ABSTRACT Title of dissertation: A DEEP X-RAY SURVEY OF THE LOCKMAN HOLE NORTHWEST Yuxuan Yang, Doctor of Philosophy, 2005 Dissertation directed by: Professor Richard F. Mushotzky NASA Goddard Space Flight Center I present the X-ray analysis of the Chandra Large Area Synoptic X-ray Survey (CLASXS) of the Lockman Hole Northwest fleld. The contiguous solid angle of the survey is?0:4 deg2 and the ux limits are 5?10?16 ergcm?2 s?1 in the 0:4?2 keV band and 3?10?15 ergcm?2 s?1 in the 2?8 keV band. The survey bridges the gap between deep pencil beam surveys, and shallower, larger area surveys, allowing a better probe of the X-ray sources that contribute most of the 2{10 keV cosmic X-ray background. A total of 525 X-ray point sources and 4 extended sources have been found. The number counts, X-ray spectra evolution, X-ray variability of the X-ray sources are presented. We show 3 of the 4 extended sources are likely galaxy clusters or galaxy groups. We report the discovery of a gravitational lensing arc associated with one of these sources. I present the spatial correlation function analysis of non-stellar X-ray point sources in the CLASXS and Chandra Deep Field North (CDFN). I calculate both redshift-space and projected correlation functions in comoving coordinates. The correlation function for the CLASXS fleld over scales of 3 Mpc< s < 200 Mpc can be modeled as a power-law of the form ?(s) = (s=s0)? , with = 1:6+0:4?0:3 and s0 = 8:05+1:4?1:5 Mpc. The redshift-space correlation function for CDFN on scales of 1 Mpc< s < 100 Mpc is found to have a similar correlation length, but a shallower slope. The real-space correlation functions are derived from the projected correlation functions. By comparing the real- and redshift-space correlation functions, we are able to estimate the redshift distortion parameter fl = 0:4 ? 0:2 at an efiective redshift z = 0:94. We found the clustering does not dependence signiflcantly on X-ray color or luminosity. A mild evolution in the clustering amplitude is found, indicating a rapid in- crease of bias with redshift. The typical mass of the dark matter halo derived from the bias estimates show little change with redshift. The average halo mass is found to be log (Mhalo=Mfl)?12:4. A DEEP X-RAY SURVEY OF THE LOCKMAN HOLE NORTHWEST by Yuxuan Yang Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Maryland, College Park in partial fulflllment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2004 Advisory Committee: Professor Richard F. Mushotzky, Advisor Professor Christopher S. Reynolds, Co-advisor, Chair Professor M. Coleman Miller Professor Gregory W. Sullivan Professor Sylvain Veilliux c Copyright by Yuxuan Yang 2005 To my family PREFACE In the early 2000, soon after the launch of the Chandra observatory, it has been found that most of the 2{10 keV Cosmic X-ray background (CXB) can be resolved into point sources, presumably AGNs. This result was conflrmed later by a set of deep Chandra and XMM-Newton observations. It has also been shown that about 2/3 of the Chandra detected AGNs in the deep flelds show no broad emission lines, and many of them looks normal in optical band. This means that the majority of AGNs were previous unknown! There are many unexpected results came out of these surveys. However, most deep surveys were performed on small flelds of size < 0:1 deg2, and could be afiected by cosmic variance. To better understand the X-ray selected AGNs, particularly the sources at the \knee" of the number counts curve, Richard invested his Chandra GTO time, and later Dr. Amy Barger obtained additional observing time on Chandra to perform a medium depth, wide fleld survey (we later call CLASXS). The data from this survey and the Chandra deep fleld North were systematically followed up with Keck and Subaru. The data set forms the largest sample of Chandra selected AGNs with a high level of redshift measurements. I joined this project in the Fall of 2001, in the wave of excitement of the new discoveries from Chandra and XMM. The question I had in mined was how X-ray selected AGNs traces the large scale structure of the universe. The clustering of AGNs carries important information about the host galaxies. Combined with the iii X-ray luminosity function, we can better understand the environment of AGNs. Because of the much higher spatial density of the X-ray selected AGNs compared to the optical selected samples, deep X-ray surveys best probe the quasi-linear regime of the structure formation. After three years of hard work (including two non-sleeping Christmas nights calibrating positions of X-ray sources before the Keck observing runs), we are now able to reach some interesting results. We have obtains so far the best X-ray luminosity function, and the best X-ray spatial correlation function of X-ray selected AGNs. Six papers have come out on this survey. At the early phase of the project we spent a large amount of time on the angular clustering of the X-ray sources. Part of the reason is that we did not have redshift data for most of the sources until early 2004, making it impossible to study the spatial clustering. However, the signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) of the angular correlation function, particularly for the soft band detected sources, is very weak. By adding more small blank flelds from the Chandra archive, we only managed to slightly increase the S/N. This is because the increase of S/N by adding non- contiguous flelds roughly proportional to the square-root of the number of flelds. The best way to make improvements is to obtain a larger contiguous fleld. We have been bidding for more Chandra fleld for three years without success. The interpretation of the angular correlation also need additional assumption on the evolution of AGN clustering. Fortunately, with spectroscopic redshift of a large fraction of the sources, the clustering of X-ray selected AGNs can be much better determined. For this reason, I decide not to include the study of angular correlation function in this dissertation. iv This work sits on the intersection of the research of the Active galactic Nuclei, the CXB, and the large scale structure of the universe. I will focus mainly on AGNs rather than cosmology. This is justifled because by comparing with our knowledge of the large scale structure, the formation of supermassive blackholes is much less known. Larger X-ray survey will eventually show that AGN is a useful tool for cosmology. Before I joined this project, I have worked on observations of local AGNs, particularly NGC 4151, with Prof. Andrew Wilson. I have also spent a summer working on X-ray observation on supernova remnants with Dr. Rob Petre. These studies gave me good introduction to X-ray astronomy and AGN. During the years at Maryland, I have authored or co-authored 9 papers. I am flrst author of 4 of them. v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my adviser, Professor Richard Mushotzky for giving me the invaluable opportunity to work on this extremely exciting project, and giving me the most need guide through the research. He always point me to the most up- to-date literature and helped to resolve almost every question I brought to his door. His knowledge on a broad range of topics is really extraordinary. I also would like to express my gratitude to all the time he spent on correcting my English on every paper and proposal that I wrote, escorting me at Goddard for a long period after 9/11. I feel I am very lucky to have a chance to work with such an extraordinary adviser. I am deeply indebted to Dr. Chris Reynolds. He has given me many useful suggestions and helps during the study. He has generously provided the computer on which I was able to carry out my research. Without his efiorts, this project will be much more delayed. My special thanks to my collaborators: Profs. Amy Barger, Len Cowie and Dr. Aaron Stefien. Without their hard work on planning and carrying out the optical observations, this thesis is impossible. I owe my gratitude to Prof. Andrew Wilson and Dr. Rob Petre. They have opened the door of X-ray astronomy for me. I thank all the Professors who have taught excellent graduate courses at As- vi tronomy and Physics Department, particularly Profs. Virginia Trimble, Sylvain Veilleux, Mike A?Hearn, Patrick Harrinton, Cole Miller, Stacy McGaugh and Derek Richardson. I thank colleagues at both GSFC and Maryland for the discussions and helps on many things. I also like to thank all the administration and system supporting stafi at GSFC and and Maryland for their hard work to make our life easier. Many thanks to Dr. John Trasco and Ms. Mary Ann Phillips for all the work they have done to help us sale smoothly through our study, and the help on various extra paper works to assist my security clearance at GSFC. Lastly, I owe my deepest thanks to my wife, Haihong, for her support and encouragements. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures xi 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Active Galactic nuclei: An Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.2 Zoo of AGNs and the \Unifled models" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.3 AGN searching methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 1.3.1 Optical Selected AGNs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 1.3.2 Radio and IR selected AGNs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 1.3.3 X-ray selected AGNs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 1.4 X-ray Surveys prior to Chandra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.4.1 Point sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.4.2 Cosmic X-ray background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.5 Chandra deep surveys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 1.6 Evolution of SMBHs: a new perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 1.6.1 Evolution of the X-ray Luminosity function . . . . . . . . . . 14 1.6.2 Clustering of AGNs: what can we learn? . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 1.7 Outline of the dissertation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 2 Chandra Observatory: Instrumentation and data reduction 22 2.1 The Chandra X-ray Observatory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 2.1.1 The X-ray telescope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 2.1.2 The ACIS detector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 2.2 ACIS data processing and reduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 2.3 ACIS Source detection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 2.3.1 Wavdetect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 2.3.2 Vtpdetect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 2.4 ACIS Spectral analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 3 CLASXS: The Survey and the Point Source Catalog 42 3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 3.2 Observations and Data reduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 3.2.1 X-ray Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 3.2.2 Source detection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 3.2.3 Source positions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 3.2.4 Source uxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 3.3 The X-ray Catalog . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 3.4 Number counts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 3.4.1 Incompleteness and Eddington Bias . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 3.4.2 Number counts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 3.4.3 Point Source Contribution to the CXB . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 3.5 Spectral properties the CXB sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 3.6 A First Look at X-ray Variability at High redshifts . . . . . . . . . . 73 3.7 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 viii 4 Optical Identiflcations and Spectroscopic Follow-up 83 4.1 Imaging observation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 4.2 Optical Counterparts of X-ray point sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 4.3 Spectroscopic observations and redshifts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 4.4 Spectroscopic Classiflcations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 4.5 Compare with XMM-Newton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 5 Extended Sources 93 5.1 Detection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 5.2 Comparing with Optical images . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 5.3 X-ray spectra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 5.4 Angular sizes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 5.5 Redshifts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 5.6 Discovery of a gravitational lensing arc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 6 Spatial Correlation Function of X-ray Selected AGNs 109 6.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 6.2 Observations and data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112 6.3 Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 6.3.1 Redshift- and real-space Correlation functions . . . . . . . . . 114 6.3.2 Correlation function Estimator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 6.3.3 Uncertainties of correlation functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 6.3.4 The mock catalog . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 6.4 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 6.4.1 Redshift-space correlation function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 6.4.2 Projected correlation function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130 6.4.3 Redshift distortion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134 6.4.4 X-ray color dependence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137 6.4.5 Luminosity dependence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138 6.5 Evolution of clustering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 6.5.1 Samples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 6.5.2 Comparing with other observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 6.6 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 6.6.1 Evolution of Bias and the typical dark matter halo mass . . . 152 6.6.2 Linking X-ray luminosity and clustering of AGNs . . . . . . . 157 6.6.3 Blackhole mass and the X-ray luminosity evolution . . . . . . 160 6.6.4 Comparison with normal galaxies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 6.7 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164 7 Conclusions 169 A CLASXS X-ray Catalog 172 B Blackhole mass and X-ray luminosity 199 ix C Notes On Cosmology 203 C.1 Standard picture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203 C.2 Cosmological distances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206 x LIST OF FIGURES 1 The medium spectral energy distribution large samples of radio quite (left panel) and radio loud (right panel) quasars. Figure from Elvis et al. (1994). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2 The observational features for difierent AGN types. Figure adapted from Krolik (1999) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3 X-ray spectra of two AGNs at z ? 10, one with no absorption and the other with a line-of-sight column density of 1024 cm?2 with pure photo-electric absorption. Figure from Mushotzky (2004). . . . . . . 9 4 The contribution to the XRB versus ux. The solid boxes are the measured values in the combined sample. The lines show the values from the power-law flts. The open boxes show the CDFN, the open diamonds the CDFS, the open upward pointing triangles the SSA13 fleld, and the open downward pointing triangles the SSA22 fleld. The individual flelds are shown only below 10?14 erg cm?2 s?1 where the error bars are small. Figure from Cowie et al. (2002). . . . . . . . . 15 5 Incompleteness corrected evolution with redshift of the rest-frame 2?8 keV comoving energy density production rate, _?X, of LX ? 1042 ergs s?1 optically-narrow AGNs (solid circles). Open diamonds show the evolution of the broad-line AGNs. Vertical bar in the z = 1:5?3 redshift interval shows the range from the spectroscopically measured value for the optically-narrow AGNs (solid circle) to the maximally incompleteness corrected value (open circle; see text for details). Dashed curve shows the pure luminosity evolution maximum likelihood flt for broad-line AGNs over the range z = 0?1 and a at line at z > 1. Figure from Barger et al. (2005). . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 6 The Chandra Observatory with the major subsystems labeled. Figure from Weisskopf et al. (2003). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 7 A schematic diagram of the HRMA mirrors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 xi 8 The HRMA, HRMA/ACIS and HRMA/HRC efiective areas versus X-ray energy. The structure near 2 keV is due to the iridium M-edge. The HRMA efiective area is calculated by the ray-trace simulation based on the HRMA model and scaled by the XRCF calibration data. The HRMA/ACIS efiective areas are the products of HRMA efiective area and the Quantum E?ciency (QE) of ACIS -I3 (front illuminated) or ACIS -S3 (back illuminated). The HRMA/HRC efiective areas are the products of HRMA efiective area and the QE of HRC-I or HRC-S at their aimpoints, including the efiect of UV/Ion Shields (UVIS). Figure from Chandra Proposer?s Observatory Guide (Online at http://asc.harvard.edu/proposer/POG/html/). . . . . . . . . . . 26 9 The HRMA efiective area versus ofi-axis angle, averaged over az- imuth, for selected energies, normalized to the on-axis area for that energy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 10 The predicted and observed fractional encircled energy as a function of radius for an on-axis point source with HRC-I at the focus of the telescope. Flight data from an observation of AR LAC is also shown. 28 11 HRMA/ACIS-I encircled energy radii for circles enclosing 50% and 90% of the power at 1.49 and 6.40 keV as a function of ofi-axis angle. The ACIS-I surface is composed by four tilted at chips which ap- proximate the curved Chandra focal plane. The HRMA optical axis passes near the aimpoint which is located at the inner corner of chip I3. Thus the ofi-axis encircled energy radii are not azimuthally sym- metric. The four panels show these radii?s radial dependence in four azimuthal directions - from the aimpoint to the outer corners of the four ACIS-I chips. These curves include the blurs due to the ACIS-I spatial resolution and the Chandra aspect error. . . . . . . . . . . . 29 12 A schematic drawing of the ACIS focal plane; insight to the termi- nology is given in the lower left. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 13 Enlarged view of an area of a FI chip I3 (left) and a BI chip (right) after being struck by a charged particle. There is far more \blooming" in the FI image since the chip is thicker. The overlaid 3x3 detection cells indicate that the particle impact on the FI chip produced a number of events, most of which end up as ASCA Grade 7, and are thus rejected with high e?ciency. The equivalent event in the BI chip, is much more di?cult to distinguish from an ordinary x-ray interaction, and hence the rejection e?ciency is lower. . . . . . . . . 34 14 An example of a Voronoi tessellation for 2000 random points. (Figure from the Chandra Detection Manual). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 xii 15 Layout of the 9 ACIS-I pointings. Gray scale map shows the adaptively smoothed full band image. The exposure maps are added (light gray) to outline the ACIS-I flelds. Fields are separated by 100 from each other. The fleld numbers (LHNW1-9) are shown at the center of each ACIS-I fleld. . 45 16 The exposure map of LHNW3 in soft (left) and hard band (right) . . 47 17 Broadband PSFs obtained from our observations (solid lines) compared with the monochromatic PSFs from the PSF library (dashed lines). Both the observed broadband PSFs and the monochromatic PSFs are normal- ized to the wing. From the narrowest to the broadest, each broadband PSF is constructed within each of the ofi-axis angle intervals 00{40, 40{60, 60{70, 70{80, 80{90, 90{120. The library PSFs are taken at the midpoints of these ofi-axis intervals. (a) Soft band PSF vs. 0.91 keV library PSF; (b) hard band PSF vs. 4.2 keV library PSF. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 18 Examples of the source and background regions used in the ux extraction. The smaller circle is the source region. The background regions are shown as segments of an annulus. Segments with counts below 3 of the mean are used in the flnal background estimation and are marked with ?X? symbols. (a) An isolated source; (b) a source with a close neighbor. . . . . . . . . 54 19 Comparison of net counts from wavdetect and our aperture photometry (marked as XPHOTO) for the (a) soft, (b) hard, and (c) full bands. . . . 55 20 Distribution of ofi-axis angles of the best positions. . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 21 Distribution of multiple detections. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 22 The simulated images with 40 and 70 ks exposures in three bands. . . . . 61 23 The 95% completeness threshold for CLASXS flelds in 2{8 keV (upper- left), 0.5{8 keV (upper-right) and 0.5{2 keV (bottom) bands. . . . . 62 24 Survey efiective solid angle vs. ux. Soft band (solid line); full band (dashed line); hard band (dotted line) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 25 Average output uxes from wavdetect vs. average input uxes for the simulated sources at a set of ofi-axis angles (diamonds). The Eddington bias is seen in the overestimates of output ux at low uxes. The bias also increases at large ofi-axis angles. The best flt of the biases are shown as dotted lines for ofi-axis angle intervals 00{2.50, 2.50{40, 40{60, 60{80, and > 80. 65 26 Cumulative LogN-LogS for the soft and hard bands. The 1 error is shaded. Dash-dotted line represents the best flt from Moretti03. Hard band LogN-LogS from Moretti et al. is rescaled to that of 2 ? 8 keV, assuming ? = 1:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 xiii 27 Difierential LogN-LogS for the soft and hard bands. The unit of dN/dS is number per 10?15 ergcm?2 s?1 . Best-flt power laws are shown as solid lines. Dotted line represents a power law with a flxed index of?2:5. The data do not constrain the slope at high uxes well. Dashed line shows the best flt of the hard band LogN-LogS from the SEXSI survey (Harrison et al. 2003) and the dash-dotted line is the best flt from Cowie et al. (2002). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 28 Hardness ratio vs. full band ux for the CLASXS sources. Open circles with arrows represent the upper or lower limits. Dashed lines with numbers label the hypothetical spectral indices, assuming the source spectra are single power laws with only Galactic absorption. Dotted line represents the typical error size of the hardness ratio for a source with hardness ratio of 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 29 Hardness ratio of the stacked sources in difierent ux bins. Crosses are the CLASXS sources and diamonds are the combined CDFs sources (Alexan- der et al. 2003). Sources with uxes below 8?10?15 ergcm?2 s?1 in the CLASXS catalog and 1?10?15 ergcm?2 s?1 in the CDFs catalogs are not included to avoid incompleteness. Dashed lines are as in Figure 28. . . . 72 30 Light curves of the sources detected to be variable. The uxes are nor- malized to the mean of all the observations. Numbers in the plots are the source numbers in the catalog. (a) Soft band; (b) hard band; (c) full band. 74 31 (Upper panel) Fraction of sources that are variable in difierent ux bins. (Lower panel) Number of variable sources (dashed histogram) and total number of sources tested for variability (solid histogram) in the same ux bins as in the upper panel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 32 Excess variability for the variable sources in each energy band vs. the ux of that band. (a) Soft band; (b) hard band; (c) full band. . . . . 78 33 Spectral variability vs. full band uxes for all the variable sources. The uxes are in units of 10?14 ergcm?2 s?1 . Numbers on top of each plot are the source numbers in the catalog. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 34 (X-ray ? optical) astrometric ofisets for the 484 CLASXS sources with detected optical counterparts. Histograms for the R.A. (decl.) separations are shown on top (right). The mean values for the R.A. and decl. ofisets are both 0:0?0:5 arcseconds. Concentric gray circles represent the probability of a source with a random R.A. and decl. being assigned an optical counterpart. The probabilities and search radii (in arcseconds) are given, respectively, at the top and bottom of each circle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 xiv 35 The optical identiflcation fraction as a function of 2{8 keV ux. Solid line shows the best-flt. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 36 Adaptively smoothed X-ray images of the extended sources superposed on R band images.(a) Sources 1 and 2; (b) Source 3; (c) Source 4. . . . . . . 96 37 RegionsforspectralextractionofSources1and2ontheGaussiansmoothed gray scale map of the clusters. The Gaussian kernal size is 600. Source re- gions are shown as circles. Elliptical annulus region is for the background extraction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 38 X-ray spectra and best-flt MEKAL models of Source 1 (dash-dotted line) and Source 2 (solid line). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 39 Combined probability contour of the temperature of Sources 1 and 2. Contour lines are 1, 2, and 3 confldence levels. Cross is the best-flt temperature. Solid line represents the equality of the temperature of the two clusters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 40 X-ray spectrum of Source 3 and the best-flt MEKAL model. . . . . . . . 100 41 Curve-of-growths for the extended sources (Sources 1 { 4 shown in pannels (a) {(d)) normalized to the best-flt background. Dotted line shows the best flt of an integrated 2 dimensional Gaussian. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 42 Color-magnitude plot for the galaxies within 0.50 of the X-ray center. Solid lines show the model red sequence from Yee & Gladders (2001) at the redshifts that best match the observations in Source 1 (z = 0:5), 2 (z = 0:5), and 4 (z = 0:45). In the plot for Source 4, the red sequences for z = 0:5 (lower solid line) and z = 1:0 (upper solid line) are shown. . . . . 104 43 R band image of the gravitational lensing arc found associated with Source 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 44 The redshift distribution of optically identifled X-ray sources.The solid line: CLASXS fleld; dashed line: CDFN. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112 45 Simulated 40 ks hard band images with sources with various counts. (a) the blue regions shows the input source locations. The red regions in (b){(e) show the images with input source counts of 3, 4.5, 7, and 16 cts respectively. Detected sources are marked with the 3 error ellipses in blue. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118 xv 46 The probability of source detection as a function of ofi-axis angle and 2{8 keV uxes. Contour levels are 0.1,0.3,0.5,0.7,0.9, 0.95,0.99. Upper(lower) panels: soft (hard) band; Left (right) panels: 70 ks exposures and 40 ks exposures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 47 The right panels shows the random sources after detections (only 3000 sources are plotted). The pixel size is 0.49200. The left panels are the cumulated counts of simulated sources (solid line) and that of the observed (dashed line). Top: hard band; bottom: soft band. . 125 48 The 2{8 keV ux vs. redshift in CLASXS sample. There is no signif- icant correlation between X-ray ux and redshift. . . . . . . . . . . . 126 49 (a). Redshift-space correlation function for CLASXS fleld with 3 Mpc< s <200 Mpc. (b). Maximum-likelihood contour for the single power- law flt. Contour levels are ?S = 2:3;6:17;11:8, corresponding to 1 , 2 and 3 confldent levels for two parameter flt. . . . . . . . . . . . 129 50 The same as Figure 49 for CDFN except the correlation function is calculated for separation 1 Mpc< s <100 Mpc. . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 51 The projected correlation function for CLASXS, CDFN and the best flt. (a)-(c) are the ?2 contours for CLASXS+CDFN, CLASXS, and CDFN, respectively. Contour levels are for 1 , 2 , and 3 confldent level ; (d) The projected correlation function for CLASXS (open cir- cles) and CDFN (black dots) flelds. Lines are the best-flt shown in (a)-(c). Solid line: CLASXS+CDFN; Dotted line: CLASXS; Dashed line: CDFN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 52 Two dimensional redshift-space correlation function ?(rp;?) of the combined CLASXS and CDFN data (dashed-dotted contour). Solid line shows the best-flt model. Both the data and model correlation functions are smoothed using a 2?2 boxcar to reduce the noise for visualization only. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136 53 The luminosity of X-ray sources vs. redshifts in CLASXS (dots) and CDFN (open circles) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 54 Luminosity dependence of clustering of AGNs. Black dots: CLASXS samples; Filled boxes: CDFN samples; Diamonds: 2dF sample (Croom et al. 2004). Lines are the models for difierent halo proflle from Far- rarese (2002). Solid line: NWF proflle (? = 0:1, ? = 1:65); Dashed line: weak lensing determined halo proflle (Seljak, 2002; ? = 0:67, ? = 1:82); Dash-dotted line: isothermal model (? = 0:027, ? = 1:82) 142 xvi 55 The Redshift-space correlation function for CLASXS fleld in four red- shift bins. Left panels: The correlation functions and the power- law best-flts using maximum-likelihood method. Right panels: the maximum-likelihood contour for the corresponding correlation func- tion on the left. Contour levels correspond to 1 , 2 and 3 confldent levels. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 56 The Redshift-space correlation function for CDFN fleld in four red- shift bins (layout and contour levels are the same as in Figure 55). . 147 57 The Redshift-space correlation function for CLASXS+CDFN fleld in four redshift bins (layout and contour levels are the same as in Figure 55). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 58 The evolution of clustering as a function of redshift for CLASXS, CDF and the two flelds combined. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 59 A comparison of clustering evolution in the combined Chandra flelds (big dots), CLASXS fleld (big fllled triangle), 2dF (diamonds), ROSAT NGP (fllled box) and AERQS (empty box). The solid line represent linear evolution of clustering normalized to the AERQS. The dashed lines represent the . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 60 The median luminosities of the 2dF quasar (C04) as a function of redshift (diamonds) compared to the median luminosities of CLASXS sample (triangles) and of CLASXS+CDFN sample (big dots). The lower panel shows the ratio of 2dF median luminosities to the X-ray samples. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 61 (a) bias evolution.The symbols have the same meaning as in Figure 59. The solid line is the best-flt from C04. Dash-dotted line shows the linear bias evolution model. (b). The mass of host halo of the X-ray sources corresponding to the bias in panel (a). . . . . . . . . . 155 62 Evolution of Eddington ratio. Solid line: Using the luminosity func- tion from Barger et al. (2005). Dashed line: using luminosity function from Ueda et al. (2001) at z < 1:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 63 The blackhole mass from reverberation mapping and their 2{10 keV luminosities. The solid line shows the best-flt. The dotted line shows the relation in Equation 6.21 (Barger et al. 2005). . . . . . . . . . . 201 64 The evolution of ?M (solid line) and ?? (dotted line). . . . . . . . . 206 xvii 65 Comoving distance (solid line), angular size distance (dotted-line) and luminosity distance (dashed-line) as a function of redshift. We have chosen k = 0 and ?? = 0:73. (dotted line). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208 xviii Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1 Active Galactic nuclei: An Overview Active galactic nuclei or AGNs, refers to a family of active galaxies, all of which show the existence of energetic phenomena in an unresolved central region. The luminosity of AGN ranges from L?1039?1046 ergcm?2 s?1 , usually brighter than the total light from the host galaxy. The continuous energy output and energy distribution of AGNs cannot be explained directly by stars. Most researchers now come to believe that all AGNs are powered by radiation from accretion onto black holes. The most striking evidence supporting the radiating blackhole scenario come from the X-ray spectral observations. Many AGNs clearly show a skewed broad orescent Fe Kfi, which can be beautifully explained by an origin only a few Schwarzchild radii away from the central blackhole. The shape of the line is an efiect of general relativity (See Reynolds & Nowak 2003 for a review). The commonly accepted picture of AGNs is that a supermassive blackhole (SMBH) with mass in the range 106 ?109 Mfl is accreting and releasing ? 10% of the rest mass energy from the accreting gas. The luminosity of an AGN is bounded by the Eddington luminosity, at which the pressure from Thompson scattering balances the gravitational force on the gas particles. In this dissertation I will use the term AGN to refer to radiating SMBHs. 1 Figure 1: The medium spectral energy distribution large samples of radio quite (left panel) and radio loud (right panel) quasars. Figure from Elvis et al. (1994). AGNs radiates in all electromagnetic waves. The broad band spectral energy distribution (SED) of the optically selected AGNs can be described by a power-law with roughly equal energy per decade from 1013?1020 Hz (Elvis et al. 1994 Figure 1), with a \big blue bump" in UV and another weaker bump in IR band. Superimposed on this spectra are strong optical and UV lines from hydrogen, highly ionized C, N, and O, and a complex of low-ionized Fe lines. 1.2 Zoo of AGNs and the \Unifled models" Classiflcation sometimes is helpful in flnding orders in the seemingly chaotic data, but sometimes just generate more confusion. The classiflcation of AGNs seems more of the latter. To make things worse, the AGN nomenclature sometimes has nothing to do with classiflcation. When calling an AGN a Seyfert 1 or BL Lac, 2 emission line width variability radio loudness Seyfert 1 Seyfert 2 broadline radio galaxies radio loud quasars Narrow line radio galaxies Optically violent variables (OVVs) BL Lac Radio quiet quasars Figure 2: The observational features for difierent AGN types. Figure adapted from Krolik (1999) it does not really tell what the object is, but a \radio loud AGN" certainly says something of its nature. Despite the diversity in their names, AGNs can usually be characterized by three observation features: the emission line width, the radio loudness, and the variability. Krolik (1999) shows some of the common types and their observation in the diagram in Figure 2. The disparate AGN varieties may simply be caused by the viewing angle of intrinsically identical objects. The models that try to unify the AGN appearances with viewing angle efiects are called the unifled models. The anisotropy of AGNs can be caused either by the intrinsically anisotropic emission from the accretion disk or jets, or by anisotropic obscuration. In the latter case, the obscuration may occur 3 very close to the SMBH by ared accretion disk, or in the interstellar medium. The unifled model is successful in unifying the Seyfert galaxies. The obscuring clouds lies at a distance 1019 cm . r . 1020 cm from the nucleus, which can block the broadline region (BLR { the region where the broad emission lines originate). If the broad line is completely blocked from the line-of-sight, and only narrow lines are observed, then the source is a Seyfert 2. If there is no obscuring cloud in the line-of-sight, the source will have strong broadlines, and the source is classifled as Seyfert 1. Some times the terms \type 1" and \type 2" are used when detailed classifl- cation is not possible. Type 1s are sources with no evidence of obscuration while the type 2s are those showing clear obscuration. In optical, type 1s usually refer to sources with clear broad emission lines and type 2s are identifled with narrow emis- sion lines. In the X-ray band, on the other hand, type 1 and type 2 are distiguished using column density. It has been noted that the X-ray and optical types do not always agree (Matt 2002) While more and more evidence supporting the existence of SMBH in AGNs and massive galaxies in general, little is known about how these massive gas swallowing monsters come to be and how they evolve. Since the AGN phase is believed to play an critical role in the formation and growth of SMBHs, the study of an unbiased sample of AGNs is the key to understand AGNs as a population. The best way to obtain such a sample is through large X-ray surveys and follow them up with optical observations, as we will discuss below. 