 16th and 84th percentiles of the posterior distributions. The last four parameters depend on the choice of n 0 and are shown for n 0 = 1; the scaling for n 0 ≠ 1 is given in the text.
Paper: Constraints on the Hosts of UHECR Accelerators
Authors: Marco Stein Muzio, Glennys R. Farrar
Figure caption: Example fit to UHECR spectrum and composition data (left; interpreted via SIBYLL2.3C) produced by the model used in this analysis. The corresponding neutrino flux prediction (right) along with data and constraints from IceCube and Auger. Further examples of fits, including fits to the astrophysical neutrino spectrum introduced in Appendix A, can be found in Muzio et al. (2022) (see, e.g., Figure 1 therein).
Paper: JWST's PEARLS: Bright 1.5–2.0 μm Dropouts in the Spitzer/IRAC Dark Field
Authors: Haojing Yan, Seth H. Cohen, Rogier A. Windhorst, Rolf A. Jansen, Zhiyuan Ma, John F. Beacom, Chenxiaoji Ling, Cheng Cheng, Jia-Sheng Huang, Norman A. Grogin, S. P. Willner, Min Yun, Heidi B. Hammel, Stefanie N. Milam, Christopher J. Conselice, Simon P. Driver, Brenda Frye, Madeline A. Marshall, Anton Koekemoer, Christopher N. A. Willmer, Aaron Robotham, Jordan C. J. D'Silva, Jake Summers, Jeremy Lim, Kevin Harrington, Leonardo Ferreira, Jose Maria Diego, Nor Pirzkal, Stephen M. Wilkins, Lifan Wang, Nimish P. Hathi, Adi Zitrin, Rachana A. Bhatawdekar, Nathan J. Adams, Lukas J. Furtak, Peter Maksym, Michael J. Rutkowski, Giovanni G. Fazio
Figure caption: (Top) Passbands of the JWIDF observations with superposed Bruzual & Charlot (2003) templates (all with Chabrier 2003 initial mass functions and solar metallicities). Gold and dark brown show 10 Myr templates at z = 11 and z = 15, respectively. Red and cyan show maximally old (i.e., as old as the age of the universe) galaxies at the same redshifts, and dark red and orange the same maximally old templates with A  V  = 2.0 mag (Calzetti 2001 extinction law). (Bottom) Diagnostic color–color diagrams for dropout selections. The left and middle panels are for F150W dropouts, and the right panel shows the F200W dropouts. The filled red circles with error bars or limits represent the selected dropouts, with symbol sizes corresponding to m 200 (left and middle) or m 356 (right). Black dots show field objects. Colored lines with dots show the color tracks from z = 10 to 30 of the three model templates in the top panel. The nearly vertical track is the young template, and cyan and orange indicate respectively z < 11, z > 11 in the left and middle panels and z < 15, z > 15 in the right panel. The tracks of the old templates are shown similarly, but the tracks are mostly outside the plotted color ranges. The blue curve is the color track of mid-z maximally old galaxies from z = 2.6 to 8.0. This track is shown in its entirety in the right panel but is only partially inside the left and middle panels. Four dropouts in the left and middle panels marked with blue circles are near these tracks and are likely mid-z contaminants. The green squares show the colors of brown dwarfs (labeled by “BD”) based on Burrows et al. (2006).
Paper: JWST's PEARLS: Bright 1.5–2.0 μm Dropouts in the Spitzer/IRAC Dark Field
Authors: Haojing Yan, Seth H. Cohen, Rogier A. Windhorst, Rolf A. Jansen, Zhiyuan Ma, John F. Beacom, Chenxiaoji Ling, Cheng Cheng, Jia-Sheng Huang, Norman A. Grogin, S. P. Willner, Min Yun, Heidi B. Hammel, Stefanie N. Milam, Christopher J. Conselice, Simon P. Driver, Brenda Frye, Madeline A. Marshall, Anton Koekemoer, Christopher N. A. Willmer, Aaron Robotham, Jordan C. J. D'Silva, Jake Summers, Jeremy Lim, Kevin Harrington, Leonardo Ferreira, Jose Maria Diego, Nor Pirzkal, Stephen M. Wilkins, Lifan Wang, Nimish P. Hathi, Adi Zitrin, Rachana A. Bhatawdekar, Nathan J. Adams, Lukas J. Furtak, Peter Maksym, Michael J. Rutkowski, Giovanni G. Fazio
Figure caption: Image stamps (2.″4 × 2.″4 in size, 60 mas pixels) of five peculiar dropouts. Four of them are F200W dropouts while one is an F150W dropout. Their IDs are labeled. The labeled magnitudes in F200W or F356W are those in the corresponding bands. The one in the top row is the second-brightest in the entire sample, and has a close neighbor that is at a low redshift (see also Figure 4). The middle row shows two F200W dropouts that are very close neighbors but are very different in brightness and color. The bottom row shows a bright system that is made of an F150W dropout and an F200W dropout.
