Spectral Energy Distribution of Hyper-Luminous Infrared Galaxies Analyzed with XMM-Newton
•Download as ODP, PDF•
0 likes•444 views
Talk for The X-ray Universe 2008.
![What is all the fuss about? ,[object Object]]()
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to Spectral Energy Distribution of Hyper-Luminous Infrared Galaxies Analyzed with XMM-Newton
Similar to Spectral Energy Distribution of Hyper-Luminous Infrared Galaxies Analyzed with XMM-Newton (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Spectral Energy Distribution of Hyper-Luminous Infrared Galaxies Analyzed with XMM-Newton
- 1. Spectral Energy Distribution of Hyper-Luminous Infrared Galaxies Ángel Ruiz 1 Francisco J. Carrera 1 , Francesca Panessa 1 , Giovanni Miniutt i 2 1: Instituto de Física de Cantabria (CSIC-UC) 2: Institute of Astronomy (University of Cambridge) May 30 th 2008 – X-ray Universe 2008 – Granada, Spain
- 3. Correlation between mass of central BH and spheroid (Magorrian et al. 1998; McLure & Dunlop,2002)
- 4. Similar evolution of X-ray AGN and optical galaxies (Silvermann et al. 2005)
- 6. Correlation between mass of central BH and spheroid (Magorrian et al. 1998; McLure & Dunlop,2002)
- 7. Similar evolution of X-ray AGN and optical galaxies (Silvermann et al. 2005) Connected growth of central BH through accretion and spheroid through star formation
- 9. MIR-FIR-submm : radiation absorbed and re- emitted
- 12. Radio
- 14. MIR-FIR-submm : radiation absorbed and re- emitted
- 17. Radio Happy marriage of X-ray and MIR-FIR astronomy: coincidence in time of Chandra, XMM-Newton, Suzaku, Spitzer, Akari, Herschel...
- 22. Fraction of AGN increases with IR luminosity (Veilleux et al. 1999)
- 23. Most in interacting systems (Farrah et al. 2001)
- 27. Fraction of AGN increases with IR luminosity (Veilleux et al. 1999)
- 28. Most in interacting systems (Farrah et al. 2001)
- 32. Transient phase in AGN evolution?
- 33. ....
- 35. Own XMM-Newton AO-5 data
- 37. 8 4 2 X 0.6 /0.4 0.323 QSO 1.5 IRAS 14026+4341 X 0.7 /0.3 0.36 QSO IRAS 13279+3401 X 0.6 /0.4 0.780 QSO IRAS F12509+3122 X 1 /0 2.038 QSO PG 1247+267 X 0.6 /0.4 0.292 Starburst IRAS 07380-2342 0.5/0.5 0.575 Starburst IRAS F00235+1024 X 1 /0 1.158 QSO PG 1206+459 X 0.8 /0.2 1.334 QSO IRAS 16347+7037 X 0.2/ 0.8 1.21 QSO IRAS F14218+3845 X 0.6 /0.4 0.297 QSO IRAS 18216+6418 0.7 /0.3 0.926 Seyfert 2 IRAS F15307+3252 0.4/ 0.6 0.3 Seyfert 2 IRAS 12514+1027 1 /0 0.442 QSO 2 IRAS 09104+4109 0.35/ 0.65 0.327 QSO 2 IRAS 00182-7112 CT? AGN / STB (IR SED fitting) z Type (opt) Source
- 38. X <42.6 - 3 σ upper limit IRAS 14026+4341 X <42.2 - 3 σ upper limit IRAS 13279+3401 X 44.3 43.8 “ thermal”+direct IRAS F12509+3122 X 45.9 45.5 “ thermal”+direct PG 1247+267 X <42.5 - 3 σ upper limit IRAS 07380-2342 <42.4 - 3 σ upper limit IRAS F00235+1024 X 45.1 <44.0 direct PG 1206+459 X 46.0 45.7 “ thermal”+direct IRAS 16347+7037 X 44.6 <43.8 direct IRAS F14218+3845 X 45.6 45.1 “ thermal”+direct IRAS 18216+6418 43.7 45.5 <43.1 “ direct” IRAS F15307+3252 43.3 42.2 thermal+absorbed direct (4x10 23 ) IRAS 12514+1027 45.3 44.2 “ thermal”+reflected+narrow line IRAS 09104+4109 44.8 <41.9 reflected+narrow line (0.8keV) IRAS 00182-7112 CT? l og L 2-10 log L 0.5-2 Model Source Not detected with XMM-Newton