4 1.3 AGN searching methods 1.3.1 Optical Selected AGNs Based on their drastically difierent optical spectra and/or colors from normal galaxies or any superposition of stellar spectra with temperature of 103 ?105 K, AGNs can be selected using the colors and color ratios (Sandage 1971). Over the last 30 years, many surveys uses the Schmidt?s (1969) for selecting quasars. The source is a candidate quasar if it shows: ? non-stellar color in the nucleus; ? luminous semi-stellar nucleus; ? time variability; ? strong emission lines; ? a lack of proper motion; ? a Lyman break features or color at high redshift. These criteria certainly have covered most characteristics of known AGNs, they are optimized for detecting quasars, and will not detect Seyfert 2 galaxies which do not have strong broad emission lines. The most recent large optical survey is the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) program, which uses 5 colors in selecting quasars (Fan et al. 1999). While programs such as the SDSS are very e?cient in selecting quasars, they may not be able to produce a complete sample in the sense of sampling the SMBHs without bias. The 5 technique designed in the surveys based on the above criteria basically focus on excluding stars rather than selecting all the quasars, given that the stars are much more copious than quasars (at m = 18, there are 500 stars for each quasar, and the selection must be better than 0.2% to avoid severe contamination!). Even with careful color selection criteria, selections based only on color can lead to inclusion of large number of star forming galaxies. One extreme example is the Byurakan survey, which selected objects by searching for blue continua, 90% of the objects found are starbursts rather than Seyferts. The host galaxy can overwhelm the light from AGNs in two situations. For an intrinsically low luminosity AGN, the star light, particularly the blue light from starbursts, can dilute the color of AGNs. Such efiect is quantifled by Richards et al. (2001). Below an optical luminosity of 6?1044 ergs?1 , the dilution efiect cannot be ignored. It has been realized recently that a signiflcant fraction of AGNs are obscured. The efiect of extinction can greatly reduce the optical light. Such AGNs are very hard to be selected by optical technique. Selection based on emission lines using low resolution spectra have little con- tamination. The completeness of such surveys is very hard to evaluate, given that the signal-to-noise depend on the equivalent width of the lines. Objects at difierent redshifts have to use difierent set of lines. The completeness of emission line de- tections is one of the fundamental problems with most high redshift surveys, since optical spectra is still the best method to obtain high quality redshift. On long enough time scales virtually all AGNs variable (Veron & Hawkins 1995; Giveon et al. 1999). Searching AGNs using optical variability requires a large 6 amount of photometric monitoring. So far the method have not produce signiflcantly large sample. However, the method will be very useful when the technology for large optical monitoring is available. 1.3.2 Radio and IR selected AGNs Radio and IR emissions can penetrate gas and dust rather easily, making the radio and IR band less subject to obscuration than the optical band. Radio observa- tions were the flrst to identify AGNs and jets. Radio observations, particularly those from VLBI or VLBA, can produce very accurate positions for optical follow-up. However, it has been realized for 40 years that radio selected AGNs tends to have small overlapping with optically selected AGNs. Only 10% of the optically selected AGNs are \radio loud" (White et al. 2000), and less than 30% of the radio selected AGNs are \optical loud" { showing no sign of strong emission lines, and very weak non-thermal continuum (Ivezi?c et al. 2002; Magliocchetti et al. 2002; Sadler et al. 2002). While IR radiation is an isotropic bolometric luminosity indicator, the biggest problem with IR selected AGN is contamination. The IR color is only subtly difier- ent from normal galaxies (Kuraszkiewicz et al. 2003) and the issue of how to separate out dusty AGNs from starburst galaxies is a issue long been debated (Veilleux 2002). 7 1.3.3 X-ray selected AGNs X-ray radiation seems to be a universal characteristic of AGNs. Very few \X-ray quiet" AGN is known. There are several advantages to search AGNs in X-rays: ? High contrast between AGN and star light. This allows detection of very low luminosity AGNs. The X-ray radiation from stellar populations are mostly from high mass X-ray binaries and the so called ultra-luminous X-ray sources (ULXs). Only below a luminosity of Lx ? 1042 ergs?1 contributions from ULXs become important. Since most of the ULXs are not found in the nucleus, Chandra observatory, with its sub-arcsecond resolution, can separate out most of the ofi-nucleus sources (Hornschemeier et al. 2003) . ? Penetrating power of X-rays. Column densities which reduces the optical ux in V band by two orders of magnitude (NH ? 1022 cm?2) only reduce ux by ? 3 in the 0.5{10 keV band. In the 2{10 keV surveys, about half of the bright objects are highly reddened in optical and often invisible in the UV. In a flxed energy band, redshift increases the energy of the band pass in the rest frame of the source by a factor of 1+z, which efiectively reduces the efiect of absorption from that source. At z ? 10 the absorption need to be Compton thick to \kill" the X-ray ux (Figure 3). ? Larger amplitude of X-ray variability on shorter time scales compared with optical variability. 8 Figure 3: X-ray spectra of two AGNs atz ?10, one with no absorption and the other with a line-of-sight column density of 1024 cm?2 with pure photo-electric absorption. Figure from Mushotzky (2004). The two fundamental selection efiects in optical surveys, dilution and obscura- tion are therefore far less important in the X-ray band. The only uncertainty in the completeness of X-ray surveys is the fraction of sources which are Compton thick (with line-of-sight column density NH > 1:5?1024 cm?2). It has been argued that about 40% of the AGNs found locally are Compton thick. However, this statement is based on known AGNs rather than on a complete local sample, the true fraction of Compton thick sources is in fact unknown. Gamma-ray missions like SWIFT will 9 be able to survey large enough area to determine this fraction. The fundamental problem for X-ray surveys is that it is very di?cult to obtain redshift using X-ray spectra, because most of the X-ray sources detected have too few counts. Therefore, X-ray observations have to be followed-up with optical telescope for the redshifts of the X-ray sources. To sum up, the hard X-ray selected AGNs is a superset of AGNs selected in optical, IR and radio band. The major uncertainty in the completeness is the fraction of Compton thick sources. 1.4 X-ray Surveys prior to Chandra 1.4.1 Point sources The flrst large X-ray survey were performed from Uhuru (Gursky & Schwartz 1977) and Ariel-V (Pounds 1979) small satellites in the 2{6 keV band in the 1970s. Detailed follow-up work of the previously unidentifled, high-latitude X-ray sources in the early surveys (Ward et al. 1980) discovered that most of them were previ- ously unknown AGNs showing non-thermal continua, narrow weak lines, and strong reddening compared to the optically selected AGNs. Einstein and ROSAT surveys have provided very large samples of soft X-ray selected AGNs (Puchnarewicz et al. 1996; Fischer et al. 1998; Zickgraf et al. 2003). At ux > 10?13 ergcm?2 s?1 there is only ? 1 ROSAT source per square degree. The error circle of ROSAT is su?ciently small that unique identiflcations can be made on the X-ray position alone for sources brighter than m ? 20 mag in the B 10 and V band. Below > 10?13 ergcm?2 s?1 , the error boxes are too large for unique identiflcation. In this case, optical broad line AGNs are searched within the error boxes. Soft X-ray selected AGNs shows a moderate correlation of optical and X-ray properties, with a narrow range of X-ray-to-optical ratio, and most of the objects are broadline AGNs in optical. Before Chandra, the hard X-ray AGN samples were most obtained by ASCA (Akiyama et al. 2003) and BeppoSax (Fiore et al. 2000) through serendipitous sur- veys. The poor angular resolution (FWHM?10?30) limits the uxes of the optical counterparts to R < 21 mag for BeppoSax HELLAS survey and R < 19 mag for ASCA Large Area Sky Survey to avoid confusion. The nature of the hard X-ray selected AGNs is rather difierent from the ROSAT sample, with ?1=3 do not show broadlines in optical. The X-ray-to-optical ratio is also more scattered than that of the soft X-ray selected samples. 1.4.2 Cosmic X-ray background The cosmic X-ray background (CXB) was flrst discovered in 1962 (Giac- coni et al. 1962) from rocket ights, with an intensity of ? 1:7 photons (2{10 keV) cm2 s?1 sr?1. The isotropic nature of CXB above 2 keV indicates its ex- tragalactic origin. The background radiation appears very uniform. ASCA observa- tions shows that on angular scales of 0.5 degree2, the rms variance is < 6% (Kushino et al. 2002). The spectra of the CXB below 10 keV can reasonably be described as a single power-law with photon index of ? = 1:4, but deviates strongly at higher en- 11 ergies. On the other hand, a thermal plasma with single temperature of 40{60 keV seem to produce better flt over the energy range probed by HEAO-1 A2 experiment (Marshall et al. 1980). Soon after the discovery of the CXB, however, it was realized that the hard XRB cannot be dominated by truely difiuse emission from hot gas, because such hot gas would leave on the Cosmic Microwave Background a trace of inverse Compton scattering. Such a signature was not observed. Later imaging observations from Einstein have found that a signiflcant fraction of the CXB can be resolved into point sources. After removing these point sources from the CXB spectrum, the single temperature thermal model no longer produce good flt. The known bright X-ray sources in the universe which are abundant enough to account for the observed CXB are AGNs. ROSAT deep surveys of the 0.5{2 keV extragalactic CXB had resolved ?80% of the emission into point sources to a ux limit of 10?16 ergcm?2 s?1 (Hasinger et al. 1998). However, there is a di?culty in extrapolating this result to hard band CXB. Most of the ROSAT observed X-ray are broad line AGNs in optical observations, with X-ray power-law index around 1.9, very difierent from the spectral shape of the hard CXB. A difierent population of AGN, either with very at spectral index or obscured by gas and dust with column density NH > 1022 cm2 is needed to account for the hard CXB spectra. It has been suggested that most of these AGNs are probably type 2 quasars, a luminous version of Seyfert 2 galaxies. The \mystery" of CXB has played a very important role in our understanding of the evolution history SMBHs. The CXB provide an integration constrain on the spectrum, luminosity function, and redshift distribution of AGNs. 12 1.5 Chandra deep surveys The Chandra X-ray observatory (see Chapter 2) has greatly improved our view of AGNs. The great advantage of Chandra is its exquisite spatial resolution. Combined with the excellent position accuracy, Chandra is able to survey as deep as 10 Ms without the problem of source confusion. Unique source identiflcation can be achieved at a very faint optical magnitudes (I ? 28). Unlike observations in other wavelength (except in radio), the certainty of the optical counterpart does not rely on spectroscopic conflrmation. Chandra also have very low background (only 10?7s?1pixel?1 in the 0.5{8 keV for ACIS-I CCD detector), making it capable of detecting sources with only a few counts. It is therefore possible to detect large number of sources. The sensitivity of the deepest Chandra surveys (Chandra Deep Field North or CDFN with 2 Ms and Chandra Deep Field South or CDFS with 1 Ms) reaches 7000 deg?2 (Bauer et al. 2004), which is 10{20 times higher than the deepest optical spectroscopic surveys. The flndings of the Chandra deep surveys is rather surprising (see Brandt & Hasinger 2005 for a review). Less than 30% of the optical counterparts have strong broadlines, while many of the rest 70% are pure absorption line objects (Barger et al. 2003), or have very low optical uxes. Sources with I > 25 are hard to identify spectroscopically. Many of these appear to be obscured AGNs at z ?1?4 when multi-wavelength properties are considered (Barger et al. 2003; Alexander et al. 2001). Some sources have no optical detection, even at the faintest optical limits, and are termed as extreme X-ray/optical radio sources; most of these sources 13 are detected in near IR images (Koekemoer et al. 2004). The X-ray spectra of the sources detected by Chandra is atter than the ROSAT sources. The composition of the point sources flt the spectra of 2{10 keV CXB very well (Mushotzky et al. 2000). Deep Chandra surveys and later the XMM- Newton surveys have shown that > 90% of the hard X-ray CXB is resolved, and the uncertainties are the normalization of CXB itself and the cosmic variance, par- ticularly at ? 10?14 ergcm?2 s?1 , where the AGN contribution to the CXB peaks (Cowie et al. 2002 see Figure 4). The latter issue can be resolved by wide fleld surveys as described in Chapter 3. The results from Chandra have shown that the X-ray observations are far more e?cient than any other technique in flnding AGNs. AGNs dominate the X- ray sources in the sky above a hard X-ray ux of 10?16 ergcm?2 s?1 . Most of the X-ray selected AGNs are unlikely to be selected with optical surveys. A large fraction of the Chandra detected AGNs are likely to be obscured AGNs. Instead of being type 2 quasars, as expected previously, most of the sources discovered have luminosity of Seyfert galaxies and most are found at z < 1. These results greatly improve our view of the evolution of SMBHs. 1.6 Evolution of SMBHs: a new perspective 1.6.1 Evolution of the X-ray Luminosity function It has been noticed soon after the discovery of quasars that the spatial density of quasars increase sharply with redshift and peak at z ?2?3. Schmidt (1968, 1970) 14 Figure 4: The contribution to the XRB versus ux. The solid boxes are the measured values in the combined sample. The lines show the values from the power-law flts. The open boxes show the CDFN, the open diamonds the CDFS, the open upward pointing triangles the SSA13 fleld, and the open downward pointing triangles the SSA22 fleld. The individual flelds are shown only below 10?14 erg cm?2 s?1 where the error bars are small. Figure from Cowie et al. (2002). 15 found roughly a factor of 100 increase of the quasar spatial density from redshift 0 to 2. The same trend was found in radio galaxies. Why there is such a strong evolution is very puzzling. In some low redshift AGNs, spectra of young stars can be seen, indicating star formation may be important in fueling the AGN activity. However, the cosmic star formation seem to peaks at redshift of 1 rather than 2{3. The gap between AGN and star formation history has long been a mystery. With extensive optical follow-up from Keck telescope, Barger et al. (2005) show that the Chandra detected AGNs have a peak redshift of 1 instead of 2. The evolution of luminosity density inferred resembles remarkably with the best mea- sured star formation history (Figure 5). This agrees in general with the expectation that AGNs and star formation evolves in a self-regulated manner: star formation fuels the AGNs while AGN feedback heat and clear the gas and ultimately halt the star formation. The evolution of X-ray luminosity function over z = 0 ? 1:2 can be best described by a pure luminosity evolution. Most of the luminosity density in this redshift range is produced by AGNs which does not show broadlines. The very steep decrease of luminosity density is interpreted as the decrease of AGN activity, or downsizing. 1.6.2 Clustering of AGNs: what can we learn? Another fundamental question needs to be addressed is the environment of AGNs or, put another way, where SMBH are formed. However, the host galaxies 16 Figure 5: Incompleteness corrected evolution with redshift of the rest-frame 2?8 keV comoving energy density production rate, _?X, of LX ? 1042 ergs s?1 optically- narrow AGNs (solid circles). Open diamonds show the evolution of the broad-line AGNs. Vertical bar in the z = 1:5?3 redshift interval shows the range from the spectroscopically measured value for the optically-narrow AGNs (solid circle) to the maximally incompleteness corrected value (open circle; see text for details). Dashed curve shows the pure luminosity evolution maximum likelihood flt for broad-line AGNs over the range z = 0?1 and a at line at z > 1. Figure from Barger et al. (2005). 17 of AGNs at high redshift are relatively di?cult to observed because the surface brightness of galaxies decrease with (1 +z)?4. Spatial clustering analysis provides an alternative approach to the question. In the standard Cold Dark Matter (CDM) structure formation paradigm, the mass in the universe can be approximated as spherical or ellipsoidal halos. The formation of large scale structure can be imagined as a process of constant merging and collapsing of these halos. The more massive halos tends to be more clustered. From the clustering property, we can infer the typical mass of the halos. Large scale AGN surveys have been traditionally carried out in the optical band with dedicated telescopes. The most recent of these are the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS, Schneider et al. 2004) and the Two Degree Field Survey (2dF, Croom et al. 2005, C05 hereafter). These surveys have found that the bright quasars have a clustering property very similar to the clustering property of local normal galaxies. However, since the spatial density for quasars is very low, the typical scales probed by these surveys are a few hundred Mpc, where the clustering signal is very low. X-ray selected AGNs, particular the Chandra selected sources have a much higher spatial density. This make them ideal probe for large scale structure traced by AGNs. The most extensive X-ray AGN surveys so far performed used the ROSAT telescope (Mullis et al. 2004). Since most of the sources in the ROSAT sample are broadline AGNs, it is not surprising that the clustering of ROSAT samples agrees with that found in optical surveys. The clustering results on hard X-ray AGNs are so far contradictory. Earlier 18 studies of a small number of individual Chandra flelds seem to indicate that the hard band number counts in these small flelds has uctuations larger than expected from Poisson noise (Cowie et al. 2002; Manners et al. 2003) but the result is contradicted with larger samples of Chandra flelds (Kim et al. 2004). Basilakos et al. (2004) found a 4 clustering signal in hard X-ray sources at f2?8keV > 10?14 ergcm?2 s?1 using angular correlation functions on a XMM detected AGN sample from a 2 deg2 survey. A similar result was also found earlier in our 0.4 deg2 Chandra fleld (see below) using the count-in-cells technique (Yang et al. 2003). Using the Limber equation Basilakos et al. (2004) argue that the hard X-ray sources are likely to be more strongly clustered than the optically selected AGNs. Gilli et al. (2003) reported the detection of large angular-redshift clustering in the Chandra Deep fleld South, which seems to be dominated by hard X-ray sources. Using the projected correlation function for the optically identifled X-ray sources from the CDFN and CDFS, Gilli et al. (2005) found that the average correlation amplitude in the CDFS is higher than that in the CDFN, and the latter is consistent with the correlation amplitude found in optically detected quasars. All the X-ray surveys so far either uses angular correlation function, or only produce the space correlation function of the whole sample, which commonly cover a broad redshift interval. The proper interpretation requires the assumption of the evolution of clustering. unfortunately, the commonly used assumptions are proved to be too simple. 19 1.7 Outline of the dissertation In this dissertation I present our moderate deep Chandra survey CLASXS of the Lockman Hole Northwest. The survey is intended to bridge the gap between ultra-deep Chandra surveys such as CDFN and CDFS, and the much shallower large area surveys from ASCA and ROSAT. This allows us to better determine the number counts at the \knee" and hence the contribution of point sources to the CXB. The wide contiguous fleld allows us to computer the spatial correlation function without being strongly afiected by cosmic variance. This allows us, for the flrst time, to directly study the evolution of clustering of X-ray selected AGNs. In Chapter 2, I discuss the Chandra instrumentation and the data reductions. In Chapter 3, I present the CLASXS survey, the data, reduction details, and the X-ray catalog (which can be found in full in Appendix A). I will discuss the number counts of soft and hard X-ray sources and compare them with previous results. The X-ray spectral properties and time variability are also presented. In Chapter 4, I summarize the optical follow-up observations of the fleld. I will show that the Chandra angular resolution is crucial for correct identiflcations. In Chapter 5, I present the analysis of extended sources and gravitational lensing in our survey. In Chapter 6, The analysis of spatial correlation function of X-ray selected AGNs based on CLASXS and CDFN will be shown. I summarize our results in Chapter 7. In Appendix B, I will present an analysis of the correlation between blackhole mass and X-ray luminosity of AGNs; and in 20 Appendix C, some basics cosmology equations and their meaning are discussed. Through out this dissertation, I will adopt a cosmology with H0 = 71 and a at universe with ?M = 0:27 and ?? = 0:73. 21 Chapter 2 Chandra Observatory: Instrumentation and data reduction In this chapter I will described some basics of the Chandra instrumentation and data reduction issues. The intention of this chapter is to provide the basic \principles" rather than details. This is because: (1) more details can always be found in publications as well as the Chandra X-ray Center (CXC) web pages. (2) The calibration and performance are constantly updated. The method and software for data reduction has also been improved constantly. The software used in this analysis may very likely to be obsolete in a year?s time. To avoid the chapter becoming too long, I will only discuss the instruments and reduction issues that are related to this work. Most of the material in this chapter are derived from the Proposer?s Observatory Guide (POG), Weisskopf et al. (2003), and the software manuals and science threads at the CXC web site (http://asc.harvard.edu/). 2.1 The Chandra X-ray Observatory The Chandra X-ray Observatory is an e?cient high-resolution X-ray telescope with a suite of advanced imaging and spectroscopic instruments. The telescope was initiated as a result of an unsolicited proposal submitted to NASA in 1976 by Giacconi and Tananbaum. The subsequent study led to the deflnition of the then named Advanced X-ray Astrophysics Facility (AXAF). The mission is one 22 component of NASA?s Great Observatory Program, including the Hubble Space Telescope, the Compton Gamma-ray Observatory, and the recently launched Spitzer Infrared telescope. In 1998 the mission was named in honor of the Nobel Prize winner Dr. Subramanyan Chandrasekhar. The telescope was launched on July 23, 1999 using space shuttle Columbia. The ight system of Chandra is 13.8 m long and 4.2 m diameter, with 19.5 m solar-panel wingspan. The orbit of Chandra is highly elliptical with a nominal apogee of 140,000 km and a perigee of 10,000 km. The inclination to the equator is 28.5?. The orbital period is 63.5 hr, and the satellite is above the radiation belt for more than 75% of the orbital period. The principal science components of Chandra includes the High Resolution Mirror Assembly (HRMA), the Aspect System, the focal plane Science Instruments (SIs), and the Objective Transmission Gratings. A schematic plot of Chandra with the major instruments labeled is shown in Figure 6. 2.1.1 The X-ray telescope The heart of the observatory is the X-ray telescope. The HRMA is made of four concentric Wolter-1 telescopes. Each of the telescope contains a hyperboloid and a paraboloid mirror (Figure 7). The double re ected X-ray photons are focused at the detector plane. Similar grazing mirror design have also been used in Einstein and ROSAT. The telescope has a focal length of 10 m and the unobscured geometric clear 23 Figure 6: The Chandra Observatory with the major subsystems labeled. Figure from Weisskopf et al. (2003). Figure 7: A schematic diagram of the HRMA mirrors 24 aperture of 1145 cm2. Since re ectivity depends on energy as well as grazing angle, the HRMA throughput varies with X-ray energy. The on-axis efiective area as a function of energy is shown is Figure 8. The efiective area decrease with ofi-axis angle because of vignetting, which can be seen in Figure 9. The energy dependence of this efiect is relatively weak for the commonly used 0.5 { 8 keV band. For a at power-law spectrum X-ray source, the efiective area at 80 ofi-axis in the 0.5{2 keV band is only ?5% higher than that in 2{8 keV band. The telescope on-axis point spread function (PSF) measured during ground calibration had a FWHM of 0.500. The on-axis PSF from ray tracing models and that from the in orbit measurements are shown in Figure 10. The size of the PSF is a strong function of ofi-axis angle and photon energy. This is shown in Figure 11. 2.1.2 The ACIS detector The Advanced CCD Imaging Spectrometer (ACIS) contains 10 , 1024?1024 pixel CCDs arranged in two groups: ACIS-I is an array with 4?4 CCDs, used for imaging, and ACIS-S is arranged in a line to be used either for spectroscopy with the gratings or for image. A schematic drawing of the ACIS focal plane is shown in Figure 12. The square pixel has a physical size of 24 ?m, corresponding to an angular size of ?0:492 00. Each CCD covers a sky region of 16.90 by 16.90. The X-ray CCD is very similar to the CCD used in the optical astronomy, which is an array of Metal-Oxide Semiconductor (MOS) capacitors. The metal gate structure on one surface of CCD deflnes the pixel. The ACIS front-illuminated (FI) 25 Figure 8: The HRMA, HRMA/ACIS and HRMA/HRC efiective areas versus X-ray energy. The structure near 2 keV is due to the iridium M-edge. The HRMA efiective area is calculated by the ray-trace simulation based on the HRMA model and scaled by the XRCF calibration data. The HRMA/ACIS efiective areas are the products of HRMA efiective area and the Quantum E?ciency (QE) of ACIS -I3 (front illu- minated) or ACIS -S3 (back illuminated). The HRMA/HRC efiective areas are the products of HRMA efiective area and the QE of HRC-I or HRC-S at their aimpoints, including the efiect of UV/Ion Shields (UVIS). Figure from Chandra Proposer?s Ob- servatory Guide (Online at http://asc.harvard.edu/proposer/POG/html/). 26 Figure 9: The HRMA efiective area versus ofi-axis angle, averaged over azimuth, for selected energies, normalized to the on-axis area for that energy. CCDs have the gate structure facing the X-ray incident beam. Two of the chips on the ACIS-S array (S1 and S3) have had the insensitive, undepleted bulk silicon material on the back of the CCD removed. They are mounted to have the backside illuminated by the incident X-ray. The back-illuminated (BI) CCD chips are more sensitive to soft X-ray photons. The capacitors can store charge within potential wells. Photo-electric absorp- 27 Figure 10: The predicted and observed fractional encircled energy as a function of radius for an on-axis point source with HRC-I at the focus of the telescope. Flight data from an observation of AR LAC is also shown. 28 Figure 11: HRMA/ACIS-I encircled energy radii for circles enclosing 50% and 90% of the power at 1.49 and 6.40 keV as a function of ofi-axis angle. The ACIS-I surface is composed by four tilted at chips which approximate the curved Chandra focal plane. The HRMA optical axis passes near the aimpoint which is located at the inner corner of chip I3. Thus the ofi-axis encircled energy radii are not azimuthally symmetric. The four panels show these radii?s radial dependence in four azimuthal directions - from the aimpoint to the outer corners of the four ACIS-I chips. These curves include the blurs due to the ACIS-I spatial resolution and the Chandra aspect error. 29 S0 S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 w168c4r w140c4r w182c4r w134c4r w457c4 w201c3r I0 I1 I2 I3 } } ACIS-S x 18 pixels = 8".8 22 pixels = 11" ~22 pixels ~11" not 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 constant with Z Top Bottom 330 pixels = 163" w203c4r w193c2 w215c2rw158c4r column CCD Key NodeDefinitions Row/Column Definition Coordinate Orientations one two three (aimpoint on S3 = (252, 510)) node zero row. . + ACIS FLIGHT FOCAL PLANE (aimpoint on I3 = (962, 964)) ACIS-I Frame Store Pixel (0,0) Image Region BI chip indicator +Z Pointing Coordinates +Y Offset TargetY?+ Z?+ Coordinates+Z -Z Sim Motion Figure 12: A schematic drawing of the ACIS focal plane; insight to the terminology is given in the lower left. tion of an X-ray photon results in a liberation of a proportional number of electrons. The charge is conflned by electric flelds to a small volume near the interaction site. The volume is usually larger than one pixel. In the ACIS, each pixel contain three \phases" or \sub pixels" which are single capacitors. By alternating the voltage in sequence on the three electrodes spanning one pixel, the charge can be transfered from one pixel to the next. The CCD have an \active" section which is exposed to the incident X-ray, and a shielded frame storage region. The standard frame expo- sure time is 3.2 s, although shorter frame time can be achieved with small window mode (only a fraction of the CCD is used; this is useful for bright sources, where 30 the probability of multiple photon hitting the same pixel within one frame time is signiflcant). A good determination of the charge deposited by an event is critical to the spectral resolution. The fraction of charges lost during the pixel-to-pixel transfer or charge transfer ine?ciency (CTI), and the readout noise are the major factors. The readout noise for ACIS is < 2 electrons rms. The total system noise ranges from 2-3 electrons (rms) and is dominated by ofi-chip analog processing electrons. The spatial resolution is limited by the physical size of the CCD pixels (0.492 00). For the on-axis observation, approximately 90% of the encircled energy lies within 4 pixels of the center pixel at 1.49 keV and within 5 pixels at 6.4 keV. For far ofi-axis sources, the PSF of the HRMA dominates the spatial resolution. Since ACIS is basi- cally a photon counting device, in observation the spacecraft is dithered so that the gaps between the CCDs can have some exposure and the pixel-to-pixel variation can be smoothed out. The dither is removed using the aspect data during the ground processing. The absolute accuracy of position is 0.400and the image reconstruction accuracy is 0.300. The FI CCDs are designed to have better energy resolution than the BI chips. After launch the energy resolution for the FI chips was found to be a function of row number, best explained by damages to the CCDs by low energy protons encountered unexpectedly when passing the radiation belt and re ected ofi the X-ray telescope. The BI chips are not afiected because the buried channels and gates are in the direc- tion opposite to the HRMA, which is di?cult for low energy protons to penetrate. The position-dependent energy resolution of the FI chips depends signiflcantly on the ACIS operating temperature. Since activation, the ACIS operating temperature 31 has been lowered in steps and is now set at the lowest temperature thought safely and consistently achievable ( ??120?C). The damage induced CTI has so far been modeled and correction procedures are implemented to recover the loss of energy resolution. 2.2 ACIS data processing and reduction The Chandra X-ray Center (CXC) performs standard or commonly refereed as \pipeline" data processing. Since the calibration is constantly updated, re- processing are often needed. I will discuss brie y the procedures in the ACIS data processing and reduction. While I will focus on ACIS-I, most of the steps are the same for ACIS-S. Details can be found in the Science thread online at http://asc.harvard.edu/ciao/threads/index.html All the data processing can be performed with the Chandra Interactive Anal- ysis of Observations (CIAO) software, which can be downloaded from the CXC web site. The data set obtained from CXC contains two levels of data products, in- cluding the event lists, images and source lists. Level 1 event list is the raw data while level 2 event list has been flltered and is meant for scientiflc analysis. The observation ancillary flles, which contains information about the telescope aspect, CCD bad pixels, good time intervals, bias maps, masks and so on, are also included. If the data need to be reprocessed to use the best calibration available, one starts with the level 1 event list. The event list register all the events with their coordinates, CCD number, node number, event time and energy. This step can be 32 done with the acis process events procedure which performs a set of tasks, including applying the ACIS gain map (now includes the time dependent gain change), the CTI correction and so on. The central part of the task is to calculate the grades of the events. The task typically uses a 3?3 (5?5 when observation uses the VFAINT mode) island of pixels centered on the event to determine the shape formed by the pixels which has been activated. A cosmic ray background incident tends to produce multiple events with shapes difierent from common X-ray photons. The shape is then coded to a grade system (in all calibrations only a subset of the grades { ASCA grades 0, 2, 3, 4 and 6 are used) for flltering. Figure 13 shows a charged particle striking the BI and FI chips. The rejection e?ciency for FI CCDs are higher then BI CCDs. The event list can then be flltered for high backgrounds time intervals (by inspecting the background light curve), the bad grades, and apply the good time intervals. The resulting flle is a level 2 event list. The event list can then be rebinned by the columns to make images, spectra or light curves for further analysis. 2.3 ACIS Source detection CIAO provide three detection tools: ? celldetect: A classic sliding box algorithm. ? wavdetect: Multi-scale flltering using wavelet transformation. ? vtpdetect: Uses the Voronoi tessellation and percolation to flnd over dense regions of events. The method works directly on the event list. 33 Figure 13: Enlarged view of an area of a FI chip I3 (left) and a BI chip (right) after being struck by a charged particle. There is far more \blooming" in the FI image since the chip is thicker. The overlaid 3x3 detection cells indicate that the particle impact on the FI chip produced a number of events, most of which end up as ASCA Grade 7, and are thus rejected with high e?ciency. The equivalent event in the BI chip, is much more di?cult to distinguish from an ordinary x-ray interaction, and hence the rejection e?ciency is lower. Celldetect does not perform very well in separating close sources and can pro- duce multiple detections for ofi-axis point sources because of the broadened PSF. It is therefore commonly used for preview. Wavdetect is more commonly used because of its high sensitivity. Vtpdetect on the other hand is better suited for detecting extended source. 2.3.1 Wavdetect Wavelet detection uses a family of oscillatory functions (wavelet functions) that are scalable and are non-zero within a limited region. The integration of the 34 function is zero. The simplest example is the \top hat" function with amplitude A and width w, anked by two negatively valued troughs with total integrated area ?Aw. Any function with zero normalization with the form Wa; (x)? 1 W x?a ? (2.1) may be used as a wavelet function. is the scaling or dilation parameter and a is the translation parameter. The localized nature of wavelet function allows determination of both the loca- tion and the dominate frequency (scale) of a source simultaneously. By convolving the wavelet with an image (correlation map), the problem of source detection boils down to the problem of flnding the statistical signiflcant correlation peaks in the correlation map. Details of the algorithm is described in Freeman et al. (2002). The algorithm use a simple unimodal wavelet function W( x; y;x;y) to detect sources in an image D. This function is convolved with D to produce a \correlation image" C: C( x; y;x;y) = Z Z dx0 dy0 W( x; y;x?x0;y?y0)D(x0;y0)? < W?D > : (2.2) The expectation value of C( x; y;x;y) is zero, if there are no sources within the limited spatial extent of the wavelet function, and the background count rate is lo- cally constant, because the normalization of W( x; y;x;y) is zero. For convenience we can write W in two parts so that C = < PW?D > + < NW?D >, where PW and NW denote the positive and negative amplitude portions of the wavelet function, respectively. If a clump of counts is contained within PW, then the con- tribution of the positive term will C outweighs that of the negative term, producing 35 a maximum. If the scale sizes are smaller, then the wavelet function will extend over a smaller region within the clump, the resulting C may or may not be a local maxima, and C ! 