论文标题

Chandra Swift-Bat选择的AGNS II的随访观察结果

Chandra Follow-up Observations of Swift-BAT-selected AGNs II

论文作者

Silver, Ross, Torres-Alba, Nuria, Zhao, Xiurui, Marchesi, Stefano, Pizzetti, Andrealuna, Ajello, Marco, Cusumano, Giancarlo, Parola, Valentina, Segreto, Alberto, Comastri, Andrea

论文摘要

我们介绍了九个低红移(z <= 0.10)的Chandra和Swift-BAT光谱分析,候选候选者掩盖了从Swift-Bat 150个月的目录中选择的积极活跃的银河核(AGN)。我们将柔软的(1-10 keV)X射线与这些蝙蝠源相交,并通过有力动机的模型适合其光谱。1-150KeV能量带中的光谱分析确定所有来源都遮盖了所有源,并具有90%的置信度,并具有一线圆柱密度NH> = 10^22 cm^-2。这些来源中有四个在NH> = 10^23 cm^-2中显示出显着的遮挡,另外两个来源是候选compton-thick-thick活跃的银河核(CT-AGNS),NH> = 10^24 cm^-2。这些两个来源,这些2Masx J020519994-0233055和IRAS 11055和IRAS 11058-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-1131-我们对蝙蝠源的软X射线随访的策略。在这里,我们介绍了到目前为止我们的方法的结果,并分析应用不同选择标准以发现本地宇宙中的CT-AGN的有效性。我们的选择标准的成功率〜20%的成功率,发现了严重遮盖的AGN,其CT性质通过随访的Nustar观察结果证实。这远高于盲目调查中发现的约5%。

We present the combined Chandra and Swift-BAT spectral analysis of nine low-redshift (z <= 0.10), candidate heavily obscured active galactic nuclei (AGN) selected from the Swift-BAT 150-month catalog. We located soft (1-10 keV) X-ray counterparts to these BAT sources and joint fit their spectra with physically motivated models.The spectral analysis in the 1-150 keV energy band determined that all sources are obscured, with a line-of-sight column density NH >= 10^22 cm^-2 at a 90% confidence level. Four of these sources show significant obscuration with NH >= 10^23 cm^-2 and two additional sources are candidate Compton-thick Active Galactic Nuclei (CT-AGNs) with NH >= 10^24 cm^-2.These two sources, 2MASX J02051994-0233055 and IRAS 11058-1131, are the latest addition to the previous 3 CT-AGN candidates found using our strategy for soft X-ray follow-up of BAT sources. In here we present the results of our methodology so far, and analyze the effectiveness of applying different selection criteria to discover CT-AGN in the local Universe. Our selection criteria has a ~20% success rate of discovering heavily obscured AGN whose CT nature is confirmed by follow-up NuSTAR observations. This is much higher than the ~5% found in blind surveys.

扫码加入交流群

加入微信交流群

微信交流群二维码

扫码加入学术交流群,获取更多资源