- 39. X <42.6 - 3 σ upper limit IRAS 14026+4341 X <42.2 - 3 σ upper limit IRAS 13279+3401 X 44.3 43.8 “ thermal”+direct IRAS F12509+3122 X 45.9 45.5 “ thermal”+direct PG 1247+267 X <42.5 - 3 σ upper limit IRAS 07380-2342 <42.4 - 3 σ upper limit IRAS F00235+1024 X 45.1 <44.0 direct PG 1206+459 X 46.0 45.7 “ thermal”+direct IRAS 16347+7037 X 44.6 <43.8 direct IRAS F14218+3845 X 45.6 45.1 “ thermal”+direct IRAS 18216+6418 43.7 45.5 <43.1 “ direct” IRAS F15307+3252 43.3 42.2 thermal+absorbed direct (4x10 23 ) IRAS 12514+1027 45.3 44.2 “ thermal”+reflected+narrow line IRAS 09104+4109 44.8 <41.9 reflected+narrow line (0.8keV) IRAS 00182-7112 CT? l og L 2-10 log L 0.5-2 Model Source Stongly absorbed or no direct continuum
- 40. X <42.6 - 3 σ upper limit IRAS 14026+4341 X <42.2 - 3 σ upper limit IRAS 13279+3401 X 44.3 43.8 “ thermal”+direct IRAS F12509+3122 X 45.9 45.5 “ thermal”+direct PG 1247+267 X <42.5 - 3 σ upper limit IRAS 07380-2342 <42.4 - 3 σ upper limit IRAS F00235+1024 X 45.1 <44.0 direct PG 1206+459 X 46.0 45.7 “ thermal”+direct IRAS 16347+7037 X 44.6 <43.8 direct IRAS F14218+3845 X 45.6 45.1 “ thermal”+direct IRAS 18216+6418 43.7 45.5 <43.1 “ direct” IRAS F15307+3252 43.3 42.2 thermal+absorbed direct (4x10 23 ) IRAS 12514+1027 45.3 44.2 “ thermal”+reflected+narrow line IRAS 09104+4109 44.8 <41.9 reflected+narrow line (0.8keV) IRAS 00182-7112 CT? l og L 2-10 log L 0.5-2 Model Source Soft excess: too bright to come from STB
- 41. X <42.6 - 3 σ upper limit IRAS 14026+4341 X <42.2 - 3 σ upper limit IRAS 13279+3401 X 44.3 43.8 “ thermal”+direct IRAS F12509+3122 X 45.9 45.5 “ thermal”+direct PG 1247+267 X <42.5 - 3 σ upper limit IRAS 07380-2342 <42.4 - 3 σ upper limit IRAS F00235+1024 X 45.1 <44.0 direct PG 1206+459 X 46.0 45.7 “ thermal”+direct IRAS 16347+7037 X 44.6 <43.8 direct IRAS F14218+3845 X 45.6 45.1 “ thermal”+direct IRAS 18216+6418 43.7 45.5 <43.1 “ direct” IRAS F15307+3252 43.3 42.2 thermal+absorbed direct (4x10 23 ) IRAS 12514+1027 45.3 44.2 “ thermal”+reflected+narrow line IRAS 09104+4109 44.8 <41.9 reflected+narrow line (0.8keV) IRAS 00182-7112 CT? l og L 2-10 log L 0.5-2 Model Source Only one detection of thermal emission from STB
- 42. Risaliti & Elvis
- 43. Risaliti & Elvis AGN
- 44. Risaliti & Elvis STARBURST AGN
- 45. Risaliti & Elvis STARBURST AGN AGN-dominated ULIRG
- 46. Risaliti & Elvis STARBURST AGN STB-dominated ULIRG AGN-dominated ULIRG
- 47. Risaliti & Elvis STARBURST AGN STB-dominated ULIRG AGN-dominated ULIRG High-z HLIRGS
- 48. Risaliti & Elvis STARBURST AGN STB-dominated ULIRG AGN-dominated ULIRG High-z HLIRGS AGN-dominated HLIRG
