The spatial clustering of X-ray selected AGN R. Gilli Istituto Nazionale di Astrofisica (INAF) Osservatorio Astronomico di Bologna On behalf of the CDFS.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The evolution of SMBH from Hard X-ray surveys Andrea Comastri (INAF – Osservatorio di Bologna – Italy) The XRB as a tracer of SMBH mass density Hard X-ray.
Advertisements

Hierarchical Clustering Leopoldo Infante Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile Reunión Latinoamericana de Astronomía Córdoba, septiembre 2001.
HI in galaxies at intermediate redshifts Jayaram N Chengalur NCRA/TIFR Philip Lah (ANU) Frank Briggs (ANU) Matthew Colless (AAO) Roberto De Propris (CTIO)
COSMOS Kyoto meeting May 2005 Obscured AGN in the COSMOS field Andrea Comastri (INAF – Bologna) on behalf of the XMM-COSMOS team.
Extragalatic Surveys, Cambridge MA, Nov 6-8, 2006 Vincenzo Mainieri G. Hasinger, N. Cappelluti, M. Brusa, F. Civano, A. Comastri, M. Elvis, A. Finoguenov,
Swift/BAT Hard X-ray Survey Preliminary results in Markwardt et al ' energy coded color.
The multiwavelength surveys of the ELAIS-S1 and GOODS fields Fabrizio Fiore & M. Brusa, A. Comastri, C. Feruglio, A. Fontana, A. Grazian, F. La Franca,
Nikolaos Nikoloudakis Friday lunch talk 12/6/09 Supported by a Marie Curie Early Stage Training Fellowship.
Probing the X-ray Universe: Analysis of faint sources with XMM-Newton G. Hasinger, X. Barcons, J. Bergeron, H. Brunner, A. C. Fabian, A. Finoguenov, H.
Weak-Lensing selected, X-ray confirmed Clusters and the AGN closest to them Dara Norman NOAO/CTIO 2006 November 6-8 Boston Collaborators: Deep Lens Survey.
The Sources of the CDF-N --- Classification Schemes, Absorption Estimates and Broadband SEDs Stephan Frank Patrick Osmer, Smita Mathur Extragalactic Surveys.
AGN and Quasar Clustering at z= : Results from the DEEP2 + AEGIS Surveys Alison Coil Hubble Fellow University of Arizona Chandra Science Workshop.
Boston, November 2006 Extragalactic X-ray surveys Paolo Tozzi Spectral analysis of X-ray sources in the CDFS.
AGN in Clusters of Galaxies Paul Martini The Ohio State University J.S. Mulchaey, D.D. Kelson (OCIW) E. Kim (CfA), A. Athey (OCIW)
Statistical Properties of Radio Galaxies in the local Universe Yen-Ting Lin Princeton University Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile Yue Shen, Michael.
A Primer on SZ Surveys Gil Holder Institute for Advanced Study.
X-ray Source-Galaxy Angular Cross-Correlation function in the COSMOS Field Takamitsu Miyaji, Richard E. Griffiths (Carnegie Mellon Univ.) COSMOS XMM-Newton.
High Redshift Galaxies (Ever Increasing Numbers).
Angular clustering and halo occupation properties of COSMOS galaxies Cristiano Porciani.
Space Density of Heavily-Obscured AGN, Star Formation and Mergers Ezequiel Treister (IfA, Hawaii Ezequiel Treister (IfA, Hawaii) Meg Urry, Priya Natarajan,
Clustering of QSOs and X-ray AGN at z=1 Alison Coil Hubble Fellow University of Arizona October 2007 Collaborators: Jeff Newman, Joe Hennawi, Marc Davis,
March, Galaxies and structure through cosmic time Venice 2006 The AGN content of the COSMOS: the XMM-Newton view Marcella Brusa (MPE) on behalf.
The Clustering of AGN Using Photometric Redshifts Elias Koulouridis Antonis Georgakakis National Observatory of Athens.
The XMM-Newton hard band wide angle Survey Nicoletta Carangelo and Silvano Molendi (IASF-MI(CNR)) Epic Consortium Meeting Palazzo Steri, Palermo,
Obscured AGN and the synthesis of the cosmic X-ray background
The spatial clustering of X-ray selected AGN at z~1 R. Gilli Istituto Nazionale di Astrofisica (INAF) Osservatorio Astronomico di Bologna and the XMM-COSMOS.
Environmental Properties of a Sample of Starburst Galaxies Selected from the 2dFGRS Matt Owers (UNSW) Warrick Couch (UNSW) Chris Blake (UBC) Michael Pracy.
How to start an AGN: the role of host galaxy environment Rachel Gilmour (ESO Chile & IfA, Edinburgh) Philip Best (Edinburgh), Omar Almaini & Meghan Gray.
Obscured AGN in the (z)COSMOS survey AGN9, Ferrara, May Angela Bongiorno Max-Planck-Institut für extraterrestrische Physik, Garching, GERMANY AND.
What can we learn from galaxy clustering? David Weinberg, Ohio State University Berlind & Weinberg 2002, ApJ, 575, 587 Zheng, Tinker, Weinberg, & Berlind.
The Evolution of Quasars and Massive Black Holes “Quasar Hosts and the Black Hole-Spheroid Connection”: Dunlop 2004 “The Evolution of Quasars”: Osmer 2004.