0 when the scale of the wavelet is very small. For larger scale sizes, the correlation value tends asymptotically to a maximum, Cmax, provided that there are no sources very close. By computing the probability S that a false source is accepted, also called the signiflcance, in each image pixel (i;j) in the C( x; y;x;y) map, one can tell if a clump is a source or noise. Si;j = Z 1 Ci;j dCp(CjnB;i;j) (2.3) nB;i;j is the inferred number of background counts within the limited spatial extent of the wavelet function, and p(CjnB;i;j) is the probability sampling distribution for C given nB;i;j, which in practice is computed using simulations. If nB;i;j is estimated from the raw data themselves, this estimate will be biased if source counts are present, so that Si;j & Si;j;true. Thus an iterative procedure is used to remove source counts from the image and replace them with the background estimates. The usual number of iterations depends upon many factors, but is usually ? 3-4. With this flnal background estimate, one computes a flnal signiflcance Sflnali;j for each value Ci;j =< W?D >i;j (the correlation of the wavelet function with the raw image data) so that a flnal listing of source pixels may be made. After this algorithm is used to determine lists of source pixels for many wavelet scale sizes, cross-identiflcation of pixels across scales is performed to create the flnal source list. The CIAO wavdetect contains two parts: wtransform, which convolve the 36 wavelet functions of a set of scales with the input image; and wrecon uses the wtransform output products to construct source lists, measure parameters for each detection, and create various maps. The two part can be ran separately. The most important input parameters are: ? scales: the scales of wavelet function which determines how many scaled trans- forms will be computed; ? sigthresh: The signiflcance threshold for source detection. A good value to use is the inverse of the total number of pixels in the image, e.g. ? 10?6 (the default) for a 1024?1024 fleld. Exposure maps (created by using the aspect histogram and instrument map, rep- resents the efiective exposure in the image) can be used with wavdetect so that the exposure variations can be taken into account when computing the signiflcance. The PSF flles for Chandra is used so the best scales can be used to extract source counts. For images taken from other telescopes, unless PSF flle is supplied, the smallest scale used for detection is used for source extraction, leading to erroneous results. This, however, does not afiect source detection. While wavdetect is very sensitive in detecting weak sources, very good in sep- arating very close sources, they tend to be CPU intensive, particularly on large images with many scales. The cross talk between scales also could eliminate legiti- mate sources if too many scales are used. It has also been found that the obtained source properties (count rate) may not be correct (see Chapter 3). The source counts are recommended to be extracted with other software. 37 2.3.2 Vtpdetect On a 2-dimension random point distribution, a Voronoi tessellation can be constructed so that each point is assigned a unique convex polygon. The formation of these cells can be imagined through the following process. Each of point starts with a small circle with the same radius centered on it. The circle expands at a constant rate. Once two adjacent circles touch, the contact point stops expanding, but the rest part of the circle continue to expand until all the space is fllled (see Figure 14). The polygon deflnes an area for each point, and the inverse of the area of the polygon is the density at that point. The probability distribution function of the area for a Poisson process can be used to assign probability to the cells which are overdense. By applying the algorithm on the spatial distribution of X-ray events, a map of overdense cells can be constructed. In practice the ux, deflned as the inverse of the product of the cell area and the exposure time, is used instead of area so the exposure efiect can be included. The sources are then found by connecting all the neighboring cells above the ux threshold. The merit of this method is that it make best use of the event list in flnding extended sources, and is not afiected by binning or the geometry of the detecting cells, as in other detecting methods. When running the CIAO vtpdetect, the user can choose the maximum proba- bility of a false source (limit). A threshold is then calculated using the probability provided. This threshold can be rescaled (through scale parameter) to allow better detection sensitivity or better ability of de-blending point sources. Addition con- 38 Figure 14: An example of a Voronoi tessellation for 2000 random points. (Figure from the Chandra Detection Manual). strain come from the minimum number of counts per source (coarse), which is useful in removing point sources. The major problem with vtpdetect is that it tends to blend point sources. Visual inspection of the source list is needed to remove point sources. 39 2.4 ACIS Spectral analysis The spectra of an X-ray source and the background can be extracted using the CIAO tool dmextract. The background can be chosen from a region close to the source, or from the background flles. The resulting spectrum is in fact a convo- lution of the original spectrum with the ACIS response and the efiective area. To understand the source spectrum, the response and efiective area of the instrument need to be obtained. These are made by utilizing the calibration flle and the obser- vation data such as the gain map and aspect data. Two flles will be generated in the process: the response matrix flle (RMF) and the ancillary response flle (ARF). The RMF maps the energy to pulse hight (or position) space and ARF contains the efiective area and quantum e?ciency as a function of energy averaged over time. The process of creating the RMF and ARF can be done in one step using meta task psextract or do it step-by-step by running each of the tasks separately. The quantum e?ciency at low energy (below 2 keV) was found to decrease with time, best explained by molecular deposition contaminating the optical blocking fll- ter or the CCDs. This degradation is most severe at energies below 1 keV. At 1 keV, the degradation is approximately 10%. Correction for this efiect has been included since the calibration release CALDB 2.26. Data processed using CALDB prior to version 2.26 are corrected within the Chandra data fltting package sherpa with a sep- arate SLANG script acisabs.sl or the UNIX shell wrapper apply acisabs on the ARF. This change can also be accounted for using a spectral fltting model ACISABS by Chartas & Getman (URL:http://www.astro.psu.edu/users/chartas/xcontdir/xcont.html). 40 To obtain the original source spectrum from the observed spectrum is always a challenge because the inverse problem is not easily solvable and the solution can be very unstable. Fortunately, in most cases the general form of the source spectrum can be reasonably assumed based on the type of the source. By folding the assumed model and the response of the instrument, and compare the result with the ob- served spectrum, the problem boils down to flnding the model parameters that best describe the data. Finding a global minimum of ?2 (or other fltting statistics) in the parameter space is the goal of model fltting. The method, however, can neither distinguish between models which produce equally good flt, nor can it distinguish between equally deep local minimums. Good scientiflc judgement is always needed. XSPEC is the most commonly used spectral fltting tool. The software is a command driven interactive fltting package which provide a large library of spectral models and provide plenty expandability. The program can also be used to compute model ux and luminosity. 41 Chapter 3 CLASXS: The Survey and the Point Source Catalog 3.1 Introduction The ultradeep Chandra surveys cover very small solid angles. In the case of the Chandra Deep Fields (CDFs), the combined sky coverage is?0:2 deg2. About 40% variance between flelds is seen in the integrated uxes in the 2?8 keV band (Cowie et al. 2002), likely as a result of the underlying large scale structure. To determine the fractional contribution of point sources to the cosmic X-ray background (CXB) with enough accuracy, and to understand how the CXB sources trace the large scale structure, a su?ciently large solid angle is needed. While very large area surveys exist above 10?13 ergcm?2 s?1 (2{8 keV) from ASCA (Akiyama et al. 2003), the data around 10?14 ergcm?2 s?1 , where the point source contribution to the CXB peaks, is limited. Several intermediate, wide-fleld, serendipitous Chandra/XMM-Newton surveys (Baldi et al. 2002; Kim et al. 2004; Harrison et al. 2003) were designed to increase the solid angle to several degrees at a 2?8 keV ux limit of 10?14 ergcm?2 s?1 . One of the advantages of such surveys is that they sample randomly across the sky, so the probability of all of them hitting overdense or underdense regions is small. This is useful in determining the normalization of LogN-LogS. On the other hand, serendipi- tous surveys sufier from the non-uniform observing conditions for each pointing, and 42 in most cases, the pointings contain bright sources. The biases introduced by these non-uniformities are hard to quantify. The serendipitous surveys also have little power in addressing the question of large scale structure traced by X-ray selected AGN, due to the small solid angle of each pointing, sparse and random positions on the sky, and the non-uniformity of the observations. With serendipitous surveys, it is also di?cult to perform extensive optical spectroscopic follow-up observations, which are critical in obtaining the redshifts and spectral classiflcations of the X-ray sources. This is due in part to the advent of large format detectors for imaging and spectroscopy (like those on the Subaru and Keck telescopes), which are more e?- cient at targeting large-area, contiguous X-ray surveys, rather than many isolated ACIS-I pointings. A contiguous, large solid angle survey can compensate for these disadvantages and bridge the gap between the ultradeep \pencil beam" surveys and the large area serendipitous surveys in determining both the normalization of the LogN-LogS and the large scale structure. In 2001, we began the Chandra Large Area Synoptic X-ray Survey (CLASXS) of the multiwavelength data-rich ISO Lockman Hole-Northwest (LHNW) region. The survey currently covers a solid angle of ? 0:4 deg2 and is sensitive to a factor of 2?3 below the \knee" of the 2?8 keV LogN-LogS. Such a choice of solid angle and depth maximizes the detection e?ciency with Chandra. The large solid angle is important for obtaining statistically signiflcant source counts at the \knee" of the LogN-LogS and to test for variance of the number counts on larger solid angles. The choice of solid angle is based on the ASCA results that the rms variance of the 43 2?10 keV CXB on a scale of 0.5 deg2 is?6% (Kushino et al. 2002). The expected variance at the angular scale of our fleld should be less than the uncertainty of the CXB ux. The uniform nature of the survey allows an unbiased measurement of AGN clustering. Our survey region is covered by the deepest 90 and 170?m ISOPHOT obser- vations (Kawara et al. 2004), as well as abundant multiwavelength observations, including the planned Spitzer Space Telescope (SST) Wide-Area Infrared Extra- galactic Survey (SWIRE, Lonsdale et al. 2004). We performed extensive optical follow-up observations using Subaru, CFHT, WIYN, and Keck to obtain multicolor images and spectra of the X-ray sources (Stefien et al. 2004, hereafter Stefien04; see Chapter 4). These observations provide critical information on the redshifts, spectroscopic classiflcations and luminosities of the X-ray sources, as well as on the morphologies of the host galaxies. 3.2 Observations and Data reduction 3.2.1 X-ray Observations We surveyed the LHNW fleld centered at fi = 10h34m, ? = 57?400 (J2000). The region has the lowest Galactic absorption (NH ? 5:72 ? 1019 cm?2 ; Dickey & Lockman 1990). All 9 ACIS-I observations were obtained with the standard conflguration. The pointings are separated from each other by 100 (Figure 15). The flelds are labeled LHNW1-9 for reference hereafter. The overlapping of the flelds allows a uniform sky coverage, because the sensitivity of the telescope drops 44 Figure 15: Layout of the 9 ACIS-I pointings. Gray scale map shows the adaptively smoothed full band image. The exposure maps are added (light gray) to outline the ACIS-I flelds. Fields are separated by 100 from each other. The fleld numbers (LHNW1-9) are shown at the center of each ACIS-I fleld. 45 Table 3.1. Observation Summary Target Name fi2000 ?2000 Obs ID Sequence # Observation date Exposurea LHNW1 10 34 00.24 +57 46 10.6 1698 900057 05/17/01 18:29:38 72.97 ks LHNW2 10 33 19.82 +57 37 13.8 1699 900058 04/30/01 10:59:38 40.74 ks LHNW3 10 34 36.12 +57 37 10.9 1697 900056 05/16/01 12:46:50 43.72 ks LHNW4 10 32 04.20 +57 37 15.6 3345 900184 04/29/02 03:23:45 38.47 ks LHNW5 10 34 00.31 +57 28 15.6 3346 900185 04/30/02 02:03:59 38.21 ks LHNW6 10 33 20.28 +57 55 15.2 3343 900182 05/03/02 09:11:41 34.04 ks LHNW7 10 32 44.23 +57 46 15.2 3344 900183 05/01/02 20:03:06 38.54 ks LHNW8 10 34 36.26 +57 55 15.6 3347 900186 05/02/02 14:16:27 38.46 ks LHNW9 10 35 14.28 +57 46 15.2 3348 900187 05/04/02 11:01:47 39.52 ks aTotal good time with dead time correction. signiflcantly at large ofi-axis angles. Fields LHNW1-3 were observed during April 30th to May 17th 2001, and the rest of the flelds were observed during April 29th to May 4th 2002. All flelds except LHNW1 have exposure times of?40 ks. LHNW1 is located at the center of the fleld and has an exposure time of 73 ks. The observations are summarized in Table 3.1. The data is reduced with CIAO v2.3 and the calibration flles in CALDB v2.20. The data reduction has later been updated with CIAO v3.01 and CALDB 2.23 to allow the use of CTI corrected calibration flles. We followed the CIAO analysis threads1 in reducing the data, including the correction of known aspect problems, CTI problems, and removing high background intervals. Background ares were found in LHNW3 and LHNW6 and have been removed. The resulting event lists were rebinned into 0:4 ? 2 keV (soft), 2 ? 8 keV (hard), and 0:4 ? 8 keV (full) broadband images. Spectral weighted exposure maps were made for each band for 1available online at http://asc.harvard.edu/ciao/ 46 Figure 16: The exposure map of LHNW3 in soft (left) and hard band (right) each observation, using the observation specifled bad pixel flles. To obtain the proper estimates of source ux, we make spectral weighed exposure maps using the CIAO script merge all. Examples of the soft and hard band exposure maps are shown in Figure 16. 3.2.2 Source detection The detection sensitivity of Chandra drops rapidly beyond 60 ofi-axis. For this reason, we overlapped our ACIS-I flelds so that the sensitivity of the survey would be uniform across the fleld. Since the added signal-to-noise from merging the observa- tions is relatively small, we chose to detect sources in each observation individually and merge the catalogs, rather than to detect sources directly on the merged im- age. This method certainly loses some sensitivity for very dim sources. However, since our major interest is to obtain a uniform sample for statistical and follow-up 47 purposes, such a choice is justifled. The method also simplifles the source ux ex- traction because the PSF information could easily be used. Multiple detections of sources in independent observations are very useful for checking and improving the X-ray positions of the sources. Multiple detections also provide an opportunity for measuring the variability of these sources. We ran wavdetect on the full resolution images with wavelet scales of 1,p2, 2, 2p2, 4, 4p2,8. Although using larger scale sizes could help to detect very far ofi-axis sources, it is not very useful for our survey, because of the overlapping of flelds. It also increases the computation time to use a large number of scales. We chose to use a signiflcance threshold of 10?7, which translates to a probability of false detection of 0.4 per ACIS-I fleld based on Monte Carlo simulation results (Freeman et al. 2002). 3.2.3 Source positions Observations performed before May 02, 2002 sufier from an systematic aspect ofiset as large as 200 from an error in the pipeline software. This systematic error was carefully calibrated by the CXC and corrections are provided. For the afiected flelds, LHNW1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7, we corrected this error following the standard procedures (see Chandra analysis thread 2). We further matched the small ofi-axis X-ray positions reported in each fleld from wavdetect to the optical images (seex4.2). Corrections were then found to max- imize the matches. Such corrections are very small. The astrometric improvement 2online at http://asc.harvard.edu/ciao/threads/arcsec correction/ 48 also only marginally improved the matching between the X-ray catalogs, thanks to the excellent astrometric accuracy of the instrument. The corrected X-ray catalogs from each observation were then merged (x 3.3). A further absolute astrometric correction was applied to the merged X-ray catalog to match to the radio sources in the fleld. 3.2.4 Source uxes Wavdetect is excellent at detecting sources, but it is not always the best method for ux extraction. Three issues could contribute to an incorrect estimation of source counts in wavdetect. First, the ux measurements in wavdetect use a monochro- matic PSF size, which, by default, corresponds to an enclosed energy of 0.393 at the energy of choice, or the 1 integrated volume of a normalized two-dimensional Gaussian. Though this parameter is adjustable, larger enclosed energy values could cause confusion of close sources. Since the construction of source cells is carried out by convolving the source image with wavelet functions, the \smearing" efiects of the convolution can in general make the source cell large enough to include most of the source photons, but the fraction of the ux recovered varies from source to source. Second, due to the statistical uctuations in the source photon distribution, some sources show multiple peaks in the convolved image. Unless perfect PSF informa- tion is available, randomness should exist in determining which peak belongs to a single source. This problem is particularly severe when the source is very ofi-axis and the PSF shape cannot be approximated by a Gaussian. The third issue is the 49 background determination, a problem other methods also share. The background in wavdetect is obtained in the immediate neighborhood of the source. This is useful because of the known large background uctuations. However, if the background is drawn too close to the source, the PSF wing would likely be taken as background. This could result in an over-subtraction of the background and lead to underesti- mated source counts. In wavdetect, the problem is treated by re-iteration of source removal (see x 2.3.1). However, our experiments show that the commonly used number of re-iteration does not clean the source very well. Increasing the number of iteration can improve the results, but will greatly increase the computing time. This efiect is seen in a correlation of source counts with background density in the wavdetect results. All of these issues would lead to an underestimation of source counts. This has been noticed in the analysis of the deep Chandra flelds (Giacconi et al. 2002, Hornschemeier, private communication). Because of the spectral difierences of the sources and the sensitivity difierences between energy bands, sources detected in one band are not always detected in another at high signiflcance. There is no simple way within wavdetect to provide upper limits for these sources. To obtain the source uxes or upper limits in the non-detection band, an alternative ux extraction method is needed. For these reasons, we wrote an aperture photometry tool for source ux extrac- tion. The method uses a simple circular aperture which matches the size of the PSF. To do this, we flrst compared the broadband PSFs derived from our observations with the PSF size flle provided with CIAO, as described below. 50 Broadband PSFs Both the PSF library used by the CIAO tool mkpsf and the circularly averaged PSFs used by the detection codes (psfsize20010416.flts) are generated at monochro- matic energies using simulations of the telescope. Spectral weighted average energy is usually used for selecting the PSF flle for broadband images. Since the spectra of the X-ray sources are mostly unknown, an average spectrum has to be assumed. Whether such selected PSFs agree with the observed broadband PSFs needs to be tested. We constructed \average PSFs" for difierent ofi-axis angles using sources which have no neighbors within 4000 in our 9 observations (Figure 17). It should be noted that these PSFs are inaccurate at large scales because the PSF wings, which span more than 10, could not be well determined in these observations. The source images from the same ofi-axis annuli are stacked, and the curves-of-growth are con- structed. The background regions are fltted with quadratic forms using nonlinear least-square flts. To compare with the library PSFs used by wavdetect, we linearly interpolated the library PSFs to the ofi-axis angles and the spectral weighted aver- aged energies. To account for the fact that part of the PSF wings had been fltted as background in our data, we did the same \background fltting" on the interpolated PSFs. This allows a comparison of the observed curve with the interpolated PSF. The broadband PSFs are generally narrower than the interpolated PSFs, except for one case in the hard band where the ofi-axis angle is large. 51 Figure 17: Broadband PSFs obtained from our observations (solid lines) compared with the monochromatic PSFs from the PSF library (dashed lines). Both the observed broad- band PSFs and the monochromatic PSFs are normalized to the wing. From the narrowest to the broadest, each broadband PSF is constructed within each of the ofi-axis angle in- tervals 00{40, 40{60, 60{70, 70{80, 80{90, 90{120. The library PSFs are taken at the midpoints of these ofi-axis intervals. (a) Soft band PSF vs. 0.91 keV library PSF; (b) hard band PSF vs. 4.2 keV library PSF. 52 Aperture photometry We perform ux extractions in the following way. We use circular extraction cells, choosing the radius of cells from the PSF library at a nominal enclosed en- ergy of ? 95% (the true enclosed energy should be >95% based on the discussion above) if the cell size is > 2:500. For source close to the aim point, a flxed 2.500 ra- dius was used. The background is estimated in an annulus region with an area 4 times as big as the source cell area, with inner radius 500 larger than the source cell radius. To avoid nearby sources being included in the background region, the background region is divided into 8 equal-sized segments (Figure 18). The mean background counts are estimated, excluding the segment which contains the highest number of events. Then the 3 Poisson upper limit is derived using the approxi- mations provided in Gehrels (1986). The background is then recalculated with only the background segments that contain counts less than the upper limit. The net counts are obtained by subtracting the background from the source counts within the source cell. We compare the obtained net counts with the net counts obtained with wavdetect (Figure 19). While they mostly agree, the source photons derived from our method are, on average, higher than those from wavdetect, especially for low-count sources. The average increases are 4%, 7%, and 8% for the soft, full, and hard bands, respectively. We hand-checked the sources with large discrepancies from the two methods, and we found our estimates to be more reliable. 53 Figure 18: Examples of the source and background regions used in the ux extraction. The smaller circle is the source region. The background regions are shown as segments of an annulus. Segments with counts below 3 of the mean are used in the flnal background estimation and are marked with ?X? symbols. (a) An isolated source; (b) a source with a close neighbor. 54 Figure 19: Comparison of net counts from wavdetect and our aperture photometry (marked as XPHOTO) for the (a) soft, (b) hard, and (c) full bands. 55 Exposure time and ux conversion The prerequisite for using exposure maps is that the efiective area is only weakly dependent on energy. This is not the case for our broadband images, where the efiective area changes rapidly with energy. Using exposure maps blindly, even the spectrally weighted ones, will inevitably introduce large errors in the resulting uxes. However, the vignetting (the positional changes of sensitivity) is less sensitive to energy. In other words, if we normalize the exposure maps obtained at difierent energies to the aim points, then the difierences between such \normalized exposure maps" are very small. Based on this fact, we use the exposure maps only to correct for vignetting and compute the ux conversion at the aim point using spectral modeling. We flrst make full resolution spectrally weighted exposure maps (using monochromatic maps do not change the results signiflcantly). For each source, the exposure map is convolved with the PSF generated using mkpsf and normalized to the exposure time at the aim point. This is the efiective exposure time if the source is at the aim point. The conversion factor is then obtained at the aim point by assuming the source has a Galactic absorbed, single power-law spectrum. The power-law index is calcu- lated using the hardness ratio of each source, deflned as HR ? Chard=Csoft, where Chard and Csoft are the count rates in the hard and soft bands. XSPEC was used in computing the conversion from HR to ? and for calculating the conversions. The degradation of quantum e?ciency during the ight of the observatory has been 56 accounted for using the script apply acisabs on the ARFs. 3.3 The X-ray Catalog We flrst merged the three band catalogs. We used a 3 error ellipse from the wavdetect output as the identiflcation cell. Flux extraction was then performed on all entries in the merged catalogs in all bands using the best position of the sources. We compared the three band catalogs with the optical catalog to flnd the astrometric corrections for each observation, as described in x 3.2.3. The nine catalogs were then merged. The uxes of the sources with more than one detection in the 9 flelds were taken from the observation in which the efiective area of the source was the largest, except for those sources with more than 2 detections having normalized areas > 80%, where we took the averaged ux. We visually checked the flnal catalog to ensure the correctness of the merging process. The flnal catalog contains 525 sources. We present the flnal catalog in two tables in Appendix A. The distribution of the source ofi-axis angles in the merged catalog is shown in Figure 20. It can be seen that most of the sources fall within the< 60 range. Figure 21 shows the distribution of sources with multiple detections. About 1/3 of the sources have more than one observation. 57 Figure 20: Distribution of ofi-axis angles of the best positions. 3.4 Number counts 3.4.1 Incompleteness and Eddington Bias Incompleteness can be caused by energy or positional dependence of the sen- sitivity of X-ray telescopes. Because the spectrum of a source carries important information on the physical nature of the source itself, sources of difierent spectra are usually categorized as difierent types. The energy dependent sensitivity acts like a fllter in selecting \hard" and \soft" types of X-ray sources. The soft band detected sources always contain more soft spectrum objects than the hard band detected sources and vice versa. Unless the fraction of each type remains constant for all uxes (which we now know is not true), the energy dependent incompleteness 58 Figure 21: Distribution of multiple detections. cannot be easily corrected. This issue is very important in interpreting the fraction of difierent types of objects in ux limited surveys. It is desirable to obtain number counts for each type of source, but it is hard to do that for the CXB sources, where spectra are hard to determine. For our medium deep survey, it is sensible to follow the tradition and only discuss the number counts in energy bands. The positional dependent incompleteness is caused by vignetting and aber- ration of the X-ray optics. The vignetting causes the efiective area to drop with ofi-axis angle, and the aberration makes the ofi-axis PSF larger so that it includes a larger number of background events in the source cell. The net efiect is that the sensitivity of source detection drops with increasing ofi-axis angle. The sky area is therefore ux dependent. 59 These efiects can be investigated via Monte Carlo simulations. We flrst gen- erated background images using observations of flelds #1 and #4, which represent the 70 ks and 40 ks exposures. Point sources are removed from the images, and the holes left in the images are fllled by sampling the local background. Random sources are generated uniformly on the background images. The uxes of the sources are generated by randomly sampling a complete subset of the combined Chandra Deep Fields catalog (Alexander et al. 2003). The subset contains only sources with hard band uxes > 5?10?16 ergcm?2 s?1 and efiective exposure times > 200 ks. The input uxes are converted to on-axis counts assuming power- law spectra with ? = 1:4. The exposure map for each image is consulted to flnd the vignetting efiect at the source location, and the normalized exposure is multiplied by the true counts to obtain the \observed" net counts. Only sources with more than 3 counts are used in the simulation to avoid adding too many undetectable dim sources to the background. We use the CIAO tool mkpsf to generate realistic source shapes at the source positions and energies. The PSF is then sampled to have the same number of photons as in the source. We chose to use mkpsf instead of using the Chandra simulator MARX because we flnd the PSF library used by mkpsf better resembles sources at large ofi-axis angles. The number density of the sources is chosen to be 2 times higher than the observed density to increase the number of simulated sources without afiecting detections. We ran 100 simulations on the 2 flelds and the three energy bands and detected the sources using wavdetect with identical parameter settings to those we used in preparing the observed catalog. Because of the large computation time, the number of simulations that can be done 60 Figure 22: The simulated images with 40 and 70 ks exposures in three bands. is limited. An example of the simulated images is shown in Figure 22. We then compared the output catalogs with the input source catalogs. Because of the small size of the simulation, the completeness within 400 is not well determined, and a 5% uncertainty exists in the determined fractions. Fortunately, the PSF efiect is small at such small ofi-axis angles. For a given ux threshold, the fraction of source detections drops monotonically with ofi-axis angle. This relation is fltted between 40 and 100 with a linear least-squares flt. The 95% complete ofi-axis angle limit is then taken from the interpolation of the flt. The resulting 95% completeness ux thresholds map is shown in Figure 23. We note that at large ofi-axis angles, the sensitivity drops rapidly. This is partly due to the choice of wavelet scales. When the largest scale used becomes smaller than the PSF size of the source, wavdetect is no longer sensitive. This efiect, however, is not important for our observations, because 61 most of the sources of interest are within 60 ofi-axis, thanks to the overlapping of flelds. Sources at very large ofi-axis angles are excluded from the study of the LogN-LogS. The combined solid angle versus ux thresholds is shown in Figure 24. 10h31m10h32m10h33m10h34m10h35m10h36m 57:15 57:30 57:45 58:00 RA DEC 0 5e?15 1e?14 1.5e?14 10h31m10h32m10h33m10h34m10h35m10h36m 57:15 57:30 57:45 58:00 RA DEC 0 5e?15 1e?14 1.5e?14 10h32m10h34m10h36m 57:15 57:30 57:45 58:00 RA DEC 0 5e?16 1e?15 1.5e?15 Figure 23: The 95% completeness threshold for CLASXS flelds in 2{8 keV (upper- left), 0.5{8 keV (upper-right) and 0.5{2 keV (bottom) bands. The Poisson uctuations in the source uxes could result in an overestimation of number counts close to the detection limits. This is known as the Eddington Bias. 62 Figure 24: Survey efiective solid angle vs. ux. Soft band (solid line); full band (dashed line); hard band (dotted line) 63 The efiect depends both on the slope of the LogN-LogS and the level of uctuation. For the CLASXS fleld, the detection threshold is below the \knee" of the LogN-LogS, and the Eddington bias is relatively small. We corrected this bias using the method described in Vikhlinin et al. (1995). In Figure 25, we compare the average input ux with the average output ux at difierent ofi-axis angles from the simulations. For the soft band, the correction is only important below 2?10?15 ergcm?2 s?1 . For the hard band, the correction is important below 8?10?15 ergcm?2 s?1 . We flt ux{ ux curves in Figure 25 for the difierent ofi-axis angles with fourth order polynomials and correct the source uxes in the observed catalog using these flts. 3.4.2 Number counts Sources are selected by consulting the threshold map at the source positions and including only those with Eddington bias corrected uxes higher than the threshold map values. Sources very far ofi-axis are excluded from the analysis. With these selections, we used a total of 310 and 235 sources in the soft and hard bands, respectively, to construct the LogN-LogS. The cumulative LogN-LogS relations are computed using the formula N(> S) = X Si>S 1 ?(Si) (3.1) where ? is the complete solid angle. We show the results in Figure 26 in the soft and hard bands with 1 Poisson errors. The difierential LogN-LogS for the two bands are shown in Figure 27, which are calculated using the formula dN dS = X 1 ?i?S ; (3.2) 64 Figure 25: Average output uxes from wavdetect vs. average input uxes for the sim- ulated sources at a set of ofi-axis angles (diamonds). The Eddington bias is seen in the overestimates of output ux at low uxes. The bias also increases at large ofi-axis angles. The best flt of the biases are shown as dotted lines for ofi-axis angle intervals 00{2.50, 2.50{40, 40{60, 60{80, and > 80. 65 in units of deg?2 per 10?15 ergcm?2 s?1 . We flt the resulting difierential number counts with single or broken power laws in the form of dN dS = n0 S 10?14 ??fi (3.3) using error weighted least-square flts. Since our survey best samples the \knee" of the LogN-LogS, the slope of the power-laws are not well constrained due to the lack of data points both far above and below the \knee". On the other hand, n0 is better determined, to within 1%. For the soft band, we flt the number counts between 10?15 and 10?14 ergcm?2 s?1 with a power law. We flnd the best-flt parameters to be fi = 1:7?0:2 and n0 = 12:49? 0:02. The slope is in good agreement with previous observations, such as the Chan- dra Deep Field-North (1:6?0:1, Brandt et al. 2001), SSA13 (1:7?0:2, Mushotzky et al. 2000), and the compiled wide flelds from Chandra, XMM-Newton, ROSAT, and ASCA (1:60+0:02?0:03, Moretti et al. 2003; hereafter, Moretti03). The normalization also shows excellent agreement with the compiled results from the large area survey of Moretti03, which has an efiective solid angle at 10?14 ergcm?2 s?1 larger than that of CLASXS. Above 10?14 ergcm?2 s?1 , the slope steepens, but the uctua- tions in the number counts make it di?cult to flnd a reasonable flt. However, the LogN-LogS is apparently consistent with a slope of fi = 2:5, shown as the dotted line at these uxes. Similarly, we model the hard band number counts with a broken power law and obtain the following best-flt parameters. For S > 10?14 ergcm?2 s?1 , fi = 2:4?0:6 and n0 = 45:6?0:5; for 3?10?15 < S < 2?10?14 ergcm?2 s?1 , fi = 1:65?0:4 and 66 Figure 26: Cumulative LogN-LogS for the soft and hard bands. The 1 error is shaded. Dash-dotted line represents the best flt from Moretti03. Hard band LogN-LogS from Moretti et al. is rescaled to that of 2?8 keV, assuming ? = 1:4. 67 n0 = 38:1?0:2. For comparison, we also plot the best-flt cumulative LogN-LogS from Moretti03 and difierential LogN-LogS from the SEXSI flelds (Harrison et al. 2003) and from Cowie et al. (2002). At uxes below 8?10?15 ergcm?2 s?1 , the difierential LogN-LogS for all the flelds agrees within the errors. The difierence in the total counts at a ux limit between the CLASXS fleld and the Moretti03 flelds is also small. An apparent difierence is seen around 10?14 ergcm?2 s?1 : the total counts at 10?14 ergcm?2 s?1 are ? 70% higher than those from Moretti03. This is signiflcant at greater than the 3 level. 3.4.3 Point Source Contribution to the CXB The integrated ux between 3 ? 10?15 and 8 ? 10?14 ergcm?2 s?1 from the LogN-LogS is (1:2?0:1)?10?11 ergs cm?2 s?1 deg?2. This is ? 20% higher than that from Moretti03 and SEXSI in the same ux range. Since there is little difierence in the number counts between the CLASXS flelds and the other large solid angle surveys at uxes lower than 8?10?15 ergcm?2 s?1 , we should expect little difierence below the survey limit on the same angular scales. If integrated to lower uxes, and including the integration from ASCA above 8?10?14 ergcm?2 s?1 , the fractional difierence between the CLASXS fleld and the other large solid angle surveys can be reduced to ? 10% without considering the possible biases. This difierence is higher than expected from the variance in the CXB from ASCA observations but is consistent with recent observations with RXTE/PCA, where a 7% variance is seen among several ?1 deg2 flelds (Revnivtsev et al. 2004). 