- 49. Risaliti & Elvis STARBURST AGN STB-dominated ULIRG AGN-dominated ULIRG High-z HLIRGS AGN-dominated HLIRG “ Mixed”
- 50. Risaliti & Elvis STARBURST AGN STB-dominated ULIRG AGN-dominated ULIRG High-z HLIRGS AGN-dominated HLIRG STB-dominated HLIRG “ Mixed”
- 51. IRAS 14026+4341 H b @ ..... Å z = ...... Risaliti & Elvis STARBURST AGN STB-dominated ULIRG AGN-dominated ULIRG High-z HLIRGS AGN-dominated HLIRG STB-dominated HLIRG “ Mixed”
- 52. IRAS 13279+3401 Risaliti & Elvis STARBURST AGN STB-dominated ULIRG AGN-dominated ULIRG High-z HLIRGS AGN-dominated HLIRG STB-dominated HLIRG “ Mixed”
- 66. Fitting without X-ray data X 0.3 / 0.7 46.44 IRAS 14026+4341 X 0 / 1 46.65 IRAS 13279+3401 X 1 / 0 46.96 IRAS F12509+3122 X 1 / 0 48.36 PG 1247+267 X 1 / 0 45.74 IRAS 07380-2342 1 / 0 46.52 AGN3 IRAS F00235+1024 X 1 / 0 47.83 PG 1206+459 X 1 / 0 48.33 IRAS 16347+7037 X 1 /0 46.33 IRAS F14218+3845 X 0.8 / 0.2 47.12 IRAS 18216+6418 1 / 0 47.17 IRAS F15307+3252 0.9 / 0.1 45.94 IRAS 12514+1027 0.9 / 0.1 46.61 IRAS 09104+4109 1 / 0 46.55 IRAS 00182-7112 CT? AGN / STB log L BOL Best fit Source AGN3 AGN3 AGN3 AGN3 AGN1 AGN1 AGN1 AGN1 AGN1 AGN1 AGN1 AGN1 STB4 STB4 STB1 STB4 STB4 STB1
- 67. Fitting with X-ray data X 0 / 1 46.44 IRAS 14026+4341 X 0 / 1 46.65 IRAS 13279+3401 X 1 / 0 46.96 IRAS F12509+3122 X 1 / 0 48.36 PG 1247+267 X 0 / 1 45.74 IRAS 07380-2342 0 / 1 46.52 IRAS F00235+1024 X 1 / 0 47.83 PG 1206+459 X 1 / 0 48.33 IRAS 16347+7037 X 1 /0 46.33 IRAS F14218+3845 X 0.7 / 0.3 47.12 IRAS 18216+6418 0.2 / 0.8 47.17 IRAS F15307+3252 0.5 / 0.5 45.94 IRAS 12514+1027 0.6 / 0.4 46.61 IRAS 09104+4109 0 / 1 46.55 IRAS 00182-7112 CT? AGN / STB log L BOL Best fit Source AGN3 AGN5 AGN1 AGN1 AGN1 AGN1 AGN1 AGN1 AGN1 STB4 STB1 STB1 STB1 STB2 STB1 STB4 STB4 STB1
- 68. X 0 / 1 46.44 (STB4) IRAS 14026+4341 X 0 / 1 46.65 (STB4) IRAS 13279+3401 X 1 / 0 46.96 AGN1 IRAS F12509+3122 X 0.6 / 0.4 48.36 AGN1 + STB3 PG 1247+267 X 0 / 1 45.74 STB1 IRAS 07380-2342 0 / 1 46.52 STB3 IRAS F00235+1024 X 0.7 / 0.3 47.83 AGN1 + STB4 PG 1206+459 X 1 / 0 48.33 AGN1 IRAS 16347+7037 X 1 /0 46.33 AGN1 IRAS F14218+3845 X 0.8 / 0.2 47.12 AGN1 + STB1 IRAS 18216+6418 1 / 0 47.17 AGN6 IRAS F15307+3252 0.8 / 0.2 45.94 AGN6 + STB4 IRAS 12514+1027 0.9 / 0.1 46.61 AGN6 + STB4 IRAS 09104+4109 1 / 0 46.55 AGN5 IRAS 00182-7112 CT? AGN / STB log L BOL Best fit Source Compton Thick
- 69. X 0 / 1 46.44 (STB4) IRAS 14026+4341 X 0 / 1 46.65 (STB4) IRAS 13279+3401 X 1 / 0 46.96 AGN1 IRAS F12509+3122 X 0.6 / 0.4 48.36 AGN1 + STB3 PG 1247+267 X 0 / 1 45.74 STB1 IRAS 07380-2342 0 / 1 46.52 STB3 IRAS F00235+1024 X 0.7 / 0.3 47.83 AGN1 + STB4 PG 1206+459 X 1 / 0 48.33 AGN1 IRAS 16347+7037 X 1 /0 46.33 AGN1 IRAS F14218+3845 X 0.8 / 0.2 47.12 AGN1 + STB1 IRAS 18216+6418 1 / 0 47.17 AGN6 IRAS F15307+3252 0.8 / 0.2 45.94 AGN6 + STB4 IRAS 12514+1027 0.9 / 0.1 46.61 AGN6 + STB4 IRAS 09104+4109 1 / 0 46.55 AGN5 IRAS 00182-7112 CT? AGN / STB log L BOL Best fit Source AGN only: 5 sources