Coevolution of black holes and galaxies at high redshift David M Alexander (Durham)
The Black-Hole – Halo Mass Relation and High Redshift Quasars Stuart Wyithe Avi Loeb (The University of Melbourne) (Harvard University) Fan et al. (2001)
XMM-Newton surveys of X-ray galaxy groups Alexis Finoguenov MPE/UMBC+ S.Giodini, V.Allevato, M. Tanaka, A. Leauthaud, O. Ilbert, N.Cappelluti, J.Silverman,
Obscured AGN and XRB models Andrea Comastri (INAF-OABologna-Italy) Roberto Gilli (INAF-OABologna-Italy) F. Fiore (INAF-OARoma-Italy) G. Hasinger (MPE-Garching-
Galaxy clustering II 2-point correlation function 5 Feb 2013.
MARK CORRELATIONS AND OPTIMAL WEIGHTS ( Cai, Bernstein & Sheth 2010 )
The Large Scale Structure of Seyferts and LINERs and Implications for their Central Engines Anca Constantin Drexel University AGN are not unbiased tracers.
Prospects for Infrared AGN Surveys Scott Croom (AAO)
The Evolution of AGN Obscuration
The Evolution of AGN Obscuration
Revealing X-ray obscured Quasars in SWIRE sources with extreme MIR/O Giorgio Lanzuisi Fabrizio Fiore Enrico Piconcelli Chiara Feruglio Cristian Vignali.
Galaxy and Quasar Clustering at z=1 Alison Coil University of Arizona April 2007.
AGN deep multiwavelength surveys: the case of the Chandra Deep Field South Fabrizio Fiore Simonetta Puccetti, Giorgio Lanzuisi.
Compton-thick AGN in the CDFN I. Georgantopoulos NOA A. Akylas NOA A. Georgakakis NOA M. Rovilos MPE M. Rowan-Robinson Imperial College.
Zheng Dept. of Astronomy, Ohio State University David Weinberg (Advisor, Ohio State) Andreas Berlind (NYU) Josh Frieman (Chicago) Jeremy Tinker (Ohio State)
Zheng I N S T I T U T E for ADVANCED STUDY Cosmology and Structure Formation KIAS Sep. 21, 2006.
Major dry-merger rate and extremely massive major dry-mergers of BCGs Deng Zugan June 31st Taiwan.
AGN feedback in action: constraints on the scaling relations between BH and galaxy at high redshift Andrea Merloni (EXC, MPE) A. Bongiorno (MPE), COSMOS.
HST Workshop Bologna Jan 31, 2008 Heavily obscured SMBH at high redshift Andrea Comastri INAF - OABologna C. Vignali, R. Gilli, K. Iwasawa, F. Civano,
J. Jasche, Bayesian LSS Inference Jens Jasche La Thuile, 11 March 2012 Bayesian Large Scale Structure inference.
Andrii Elyiv and XMM-LSS collaboration The correlation function analysis of AGN in the XMM-LSS survey.
Probing Cosmology with Weak Lensing Effects Zuhui Fan Dept. of Astronomy, Peking University.
How Different was the Universe at z=1? Centre de Physique Théorique, Marseille Université de Provence Christian Marinoni.
EROSITA + group meeting, Ringberg, February 2008 z>3 QSOs in XMM-COSMOS: lessons for eROSITA Marcella Brusa (MPE) with help from: A. Comastri M. Salvato,
The dependence on redshift of quasar black hole masses from the SLOAN survey R. Decarli Università dell’Insubria, Como, Italy A. Treves Università dell’Insubria,
The History of Active Galaxies A.Barger, P. Capak, L. Cowie, RFM, A. Steffen, and Y. Yang Active Galaxies (AKA quasars, Seyfert galaxies etc) are radiating.
Evolution of Absorption in AGN Günther Hasinger NGC 3079 Sy2 + SB Gal HST & Chandra Ringberg HE Meeting February,
ZCOSMOS galaxy clustering: status and perspectives Sylvain de la Torre Marseille - June, 11th Clustering working group: Ummi Abbas, Sylvain de la Torre,
Tools for computing the AGN feedback: radio-loudness and the kinetic luminosity function Gabriele Melini Fabio La Franca Fabrizio Fiore Active Galactic.
Multiwavelength AGN Number Counts in the GOODS fields Ezequiel Treister (Yale/U. de Chile) Meg Urry (Yale) And the GOODS AGN Team.
Spatial properties of AGN in hierarchical models Federico Marulli Dipartimento di Astronomia, Università di Bologna In collaboration with: Silvia Bonoli.
Why is the BAT survey for AGN Important? All previous AGN surveys were biased- –Most AGN are ‘obscured’ in the UV/optical –IR properties show wide scatter.
Cosmic Momentum Field and Matter Fluctuation Study of Matter through Motions of Galaxies Changbom Park (Korea Institute for Advanced Study)
X-rays in the COSMOS A picture of large scale structures Nico Cappelluti Nico Cappelluti MPE-Garching MPE-Garching In collaboration with: XMM-COSMOS team:
Galaxy Evolution and WFMOS
Clustering properties and environment of AGN
Andrea Comastri (INAF- Oss. Astr. Bologna)
Cluster Cosmology in Deep Fields
Shaji Vattakunnel - University of Trieste
Presentation transcript:

