The DOI matches its Crossref record; 169 of the 169 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The bolometric quasar luminosity function at z = 0–7
Open accessAbstract
In this paper, we provide updated constraints on the bolometric quasar luminosity function (QLF) from z = 0 to z = 7. The constraints are based on an observational compilation that includes observations in the rest-frame IR, B band, UV, soft, and hard X-ray in past decades. Our method follows Hopkins et al. with an updated quasar SED model and bolometric and extinction corrections. The new best-fitting bolometric quasar luminosity function behaves qualitatively different from the old Hopkins model at high redshift. Compared with the old model, the number density normalization decreases towards higher redshift and the bright-end slope is steeper at z ≳ 2. Due to the paucity of measurements at the faint end, the faint end slope at z ≳ 5 is quite uncertain. We present two models, one featuring a progressively steeper faint-end slope at higher redshift and the other featuring a shallow faint-end slope at z ≳ 5. Further multiband observations of the faint-end QLF are needed to distinguish between these models. The evolutionary pattern of the bolometric QLF can be interpreted as an early phase likely dominated by the hierarchical assembly of structures and a late phase likely dominated by the quenching of galaxies. We explore the implications of this model on the ionizing photon production by quasars, the CXB spectrum, the SMBH mass density, and mass functions. The predicted hydrogen photoionization rate contributed by quasars is subdominant during the epoch of reionization and only becomes important at z ≲ 3. The predicted CXB spectrum, cosmic SMBH mass density, and SMBH mass function are generally consistent with existing observations.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
<tt>emcee</tt>: The MCMC Hammer
Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J. (2013) · Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific · doi:10.1086/670067 · Cited by 12,414
Unified Schemes for Radio-Loud Active Galactic Nuclei
Urry, C. M., & Padovani, P. (1995) · Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific · doi:10.1086/133630 · Cited by 4,868
A Fundamental Relation between Supermassive Black Holes and Their Host Galaxies
Ferrarese, L., & Merritt, D. (2000) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1086/312838 · Cited by 4,417
Coevolution (Or Not) of Supermassive Black Holes and Host Galaxies
Kormendy, J., & Ho, L. C. (2013) · Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics · doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-082708-101811 · Cited by 4,196
The Demography of Massive Dark Objects in Galaxy Centers
Magorrian, J., Tremaine, S., Richstone, D., Bender, R., Bower, G., Dressler, A., Faber, S. M., Gebhardt, K., Green, R., Grillmair, C., et al. (1998) · The Astronomical Journal · doi:10.1086/300353 · Cited by 4,007
Unified Models for Active Galactic Nuclei and Quasars
Antonucci, R. (1993) · Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics · doi:10.1146/annurev.aa.31.090193.002353 · Cited by 3,943
Croton, D. J., Springel, V., White, S. D. M., De Lucia, G., Frenk, C. S., Gao, L., Jenkins, A., Kauffmann, G., Navarro, J. F., & Yoshida, N. (2006) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09675.x · Cited by 3,685
A Relationship between Nuclear Black Hole Mass and Galaxy Velocity Dispersion
Gebhardt, K., Bender, R., Bower, G., Dressler, A., Faber, S. M., Filippenko, A. V., Green, R., Grillmair, C., Ho, L. C., Kormendy, J., et al. (2000) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1086/312840 · Cited by 3,671
Observational Evidence of Active Galactic Nuclei Feedback
Fabian, A. C. (2012) · Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics · doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125521 · Cited by 2,795
Sanders, D. B., & Mirabel, I. F. (1996) · Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics · doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.34.1.749 · Cited by 2,786
Cited by
Astrophysics with the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna
Amaro-Seoane, P., Andrews, J., Arca Sedda, M., Askar, A., Baghi, Q., Balasov, R., Bartos, I., Bavera, S. S., Bellovary, J., Berry, C. P. L., et al. (2023) · Living Reviews in Relativity · doi:10.1007/s41114-022-00041-y · Cited by 609
Greene, J. E., Labbe, I., Goulding, A. D., Furtak, L. J., Chemerynska, I., Kokorev, V., Dayal, P., Volonteri, M., Williams, C. C., Wang 王, B. 冰., et al. (2024) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad1e5f · Cited by 429
Quasars and the Intergalactic Medium at Cosmic Dawn
Fan, X., Bañados, E., & Simcoe, R. A. (2023) · Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics · doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-052920-102455 · Cited by 304
What drives the growth of black holes: A decade of progress
Alexander, D. M., Hickox, R. C., Aird, J., Combes, F., Costa, T., Habouzit, M., Harrison, C. M., Leng, R. I., Morabito, L. K., Uckelman, S. L., et al. (2025) · New Astronomy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.newar.2025.101733 · Cited by 18
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Shen, X., Hopkins, P. F., Faucher-Giguère, C.-A., Alexander, D. M., Richards, G. T., Ross, N. P., & Hickox, R. C.
- Venue
- Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2020-01
- Volume
- 495
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 3252-3275
- ISSN
- 0035-8711 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2966
- OpenAlex
- W2999485775
- Cited by
- 323
- References
- 169
- FWCI
- 16.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The bolometric quasar luminosity function at z = 0–7. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/mnras/staa1381
- The paper
- Shen, X., Hopkins, P. F., Faucher-Giguère, C.-A., Alexander, D. M., Richards, G. T., Ross, N. P., & Hickox, R. C. (2020). The bolometric quasar luminosity function at z = 0–7. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/staa1381
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