- 70. X 0 / 1 46.44 (STB4) IRAS 14026+4341 X 0 / 1 46.65 (STB4) IRAS 13279+3401 X 1 / 0 46.96 AGN1 IRAS F12509+3122 X 0.6 / 0.4 48.36 AGN1 + STB3 PG 1247+267 X 0 / 1 45.74 STB1 IRAS 07380-2342 0 / 1 46.52 STB3 IRAS F00235+1024 X 0.7 / 0.3 47.83 AGN1 + STB4 PG 1206+459 X 1 / 0 48.33 AGN1 IRAS 16347+7037 X 1 /0 46.33 AGN1 IRAS F14218+3845 X 0.8 / 0.2 47.12 AGN1 + STB1 IRAS 18216+6418 1 / 0 47.17 AGN6 IRAS F15307+3252 0.8 / 0.2 45.94 AGN6 + STB4 IRAS 12514+1027 0.9 / 0.1 46.61 AGN6 + STB4 IRAS 09104+4109 1 / 0 46.55 AGN5 IRAS 00182-7112 CT? AGN / STB log L BOL Best fit Source SB only: 4 sources
- 71. X 0 / 1 46.44 (STB4) IRAS 14026+4341 X 0 / 1 46.65 (STB4) IRAS 13279+3401 X 1 / 0 46.96 AGN1 IRAS F12509+3122 X 0.6 / 0.4 48.36 AGN1 + STB3 PG 1247+267 X 0 / 1 45.74 STB1 IRAS 07380-2342 0 / 1 46.52 STB3 IRAS F00235+1024 X 0.7 / 0.3 47.83 AGN1 + STB4 PG 1206+459 X 1 / 0 48.33 AGN1 IRAS 16347+7037 X 1 /0 46.33 AGN1 IRAS F14218+3845 X 0.8 / 0.2 47.12 AGN1 + STB1 IRAS 18216+6418 1 / 0 47.17 AGN6 IRAS F15307+3252 0.8 / 0.2 45.94 AGN6 + STB4 IRAS 12514+1027 0.9 / 0.1 46.61 AGN6 + STB4 IRAS 09104+4109 1 / 0 46.55 AGN5 IRAS 00182-7112 CT? AGN / STB log L BOL Best fit Source Composite: 5 sources
- 72. Bolometric output dominated by AGN emission X 0 / 1 46.44 (STB4) IRAS 14026+4341 X 0 / 1 46.65 (STB4) IRAS 13279+3401 X 1 / 0 46.96 AGN1 IRAS F12509+3122 X 0.6 / 0.4 48.36 AGN1 + STB3 PG 1247+267 X 0 / 1 45.74 STB1 IRAS 07380-2342 0 / 1 46.52 STB3 IRAS F00235+1024 X 0.7 / 0.3 47.83 AGN1 + STB4 PG 1206+459 X 1 / 0 48.33 AGN1 IRAS 16347+7037 X 1 /0 46.33 AGN1 IRAS F14218+3845 X 0.8 / 0.2 47.12 AGN1 + STB1 IRAS 18216+6418 1 / 0 47.17 AGN6 IRAS F15307+3252 0.8 / 0.2 45.94 AGN6 + STB4 IRAS 12514+1027 0.9 / 0.1 46.61 AGN6 + STB4 IRAS 09104+4109 1 / 0 46.55 AGN5 IRAS 00182-7112 CT? AGN / STB log L BOL Best fit Source
- 77. Future work: include more complex and detailed models of STB and AGN
Editor's Notes
- In the last years strong evidences have been found supporting the hypothesis that Active Galactic Nuclei and galaxy formation and evolution are closely related, that is, there is a connection between the growth of the central supermassive black hole and the spheroid of the galaxy. So, how can we study this relationship? On the one hand, star formation takes place in heavily obscured environment, so we need penetrating radiation, like the X-rays, or the MIR-FIR-submm. On the other hand, BH growth produces AGN activity, and X-ray emission is its signature. However, most of this radiation is absorbed and re-radiated in MIR-FIR bands. We see that IR and X-ray observations are essential to understand the star formation and AGN phenomena. Fortunately, at this time we have powerful tools to observe the Universe in either ranges, like XMM, Chandra, Spitzer, etc.