68 Figure 27: Difierential LogN-LogS for the soft and hard bands. The unit of dN/dS is number per 10?15 ergcm?2 s?1 . Best-flt power laws are shown as solid lines. Dotted line represents a power law with a flxed index of ?2:5. The data do not constrain the slope at high uxes well. Dashed line shows the best flt of the hard band LogN- LogS from the SEXSI survey (Harrison et al. 2003) and the dash-dotted line is the best flt from Cowie et al. (2002). 69 The uncertainty of the hard CXB itself is ?10?15%. The difierences in the integrated point source uxes from various large flelds are within this uncertainty. In terms of the true contribution from point sources to the CXB, a fleld with a solid angle of ?0:3 deg2 seems to be large enough to be representative. The large difierence in the cumulative number counts at the \knee" between our flelds and the other large flelds seems to indicate that the sources that emerge at this ux are more clustered on the sky than the soft band selected sources. However, caution must be taken because the uxes between the surveys are not calibrated. A small systematic error in ux estimates could result in signiflcant change in the number counts above the \knee" of the LogN-LogS. 3.5 Spectral properties the CXB sources We employ the hardness ratio to quantify statistically the spectra of the CXB sources in our fleld. Figure 28 shows the distribution of hardness ratio versus full band ux. We have also marked the hypothetical photon indices (?), assuming the hardness ratio change is purely due to the slope change of a single power-law spectrum. At uxes > 3?10?14 ergcm?2 s?1 , most sources cluster around ??1:7. At lower uxes, the hardness ratio distribution scatter increases and the relative number of hard sources increases. Below 3?10?15 ergcm?2 s?1 , the data show a paucity of hard sources. This is a selection efiect caused by the sensitivity in the hard band being lower than in the soft band for most spectra. We stacked the sources in ux bins and calculated the hardness ratios of the stacked spectra. Figure 29 shows 70 the stacked hardness ratios from both the CLASXS > 10?14 ergcm?2 s?1 sample and the combined CDFs > 10?15 ergcm?2 s?1 sample. The ux thresholds are chosen to avoid selection efiects caused by the sensitivity difierences between the soft and hard bands. It is apparent that the results from our data and those from the CDFs agree well. Figure 28: Hardness ratio vs. full band ux for the CLASXS sources. Open circles with arrows represent the upper or lower limits. Dashed lines with numbers label the hypothetical spectral indices, assuming the source spectra are single power laws with only Galactic absorption. Dotted line represents the typical error size of the hardness ratio for a source with hardness ratio of 1. The spectral attening at low uxes has been observed by several authors (e.g., Mushotzky et al. 2000; Tozzi et al. 2001; Piconcelli et al. 2003; Alexander 71 Figure 29: Hardness ratio of the stacked sources in difierent ux bins. Crosses are the CLASXS sources and diamonds are the combined CDFs sources (Alexander et al. 2003). Sources with uxes below 8 ? 10?15 ergcm?2 s?1 in the CLASXS catalog and 1 ? 10?15 ergcm?2 s?1 in the CDFs catalogs are not included to avoid incompleteness. Dashed lines are as in Figure 28. 72 et al. 2003) with observations of difierent depths. Spectral analysis with XMM- Newton observations indicate that such a attening is mainly caused by absorption. These obscured AGN must dominate the population around the \knee" of the LogN- LogS to account for the at spectrum of the CXB. Since most of the XMM-Newton spectral observations have reached a few times 10?14 ergcm?2 s?1 (Piconcelli et al. 2002), and the mean spectrum at this threshold is still too soft compared with that of the CXB, a sharp increase of obscuration or a change of spectral shape at a ux ? 10?14 ergcm?2 s?1 is inevitable. Such a sharp change is seen in the change of hardness ratio in our wide-fleld sample. 3.6 A First Look at X-ray Variability at High redshifts X-ray variability is an important factor in distinguishing AGN from starburst galaxies. Almost all AGN vary in X-rays, except those sources which are Compton thick. Alexander et al. (2001) showed that only a small fraction of the optically faint X-ray sources vary. Possible explanations could be that a large fraction of the optically faint sources are Compton thick, or that the amplitude of variation of the optically faint sources is much lower than that of the broad and/or narrow-line AGN at the same ux thresholds. We examine the variability of sources that have been detected in more than one of our observations. Since the observations were taken in two groups, separated by about one year, and each group of observations were taken within a few days (see Table 3.1), we are able to test variability on timescales of days and/or one year, 73 Figure 30: Light curves of the sources detected to be variable. The uxes are normalized to the mean of all the observations. Numbers in the plots are the source numbers in the catalog. (a) Soft band; (b) hard band; (c) full band. depending on the location of the source. For timing analysis with low counts per bin, the usual?2 statistic is inadequate. We use the C-statistic (Cash 1979) in testing the signiflcance of variability. Cash (1979) showed that the C-statistic (a reduced form of likelihood ratio) written as ?C =?2 NX i=1 [niln(ei)?ei?niln(ni) +ni] (3.4) is asymptotic to a ?2 distribution with N ?1 degrees of freedom, where ni is the observed counts in the ith sample, ei is the expected counts in that sample, and N is the total number of samples used. We restricted the sample for the variability test to sources with expected counts greater than 10 in all observations. The null hypothesis rejection probability was chosen to be 0.01. 74 Figure 30 (continued) 75 A total of 168 sources were tested for variability, of which 42 sources are signiflcantly variable and 28 sources show variability on timescales of days. There are 29, 16, and 30 variable sources detected in the soft, hard, and full bands, respectively. Figure 30 shows the light-curves of the sources that were tested to be variable in any of the three energy bands. In the top panel of Figure 31, we show the fraction of variable sources detected versus ux. Between 4?8?10?14 ergcm?2 s?1 , 70% of the sources tested show variability. This fraction drops dramatically as the ux decreases and, at 10?14 ergcm?2 s?1 , reaches below 20%. This is at least in part due to the selection efiect that larger variability is needed at lower uxes to make the test signiflcant. At uxes above 8?10?14 ergcm?2 s?1 , only one of the four sources tested (25%) was found to be variable. Following Nandra et al. (1997), we deflne the magnitude of variability as the \excess variance", the error subtracted rms variance 2rms = 1N?2 NX i=1 [(fi??)2? 2i ] (3.5) where fi is the ux in each observation, ? is the mean of the uxes, and i is the Poisson error of the ux. By assuming the same power density spectrum of X- ray variability for all AGN, 2rms can be used as a good indicator of whether the variability exceeds the Poisson noise. It has been found that there exists a good anti-correlation between 2rms and AGN luminosity (Nandra et al. 1997) in local AGN samples. In Figure 32, we show the excess variance of sources that had been detected to be variable versus X-ray ux in the three energy bands. At high uxes, the average 76 Figure 31: (Upper panel) Fraction of sources that are variable in difierent ux bins. (Lower panel) Number of variable sources (dashed histogram) and total number of sources tested for variability (solid histogram) in the same ux bins as in the upper panel. 77 2rms is signiflcantly lower than at lower uxes. As mentioned above, variability is harder to detect for low ux sources, unless the source is more variable than that of the brighter sources, so this bias could explain why there are very few low ux, low variability sources in the plot. In addition, the sources we detect to be variable are generally soft. This is consistent with the observation from the CDFs that optically faint sources (most of which are hard spectrum AGN) are less variable (Alexander et al. 2001). Figure 32: Excess variability for the variable sources in each energy band vs. the ux of that band. (a) Soft band; (b) hard band; (c) full band. 78 Spectral variability Very little is known about the spectral variability of the sources that contribute the most to the CXB due to a lack of data. Spectral variability is seen in about half of the well-studied brighter sources, with a general trend of softening of the 2?10 keV spectra with increasing source intensity. But a counterexample is NGC7469, where the spectrum attens when the source ux increases (Barr 1986). The variability could be accounted for either with a change in the relative normalization of the difierent spectral components or by variation in the absorption. In Figure 33, we show hardness ratios versus full band uxes for the variable sources. While most of the sources show either no clear spectral variability, or a trend of spectral softening with increasing ux, there are a number of sources that clearly become harder with increasing ux. There are also a few sources that exhibit a mixed trend. On average, these sources tend to have softer spectra with increasing ux. 3.7 Summary In this chapter, we presented the CLASXS X-ray catalog. Our survey cov- ers a ? 0:4 deg2 contiguous area in an uniform manner and reaches uxes of 5?10?16 ergcm?2 s?1 in the 0:4?2 keV band and 3?10?15 ergcm?2 s?1 in the 2?8 keV band. We found a total of 525 point sources and 4 extended sources. We summarize our results as follows. The number counts in the 0:4?2 keV band agree very well with other large 79 Figure 33: Spectral variability vs. full band uxes for all the variable sources. The uxes are in units of 10?14 ergcm?2 s?1 . Numbers on top of each plot are the source numbers in the catalog. 80 Figure 33 (continued) area surveys. On the other hand, the number counts in the 2?8 keV band deviate signiflcantly from other large area surveys at the \knee" of the LogN-LogS, possibly as a result of the underlying large scale structure. The total 2?8 keV band ux agrees with the observed CXB ux within the observed variance of the CXB, indi- cating that the true normalization of the CXB can be determined using flelds with solid angles ?0:3?0:4 deg2. The hardness ratios of the sources in the CLASXS fleld show a signiflcant change at f2?8 keV ?10?14 ergcm?2 s?1 , which bridges the range sampled by previ- ous studies and conflrms the results found in deep Chandra/XMM-Newton surveys. About 60% of the sources with full band uxes > 4?10?14 show signiflcant variabil- ity, while the fraction drops dramatically with decreasing ux, at least partly due to selection efiects. Most sources show no change of hardness ratio or anti-correlation 81 with ux. But some sources show a positive correlation or mixed trends. 82 Chapter 4 Optical Identiflcations and Spectroscopic Follow-up As mentioned earlier, optical follow-up is critical in obtaining redshift and spectral type of X-ray selected AGNs. These information will be used to obtain the X-ray luminosity function and spatial correlation function. The details of the observation and reduction are discussed in Stefien et al. (2004) and Barger et al. (2005). I will summarize the observations and basic methods used in the data reduction. This will provide the useful information to understand the systematics introduced from optical observations when we try to combine the X-ray results with these observations. I will also discuss the importance of the high spatial resolution of Chandra in obtaining the correct counterparts, particularly to the optical normal AGNs. 4.1 Imaging observation Deep optical images were taken from the Subaru 8.2m telescope using the Suprime-Cam camera; and from the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope (CFHT) with CFH12K camera. The observations, the 2 limiting magnitudes can be found in Tabel 4.1. The optical sources are detected using the SExtractor (Bertin & Arnouts 1996) and the source uxes were extracted using the IDL program APER from the IDL 83 Table 4.1. Summary of Optical Images Band Telescope Average seeing Integration 2 limit Total area Deep area (arcsecond) (hr) (AB mag) (deg2) (deg2) B Subaru 8.2 m 0.96 1.7 27.8 0.27 0.20 B CFHT 3.6 m 0.97 5.8 27.6 0.49 0.49 V Subaru 8.2 m 1.15 6.4 27.5 0.36 0.20 R Subaru 8.2 m 0.96 5.2 27.9 0.27 0.20 R Subaru 8.2 m 0.61 2.0 27.7 0.81 0.81 R CFHT 3.6 m 0.89 11.9 27.9 0.49 0.49 I Subaru 8.2 m 1.30 0.9 26.4 0.36 0.20 z0 Subaru 8.2 m 1.01 1.3 26.2 0.36 0.20 Z CFHT 3.6m 0.95 23.8a 26.3 0.49 0.49 aTaken in two separate 11.9 hr integrations 84 Astronomy User?s Library1. A flxed 300 diameter aperture is used to extract source magnitudes. Aperture corrections are made by examining the curve-of-growth for isolated, moderately bright (R = 20 ? 26) sources. The sources brighter than R = 20 Mag are saturated. 4.2 Optical Counterparts of X-ray point sources Optical counterparts of the X-ray sources are matched using flxed search ra- dius. In cases when multiple counterparts are found in the search radius, the source closest to the X-ray position is chosen to be the tentative counterpart. We used these positions to make the global adjustments to the X-ray positions as discuss in x 3.2.3. We search for the counterparts again with the new X-ray positions. In Figure 34, we show the (X-ray?optical) astrometric ofisets for the CLASXS sources. Histograms for the right ascension and declination ofisets are shown above and to the right, respectively. The average astrometric discrepancies in both axis are 0:0?0:5 arcseconds. We ran simulations to examine the probability of an X-ray source being assigned an incorrect optical counterpart. The probability of a chance projection is a strong function of the limiting optical magnitude in the catalog, since there are many more sources at the faint end. The concentric circles represent the probability of a source with a random right ascension and declination being assigned an optical counterpart from the full optical catalog (R < 27:9). The inner circle is 10%, and the other circles increase outward with 10% increments. The majority 1online at http://idlastro.gsfc.nasa.gov/homepage.html 85 of CLASXS sources have (X-ray ? optical) separations of less than 0:500 (1 ) for which there is only a 2% probability of an incorrect X-ray/optical match. With our search radius of 200, we calculate that 30% of the CLASXS sources that in fact have no optical counterpart will be assigned an incorrect optical counterpart. Almost all of these will be with optically faint sources. If we limit the optical sources to those spectroscopically accessible (R < 24), we flnd only an 8% chance of an incorrect X-ray/optical overlap using a 200 matching radius. 4.3 Spectroscopic observations and redshifts Optical spectra were obtained using the multi-flber spectrograph HYDRA on the WIYN 3.5 m telescope for bright (I < 19) sources, and with the Deep Extra- galactic Imaging Multi-Object Spectrograph (DEIMOS) on the 10 m Keck II tele- scope for fainter sources. For the HYDRA observations, we used a low-resolution grating, 316@7.2, centered at 7600 ?A, yielding a wavelength coverage of 4900 ? 10300 ?A with a resolution of 2.64 ?Apixel?1. The red bench camera was used with the 200 \red" HYDRA flbers to maximize the sensitivity at longer wavelengths. To obtain a wavelength solution for each flber, CuAr comparison lamps were observed in each HYDRA conflguration. Our HYDRA masks were designed to maximize the number of optically bright sources in each conflguration, while minimizing the amount of overlap between conflgurations. Fibers that were unable to be placed on a source were assigned to a random sky location. We observed 2.7 hrs on two HYDRA conflgurations in 2001 February, 7.4 hrs on two conflgurations in 2002 February , 86 Figure 34: (X-ray ? optical) astrometric ofisets for the 484 CLASXS sources with detected optical counterparts. Histograms for the R.A. (decl.) separations are shown on top (right). The mean values for the R.A. and decl. ofisets are both 0:0?0:5 arcseconds. Concentric gray circles represent the probability of a source with a random R.A. and decl. being assigned an optical counterpart. The probabilities and search radii (in arcseconds) are given, respectively, at the top and bottom of each circle. 87 Figure 35: The optical identiflcation fraction as a function of 2{8 keV ux. Solid line shows the best-flt. and 6.0 hrs on two conflgurations in 2002 March. To remove flber-to-flber variations, on-source observations were alternated with ?7:500 \sky" exposures taken with the same exposure times. This efiectively reduced our on-source integration times to 1.3, 3.6, and 3.0 hrs in 2001 February, 2002 February, and 2002 March, respectively. Reductions were performed using the standard IRAF package DOHYDRA. To optimize sky subtraction, we performed a two-step process. In the flrst step, the DOHYDRA routine was used to create an average sky spectrum using the flbers assigned to random sky locations. This average sky spectrum was then removed from all of the remaining flbers. In the ofiset images, this step efiectively removed all of the sky signal, leaving behind only residuals caused by difierences among the flbers. To remove these variations, we then subtracted the residuals present in 88 the sky-subtracted ofisets from the sky-subtracted, on-source spectra. We found this method to be very efiective at removing the residuals created by flber-to-flber variations with HYDRA. For the DEIMOS observations, we used the 600 lines mm?1 grating, which yielded a resolution of 3.5 ?A and a wavelength coverage of 5300 ?A. The exact cen- tral wavelength depends upon the slit position, but the average was 7200 ?A. Each ? 1 hr exposure was broken into 3 subsets. In each subset the object was stepped 1.500 in each direction. The DEIMOS spectroscopic reductions follow the same pro- cedures used by Cowie et al. (1996) for LRIS reductions. The sky contribution was removed by subtracting the median of the dithered images. Cosmic rays were removed by registering the images and using a cosmic ray rejection fllter on the combined images. Geometric distortions were also removed and a proflle-weighted extraction was applied to obtain the spectrum. Wavelength calibration was done using a polynomial flt to known sky lines rather than using calibration lamps. The spectra were individually inspected and a redshift was measured only for sources where a robust identiflcation was possible. The high-resolution DEIMOS spectra can resolve the doublet structure of the [O II] ?3727 ?A line, allowing spectra to be identifled by this doublet alone. The optical spectra of the X-ray sources in our sample span difierent rest- frame wavelengths. They also sufier varying degrees of host{AGN mixing. It is therefore very di?cult to perform source identiflcations in a uniform manner. The identiflcation selection function is rather complex and to properly quantify. It is found, however, that the optical and X-ray uxes only show good correlation at 89 f2?8 keV > 10?14 ergcm?2 s?1 . AGN light is more prominent at higher uxes and therefore easier to detect. At f2?8 keV < 10?14 ergcm?2 s?1 , the optical light from more and more AGNs starts to be either obscured or simply overwhelmed by the light from host galaxy. The identiflcation of X-ray sources are biased to those optically brighter ones. The net efiect is that the spectroscopic identiflcation is a strong function of X-ray ux. We so far identifled a total of 272 source. The fraction of sources with spectroscopic redshift as a function of hard X-ray ux is shown in Figure 35. 4.4 Spectroscopic Classiflcations Because the non-uniform manner of the optical spectra, only rough classiflca- tion could be made based on various spectral features. We call sources without any strong emission lines (EW([OII])< 3 ?A or EW(Hfi+NII)< 10 ?A) absorbers; sources with strong Balmer lines and no broad or high-ionization lines star formers; sources with [NeV] or CIV lines or strong [OIII] (EW([OIII] 5007 ?A) > 3 EW(Hfl)) high- excitation (HEX) sources; and, flnally, sources with optical lines having FWHM line widths > 2000 km s?1 broad-line AGNs. Sometimes combine the absorber and the star former classes into a normal galaxy class. Table 4.2 gives the breakdown of optically identifled CLASXS sample by spectral type. Hereafter, we call all of the sources that do not show broad-line (FWHM> 2000 km s?1) signatures \optically-narrow" or non-broadline AGNs. However, we note that there may be a few sources where our wavelength cover- 90 Table 4.2. Number of X-ray Sources Per Spectral Type For Identifled CLASXS Sources Class Number fraction Stars 20 4% Star Formers 73 14% Broad-line AGNs 106 20% Seyferts 44 8% Absorbers 28 5% age is such that we are missing lines which would result in us deflning the spectrum as broad-line. It is obvious that the optically identifled sources contains larger fractions of optically active galaxies than the whole sample. Only?1=3 of the optically normal AGNs are identifled. The efiect of this incompleteness on the X-ray luminosity function is addressed in Barger et al. (2005). The true nature of the optical normal AGNs at high redshift is still a puzzle. 4.5 Compare with XMM-Newton We have shown that the spatial resolution of Chandra is needed to properly identify optical counterparts at high magnitudes. The commonly asked question is 91 that, given the larger collecting area, XMM-Newton seem to be the more adequate instrument than Chandra in surveying CXB sources. In fact, the ? 300 XMM posi- tions are not adequate to determine the correct R > 24 optical counterparts to the X-ray sources. The surface density of galaxies and stars to R = 24 is approximately 16.6 arcmin?2, so with a search radius of 300, we may expect a random fleld contami- nation of about 15%. By R = 24?26 the fleld surface density is 50.1 arcmin?2, and thus we may expect that half of the optical identiflcations using an XMM error circle will be incorrect. Without the correct optical identiflcations, one cannot determine the redshifts. 92 Chapter 5 Extended Sources 5.1 Detection We searched the 0:4?2 keV images of each observation for extended sources using the vtpdetect tool provided in CIAO. The method uses Voronoi tessellation and percolation to identify dense regions above Poisson noise. This method performs best on smooth overdense regions but could confuse crowded point sources. We chose to use a threshold scale factor of 0.8 and a maximum probability of false detection of 10?6 and to restrict the number of events per source to > 30. We used default values for the rest of the parameters. This choice of parameters maximizes the detection of low surface brightness sources at high signiflcance. We visually examined the source list to screen out apparent blended point sources. The candidates were then selected by comparing the 99% PSF radius with the equivalent radius of the source region, and only sources with a PSF ratio (deflned as pA=?=r99, where A is the area of the source region reported by vtpdetect, and r99 is the 99% PSF radius at the ofi-axis angle) higher than 10 were considered extended (Table 5.1). Four sources were found to be signiflcantly extended, and all but Source 3 have an ofi-axis angle of < 50 in the X-ray observations. Source 3 is at an ofi-axis angle of 8.40. With the X-ray image alone, one could not rule out the source being a blend of point sources. However, a bright gravitational lensing arc found in the optical 93 Table 5.1. Extended Sources Source # fi2000 ?2000 ?fi (00) ?? (00) (0)a PSF ratiob Net Countsc Fieldd 1 10 35 25.4 +57 50 48 2.628 1.044 4.786 37.89 100:1?11 9 2 10 35 13.4 +57 50 17 3.312 1.476 4.029 39.33 87:7?11 9 3 10 35 37.9 +57 57 15 3.060 1.476 8.422 19.09 77:0?10 8 4 10 34 30.8 +57 59 12 3.132 2.196 4.016 16.69 30:7?6:6 8 aOfi-axis angle in the fleld the source is detected. bDeflned as pA=?=r99, where A is the area of the source region from the vtpdetect report and r99 is the 99% PSF radius at the ofi-axis angle. cNet counts reported by vtpdetect dLHNW fleld number where the source has the smallest ofi-axis angle. 94 image (see x5.6) at the X-ray peak makes it very likely that the X-ray emission is associated with a cluster. Considering the non-uniformity of the detection due to vignetting and PSF efiects, the number counts for extended sources above 3:7? 10?15 ergcm?2 s?1 are roughly > 10 deg?2. This agrees with the LogN-LogS of clusters at these uxes found in the CDFs (Bauer et al. 2002). It is interesting to note that all 4 extended sources are found on only two of the overlapping ACIS-I flelds in the north of the LHNW region. 5.2 Comparing with Optical images Optical observations are describe in Chapter 4. X-ray contours overlaid on R band optical images are shown in Figure 36. We examined the number counts of galaxies within circular cells with flxed radii of 0.50. At a threshold of R < 24, a total of 19, 28, 18, and 9 galaxies were found within the cells centered at the X-ray peaks of each extended source. Because a star is found at 0.60 south-east of the X-ray peak of Source 2, the galaxy counts could be underestimated. Compared with the expected 6.7 galaxies per cell obtained from the whole fleld, the overdensities of galaxies in Sources 1 and 2 are > 3 , while the overdensity of galaxies in Source 3 is ? 3 . Source 4 does not show signiflcant clustering of galaxies in the R band image. Sources 1 and 2 are very close to each other, with a separation of ?20. The closeness and the elongated morphology of the two sources suggest that they are undergoing interactions. Source 3 is extended along the east-west direction with multiple peaks. All 4 sources show bright elliptical galaxies at the X-ray peaks. 95 10h35m10s10h35m20s10h35m30s 57:49 57:50 57:51 57:52 RA DEC 10h35m33s10h35m36s10h35m39s10h35m42s 57:56:40 57:57:00 57:57:20 57:57:40 RA DEC 10h34m27s10h34m30s10h34m33s 57:58:40 57:59:00 57:59:20 57:59:40 58:00:00 RA DEC Figure 36: Adaptively smoothed X-ray images of the extended sources superposed on R band images.(a) Sources 1 and 2; (b) Source 3; (c) Source 4. 96 5.3 X-ray spectra We extract very coarse spectra (grouped to > 15 counts per bin to allow the use of the ?2 statistic) and attempt to constrain the properties of the clusters. We flt the data with a simple MEKAL model in XSPEC (v11.2), with a flxed abundance of 0.3 of the solar value and a flxed Galactic absorption. We restrict the spectral fltting to within 0:5?5 keV, because the signal-to-noise ratio is poor outside of this range. The source extraction and background regions of Sources 1 and 2 are Figure 37: Regions for spectral extraction of Sources 1 and 2 on the Gaussian smoothed gray scale map of the clusters. The Gaussian kernal size is 600. Source regions are shown as circles. Elliptical annulus region is for the background extraction. 97 Figure 38: X-ray spectra and best-flt MEKAL models of Source 1 (dash-dotted line) and Source 2 (solid line). shown in Figure 37. The regions avoid the point sources between the two clusters. The spectra are shown in Figure 38. For Source 1, we found the best flt to be kT= 1:4+1:0?0:2 keV and a = 0:5+0:2?0:2, with a reduced ?2 = 8:8 for 9 degrees of freedom. This agrees with the redshift estimates using the optical data (Table 5.2). Fitting the same model to the spectrum of Source 2 with the redshift flxed to z = 0:5 yields kT= 3:1+13:5?1:6 keV, with a reduced ?2 = 4:6 for 9 degrees of freedom. The constraint on the temperature is poor, but the probability that the temperature of Source 2 is signiflcantly difierent than that of Source 1 is low. This can be seen in Figure 39, where the joint probability contour of the temperature from the two sources is shown. The confldence level for the two sources having difierent temperatures is only 2 . Combining the two data sets and flxing z = 0:5, we flnd kT= 1:7+2:2?0:5 keV. 98 Figure 39: Combined probability contour of the temperature of Sources 1 and 2. Contour lines are 1, 2, and 3 confldence levels. Cross is the best-flt temperature. Solid line represents the equality of the temperature of the two clusters. Table 5.2. Redshift estimates for the extended Sources Source # zRS zBCG zX?ray 1 0.50 0:59+0:08?0:08 0:5?0:2 2 0.50 0:55+0:09?0:09 0:5?0:2 3 ..... 0:73+0:09?0:08 ..... 4 0.45 0:45+0:06?0:05 ..... 99 The spectrum of Source 3 shown in Figure 40 was extracted from a circular region with radius 3600. The background was extracted from an annulus with inner radius 3600 and outer radius 6000. The data cannot constrain the model very well, but a simple flt with an absorbed power-law shows that the spectrum is very soft with photon index ? = 2:6 and reduced ?2 = 7:2 for 7 degrees of freedom. Fitting with a MEKAL model and assuming a redshift of z = 0:73 (see x5.5), we obtain a temperature of 2:3+1:0?0:9 with reduced ?2 = 0:77. The temperature is insensitive to the redshift between z = 0:4?1:4. The fact that the MEKAL model flts the data better makes it less likely that Source 3 is a blend of several point sources. Figure 40: X-ray spectrum of Source 3 and the best-flt MEKAL model. With only 30.7 net counts, it is impossible to model the spectrum for Source 4. However, the source has very few counts above 2 keV, indicating that the tempera- ture should be low if the source is at z > 0:4, as implied from the optical data. 100 Figure 41: Curve-of-growths for the extended sources (Sources 1 { 4 shown in pannels (a) {(d)) normalized to the best-flt background. Dotted line shows the best flt of an integrated 2 dimensional Gaussian. The virial masses of the extended sources can be roughly estimated using the best-flt M ?L relation (Finoguenov et al. 2001), M500 = 2:45?1013 T1:87, where M500 is the mass within a radius where the overdensity is 500. The results are shown in Table 5.3. All of the sources belong to low mass clusters or groups, and this result is not very sensitive to the redshift because of the very soft spectra. 101 5.4 Angular sizes The angular sizes of the sources were quantifled by the widths of the radial proflles. We fltted the radial proflles of the sources with integrated 2-D Gaussian curves, which describe the low S/N ratio data reasonably well. We constructed the cumulative counts as a function of ofi-source radius (curve-of-growth). Exposure maps were applied to correct for vignetting. Nearby point sources were removed and replaced with background noise. The background regions were selected visually and fltted with a quadratic form plus a constant. The curves-of-growth were then normalized to the best-flt backgrounds. The normalized curve-of-growth for each source is shown in Figure 41. This left only one parameter to be determined|the widths of the curves. The best-flt core radii are listed in Table 5.3. 5.5 Redshifts We infer the redshifts of the extended sources using the red sequence method, as well as the brightest cluster galaxy (BCG) method. Based on observations of clusters, there is usually a population of early-type galaxies which follow a color- magnitude relation (red sequence). This relation changes with redshift in a pre- dictable way, such that a robust two-color photometric redshift can be obtained (Gladders & Yee 2000). Color-magnitude plots of the sources within 0.50 of the X-ray centers are shown for each extended source in Figure 42. Red sequences can be clearly seen in Sources 1, 2, and 4. By comparing with the models from Yee & Gladders (2001), we can estimate the redshifts for these three extended sources 102 Table 5.3. Properties of the extended sources Source # zfix kTa M500b core radius (00) f0:5?8keV c Lbol d 1 .50 1:4+0:8?0:4 0:45+:0:61?:21 12.9 1.6 2.2 2 .50 3:1+6:5?1:4 2:0+15:?1:4 17.0 1.2 1.5 3 .73 2:3+1:0?0:9 1:2+1:2?:64 14.7 1.5 5.1 4 .45 1.0 (flxed) .24 11.8 .42 .45 aListed are single parameter 1 errors. bunit: 1014 Mfl cUnit: 10?14 ergcm?2 s?1 . dUnit: 1043 ergs?1 . 103 Figure 42: Color-magnitude plot for the galaxies within 0.50 of the X-ray center. Solid lines show the model red sequence from Yee & Gladders (2001) at the redshifts that best match the observations in Source 1 (z = 0:5), 2 (z = 0:5), and 4 (z = 0:45). In the plot for Source 4, the red sequences for z = 0:5 (lower solid line) and z = 1:0 (upper solid line) are shown. (Table 5.2). Source 3 does not show a clear red sequence. BCGs are often used as distance indicators, because they have almost con- stant luminosity (Humasom, Mayall, & Sandage 1956). One of the di?culties in applying this method is that with optical images alone, it is hard to distinguish be- tween the background and the cluster members, unless a density peak can be clearly determined. In our case, this is less worrisome because bright spheroidal/lenticular galaxies are found at the X-ray peaks of all of the extended sources. This clearly 104 associates these galaxies with the clusters. Furthermore, these galaxies are also the brightest early-type galaxies in the regions where X-ray emission is signiflcant. Following Postman & Lauer (1995), we use the Lm ?fi relation to flnd the redshift. We flt the radial proflle around 200{600of each of the BCGs to obtain the magnitudes within radius rm and the slope of the proflle fi?dlogLm=dlogrjrm; (5.1) where Lm is the luminosity within rm. The empirical relation between the absoluted R magnitude and fi is R =?20:896?4:397fi + 2:738fi2: (5.2) We eye examine the proflle so that nearby galaxies are not included in the aperture. The redshift of the BCG can be found by solving mR?R = 5logd(z)?5 +KR(z); (5.3) where mR is the R magnitude of the BCG, d(z) is the luminosity distance. In the R band K-correction is performed by KR = 2:5log(1 + 0:96z): (5.4) The resulting redshifts are listed in Table 5.2. While it appears that the BCG method produces higher redshifts than the red sequence method, the difierences are not signiflcant, given the large uncertainties in both methods. The redshifts of Sources 1 and 2 also agree with the spectral fltting results from the X-ray data. 105 The X-ray luminosities of the extended sources are listed in Table 5.3, assuming the red sequence-determined redshifts except for Source 3, where BCG redshift is adopted. Within errors, the temperatures and luminosities of the sources agree with the scaling law found in high-redshift X-ray clusters (Ettori et al. 2003), but the constraint is weak. 5.6 Discovery of a gravitational lensing arc 10h35m38.0s10h35m38.5s10h35m39.0s10h35m39.5s 57:57:12 57:57:15 57:57:18 RA DEC Figure 43: R band image of the gravitational lensing arc found associated with Source 3. We have found a gravitational lensing arc close to Source 3 (Figure 43). The arc has an angular radius of ? 600 . A bright spheroidal galaxy is clearly associ- 106 ated with the arc. A possible counter arc is seen connecting to the west of the bright galaxy but is not fully resolved. With B;V;R;I; and z0 observations, we can estimate photometric redshifts for the cD galaxy and the arc using the pub- licly available photometric redshift code Hyperz (Bolzonella et al. 2000). We flnd photometric redshifts for the cD galaxy and the arc of z = 0:45 and z = 1:7, respec- tively. The redshift of the galaxy is slightly difierent than the redshift of the cluster obtained using the BCG method. From our experience, one often needs at least 7 colors to obtain a secure photometric redshift. The redshift estimates therefore need veriflcation. If the source is at zsrc ?0:45 and the arc is at zarc ?1:7, then we can estimate the mass within the Einstein radius (reasonably approximated by the radius of the arc) as M( < E) = 1:1?1014( 3000)2(DLSDLD S )Mfl ; (5.5) where DL, DS, and DLS are, respectively, the angular diameter distances (in units of Gpc) of the lens, source, and the distance between the lens and source. With zsrc ? 0:45 and zarc ? 1:7, we obtain M( < E) ? 3:3?1012 Mfl. We compare this mass with what would be expected if the source were a group of galaxies at z = 0:45, assuming the mass proflles are self-similar. By flxing the redshift, the X-ray spectra yield a temperature of 2.2 keV. The virial radius is roughly r500 = 0:63?pkT = 955 kpc (Finoguenov et al. 2001), where r500 is deflned as the radius within which the overdensity is 500. The size of the arc at z ? 0:45 is rarc ? 37 kpc = 0:036r500. Comparing with the mass proflles of NGC2563, NGC4325, and 107 NGC2300 (Mushotzky et al. 2003), the mass inside the Einstein radius agrees very well with that of a group of galaxies. The virial mass of the group can then be estimated to be ?1:2?1014 Mfl (Finoguenov et al. 2001). If the cluster is at z ?0:7, as implied from the BCG method, and if the best-flt temperature kT = 0:23 keV is assumed, then we can search for the best redshift of the lensed galaxy, so that the mass within the Einstein radius agrees with the mass proflle of groups. We flnd that if the lensed galaxy is at z = 1:8, then the mass within the Einstein radius is M( < E) ? 3?1012Mfl, which flts the mass proflle of groups. If the redshift estimate is correct, then the arc system is very similar to the one discovered in the ROSAT deep survey of the Lockman Hole (Hasinger et al. 1998b). High-redshift gravitational lensing arcs are rare objects so far observed. However, since our large area survey is very similar in sky area and depth to the ROSAT Deep Survey, and since both have produced a detection of a strong arc, the probability of detection seems high. Larger area surveys of X-ray selected clusters of galaxies with deep optical follow-up would help to determine the probability of detection. Such observations should put useful constraints on ?m and on the density of galaxies at high redshifts (Cooray 1999). It is interesting to note that all four of our clusters may have redshifts z ? 