Paper: JWST's PEARLS: Bright 1.5–2.0 μm Dropouts in the Spitzer/IRAC Dark Field
Authors: Haojing Yan, Seth H. Cohen, Rogier A. Windhorst, Rolf A. Jansen, Zhiyuan Ma, John F. Beacom, Chenxiaoji Ling, Cheng Cheng, Jia-Sheng Huang, Norman A. Grogin, S. P. Willner, Min Yun, Heidi B. Hammel, Stefanie N. Milam, Christopher J. Conselice, Simon P. Driver, Brenda Frye, Madeline A. Marshall, Anton Koekemoer, Christopher N. A. Willmer, Aaron Robotham, Jordan C. J. D'Silva, Jake Summers, Jeremy Lim, Kevin Harrington, Leonardo Ferreira, Jose Maria Diego, Nor Pirzkal, Stephen M. Wilkins, Lifan Wang, Nimish P. Hathi, Adi Zitrin, Rachana A. Bhatawdekar, Nathan J. Adams, Lukas J. Furtak, Peter Maksym, Michael J. Rutkowski, Giovanni G. Fazio
Figure caption: Image stamps of seven of the eight F150W dropouts (with short IDs noted) in the HST ACS F814W and four JWST NIRCam bands (from left to right). The eighth is shown in Figure 5. The images are 2.″4 × 2.″4 in size, have 60 mas pixels, and are oriented north-up and east-left. The dropouts are centered on the images and are indicated by red circles (0.″5 radius). F150D_H19 has a close neighbor that is unrelated, and an arrow is used to indicate the dropout to avoid confusion. The numbers shown on the F200W images are their magnitudes in this band (m 200). The last three objects are among the four that are close to the mid-z old galaxy tracks in Figure 1, and the question marks are to indicate that they might be contaminants by these diagnostics. F150D_H12, H14, and H07 are compact, and the last panels show the 2D Gaussian profile fits to their light distributions in F356W. H14 is consistent with being a point source.
Paper: General Circulation Model Constraints on the Detectability of the CO2-CH4 Biosignature Pair on TRAPPIST-1e with JWST
Authors: Yoav Rotman, Thaddeus D. Komacek, Geronimo L. Villanueva, Thomas J. Fauchez, Erin M. May
Figure caption: A cross-case comparison of the single-transit S/N (top) of each species in the atmosphere, and the resulting number of transits needed for a 5σ detection (bottom), for the methane-inclusive cases. The 〈S/N〉1 for CO2 steadily increases with pCO2, while water increases at a lower rate due to the competition between a higher self-determined mixing ratio, which increases feature height, and increased cloud cover, which flattens the spectral features. 〈S/N〉1 for CH4 decreases as its features are suppressed by the stronger CO2 features, due to its decreased mixing ratio in higher pCO2 cases. Note that in many cases, the 0 ppm and 10 ppm noise floor results overlap, and that in some cases a 5σ detection is unattainable (such as in the 30 and 50 ppm CH4 and H2O cases), in which case the value for transits are shown beyond the axes to represent a need for over 30 transits. The full list of transits needed for detection can be found in Table 1.