- In the last years strong evidences have been found supporting the hypothesis that Active Galactic Nuclei and galaxy formation and evolution are closely related, that is, there is a connection between the growth of the central supermassive black hole and the spheroid of the galaxy. So, how can we study this relationship? On the one hand, star formation takes place in heavily obscured environment, so we need penetrating radiation, like the X-rays, or the MIR-FIR-submm. On the other hand, BH growth produces AGN activity, and X-ray emission is its signature. However, most of this radiation is absorbed and re-radiated in MIR-FIR bands. We see that IR and X-ray observations are essential to understand the star formation and AGN phenomena. Fortunately, at this time we have powerful tools to observe the Universe in either ranges, like XMM, Chandra, Spitzer, etc.
- We can observe the AGN-galaxy co-evolution with differents methods, for instance, through targeted MIR observation of X-ray sources, or by multi-wavelength surveys, or, through targeted X-ray observations of MIR-FIR sources, like the Ultraluminous or the Hyperluminous infrared galaxies, the core of thid talk.
- ULIRGs are sources with an infrared luminosity between 10 to the 12 and 10 to the 13 solar luminosities. IR and X-rays studies suggest that they are composite sources, powered by starburst and/or ANG, most of them being starburst dominated. Most are in interacting systems, that is, they are triggered by galaxy mergers. HLIRGs present an infrared luminosity greater than 10 to the 13 solar luminosities. IR and optical observations support that most harbour and AGN, although the main power source is still controversial. Only about a third are located in interacting system, so we cannot just classified them as the high luminosity end of ULIRGs. A few have been studied in X-rays, some of them been heavily obscured. HLIRGs present strong star formation and high AGN fraction, so they are excellent labs to investigate the connection between extreme star formation and BH growth.
- ULIRGs are sources with an infrared luminosity between 10 to the 12 and 10 to the 13 solar luminosities. IR and X-rays studies suggest that they are composite sources, powered by starburst and/or ANG, most of them being starburst dominated. Most are in interacting systems, that is, they are triggered by galaxy mergers. HLIRGs present an infrared luminosity greater than 10 to the 13 solar luminosities. IR and optical observations support that most harbour and AGN, although the main power source is still controversial. Only about a third are located in interacting system, so we cannot just classified them as the high luminosity end of ULIRGs. A few have been studied in X-rays, some of them been heavily obscured. HLIRGs present strong star formation and high AGN fraction, so they are excellent labs to investigate the connection between extreme star formation and BH growth.