0:4?0:5 and are located within a region of only ?200 at the north-east corner of our fleld. This corresponds to a comoving radius of ? 5 Mpc. The implications of such large scale structure on the CXB need to be investigated further. 108 Chapter 6 Spatial Correlation Function of X-ray Selected AGNs 6.1 Introduction The early studies on AGN clustering are mostly carried out in optical band on quasars. Since quasars are rare objects, the samples are generally sparse, which makes the clustering di?cult to detect. Osmer (1981) flrst detected a 2 upper limit of clustering on scales of 100{3000 Mpc. The flrst signiflcant excess of pairs of quasars was found using the Veron-Cetty & Veron (1984) catalog (Shaver 1984). In the following years, a set of 3 ?4 detections of clustering were found using samples with typical size of a few hundred of quasars (Shanks et al. 1987; Andreani & Cristiani 1992; Shanks & Boyle 1994; Croom & Shanks 1996). The major progress in this fleld came since the 2dF and SDSS surveys. Even though the spatial density of quasars in these surveys is low, these surveys have enough quasars to probe reasonably well the scale where the rms uctuation of source density reaches unity (Croom et al. 2001, 2005). This allows the proper quantiflcation of the shape of the correlation function and/or the power spectrum. These observations conflrmed earlier claims that the correlation function reaches unity at r0 = 6h?1 Mpc at ?z ? 1?2, similar to that found in the local luminous galaxies. At lower redshift, the best sample of optically selected QSO with z < 0:3 yields r0 = 8:6?2 h?1 Mpc (Grazian et al. 2004). This is higher than typical clustering length of normal galaxies 109 (r0 ?5 h?1). On the other hand, using the SDSS data, Wake et al. (2004) show that the low luminosity, low redshift AGNs are clustered identically with the non-active galaxies. The early X-ray surveys concentrate largely on clustering of point X-ray sources on the sky or uctuations in the CXB. The all sky distribution of CXB is best mapped with HEAO-1 experiment. Treyer et al. (1998) analyzed the power spec- trum of the CXB using the HEAO-1 A2 data. They found the low order multiples are consistent with that the CXB is mostly discrete sources clustering with a biased factor (see below) b = 1?2. On scales of degree or smaller, only weak uctuation of CXB was found (< 2% on 5??5?, Shafer & Fabian 1983; < 4% on 1??2?, Shafer & Fabian 1983). Recent more detailed study of small scale uctuation from ASCA show the rms uctuation on 0:5deg2 is ? 4% (Kushino et al. 2002), while the ob- servations from RXTE/PCA yields a 7% variance on scale of ? 1deg2 (Revnivtsev et al. 2004). Angular correlation function of discrete sources have been performed using imaging telescopes (Vikhlinin & Forman 1995; Akylas et al. 2000; Giacconi et al. 2002; Basilakos et al. 2004). The interpretation these results requires proper assumption of the evolution of clustering and selection function. Direct measurements of the spatial correlation function was attempted by Carrera et al. (1998) using a deep pencil beam ROSAT survey, but without detecting signiflcant clustering. Signiflcant results have only become available recently (Mullis et al. 2004; Gilli et al. 2005). The clustering of the soft X-ray selected AGNs from a 80 deg2 North Elliptic Pole sample yields a correlation function very similar to the that of optical quasar. Since most of the AGNs in that sample are broadline 110 AGNs in optical, the result is not surprising. Gilli et al. (2005) showed that the 0.5{ 10 keV band selected AGNs in the CDF-N and CDF-S are very similar to the result found in Mullis et al. (2005). However, Gilli et al. (2005) also found the existence of a small number of redshift spikes can signiflcantly change the correlation result from these ultra-deep surveys. The other caveat of the Gilli et al (2005) analysis is that without the knowledge of the evolution of clustering, the interpretation of the spatial correlation function over a broad redshift range is di?cult. In this chapter, I will investigate the clustering and clustering evolution of the X-ray selected AGNs using the CLASXS and CDFN data. This results in a sample of ? 600 sources with spectroscopic redshifts, the largest Chandra sample so far used for the study of spatial correlation function of AGNs. Both data sets are followed-up in optical using the same instrumentation, resulting in very similar systematics. This allows us to combine/compare the results from the two surveys easily. The depth of CDFN and the angular size of CLASXS compensate each other in providing an unbiased picture of the spatial clustering and evolution. In principle, the clustering can be used to study cosmological parameters. In our case, however, the data set is too small to make useful constrains on cosmology. On the other hand, if the standard cosmology is taken as a priori, the clustering of AGNs provides very important clue between the SMBHs and their host galaxies. 111 6.2 Observations and data As mentioned in Chapter 5, we have made spectroscopic observations for ? 90% of the 525 CLASXS X-ray sources. A total of 272 source have spectroscopic redshifts. The redshift distribution of these sources are shown in Figure 44. The fraction of sources with spectroscopic redshift as a function of hard X-ray ux is shown in Figure 35. Figure 44: The redshift distribution of optically identifled X-ray sources.The solid line: CLASXS fleld; dashed line: CDFN. The 2 Ms CDFN is so far the deepest Chandra fleld, reaching a ux limit of f2?8keV ? 1:4?10?16 ergcm?2 s?1 (Alexander et al. 2003). This is ? 20 times deeper than the CLASXS fleld. The areal density of sources in CDFN is also ? 5 112 times higher. The optical observation were performed using the same telescopes as that has been used with CLASXS (Barger et al. 2003), which make it easy to compare the redshift results from both observation. We use the published catalog, which contains 306 sources with spectroscopic redshift. The redshift distribution of the CDFN sources is also shown in Figure 44. The fainter X-ray sources in the CDFN are more likely to be found at low redshift, z < 1, compared to the CLASXS sources. 6.3 Methods To quantify spatial clustering in a point process, the most commonly used technique is the two point correlation function. In short, a two point correlation function measures the excess probability of flnding a pair of objects as a function of pair separation (Peebles 1980). dP = n20[1 +?(r)]dV1dV2 (6.1) where n0 is the mean density and r is the comoving distance between two sources. Observations of low redshift galaxies and clusters of galaxies show that the correlation function of these objects over a wide range of scales can be described by a power-law ?(r) = ( rr 0 )? ; (6.2) with ?1:6?1:9 (Peebles 1980). It should be noted that the correlation function is in fact a function of redshift, which we will discuss in x 6.4. Because of the small sample sizes of most of the AGN surveys, correlation functions over very wide 113 redshift ranges are commonly used. This only makes sense if the clustering is almost constant in comoving coordinates. Fortunately, this is very close to the truth, as we shall see in x 6.5. 6.3.1 Redshift- and real-space Correlation functions The nominal distance between sources calculated using the sky coordinates of the sources and their redshifts is sometimes called distance in redshift-space, we shall use s instead of r to indicate the distance calculated this way. It is apparent that the line-of-sight peculiar velocity of the sources could also contribute to the measured redshift (redshift distortion). This efiect is most important at separations smaller than the correlation length. The projected correlation function, which computes the integrated correlation function along the line-of-sight and is not not afiected by redshift distortion, is often used to obtain the real space correlation function (Peebles 1980). The projection, however, could make the correlation signal more di?cult to measure. In small flelds like the Chandra Deep Field North, the projected correlation function is also restricted by the fleld size, and could be afiected by cosmic variance. We will calculate both the redshift-space and projected correlation functions in this paper. This allows us to estimate the correlation functions correctly at both small and large scales. Following (Davis & Peebles 1983), we deflne v1 and v2 to be the positions of two sources in the redshift-space, s ? v1 ?v2 to be the redshift-space separation, and l ? (v1 + v2)=2 to be the mean distance to the pair. We can then compute 114 the correlation function ?(rp;?) on a two dimensional grid, where ? and rp are separations along and across the line-of-sight: ? = s?ljlj ; (6.3) rp =ps?s??2: (6.4) The projected correlation function is deflned as the line-of-sight integration of?(rp;?): wp(rp) = 2 Z ?max 0 d? ?(rp;?) = 2 Z ?max 0 dy ?( q r2p +y2); (6.5) where y is the line-of-sight separation. It has been shown (Davis & Peebles 1983) that, when ?max !1, wp(rp) satisfles a simple relation with the real-space corre- lation function. If a power-law form in Equation 6.2 is assumed, then wp(rp) = rp r 0 rp ? ?(1 2)?( ?1 2 ) ?( 2) : (6.6) In practice, the integration is not performed to very large separations because the major contribution to the projected signal comes from separations of a few times the correlation length s0. Integrating to larger ? will only add noise to the results. After testing various scales, we found ?max = 20?40 Mpc produces consistent results for our samples. 6.3.2 Correlation function Estimator To obtain an unbiased estimate of the correlation functions, we must correct for selection efiects. Usually, these selection efiects are determined using random samples generated with computer simulations. By comparing the simulated and 115 observed pair distribution, the selection functions efiectively cancel. We compute the correlation function using the minimum variance estimator ? = DD?2DR +RRRR (6.7) where DD, DR and RR are the numbers of data-data, data-random and random- random pairs respectively, with comoving distances s0 ??s=2 < s < s0 + ?s=2 (L-S estimator, Landy & Szalay 1993). The random catalog is produced through simulations described below to account for the selection efiects in observations. The random catalog usually contains a very large number of objects so that the Poisson noise introduced is ignorable. We have checked our results using both L-S and the Davis-Peebles estimators (Davis & Peebles 1983) and found very good agreement between the two methods. 6.3.3 Uncertainties of correlation functions The uncertainty of the correlation function is estimated assuming the error of the DR and RR pairs are zero, and the uncertainty of DD is, ? = (1 +?)pDD (6.8) when DD is large. In the case of small DD, where pDD underestimates the error, we use the approximation formula (Gehrels 1986) to calculate the Poisson upper and lower limits. Since the DDs are in fact correlated, the use of Poisson errors could underestimate the real uncertainty. In the literature bootstrap resampling (Efron 1982) is often used to calculate the errors of the correlation function. The method 116 is particularly useful in cases when the probability distribution function (PDF) of the variable is unknown, or in cases when the variables are derived from Poissonian distributed data using complex transformations, which results in rather complex PDFs. Mo et al. (1992) showed that in the case of large DD, the bootstrap error is ?p3 of the Poisson error. We use Poisson errors in our redshift-space correlation function estimates. On the other hand, we use bootstrap methods when estimating the uncertainties of the projected correlation function. This is because the arbitrary binning and numerical integration used in Equation 6.5 make it di?cult to apply Poisson errors directly. 6.3.4 The mock catalog To account for the observational selection and edge efiects, we perform exten- sive simulations to construct a mock catalog. The Chandra detection sensitivity is not uniform because of vignetting efiects, quantum e?ciency changes across the fleld and the broadening of the point spread functions. The consequence is that the sensitivity of source detection drops mono- tonically with ofi-axis angles. To quantify this we generate simulated observations of our 40 ks and 70 ks exposure in both soft and hard bands. In Figure 45 we show some of the simulations. Using wavdetect (Freeman et al. 2002) on these images we obtain an estimate of the detection probability function at difierent uxes and ofi-axis angles (Figure 46). With this probability, we can generate randomly distributed sources with the 117 Figure 45: Simulated 40 ks hard band images with sources with various counts. (a) the blue regions shows the input source locations. The red regions in (b){(e) show the images with input source counts of 3, 4.5, 7, and 16 cts respectively. Detected sources are marked with the 3 error ellipses in blue. 118 Figure 45 Continue. (b) 119 Figure 45 Continue. (c) 120 Figure 45 Continue. (d) 121 Figure 45 Continue. (e) 122 Figure 46: The probability of source detection as a function of ofi-axis angle and 2{ 8 keV uxes. Contour levels are 0.1,0.3,0.5,0.7,0.9, 0.95,0.99. Upper(lower) panels: soft (hard) band; Left (right) panels: 70 ks exposures and 40 ks exposures. 123 X-ray selection efiects to the flrst order. We use this method instead of running detections on a large number of simulated images because the detection program runs very slowly on these images. We generate source uxes based on the best flt LogN-LogS from (Yang et al. 2004; see Chapter 3) and then \detections" are run on each of the images. The resulting catalogs from all the nine simulated images are then merged in the same way as for the real data. The resulting random source distribution and the resulting cumulative counts are shown in Figure 47. We next consider the optical selection efiects. Since our spectroscopic obser- vation is close to complete for all sources with R< 24:5, the sky coverage is uniform and only a very small number of very close sources could be missed. The redshift distribution of the sources shows a very weak dependence on the X-ray ux (Fig- ure 48), which is due largely to the weak correlation between X-ray and optical ux in our hard X-ray sample. We can thus \scramble" the observed redshifts and assign them to the simulated sample without introducing a signiflcant bias. The major selection efiect in our optical observation is that the optical identiflcations are biased toward brighter sources. We select X-ray random sources using the best-flt curve in Figure 35 as a prob- ability function. The optical selection removes a large fraction of X-ray dim sources and therefore reduces the non-uniformity in the angular distribution caused by the X-ray selection efiects. The redshift of the random sources were sampled from a Gaussian smoothed ( z = 0:2) redshift distribution from the observations. The pur- pose of the smoothing is to remove possible redshift clustering in the random sample but still preserve the efiect of the selection function. We tested difierent smooth- 124 Figure 47: The right panels shows the random sources after detections (only 3000 sources are plotted). The pixel size is 0.49200. The left panels are the cumulated counts of simulated sources (solid line) and that of the observed (dashed line). Top: hard band; bottom: soft band. 125 Figure 48: The 2{8 keV ux vs. redshift in CLASXS sample. There is no signiflcant correlation between X-ray ux and redshift. 126 ing scales ?z = 0:1?0:3 and found the resulting correlation function efiectively unchanged. 6.4 Results 6.4.1 Redshift-space correlation function We calculate the redshift-space correlation function for non-stellar sources with 0:1 < z < 3 and 2{8 keV uxes > 5 ? 10?16, assuming constant clustering in comoving coordinates. The total number of sources in the sample is 233. The median redshift of the sample is 1.2. We estimate the signiflcance of clustering by comparing the number of detected pairs with separations < 20 Mpc with that expected by simulation. We found the signiflcance of clustering is 6:7 . We use the maximum likelihood method in searching for the best-flt parame- ters (Cash 1979; Popowski et al. 1998; Mullis et al. 2004). The method is preferable to the commonly used ?2 method because it is less afiected by arbitrary binning. The method uses very small bins so that each bin contains only 1 or 0 DD pair. In this limit, the probability associated with each bin is independent. The expected number of DD pairs in each bin is calculated using the DR, RR pairs using the mock catalog. The likelihood is deflned as L= Y i e??i?xii xi! (6.9) where ?i is the expected number of pairs in each bin and xi is the observed number 127 Table 6.1. Redshift-space Correlation Function CLASXS Field CDF-N Field s range (Mpc) s0 ?2=dof s range (Mpc) s0 ?2=dof 10{200 11:4+1:8?3:1 2:4+1:1?0:8 6.2/8 10{100 11:5+0:8?1:2 2:9+1:4?0:8 7.9/8 3{30 8:15+1:6?2:0 1:2+0:5?0:4 3.8 /8 1{20 11:4+1:8?1:4 :96+:15?:17 6.8/8 3{200 8:05+1:4?1:5 1:6+0:4?0:3 10.6/8 1{100 8:55+:75?:74 1:3?0:1 15.0/8 of pairs. The likelihood ratio deflned as S =?2(lnL?lnL0) (6.10) and satisfles the usual ?2 distribution, where L0 is the maximum likelihood. Since the maximum-likelihood method is not a goodness-of-flt indicator, we quote the ?2 derived from the binned correlation function (as shown in the flgures) and the best-flt parameters from maximum-likelihood estimates. We flt the correlation functions over three separation ranges. In Figure 49 we show the correlation function and the best-flt with 3 Mpc< s <200 Mpc. The best- flt parameters for all three separation ranges are listed in Table 6.1. The measured = 1:6 for 3 Mpc< s <200 Mpc is very close to the canonical value. However, the rather large ?2 implies that the single power-law model may not be a proper description of the data. For comparison, we also computed the correlation function of the X-ray sources in CDFN in the same redshift interval. We created a mock catalog 50 times larger 128 Figure 49: (a). Redshift-space correlation function for CLASXS fleld with 3 Mpc< s <200 Mpc. (b). Maximum-likelihood contour for the single power-law flt. Contour levels are ?S = 2:3;6:17;11:8, corresponding to 1 , 2 and 3 confldent levels for two parameter flt. 129 than the observation. The positions and redshifts of the random sources are gen- erated by randomizing the observed positions and redshifts. A large Poisson noise was added to avoid artiflcial clustering in the mock catalog. Such randomization is justifled because the clustering signal in a small fleld like the CDFN mainly comes from clustering along the line-of-sight direction. The randomized sky coordinates are flltered using an image mask to take into account the edge efiects. We include all the non-stellar sources in the same redshift interval as we use for CLASXS, which results in 252 sources in the sample. The best-flt parameters for CDFN fleld over three scale ranges are also shown in Table 6.1. The correlation function over 1 Mpc< s <100 Mpc is shown in Figure 50 There is a good agreement of the correlation lengths obtained in the two deep flelds. There seems to be a systematic attening of the slope at small separations (s ? 10 Mpc) in both samples. When the correlation functions are fltted at small and large separations independently, the resulting ?2s are systematically smaller. As we shall see with the projected correlation function, this attening is very likely to be real. 6.4.2 Projected correlation function The projected correlation function is computed using the methods described in x 6.4.2. To test the method, we flrst compute the projected correlation function for the CDFN and compare the results with that published in Gilli et al. (2005). We selected the same redshift interval for the CLASXS fleld. A two dimensional 130 Figure 50: The same as Figure 49 for CDFN except the correlation function is calculated for separation 1 Mpc< s <100 Mpc. 131 correlation function is calculated on a 5?10 grid on the (rp,?) plane. The 5 inter- vals along rp axis covers 0.16{20 Mpc. We integrate the resulting two dimensional correlation function along the line-of-sight to a ?max = 20 Mpc. Our projected cor- relation function for CDFN is shown Figure 51, and it agrees perfectly with that reported in Gilli et al. (2005) for z = 0?4. We next compute the projected correlation function for the CLASXS fleld. The correlation function is calculated on scales of rp = 1?30 Mpc. The 2-D correlation function is integrated to ?max = 30. The result is also shown in Figure 51. It is obvious that the correlation functions of the CDFN and CLASXS flelds agree very well at rp ?10 Mpc. The slope, however, appears to be atter in the CDFN fleld. We perform a ?2 flt to the correlation functions using Equation 6.6. The best-flt parameters for CDFN are r0 = 5:8+1:0?1:5 Mpc, = 1:38+0:12?0:14, and the reduced ?2=dof = 2:5=3. This is in good agreement with the result from Gilli et al. (2005, r0 = 5:7 Mpc, = 1:42). The quoted errors in that paper is smaller than we obtained, but since we adopt a bootstrap error instead of Poisson error in this analysis, the difierence is expected. The best-flt parameters for the CLASXS fleld are r0 = 8:1+1:2?2:2 Mpc, = 2:1+0:5?0:5, and the reduced ?2=dof = 1:6=4. The correlation length appears to be higher than that of the CDFN, but agrees within the errors. The slope also seems steeper than that of the CDFN and agrees better with the slope of the redshift-space correlation function at rp > 10 Mpc. Since the CLASXS sample does not cover separations < 10 Mpc very well, it is hard to see a slope change in this sample alone. Since the CDFN and CLASXS connect very well at separations where both surveys are sensitive, we try to model the combined data 132 Figure 51: The projected correlation function for CLASXS, CDFN and the best flt. (a)-(c) are the ?2 contours for CLASXS+CDFN, CLASXS, and CDFN, respectively. Contour levels are for 1 , 2 , and 3 confldent level ; (d) The projected correla- tion function for CLASXS (open circles) and CDFN (black dots) flelds. Lines are the best-flt shown in (a)-(c). Solid line: CLASXS+CDFN; Dotted line: CLASXS; Dashed line: CDFN 133 points with a single power-law. This yields r0 = 6:1+0:4?1:0 Mpc, 0 = 1:47+0:07?0:10, and ?2=dof = 10:7=9. The reduced ?2 is much worse than than two samples fltted separately. This again seems to suggest that the slope of the correlation function attens at small separations. 6.4.3 Redshift distortion Redshift distortion afiects the correlation function (power-spectrum) by in- creasing the redshift-space correlation amplitude and changing the shape of the 2-D redshift-space correlation function at small scales (such as the well known \flnger- of-God" efiect, e.g. Hamilton 1992). Since our data is too noisy at small separa- tions, we only discuss the efiect of the amplitude boosting of correlation function in redshift-space. Kaiser (1987) showed that to the flrst order, ?(s) = ?(r)(1 + 23fl + 15fl2); (6.11) where fl ? ?M(z)0:6=b(z) and b(z) is bias. In principle, the redshift-space distor- tion can be estimated by comparing ?(s) and ?(r). To quantify the efiect, we use the correlation function estimate at scales where both projected and redshift-space correlation functions are well determined. For the CDFN, we chose the correlation function estimates at 10 Mpc and flnd ?(s = 10 Mpc)=?(r = 10 Mpc) = 1:75?0:55, if the best-flt of ?(s) on 1-100 Mpc is used. The choice of this scale is justifled given that the slope possibly changes below and above 10 Mpc, as seen in the projected correlation function. Since the slope of the redshift- and real-space correlation func- tion is very similar in the CDFN, the ratio is almost constant. For the CLASXS 134 fleld, we chose to estimate the ratio at 20 Mpc. We flnd ?(s = 20 Mpc)=?(r = 20 Mpc) = 1:73 ? 0:42 by using the best-flt on 1{100 Mpc for ?(s). The ratio changes slowly with the scales probed, but is within the errors. We flnd a general agreement between CLASXS and CDFN. It should be noted that if the best-flts of redshift-space correlation function on small scales are used, the results from the CDFN and CLASXS do not agree. Nonlinear redshift-space distortion and the win- dow function of the two surveys are possible causes. To avoid the random choice of scales, and to make the best use of the data, we combine the two samples to study the redshift distortion efiect on ?(rp;?). Since the projected correlation function of CDFN and and CLASXS agrees in general, we are encouraged to assume that the the two samples, even with the vast difierence in ux limits, generally trace the large scale structure in the same way. In Figure 52. we show the combined ?(rp;?). The contours show no signiflcant signature of nonlinear redshift distortion, such as the \flnger-of-god". We flt ?(rp;?) with Equation 6.11, assuming the best-flt parameters for the real-space correlation function from the combined sample (r0 = 6:1 Mpc, 0 = 1:47), and ignoring the higher order redshift distortions. We generate the 2-D correlation function at each grid point. By minimizing ?2 by changing fl, we found the best-flt fl = 0:4 ? 0:2, which corresponds to ?(s)=?(r) ? 1:3, which agrees with the estimates from individual flelds above. By flxing ?M = 0:27, we can estimate the bias factor of X-ray selected AGNs from fl. The median redshift of the combined sample is 0.94, and ?M(z = 0) = 0:27 gives ?M(z = 0:94) = 0:73. This yields b?2:04?1:02 using the relation fl ??0:6M =b. 135 Figure 52: Two dimensional redshift-space correlation function ?(rp;?) of the com- bined CLASXS and CDFN data (dashed-dotted contour). Solid line shows the best-flt model. Both the data and model correlation functions are smoothed using a 2?2 boxcar to reduce the noise for visualization only. 136 6.4.4 X-ray color dependence We further test if there is any difierences in clustering properties between the hard and soft spectra sources in the CLASXS sample. We use the hardness ratio, deflned as HR ? C2?8keV =C0:5?2keV (where C is the count rate), to quantify the spectral shape of the X-ray sources. Correlation functions of soft (HR < 0:7) and hard (HR ? 0:7) sources are calculated the same way as above. The fraction of broad-line AGNs is 56.4% in the soft sample and 15.4% in hard sample. The median redshifts are 1.25 and 0.94 for soft and hard samples, respectively. We compute ?(s) for both soft and hard sources over scales of 3{200 Mpc. Using a maximum-likelihood flt, we found s0 = 9:6+2:4?3:4 Mpc, = 1:6+0:8?0:6 for hard sources and s0 = 8:6+2:2?2:0 Mpc, = 1:6+0:6?0:5 for soft sources. We found no signiflcant difierence in clustering between the soft and hard sources. This agrees with the results of G04. It is noticeable that the soft sources have a higher median redshift than hard sources. The interpretation of this result must include evolution efiects. To avoid this complication, we restricted the redshift range to z = 0:1?1:5. The best-flt parameters are s0 = 9:5+3:1?3:7 Mpc (6:2+2:7?4:6 Mpc) and = 1:7+0:9?0:6 (2:5+1:6?0:9) for hard (soft) sources. The difierence in clustering parameters between soft and hard sources are well within error. The same analysis on CDFN yields similar results. Thus there is no signiflcant dependence of clustering on the X-ray color. 137 6.4.5 Luminosity dependence The cold dark matter (CDM) model of hierarchical structure formation pre- dicts that massive (and hence luminous) galaxies are formed in rare peaks, and therefore should be more strongly clustered. This is seen in normal galaxies (e.g. Giavalisco & Dickinson 2001). Whether this relation can be extended to X-ray lumi- nosity of AGNS is unknown. This is because the X-ray luminosity relates to the dark matter halo mass in a more complex way. The X-ray luminosity is directly linked to the accretion process, and the process is afiected by factors such as accretion rate, radiative e?ciency, blackhole mass and the details of the dynamical process in the accretion process. We have shown that at least in broadline AGNs, where the blackhole mass can be inferred from the line-width and nuclear luminosity, the Eddington ratio is close to constant over two decades of 2{8 keV luminosity (Barger et al. 2005). If this is the case for all X-ray selected AGNs, we should expect the AGN luminosity to be mainly determined by the blackhole mass, which in turn, should be closely related to the halo mass (Ferrarese 2002), even though the exact form of this relation is highly uncertain. However, the optical quasar surveys such as 2dF found little evidence of correlation between clustering amplitude and ensemble luminosity (C05), probably due to the small dynamical range in luminosity these surveys probe. The X-ray luminosity of sources in the CLASXS and CDFN cover a luminosity range of four orders of magnitudes, making it possible to make such a test. The 2{8 keV luminosity Lx is calculated from the hard band uxes, with a 138 K-correction made assuming a power-law spectra with photon index ? = 1:8. This yields Lx = LO(1 +z)0:2: (6.12) In Figure 53 we show Lx vs. redshift for both CLASXS and CDFN. For a better Figure 53: The luminosity of X-ray sources vs. redshifts in CLASXS (dots) and CDFN (open circles) comparison of the correlation amplitude, we adopt the averaged correlation function within 20 Mpc, ??(20) = 3 203 Z 20 0 ds?(s)s2: (6.13) The quantity is chosen rather than s0 because it measures the clustering (directly linked to the rms uctuations) regardless of the shape of the correlation function. 139 Table 6.2. Luminosity dependance of Correlation Function Field z range zmedian < Lx > (ergs?1 ) s0 ?2=dof ??(20) CLASXS 0.1{3.0 1.5 3:3?1044 11:5+1:9?2:1 2:0+:5?0:4 7.2/8 1:00+:25?:24 0.1{3.0 .73 1:5?1043 7:35+1:9?2:0 1:9+1:2:54 8.8/8 :41+14?:13 0.3{1.5 1.1 1:4?1044 11:0?2:6 2:3+1:6?0:6 9.2/8 1:04+:38?:33 0.3{1.5 .81 1:6?1043 5:30+2:9?3:8 1:4+0:8?0:5 7.8/8 :28+:13?:15 CDF-N 0.1{3.0 .98 7:9?1043 13:2?2:9 :81+0:20?0:17 8.2/8 :98?0:11 0.1{3.0 .51 8:3?1041 5:6+1:2?1:1 1:26+0:22?0:20 11.9/8 :35?:05 0.3{1.5 .96 4:0?1043 8:0+1:5?1:4 1:11+:25?:22 11.1/8 :57+:08?:07 0.3{1.5 .63 1:0?1041 6:8+1:3?1:2 1:28+:27?:21 8.4/8 :43?:08 On scales of 20 Mpc the clustering is well described by the linear approximation of the structure formation. It is also independent of the assumed H0 which allows easy comparison with other observations. The error in ??(20) we quote is from the single parameter 1 confldence interval obtained by flxing the slope of the correlation function to the best-flt. We split the CLASXS sample into two subsamples atLx = 4:5?1043 ergs?1 and the CDFN sample at Lx = 3:2 ? 1042 ergs?1 . Each subsample contain similar number of objects. In Table 6.2 we show the maximum-likelihood flts as well as ??(20)s. It should be noted that the correlation amplitude is biased in redshift space. The dominant part of this bias is characterized in Equation 6.11. Comparing with other observations (da ^Angela et al. 2005, e.g.), fl is likely a weak function of red- 140 shift in the redshift range probed by our sample, with fl ? 0:4, this translates to ?(s)=?(r) ? 1:3. We correct the ??(20)?s for this bias by dividing them by 1.3. The correlation amplitude for the more luminous sources appears to be higher than that of the less luminous sources, which qualitatively agrees with expectations that X-ray luminosity re ects the dark matter halo mass. The correlation amplitude for the more luminous subsamples are 2:3 and 5:7 higher than that of the less bright subsample in the CLASXS and CDFN flelds, respectively. However, since the more luminous subsamples also are preferentially found at higher redshifts, the evolution in ?(s) should be taken into account. To reduce this complication, we restrict ourselves to sources within the redshift range of 0.3{1.5, where the evolution efiect is relatively small (see also x 6.5). In Figure 54 we show Lx vs. ??(20) for both CLASXS and CDFN. By reducing the redshift range, the difierence in correlation amplitude between the brighter and dimmer subsample reduce signiflcantly in the CDFN sample, to merely 1:7 . For the CLASXS fleld, on the other hand, the correlation amplitude for both subsamples do not show signiflcant change. For comparison, we also plot in Figure 54 the correlation amplitude from the 2dF survey (C05). The X-ray luminosities for the QSOs in the 2dF are obtained by dividing the bolometric luminosities by 35 (Elvis et al. 1994). We perform Spearman?s ? test for correlations between log Lx and ??. We found the correlation coe?cient ? = 0:8 for X-ray samples, or a corresponding null probability of 20%, indicating a mild correlation between the two quantities. If the 2dF samples are added, however, ? drops to 0.1, with a null probability of 81%. This means that for the combined optical and X-ray sample there is no correlation 141 Figure 54: Luminosity dependence of clustering of AGNs. Black dots: CLASXS samples; Filled boxes: CDFN samples; Diamonds: 2dF sample (Croom et al. 2004). Lines are the models for difierent halo proflle from Farrarese (2002). Solid line: NWF proflle (? = 0:1, ? = 1:65); Dashed line: weak lensing determined halo proflle (Seljak, 2002; ? = 0:67, ? = 1:82); Dash-dotted line: isothermal model (? = 0:027, ? = 1:82) 142 between X-ray luminosity and clustering amplitude. 6.5 Evolution of clustering Measuring the correlation function over a wide redshift range only makes sense if the correlation function is a weak function of redshift. The best measurements of clustering of 2dF quasars at high redshift show that the correlation function indeed exhibits only mild evolution (C05). In this section, we test the evolution of clustering of X-ray selected AGNs and compare them with other survey results. 6.5.1 Samples We study the evolution of clustering in both CLASXS and CDFN samples, using the redshift-space correlation function. The sources are grouped in 4 redshift intervals from 0.1 to 3. The sizes of the intervals are chosen so that the number of objects in each interval is similar in the CLASXS sample. This result in a very wide redshift bin above z = 1:5. The correlation functions for the CLASXS, CDFN and CLASXS+CDFN flelds are shown in Figures 55, 56, and 57, respectively. We group the pair separations in 10 bins in these flgures to show the shape of the correlation function. In some bins there could be no DD pairs, and the correlation function is set to -1 without errors. We model the correlation functions using single power-laws and flt the data using the maximum-likelihood method. As we mentioned earlier, the method is not afiected by binning. We found on 3{50 Mpc scales that a single power-law provides a good flt to the data except, for the the z = 1:5?3 interval 143 Figure 55: The Redshift-space correlation function for CLASXS fleld in four red- shift bins. Left panels: The correlation functions and the power-law best-flts using maximum-likelihood method. Right panels: the maximum-likelihood contour for the corresponding correlation function on the left. Contour levels correspond to 1 , 2 and 3 confldent levels. in the CDFN, where the sample is too sparse and have very few close separation pairs, we use a separation range of 5{200 Mpc to obtain the flt. The goodness-of-flt is quantifled with ?2. In the case where empty bins exist, we increase the bin sizes until no bins are empty before we compute the ?2. The results are summarized in Table 6.3 and the ??(20)s as a function of red- shift are shown in Figure 58. We have tested fltting the correlation functions over difierence scale ranges, and found no signiflcant difierences in the resulting ??(20). 144 Table 6.3. Evolution of redshift-space Correlation Function Field z range < z > Na < Lx >b s0 ?2=dof ??(20) CLASXS 0.1{0.7 0.44 57 1:6?1043 10:6+3:2?3:0 1:3+0:7?0:5 4.1/8 0:78+0:19?0:17 0.7{1.1 0.90 60 6:7?1043 6:2+2:1?2:8 2:3+6:0?1:0 5.9/8 0:33+0:20?0:16 1.1{1.5 1.27 49 1:1?1044 6:4+5:0?6:6 1:3+1:2?0:7 1.6/3 0:39+0:20?0:20 1.5{3.0 2.00 67 4:9?1044 13:6+4:2?5:4 1:4+0:6?0:5 3.1/3 1:09+0:39?0:20 CDFN 0.1{0.7 0.46 111 2:8?1042 6:8+0:7?0:6 2:2+0:5?0:3 12.5/8 0:35+0:04?0:05 0.7{1.1 0.94 91 2:6?1043 9:4+1:3?1:4 1:2+0:3?0:2 5.6/8 0:67+0:09?0:07 1.1{1.5 1.22 28 3:8?1043 8:8+2:6?2:3 2:1+1:0?0:8 2.9/8 0:60+0:24?0:22 1.5{3.0 2.24 22 2:4?1044 14:2+8:5?7:9 2:3+2:2?1:4 1.4/7 1:6+1:2?1:0 CLASXS+CDFN 0.1{0.7 0.45 168 7:3?1042 7:9+0:9?0:9 1:9+0:3?0:3 5.3/8 0:47+0:06?0:05 0.7{1.1 0.92 151 4:3?1043 10:1+1:1?1:0 1:4+0:2?0:2 5.5/8 0:72+0:08?0:07 1.1{1.5 1.26 77 8:2?1043 8:4+1:8?2:4 2:0+0:8?0:6 1.8/8 0:53+0:17?0:15 1.5{3.0 2.07 89 4:3?1044 12:4+2:7?3:4 1:7+0:5?0:4 4.2/7 1:13+0:30?0:24 aThe number of sources bUnit: ergs?1 145 Figure 55 (continued) There is only mild evolution seen in both the CLASXS and CDFN flelds, in agreement with the assumption that clustering is close to constant in comoving coordinates. There are some small discrepancies between the CLASXS and the CDFN clustering strength. These discrepancies give the sense of the fleld-to-fleld uncertainty. The decrease of ??(20) from z ? 0:44 to z ? 0:9 in CLASXS fleld, is not seen in the CDFN. The CDFN sample has very good signal-to-noise ratio at z ?1 because of the large spatial density. However, the large increase of ??(20) from z ? 0:46 to z ? 0:94, is possibly to caused by cosmic variance, i.e. the two large \spikes" of sources at these redshifts. The issue could be resolved with a larger survey. At the highest redshift, both samples show an increase trend of clustering, but only at the ? 