Paper: JWST's PEARLS: Bright 1.5–2.0 μm Dropouts in the Spitzer/IRAC Dark Field
Authors: Haojing Yan, Seth H. Cohen, Rogier A. Windhorst, Rolf A. Jansen, Zhiyuan Ma, John F. Beacom, Chenxiaoji Ling, Cheng Cheng, Jia-Sheng Huang, Norman A. Grogin, S. P. Willner, Min Yun, Heidi B. Hammel, Stefanie N. Milam, Christopher J. Conselice, Simon P. Driver, Brenda Frye, Madeline A. Marshall, Anton Koekemoer, Christopher N. A. Willmer, Aaron Robotham, Jordan C. J. D'Silva, Jake Summers, Jeremy Lim, Kevin Harrington, Leonardo Ferreira, Jose Maria Diego, Nor Pirzkal, Stephen M. Wilkins, Lifan Wang, Nimish P. Hathi, Adi Zitrin, Rachana A. Bhatawdekar, Nathan J. Adams, Lukas J. Furtak, Peter Maksym, Michael J. Rutkowski, Giovanni G. Fazio
Figure caption: Subtraction of close neighbors for three F200W dropouts that have unrelated companions. Each object’s short ID is below that object's images, and the passbands are labeled at top. Stamps are 2.″4 × 2.″4 in size with 60 mas pixels. For each object, the top row shows the original NIRCam negative images, and the bottom row shows images that have the neighbor (indicated by the yellow arrow in the F200W image) subtracted.
Paper: General Circulation Model Constraints on the Detectability of the CO2-CH4 Biosignature Pair on TRAPPIST-1e with JWST
Authors: Yoav Rotman, Thaddeus D. Komacek, Geronimo L. Villanueva, Thomas J. Fauchez, Erin M. May
Figure caption: Four days of ExoCAM GCM simulations of TRAPPIST-1e with a partial pressure of carbon dioxide of 0.01 bar, with temperature (top) and cloud water path (bottom) at a pressure of 780 mbar. There is significant cloud variability, and eastward motion of clouds due to equatorial winds which drive a hot spot offset, along with eddies on the mid-latitude nightside. The substellar point (shown at the center of each plot, [0°N, 180°E]) is consistently cloudy and hot, but still undergoes variability in the local cloud water path.
Paper: General Circulation Model Constraints on the Detectability of the CO2-CH4 Biosignature Pair on TRAPPIST-1e with JWST
Authors: Yoav Rotman, Thaddeus D. Komacek, Geronimo L. Villanueva, Thomas J. Fauchez, Erin M. May
Figure caption: Spectral decomposition for the 32nd day in the final year of the 10−2 bar pCO2 CH4-inclusive case. The total transit spectrum with all species included is shown in black, with the decomposed spectrum without each species shown in orange. The three main peaks of CO2 are visible, with the CH4 features at 2.6 and 3.3 μm and the several water peaks also identifiable.
Paper: JWST's PEARLS: Bright 1.5–2.0 μm Dropouts in the Spitzer/IRAC Dark Field
Authors: Haojing Yan, Seth H. Cohen, Rogier A. Windhorst, Rolf A. Jansen, Zhiyuan Ma, John F. Beacom, Chenxiaoji Ling, Cheng Cheng, Jia-Sheng Huang, Norman A. Grogin, S. P. Willner, Min Yun, Heidi B. Hammel, Stefanie N. Milam, Christopher J. Conselice, Simon P. Driver, Brenda Frye, Madeline A. Marshall, Anton Koekemoer, Christopher N. A. Willmer, Aaron Robotham, Jordan C. J. D'Silva, Jake Summers, Jeremy Lim, Kevin Harrington, Leonardo Ferreira, Jose Maria Diego, Nor Pirzkal, Stephen M. Wilkins, Lifan Wang, Nimish P. Hathi, Adi Zitrin, Rachana A. Bhatawdekar, Nathan J. Adams, Lukas J. Furtak, Peter Maksym, Michael J. Rutkowski, Giovanni G. Fazio
Figure caption: Similar to Figure 2 but for four of the eight F200W dropouts. The other four are shown in Figure 5. The numbers shown on the F356W images are their magnitudes in this band (m 356). F200D_H11 is consistent with being a point source.
