Paper detail

X-ray spectral properties of the AGN sample in the northern XMM-XXL field

In this paper we describe and publicly release a catalogue consisting of 8445 point-like X-ray sources detected in the XMM-XXL north survey. For the 2512 AGN which have reliable spectroscopy, we present the X-ray spectral fitting which has been computed with a Bayesian approach. We have also applied an X-ray spectral stacking method to different sub-samples. We confirm the well-known Iwasawa-Taniguchi effect in our luminosity-redshift sub-samples, and argue that such an effect is due to a decrease in the covering factor of a distant obscuring torus with increasing X-ray luminosity. By comparing the distribution of the reflection fraction, the ratio of the normalization of the reflected component to the direct radiation, we find that the low-luminosity, low-redshift sub-sample had systematically higher reflection fraction values than the high-redshift, high-luminosity one. On the other hand, no significant difference is found between samples having similar luminosity but different redshift, suggesting that the structure of the torus does not evolve strongly with redshift. Contrary to previous works, we do not find evidence for an increasing photon index at high Eddington ratio. This may be an indication that the structure of the accretion disc changes as the Eddington ratio approaches unity. Comparing our X-ray spectral analysis results with the optical spectral classification, we find that $\sim20$ per cent of optical type-1 AGN show an X-ray absorbing column density higher than $10^{21.5}\,\rm{cm^{-2}}$, and about 50 per cent of type-2 AGN have an X-ray absorbing column density less than $10^{21.5}\,\rm{cm^{-2}}$. We suggest that the excess X-ray absorption shown in the high-luminosity optical type-1 AGN can be due to small-scale dust-free gas within (or close to) the broad line region, while in the low-luminosity ones it can be due to a clumpy torus with a large covering factor.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access10 authors1 topic

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.

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.