2 level. The higher clustering can be explained by the order of 146 Figure 56: The Redshift-space correlation function for CDFN fleld in four redshift bins (layout and contour levels are the same as in Figure 55). 147 Figure 57: The Redshift-space correlation function for CLASXS+CDFN fleld in four redshift bins (layout and contour levels are the same as in Figure 55). 148 Figure 58: The evolution of clustering as a function of redshift for CLASXS, CDF and the two flelds combined. 149 magnitude increase of luminosity from z ?1 to z > 1:5, caused by the evolution of the luminosity function (Barger et al. 2005) and \Malmquist bias". 6.5.2 Comparing with other observations Figure 59: A comparison of clustering evolution in the combined Chandra flelds (big dots), CLASXS fleld (big fllled triangle), 2dF (diamonds), ROSAT NGP (fllled box) and AERQS (empty box). The solid line represent linear evolution of clustering normalized to the AERQS. The dashed lines represent the In Figure 59 we plot ??(20) as a function of redshift for CLASXS, the combined CLASXS and CDFN, as well as results from the 2dF (C05), the ROSAT North Galactic Pole Survey (NGP, Mullis et al. 2004), and the Asiago-ESO/RASS QSO 150 survey (AERQS, Grazian et al. 2004). We did not correct for redshift distortion for observations which uses redshift-space correlation function. This leads to overesti- mates of the real-space correlation amplitude. Our correlation function shows a clear Figure 60: The median luminosities of the 2dF quasar (C04) as a function of redshift (diamonds) compared to the median luminosities of CLASXS sample (triangles) and of CLASXS+CDFN sample (big dots). The lower panel shows the ratio of 2dF median luminosities to the X-ray samples. agreement with the evolution trend found in C05. However, as seen in x 6.4.5, our measured correlation amplitude on average appears higher than, or at least the same as that of 2dF. This result is surprising because one would expect the 2dF quasars to be more clustered because they are more luminous (see x 6.4.5) than the sources 151 in the deep X-ray surveys. We compare the X-ray luminosities of the CLASXS and CLASXS+CDFN samples with those of the 2dF in Figure 60. The X-ray lumi- nosities of 2dF quasars are obtained the same way as in x 6.4.5. The luminosity difierence between the 2dF sample and X-ray samples is the largest at low redshift and decreases at higher redshift. At z > 2, the X-ray sample and the 2dF samples have similar median luminosity. As mentioned in x 6.4.5, the clustering is weakly correlated to luminosity below 1043 ergs?1 , but the correlation function increases more rapidly above 1044 ergs?1 . Therefore, we should expect to see the optical sample being more clustered than X-ray samples at medium redshifts. However, the trend is not seen. 6.6 Discussion 6.6.1 Evolution of Bias and the typical dark matter halo mass In the CDM structure formation paradigm, the continuous density uctuations can be approximated by discrete dark matter halos. The growth of large scale structure can be seen as merging of the halos. Less massive halos form early and then merge into larger halos. It is obvious that more massive halos tend to be found in denser environment because the chance for merging is higher. This links the clustering property to the halo mass. On the other hand, the formation of stars and galaxies is not only afiected by gravitational force, but also afiected by gas dynamics and star formation. These processes are generally afiected by the mass and the age of the galaxy. The clustering property of luminous matter should thus be difierent 152 from that of the halos. The bias factor is introduced to account for this difierence. In terms of correlation function, the bias can be deflned as b2 ??light=?mass: (6.14) The bias evolution of optical quasar is extensively discussed in C05. They found that the bias increases rapidly with redshift(b ? (1 + z)2). We will follow these arguments to estimate the bias evolution of the X-ray samples. On scales of 20 Mpc, the clustering of dark matter and AGNs are both in the linear regime, i.e., ??(20) < 1. This allows us to measure the bias as a function of redshift by comparing the observed correlation function with the linear growth rate of dark halos in the ?CDM model. The averaged correlation function of mass can be obtained using ??(20) = 3 (3? )J2( )( 8 20) 2 8D(z) 2 (6.15) where J2( ) = 72=[(3? )(4? )(6? )2 ], 8 = 0:84 is the rms uctuation of mass at z = 0 obtained by WMAP observation (Spergel et al. 2003), and we choose the best-flt ?1:5. D(z) is the linear growth factor, for which we use the approximation formula from Carroll et al. (1992). The redshift-space distortion is taken into account to the flrst order through Equation 6.11 and the bias factor is solved for numerically. The result is shown in Table 6.4. The estimate of b(z = 1) ? 2:2 in the combined sample agrees with the result from the redshift-space distortion analysis in x 6.4.3. In Figure 61(a) we show the bias estimates for the CDFN and CLASXS+CDFN samples. The best-flt model from C05 qualitatively agrees with the X-ray results, but the bias of the combined X-ray sample is slightly higher, as expected from their 153 Table 6.4. Bias evolution and dark matter halo mass CLASXS CLASXS+CDFN < z > b Log10(M=Mfl) < z > b Log10(M=Mfl) 0.44 1:83?0:29 12:9?0:2 0.45 1:41?0:09 12:50?0:09 0.90 1:41?0:50 12:1?0:4 0.92 2:20?0:16 12:72?0:08 1.27 1:83?0:61 12:2?0:4 1.26 2:12?0:43 12:43?0:22 2.00 4:18?0:62 12:7?0:1 2.07 4:15?0:79 12:69?0:18 higher correlation functions. The simplest model for bias evolution is that the AGNs are formed at high redshift, and evolve according to the continuity equation (Nusser & Davis 1994; Fry 1996). The model is some times called the conserving model or the test particle model. By normalizing the bias to z = 0, the model can be written as b(z) = 1 + (b0?1)=D(z): (6.16) This model is shown in Figure 61(a) as dash-dotted line. The model produces a bias evolution which is slightly too shallow at high redshifts. The correlation function evolution based on this model is also shown in Figure 59, where it underpredicts the observed ?. This model predicts a decrease of correlation function at high redshift, which is not true based on our results and that of the 2dF. This implies that the bulk of the AGNs observed in the local universe are unlikely to have formed at z 2. On the other hand, this is consistent with the idea that the high redshift quasars 154 Figure 61: (a) bias evolution.The symbols have the same meaning as in Figure 59. The solid line is the best-flt from C04. Dash-dotted line shows the linear bias evolution model. (b). The mass of host halo of the X-ray sources corresponding to the bias in panel (a). 155 should have died away long ago. One of the direct predictions of the CDM structure formation scenario is that the bias is determined by the dark halo mass. Mo & White (1996) found a sim- ple relation between the minimum mass of the dark matter halo and the bias b. By adopting the more general formalism by Sheth, Mo, & Tormen (2001) we can compute the \typical" dark halo mass of the sample. It should be noted that the method assumes that halos are formed through violent collapse or mergers of smaller halos and hence is best applied at large separations, where the halo-halo term dom- inates the correlation function. This requirement is apparently satisfled by AGNs. Following Sheth, Mo, & Tormen (2001), b(M;z) = 1 + 1pa? c(z) [a?2pa+ 0:5pa(a?2)(1?c)? (a? 2)c (a?2)c + 0:5(1?c)(1?c=2)]; (6.17) where ? ??c(z)= (M;z), a = 0.707, c = 0.6. ?c is the critical overdensity. (M;z) is the rms density uctuation in the linear density fleld and evolves as (M;z) = 0(M)D(z); (6.18) where 0(M) can be obtained from the power spectrum of density perturbation P(k) convolved with a top-hat window function W(k), 0(M) = 12?2 Z dkk2P(k)jW(k)j2 (6.19) At the scale of interest (?10 Mpc), the power spectrum can be approximated with a power-law, P(k) / kn, with ?2 . n . ?1 for CDM type spectrum. Integrating 156 Equation 6.19 gives 0(M) = 8 M M8 ??(n+3)=6 ; (6.20) where M8 is the mean mass within 8 h?1 Mpc. We can then solve Equation 6.17 for halo mass. The resulting mass is shown in Table 6.4 and Figure 61(b). Consistent with what?s been found in C05 for the 2dF, the halo mass does not show any evolution trend with redshift. We found < log(Mhalo=Mfl) >? 12:49?0:36, which is consistent with 2dF estimates (C05, Grazian et al. 2004). The shallow evolution of the clustering amplitude apparently deviates from the clustering evolution of halos, indicating baryonic processes must be of signifl- cant importance in the formation and evolution of SMBHs. Using a detailed semi- analytical model (Kaufimann & Haehnelt 2000), where quasars are triggered and fueled by major mergers, Kaufimann & Haehnelt (2002) predicted an evolution of quasar clustering which qualitatively agrees with our result. In other words, our re- sult is consistent with the hierachical merging scenario which includes the physical processes of star bursts. 6.6.2 Linking X-ray luminosity and clustering of AGNs We have shown that over a very wide range of luminosity, the clustering am- plitude of AGNs changes very little. This allows us to put useful constrains on the correlations among X-ray luminosity, blackhole mass MBH, and the dark matter halo Mhalo. 157 Using the equivalent width of broad emission lines as mass estimators, Barger et al. (2005) found that the Eddington ratio of broadline AGNs is close to constant. Since the hard X-ray luminosity is an isotropic indicator of the bolometric luminos- ity, this implies that the blackhole mass is linearly correlated with X-ray luminosity. Barger et al. (2005) found that L44 = ( MBH108 M fl ); (6.21) where L44 is the Lx in units of 1044 ergs?1 . An identical relation is also found at low redshift using a sample of broadline AGNs with mass estimates based on rever- beration mapping (Appendix B). The relation, however, is only tested for broadline AGNs. We nevertheless use this relation for non-broadline AGNs by arguing, based on the unifled models of AGNs, that this relation should hold because the extinction efiect in X-ray band is generally small. Deviations from this relation are expected at low luminosities since many low luminosity AGNs tend to have a low Eddington ratio (Ho 2005). Blackhole mass have been shown to correlate with velocity dispersion of the spheroidal component of the host galaxies (Gebhardt et al. 2000; Ferrarese & Merritt 2000). This lead to a linear correlation between MBH and the mass of the spherical component. This relation, however, could be difierent at high redshift (Akiyama 2005). How these relationships translate to the MBH?Mhalo relation is also unclear and could likely be nonlinear. Ferrarese (2002) showed that MBH { Mhalo can be modeled with a scaling law MBH 108 Mfl = ?( Mhalo 1012 Mfl) ?; (6.22) 158 with ? and ? determined by the halo mass proflle. Combining the above and using Equation 6.17, we can calculate the correlation amplitude as a function of X-ray luminosity. In Figure 54 we show the model expectations compared with the observations from CLASXS, CDFN and 2dF. In calculating the bias we have assumed the nonlinear power-law index n = 3? , with the best flt = 1:5. The three lines represent three difierent halo proflles discussed in Ferrarese (2002). We found that the Lx???(20) relation is in fact dominated by the very nonlinear relation between halo mass and correlation amplitude. The difierence between difierent halo proflles is caused mainly by the normalization ?, or roughly the fractional mass of the SMBH, rather than the power-law index ?. One of the important model predictions is that the correlation between X-ray luminosity and clustering is weak below?1043 ergs?1 and increases rapidly above that. The lack of rapid change of the correlation amplitude indicates the halo mass of AGN cannot be signiflcantly higher than the corresponding threshold. Under the assumed cosmology and bias model, the Lx ? ??(20) relation based on the weak lensing derived halo mass proflle (Seljak 2002) and the NFW proflle (Navarro, Frenk, & White 1997) are consistent with the data, while the isothermal proflle predicts a too steep correlation amplitude curve at high luminosity. However, we cannot rule out the latter proflle as a reasonable descriptions of the AGN host halo because of the uncertainty in the shape of the correlation function. In Figure 54 we also mark the model dark halo mass corresponding to the Seljak (2002) mass proflle. The average correlation amplitude of the combined optical and X-ray sample (dotted-line) corresponds to a halo mass of ? 2?1012 Mfl. While the luminosity in our sample ranges over 159 flve orders of magnitudes, the range of halo mass may be much smaller. The 2dF sample has a high luminosity but has a similar average correlation amplitude as that of the X-ray samples. A possible explanation is that the optical selection technique tends to select sources with a higher Eddington ratio. The correlation amplitude of the CDFN sample at ? 1041 ergs?1 , on the other hand, is higher than the model predictions. This is expected because many AGNs with such luminosities are LINERs which are probably accreting with a low radiative e?ciency. It is now clear that the weak luminosity dependence of AGN clustering is consistent with the simplest model based on the observed Lx ?MBH and MBH ? Mhalo relations. A large dynamical range in X-ray luminosity, as well as better measurements of correlation function, are needed to better quantify this relation. The luminosity range of the 2dF survey is too small and the optical selection method is also likely biased to high Eddington ratio sources. By increasing our current CLASXS fleld by a factor of a few will be helpful in better determine the luminosity dependence of AGN clustering, and to put tighter constrains on AGN hosts. 6.6.3 Blackhole mass and the X-ray luminosity evolution We look again at the MBH{Mhalo relation in the light of the mass estimates of the dark matter halos from Chandra samples. If the Ferrarese (2002) relation is independent of redshift, the nearly constant dark halo mass implies little evolution for the blackhole mass. On the other hand, strong luminosity evolution is seen since z = 1:2 in hard X-ray selected AGNs (Barger et al. 2005). This implies a systematic 160 decrease of the ensemble Eddington ratio with cosmic time. Barger et al. (2005) showed that the characteristic luminosity of hard X-ray selected AGNs L? = L0(1 +z2 )a; (6.23) where log(L0=ergs?1 ) = 44:11 and a = 3:2 for z < 1:2. If the typical blackhole mass does not change with redshift, the observed luminosity evolution can lead to the ensemble Eddington ratio increasing by a factor of ? 10 from z = 0 to z = 1. It is hard to understand such a change of the typical Eddington ratio with redshift. One possibility is that a large number of highly obscured and possibly Compton thick AGNs at z ?1 are missed in the Chandra surveys (e.g. Worsley et al. 2005), leading to the observed strong luminosity evolution. Alternatively, instead of MBH{Mhalo being independent of redshift, the MBH{ vc could be unchanged with cosmic time, as suggested by Shields et al. (2003). This is theoretically attractive because the feedback regulated growth of blackholes implies a constant MBH{vc relation (Wyithe & Loeb 2003, WL model hereafter): MBH = 1:9?108 Mfl ?F q 0:07 ?? v c 350 km s?1 ?5 ; (6.24) where ? and Fq are the Eddington ratio and the feedback fraction of the acretion energy returned to the galaxy respectively. This implies that MBH?Mhalo is in fact a function of redshift: MBH(Mhalo;z) = ? M halo 1012 Mfl ?2=3 g(z)5=6(1 +z)5=2; (6.25) where g(z) is close to unity, and is deflnded as g = ?m?z m ?c 10?2; 161 ?c = 18?2 + 82d?39d2;d = ?zm?1: Croom et al. (2005) showed that this model could lead to a close to constant Ed- dington ratio in the 2dF sample if the optical luminosity is used to compare with the derived MBH. Since the correlation function is only a weak function of lumi- nosity, as we have demonstrated in x 6.4.5, it is better to estimate the evolution of the Eddington ratio using the characteristic mass of the blackholes from the WL model, and the characteristic luminosity from Equation 6.23. In Figure 62, we show the derived ensemble Eddington ratio, assuming the dark halo mass to be constant and log (< Mhalo=Mfl >) ? 12:4. (we adopt the normalization of the WL model so that it matches the prediction of MBH { Mhalo with a NWF type of halo proflle. However, the choice of this normalization is not crucial). In the flgure, we see a factor of ?2:5 change in the ensemble Eddington ratio from z = 0 to z = 1:2. This change, however, is smaller than the typical scatter in both the luminosity and halo mass. 6.6.4 Comparison with normal galaxies We now compare our clustering results with those for normal galaxies. Using the Sloan Digital Sky Survey First Data Release, Wake et al. (2004) found that the clustering of narrow-line AGNs in the redshift range 0:055 < z < 0:2, selected using emission-line ux ratios, have the same correlation amplitude as normal galaxies. Our samples are not a very good probe at these redshifts, and the best clustering analysis at a comparable redshift for normal galaxies is from DEEP2 (Coil et al. 162 Figure 62: Evolution of Eddington ratio. Solid line: Using the luminosity function from Barger et al. (2005). Dashed line: using luminosity function from Ueda et al. (2001) at z < 1:2. 163 2004). At efiective redhsift zeff ? 1, they found r0 = 3:19?0:51 h?1 Mpc, and = 1:68?0:07, which translates to ??(20) ? 0:1. The correlation amplitude from CLASXS at z = 0:9 is ??(20) ? 0:33+0:20?0:16. Considering the redshift-space distortion (?(s)=?(r) ? 1:4 at z ? 1), the clustering of AGNs in CLASXS fleld is marginally consistent with the clustering of normal galaxies in DEEP2, but probably larger. On the other hand, the clustering amplitude in the CDFN at a similar redshift is signiflcantly higher, but we cannot rule out the possibility that the stronger cluster- ing is a result of cosmic variance. At higher redshifts, the best estimate for galaxy clustering is from the so called \Lyman break galaxies", named after the technique by which they are found. Adelberger et al. (1998) found, at a typical z ? 3, these galaxies tend to have similar correlation function as galaxies in the local universe, indicating they are highly biased tracers of the large scale structure. In the ?CDM cosmology, these authors found b = 4:0?0:7. This is very similar to the bias found in the highest bin of our Chandra flelds (mainly from the CLASXS fleld), which has a median redshift of?2:0. If we extrapolate the bias of the X-ray sources to z = 3, the bias of X-ray sources should be ? 5?7, higher than that of Lymann break galaxies. 6.7 Conclusion In this Chapter we study the clustering and evolution of clustering of Chandra selected AGNs with optically identifled AGNs from the 0.4 deg2 Chandra contiguous survey of the Lockman Hole Northwest region, CLASXS. The size of fleld is large 164 enough to produce a fair sample of X-ray selected AGNs. We supplement our study by employing the published data of the CDFN, which uses exactly the same optical follow-up instrumentation and allows an estimate of correlation functions and systematic errors in both samples in a consistent way. The very similar LogN- LogS of CLASXS and CDFN also suggests that cosmic variance should not be important when the CDFN is included in the analysis. The very deep CDFN gives a better probe of the correlation function at small separations. A total of 233 non- stellar sources from CLASXS and 252 sources from CDFN are used in this study. Correlation function are computed in the redshift-space for both samples. For the whole sample, we have also performed an analysis using the projected correlation. Though noisier and restricted by the angular size of the fleld, the method is not afiected by the redshift-space distortion, which allows us to quantify the efiect. We summarize our results as follows: ? We calculated the redshift-space correlation function for sources with 0:1 < z < 3:0 in both the CLASXS and CDFN flelds, assuming constant clustering in comoving coordinates. We found a 6:7 clustering for pairs within s < 20 Mpc in the CLASXS fleld. The real-space correlation function over scales from 3 Mpc< s < 200 Mpc is found to be a power-law with = 1:6+0:4?0:3 and s0 = 8:05+1:4?1:5 Mpc. The redshift-space correlation function for CDFN on scales of 1 Mpc< s < 100 Mpc is found to have similar correlation length s0 = 8:55+0:75?0:74 Mpc, but the slope is shallower ( = 1:3?0:1). The power-law slope in both flelds tends to be shallower at small separations. 165 ? We study the projected correlation function of both CLASXS and CDFN. The best-flt parameters for the real-space correlation functions are found to be r0 = 8:1+1:2?2:2 Mpc, = 2:1?0:5 for CLASXS fleld, and r0 = 5:8+1:0?1:5 Mpc, = 1:38+0:12?0:14 for CDFN fleld. Our result for the CDFN shows perfect agreement with the published results from Gilli et al. (2004). Fitting the combined data from both flelds gives r0 = 6:1+0:4?1:0 Mpc and = 1:47+0:07?0:10. ? Comparing the redshift- and real-space correlation function of the combined CLASXS and CDFN flelds, we found the redshift distortion parameter fl = 0:4?0:2 at an efiective redshift z = 0:94. Under the assumption of ?CDM cosmology, this implies a bias parameter b?2:04?1:02 for the X-ray selected AGN. ? We tested whether the clustering of the X-ray sources is dependent on the X-ray spectra in the CLASXS fleld. Using a hardness ratio cut at HR = 0:7, we found no signiflcant difierence in clustering between hard and soft sources. This agrees with previous claims. ? With the large dynamic range in X-ray luminosity, we found very weak corre- lation between X-ray luminosity and clustering amplitude. We show that the data agrees with the expectations of the simplest model based on observations that connects the X-ray luminosity with the dark matter halo mass. ? We studied the evolution of the clustering using the redshift-space correlation function in 4 redshift intervals from ranging from 0.1 and 3.0. We found only a 166 mild evolution of AGN clustering in both CLASXS and CDFN samples. This qualitatively agrees with the results based on optically selected quasars from 2dF survey. The X-ray samples, however, show an equal or higher correlation amplitude than that of the 2dF sample. This again shows the correlation amplitude is insensitive to luminosity. ? We estimate the evolution of bias by comparing the observed clustering am- plitude with expectations of the linear evolution of density uctuations. The result shows that the bias increases rapidly with redshift (b(z = 0:44) = 1:83 and b(z = 2:0) = 4:18 in CLASXS fleld). This agrees with the flndings from 2dF. ? Using the bias evolution model for dark halos from Sheth, Mo & Tormen (2001), we estimated the characteristic mass of AGNs in each redshift interval. We found the mass of the dark halo changes very little with redshift. The average halo mass is found to be log (Mhalo=Mfl)?12:4. Our results have demonstrated that deep X-ray surveys are a very powerful tool in probing large scale structure at z ? 0:5 ? 2. The higher spatial density and much better completeness compared to current optical surveys allows us to study clustering on scales only accessible to very large optical surveys such as the 2dF and the SDSS. Good quality optical identiflcations and redshift measurements are critical for the clustering analysis. This is best achieved by the high spatial resolution of Chandra, which provides accurate enough positions for unambiguous identiflcations. Since our results on the evolution of AGN clustering could still be afiected by a small 167 number of large scale structures, as seen in Chandra Deep Field South, which also might be the cause of higher clustering amplitude at z ? 1 in CDFN fleld, larger flelds are still needed to improve the measurements. 168 Chapter 7 Conclusions In this dissertation, I have presented the observation and analysis of the mod- erate deep 0.4 deg2 contiguous CLASXS survey. The X-ray sources are rigorously followed-up with large optical telescopes Keck and Subaru. The survey is so far the largest Chandra deep survey with high level of redshift completeness. The highlights from this work are: ? The number counts of hard X-ray selected AGNs at ? 10?14 ergcm?2 s?1 is better determined. The result agrees in general with other serendipitous sur- veys. Combined with the results from CDFN and ASCA observations, the 2-8 keV CXB is resolved within the error margin of the CXB itself. ? The at spectra sources dominates the AGNs only at 2{8 keV uxes below 10?14 ergcm?2 s?1 . This is why the hard X-ray sources were not detected in large numbers in pre-Chandra X-ray missions. ? Many of the bright sources show variability in X-ray. ? A 6:7 clustering is detected using the point sources in CLASXS which have redshift measurements. The correlation function of the CLASXS sample agrees with that found in CDFN. The correlation amplitude from the X-ray survey agrees with that found using optical selected quasars. 169 ? The correlation function does not depend strongly on the X-ray luminosity. ? The clustering evolution of the X-ray selected AGNs is measured for the flrst time using spatial correlation function. The clustering amplitude in comoving coordinate only show mild evolution. ? AGNs are biased tracers of the large scale structure. The bias increase very fast with redshift. From the X-ray luminosity function derived from this and other large Chandra survey, Barger et al. (2005) conclude that, in the redshift range 0 . z . 1:2, the luminosity of AGNs drop steadily with redshift. The AGN activity seems to quite down, just like star formation. On the other hand, the typical dark halo mass inferred from clustering seem to be rather stable over a wide range of redshifts and luminosity. This seem to be at odds with the the picture of pure gravitational collapse, where the density contrast determines the formation of galaxies or cluster of galaxies. The implication is that the growth of SMBH must has gone through some highly non-linear process, dominated by gas dynamics, and feedback processes from star formation and AGN activity. We have shown that even with a fleld as small as ours, we are able to estimated the redshift distortion at z ? 1. The importance of this parameter cannot be overstated, because it carries direct information of the mass density at high redshift. Only optical surveys like the 2dF and SDSS have achieved this. This result shows the potential of X-ray selected AGNs in the study of cosmology. 170 X-ray deep surveys are very powerful in flnding AGNs in large numbers. This provides unique opertunity to study both AGNs and cosmology with large samples of X-ray selected AGNs. To achieve the same signal-to-noise ratio as the 2dF, a survey with similar depth as ours would only need to be a few square degrees. The advantage of Chandra is that it can provide enough accuracy for optical identifl- cation, but it not as powerful as XMM-Newton. The X-ray telescopes studied for the near future will mostly focus on spectroscopy rather than imaging, Chandra probably will be the only telescope to have the capability. An alternative approach to the clustering of AGNs is to use powerful telescopes such as XMM and obtain redshift through photometric redshift. The identiflcation is still the biggest problem for sources dimmer than R = 24. Dim sources have to be identifled with the help of other AGN features. As most of the dim sources are optical normal, the task is hard. Photometric redshift can constrain redhsifts of known normal galaxies to a norminal ?z ? 0:1. It is unclear how this method perform on AGNs. If a wide fleld survey to reach a hundred sources per square degree, the optical magnitude of most of the sources at such ux level are well correlated with their X-ray ux. The identiflcation at these magnitudes will be unique. Such surveys over a large fleld will improve signiflcantly on the clustering of AGNs. 171 Appendix A CLASXS X-ray Catalog This appendix includes the CLASXS X-ray catalog. The line-to-line descrip- tion of the catalog can be found in Chapter 3. In Table A.1, we list the source positions, uxes, and hardness ratios. In Ta- ble A.2, we list the source net counts, efiective exposures, and detection information. Table A.1: Basic properties Column 1: Source number used in the catalog. The numbers correspond to ascending order of right ascension. Column 2: Source name follows the IAU convention and should read CXC- CLASXS, plus the name given in the table. Columns 3 { 4: The X-ray position, corrected for the aspect errors of the telescope, if applicable, and for the general astrometric solution by comparing with the optical images (see x 3.2.3). For sources with multiple detections in the three bands and the 9 observations, the best position is taken. Columns 5 { 6: Statistical error of the X-ray position quoted from the wavdetect lists. Columns 7 { 9 : X-ray uxes in the soft, hard, and full bands in units of 10?15 ergcm?2 s?1 . If a source is detected in multiple observations, and if there are more than one observation in which the source efiective area is more than 80% of the efiective area at the aim point, then the mean ux is used; otherwise, the ux 172 from the observation that has the largest efiective area is used. The errors quoted are the 1 upper and lower limits, using the approximations from Gehrels (1986). For any source detected in one band but with a very weak signal in another, the background subtracted ux could be negative. In this case, only the upper limit is quoted. Columns 10: Hardness ratio. The upper or lower limit is listed for a source with no net extracted photons in the soft or hard bands. Table A.2: Additional Properties Column 1: Source number. Columns 2{4: Net counts in the soft, hard, and full bands. If a source is detected in multiple observations, then the observation in which the source has the largest efiective area (see Column 8) is used. As in Table 2a, for the sources with negative counts, only the upper limits are listed. Columns 5{7: Efiective exposure time in each of the three energy bands from the exposure map. Columns 8{9: Detection information. Column 8 is the LHNW fleld number where the source has the largest efiective area. Column 9 lists the LHNW fleld numbers (each digit represents a fleld number) in which the source has been detected in at least one of the three bands. Sources with multiple detections are necessary for the detection of variability (see x 3.6). 173 Table A.1. Main Chandra Catalog: Basic Source Properties # name fi2000 ?2000 ?fi(00) ??(00) f0:4?2:0keV f2:0?8:0keV f0:4?8:0keV HR 1 J103055.6+573319 10 30 55.62 +57 33 20.0 1.283 0.493 3.8+0:79?1:1 3.7+1:4?2:5 7.5+1:4?1:9 0.299 2 J103059.6+573844 10 30 59.68 +57 38 44.2 1.287 0.350 1.8+0:52?0:75 5.3+2:1?2:5 5+1:3?1:9 0.691 3 J103103.3+573650 10 31 03.32 +57 36 50.4 0.845 0.560 3.2+0:68?0:92 13+3?3:9 16+2:5?3:3 0.870 4 J103106.0+573748 10 31 06.06 +57 37 48.4 0.977 0.517 3.7+0:82?1:3 0.74+0:67?0:94 4.3+0:91?1:2 0.090 5 J103111.8+573521 10 31 11.83 +57 35 21.7 0.849 0.456 3.2+0:87?1:1 0.91+0:54?1:6 4+1?1:1 0.118 6 J103122.0+573134 10 31 22.06 +57 31 34.6 0.834 0.243 3.7+0:81?0:89 19+3:9?4:6 21+3:1?3:8 1.040 7 J103123.5+574309 10 31 23.55 +57 43 09.3 0.488 0.241 15+1:2?1:3 25+2:9?3:3 40+2:6?2:7 0.375 8 J103126.5+573743 10 31 26.59 +57 37 43.4 0.262 0.176 1.2+0:39?0:66 4.9+1:8?2:7 6.5+1:8?2 0.882 9 J103129.8+573712 10 31 29.84 +57 37 12.4 0.378 0.150 2.5+0:55?0:83 11+2:7?3:6 14+2:4?2:9 0.951 10 J103129.8+573243 10 31 29.86 +57 32 43.6 0.687 0.215 0.34+0:23?0:43 0.78+0:69?1:4 1.8+0:81?1:1 0.566 11 J103131.2+573934 10 31 31.26 +57 39 34.7 0.281 0.115 16+1:9?2:2 8+2:3?3 24+2:6?3:1 0.183 12 J103131.4+574334 10 31 31.49 +57 43 34.9 1.071 0.511 2.3+0:62?0:77 5.2+1:7?2:7 6.5+1:4?2 0.563 13 J103133.4+574211 10 31 33.41 +57 42 11.1 0.611 0.294 2+0:53?0:86 5.6+1:8?3:1 9.3+2?2:2 0.651 14 J103133.8+573909 10 31 33.83 +57 39 09.6 0.435 0.136 3+0:72?1:1 1.2+0:83?1:3 4.1+0:93?1:3 0.153 15 J103134.4+574223 10 31 34.41 +57 42 24.0 0.443 0.166 14+1:1?1:2 23+2:8?3:2 35+2:4?2:6 0.335 16 J103134.7+574446 10 31 34.71 +57 44 46.3 0.412 0.188 27+2:1?2:3 48+5:6?6:2 76+4:8?5:4 0.468 17 J103135.3+574304 10 31 35.35 +57 43 04.5 1.113 0.367 3.5+0:98?1:2 0.34+0:27?1:3 2.6+0:7?0:89 0.052 18 J103136.0+573312 10 31 36.01 +57 33 12.0 0.818 0.189 1.3+0:6?0:75 0.56+0:47?1:5 2+0:73?1:1 0.162 19 J103136.4+574312 10 31 36.48 +57 43 12.7 0.695 0.523 0.47+0:23?0:58 4.5+1:7?3:8 6.7+2:2?2:7 1.738 20 J103137.0+573200 10 31 37.08 +57 32 00.6 0.561 0.319 8.1+1:4?1:5 <2.1 7.9+1:2?1:6 <0.109 21 J103137.7+574004 10 31 37.75 +57 40 04.4 0.238 0.195 1.1+0:34?0:61 7.8+2:7?2:8 8.2+2?2:4 1.385 22 J103139.2+574027 10 31 39.22 +57 40 28.0 0.394 0.206 2.9+0:67?0:97 2.2+1:1?1:6 5.3+1:2?1:4 0.247 23 J103139.9+573838 10 31 39.92 +57 38 38.8 0.364 0.107 2.4+0:6?0:8 4+1:3?2:5 6.8+1:4?1:8 0.447 24 J103140.4+574235 10 31 40.47 +57 42 35.8 0.490 0.209 4.3+0:75?1 16+3:1?4:4 20+2:7?3:4 0.835 25 J103140.7+573103 10 31 40.79 +57 31 03.5 1.334 0.333 5+1:5?2:2 <0.0028 0.76+0:25?0:26 0.001 26 J103140.9+574116 10 31 40.94 +57 41 16.2 0.611 0.220 3.2+1?1:3 <0.082 1.4+0:44?0:63 0.019 27 J103141.1+573741 10 31 41.13 +57 37 41.7 0.286 0.112 3.1+0:75?0:92 2.7+1:1?2 6.3+1:2?1:7 0.279 28 J103142.0+573015 10 31 42.04 +57 30 15.8 0.460 0.229 9.4+1:2?1:5 26+4?5:4 35+3:7?4 0.656 29 J103143.3+573252 10 31 43.33 +57 32 52.6 0.146 0.057 41+2:6?2:7 92+7:6?8:4 130+6:5?7 0.555 30 J103143.3+573157 10 31 43.38 +57 31 57.6 0.425 0.155 13+1:7?1:8 14+2:9?4:2 27+2:9?3:4 0.317 31 J103143.7+574903 10 31 43.77 +57 49 03.9 0.974 0.560 1.9+0:64?1 5.3+2:3?3:6 7.1+1:8?2:8 0.653 32 J103145.8+573401 10 31 45.85 +57 34 01.8 0.227 0.099 4.6+0:83?1 27+4:7?5:2 32+3:8?4:6 1.163 33 J103145.8+573344 10 31 45.89 +57 33 44.7 0.436 0.204 2.9+0:65?0:87 6.7+1:8?3:1 9.4+1:9?2 0.566 34 J103145.9+573047 10 31 45.90 +57 30 48.0 0.621 0.614 1.4+0:43?0:77 2.1+1:2?1:9 3.1+1:1?1:2 0.417 35 J103146.0+574038 10 31 46.00 +57 40 38.8 0.240 0.125 2.4+0:54?0:84 15+3:3?4:3 15+2:7?3:2 1.222 36 J103147.6+573104 10 31 47.65 +57 31 04.1 0.517 0.259 2.6+0:76?1:1 0.4+0:33?1:3 2.2+0:64?0:9 0.074 37 J103148.1+574339 10 31 48.18 +57 43 39.8 0.915 0.420 2.1+0:69?0:71 <3.5 4.5+1:2?1:7 <0.444 38 J103148.2+574231 10 31 48.20 +57 42 31.2 0.364 0.334 1.3+0:45?0:61 8.2+2:7?3:1 8.4+1:9?2:8 1.265 39 J103148.3+574009 10 31 48.36 +57 40 09.6 0.264 0.122 0.52+0:25?0:43 13+3:3?4:6 13+3:1?3:4 3.772 40 J103150.5+574247 10 31 50.57 +57 42 47.4 0.256 0.161 14+1:1?1:2 23+2:8?3:1 37+2:4?2:6 0.468 41 J103150.9+574349 10 31 50.92 +57 43 49.1 0.286 0.148 18+1:3?1:4 21+2:6?2:9 39+2:4?2:6 0.349 42 J103154.8+574520 10 31 54.89 +57 45 20.9 0.725 0.390 1.7+0:49?0:73 13+3:2?4:1 14+2:9?3:2 1.396 43 J103155.3+574350 10 31 55.30 +57 43 50.7 0.497 0.247 1.8+0:37?0:45 20+3?3:4 21+2:5?2:8 1.847 44 J103156.3+574723 10 31 56.39 +57 47 23.2 0.476 0.209 5.8+0:73?0:83 7.8+1:6?2 13+1:4?1:6 0.224 45 J103156.6+573846 10 31 56.63 +57 38 46.0 0.078 0.033 12+1:4?1:4 64+6:4?7:3 75+5:4?6:2 1.079 46 J103157.3+574752 10 31 57.39 +57 47 52.1 0.372 0.127 15+1:5?1:9 17+3:2?3:9 31+2:9?3:4 0.342 47 J103158.7+573100 10 31 58.77 +57 31 00.1 0.500 0.265 4.7+0:99?1:1 3.3+1:2?2:2 8+1:4?1:8 0.229 48 J103159.9+574411 10 31 59.99 +57 44 11.3 0.363 0.193 3.7+0:51?0:59 100+7?7:5 97+6?6:4 3.374 49 J103201.3+573639 10 32 01.33 +57 36 39.3 0.281 0.203 0.53+0:24?0:46 2.5+1:1?2:3 2.8+1:1?1:5 0.986 50 J103201.5+574415 10 32 01.52 +57 44 15.8 0.469 0.192 7.7+0:79?0:87 18+2:4?2:8 24+2:1?2:2 0.579 51 J103202.0+573607 10 32 02.01 +57 36 07.5 0.169 0.118 1.5+0:46?0:66 3.3+1:6?1:7 5+1:2?1:7 0.548 52 J103202.9+573208 10 32 02.95 +57 32 08.7 0.161 0.074 25+2?2:2 47+5:4?6:1 72+4:9?4:9 0.480 174 Table A.1|Continued # name fi2000 ?2000 ?fi(00) ??