- We have done the first systematic study of HLIRGs in the X-ray band. We choose those HLIRGs of the Rowan-Robinson sample with public XMM data as of December 2004, and we added our own XMM data. We limited this sample to sources with redshift less than 2, to avoid biasing towards high redshift quasars. We have fourteen objects in the final sample, all of them with SED fitting in the infrared.
- This is the final sample. In accord with their optical spectra, we have two starburst galaxies, 4 type 2 and 8 type 1 AGNs, either seyfert and quasars. Previous results suggest that 5 of this objects are Compton Thick candidates.
- 4 sources were not detected by XMM. We calculated three sigma upper limits for them. All the detected sources present an AGN-dominated X-ray spectrum.
- Three sources are strongly absorbed or even they have no direct continuum, just a reflection component.
- We found a thermal component in 5 sources too bright to come from a starburst, but consistent with the soft excess associated with AGNs.
- Only one source present thermal emission truly consistent with a starburst origin.
- This plot shows the hard X-ray versus the FIR luminosity. This line represents the expected X-ray luminosity of a starburst galaxy given its FIR luminosity. And this area is the same for AGNs, taking account the intrinsic dispersion in the spectral energy distribution of AGNs. We have included a comparison sample of high redshift HLIRGs, and a sample of ULIRG studied in X-rays. These are AGN dominated objects, and these are SB dominated. Most of our HLIRGs, and the high-z sample, lie in the AGN-zone, although they are systematically underluminous in X-rays with respect to the mean value. The non detected sources are consistent with starburst luminosity. There are also two composite objects, that is, nor SB or AGN alone can explain their X-ray luminosites. Among these SB dominated HLIRGs are the sources optically classified as starburst, but also two type 1 QSO. They are quasars extremely underluminous in X-rays.
- This plot shows the hard X-ray versus the FIR luminosity. This line represents the expected X-ray luminosity of a starburst galaxy given its FIR luminosity. And this area is the same for AGNs, taking account the intrinsic dispersion in the spectral energy distribution of AGNs. We have included a comparison sample of high redshift HLIRGs, and a sample of ULIRG studied in X-rays. These are AGN dominated objects, and these are SB dominated. Most of our HLIRGs, and the high-z sample, lie in the AGN-zone, although they are systematically underluminous in X-rays with respect to the mean value. The non detected sources are consistent with starburst luminosity. There are also two composite objects, that is, nor SB or AGN alone can explain their X-ray luminosites. Among these SB dominated HLIRGs are the sources optically classified as starburst, but also two type 1 QSO. They are quasars extremely underluminous in X-rays.
- This plot shows the hard X-ray versus the FIR luminosity. This line represents the expected X-ray luminosity of a starburst galaxy given its FIR luminosity. And this area is the same for AGNs, taking account the intrinsic dispersion in the spectral energy distribution of AGNs. We have included a comparison sample of high redshift HLIRGs, and a sample of ULIRG studied in X-rays. These are AGN dominated objects, and these are SB dominated. Most of our HLIRGs, and the high-z sample, lie in the AGN-zone, although they are systematically underluminous in X-rays with respect to the mean value. The non detected sources are consistent with starburst luminosity. There are also two composite objects, that is, nor SB or AGN alone can explain their X-ray luminosites. Among these SB dominated HLIRGs are the sources optically classified as starburst, but also two type 1 QSO. They are quasars extremely underluminous in X-rays.
- This plot shows the hard X-ray versus the FIR luminosity. This line represents the expected X-ray luminosity of a starburst galaxy given its FIR luminosity. And this area is the same for AGNs, taking account the intrinsic dispersion in the spectral energy distribution of AGNs. We have included a comparison sample of high redshift HLIRGs, and a sample of ULIRG studied in X-rays. These are AGN dominated objects, and these are SB dominated. Most of our HLIRGs, and the high-z sample, lie in the AGN-zone, although they are systematically underluminous in X-rays with respect to the mean value. The non detected sources are consistent with starburst luminosity. There are also two composite objects, that is, nor SB or AGN alone can explain their X-ray luminosites. Among these SB dominated HLIRGs are the sources optically classified as starburst, but also two type 1 QSO. They are quasars extremely underluminous in X-rays.
