Paper detail

On the relation between hard X-ray photon index versus accretion rate for super-Eddington accreting quasars

We investigate whether the hard X-ray photon index ($Γ$) versus accretion rate correlation for super-Eddington accreting quasars is different from that for sub-Eddington accreting quasars. We construct a sample of 113 bright quasars from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey Data Release 14 quasar catalog, including 38 quasars as the super-Eddington subsample and 75 quasars as the sub-Eddington subsample. We derive black-hole masses using a simple-epoch virial mass formula based on the ${\rm Hβ}$ lines, and we use the standard thin disk model to derive the dimensionless accretion rates ($\dot{\mathscr{M}}$) for our sample. The X-ray data for these quasars are collected from the Chandra and XMM-Newton archives. We fit the hard X-ray spectra using a single power-law model to obtain $Γ$ values. We find a statistically significant ($R_{\rm S}=0.43$, $p=7.75\times{10}^{-3}$) correlation between $Γ$ and $\dot{\mathscr{M}}$ for the super-Eddington subsample. The $Γ$-$\dot{\mathscr{M}}$ correlation for the sub-Eddington subsample is also significant, but weaker ($R_{\rm S}=0.30$, $p=9.98\times{10}^{-3}$). Linear regression analysis shows that ${\rm Γ}=(0.34\pm0.11){\rm log}{\dot{\mathscr{M}}}+(1.71\pm0.17)$ and ${\rm Γ}=(0.09\pm0.04){\rm log}{\dot{\mathscr{M}}}+(1.93\pm0.04)$ for the super- and sub-Eddington subsamples, respectively. The $Γ$-$\dot{\mathscr{M}}$ correlations of the two subsamples are different, suggesting different disk-corona connections in these two types of systems. We propose one qualitative explanation of the steeper $Γ$-$\dot{\mathscr{M}}$ correlation in the super-Eddington regime that involves larger seed photon fluxes received by the compact coronae from the thick disks in super-Eddington accreting quasars.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.