The spatial clustering of X-ray selected AGN R. Gilli Istituto Nazionale di Astrofisica (INAF) Osservatorio Astronomico di Bologna On behalf of the CDFS and COSMOS teams

The Large Scale Structure of the Universe 12.6 billion yr ago z=5.7 From Springel et al billion yr ago z=1.4 Now z=0 (SDSS, Zehavi et al. 2002) Matter distribution is everything but random DARK MATTER GALAXIES (theory) (observations)

AGN clustering… AGN can trace the Large Scale Structure of the Universe to cosmologically significant redshifts (z>1-2) AGN physics from clustering: e.g. host halo mass and lifetimes Also used to estimate the host galaxy type …in the X-ray band X-rays efficiently sample obscured AGNs (which outnumber unobscured ones by a factor of at least 3-4; see XRB synthesis and the results from the deep surveys) High surface density, above sources/deg 2, even in moderately deep surveys  high clustering significance with relatively small number of objects e.g. Croom 05, Porciani 05 Martini & Weinberg 01

AGN clustering as a function of.. 1) redshift: measured for optical QSOs r 0 increases with redshift  halo mass ~ constant ~ M sun (e.g 2dF – Croom et al. 04,05 ; Porciani et al. 05,06) 2) luminosity: still to be measured 3) obscuration: still to be measured From optical and X-ray studies (Yang 05) there is no clear evidence for any dependence of r 0 on L. Similarly, there is no evidence yet for any dependence of r 0 on obscuration (X-ray samples still small)

X-ray fields with measured 3D clustering Field Area/deg 2 S lim [cgs] N/deg 2 N(zspec)z med logL med Ref. CDFS Gilli 05 CDFN ’’ CLASXS Yang 05 COSMOS in prep. NEP Mullis 03 Surveys with different sensitivities sample different z and Lx regimes: one needs to always specify at which average z and Lx clustering is computed

Statistical description of LSS: the 2-point correlation function Spatial Correlation Function: excess probability over random of finding a source in dV 1 and another in dV 2 separated by a distance r ξ(r) increases at small separations, then one needs either deep fields in which the source density is very high or large volumes – or, preferably, both Projected correlation function w(r p ): Allows to get rid of distortions in redshift space (i.e. peculiar velocities, redshift errors)

Expected 3D clustering significance in X-ray surveys SNR=(DD-RR)/RR 0.5 Where DD and RR are the numbers of data-data and random-random pairs within a given separation (e.g. 10 Mpc) SNR ≈ V -0.5 N

3D correlation function in the Chandra Msec fields CDFS r 0 =10.3±1.7  1.33±0.14 CDFN r0=5.5±0.6  1.50±0.12 unabsorbed AGN absorbed AGN CDFS vs CDFN AGNCDFN: abs vs unabs AGN Large variance between the two Chandra Msec fields No statistically significant difference between clustering of obscured and unobscured AGN within a single CDF

Comparing redshift distributions CDFS 30% of sources in the 2 most prominent spikes 13% 6% CDFN CLASXSCOSMOS 5-8% Due to redshift spikes, cannot divide in z–bins in the CDF-S/N Need large area to avoid cosmic variance

XMM-COSMOS CDF-S/N CLASXS 0.1 deg deg 2 2 deg 2 First XMM-COSMOS results: Hasinger 06, Cappelluti 06, Brusa 06, Mainieri 06, Miyaji 06, Finoguenov 06

Preliminary measurements in COSMOS unobscured obscured Based on Hardness Ratios All sources r 0 = 7.3 ± 0.5 γ = 1.8 ± 0.1

Clustering of ~ obscured vs unobscured AGN No statistical evidence for any difference. Based on hardness-ratios: need to be done using NH measurements from spectral fits unobscured obscured

AGN Correlation length vs redshift (and luminosity) Late,early type r 0 from Coil et al. 03 late early Halo catalogs from Kauffman et al. 99

Summary Spatial clustering of X-ray selected AGN has been measured so far in only 5 fields. Large cosmic variance is observed between the two pencil beam Chandra Msec fields. Need large areas to get an “unbiased” estimate of AGN clustering and need large area x N sources product (i.e. large and sensitive surveys) to measure clustering signal at high significance. Within each field no significant difference is found between the clustering properties of obscured and unobscured AGN (but check using X-ray spectra rather than HR). X-ray selected AGN appear hosted by halos with mass larger than 1-2 x Msun At z~1 the AGN correlation length is in between that of early and late type galaxies at the same redshift (but large scatter: COSMOS ~ early).