Paper detail

An Archival Chandra and XMM-Newton Survey of Type 2 Quasars

(Abridged) We analyzed the {\it Chandra} and {\it XMM-Newton} archival observations for 72 type 2 quasars at $z<1$. These objects were was selected based on the [O III]$λ$5007 optical emission line which we assume to be an approximate indicator of the intrinsic AGN luminosity. We find that the means of the column density and photon index of our sample are $\log N_{\rm H}=23.0$ cm$^{-2}$ and $Γ=1.87$ respectively, which are consistent with results from deep X-ray surveys. The observed ratios of hard X-ray and [O III] line luminosities imply that the majority of our sample suffer significant amounts of obscuration in the hard X-ray band. A more physically realistic model which accounts for both Compton scattering and a potential partial covering of the central X-ray source was used to estimate the true absorbing column density. We find that the absorbing column density estimates based on simple power-law models significantly underestimate the actual absorption in approximately half of the sources. Eleven sources show a prominent Fe K$α$ emission line, and we detect this line in the other sources through a joint fit (spectral stacking). The correlation between the Fe K$α$ and [O III] fluxes and the inverse correlation of the equivalent width of Fe K$α$ line with the ratio of hard X-ray and [O III] fluxes is consistent with previous results for lower luminosity Seyfert 2 galaxies. We conclude that obscuration is the cause of the weak hard X-ray emission rather than intrinsically low X-ray luminosities. We find that about half of the population of optically-selected type 2 quasars are likely to be Compton-thick. We also find no evidence that the amount of X-ray obscuration depends on the AGN luminosity (over a range of more than three orders-of-magnitude in luminosity).

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.