The environmental dependence of X-ray AGN activity at <i>z</i> ∼ 0.4
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT We present an analysis of the X-ray active galactic nucleus (AGN) population in a sample of seven massive galaxy clusters in the redshift range 0.35 < z < 0.45. We utilize high-quality Chandra X-ray imaging to robustly identify AGN and precisely determine cluster masses and centroids. Follow-up VIsible Multi-Object Spectrograph optical spectroscopy allows us to determine which AGN are cluster members. Studying the subset of AGN with 0.5–8 keV luminosities >6.8 × 1042 erg s−1, within r ≤ 2r500 (approximately the virial radius), we find that the cluster AGN space density scales with cluster mass as $\sim M^{-2.0^{+0.8}_{-0.9}}$. This result rules out zero mass dependence of the cluster X-ray AGN space density at the 2.5σ level. We compare our cluster X-ray AGN sample to a control field with identical selection and find that the cluster AGN fraction is significantly suppressed relative to the field when considering the brightest galaxies with V < 21.5. For fainter galaxies, this difference is not present. Comparing the X-ray hardness ratios of cluster member AGN to those in the control field, we find no evidence for enhanced X-ray obscuration of cluster member AGN. Lastly, we see tentative evidence that disturbed cluster environments may contribute to enhanced AGN activity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".