MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1985060735 · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/708/1/584

A COMPARISON OF X-RAY AND MID-INFRARED SELECTION OF OBSCURED ACTIVE GALACTIC NUCLEI

2009· article· en· W1985060735 on OpenAlexaff
Megan E. Eckart, Ian D. McGreer, Daniel Stern, Fiona A. Harrison, D. J. Helfand

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsQuest University Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActive galactic nucleusPhysicsAstrophysicsInfraredLuminosityAstronomyRedshiftLuminous infrared galaxyGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We compare the relative merits of active galactic nuclei (AGNs) selection at X-ray and mid-infrared wavelengths using data from moderately deep fields observed by both Chandra and Spitzer . The X-ray-selected AGN sample and associated photometric and spectroscopic optical follow-up are drawn from a subset of fields studied as part of the Serendipitous Extragalactic X-ray Source Identification (SEXSI) program. Mid-infrared data in these fields are derived from targeted and archival Spitzer imaging, and mid-infrared AGN selection is accomplished primarily through application of the Infrared Array Camera (IRAC) color–color AGN "wedge" selection technique. Nearly all X-ray sources in these fields which exhibit clear spectroscopic signatures of AGN activity have mid-infrared colors consistent with IRAC AGN selection. These are predominantly the most luminous X-ray sources. X-ray sources that lack high-ionization and/or broad lines in their optical spectra are far less likely to be selected as AGNs by mid-infrared color selection techniques. The fraction of X-ray sources identified as AGNs in the mid-infrared increases monotonically as the X-ray luminosity increases. Conversely, only 22% of mid-infrared-selected AGNs are detected at X-ray energies in the moderately deep (〈 t exp 〉 ≈ 100 ks) SEXSI Chandra data. We hypothesize that IRAC sources with AGN colors that lack X-ray detections are predominantly high-luminosity AGNs that are obscured and/or lie at high redshift. A stacking analysis of X-ray-undetected sources shows that objects in the mid-infrared AGN selection wedge have average X-ray fluxes in the 2–8 keV band 3 times higher than sources that fall outside the wedge. Their X-ray spectra are also harder. The hardness ratio of the wedge-selected stack is consistent with moderate intrinsic obscuration, but is not suggestive of a highly obscured, Compton-thick source population. It is evident from this comparative study that in order to create a complete, unbiased census of supermassive black hole growth and evolution, a combination of sensitive infrared, X-ray, and hard X-ray selection is required. We conclude by discussing what samples will be provided by upcoming survey missions such as WISE , eROSITA , and NuSTAR .

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations67
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→