- This plot shows the hard X-ray versus the FIR luminosity. This line represents the expected X-ray luminosity of a starburst galaxy given its FIR luminosity. And this area is the same for AGNs, taking account the intrinsic dispersion in the spectral energy distribution of AGNs. We have included a comparison sample of high redshift HLIRGs, and a sample of ULIRG studied in X-rays. These are AGN dominated objects, and these are SB dominated. Most of our HLIRGs, and the high-z sample, lie in the AGN-zone, although they are systematically underluminous in X-rays with respect to the mean value. The non detected sources are consistent with starburst luminosity. There are also two composite objects, that is, nor SB or AGN alone can explain their X-ray luminosites. Among these SB dominated HLIRGs are the sources optically classified as starburst, but also two type 1 QSO. They are quasars extremely underluminous in X-rays.
- This plot shows the hard X-ray versus the FIR luminosity. This line represents the expected X-ray luminosity of a starburst galaxy given its FIR luminosity. And this area is the same for AGNs, taking account the intrinsic dispersion in the spectral energy distribution of AGNs. We have included a comparison sample of high redshift HLIRGs, and a sample of ULIRG studied in X-rays. These are AGN dominated objects, and these are SB dominated. Most of our HLIRGs, and the high-z sample, lie in the AGN-zone, although they are systematically underluminous in X-rays with respect to the mean value. The non detected sources are consistent with starburst luminosity. There are also two composite objects, that is, nor SB or AGN alone can explain their X-ray luminosites. Among these SB dominated HLIRGs are the sources optically classified as starburst, but also two type 1 QSO. They are quasars extremely underluminous in X-rays.
- This plot shows the hard X-ray versus the FIR luminosity. This line represents the expected X-ray luminosity of a starburst galaxy given its FIR luminosity. And this area is the same for AGNs, taking account the intrinsic dispersion in the spectral energy distribution of AGNs. We have included a comparison sample of high redshift HLIRGs, and a sample of ULIRG studied in X-rays. These are AGN dominated objects, and these are SB dominated. Most of our HLIRGs, and the high-z sample, lie in the AGN-zone, although they are systematically underluminous in X-rays with respect to the mean value. The non detected sources are consistent with starburst luminosity. There are also two composite objects, that is, nor SB or AGN alone can explain their X-ray luminosites. Among these SB dominated HLIRGs are the sources optically classified as starburst, but also two type 1 QSO. They are quasars extremely underluminous in X-rays.
- This plot shows the hard X-ray versus the FIR luminosity. This line represents the expected X-ray luminosity of a starburst galaxy given its FIR luminosity. And this area is the same for AGNs, taking account the intrinsic dispersion in the spectral energy distribution of AGNs. We have included a comparison sample of high redshift HLIRGs, and a sample of ULIRG studied in X-rays. These are AGN dominated objects, and these are SB dominated. Most of our HLIRGs, and the high-z sample, lie in the AGN-zone, although they are systematically underluminous in X-rays with respect to the mean value. The non detected sources are consistent with starburst luminosity. There are also two composite objects, that is, nor SB or AGN alone can explain their X-ray luminosites. Among these SB dominated HLIRGs are the sources optically classified as starburst, but also two type 1 QSO. They are quasars extremely underluminous in X-rays.
- This plot shows the hard X-ray versus the FIR luminosity. This line represents the expected X-ray luminosity of a starburst galaxy given its FIR luminosity. And this area is the same for AGNs, taking account the intrinsic dispersion in the spectral energy distribution of AGNs. We have included a comparison sample of high redshift HLIRGs, and a sample of ULIRG studied in X-rays. These are AGN dominated objects, and these are SB dominated. Most of our HLIRGs, and the high-z sample, lie in the AGN-zone, although they are systematically underluminous in X-rays with respect to the mean value. The non detected sources are consistent with starburst luminosity. There are also two composite objects, that is, nor SB or AGN alone can explain their X-ray luminosites. Among these SB dominated HLIRGs are the sources optically classified as starburst, but also two type 1 QSO. They are quasars extremely underluminous in X-rays.