Paper: Gas-rich, Field Ultra-diffuse Galaxies Host Few Gobular Clusters
Authors: Michael G. Jones, Ananthan Karunakaran, Paul Bennet, David J. Sand, Kristine Spekkens, Burçin Mutlu-Pakdil, Denija Crnojević, Steven Janowiecki, Lukas Leisman, Catherine E. Fielder
Figure caption: Effective radius vs. central surface brightness for our target sample (black error bars) compared to the van Dokkum et al. (2015) UDGs in Coma (red crosses) and LSB galaxies in Fornax (gray circles, Venhola et al. 2017). The horizontal dashed line indicates the standard r eff = 1.5 kpc cutoff for UDGs. The vertical dashed line at μ g,0 = 24 corresponds to the UDG surface brightness criterion of van Dokkum et al. (2015), while the more relaxed limit of van der Burg et al. (2016) is approximated by the dotted line at μ g,0 = 23.2 (for a typical color of g − r = 0.3). Nine of our targets meet the more stringent criteria, while 11 meet the more relaxed criteria. The horizontal red and black arrows indicate how the surface brightness values of the van Dokkum et al. (2015) UDGs and our sample would shift (on average, based on their mean g − r colors) if the r-band central surface brightness was used instead of the g band. As our objects are bluer their surface brightness does not increase as much between the g and r bands.
Paper: A Candidate for the Least-massive Black Hole in the First 1.1 Billion Years of the Universe
Authors: Masafusa Onoue, Kohei Inayoshi, Xuheng Ding, Wenxiu Li, Zhengrong Li, Juan Molina, Akio K. Inoue, Linhua Jiang, Luis C. Ho
Figure caption: The results of our SED fitting. In each panel, we show the best-fit model of galaxies or AGNs with a black line. The photometric redshift and the chi-square of the best-fit model are shown at the upper left of each panel. The observed photometry is shown in red dots and the filter-convolved magnitudes of the best-fit models in blue crosses. (a) The best-fit galaxy template from Inoue's (2011) galaxy models. This model is a metal-poor (Z = 0.004) galaxy at z = 4.93 with a stellar age of 500 Myr, including dust attenuation of E(B − V) = 0.1 mag with the Calzetti law. (b) The best-fit galaxy model when the stellar age is fixed to 10 Myr. This model is also a Z = 0.004 galaxy with photometric redshift z = 5.09. Heavier dust attenuation (E(B − V) = 0.25 mag) by the Calzetti law is required to trace the continuum. (c) The low-redshift composite quasar spectrum of Vanden Berk et al. (2001) scaled to match the photometry of CEERS-AGN-z5-1. (d) The same low-redshift composite spectrum with emission lines added to match Hα. See the text for the details of the procedure. (e) The SED model of an accreting super-Eddington BH (Inayoshi et al. 2022a). The scale of the best-fit model corresponds to the central BH mass of M BH = 106.3  M ⊙.
Paper: A Candidate for the Least-massive Black Hole in the First 1.1 Billion Years of the Universe
Authors: Masafusa Onoue, Kohei Inayoshi, Xuheng Ding, Wenxiu Li, Zhengrong Li, Juan Molina, Akio K. Inoue, Linhua Jiang, Luis C. Ho
Figure caption: The BH mass–bolometric luminosity plane. The bolometric luminosity of CEERS-AGN-z5-1 (L bol = 2.5 × 1044 erg s−1;  red line) is estimated from its 3000 Å monochromatic luminosity. The virial BH masses of broad-line AGNs at various redshift ranges are also shown for comparison. Blue symbols are z > 6 quasars from Subaru/HSC (circle; Matsuoka et al. 2019; Onoue et al. 2019; Kato et al. 2020), SDSS (diamond; Shen et al. 2019), and CFHQS (triangle; Willott et al. 2010). Green squares show z ∼ 4.8 quasars from Trakhtenbrot et al. (2011). The blue contour is the normalized distribution of SDSS DR7 quasars with a logarithm step of 0.5 dex. (Shen et al. 2011). The BH masses from the literature above are estimated based on Mg II λ2798. The gray contour shows the normalized distribution of low-redshift (z ≲ 0.35) broad-line AGNs (Liu et al. 2019) with the same step as for Shen et al.'s z ∼ 1–2 distribution. Black symbols are the individual low-redshift AGNs with estimated BH masses M BH ≲ 106.3  M ⊙ from Greene & Ho (2007; dot), and Liu et al. (2018; cross). Those low-redshift samples use Balmer lines to estimate BH masses. Clearly, CEERS-AGN-z5-1 has the typical luminosity of the z < 0.35 AGNs with M BH ≳ 106  M ⊙. The three diagonal lines indicate 100%, 10%, and 1% Eddington luminosity from top left to bottom right.