Characterizing the roles of transitory obscured phases and inner torus in shaping the fractions of obscured Active Galactic Nuclei at cosmic noon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The origin of obscuration in active galactic nuclei (AGN) is still a matter of contention. It is unclear whether obscured AGN are primarily due to line-of-sight effects (Orientation model), a transitory, dust-enshrouded phase in galaxy evolution (Evolution models), or a combination of both. The role of an inner torus around the central supermassive black hole also remains unclear in pure Evolution models. We use cosmological semi-analytic models and semi-empirical prescriptions to explore obscuration effects in AGN at cosmic noon, in the range $1< z < 3$. We consider a realistic object-by-object modelling of AGN evolution including different AGN light curves (LCs) composed of phases of varying levels of obscuration, usually (but not uniquely) with a larger degree of obscuration before the peak of AGN activity, mimicking the possible clearing effects of strong AGN feedback. Evolution models characterized by AGN LCs with relatively short pre-peak obscured phases followed by more extended optical/ultraviolet (UV) visible post-peak phases, struggle to reproduce the high fraction of obscured AGN at $z \sim$ 2–3 inferred from X-ray surveys. Evolution models characterized by AGN LCs with sharp post-peak declines or persistent or multiple obscuration phases are more successful, although they still face challenges in reproducing the steady drop in the fractions of obscured AGN with increasing luminosity measured by some groups. Invoking a fine-tuning in the input LCs, with more luminous AGN defined by longer optical/UV visible windows, can improve the match to the decreasing fractions of obscured AGN with luminosity. Alternatively, a long-lived central torus-like component, with thickness decreasing with increasing AGN power, naturally boosts the luminosity-dependent fractions of obscured AGN, suggesting that small-scale orientation effects may still represent a key component even in Evolution models. We also find that in our models major mergers and starbursts, when considered in isolation, fall short in accounting for the large fractions of highly obscured faint AGN detected at cosmic noon.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".