- This plot shows the hard X-ray versus the FIR luminosity. This line represents the expected X-ray luminosity of a starburst galaxy given its FIR luminosity. And this area is the same for AGNs, taking account the intrinsic dispersion in the spectral energy distribution of AGNs. We have included a comparison sample of high redshift HLIRGs, and a sample of ULIRG studied in X-rays. These are AGN dominated objects, and these are SB dominated. Most of our HLIRGs, and the high-z sample, lie in the AGN-zone, although they are systematically underluminous in X-rays with respect to the mean value. The non detected sources are consistent with starburst luminosity. There are also two composite objects, that is, nor SB or AGN alone can explain their X-ray luminosites. Among these SB dominated HLIRGs are the sources optically classified as starburst, but also two type 1 QSO. They are quasars extremely underluminous in X-rays.
- This plot shows the hard X-ray versus the FIR luminosity. This line represents the expected X-ray luminosity of a starburst galaxy given its FIR luminosity. And this area is the same for AGNs, taking account the intrinsic dispersion in the spectral energy distribution of AGNs. We have included a comparison sample of high redshift HLIRGs, and a sample of ULIRG studied in X-rays. These are AGN dominated objects, and these are SB dominated. Most of our HLIRGs, and the high-z sample, lie in the AGN-zone, although they are systematically underluminous in X-rays with respect to the mean value. The non detected sources are consistent with starburst luminosity. There are also two composite objects, that is, nor SB or AGN alone can explain their X-ray luminosites. Among these SB dominated HLIRGs are the sources optically classified as starburst, but also two type 1 QSO. They are quasars extremely underluminous in X-rays.
- We have seen that most HIRGS in our sample present a systematic IR excess with respect to the mean AGN value. This could be due to X-ray obscuration, or starburst emission, or may be an intrinsic difference between the SED of AGN in HLIRGs and the SED of local QSO. Moreover, we are interested in the relative contribution of the starburst and AGN to the total bolometric output. Then, to solve this question, we have built and modelled the SED of every source in our sample.
- We have seen that most HIRGS in our sample present a systematic IR excess with respect to the mean AGN value. This could be due to X-ray obscuration, or starburst emission, or may be an intrinsic difference between the SED of AGN in HLIRGs and the SED of local QSO. Moreover, we are interested in the relative contribution of the starburst and AGN to the total bolometric output. Then, to solve this question, we have built and modelled the SED of every source in our sample.
- To model the HLIRGs SED, we used as templates the observed SED of standard starbursts and AGNs. As starburst templates, we employed the SED of these four objects.
- We have used 6 AGN templates: the radio quiet and radio loud mean quasar SED, and the SEDs of 4 type 2 sources, with column densities from 10 to de 22 to greater than 10 to the 25.
- We have used 6 AGN templates: the radio quiet and radio loud mean quasar SED, and the SEDs of 4 type 2 sources, with column densities from 10 to de 22 to greater than 10 to the 25.
- These are the SED and their best fit for the HLIRGs optically classified as starburst...
- ... for the type 1..
- ... and the type 2 AGNs. This fits could be improved using more complex models. Nevertheless, we found some interesting results:
- Most of CT candidates have a CT template in their models.
- Most of CT candidates have a CT template in their models.
- Most of CT candidates have a CT template in their models.
- 5 sources can be well fitted with just an AGN template,
- And 4 sources with just a starburst template. The preferred templates for starburst are young and dusty bursts.
- In 5 sources both components are needed. In total, 10 out of 14 sources need an AGN component. The bolometric luminosity of these objects are clearly AGN dominated.
- In 5 sources both components are needed. In total, 10 out of 14 sources need an AGN component. The bolometric luminosity of these objects are clearly AGN dominated.