(00) f0:4?2:0keV f2:0?8:0keV f0:4?8:0keV HR 53 J103203.7+575211 10 32 03.79 +57 52 11.4 0.734 0.322 5.1+0:92?1 21+3:7?4:9 28+3:4?3:9 0.878 54 J103203.8+573459 10 32 03.82 +57 34 59.1 0.378 0.161 1.1+0:39?0:57 2.2+0:97?2:1 3.3+0:89?1:5 0.533 55 J103205.0+573554 10 32 05.10 +57 35 54.9 0.433 0.150 0.24+0:15?0:42 2.8+1:7?2 2.8+1:2?1:9 2.031 56 J103205.1+573600 10 32 05.11 +57 36 00.0 0.381 0.174 0.68+0:32?0:59 0.58+0:5?1:3 0.9+0:55?0:66 0.267 57 J103205.1+573854 10 32 05.12 +57 38 54.9 0.201 0.224 0.43+0:24?0:41 2.2+1:3?1:7 2.4+0:94?1:6 1.060 58 J103205.8+574427 10 32 05.83 +57 44 27.5 0.464 0.154 5.7+0:76?0:86 4.9+1:2?1:6 10+1:2?1:3 0.098 59 J103206.5+574817 10 32 06.51 +57 48 17.4 0.533 0.149 3.2+0:65?0:97 5.6+1:8?2:5 7.9+1:4?2:1 0.464 60 J103206.7+574546 10 32 06.74 +57 45 46.5 0.431 0.121 4.9+0:64?0:73 7.7+1:5?1:9 12+1:4?1:5 0.447 61 J103208.3+574122 10 32 08.38 +57 41 22.9 0.314 0.092 0.39+0:28?0:34 0.74+0:66?1:2 1.8+0:65?1:2 0.499 62 J103209.7+573850 10 32 09.77 +57 38 50.3 0.118 0.082 5.5+0:66?0:74 11+1:9?2:2 17+1:6?1:8 0.548 63 J103210.0+575012 10 32 10.08 +57 50 12.5 0.675 0.182 1.4+0:5?0:58 4.2+1:8?2:2 6.2+1:5?1:9 0.688 64 J103210.8+574300 10 32 10.82 +57 43 00.9 0.583 0.393 0.8+0:35?0:53 2.2+1:3?1:7 3.4+1:2?1:4 0.651 65 J103211.9+573228 10 32 11.96 +57 32 28.6 0.249 0.232 0.42+0:21?0:5 1.1+0:69?2 1.7+0:7?1:3 0.654 66 J103212.7+574534 10 32 12.70 +57 45 34.2 0.516 0.106 1.5+0:37?0:47 1.3+0:85?1:7 2.1+0:52?0:67 <0.359 67 J103213.2+573420 10 32 13.27 +57 34 20.6 0.162 0.101 2.1+0:49?0:75 13+3:3?3:5 14+2:7?2:8 1.208 68 J103213.5+574826 10 32 13.53 +57 48 26.2 0.316 0.271 1.5+0:64?1:1 13+4:3?7:2 13+3:6?5:9 1.586 69 J103213.7+575249 10 32 13.72 +57 52 49.1 0.689 0.366 3.9+0:72?1 20+3:6?5:1 22+3:1?3:8 1.052 70 J103214.3+573228 10 32 14.33 +57 32 28.6 0.359 0.220 3.3+0:7?1 4.5+1:7?2:4 7.4+1:5?1:9 0.382 71 J103214.7+575246 10 32 14.75 +57 52 47.0 0.571 0.275 5.1+0:67?0:76 25+3:3?3:8 30+2:8?3:1 1.235 72 J103214.9+575350 10 32 14.97 +57 53 50.2 1.374 0.450 0.43+0:31?0:43 3.3+1:9?2:7 2.5+1:1?2:2 1.442 73 J103215.1+574749 10 32 15.16 +57 47 49.8 0.487 0.138 0.26+0:17?0:38 5.9+2:6?2:9 7.1+2:4?2:7 3.403 74 J103215.4+573247 10 32 15.45 +57 32 47.4 0.494 0.290 0.59+0:28?0:46 8+2:7?3:6 8.4+2?3:3 2.307 75 J103215.8+574926 10 32 15.89 +57 49 26.1 0.098 0.039 87+4?4:3 91+7:5?8:4 180+7:3?7:6 0.315 76 J103216.7+574615 10 32 16.76 +57 46 15.6 0.253 0.084 2.4+0:56?0:77 14+3?4 16+2:6?3:4 1.167 77 J103217.1+575143 10 32 17.10 +57 51 43.7 0.779 0.372 1.5+0:45?0:64 8.5+2:7?3 9.3+2:1?2:6 1.165 78 J103218.1+573830 10 32 18.12 +57 38 30.1 0.180 0.089 6.5+0:62?0:68 6.4+1:1?1:3 13+1:1?1:2 0.289 79 J103219.1+573945 10 32 19.12 +57 39 45.8 0.382 0.389 0.35+0:24?0:42 <7.3 <5 <3.193 80 J103220.0+573420 10 32 20.03 +57 34 20.9 0.305 0.183 0.29+0:2?0:33 9.7+3?4:1 8.8+2:3?3:8 4.764 81 J103220.2+573211 10 32 20.23 +57 32 11.5 0.353 0.219 6.2+1?1:2 8.8+2:5?2:8 14+2?2:5 0.396 82 J103220.3+575658 10 32 20.37 +57 56 58.4 0.890 0.655 1.9+0:68?0:73 9.1+3:1?3:9 9.7+2:6?2:8 1.013 83 J103220.8+574921 10 32 20.89 +57 49 21.8 0.606 0.193 1.5+0:47?0:69 <2.8 2.7+0:88?1:3 <0.476 84 J103221.2+573754 10 32 21.21 +57 37 54.9 0.381 0.107 0.97+0:45?0:84 <0.076 0.59+0:25?0:61 0.045 85 J103221.7+573356 10 32 21.80 +57 33 56.4 0.235 0.136 1.5+0:44?0:74 5.9+2?2:9 6.4+1:6?2:1 0.846 86 J103222.1+573654 10 32 22.19 +57 36 54.7 0.121 0.101 3.2+0:5?0:58 7.2+1:5?1:8 10+1:3?1:5 0.515 87 J103222.2+573934 10 32 22.29 +57 39 34.8 0.144 0.090 4.3+0:48?0:54 15+2:3?2:7 16+1:4?1:5 0.498 88 J103222.8+573528 10 32 22.81 +57 35 28.5 0.249 0.232 0.44+0:25?0:42 <3.7 1.5+0:77?1:6 <1.568 89 J103222.9+575551 10 32 22.90 +57 55 51.0 0.654 0.240 24+1:6?1:7 31+3:3?3:7 56+3:1?3:3 0.409 90 J103222.9+573648 10 32 22.94 +57 36 48.5 0.226 0.169 0.98+0:35?0:69 0.77+0:69?1 1.5+0:56?0:93 0.252 91 J103223.3+573836 10 32 23.38 +57 38 36.8 0.325 0.000 0.43+0:23?0:47 1+0:59?1:9 2.4+0:9?1:2 0.581 92 J103224.1+573301 10 32 24.19 +57 33 01.4 0.460 0.191 2.9+0:48?0:57 6.3+1:4?1:8 8.8+1:2?1:4 0.454 93 J103224.6+575950 10 32 24.66 +57 59 50.2 1.120 0.454 5.7+1:2?1:3 4.3+1:7?2:7 8.7+1:8?1:9 0.245 94 J103224.9+573153 10 32 25.00 +57 31 53.8 1.075 0.384 7.4+0:78?0:86 26+3:2?3:6 33+2:6?2:8 1.375 95 J103225.0+572814 10 32 25.08 +57 28 14.2 0.716 0.321 14+1:5?1:8 24+4:4?4:4 38+3:7?3:9 0.451 96 J103226.0+574851 10 32 26.06 +57 48 51.7 0.491 0.134 1.6+0:51?0:76 0.87+0:53?1:5 2.3+0:75?0:94 0.193 97 J103227.0+573831 10 32 27.01 +57 38 31.4 0.210 0.114 1.2+0:4?0:61 3.8+1:4?2:6 6+1:6?1:8 0.735 98 J103227.1+574548 10 32 27.14 +57 45 48.1 0.419 0.121 0.82+0:31?0:52 5.5+1:9?2:9 6.2+1:5?2:4 1.318 99 J103227.9+573822 10 32 27.97 +57 38 22.5 0.059 0.041 33+1:3?1:4 51+3:2?3:4 82+2:9?3 0.490 100 J103228.3+575109 10 32 28.39 +57 51 09.3 0.461 0.239 4.8+0:69?0:79 4+1:1?1:5 9.1+1:1?1:3 0.331 101 J103228.6+575446 10 32 28.68 +57 54 46.1 0.860 0.460 1.9+0:65?0:71 9.1+2:9?3:7 11+2:5?3 0.994 102 J103229.0+573456 10 32 29.03 +57 34 56.2 0.584 0.216 7.8+0:83?0:92 9.4+1:7?2:1 17+1:6?1:7 0.266 103 J103229.0+574100 10 32 29.06 +57 41 00.2 0.343 0.252 0.92+0:4?0:46 7.3+2:6?2:9 7.9+1:8?2:8 1.505 104 J103229.4+574129 10 32 29.41 +57 41 29.1 0.394 0.347 4.7+0:71?0:83 1.8+0:69?1 5.8+0:8?0:91 0.308 175 Table A.1|Continued # name fi2000 ?2000 ?fi(00) ??(00) f0:4?2:0keV f2:0?8:0keV f0:4?8:0keV HR 105 J103229.9+572939 10 32 29.94 +57 29 39.2 1.193 0.645 1.4+0:51?0:61 8.9+2:8?3:7 10+2:1?3:3 1.261 106 J103230.8+575539 10 32 30.89 +57 55 39.8 0.992 0.271 6.2+1:1?1:5 4.1+1:7?2:4 9.9+1:8?2:1 0.225 107 J103232.9+574915 10 32 32.91 +57 49 15.6 0.203 0.165 0.8+0:38?0:66 0.25+0:18?1:4 1.2+0:56?0:63 0.127 108 J103233.3+574811 10 32 33.35 +57 48 11.0 0.256 0.136 0.51+0:23?0:47 4.5+1:9?2:5 4.4+1:4?2 1.633 109 J103233.5+573720 10 32 33.59 +57 37 20.4 0.267 0.144 1.5+0:32?0:4 6.5+1:5?1:9 6.9+1:2?1:4 1.103 110 J103233.6+574353 10 32 33.69 +57 43 53.6 0.154 0.066 5.4+0:65?0:74 11+1:9?2:3 17+1:7?1:8 0.673 111 J103233.8+575624 10 32 33.81 +57 56 24.4 0.311 0.224 2+0:65?0:75 <5.1 4.5+1:5?1:7 <0.627 112 J103234.1+575622 10 32 34.18 +57 56 22.8 0.433 0.299 3.5+0:96?1:1 1.1+0:71?1:7 4.6+1:2?1:3 0.130 113 J103234.6+574210 10 32 34.68 +57 42 10.5 0.458 0.225 0.4+0:22?0:41 6.3+2:6?2:8 5+1:8?2:3 2.582 114 J103236.1+580033 10 32 36.17 +58 00 33.4 0.441 0.212 31+2:7?2:8 21+3:7?4:8 53+4:1?4:4 0.230 115 J103236.8+574743 10 32 36.81 +57 47 43.7 0.172 0.133 0.96+0:37?0:61 1.1+0:74?1:4 2.7+0:88?1 0.338 116 J103236.8+573521 10 32 36.87 +57 35 21.2 0.602 0.353 2.8+0:85?0:95 0.22+0:17?1:1 2.2+0:58?0:73 0.043 117 J103237.3+573339 10 32 37.31 +57 33 39.3 0.714 0.698 2.1+0:65?1:3 <0.06 0.97+0:38?0:46 0.020 118 J103237.5+574837 10 32 37.57 +57 48 37.5 0.196 0.193 0.95+0:36?0:64 0.87+0:52?1:6 1.9+0:58?1:1 0.284 119 J103237.5+575209 10 32 37.59 +57 52 09.3 0.575 0.471 2.1+0:44?0:54 3.5+1:1?1:5 6+1?1:2 0.509 120 J103239.3+575311 10 32 39.38 +57 53 11.6 0.210 0.070 40+1:9?2 63+4:6?5 100+4:2?4:4 0.435 121 J103239.4+574035 10 32 39.42 +57 40 35.5 0.157 0.170 15+1:1?1:2 24+2:8?3:1 40+2:5?2:6 0.574 122 J103239.4+573737 10 32 39.46 +57 37 37.3 0.683 0.362 1.4+0:33?0:42 3.4+1:1?1:4 4.5+0:88?1:1 0.432 123 J103240.0+573520 10 32 40.02 +57 35 20.5 0.771 0.339 1.4+0:32?0:41 2.8+1:7?3:3 3.8+0:77?0:94 <0.534 124 J103240.1+574512 10 32 40.11 +57 45 12.6 0.268 0.120 1.6+0:51?0:69 1.6+0:85?1:6 3.1+0:95?1 0.296 125 J103240.2+575205 10 32 40.20 +57 52 05.5 0.470 0.270 1.8+0:58?0:61 4.9+1:5?2:8 7.3+1:5?2:1 0.660 126 J103241.4+574807 10 32 41.47 +57 48 07.2 0.143 0.136 1.4+0:47?0:72 1.3+0:9?1:3 2.8+0:97?1 0.285 127 J103241.7+574332 10 32 41.78 +57 43 32.9 0.267 0.145 0.11+0:094?0:29 14+4:2?4:9 12+3:2?5:3 13.67 128 J103242.0+574005 10 32 42.02 +57 40 05.7 0.481 0.381 0.76+0:23?0:31 21+3:3?3:8 20+2:8?3:2 4.792 129 J103242.3+574426 10 32 42.32 +57 44 26.4 0.804 0.359 6.5+0:73?0:82 13+2:1?2:4 20+1:8?2 0.591 130 J103242.5+573006 10 32 42.58 +57 30 06.8 1.069 0.355 3.3+1?1:4 <5.6 6.6+1:8?3 <0.444 131 J103242.5+575620 10 32 42.58 +57 56 20.8 0.349 0.173 7.9+1:3?1:7 5.3+1:7?2:9 14+2:2?2:3 0.226 132 J103242.8+573159 10 32 42.83 +57 31 59.7 0.783 0.486 3.1+0:77?0:9 <9.6 8.7+1:9?2:6 <0.714 133 J103242.8+574503 10 32 42.84 +57 45 03.5 0.075 0.046 12+1:3?1:7 26+4:5?4:7 37+3:8?3:8 0.556 134 J103243.4+574503 10 32 43.45 +57 45 03.1 0.588 0.240 15+1:1?1:2 25+2:8?3:2 40+2:5?2:7 0.442 135 J103243.7+574834 10 32 43.79 +57 48 34.1 0.369 0.176 0.6+0:29?0:49 <1.7 2.1+0:8?1:3 <0.677 136 J103243.8+573558 10 32 43.80 +57 35 58.6 0.460 0.245 1.2+0:31?0:4 3.7+1:1?1:5 4.6+0:91?1:1 1.268 137 J103244.2+575415 10 32 44.22 +57 54 15.7 0.329 0.363 0.84+0:35?0:62 5.9+2:6?2:8 4.5+1:4?2:5 1.351 138 J103244.9+574949 10 32 44.94 +57 49 49.5 0.262 0.149 2.4+0:46?0:56 5.2+1:4?1:8 6.7+1:1?1:3 0.242 139 J103245.0+573841 10 32 45.04 +57 38 41.2 0.558 0.196 1.1+0:3?0:39 4.1+1:2?1:6 4.9+0:99?1:2 1.112 140 J103246.5+575851 10 32 46.54 +57 58 51.8 0.438 0.156 9.6+1:4?1:6 14+3:4?3:7 24+2:9?3:2 0.405 141 J103247.0+575510 10 32 47.03 +57 55 10.5 0.591 0.135 2.8+0:72?1:1 <1.9 3.8+1?1:4 <0.231 142 J103247.7+575829 10 32 47.76 +57 58 29.3 0.671 0.276 1.6+0:54?0:84 <3.5 3.9+1:3?1:7 <0.551 143 J103247.9+575624 10 32 47.98 +57 56 24.2 0.386 0.180 3.9+0:91?1:1 7+2:2?3:3 10+2:1?2:3 0.468 144 J103248.2+573627 10 32 48.23 +57 36 27.4 0.428 0.261 1+0:37?0:55 2.3+1:1?1:9 3.2+1:1?1:2 0.552 145 J103248.6+574156 10 32 48.66 +57 41 56.5 0.253 0.084 0.84+0:24?0:32 8.2+1:9?2:4 7.5+1:4?1:7 12.12 146 J103248.6+574128 10 32 48.70 +57 41 28.8 0.430 0.216 2.6+0:35?0:41 19+2:2?2:5 21+1:9?2 0.935 147 J103248.7+573820 10 32 48.73 +57 38 20.8 0.435 0.145 2.2+0:71?0:76 0.82+0:48?1:5 3+0:81?1 0.141 148 J103250.2+580217 10 32 50.23 +58 02 17.5 0.878 0.332 6.8+1:3?1:4 6.4+2:5?2:6 13+2?2:6 0.289 149 J103250.5+573819 10 32 50.59 +57 38 19.2 0.501 0.000 0.32+0:23?0:29 <2.2 1.2+0:64?1:4 <1.313 150 J103251.2+575832 10 32 51.26 +57 58 32.1 0.223 0.136 11+1:6?1:9 10+2:9?3:4 21+2:8?2:9 0.277 151 J103252.1+574547 10 32 52.16 +57 45 47.4 0.152 0.067 2.8+0:46?0:54 5.5+1:3?1:7 8.2+1:1?1:3 0.578 152 J103252.5+574427 10 32 52.58 +57 44 27.4 0.263 0.155 1.2+0:45?0:71 0.57+0:5?1:1 2+0:64?0:91 0.169 153 J103253.0+575357 10 32 53.09 +57 53 57.1 0.419 0.181 0.65+0:3?0:57 5+1:7?3:6 5.5+1:9?2:3 1.448 154 J103253.2+574116 10 32 53.28 +57 41 16.1 0.579 0.276 2.8+0:41?0:48 2.5+0:7?0:93 5.6+0:71?0:81 0.445 155 J103253.9+574149 10 32 53.91 +57 41 49.6 0.268 0.121 7.5+0:51?0:55 12+1:3?1:4 20+1:1?1:2 0.373 156 J103254.5+575426 10 32 54.59 +57 54 26.8 0.000 0.000 0.4+0:26?0:57 0.33+0:24?1:8 0.82+0:41?0:97 0.261 176 Table A.1|Continued # name fi2000 ?2000 ?fi(00) ??(00) f0:4?2:0keV f2:0?8:0keV f0:4?8:0keV HR 157 J103256.1+574816 10 32 56.16 +57 48 16.9 0.114 0.073 5.4+0:48?0:52 17+1:8?2 21+1:5?1:6 0.667 158 J103257.5+574746 10 32 57.57 +57 47 47.0 0.187 0.099 2+0:61?0:84 0.54+0:48?1 2.4+0:68?0:91 0.115 159 J103257.7+574425 10 32 57.72 +57 44 25.1 0.177 0.192 0.95+0:41?0:66 0.32+0:25?1:3 1.1+0:55?0:62 0.135 160 J103258.0+572802 10 32 58.07 +57 28 02.0 1.130 0.374 1.7+0:49?0:79 4.8+2:1?2:5 5.9+1:7?1:8 0.670 161 J103259.1+575125 10 32 59.18 +57 51 25.2 0.775 0.619 1.5+0:47?0:88 0.75+0:68?1:1 1.9+0:64?1 0.179 162 J103259.7+575321 10 32 59.71 +57 53 21.2 0.229 0.137 2+0:58?0:89 2.3+1:4?1:7 4.4+1:3?1:4 0.346 163 J103301.7+574650 10 33 01.75 +57 46 51.0 0.000 0.000 0.79+0:35?0:52 2+1:1?1:9 2.3+0:82?1:4 0.606 164 J103301.9+574557 10 33 01.96 +57 45 57.7 0.230 0.107 0.56+0:27?0:46 <2.6 1.9+0:71?1:6 <0.976 165 J103302.4+572834 10 33 02.48 +57 28 34.6 0.538 0.296 15+1:1?1:2 29+3:1?3:4 45+2:7?2:9 0.605 166 J103302.7+580240 10 33 02.79 +58 02 40.7 0.592 0.311 6.1+0:99?1:4 19+3:9?5:1 26+3:4?3:9 0.720 167 J103303.6+575938 10 33 03.70 +57 59 38.2 0.326 0.337 0.81+0:32?0:64 5.4+2:2?3:2 6.2+1:8?2:5 1.290 168 J103303.9+573948 10 33 03.92 +57 39 48.8 0.140 0.201 0.84+0:32?0:54 3.1+1:2?2:4 2.4+1?1:3 0.795 169 J103304.1+573850 10 33 04.20 +57 38 50.5 0.253 0.168 0.85+0:35?0:62 0.38+0:31?1:2 1.4+0:47?0:85 0.161 170 J103305.4+574910 10 33 05.46 +57 49 10.0 0.229 0.143 0.94+0:19?0:23 23+2:5?2:7 21+2?2:2 2.723 171 J103307.0+574231 10 33 07.06 +57 42 31.2 0.487 0.201 4+0:42?0:47 3.9+0:76?0:93 7.7+0:72?0:8 0.137 172 J103308.0+573458 10 33 08.08 +57 34 58.1 0.348 0.104 0.75+0:28?0:5 7.2+2:2?3:2 5.5+1:7?2 1.708 173 J103308.3+574112 10 33 08.36 +57 41 12.1 0.382 0.213 0.47+0:2?0:47 2.4+1?2:3 2.1+0:96?1:2 1.025 174 J103308.3+573502 10 33 08.38 +57 35 02.0 0.255 0.136 0.74+0:28?0:49 8.9+2:3?3:8 4.9+1:7?2 2.048 175 J103308.8+575718 10 33 08.83 +57 57 18.9 0.171 0.069 4.3+0:89?1 10+2:9?3:3 16+2:6?2:8 0.590 176 J103308.8+573831 10 33 08.85 +57 38 31.7 0.098 0.046 7.3+0:67?0:74 5+0:97?1:2 12+0:98?1:1 0.106 177 J103308.8+575424 10 33 08.88 +57 54 24.6 0.201 0.106 0.59+0:31?0:64 1.8+1:2?2:4 2.9+1?2 0.712 178 J103309.3+575805 10 33 09.35 +57 58 05.7 0.272 0.121 0.99+0:36?0:69 5.9+2:1?3:5 5.6+1:8?2:4 1.199 179 J103310.3+574850 10 33 10.31 +57 48 50.5 0.851 0.513 0.29+0:14?0:22 11+2:3?3:1 10+2:1?2:6 5.120 180 J103310.3+575831 10 33 10.39 +57 58 31.4 0.371 0.108 0.68+0:3?0:63 <2.9 2.2+1:2?1:4 <0.915 181 J103310.5+572911 10 33 10.53 +57 29 11.3 0.711 0.300 7.1+0:86?0:97 2+0:71?1 7.5+0:88?0:99 0.180 182 J103310.5+574132 10 33 10.57 +57 41 32.5 0.283 0.146 3+0:35?0:4 5.9+0:98?1:2 8.6+0:84?0:93 0.316 183 J103310.9+574850 10 33 10.95 +57 48 50.4 0.803 0.428 0.39+0:18?0:22 9.4+2?3 7+1:5?2:2 3.591 184 J103312.2+574015 10 33 12.29 +57 40 15.6 0.243 0.135 0.12+0:1?0:27 6.5+2:4?3:6 5.5+2?3:1 6.845 185 J103312.3+574752 10 33 12.36 +57 47 52.2 0.165 0.108 <0.066 8.3+3:1?4:4 5.7+2:6?3:6 >13.56 186 J103312.5+573426 10 33 12.57 +57 34 26.8 0.133 0.066 7.7+0:81?0:9 21+3:9?4:5 32+3:5?3:5 0.551 187 J103312.6+574203 10 33 12.64 +57 42 03.8 0.202 0.108 <0.25 16+2:3?2:6 15+3:3?4:2 10.08 188 J103312.8+574202 10 33 12.89 +57 42 02.2 0.580 0.130 0.29+0:21?0:29 6.3+2?3:6 7.2+1:9?3:1 3.287 189 J103312.9+573406 10 33 12.97 +57 34 06.2 0.251 0.112 2.6+0:45?0:54 5.3+1:3?1:7 7.7+1:1?1:3 0.632 190 J103313.2+574026 10 33 13.21 +57 40 26.5 0.308 0.108 0.51+0:23?0:44 <2 1.7+0:68?1:3 <0.833 191 J103313.3+575141 10 33 13.38 +57 51 41.2 0.327 0.204 1.3+0:47?0:7 2.8+1:2?2:6 3.3+0:97?1:8 0.548 192 J103313.4+580452 10 33 13.45 +58 04 52.5 1.664 0.594 1.5+0:48?0:77 <9.4 4.1+1:3?2:7 <1.265 193 J103313.6+573554 10 33 13.62 +57 35 54.4 0.190 0.088 2.5+0:6?0:74 2.9+1:1?2 5.4+1:1?1:4 0.338 194 J103314.2+580037 10 33 14.26 +58 00 37.7 0.506 0.181 2+0:57?0:83 5.9+2:4?2:6 8.4+2?2:2 0.695 195 J103314.3+572544 10 33 14.34 +57 25 44.6 1.253 0.565 0.98+0:42?0:52 <3.7 2.7+0:9?1:7 <0.833 196 J103314.4+575701 10 33 14.46 +57 57 01.3 0.166 0.176 1.1+0:44?0:83 0.49+0:4?1:5 1.7+0:74?0:88 0.166 197 J103314.6+573449 10 33 14.65 +57 34 49.3 0.216 0.192 0.99+0:36?0:69 1.6+1:1?1:6 2.5+1?1:1 0.426 198 J103315.2+573959 10 33 15.21 +57 39 59.6 1.100 0.442 0.37+0:19?0:25 0.86+0:61?0:84 0.88+0:35?0:7 0.560 199 J103315.9+575028 10 33 16.00 +57 50 28.7 0.400 0.315 2.4+0:32?0:37 5.1+0:95?1:1 7.5+0:82?0:92 0.240 200 J103316.0+572253 10 33 16.01 +57 22 53.3 1.225 0.458 2.9+0:69?0:84 12+3:1?3:8 15+2:6?3 0.912 201 J103316.1+574244 10 33 16.17 +57 42 44.3 0.413 0.335 <0.16 5.7+1:5?1:9 5.1+1:2?1:5 10.23 202 J103316.5+572623 10 33 16.56 +57 26 23.9 0.375 0.159 8.1+1:2?1:5 4.8+1:5?2:4 13+1:8?2 0.206 203 J103317.1+575236 10 33 17.14 +57 52 36.5 1.007 0.512 1.1+0:29?0:48 0.75+0:54?0:66 2.3+0:57?0:66 0.218 204 J103317.6+573519 10 33 17.70 +57 35 19.1 0.980 0.448 5.1+0:67?0:77 9+1:7?2:1 14+1:6?1:7 0.705 205 J103318.1+572601 10 33 18.13 +57 26 01.4 0.311 0.105 18+1:7?2 22+3:4?4:6 41+3:5?3:7 0.359 206 J103319.0+575127 10 33 19.01 +57 51 27.2 0.291 0.216 2.6+0:33?0:37 7.5+1:2?1:4 9.8+0:99?1:1 0.659 207 J103319.3+572428 10 33 19.34 +57 24 28.4 0.616 0.617 1.8+0:57?0:69 4.6+1:6?2:7 6.3+1:6?1:8 0.612 208 J103319.3+575808 10 33 19.37 +57 58 09.0 0.099 0.059 11+1:6?1:7 6.8+2?2:7 19+2:4?2:4 0.210 177 Table A.1|Continued # name fi2000 ?2000 ?fi(00) ??(00) f0:4?2:0keV f2:0?8:0keV f0:4?8:0keV HR 209 J103319.3+573525 10 33 19.39 +57 35 25.4 0.092 0.060 4.4+0:57?0:65 19+2:6?3 23+2:2?2:4 0.654 210 J103319.4+572711 10 33 19.41 +57 27 11.3 0.525 0.177 2+0:56?0:73 5.7+1:7?3 7.6+1:6?2:1 0.663 211 J103319.9+572841 10 33 19.94 +57 28 41.5 0.462 0.136 3.9+0:98?1 1.3+0:93?1:2 5.1+1:1?1:3 0.133 212 J103319.9+574820 10 33 19.99 +57 48 20.7 0.465 0.175 4.4+0:44?0:49 7+1:1?1:3 11+0:96?1 0.356 213 J103320.1+573720 10 33 20.14 +57 37 20.1 0.179 0.075 2.5+0:65?0:87 0.65+0:59?0:82 2.8+0:64?0:96 0.108 214 J103321.1+573857 10 33 21.11 +57 38 57.0 0.199 0.123 0.77+0:34?0:51 0.65+0:58?0:97 1+0:4?0:83 0.259 215 J103321.2+573214 10 33 21.25 +57 32 14.2 0.154 0.075 22+1:1?1:2 25+2:2?2:5 47+2:1?2:2 0.287 216 J103321.4+573335 10 33 21.46 +57 33 35.0 0.229 0.123 <0.042 1.1+1?1:7 1.9+0:97?2 3.864 217 J103322.2+573259 10 33 22.24 +57 32 59.2 0.514 0.251 1+0:34?0:65 1.1+0:7?1:4 2.2+0:74?0:99 0.304 218 J103322.7+575858 10 33 22.71 +57 58 58.4 0.256 0.084 0.95+0:38?0:74 0.9+0:81?1:3 2.3+0:9?1:1 0.292 219 J103324.3+572445 10 33 24.34 +57 24 45.8 0.322 0.133 9.4+1:3?1:3 21+3:9?4:1 30+3:3?3:5 0.550 220 J103324.5+573754 10 33 24.55 +57 37 54.6 0.260 0.224 0.46+0:25?0:47 0.34+0:27?1:3 1.2+0:45?0:86 0.235 221 J103325.5+575634 10 33 25.51 +57 56 34.4 0.139 0.161 1.3+0:49?0:67 2.5+1:5?1:8 4+1:2?1:7 0.502 222 J103325.5+580038 10 33 25.58 +58 00 38.8 0.338 0.200 4.7+0:97?1:1 12+3:3?3:6 18+2:7?3:2 0.615 223 J103326.1+580120 10 33 26.17 +58 01 20.6 0.251 0.154 16+1:8?2 22+3:9?4:9 38+3:8?3:8 0.383 224 J103326.9+573304 10 33 26.92 +57 33 04.6 0.750 0.319 0.67+0:27?0:52 4.8+2:1?2:5 5+1:6?2 1.358 225 J103327.2+572153 10 33 27.25 +57 21 53.8 1.013 0.372 6.6+1:1?1:5 3.2+1:4?2:1 9.8+1:6?2 0.177 226 J103327.4+573750 10 33 27.46 +57 37 50.3 0.395 0.109 1.1+0:38?0:51 4+1:7?2 4.2+1:2?1:6 0.812 227 J103327.5+573932 10 33 27.51 +57 39 32.5 0.978 0.353 2.2+0:45?0:54 3.7+1?1:6 5.7+0:99?1:1 0.434 228 J103327.6+574904 10 33 27.60 +57 49 04.0 0.287 0.299 5.2+0:55?0:61 8.4+1:4?1:6 14+1:2?1:3 0.341 229 J103328.6+573510 10 33 28.61 +57 35 10.9 0.324 0.174 <0.093 1.2+0:65?2:3 1.8+0:75?1:9 >2.114 230 J103328.7+573820 10 33 28.70 +57 38 20.9 0.347 0.155 1.3+0:43?0:6 <1.8 2.2+0:66?1:1 <0.378 231 J103329.2+574708 10 33 29.23 +57 47 08.1 0.488 0.426 2.1+0:31?0:36 5.9+1:2?1:5 7.4+0:87?0:97 1.844 232 J103329.6+575226 10 33 29.68 +57 52 26.6 0.383 0.123 0.52+0:28?0:53 1.7+1:2?2 2.6+1?1:6 0.748 233 J103330.4+574224 10 33 30.50 +57 42 24.1 0.455 0.348 1.9+0:29?0:33 1.7+0:5?0:67 3.8+0:5?0:57 0.228 234 J103331.7+575458 10 33 31.75 +57 54 58.3 0.231 0.107 <0.33 0.9+0:79?1:7 1.5+0:69?1:4 >0.650 235 J103332.5+573020 10 33 32.54 +57 30 20.1 0.702 0.428 0.72+0:3?0:54 11+3:1?4:3 8.2+2:4?3:1 2.401 236 J103332.6+574111 10 33 32.61 +57 41 12.0 0.579 0.336 0.1+0:086?0:34 9.1+2:9?5:1 7.9+2:5?4:5 10.02 237 J103332.6+575214 10 33 32.67 +57 52 14.7 0.990 0.434 0.76+0:22?0:36 2.7+1:1?1:2 3.9+0:91?1:1 0.787 238 J103332.6+574442 10 33 32.67 +57 44 42.9 0.299 0.130 0.31+0:12?0:17 16+2:5?2:9 15+2:2?2:6 4.085 239 J103332.6+575046 10 33 32.69 +57 50 46.5 0.928 0.234 0.96+0:3?0:36 2.4+1?1:2 3.1+0:78?0:94 0.589 240 J103333.8+574052 10 33 33.84 +57 40 52.9 0.705 0.416 0.92+0:3?0:32 3.3+1:1?1:5 4.4+1?1:1 0.789 241 J103333.8+574027 10 33 33.89 +57 40 27.7 0.874 0.533 0.26+0:15?0:2 3.2+1:2?1:8 3.9+1:2?1:3 2.096 242 J103334.0+573334 10 33 34.02 +57 33 34.7 0.378 0.275 1+0:37?0:59 1.5+0:74?1:9 2.4+0:81?1:1 0.397 243 J103334.0+575601 10 33 34.07 +57 56 01.9 0.000 0.139 0.43+0:22?0:51 8.2+2:8?4:3 5.7+2:3?2:5 2.993 244 J103334.4+575323 10 33 34.46 +57 53 23.8 0.193 0.132 2.1+0:28?0:32 18+2?2:2 19+1:6?1:8 1.555 245 J103335.5+574334 10 33 35.51 +57 43 34.4 0.273 0.112 1.7+0:29?0:34 8.1+1:4?1:6 8.6+1:1?1:3 1.106 246 J103336.2+573223 10 33 36.22 +57 32 23.6 0.656 0.361 1.2+0:54?0:59 0.32+0:26?1:2 1.9+0:57?0:83 0.109 247 J103336.3+573106 10 33 36.33 +57 31 06.9 0.305 0.116 1+0:35?0:54 32+5:7?6:3 31+4:5?5:8 4.443 248 J103337.5+575227 10 33 37.56 +57 52 27.8 1.125 0.296 0.24+0:22?0:29 3.2+1:9?2:5 2.1+1:2?1:9 2.216 249 J103337.9+574238 10 33 37.96 +57 42 38.8 0.138 0.055 21+1:1?1:2 18+1:9?2:1 39+1:9?1:9 0.273 250 J103338.0+575801 10 33 38.09 +57 58 01.4 0.184 0.166 3.1+0:52?0:61 8.9+1:8?2:2 12+1:5?1:7 0.794 251 J103338.1+574544 10 33 38.18 +57 45 44.3 0.059 0.021 33+1:4?1:4 43+3?3:2 77+2:8?2:9 0.348 252 J103338.4+575858 10 33 38.46 +57 58 58.8 0.203 0.225 0.75+0:36?0:62 1.3+0:81?2:1 2.5+0:86?1:5 0.463 253 J103338.8+573201 10 33 38.83 +57 32 01.2 0.567 0.231 0.76+0:37?0:4 8.9+2:6?3:6 7+1:8?2:8 2.041 254 J103339.2+574816 10 33 39.23 +57 48 16.3 0.227 0.162 0.66+0:21?0:32 2.3+0:8?1:4 3+0:69?1 0.766 255 J103339.6+573817 10 33 39.61 +57 38 17.1 0.000 0.123 0.27+0:17?0:38 1.1+0:66?2 2+0:93?1:2 0.882 256 J103340.2+574234 10 33 40.25 +57 42 34.6 0.380 0.204 1.6+0:32?0:48 5+1:4?1:5 6.1+1:1?1:3 0.696 257 J103341.4+574903 10 33 41.41 +57 49 03.1 0.290 0.108 3+0:39?0:44 2.4+0:61?0:79 5+0:58?0:66 0.432 258 J103341.5+572847 10 33 41.55 +57 28 47.8 0.254 0.092 2.5+0:64?0:77 4.3+1:7?2 6.7+1:3?1:8 0.456 259 J103341.5+573644 10 33 41.56 +57 36 44.5 0.110 0.079 8.1+0:74?0:81 2.5+0:65?0:84 9.5+0:81?0:88 0.145 260 J103341.6+574042 10 33 41.62 +57 40 42.4 0.280 0.216 2.9+0:68?0:88 2.1+1?1:6 4.6+1:1?1:1 0.227 178 Table A.1|Continued # name fi2000 ?2000 ?fi(00) ??(00) f0:4?2:0keV f2:0?8:0keV f0:4?8:0keV HR 261 J103343.6+574044 10 33 43.67 +57 40 44.1 0.135 0.094 11+0:67?0:71 12+1:3?1:5 23+1:2?1:3 0.347 262 J103343.6+572446 10 33 43.67 +57 24 46.7 0.201 0.224 0.67+0:28?0:49 6.1+2?3:2 5.9+1:9?2:1 1.670 263 J103344.7+575118 10 33 44.79 +57 51 18.5 0.660 0.265 0.98+0:28?0:37 <2.5 2+0:57?0:84 <0.599 264 J103345.0+574910 10 33 45.06 +57 49 10.5 0.085 0.039 19+0:96?1 15+1:6?1:7 34+1:6?1:6 0.293 265 J103345.5+572731 10 33 45.59 +57 27 31.6 0.261 0.129 1+0:38?0:69 0.58+0:51?1:1 2.2+0:62?1:1 0.197 266 J103347.4+573744 10 33 47.46 +57 37 44.7 0.202 0.148 2.3+0:45?0:54 2.1+0:77?1:1 4+0:69?0:82 0.482 267 J103347.9+575036 10 33 47.99 +57 50 36.7 0.238 0.210 0.94+0:32?0:35 1.1+0:66?0:81 2.1+0:58?0:69 0.331 268 J103348.1+574719 10 33 48.14 +57 47 19.6 0.101 0.053 5.3+0:49?0:54 6.7+1?1:2 13+0:98?1:1 0.333 269 J103348.2+575807 10 33 48.28 +57 58 07.1 0.370 0.184 1.1+0:3?0:4 4.9+1:4?1:9 6.7+1:3?1:5 1.075 270 J103348.3+575321 10 33 48.34 +57 53 21.3 0.749 0.285 1.7+0:27?0:32 5.8+1:1?1:3 7.5+0:91?1 0.654 271 J103348.4+575650 10 33 48.42 +57 56 50.7 0.437 0.134 0.15+0:13?0:41 1.4+0:79?3 2.9+1:5?1:7 1.720 272 J103348.6+575049 10 33 48.60 +57 50 49.9 0.295 0.195 0.62+0:22?0:3 9.1+2:2?2:4 8.9+1:6?2:2 2.420 273 J103348.7+574223 10 33 48.80 +57 42 23.8 0.242 0.156 0.24+0:14?0:18 3.5+1:2?1:8 3.9+1?1:5 2.417 274 J103348.8+574148 10 33 48.81 +57 41 48.9 0.346 0.128 2.1+0:34?0:4 2.9+0:77?1 5.3+0:72?0:82 0.441 275 J103348.8+572956 10 33 48.84 +57 29 56.9 0.217 0.104 1.8+0:39?0:48 3.9+1:4?2:7 4.4+1:4?1:8 1.154 276 J103348.9+574432 10 33 48.90 +57 44 32.3 0.199 0.094 1.7+0:39?0:51 5.4+1:6?1:7 6.6+1:2?1:4 0.695 277 J103349.1+573213 10 33 49.14 +57 32 13.2 0.268 0.163 2.5+0:44?0:53 3.4+1?1:3 6.1+0:93?1:1 0.440 278 J103349.3+575444 10 33 49.31 +57 54 44.8 0.141 0.095 2.1+0:64?1 0.82+0:74?1:3 2.7+0:85?1:2 0.152 279 J103350.6+572953 10 33 50.63 +57 29 53.8 0.204 0.150 0.99+0:37?0:66 0.62+0:55?1 1.8+0:55?0:99 0.213 280 J103350.6+580114 10 33 50.68 +58 01 14.2 0.292 0.394 2.3+0:43?0:52 30+3:8?4:3 31+3:2?3:6 1.846 281 J103351.0+575126 10 33 51.03 +57 51 26.3 0.594 0.331 1.1+0:29?0:42 2.2+0:95?1:1 2.9+0:68?0:94 0.502 282 J103351.6+572502 10 33 51.61 +57 25 02.9 0.154 0.083 10+1:4?1:4 14+2:7?3:9 24+2:8?3 0.371 283 J103352.4+574635 10 33 52.43 +57 46 35.2 0.202 0.108 0.38+0:16?0:28 <2.1 0.87+0:38?0:82 <1.084 284 J103352.5+580024 10 33 52.59 +58 00 24.0 0.567 0.441 0.73+0:35?0:58 <3.1 1.6+0:87?1:5 <0.915 285 J103352.8+575005 10 33 52.81 +57 50 05.6 0.213 0.101 0.75+0:21?0:33 10+2:1?2:5 9.4+1:6?2:1 2.257 286 J103353.2+573241 10 33 53.24 +57 32 41.0 0.152 0.082 17+1?1:1 14+1:6?1:8 31+1:6?1:7 0.208 287 J103353.2+575025 10 33 53.28 +57 50 25.3 0.203 0.091 2.9+0:34?0:39 11+1:5?1:7 14+1:3?1:4 1.005 288 J103353.6+575157 10 33 53.67 +57 51 57.7 0.521 0.287 0.43+0:15?0:32 4.9+1:4?2:2 5.5+1:3?1:7 1.961 289 J103355.0+575934 10 33 55.07 +57 59 34.9 0.890 0.321 0.81+0:42?0:92 <0.097 1.2+0:55?0:72 0.062 290 J103355.2+573716 10 33 55.24 +57 37 16.7 0.945 0.609 1.1+0:29?0:38 6.7+1:3?1:6 7.8+1:4?1:7 2.217 291 J103356.2+575449 10 33 56.21 +57 54 49.1 0.251 0.206 1.5+0:24?0:28 25+2:5?2:7 23+2?2:2 2.763 292 J103356.4+573925 10 33 56.42 +57 39 25.7 0.213 0.514 0.87+0:36?0:47 <3.5 2.3+0:94?1:3 <0.853 293 J103357.7+573654 10 33 57.74 +57 36 54.5 0.095 0.090 20+1:1?1:1 38+3:4?3:7 57+2:4?2:5 0.549 294 J103357.8+574942 10 33 57.83 +57 49 42.8 0.148 0.090 3.3+0:38?0:43 8.3+1:2?1:4 11+1?1:1 0.313 295 J103358.2+574242 10 33 58.24 +57 42 42.8 0.292 0.155 0.88+0:21?0:27 3.8+0:96?1:2 4.6+0:81?0:96 1.107 296 J103358.2+573206 10 33 58.28 +57 32 06.1 0.288 0.196 0.99+0:39?0:6 1+0:65?1:5 2.2+0:65?1:2 0.313 297 J103358.6+574316 10 33 58.66 +57 43 17.0 0.290 0.193 1.3+0:26?0:32 3.5+1:4?2 3.8+0:67?0:8 0.542 298 J103358.9+573935 10 33 58.91 +57 39 35.5 0.344 0.249 4+0:41?0:45 5.6+0:94?1:1 10+0:86?0:93 0.323 299 J103359.0+574442 10 33 59.02 +57 44 42.6 0.217 0.100 0.39+0:16?0:3 0.39+0:35?0:54 0.86+0:3?0:52 0.292 300 J103359.7+574420 10 33 59.71 +57 44 20.6 0.404 0.088 0.13+0:08?0:23 1.9+0:9?1:6 2.4+0:93?1:2 2.376 301 J103359.9+575900 10 33 59.91 +57 59 00.3 0.353 0.350 1+0:28?0:37 8.1+1:9?2:3 7.4+1:4?1:7 1.509 302 J103400.7+574446 10 34 00.70 +57 44 46.5 0.297 0.071 0.72+0:27?0:39 0.41+0:37?0:61 1.5+0:47?0:55 0.194 303 J103400.8+574743 10 34 00.87 +57 47 43.9 0.000 0.000 0.68+0:32?0:56 7.8+2:4?4:5 6.4+1:9?3:3 1.983 304 J103400.8+572851 10 34 00.90 +57 28 51.5 0.215 0.110 1.4+0:45?0:63 3.4+1:6?2:1 5.1+1:3?1:6 0.608 305 J103401.0+573324 10 34 01.00 +57 33 24.6 0.302 0.199 3.5+0:53?0:62 7.7+1:6?1:9 11+1:4?1:6 0.828 306 J103401.2+574227 10 34 01.22 +57 42 27.4 0.404 0.205 0.17+0:13?0:15 5+1:6?2 4.4+1:1?1:9 4.149 307 J103401.8+573328 10 34 01.85 +57 33 28.5 0.380 0.107 0.54+0:33?0:39 1.5+1?1:6 1.4+0:6?1:3 0.649 308 J103401.9+574356 10 34 01.95 +57 43 56.3 0.240 0.095 0.68+0:21?0:35 <1.9 2.2+0:67?0:77 <0.639 309 J103402.6+575002 10 34 02.63 +57 50 02.8 0.519 0.095 <0.007 1.7+1:2?1:6 2.8+1:4?2 22.66 310 J103402.7+575116 10 34 02.77 +57 51 16.7 0.346 0.328 0.34+0:18?0:22 1.3+0:54?1:3 1.9+0:7?0:76 0.828 311 J103403.2+573911 10 34 03.22 +57 39 12.0 0.357 0.210 0.81+0:18?0:22 5+1?1:3 5.6+0:84?0:97 1.345 312 J103403.4+573407 10 34 03.45 +57 34 07.4 0.670 0.252 1.3+0:26?0:31 3.3+0:85?1:1 4.6+0:74?0:87 0.852 179 Table A.1|Continued # name fi2000 ?2000 ?fi(00) ??(00) f0:4?2:0keV f2:0?8:0keV f0:4?8:0keV HR 313 J103404.4+575655 10 34 04.41 +57 56 55.3 0.551 0.138 1.8+0:39?0:48 12+2:2?2:7 13+1:8?2:1 1.500 314 J103404.5+575159 10 34 04.54 +57 51 59.7 0.666 0.271 0.47+0:19?0:28 1.7+0:67?1:3 1.6+0:57?0:78 0.786 315 J103404.5+575241 10 34 04.60 +57 52 41.3 0.437 0.133 2+0:32?0:37 1.6+0:63?0:92 2.7+0:42?0:49 <0.387 316 J103404.9+574156 10 34 04.94 +57 41 57.0 0.515 0.204 0.38+0:18?0:23 <2.6 1.4+0:54?0:94 <1.305 317 J103405.4+573615 10 34 05.44 +57 36 15.2 0.240 0.204 2.3+0:35?0:41 3.1+0:94?1:3 5+0:83?0:98 0.371 318 J103406.0+572003 10 34 06.09 +57 20 03.9 1.196 0.366 4.6+1:1?1:3 0.96+0:58?1:7 5.4+1:1?1:4 0.093 319 J103406.1+572032 10 34 06.13 +57 20 32.1 0.776 0.401 6.3+1?1:3 10+2:6?3:6 17+2:4?2:8 0.432 320 J103406.2+575327 10 34 06.22 +57 53 27.2 0.249 0.093 7.8+0:58?0:63 15+1:6?1:8 24+1:4?1:5 0.567 321 J103406.2+575005 10 34 06.29 +57 50 05.5 0.393 0.184 0.41+0:2?0:34 4.6+1:5?2:5 3.9+1:1?2 1.924 322 J103406.6+575607 10 34 06.65 +57 56 07.3 0.193 0.081 10+0:94?1 19+2:5?2:9 29+2:2?2:4 0.499 323 J103406.7+580236 10 34 06.78 +58 02 36.1 0.397 0.168 22+1:8?2:1 59+6:4?6:9 82+5:4?6 0.632 324 J103407.6+572104 10 34 07.67 +57 21 04.9 0.848 0.450 0.47+0:28?0:38 14+4:2?4:5 11+3:2?3:6 4.329 325 J103407.9+575420 10 34 07.98 +57 54 21.0 0.798 0.285 1.5+0:6?0:72 <3.4 3.7+1:4?1:5 <0.559 326 J103408.4+574510 10 34 08.44 +57 45 10.8 0.160 0.164 0.34+0:17?0:24 2.8+1:2?1:5 3.6+1:1?1:3 1.530 327 J103409.0+572528 10 34 09.04 +57 25 28.5 0.173 0.095 2.8+0:66?0:79 7.8+2:3?2:9 10+1:7?2:4 0.652 328 J103409.2+571823 10 34 09.23 +57 18 23.8 0.679 0.340 18+1:9?1:9 25+4:3?4:7 43+3:6?4:2 0.382 329 J103409.4+572953 10 34 09.47 +57 29 53.8 0.128 0.086 3.2+0:7?0:87 5.4+1:8?2:4 8.7+1:5?2 0.448 330 J103409.5+574728 10 34 09.58 +57 47 28.4 0.109 0.061 3.2+0:35?0:39 12+1:4?1:6 15+1:2?1:3 0.913 331 J103410.2+580346 10 34 10.21 +58 03 46.9 0.300 0.149 55+3:1?3:2 100+8:4?8:8 160+7:5?7:6 0.488 332 J103410.5+573415 10 34 10.53 +57 34 15.1 0.189 0.069 25+1:1?1:2 39+2:8?3 65+2:5?2:6 0.301 333 J103410.6+575601 10 34 10.63 +57 56 01.1 1.157 0.534 0.23+0:2?0:34 4.8+2:5?3:4 6.7+2:2?3:6 3.295 334 J103410.6+572153 10 34 10.64 +57 21 54.0 0.670 0.406 0.89+0:33?0:59 3.5+1:5?2:6 4.6+1:3?2 0.869 335 J103410.6+573327 10 34 10.64 +57 33 27.9 0.192 0.376 0.5+0:21?0:51 4.4+1:6?3:1 5.1+1:5?2:3 1.610 336 J103410.7+575918 10 34 10.76 +57 59 18.8 0.721 0.481 2.5+0:5?0:61 2.8+0:97?1:4 5.7+0:97?1:1 0.318 337 J103411.2+575528 10 34 11.26 +57 55 28.7 0.253 0.134 0.97+0:38?0:59 1.5+0:69?2 2.7+0:94?1:1 0.414 338 J103411.5+574327 10 34 11.58 +57 43 27.7 0.165 0.216 0.32+0:12?0:27 <2.8 2.1+0:71?1 <1.600 339 J103412.3+573022 10 34 12.35 +57 30 22.6 0.221 0.130 1.3+0:43?0:66 1.5+0:77?1:9 3.4+1?1:1 0.351 340 J103412.4+574359 10 34 12.46 +57 43 59.9 0.326 0.204 0.19+0:094?0:22 3.9+1:5?1:6 3.7+1:1?1:5 3.206 341 J103412.8+574831 10 34 12.89 +57 48 31.4 0.203 0.084 0.93+0:23?0:39 3.5+1:1?1:6 4.7+0:94?1:2 0.813 342 J103412.9+572818 10 34 12.99 +57 28 18.8 0.149 0.088 3.6+0:76?0:94 3.9+1:4?2:2 8.4+1:4?1:8 0.326 343 J103413.6+573402 10 34 13.63 +57 34 02.6 0.455 0.198 1.9+0:34?0:4 1.5+0:81?1:4 3+0:5?0:59 <0.386 344 J103413.9+574641 10 34 13.97 +57 46 41.5 0.153 0.092 0.38+0:13?0:19 23+3?3:4 20+2:6?3 12.60 345 J103413.9+574547 10 34 13.99 +57 45 47.3 0.254 0.099 0.49+0:17?0:31 1.9+0:89?1:1 2.2+0:69?0:85 0.831 346 J103414.3+572227 10 34 14.33 +57 22 27.7 0.456 0.301 0.95+0:38?0:56 2.5+1:1?2:4 3.5+0:96?1:7 0.626 347 J103414.5+573453 10 34 14.58 +57 34 53.5 0.367 0.141 1.9+0:4?0:49 2.3+0:81?1:2 3.6+0:71?0:86 0.524 348 J103414.5+574641 10 34 14.59 +57 46 41.8 0.322 0.124 0.39+0:14?0:29 16+2:9?3:5 4.4+1:5?1:7 5.402 349 J103414.8+575400 10 34 14.81 +57 54 00.4 0.232 0.104 0.1+0:085?0:32 9.4+2:8?4:8 7.3+2:9?3:6 10.55 350 J103414.9+573036 10 34 14.97 +57 30 36.6 0.249 0.134 0.55+0:25?0:47 <2.6 1.8+0:95?1:2 <0.989 351 J103415.3+572125 10 34 15.34 +57 21 25.5 0.660 0.294 4+0:86?0:95 6.5+1:9?3 11+1:9?2:1 0.441 352 J103415.5+575935 10 34 15.52 +57 59 35.4 0.392 0.165 3.1+0:65?0:9 9.4+2:2?3:5 12+1:9?2:7 0.698 353 J103416.3+580331 10 34 16.37 +58 03 31.8 0.904 0.357 7.4+1:2?1:3 4.5+1:5?2:3 12+1:7?2:1 0.208 354 J103417.0+574321 10 34 17.07 +57 43 22.0 0.250 0.268 0.42+0:18?0:41 <0.066 0.66+0:23?0:39 0.073 355 J103417.4+575022 10 34 17.44 +57 50 22.9 0.122 0.086 12+1?1:1 13+1:9?2:4 26+1:8?2:1 0.307 356 J103418.6+573829 10 34 18.65 +57 38 29.4 0.327 0.109 1.4+0:45?0:67 <1.9 2.6+0:76?1:2 <0.370 357 J103419.6+574449 10 34 19.64 +57 44 49.2 0.584 0.245 14+1:1?1:2 24+2:8?3:2 37+2:5?2:6 0.524 358 J103419.9+574152 10 34 19.91 +57 41 52.1 0.342 0.275 0.51+0:19?0:36 <2.4 1.4+0:63?0:83 <0.953 359 J103420.1+571832 10 34 20.17 +57 18 32.8 1.132 0.638 1.5+0:53?0:6 12+3:4?4:2 14+2:9?3:3 1.503 360 J103420.3+575305 10 34 20.37 +57 53 05.7 0.654 0.307 2.8+0:45?0:61 6.8+1:5?2 9.4+1:3?1:5 0.580 361 J103420.5+574903 10 34 20.55 +57 49 03.4 0.263 0.099 0.21+0:11?0:21 4.7+1:4?2:2 4.9+1:3?1:7 3.417 362 J103421.3+575016 10 34 21.32 +57 50 16.6 0.171 0.123 4.2+0:48?0:54 11+1:6?1:9 16+1:4?1:6 0.756 363 J103421.3+574630 10 34 21.34 +57 46 30.0 0.208 0.114 1.1+0:27?0:38 4.9+1:4?1:6 5.7+1?1:4 0.923 364 J103421.6+575030 10 34 21.64 +57 50 30.8 0.246 0.177 4.2+0:43?0:48 4.5+0:83?1 8.4+0:77?0:84 0.307 180 Table A.1|Continued # name fi2000 ?2000 ?fi(00) ??(00) f0:4?2:0keV f2:0?8:0keV f0:4?8:0keV HR 365 J103422.0+575231 10 34 22.02 +57 52 31.1 0.508 0.094 0.85+0:21?0:27 3.8+0:97?1:3 3.9+0:75?0:91 1.257 366 J103424.4+575812 10 34 24.40 +57 58 12.7 0.213 0.121 2.2+0:48?0:6 0.81+0:46?1:5 3.7+0:7?0:84 0.161 367 J103425.3+574922 10 34 25.32 +57 49 22.9 0.272 0.136 2.3+0:43?0:56 2.2+0:89?1 5+0:79?1 0.290 368 J103425.6+575516 10 34 25.69 +57 55 16.2 0.173 0.141 0.88+0:32?0:61 1.5+0:69?1:9 2.4+0:91?1 0.443 369 J103428.2+572907 10 34 28.25 +57 29 07.4 0.804 0.327 1.2+0:42?0:58 6.8+2:1?3:4 8+1:8?2:6 1.124 370 J103428.7+574058 10 34 28.70 +57 40 58.0 0.290 0.252 0.63+0:25?0:49 6.2+2:3?2:6 4+1:4?1:9 1.745 371 J103429.6+574327 10 34 29.66 +57 43 27.7 0.432 0.214 0.31+0:12?0:18 4.2+1:1?1:5 4.9+1?1:2 3.274 372 J103429.6+575217 10 34 29.67 +57 52 17.5 0.385 0.085 4.2+0:5?0:57 5.3+1:1?1:3 9.5+0:98?1:1 0.106 373 J103429.7+575058 10 34 29.73 +57 50 58.2 0.253 0.177 8+0:59?0:64 9.8+1:2?1:4 19+1:2?1:2 0.329 374 J103429.9+573749 10 34 29.95 +57 37 49.2 0.149 0.064 2.9+0:35?0:39 9.5+1:3?1:5 12+1:1?1:2 1.142 375 J103430.1+574426 10 34 30.14 +57 44 26.9 0.492 0.331 1.2+0:32?0:41 2.5+0:89?1:3 4.3+0:85?1 0.232 376 J103430.5+572847 10 34 30.58 +57 28 47.0 0.317 0.169 3.6+0:55?0:64 6.5+1:5?1:8 11+1:3?1:5 0.993 377 J103432.2+575410 10 34 32.23 +57 54 10.6 0.232 0.106 1.2+0:54?0:59 0.37+0:3?1:1 1.6+0:54?0:79 0.123 378 J103432.6+575417 10 34 32.67 +57 54 17.3 0.158 0.216 0.65+0:34?0:43 1.2+0:8?1:5 1.7+0:62?1:1 0.480 379 J103432.8+574301 10 34 32.86 +57 43 01.6 0.357 0.292 0.28+0:18?0:37 6.1+2:1?3:7 6.5+2:3?2:6 3.327 380 J103433.5+575746 10 34 33.58 +57 57 46.6 0.186 0.083 <0.033 60+9:5?12 58+10?11 >108.8 381 J103433.6+573231 10 34 33.68 +57 32 31.2 0.137 0.071 31+1:8?1:9 4.7+1?1:3 27+1:6?1:7 0.079 382 J103434.9+574214 10 34 34.92 +57 42 14.2 0.359 0.336 0.8+0:21?0:28 3.2+0:92?1:2 3.3+0:69?0:85 0.154 383 J103435.1+572759 10 34 35.19 +57 27 59.3 1.299 0.616 2.9+0:5?0:6 11+2:5?4:1 9.7+1:4?1:6 0.830 384 J103435.7+574625 10 34 35.73 +57 46 25.9 0.526 0.162 3.1+0:4?0:45 8.9+1:4?1:7 12+1:2?1:3 0.926 385 J103435.8+580118 10 34 35.81 +58 01 18.6 0.485 0.297 0.91+0:4?0:45 16+3:7?4:9 15+3:1?3:9 2.851 386 J103436.7+574124 10 34 36.77 +57 41 24.6 0.314 0.164 2.2+0:41?0:5 4+1:3?1:8 5.7+0:95?1:1 <0.368 387 J103437.1+572807 10 34 37.13 +57 28 07.2 0.347 0.147 2+0:44?0:54 4.1+1:2?1:6 5.2+0:94?1:1 0.109 388 J103437.7+575443 10 34 37.78 +57 54 43.5 0.961 0.487 7.5+1:2?1:2 9.5+2:5?3 17+2:2?2:6 0.363 389 J103437.9+573516 10 34 37.93 +57 35 16.3 0.313 0.195 <0.06 9+2:8?5:3 8.2+3:2?4 15.44 390 J103438.8+575012 10 34 38.81 +57 50 13.0 0.399 0.168 7.7+0:58?0:62 12+1:4?1:5 19+1:2?1:3 0.547 391 J103439.7+573529 10 34 39.75 +57 35 29.4 0.215 0.075 1.5+0:46?0:71 1.4+0:69?1:7 3.2+0:79?1:2 0.273 392 J103439.8+573804 10 34 39.88 +57 38 04.4 0.183 0.079 3.5+0:81?1 0.88+0:57?1:2 3.9+0:79?1:1 0.103 393 J103439.9+574354 10 34 39.92 +57 43 55.0 0.205 0.129 32+1:6?1:7 47+3:8?4:1 80+3:4?3:6 0.438 394 J103440.1+574556 10 34 40.20 +57 45 56.1 0.461 0.231 0.66+0:25?0:55 2.5+1:2?2:2 3.8+1:2?1:7 0.846 395 J103440.5+573845 10 34 40.57 +57 38 45.7 0.220 0.115 1.7+0:49?0:65 4.1+1:4?2:4 5.8+1:3?1:7 0.571 396 J103440.8+575017 10 34 40.90 +57 50 17.9 0.440 0.372 0.16+0:11?0:18 5.1+1:5?2:5 4.8+1:5?1:7 4.532 397 J103440.9+574714 10 34 40.97 +57 47 15.0 0.297 0.229 8+0:6?0:64 12+1:4?1:6 21+1:3?1:4 0.976 398 J103441.3+575335 10 34 41.33 +57 53 35.6 0.138 0.063 9.7+0:9?0:99 10+1:7?2 20+1:6?1:8 0.299 399 J103441.5+573240 10 34 41.56 +57 32 40.4 0.377 0.148 2.3+0:45?0:54 2.4+0:83?1:2 4.7+0:79?0:93 0.413 400 J103441.9+575858 10 34 41.92 +57 58 58.7 0.232 0.204 0.2+0:18?0:28 <3.5 2+1:1?2 <2.825 401 J103442.3+572608 10 34 42.33 +57 26 09.0 0.253 0.200 2.6+0:66?0:98 2.2+0:92?2:3 5.3+1:1?1:7 0.267 402 J103442.3+575343 10 34 42.40 +57 53 43.8 0.203 0.257 <0.047 2.9+1:5?3:4 4.7+2:1?3 >7.736 403 J103442.5+573911 10 34 42.59 +57 39 11.8 0.230 0.174 0.24+0:16?0:34 6.7+2:1?3:8 4.6+1:7?2:6 3.991 404 J103444.5+572824 10 34 44.56 +57 28 24.4 0.202 0.175 7.8+0:85?0:95 6.8+1:4?1:8 15+1:4?1:6 0.320 405 J103445.1+575543 10 34 45.14 +57 55 43.9 0.209 0.194 1.7+0:57?0:87 0.23+0:17?1:2 1.8+0:59?0:69 0.068 406 J103445.1+572416 10 34 45.18 +57 24 16.4 0.734 0.432 3.1+0:7?0:93 5.6+2?2:7 8.5+1:6?2:2 0.480 407 J103445.2+574034 10 34 45.26 +57 40 34.7 0.398 0.149 0.68+0:31?0:58 0.32+0:25?1:3 1.6+0:62?0:73 0.167 408 J103445.5+574534 10 34 45.54 +57 45 34.4 0.001 0.224 0.87+0:34?0:71 0.3+0:24?1:3 1+0:46?0:69 0.137 409 J103446.5+574039 10 34 46.56 +57 40 39.1 0.233 0.208 2.6+0:72?0:89 0.56+0:5?0:93 2.9+0:73?0:92 0.095 410 J103446.6+573738 10 34 46.69 +57 37 38.3 0.172 0.164 1.2+0:43?0:58 <1.7 2.1+0:73?1:1 <0.382 411 J103446.9+575127 10 34 46.98 +57 51 28.0 0.210 0.088 34+1:7?1:8 38+3:4?3:7 74+3:2?3:4 0.359 412 J103447.0+580221 10 34 47.00 +58 02 21.1 0.516 0.557 2.1+0:65?0:8 1.8+0:98?1:7 4.1+1?1:4 0.268 413 J103447.6+574957 10 34 47.63 +57 49 57.5 0.444 0.325 2+0:32?0:38 17+2:2?2:5 18+1:9?2:1 1.345 414 J103447.7+572808 10 34 47.78 +57 28 08.7 0.241 0.252 9+1:3?1:4 17+3:1?4:3 25+3?3:1 0.485 415 J103448.5+574135 10 34 48.51 +57 41 35.5 0.186 0.342 0.46+0:28?0:33 5.9+2:4?2:7 4.9+1:5?2:4 2.139 416 J103448.5+574413 10 34 48.56 +57 44 13.4 0.309 0.215 0.19+0:18?0:25 3.2+1:5?2:7 3.5+1:3?2:3 2.662 181 Table A.1|Continued # name fi2000 ?2000 ?fi(00) ??(00) f0:4?2:0keV f2:0?8:0keV f0:4?8:0keV HR 417 J103448.8+575001 10 34 48.84 +57 50 01.1 0.471 0.193 2.9+0:62?0:97 6.6+1:9?3:2 8.5+1:9?1:9 0.563 418 J103449.2+574749 10 34 49.27 +57 47 49.3 0.400 0.364 1.9+0:33?0:38 6.5+1:3?1:6 8.6+1:1?1:2 0.529 419 J103449.4+575518 10 34 49.45 +57 55 18.6 0.244 0.086 3.2+0:52?0:61 4.4+1:2?1:5 7.8+1:1?1:2 0.219 420 J103449.6+574652 10 34 49.64 +57 46 52.1 0.308 0.059 0.94+0:2?0:25 6.7+1:2?1:5 7+0:97?1:1 0.273 421 J103449.6+575808 10 34 49.64 +57 58 08.6 0.352 0.125 0.7+0:3?0:48 5+1:7?3 5.5+1:8?1:9 1.374 422 J103449.6+572544 10 34 49.68 +57 25 44.3 0.557 0.575 1.7+0:55?0:66 <4.4 3.7+1:1?1:7 <0.625 423 J103450.0+573212 10 34 50.07 +57 32 12.4 0.854 0.390 0.68+0:22?0:31 8.2+3:1?4:6 5.1+1:2?1:6 <1.979 424 J103450.5+574257 10 34 50.51 +57 42 57.7 0.412 0.132 1.4+0:39?0:64 28+5?5:8 24+4:2?4:3 3.108 425 J103450.5+574116 10 34 50.53 +57 41 16.4 0.301 0.245 1.6+0:4?0:51 0.5+0:33?0:66 2.1+0:47?0:58 0.177 426 J103451.0+573751 10 34 51.03 +57 37 51.3 0.215 0.090 1.4+0:44?0:65 2.6+1:3?1:8 4.2+1?1:6 0.486 427 J103451.0+573343 10 34 51.03 +57 33 43.3 0.318 0.105 1.7+0:54?0:75 1.6+0:83?1:8 3.2+0:94?1:2 0.278 428 J103451.3+573317 10 34 51.34 +57 33 17.7 0.432 0.268 0.12+0:1?0:32 1.7+1:2?2:1 2.9+1:3?1:9 2.368 429 J103451.3+572822 10 34 51.35 +57 28 22.8 0.739 0.431 1.5+0:49?0:81 0.87+0:48?1:8 2.6+0:89?0:99 0.201 430 J103451.9+573933 10 34 51.93 +57 39 33.4 0.000 0.000 0.58+0:28?0:44 1.7+0:83?2 1.7+0:78?1:1 0.667 431 J103452.0+575402 10 34 52.06 +57 54 02.8 0.108 0.087 1.4+0:42?0:67 3.1+1:3?2:3 4.4+1:3?1:4 0.565 432 J103452.1+573420 10 34 52.10 +57 34 20.1 0.418 0.108 1.1+0:46?0:69 0.25+0:18?1:4 1.4+0:56?0:72 0.100 433 J103452.8+574642 10 34 52.87 +57 46 42.6 0.236 0.099 2.1+0:38?0:46 1.7+0:6?0:85 3.6+0:56?0:66 0.027 434 J103453.0+574032 10 34 53.02 +57 40 32.5 0.250 0.134 0.78+0:38?0:41 2.7+1:4?1:9 3.3+1:1?1:4 0.769 435 J103453.3+573446 10 34 53.34 +57 34 47.0 0.190 0.108 5.2+0:96?1:2 3.9+1:4?2:1 9.4+1:5?1:8 0.237 436 J103453.4+573353 10 34 53.42 +57 33 53.6 0.324 0.261 1.3+0:4?0:71 1.1+0:73?1:4 1.9+0:67?0:98 0.268 437 J103453.8+574320 10 34 53.88 +57 43 20.9 0.464 0.136 5.8+1:4?1:9 <0.058 2.2+0:47?0:71 0.009 438 J103454.7+574205 10 34 54.79 +57 42 05.5 0.240 0.107 10+0:9?0:99 15+2:1?2:4 25+1:9?2 0.395 439 J103454.9+574654 10 34 54.95 +57 46 54.7 0.213 0.135 1.3+0:27?0:33 2.5+0:73?0:98 4.2+0:68?0:8 0.315 440 J103456.0+574600 10 34 56.01 +57 46 00.6 0.173 0.135 0.22+0:13?0:37 6+2:2?3:3 5.1+1:6?3 4.052 441 J103456.2+574724 10 34 56.23 +57 47 24.5 0.379 0.407 1.6+0:35?0:42 20+3:1?3:6 21+2:7?2:9 2.190 442 J103456.5+573759 10 34 56.57 +57 37 59.1 0.177 0.101 6.2+0:72?0:81 7.6+1:5?1:8 14+1:4?1:6 0.202 443 J103456.6+574740 10 34 56.61 +57 47 40.0 0.240 0.116 1.1+0:35?0:58 6.8+2:4?2:6 4.8+1:6?1:7 1.235 444 J103456.8+573311 10 34 56.89 +57 33 11.9 0.277 0.146 8.4+1:3?1:8 3+1:2?2:3 10+1:6?2:1 0.137 445 J103456.9+574822 10 34 56.96 +57 48 22.8 0.227 0.112 2.2+0:64?0:8 <1.5 2.9+0:77?1:2 <0.230 446 J103457.5+575705 10 34 57.57 +57 57 05.2 0.257 0.080 0.9+0:29?0:58 14+3:4?4:3 11+2:6?3:3 2.501 447 J103457.6+573756 10 34 57.66 +57 37 56.4 0.307 0.108 0.38+0:2?0:39 8.4+2:5?3:9 8.3+2:2?3:2 3.366 448 J103457.9+573756 10 34 57.92 +57 37 56.1 0.229 0.161 2.3+0:4?0:48 13+2:2?2:6 16+1:9?2:1 0.943 449 J103457.9+575047 10 34 57.93 +57 50 47.7 0.458 0.270 0.63+0:38?0:45 0.27+0:2?1:3 1.5+0:51?0:86 0.159 450 J103458.3+574612 10 34 58.33 +57 46 12.8 0.381 0.149 0.23+0:15?0:36 4.7+1:7?3:2 4.6+1:9?2 3.142 451 J103458.4+574139 10 34 58.49 +57 41 39.8 0.477 0.240 4.2+0:58?0:67 8.4+1:7?2 12+1:4?1:6 0.581 452 J103459.0+573032 10 34 59.01 +57 30 32.6 0.340 0.276 20+1:4?1:5 15+2:2?2:5 35+2:2?2:4 0.226 453 J103500.3+574327 10 35 00.35 +57 43 27.1 0.377 0.136 0.96+0:35?0:67 0.93+0:55?1:7 2.3+0:86?0:93 0.298 454 J103500.3+573032 10 35 00.36 +57 30 32.9 0.316 0.190 32+1:8?1:9 15+2?2:3 42+2:3?2:4 0.150 455 J103501.1+575700 10 35 01.20 +57 57 00.8 0.222 0.146 0.86+0:35?0:5 6.9+2:3?3:1 7.1+1:9?2:3 1.499 456 J103502.0+575006 10 35 02.01 +57 50 06.4 0.277 0.146 0.72+0:16?0:2 25+2:5?2:8 23+2:2?2:4 3.699 457 J103503.3+574107 10 35 03.35 +57 41 07.3 0.360 0.202 2.3+0:41?0:49 5.5+1:3?1:7 7.7+1:1?1:3 0.517 458 J103504.0+574352 10 35 04.10 +57 43 52.6 0.270 0.115 1.3+0:32?0:4 3+2:5?6:7 3.3+0:71?0:88 0.232 459 J103505.3+574201 10 35 05.32 +57 42 01.0 0.556 0.495 1.2+0:48?0:53 <3.4 2.5+0:87?1:5 <0.675 460 J103505.4+575219 10 35 05.41 +57 52 19.2 0.505 0.203 1.8+0:63?0:73 0.86+0:51?1:6 2.7+0:87?0:95 0.175 461 J103506.8+573638 10 35 06.90 +57 36 38.5 0.433 0.134 0.6+0:27?0:57 4.1+1:7?3:1 4+1:5?2 1.287 462 J103507.3+574310 10 35 07.37 +57 43 11.0 0.754 0.324 0.43+0:24?0:42 11+3:3?4:3 8.8+2:3?3:8 3.713 463 J103508.1+573849 10 35 08.18 +57 38 49.6 0.142 0.144 8.3+0:83?0:92 14+2:1?2:4 22+1:9?2 0.350 464 J103508.2+575857 10 35 08.22 +57 58 57.6 0.562 0.169 <0.38 5.4+2:1?3:2 3.2+1:4?2:2 >2.391 465 J103508.2+574818 10 35 08.23 +57 48 18.1 0.205 0.163 0.81+0:3?0:54 2.1+0:87?2:1 2.6+0:93?1:2 0.618 466 J103508.4+575743 10 35 08.46 +57 57 43.8 0.192 0.286 0.5+0:21?0:5 9.4+2:5?4:3 8.8+2:1?3:5 2.971 467 J103508.5+575839 10 35 08.54 +57 58 39.7 0.511 0.275 2.1+0:51?0:79 10+2:7?3:5 13+2:3?3 1.022 468 J103509.5+580155 10 35 09.53 +58 01 55.8 0.933 0.864 3+0:75?0:93 2.7+1:5?1:6 5.4+1:3?1:4 0.282 182 Table A.1|Continued # name fi2000 ?2000 ?fi(00) ??(00) f0:4?2:0keV f2:0?8:0keV f0:4?8:0keV HR 469 J103510.1+574414 10 35 10.18 +57 44 14.1 0.147 0.118 0.41+0:22?0:42 16+4?5:4 15+3:3?4:7 5.245 470 J103510.5+573049 10 35 10.59 +57 30 49.6 0.859 0.570 2+0:55?0:7 <9.2 5.9+1:7?2 <0.960 471 J103512.1+575547 10 35 12.17 +57 55 47.9 0.076 0.063 40+2:5?2:9 110+8:7?9:7 150+7:8?7:8 0.646 472 J103513.3+573940 10 35 13.39 +57 39 40.6 0.551 0.219 4.6+0:59?0:68 16+2:3?2:7 21+2?2:2 0.835 473 J103514.2+575704 10 35 14.27 +57 57 04.1 0.526 0.362 1.5+0:46?0:85 0.65+0:58?1:1 2.2+0:8?0:84 0.163 474 J103515.2+573056 10 35 15.24 +57 30 56.9 0.826 0.481 0.32+0:22?0:34 46+7:5?10 43+7:9?8:3 14.94 475 J103516.1+574554 10 35 16.10 +57 45 54.7 0.181 0.099 4.2+0:96?1:3 5.9+2?3:7 11+2?2:7 0.391 476 J103518.7+573351 10 35 18.80 +57 33 51.3 0.634 0.632 0.43+0:24?0:39 7.6+2:9?3:3 7.9+2:3?3 2.814 477 J103519.5+575438 10 35 19.57 +57 54 38.6 0.590 0.400 1.8+0:51?0:89 1.1+0:73?1:5 2.8+0:81?1:1 0.209 478 J103519.6+574721 10 35 19.65 +57 47 21.2 0.158 0.083 2.3+0:57?0:7 9.8+2:5?3:3 12+2:1?2:4 0.908 479 J103519.9+575057 10 35 19.95 +57 50 57.3 0.233 0.142 3.4+0:67?0:89 11+2:8?3:1 16+1:8?2 0.735 480 J103520.9+573349 10 35 20.98 +57 33 49.2 0.630 0.397 2.1+0:57?0:74 4.3+1:9?2:1 6.5+1:4?1:9 0.516 481 J103522.1+573720 10 35 22.13 +57 37 21.0 0.331 0.169 7+0:76?0:85 10+2:3?2:9 15+1:5?1:7 0.448 482 J103522.9+574116 10 35 22.91 +57 41 16.8 0.176 0.088 15+1:6?1:6 22+2:7?3:1 40+2:5?2:7 0.515 483 J103522.9+574606 10 35 22.97 +57 46 06.1 0.417 0.136 0.11+0:094?0:29 6.3+2:7?3:3 7.3+2:2?3:7 7.251 484 J103523.6+574530 10 35 23.65 +57 45 30.1 0.180 0.105 1.4+0:44?0:6 4.9+1:5?2:9 6.4+1:4?2:1 0.786 485 J103524.2+574435 10 35 24.20 +57 44 35.1 0.258 0.150 0.53+0:26?0:41 3.9+1:9?2:1 4.1+1:3?1:9 1.411 486 J103526.0+575536 10 35 26.01 +57 55 36.8 0.455 0.297 2.3+0:6?0:7 27+5:1?5:4 26+4:1?4:4 2.074 487 J103526.0+575218 10 35 26.05 +57 52 19.0 0.577 0.262 2.1+0:45?0:55 1.4+0:6?0:94 3.5+0:66?0:79 0.257 488 J103526.6+580029 10 35 26.61 +58 00 29.3 1.204 0.428 1.2+0:45?0:56 13+3:4?4:5 11+2:7?3:2 2.025 489 J103527.1+574708 10 35 27.18 +57 47 08.3 0.251 0.232 0.66+0:31?0:54 0.45+0:38?1:2 1.6+0:55?0:93 0.230 490 J103527.4+574159 10 35 27.49 +57 41 59.0 0.354 0.338 1.3+0:32?0:41 3.9+1:2?1:6 4.8+0:96?1:2 1.714 491 J103528.1+574613 10 35 28.17 +57 46 13.5 0.219 0.095 3+0:65?0:9 4.3+1:7?2:1 6.6+1:4?1:6 0.400 492 J103528.9+574231 10 35 28.91 +57 42 31.6 0.215 0.183 3.3+0:54?0:63 4.9+1:3?1:6 8.6+1:1?1:3 0.176 493 J103529.0+573602 10 35 29.09 +57 36 02.0 0.188 0.315 0.94+0:42?0:45 9.4+2:9?3:6 9+2:2?2:8 1.762 494 J103530.2+574909 10 35 30.29 +57 49 09.7 0.165 0.165 0.64+0:25?0:52 <2.9 2+0:86?1:4 <0.950 495 J103530.9+573835 10 35 30.97 +57 38 36.0 0.757 0.654 2.6+0:68?0:87 2.9+1:6?1:8 6.6+1:3?1:8 0.334 496 J103531.0+574545 10 35 31.04 +57 45 45.0 0.112 0.061 5.8+0:91?1 25+4?5 30+3:6?3:7 0.929 497 J103531.7+575217 10 35 31.76 +57 52 17.4 0.454 0.363 3.7+0:83?0:86 12+3?3:6 17+2:7?2:8 0.750 498 J103531.8+575255 10 35 31.82 +57 52 55.0 0.831 0.689 1.5+0:35?0:44 3.7+1:1?1:5 4.9+0:95?1:2 0.788 499 J103531.8+573544 10 35 31.90 +57 35 44.3 0.477 0.341 8+0:81?0:89 20+3:4?4:8 31+2:4?2:6 0.689 500 J103532.2+575632 10 35 32.20 +57 56 32.8 0.632 0.497 0.71+0:29?0:51 19+4:6?5:2 18+3:5?4:9 4.010 501 J103532.2+574644 10 35 32.29 +57 46 44.7 0.160 0.130 1.5+0:48?0:66 2.2+1?1:9 4+0:95?1:5 0.393 502 J103533.1+574814 10 35 33.17 +57 48 14.0 0.225 0.112 0.35+0:19?0:39 16+4:4?4:5 17+3:4?5 6.075 503 J103533.8+573845 10 35 33.90 +57 38 45.8 0.483 0.744 0.37+0:18?0:48 7+2:1?4:1 8.7+2:3?3:3 2.931 504 J103534.0+574231 10 35 34.03 +57 42 31.4 0.359 0.379 1.5+0:59?0:84 0.41+0:33?1:6 1.4+0:53?0:97 0.116 505 J103534.3+574354 10 35 34.38 +57 43 54.6 0.485 0.169 1.1+0:36?0:56 6+2:3?2:5 7.3+1:6?2:4 1.129 506 J103535.0+575036 10 35 35.01 +57 50 36.7 0.291 0.173 5+0:94?1:2 1.5+0:88?1:3 6.2+1:1?1:3 0.125 507 J103536.1+575343 10 35 36.11 +57 53 43.3 0.851 0.644 <0.075 <0.34 0.59+0:53?0:94 0.958 508 J103536.4+574910 10 35 36.41 +57 49 10.1 0.140 0.222 0.068+0:052?0:34 6.5+2:5?4:2 5.9+2:2?3:8 10.87 509 J103539.7+574254 10 35 39.75 +57 42 54.4 0.353 0.166 2.1+0:65?0:74 1.5+0:75?1:7 4.2+1:1?1:2 0.231 510 J103540.0+574947 10 35 40.00 +57 49 47.0 0.202 0.088 0.81+0:31?0:52 6.1+2:2?2:8 5.9+1:7?2:2 1.442 511 J103540.8+575037 10 35 40.87 +57 50 37.6 0.371 0.270 1.3+0:46?0:57 4.9+1:9?2:4 6.8+1:4?2:2 0.811 512 J103543.8+574441 10 35 43.80 +57 44 41.4 0.204 0.149 4.7+0:94?1 5.9+1:6?2:9 10+1:8?2 0.359 513 J103547.2+574902 10 35 47.25 +57 49 02.1 0.250 0.268 0.73+0:28?0:61 1.1+0:66?1:7 1.5+0:73?0:86 0.402 514 J103547.8+574303 10 35 47.88 +57 43 03.6 0.329 0.249 11+1:9?2:1 18+4:3?6:3 30+4:1?5:3 0.451 515 J103548.6+574333 10 35 48.70 +57 43 33.3 0.491 0.362 1.8+0:51?0:67 6.9+2?3:3 8.5+1:8?2:3 0.851 516 J103550.8+575201 10 35 50.85 +57 52 01.1 0.924 0.475 1+0:4?0:52 8.9+2:7?3:6 9.8+2:4?2:6 1.602 517 J103551.0+574332 10 35 51.02 +57 43 33.0 0.107 0.091 43+2:6?2:9 73+6:7?7:6 120+6?6:4 0.450 518 J103600.7+574803 10 36 00.75 +57 48 03.6 0.464 0.303 2+0:53?0:66 29+4:9?6:1 25+4:1?4:3 2.460 519 J103601.8+574336 10 36 01.83 +57 43 36.1 0.637 0.463 2.3+0:61?0:75 7.5+2?3:4 9.1+2?2:1 0.734 520 J103602.1+575132 10 36 02.12 +57 51 32.8 1.363 0.623 0.38+0:2?0:43 18+3:9?6:1 18+4:3?4:5 6.164 183 Table A.1|Continued # name fi2000 ?2000 ?fi(00) ??(00) f0:4?2:0keV f2:0?8:0keV f0:4?8:0keV HR 521 J103603.6+574813 10 36 03.63 +57 48 13.9 0.846 0.507 2.6+0:67?0:97 0.89+0:54?1:5 3.4+0:78?1:2 0.138 522 J103604.2+574748 10 36 04.22 +57 47 48.3 0.358 0.544 2.4+0:58?0:94 1.9+1:2?1:4 4.4+1?1:4 0.257 523 J103607.6+575009 10 36 07.61 +57 50 09.2 0.542 0.530 1.1+0:35?0:67 46+7:4?8:5 45+7?7:1 5.454 524 J103611.8+575055 10 36 11.84 +57 50 56.0 0.919 0.661 4.1+0:81?1:2 3.7+1:3?2:7 8.9+1:6?2:2 0.282 525 J103612.3+574624 10 36 12.39 +57 46 24.4 0.907 0.449 1.7+0:52?0:76 2.2+1:3?1:5 4.6+1:1?1:6 0.365 184 Table A.2. Main Chandra Catalog: Additional Source Properties # nsoft nhard nfull tsoft thard tfull Field #s Detections 1 19.6+5:92?4:07 5.77+3:8?2:17 24.8+6:25?4:78 3.22E+04 3.15E+04 3.21E+04 4 4 2 10.8+4:56?3:13 7.27+3:49?2:87 12.8+4:89?3:37 3.35E+04 3.25E+04 3.33E+04 4 4 3 19.8+5:73?4:25 17+5:2?4:09 37.7+7:54?5:82 3.37E+04 3.32E+04 3.37E+04 4 4 4 16.5+5:68?3:61 1.45+1:83?1:32 20.9+5:8?4:41 3.40E+04 3.30E+04 3.40E+04 4 4 5 14.1+4:71?3:82 1.67+2:95?0:996 17.3+4:9?4:4 3.22E+04 3.22E+04 3.24E+04 4 4 6 23.3+5:57?5:06 24.1+5:88?4:96 44.7+8:01?6:43 3.31E+04 3.29E+04 3.32E+04 4 4 7 99.6+11:4?9:62 36.6+7:51?5:69 135+12:5?11:7 3.46E+04 3.39E+04 3.45E+04 4 47 8 7.72+4:22?2:51 6.93+3:83?2:53 15.3+4:63?4:17 3.44E+04 3.50E+04 3.45E+04 4 4 9 16.6+5:61?3:68 15.9+5:16?3:89 32.9+6:86?5:67 3.60E+04 3.62E+04 3.63E+04 4 4 10 2.06+2:57?1:38 1.17+2:12?1:04 5.13+3:24?2:31 3.42E+04 3.43E+04 3.44E+04 4 4 11 66+9:2?8:07 12+4:56?3:42 78.6+10:3?8:49 2.85E+04 2.83E+04 2.81E+04 4 4 12 14.1+4:74?3:8 7.83+4:11?2:61 18.8+5:68?4:09 3.48E+04 3.43E+04 3.48E+04 4 4 13 11.6+4:93?3:05 7.66+4:28?2:44 23.4+5:5?5:13 3.17E+04 3.21E+04 3.21E+04 4 4 14 14.7+5:27?3:53 2.24+2:39?1:56 17.8+5:52?4:01 3.45E+04 3.44E+04 3.47E+04 4 4 15 64.3+8:74?8:28 20.5+5:06?4:93 88.1+10:3?9:51 3.27E+04 3.11E+04 3.25E+04 4 47 16 159+13:9?12:4 73.1+9:48?8:63 232+16:7?14:8 3.43E+04 3.37E+04 3.43E+04 4 47 17 13.1+4:62?3:65 0.678+2:61?0:544 14.1+4:77?3:76 3.16E+04 3.11E+04 3.25E+04 4 4 18 5.3+3:08?2:48 0.892+2:4?0:758 6.93+3:83?2:53 2.84E+04 2.95E+04 2.81E+04 4 4 19 2.65+3:26?1:31 4.56+3:81?1:74 10.2+4:1?3:28 2.90E+04 2.88E+04 2.90E+04 4 4 20 38.3+6:88?6:48 <5.4 37.8+7:45?5:91 3.51E+04 3.43E+04 3.50E+04 4 4 21 7.62+4:32?2:4 10.5+3:81?3:58 17.1+5:06?4:23 3.67E+04 3.64E+04 3.69E+04 4 4 22 16.7+5:49?3:8 4.13+3:03?2:06 21.2+5:48?4:73 3.67E+04 3.65E+04 3.69E+04 4 4 23 14.9+5:02?3:77 6.64+4:12?2:24 22.9+5:96?4:67 3.67E+04 3.65E+04 3.70E+04 4 4 24 28.6+6:85?4:96 23.6+6:38?4:46 50.7+8:45?6:86 3.58E+04 3.53E+04 3.58E+04 4 47 25 9.91+4:35?3:04 0.0105+1:82?0:0105 11.4+3:99?3:7 3.26E+04 3.16E+04 3.23E+04 4 4 26 10.1+4:16?3:22 0.199+1:63?0:199 9.92+4:34?3:04 3.21E+04 3.21E+04 3.22E+04 4 4 27 17.1+5:13?4:16 4.81+3:56?1:99 23.6+6:35?4:49 3.52E+04 3.55E+04 3.54E+04 4 4 28 57.6+9:01?7:24 36.5+7:6?5:6 93.1+10:5?9:76 3.39E+04 3.28E+04 3.38E+04 4 4 29 262+17:1?16:3 143+13?11:9 390+21?19:5 3.60E+04 3.53E+04 3.59E+04 4 4 30 64.1+8:91?8:11 19.6+5:94?4:05 80.7+10:3?8:73 3.01E+04 2.90E+04 2.96E+04 4 4 31 7.84+4:1?2:62 4.99+3:38?2:17 12.7+5:02?3:25 2.27E+04 2.21E+04 2.27E+04 7 7 32 30+6:57?5:41 34.2+6:64?6:05 65.8+9:41?7:86 3.41E+04 3.35E+04 3.43E+04 4 4 33 18.8+5:59?4:18 10.6+4:83?2:86 28.4+5:98?5:64 3.64E+04 3.61E+04 3.66E+04 4 4 34 7.63+4:31?2:41 3.08+2:83?1:74 9.41+3:69?3:37 3.32E+04 3.21E+04 3.29E+04 4 4 35 15.6+5:49?3:56 18.9+5:49?4:27 30+6:49?5:5 3.42E+04 3.40E+04 3.42E+04 4 4 36 10.9+4:48?3:21 0.795+2:49?0:661 10.9+4:49?3:2 3.34E+04 3.25E+04 3.32E+04 4 4 37 11.5+3:92?3:77 <5.13 12.9+4:76?3:5 3.22E+04 3.18E+04 3.13E+04 4 47 38 8.07+3:87?2:85 10.3+3:96?3:42 16.6+5:57?3:72 3.33E+04 3.35E+04 3.38E+04 4 4 185 Table A.2|Continued # nsoft nhard nfull tsoft thard tfull Field #s Detections 39 3.93+3:22?1:87 14.8+5:12?3:67 18.3+5:01?4:52 3.72E+04 3.72E+04 3.75E+04 4 4 40 89.5+9:98?9:91 41.7+7:88?6:11 125+12:2?11:2 3.60E+04 3.58E+04 3.62E+04 4 47 41 97.1+10:7?9:97 33.9+6:94?5:75 129+12?11:7 3.28E+04 3.28E+04 3.28E+04 4 47 42 10.8+4:61?3:08 15+4:92?3:87 26.3+5:91?5:32 3.27E+04 3.26E+04 3.27E+04 7 7 43 15.8+5:23?3:81 29.6+6:95?5:04 45.7+8:18?6:41 3.44E+04 3.47E+04 3.49E+04 4 47 44 39.2+7:08?6:44 8.74+4:37?2:7 46.5+8:36?6:38 3.51E+04 3.49E+04 3.51E+04 7 47 45 86.4+9:86?9:71 94.9+10:9?9:6 180+14:9?13 3.79E+04 3.85E+04 3.84E+04 4 4 46 85.6+10:8?8:81 28.9+6:5?5:31 110+11:9?10:1 3.52E+04 3.48E+04 3.51E+04 7 7 47 25.3+5:72?5:32 5.67+3:9?2:07 30.8+6:83?5:34 3.49E+04 3.40E+04 3.47E+04 4 4 48 31+6:67?5:5 104+11:7?9:76 129+12:3?11:4 3.52E+04 3.49E+04 3.52E+04 4 47 49 3.83+3:32?1:77 3.7+3:46?1:64 7.03+3:73?2:63 3.85E+04 3.76E+04 3.85E+04 4 4 50 51.6+8:64?6:8 29.6+6:91?5:08 76.8+9:96?8:61 3.51E+04 3.48E+04 3.52E+04 4 47 51 9.89+4:37?3:01 5.45+2:92?2:63 15.7+5:34?3:71 3.76E+04 3.78E+04 3.78E+04 4 4 52 157+13:7?12:4 73.9+9:71?8:52 227+15:6?15:5 3.57E+04 3.51E+04 3.57E+04 4 4 53 33.3+6:55?5:97 28.7+6:74?5:07 65+9:14?8:01 3.48E+04 3.42E+04 3.46E+04 7 67 54 6.97+3:8?2:56 3.68+3:47?1:62 10.6+4:82?2:87 3.77E+04 3.74E+04 3.79E+04 4 4 55 1.71+2:92?1:03 3.43+2:48?2:09 5.01+3:36?2:19 3.59E+04 3.55E+04 3.59E+04 4 4 56 3.83+3:32?1:77 1.02+2:27?0:882 3.41+2:5?2:07 3.56E+04 3.53E+04 3.53E+04 4 4 57 3.03+2:88?1:69 3.34+2:57?2 5.85+3:73?2:25 3.68E+04 3.82E+04 3.83E+04 4 4 58 29.2+6:27?5:54 2.9+3:01?1:55 33.2+6:57?5:95 3.54E+04 3.58E+04 3.56E+04 7 47 59 19.6+5:97?4:02 9.04+4:07?3 25.5+6:65?4:59 3.59E+04 3.57E+04 3.59E+04 7 7 60 21.5+6:24?4:18 9.7+4:56?2:83 30.1+6:46?5:53 3.59E+04 3.62E+04 3.61E+04 7 47 61 2.46+2:17?1:78 1.24+2:05?1:1 5.7+3:88?2:09 3.68E+04 3.70E+04 3.71E+04 4 4 62 32.2+6:49?5:85 17.6+5:71?3:82 47.9+8:12?6:77 3.71E+04 3.70E+04 3.73E+04 4 247 63 9.32+3:79?3:28 6.33+3:25?2:73 17+5:16?4:13 3.60E+04 3.55E+04 3.59E+04 7 7 64 5.05+3:33?2:23 3.33+2:58?1:99 9.34+3:76?3:3 3.51E+04 3.55E+04 3.53E+04 7 7 65 2.68+3:23?1:34 1.7+2:93?1:02 4.77+3:61?1:95 3.58E+04 3.47E+04 3.57E+04 4 4 66 5.6+3:98?2 <2.5 5.11+3:27?2:29 3.63E+04 3.67E+04 3.65E+04 7 47 67 14.6+5:33?3:47 17.4+4:79?4:51 31.4+6:24?5:92 3.70E+04 3.65E+04 3.71E+04 4 4 68 4.82+3:56?2 7.75+4:19?2:54 10.6+4:77?2:92 1.61E+04 1.63E+04 1.50E+04 7 7 69 24.6+6:46?4:58 25.6+6:58?4:65 45.8+7:98?6:61 3.36E+04 3.32E+04 3.35E+04 7 7 70 18.6+5:83?3:93 7.02+3:75?2:62 24+6:01?4:83 3.35E+04 3.30E+04 3.34E+04 4 4 71 32+6:74?5:6 38.9+7:43?6:09 71.6+9:97?8:02 3.30E+04 3.25E+04 3.34E+04 7 67 72 2.33+2:3?1:65 3.26+2:65?1:92 3.82+3:34?1:76 2.79E+04 2.70E+04 2.75E+04 6 6 73 1.91+2:72?1:23 6.42+3:16?2:82 10.3+3:96?3:43 3.58E+04 3.54E+04 3.58E+04 7 7 74 4+3:16?1:93 9.04+4:06?3 13.5+5:31?3:22 3.44E+04 3.37E+04 3.45E+04 4 4 75 463+22:6?21:4 144+13:2?11:8 601+25:4?24:7 3.28E+04 3.23E+04 3.28E+04 7 7 76 16.8+5:36?3:93 19.8+5:72?4:27 36.6+7:52?5:67 3.67E+04 3.70E+04 3.69E+04 7 7 186 Table A.2|Continued # nsoft nhard nfull tsoft thard tfull Field #s Detections 77 9.92+4:34?3:05 11.4+4?3:69 20+5:52?4:46 3.57E+04 3.53E+04 3.56E+04 7 7 78 21.9+5:85?4:57 6.23+3:34?2:63 28.8+6:67?5:13 3.73E+04 3.67E+04 3.75E+04 4 247 79 2.12+2:5?1:45 <9.07 <6.28 2.99E+04 2.90E+04 2.95E+04 7 7 80 2.15+2:48?1:47 9.99+4:27?3:11 11.6+4:97?3:01 3.67E+04 3.59E+04 3.67E+04 4 4 81 36.9+7:27?5:93 14.3+4:52?4:01 48.7+8:31?6:71 3.54E+04 3.47E+04 3.53E+04 4 4 82 9.44+3:66?3:4 9.21+3:9?3:16 16.3+4:73?4:32 2.67E+04 2.57E+04 2.63E+04 6 6 83 9.87+4:39?2:99 <6.56 8.94+4:16?2:9 3.70E+04 3.69E+04 3.70E+04 7 7 84 3.83+3:32?1:77 0.172+1:65?0:172 3.52+3:64?1:45 3.43E+04 3.39E+04 3.44E+04 4 4 85 9.64+4:62?2:77 7.96+3:98?2:75 15+4:93?3:86 3.39E+04 3.31E+04 3.39E+04 4 4 86 23.3+5:56?5:07 11.8+4:79?3:19 34.1+6:79?5:9 3.69E+04 3.61E+04 3.70E+04 4 24 87 43.4+7:17?6:97 21.2+5:46?4:74 62.9+9:08?7:82 3.68E+04 3.60E+04 3.68E+04 4 247 88 3.03+2:88?1:69 <5.94 2.82+3:09?1:48 3.53E+04 3.25E+04 3.55E+04 4 4 89 126+12:6?10:9 50.1+8:06?7:1 176+14:7?12:9 3.34E+04 3.25E+04 3.30E+04 7 67 90 5.63+3:94?2:03 1.39+1:89?1:26 5.84+3:74?2:24 3.68E+04 3.60E+04 3.69E+04 4 4 91 2.82+3:09?1:48 1.6+3:02?0:927 7.14+3:63?2:74 3.69E+04 3.61E+04 3.69E+04 4 4 92 17.6+5:73?3:8 7.82+4:12?2:6 22.5+5:29?5:13 3.58E+04 3.50E+04 3.57E+04 4 24 93 25.3+5:79?5:25 5.87+3:71?2:27 26.3+5:83?5:4 2.86E+04 2.71E+04 2.75E+04 6 6 94 25.7+6:47?4:77 34.7+7:26?5:6 57+8:56?7:57 3.46E+04 3.40E+04 3.45E+04 2 24 95 77.8+10:1?8:61 33.5+6:31?6:22 110+11:4?10:6 3.25E+04 3.10E+04 3.19E+04 4 4 96 8.87+4:23?2:83 1.72+2:9?1:05 10.1+4:11?3:27 3.74E+04 3.75E+04 3.75E+04 7 7 97 7.89+4:05?2:68 5.7+3:88?2:1 16.3+4:75?4:3 3.66E+04 3.60E+04 3.64E+04 4 4 98 5.85+3:73?2:25 7.86+4:08?2:64 13.5+5:31?3:22 3.73E+04 3.80E+04 3.77E+04 7 7 99 192+15:3?13:4 92.7+11?9:35 266+17:4?16:2 3.66E+04 3.61E+04 3.67E+04 4 247 100 21.4+5:3?4:91 7.08+3:68?2:68 28.3+6:02?5:6 3.65E+04 3.65E+04 3.66E+04 7 67 101 10.4+3:87?3:52 10.1+4:15?3:23 21.1+5:52?4:69 2.89E+04 2.83E+04 2.87E+04 6 6 102 46.4+7:44?7:15 12.4+4:19?3:79 56.7+8:92?7:2 3.62E+04 3.61E+04 3.62E+04 2 24 103 6.36+3:21?2:76 9.44+3:66?3:4 15.6+5:44?3:61 3.59E+04 3.54E+04 3.60E+04 4 4 104 14.8+5:18?3:62 4.48+2:68?2:41 20.6+6:06?4:15 3.57E+04 3.51E+04 3.57E+04 4 47 105 8.29+3:65?3:08 10.1+4:21?3:18 18.5+5:93?3:83 3.13E+04 3.01E+04 3.09E+04 4 4 106 27.6+6:73?4:89 6.08+3:49?2:48 32.1+6:66?5:69 2.92E+04 2.86E+04 2.89E+04 6 6 107 3.93+3:22?1:87 0.502+2:79?0:368 5.42+2:95?2:6 3.54E+04 3.54E+04 3.59E+04 7 7 108 3.73+3:43?1:66 6.18+3:4?2:58 8.95+4:16?2:91 3.80E+04 3.85E+04 3.83E+04 7 7 109 9.76+4:5?2:88 10.6+4:81?2:88 20.1+5:46?4:52 3.60E+04 3.54E+04 3.61E+04 4 24 110 39.3+7:01?6:51 26.2+5:92?5:32 66.2+8:92?8:36 3.78E+04 3.75E+04 3.77E+04 7 247 111 10.3+3:94?3:45 <6.67 10.3+3:93?3:46 2.94E+04 2.87E+04 2.91E+04 6 6 112 14.2+4:59?3:94 1.82+2:81?1:14 17.4+4:79?4:5 2.94E+04 2.88E+04 2.92E+04 6 6 113 2.91+2:99?1:57 7.43+3:33?3:03 8.17+3:77?2:95 3.67E+04 3.62E+04 3.65E+04 7 7 114 138+12:6?11:9 30.7+6:89?5:28 168+14?13 2.90E+04 2.80E+04 2.86E+04 6 6 187 Table A.2|Continued # nsoft nhard nfull tsoft thard tfull Field #s Detections 115 5.85+3:73?2:25 2.02+2:61?1:34 10.3+3:99?3:39 3.70E+04 3.77E+04 3.84E+04 7 7 116 12.3+4:21?3:78 0.543+2:74?0:409 15+4:91?3:89 3.71E+04 3.71E+04 3.72E+04 2 2 117 7.5+4:44?2:28 0.155+1:67?0:155 7.27+3:5?2:86 3.36E+04 3.45E+04 3.35E+04 2 2 118 5.75+3:83?2:14 1.66+2:97?0:982 7.56+4:38?2:34 3.79E+04 3.85E+04 3.82E+04 7 7 119 10.7+4:74?2:95 5.39+2:98?2:57 18+5:31?4:22 2.88E+04 2.86E+04 2.87E+04 6 67 120 192+15:1?13:6 83+10:1?9:11 270+17:9?16 2.93E+04 2.91E+04 2.92E+04 6 67 121 71.8+9:7?8:3 40.9+7:58?6:26 110+11:4?10:6 3.53E+04 3.50E+04 3.54E+04 4 247 122 9.85+4:41?2:97 4.25+2:9?2:19 12.3+4:3?3:68 3.62E+04 3.61E+04 3.63E+04 2 24 123 11.7+4:82?3:16 <6.6 14.5+4:33?4:2 3.73E+04 3.75E+04 3.75E+04 2 24 124 10+4:26?3:12 2.95+2:96?1:6 12.4+4:16?3:83 3.85E+04 3.83E+04 3.85E+04 7 7 125 11.5+3:94?3:75 7.58+4:36?2:37 20.6+6:04?4:17 3.61E+04 3.61E+04 3.61E+04 7 7 126 7.87+4:07?2:65 2.28+2:34?1:61 10.5+3:78?3:6 3.54E+04 3.60E+04 3.53E+04 7 7 127 0.905+2:38?0:771 12.3+4:27?3:71 11.6+4:96?3:02 3.77E+04 3.74E+04 3.76E+04 7 7 128 4.66+3:71?1:84 22.1+5:62?4:8 24.5+5:51?5:33 3.52E+04 3.48E+04 3.53E+04 4 247 129 41.9+7:63?6:36 24.2+5:77?5:07 65.9+9:3?7:97 3.63E+04 3.55E+04 3.61E+04 2 127 130 9.97+4:29?3:09 <4.77 10.6+4:84?2:85 1.71E+04 1.67E+04 1.72E+04 2 2 131 34.6+7:34?5:53 7.67+4:27?2:45 44.4+7:31?6:99 2.88E+04 2.82E+04 2.86E+04 6 6 132 17.2+5:03?4:26 <13.3 19.7+5:8?4:19 3.06E+04 2.94E+04 3.01E+04 4 4 133 69.6+9:83?7:93 38.4+6:83?6:53 101+10:6?10:5 3.34E+04 3.31E+04 3.32E+04 7 7 134 130+12:7?11:1 55.9+8:67?7:32 185+15?13:2 3.60E+04 3.51E+04 3.57E+04 2 127 135 3.94+3:22?1:87 <2.85 5.85+3:73?2:25 3.61E+04 3.73E+04 3.64E+04 7 7 136 6.72+4:05?2:31 8.56+4:55?2:52 13.6+5:21?3:32 3.78E+04 3.80E+04 3.81E+04 2 24 137 4.82+3:56?2 6.47+3:1?2:87 7.61+4:33?2:4 2.99E+04 2.97E+04 2.98E+04 6 6 138 14.7+5:24?3:55 3.61+3:54?1:55 20.1+5:43?4:56 3.73E+04 3.77E+04 3.75E+04 7 67 139 6.91+3:86?2:51 7.62+4:31?2:41 12.1+4:41?3:57 3.61E+04 3.58E+04 3.61E+04 2 24 140 49.1+7:94?7:09 19.4+5:04?4:72 67.1+9:08?8:31 3.02E+04 2.94E+04 2.98E+04 6 6 141 12.8+4:91?3:35 <4.21 12.9+4:82?3:44 3.02E+04 3.01E+04 3.02E+04 6 6 142 7.83+4:11?2:61 <4.58 9.1+4?3:06 2.78E+04 2.69E+04 2.77E+04 6 6 143 19.1+5:36?4:41 8.91+4:2?2:87 25.3+5:73?5:31 2.83E+04 2.82E+04 2.81E+04 6 6 144 6.96+3:81?2:55 3.86+3:29?1:8 10.4+3:84?3:54 3.83E+04 3.85E+04 3.86E+04 2 2 145 0.778+2:51?0:644 9.32+3:79?3:27 6.92+3:84?2:52 3.64E+04 3.60E+04 3.62E+04 7 27 146 21.1+5:6?4:61 19.3+5:1?4:66 39.4+6:86?6:66 3.82E+04 3.75E+04 3.81E+04 2 1247 147 11.4+3:98?3:71 1.64+2:99?0:959 14.1+4:71?3:82 3.59E+04 3.63E+04 3.60E+04 2 2 148 30.4+6:18?5:81 8.5+3:44?3:28 37.7+7:54?5:82 2.78E+04 2.69E+04 2.75E+04 6 6 149 2.46+2:17?1:78 <4.76 2.78+3:12?1:44 3.87E+04 3.87E+04 3.89E+04 2 2 150 49+8:03?7 13.3+4:42?3:84 59.4+8:31?8:08 2.72E+04 2.65E+04 2.73E+04 6 6 151 19+5:45?4:31 10.6+4:78?2:91 28.6+6:88?4:92 3.76E+04 3.64E+04 3.73E+04 7 27 152 6.86+3:9?2:46 1.14+2:15?1 8.95+4:16?2:91 3.79E+04 3.70E+04 3.77E+04 7 7 188 Table A.2|Continued # nsoft nhard nfull tsoft thard tfull Field #s Detections 153 3.82+3:34?1:75 5.55+4:03?1:95 9.2+3:9?3:16 3.03E+04 3.04E+04 3.04E+04 6 6 154 12.4+4:15?3:84 5.44+2:94?2:62 17.6+5:69?3:84 3.45E+04 3.39E+04 3.42E+04 7 247 155 48.9+8:13?6:89 18+5:32?4:21 68.2+9:1?8:41 3.62E+04 3.57E+04 3.60E+04 7 1247 156 1.91+2:72?1:23 0.502+2:79?0:368 2.7+3:2?1:36 3.05E+04 3.07E+04 3.06E+04 6 6 157 41.1+7:35?6:48 26.9+6:35?5:08 64.6+9:49?7:65 3.75E+04 3.68E+04 3.74E+04 7 167 158 10+4:26?3:12 1.14+2:15?1 12+4:58?3:41 3.75E+04 3.69E+04 3.74E+04 7 7 159 4.95+3:43?2:13 0.649+2:64?0:515 5.43+2:94?2:61 3.74E+04 3.63E+04 3.72E+04 7 7 160 9.7+4:56?2:82 6.31+3:26?2:71 14.4+4:42?4:11 3.19E+04 3.10E+04 3.15E+04 5 5 161 7.57+4:37?2:36 1.35+1:93?1:22 7.82+4:12?2:6 3.39E+04 3.39E+04 3.39E+04 7 7 162 9.79+4:48?2:91 3.4+2:5?2:06 13.4+4:29?3:98 3.04E+04 3.06E+04 3.05E+04 6 6 163 5.05+3:32?2:23 3.02+2:89?1:68 6.76+4:01?2:35 3.58E+04 3.52E+04 3.57E+04 7 7 164 3.94+3:22?1:87 <3.78 4.53+3:85?1:71 3.71E+04 3.64E+04 3.70E+04 7 7 165 70.9+9:56?8:31 41.7+7:81?6:18 112+11:1?11 3.43E+04 3.33E+04 3.39E+04 5 25 166 32.5+7:28?5:24 22.8+6:05?4:58 55+8:47?7:39 2.91E+04 2.83E+04 2.87E+04 6 6 167 4.7+3:68?1:88 6.01+3:57?2:4 10.9+4:46?3:23 3.01E+04 2.99E+04 3.03E+04 6 6 168 5.85+3:73?2:25 4.68+3:69?1:86 6.22+3:35?2:62 3.68E+04 3.69E+04 3.57E+04 2 2 169 4.84+3:53?2:02 0.781+2:51?0:647 6.65+4:11?2:25 3.82E+04 3.81E+04 3.82E+04 2 2 170 8.98+4:13?2:93 24.1+5:9?4:94 30.5+7:11?5:06 3.66E+04 3.60E+04 3.65E+04 7 167 171 28.8+6:67?5:14 3.92+3:23?1:86 32.4+6:28?6:06 3.85E+04 3.83E+04 3.85E+04 2 127 172 5.75+3:83?2:14 9.87+4:39?2:99 11.3+4:13?3:56 3.86E+04 3.88E+04 3.87E+04 2 2 173 3.58+3:58?1:52 3.66+3:5?1:59 5.25+3:12?2:43 3.93E+04 3.91E+04 3.94E+04 2 2 174 5.75+3:83?2:14 11.6+4:93?3:06 9.26+3:84?3:22 3.87E+04 3.82E+04 3.86E+04 2 2 175 24.1+5:83?5:01 14.3+4:56?3:97 41.3+7:14?6:69 3.16E+04 3.16E+04 3.16E+04 6 6 176 60.3+8:5?8:02 6.5+3:08?2:9 67.2+9:07?8:32 4.04E+04 4.07E+04 4.07E+04 2 247 177 2.82+3:09?1:48 1.98+2:65?1:3 5.64+3:94?2:04 2.65E+04 2.60E+04 2.60E+04 6 6 178 5.64+3:94?2:04 6.75+4:01?2:35 10.1+4:2?3:19 3.00E+04 2.99E+04 2.99E+04 6 6 179 4.03+3:13?1:96 19.8+5:72?4:27 23.9+6:03?4:81 6.71E+04 6.45E+04 6.63E+04 1 1 180 3.71+3:44?1:65 <5.02 4.4+2:76?2:33 2.94E+04 2.91E+04 2.92E+04 6 6 181 29.2+6:2?5:6 5.14+3:23?2:32 32.8+7:01?5:51 3.50E+04 3.42E+04 3.47E+04 5 25 182 22.9+5:98?4:65 7.23+3:53?2:83 28.9+6:54?5:27 3.91E+04 3.90E+04 3.92E+04 2 127 183 5.32+3:05?2:5 18.6+5:87?3:89 18.7+5:76?4 6.66E+04 6.46E+04 6.64E+04 1 1 184 1.01+2:28?0:876 6.97+3:8?2:56 6.86+3:9?2:46 3.97E+04 4.00E+04 3.99E+04 2 2 185 <0.752 7.03+3:73?2:63 5.15+3:23?2:33 3.64E+04 3.60E+04 3.63E+04 7 7 186 57.4+8:23?7:9 31.1+6:54?5:63 90.5+10?9:96 3.34E+04 3.29E+04 3.32E+04 2 25 187 0.423+1:4?0:423 4.25+2:9?2:19 6.79+3:97?2:39 3.89E+04 3.88E+04 3.90E+04 2 127 188 2.33+2:3?1:65 7.62+4:31?2:41 11.6+4:95?3:03 3.89E+04 3.88E+04 3.90E+04 2 2 189 14+4:79?3:74 8.72+4:38?2:68 22+5:74?4:68 3.69E+04 3.63E+04 3.68E+04 2 25 190 3.83+3:32?1:77 <3.72 4.73+3:64?1:91 3.97E+04 4.00E+04 4.00E+04 2 2 189 Table A.2|Continued # nsoft nhard nfull tsoft thard tfull Field #s Detections 191 6.96+3:8?2:56 3.72+3:43?1:66 8.53+4:57?2:49 3.09E+04 3.01E+04 3.05E+04 6 6 192 7.8+4:14?2:58 <9.72 6.51+4:25?2:11 2.80E+04 2.69E+04 2.75E+04 6 6 193 17.1+5:13?4:16 5.71+3:86?2:11 22.8+6:05?4:58 4.07E+04 4.03E+04 4.07E+04 2 2 194 10.9+4:55?3:14 7.45+3:31?3:05 19.3+5:11?4:65 3.03E+04 2.99E+04 3.01E+04 6 6 195 6.28+3:3?2:67 <5.43 6.57+4:19?2:17 3.46E+04 3.42E+04 3.44E+04 5 5 196 4.74+3:64?1:92 0.79+2:5?0:656 6.34+3:24?2:73 3.01E+04 3.02E+04 3.02E+04 6 6 197 5.64+3:94?2:04 2.32+2:31?1:64 7.45+3:31?3:05 3.25E+04 3.13E+04 3.20E+04 2 2 198 4.27+2:89?2:2 2.34+2:28?1:67 4.67+3:7?1:85 6.29E+04 6.17E+04 6.25E+04 1 1 199 11.9+4:67?3:31 2.77+3:14?1:43 15.6+5:5?3:54 3.02E+04 2.93E+04 2.98E+04 6 167 200 18.1+5:26?4:27 16.1+4:94?4:11 33.1+6:74?5:79 3.34E+04 3.27E+04 3.31E+04 5 5 201 1.13+2:15?0:999 11.5+5:01?2:97 10.3+3:92?3:47 3.85E+04 3.83E+04 3.85E+04 2 12 202 42.6+7:99?6:15 8.71+4:39?2:67 51.3+7:91?7:4 3.50E+04 3.47E+04 3.49E+04 5 5 203 11.6+4:95?3:03 2.47+2:16?1:79 17.2+4:97?4:32 6.56E+04 6.38E+04 6.49E+04 1 1 204 31.9+6:8?5:54 21.7+6:05?4:38 52.5+7:8?7:65 3.41E+04 3.29E+04 3.32E+04 5 25 205 103+11:6?9:74 36.5+7:59?5:6 139+12:7?11:9 3.50E+04 3.47E+04 3.49E+04 5 5 206 6.85+3:92?2:44 4.4+2:75?2:34 11.4+3:97?3:72 3.07E+04 2.99E+04 3.01E+04 6 167 207 11.2+4:22?3:47 6.77+3:99?2:37 17.3+4:91?4:38 3.44E+04 3.40E+04 3.42E+04 5 5 208 52.4+7:83?7:61 11+4:4?3:29 65.4+8:65?8:49 3.10E+04 3.10E+04 3.10E+04 6 6 209 35.9+7:11?5:92 23.4+5:5?5:13 60.9+8:97?7:68 3.77E+04 3.74E+04 3.79E+04 2 25 210 13+4:7?3:56 8.56+4:55?2:51 20.9+5:73?4:48 3.55E+04 3.52E+04 3.54E+04 5 5 211 18.4+4:88?4:65 2.42+2:2?1:75 22.1+5:67?4:75 3.40E+04 3.35E+04 3.38E+04 5 5 212 44.3+7:39?6:91 15.2+4:75?4:05 58.2+8:42?7:83 6.88E+04 6.63E+04 6.80E+04 1 167 213 13.9+4:89?3:64 1.46+1:83?1:32 15.6+5:44?3:61 4.02E+04 3.88E+04 4.00E+04 2 2 214 5.05+3:32?2:23 1.32+1:97?1:18 4.63+3:74?1:81 4.03E+04 4.05E+04 4.07E+04 2 2 215 154+13:5?12:4 43.2+7:43?6:71 192+14:6?14:1 3.81E+04 3.72E+04 3.78E+04 2 235 216 0.342+1:48?0:342 1.3+1:99?1:17 2.82+3:09?1:47 3.91E+04 3.85E+04 3.90E+04 2 2 217 6.61+4:15?2:21 1.98+2:65?1:3 9.06+4:04?3:02 3.87E+04 3.80E+04 3.85E+04 2 2 218 4.72+3:66?1:89 1.37+1:91?1:24 7.3+3:46?2:9 3.10E+04 3.09E+04 3.09E+04 6 6 219 57.4+8:18?7:95 31.4+6:27?5:9 88.1+10:3?9:51 3.49E+04 3.46E+04 3.47E+04 5 5 220 2.93+2:98?1:58 0.668+2:62?0:534 5.64+3:94?2:04 4.01E+04 3.89E+04 4.00E+04 2 2 221 7.07+3:69?2:67 3.43+2:48?2:09 10.9+4:51?3:18 3.16E+04 3.05E+04 3.13E+04 6 6 222 25.3+5:81?5:23 15.4+4:59?4:21 42.9+7:67?6:47 3.02E+04 2.99E+04 3.00E+04 6 6 223 81.9+10:2?8:95 30.9+6:77?5:4 107+10:9?10:8 2.98E+04 2.93E+04 2.96E+04 6 6 224 4.7+3:67?1:88 6.29+3:29?2:68 10.2+4:07?3:31 3.58E+04 3.52E+04 3.57E+04 2 2 225 29.6+6:91?5:08 5.06+3:31?2:24 34.9+7:04?5:82 3.07E+04 2.95E+04 2.98E+04 5 5 226 8.08+3:86?2:86 6.37+3:21?2:77 12+4:54?3:44 4.00E+04 3.88E+04 3.99E+04 2 2 227 25.1+6:01?5:03 10.7+4:68?3 34.1+6:8?5:9 6.35E+04 6.25E+04 6.32E+04 1 12 228 40.2+7:15?6:53 13.6+5:25?3:28 53.7+8:72?7 3.49E+04 3.45E+04 3.48E+04 7 167 190 Table A.2|Continued # nsoft nhard nfull tsoft thard tfull Field #s Detections 229 <1.16 1.53+3:1?0:855 3.52+3:64?1:45 4.00E+04 3.90E+04 3.98E+04 2 2 230 8.99+4:12?2:94 <3.93 8.67+4:43?2:63 4.00E+04 3.91E+04 4.00E+04 2 2 231 7.3+3:46?2:9 13.4+4:34?3:92 18.4+4:88?4:65 3.49E+04 3.46E+04 3.48E+04 7 167 232 2.93+2:98?1:58 2.13+2:5?1:45 5.96+3:62?2:35 3.11E+04 3.02E+04 3.07E+04 6 6 233 11.7+4:81?3:18 2.68+3:23?1:34 14.2+4:67?3:87 3.84E+04 3.83E+04 3.85E+04 2 127 234 <1.83 1.15+2:14?1:01 3.73+3:43?1:66 3.09E+04 2.99E+04 3.08E+04 6 6 235 4.78+3:59?1:96 11+4:45?3:24 12.1+4:5?3:49 3.28E+04 3.13E+04 3.15E+04 2 25 236 0.779+2:51?0:645 7.62+4:32?2:41 7.62+4:32?2:4 3.48E+04 3.39E+04 3.51E+04 2 2 237 9.64+4:62?2:76 7.45+3:32?3:04 19.1+5:35?4:41 6.74E+04 6.61E+04 6.69E+04 1 1 238 5.38+3?2:56 21.7+6:1?4:32 21.3+5:35?4:85 6.87E+04 6.77E+04 6.79E+04 1 17 239 11.2+4:22?3:47 6.44+3:14?2:84 16.1+4:94?4:1 6.39E+04 6.24E+04 6.37E+04 1 1 240 11.4+3:99?3:7 8.97+4:14?2:92 21.2+5:44?4:77 6.56E+04 6.52E+04 6.55E+04 1 12 241 3.33+2:58?1:99 6.93+3:84?2:52 12.3+4:29?3:69 6.50E+04 6.46E+04 6.50E+04 1 1 242 6.84+3:92?2:44 2.65+3:26?1:3 9.07+4:03?3:03 3.85E+04 3.74E+04 3.84E+04 2 2 243 2.72+3:19?1:37 7.86+4:08?2:64 7.45+3:31?3:05 3.13E+04 3.03E+04 3.10E+04 6 6 244 8.99+4:12?2:94 13.5+4:21?4:05 20.9+5:75?4:45 3.09E+04 2.98E+04 3.07E+04 6 168 245 13.5+4:24?4:02 15+4:98?3:82 22.4+5:38?5:04 6.87E+04 6.91E+04 6.90E+04 1 12 246 6.45+3:13?2:85 0.692+2:6?0:558 9.87+4:39?2:99 3.79E+04 3.70E+04 3.75E+04 2 2 247 7.85+4:09?2:63 34.2+6:66?6:04 41.6+7:91?6:08 3.71E+04 3.64E+04 3.68E+04 5 235 248 1.5+1:79?1:36 3.29+2:62?1:95 3.16+2:75?1:82 3.12E+04 3.10E+04 3.11E+04 8 8 249 238+16:1?15:8 65.6+9:6?7:68 300+18:2?17:4 6.79E+04 6.83E+04 6.82E+04 1 127 250 17.6+5:69?3:84 13.6+5:27?3:26 27.1+6:19?5:23 3.07E+04 2.98E+04 3.04E+04 6 68 251 419+21:1?20:8 150+12:9?12:6 567+25?23:6 6.61E+04 6.80E+04 6.53E+04 1 167 252 3.92+3:23?1:86 1.77+2:86?1:09 6.72+4:04?2:32 3.04E+04 2.96E+04 3.01E+04 6 6 253 5.48+2:9?2:66 11+4:42?3:27 12.6+5:07?3:19 3.70E+04 3.64E+04 3.67E+04 5 5 254 8.87+4:23?2:83 6.74+4:02?2:34 15.6+5:44?3:61 7.13E+04 7.06E+04 7.13E+04 1 1 255 1.92+2:71?1:24 1.65+2:97?0:977 5.22+3:15?2:4 3.77E+04 3.69E+04 3.75E+04 2 2 256 20.5+6:14?4:07 14.4+4:47?4:07 32+6:69?5:65 6.80E+04 6.84E+04 6.83E+04 1 12 257 27.4+5:87?5:55 11.8+4:79?3:19 38.5+6:73?6:63 7.10E+04 7.05E+04 7.10E+04 1 167 258 16.2+4:92?4:13 7.37+3:39?2:97 22.7+6:15?4:48 3.75E+04 3.74E+04 3.75E+04 5 5 259 53+8:31?7:27 7.5+4:44?2:28 54.6+8:85?7:01 3.90E+04 3.80E+04 3.88E+04 2 235 260 17.9+5:37?4:16 4.01+3:14?1:95 20.5+5:06?4:92 3.86E+04 3.78E+04 3.85E+04 2 12 261 72.5+9:03?8:96 24.7+6:32?4:72 98.2+10:8?10:1 3.84E+04 3.77E+04 3.83E+04 2 123 262 4.82+3:55?2 7.83+4:11?2:61 11.3+4:09?3:6 3.70E+04 3.60E+04 3.65E+04 5 5 263 12+4:56?3:42 <8.26 10.8+4:57?3:12 6.71E+04 6.68E+04 6.60E+04 1 1 264 193+14:6?14:2 55.4+8:04?7:82 245+17:1?15:2 6.46E+04 6.31E+04 6.36E+04 1 1678 265 5.75+3:83?2:14 1.14+2:15?1 9.58+4:68?2:7 3.75E+04 3.76E+04 3.76E+04 5 5 266 12+4:54?3:44 5.68+3:9?2:08 15.3+4:69?4:11 3.86E+04 3.79E+04 3.85E+04 2 23 191 Table A.2|Continued # nsoft nhard nfull tsoft thard tfull Field #s Detections 267 10.4+3:85?3:53 3.4+2:51?2:06 14.2+4:65?3:88 6.54E+04 6.45E+04 6.50E+04 1 1 268 71.3+9:17?8:71 23.9+6:03?4:81 96.7+11:2?9:56 7.26E+04 7.30E+04 7.30E+04 1 167 269 6.06+3:52?2:46 6.34+3:24?2:74 13.6+5:27?3:26 2.89E+04 2.81E+04 2.86E+04 6 68 270 26.6+6:62?4:81 16.8+5:43?3:86 44.2+7:52?6:78 6.60E+04 6.34E+04 6.55E+04 1 168 271 0.896+2:39?0:762 1.5+3:13?0:825 4.48+2:67?2:42 3.03E+04 2.96E+04 3.00E+04 6 6 272 8.03+3:9?2:82 19.4+5:02?4:75 26.7+6:55?4:88 6.47E+04 6.46E+04 6.47E+04 1 1 273 3.35+2:56?2:01 7.92+4:02?2:71 12.7+4:95?3:32 7.04E+04 6.88E+04 6.98E+04 1 1 274 24.4+5:53?5:31 10.5+4:88?2:81 35+6:93?5:94 6.97E+04 6.80E+04 6.91E+04 1 13 275 4.95+3:43?2:13 5.7+3:87?2:1 10.2+4:09?3:29 3.81E+04 3.81E+04 3.81E+04 5 25 276 18.9+5:55?4:21 13.3+4:35?3:91 30.2+6:37?5:61 5.80E+04 5.89E+04 5.88E+04 1 1 277 18.2+5:13?4:39 7.91+4:03?2:69 24.7+6:39?4:65 3.72E+04 3.67E+04 3.70E+04 5 25 278 8.75+4:35?2:71 1.3+1:99?1:16 9.98+4:28?3:1 2.97E+04 2.88E+04 2.95E+04 6 6 279 5.75+3:83?2:14 1.23+2:06?1:1 7.62+4:32?2:41 3.82E+04 3.82E+04 3.82E+04 5 5 280 15.5+4:47?4:32 27.5+5:76?5:66 43.6+8:13?6:17 2.89E+04 2.78E+04 2.85E+04 6 68 281 12.8+4:93?3:33 6.34+3:24?2:73 16.8+5:38?3:91 6.52E+04 6.44E+04 6.49E+04 1 1 282 58.5+8:18?8:08 21.6+6:18?4:24 79.3+9:66?9:13 3.39E+04 3.37E+04 3.35E+04 5 5 283 4.84+3:53?2:02 <7.77 3.69+3:47?1:62 6.59E+04 6.68E+04 6.73E+04 1 1 284 3.99+3:16?1:93 <5.27 3.01+2:9?1:67 2.92E+04 2.80E+04 2.87E+04 6 6 285 10.7+4:76?2:93 24+5:96?4:88 31.6+7:09?5:25 7.07E+04 7.05E+04 7.08E+04 1 1 286 129+12:4?11:3 26.7+6:51?4:92 153+13?12:7 3.45E+04 3.43E+04 3.45E+04 5 235 287 39.7+7:66?6:02 39.8+7:57?6:11 82.7+10:5?8:75 7.04E+04 7.02E+04 7.04E+04 1 168 288 5.52+4:06?1:92 10.7+4:7?2:99 17.8+5:49?4:04 6.42E+04 6.35E+04 6.43E+04 1 1 289 2.77+3:14?1:43 0.166+1:66?0:166 5.23+3:14?2:41 2.81E+04 2.72E+04 2.77E+04 6 6 290 4.86+3:52?2:03 10.4+3:88?3:51 17.2+5:04?4:25 3.40E+04 3.28E+04 3.31E+04 5 235 291 11.7+4:9?3:08 31.3+6:3?5:87 41.6+7:97?6:02 2.97E+04 2.89E+04 2.93E+04 6 168 292 6.2+3:38?2:6 <8.57 6.09+3:48?2:49 3.77E+04 3.72E+04 3.77E+04 2 2 293 120+12?11 64.8+9:32?7:82 221+16:2?14:6 3.76E+04 3.69E+04 3.75E+04 2 1235 294 52+8:28?7:17 15.9+5:19?3:86 68.2+9:12?8:39 7.10E+04 6.92E+04 7.11E+04 1 168 295 7.65+4:29?2:43 8.26+3:68?3:05 16.9+5:32?3:97 6.64E+04 6.48E+04 6.65E+04 1 12 296 5.95+3:63?2:35 1.85+2:78?1:17 8.53+4:58?2:48 3.73E+04 3.71E+04 3.72E+04 5 5 297 14.5+5:43?3:36 7.75+4:19?2:53 20.8+5:9?4:31 6.67E+04 6.56E+04 6.70E+04 1 12 298 26.4+5:79?5:45 8.41+3:52?3:2 36.6+7:56?5:63 3.75E+04 3.69E+04 3.74E+04 2 123 299 4.74+3:64?1:92 1.37+1:92?1:23 6.72+4:05?2:32 7.30E+04 7.20E+04 7.30E+04 1 1 300 1.71+2:92?1:03 3.91+3:25?1:84 7.14+3:63?2:74 6.40E+04 6.17E+04 6.33E+04 1 1 301 6.16+3:42?2:55 9.18+3:93?3:13 14.3+4:53?4:01 3.59E+04 3.54E+04 3.57E+04 8 68 302 6.97+3:8?2:56 1.33+1:96?1:19 11.3+4:13?3:56 6.27E+04 6.15E+04 6.27E+04 1 1 303 3.94+3:22?1:87 7.56+4:38?2:34 8.67+4:43?2:63 2.90E+04 2.81E+04 2.73E+04 1 1 304 8.99+4:12?2:94 5.23+3:14?2:41 15.1+4:84?3:95 3.69E+04 3.53E+04 3.69E+04 5 5 192 Table A.2|Continued # nsoft nhard nfull tsoft thard tfull Field #s Detections 305 15.8+5:28?3:77 13+4:71?3:56 28.9+6:59?5:22 3.49E+04 3.46E+04 3.47E+04 5 235 306 2.47+2:16?1:79 10.2+4:04?3:34 11.6+4:98?3 6.89E+04 6.86E+04 6.94E+04 1 1 307 3.43+2:48?2:09 2.2+2:43?1:52 3.71+3:45?1:64 3.52E+04 3.47E+04 3.49E+04 5 5 308 8.67+4:43?2:63 <6.07 12.3+4:26?3:72 6.91E+04 6.83E+04 6.89E+04 1 1 309 0.106+1:72?0:106 2.38+2:24?1:71 4.14+3:01?2:08 6.56E+04 6.49E+04 6.57E+04 1 1 310 4.33+2:82?2:27 3.56+3:59?1:5 9.44+3:67?3:39 6.82E+04 6.77E+04 6.81E+04 1 1 311 4.27+2:89?2:2 5.69+3:89?2:08 9.51+4:75?2:63 3.42E+04 3.39E+04 3.52E+04 2 123 312 8.44+3:5?3:23 7.21+3:55?2:81 16.2+4:84?4:21 3.55E+04 3.55E+04 3.52E+04 5 235 313 9.17+3:94?3:13 13.6+5:27?3:27 20.9+5:75?4:46 3.63E+04 3.58E+04 3.64E+04 8 68 314 6.01+3:56?2:41 4.69+3:68?1:87 8.07+3:87?2:85 6.81E+04 6.76E+04 6.81E+04 1 1 315 7.85+4:09?2:63 <3.49 8.15+3:79?2:93 3.55E+04 3.62E+04 3.57E+04 8 168 316 5.25+3:12?2:43 <7.39 5.77+3:8?2:17 6.96E+04 6.80E+04 6.91E+04 1 1 317 15.4+4:6?4:2 5.81+3:77?2:21 21.9+5:91?4:52 3.70E+04 3.77E+04 3.73E+04 3 235 318 19+5:42?4:34 1.69+2:94?1:01 23.8+6:18?4:65 3.12E+04 2.97E+04 3.09E+04 5 5 319 33.8+7:05?5:64 13.9+4:95?3:58 48+8?6:88 3.16E+04 3.00E+04 3.09E+04 5 5 320 48.1+7:84?7:05 27.9+6:46?5:16 74.8+9:87?8:48 3.59E+04 3.67E+04 3.62E+04 8 168 321 3.93+3:23?1:86 7.7+4:24?2:48 9.53+4:73?2:65 4.77E+04 4.86E+04 4.79E+04 1 1 322 50.6+8:58?6:73 25.5+6:62?4:61 72.9+9:66?8:45 3.65E+04 3.69E+04 3.67E+04 8 68 323 138+13:2?11:3 86.1+10:2?9:36 223+16:3?14:6 3.45E+04 3.42E+04 3.43E+04 8 8 324 3.28+2:63?1:94 13.4+4:3?3:96 14.3+4:48?4:05 3.44E+04 3.24E+04 3.37E+04 5 5 325 7.29+3:47?2:89 <4.11 8.48+3:46?3:26 2.74E+04 2.66E+04 2.72E+04 6 6 326 4.21+2:94?2:15 6.29+3:29?2:69 12.1+4:41?3:58 6.27E+04 6.11E+04 6.10E+04 1 1 327 19.1+5:34?4:42 12.1+4:45?3:53 29.6+6:97?5:02 3.74E+04 3.64E+04 3.70E+04 5 5 328 98.4+10:5?10:3 35.2+6:76?6:1 131+12:9?11 3.24E+04 3.03E+04 3.15E+04 5 5 329 21+5:65?4:56 9.13+3:97?3:09 29.6+6:97?5:02 3.79E+04 3.67E+04 3.75E+04 5 5 330 24.9+6:12?4:91 22.1+5:62?4:8 42+7:56?6:43 7.19E+04 6.99E+04 7.15E+04 1 189 331 323+18:6?18:4 155+13:2?12:7 472+22:4?22:1 3.39E+04 3.34E+04 3.36E+04 8 8 332 147+13:3?12 45.4+7:35?7:1 193+15:1?13:7 3.65E+04 3.74E+04 3.68E+04 3 235 333 1.31+1:98?1:17 4.2+2:96?2:13 7.8+4:14?2:58 2.87E+04 2.80E+04 2.84E+04 6 6 334 5.75+3:83?2:15 4.8+3:58?1:97 10.7+4:7?2:99 3.50E+04 3.35E+04 3.43E+04 5 5 335 3.54+3:61?1:48 5.62+3:95?2:02 9.74+4:52?2:86 3.63E+04 3.59E+04 3.61E+04 5 5 336 14.9+5:01?3:78 4.62+3:75?1:8 20.6+6:02?4:18 2.75E+04 2.67E+04 2.71E+04 6 68 337 5.95+3:62?2:35 2.53+3:38?1:19 9.26+3:85?3:21 3.64E+04 3.72E+04 3.66E+04 8 8 338 4.53+3:85?1:71 <7.13 7.94+4?2:72 7.11E+04 6.94E+04 7.06E+04 1 1 339 7.87+4:07?2:65 2.67+3:24?1:33 12.4+4:16?3:83 3.76E+04 3.62E+04 3.71E+04 5 5 340 2.72+3:19?1:37 8.49+3:45?3:28 11.1+4:34?3:35 7.15E+04 6.98E+04 7.10E+04 1 1 341 12.5+5:19?3:07 9.85+4:41?2:97 23.9+6:07?4:76 7.09E+04 6.87E+04 7.04E+04 1 1 342 22+5:74?4:68 6.89+3:87?2:49 31.8+6:91?5:43 3.76E+04 3.61E+04 3.71E+04 5 5 193 Table A.2|Continued # nsoft nhard nfull tsoft thard tfull Field #s Detections 343 10.8+4:65?3:04 <4.71 12.3+4:23?3:75 3.65E+04 3.74E+04 3.68E+04 3 235 344 3.41+2:5?2:07 41.5+7:98?6:01 39.1+7:19?6:33 6.91E+04 6.68E+04 6.88E+04 1 19 345 6.65+4:11?2:25 5.27+3:1?2:45 11.2+4:23?3:46 7.11E+04 6.78E+04 7.02E+04 1 1 346 6.03+3:55?2:42 3.62+3:53?1:56 9.51+4:75?2:63 3.53E+04 3.39E+04 3.45E+04 5 5 347 11.7+4:88?3:1 6.29+3:29?2:69 16.1+5:02?4:02 3.70E+04 3.81E+04 3.74E+04 3 35 348 5.54+4:04?1:93 29+6:41?5:39 10.2+4:03?3:36 6.77E+04 6.57E+04 6.72E+04 1 1 349 0.8+2:49?0:666 8.67+4:44?2:63 7.24+3:52?2:84 3.67E+04 3.76E+04 3.71E+04 8 8 350 3.83+3:32?1:77 <4.55 4.32+2:84?2:25 3.73E+04 3.59E+04 3.68E+04 5 5 351 23.3+5:56?5:07 9.78+4:49?2:9 33.3+6:54?5:99 3.45E+04 3.28E+04 3.38E+04 5 5 352 20.7+5:92?4:28 14.6+5:35?3:44 33.5+7:34?5:35 3.63E+04 3.66E+04 3.62E+04 8 8 353 38.3+6:95?6:41 7.85+4:09?2:64 45.7+8:13?6:46 3.42E+04 3.37E+04 3.40E+04 8 8 354 3.6+3:56?1:53 0.26+1:57?0:26 6.76+4:01?2:35 6.62E+04 6.45E+04 6.55E+04 1 1 355 142+13:1?11:7 42.6+8:02?6:12 186+15?13:3 6.91E+04 6.75E+04 6.87E+04 1 189 356 8.88+4:22?2:84 <3.97 9.68+4:58?2:8 3.68E+04 3.74E+04 3.70E+04 3 3 357 52.7+8:67?6:92 26.9+6:32?5:11 79.2+9:7?9:1 3.56E+04 3.48E+04 3.52E+04 9 139 358 5.64+3:93?2:04 <6.71 5.23+3:15?2:41 5.73E+04 5.64E+04 5.73E+04 1 1 359 9.37+3:74?3:33 13.1+4:55?3:72 23.2+5:65?4:98 3.23E+04 3.01E+04 3.13E+04 5 5 360 33.6+7:28?5:42 18.9+5:56?4:2 51.1+8:13?7:18 6.59E+04 6.38E+04 6.52E+04 1 1 361 2.92+2:99?1:58 9.68+4:58?2:81 13.9+4:92?3:61 6.92E+04 6.72E+04 6.91E+04 1 1 362 58.4+8:27?7:98 43.1+7:51?6:63 101+11?10:1 6.88E+04 6.71E+04 6.83E+04 1 189 363 14.8+5:12?3:68 13.3+4:38?3:88 26.7+6:51?4:92 7.02E+04 6.82E+04 6.98E+04 1 1 364 46.5+8:4?6:34 13.9+4:89?3:64 59.9+8:93?7:59 6.85E+04 6.69E+04 6.81E+04 1 189 365 2.82+3:09?1:48 3.54+3:62?1:47 5.32+3:05?2:5 3.42E+04 3.42E+04 3.49E+04 8 18 366 9.99+4:27?3:12 1.6+3:03?0:92 14.6+5:33?3:46 3.71E+04 3.66E+04 3.72E+04 8 68 367 25.8+6:36?4:87 7.38+3:39?2:97 36.8+7:38?5:81 6.89E+04 6.77E+04 6.86E+04 1 1 368 5.64+3:94?2:04 2.55+3:36?1:21 8.36+3:58?3:14 3.75E+04 3.82E+04 3.79E+04 8 8 369 8.02+3:92?2:8 8.77+4:33?2:73 16.7+5:46?3:83 3.45E+04 3.36E+04 3.40E+04 3 3 370 4.71+3:66?1:89 8.37+3:57?3:15 8.07+3:87?2:85 3.79E+04 3.86E+04 3.81E+04 3 3 371 3.1+2:8?1:76 9.73+4:54?2:85 15.4+4:58?4:21 6.89E+04 6.59E+04 6.79E+04 1 13 372 18.1+5:24?4:29 1.92+2:71?1:24 20.9+5:75?4:45 3.51E+04 3.49E+04 3.50E+04 8 18 373 73.5+10:1?8:12 23.8+6:21?4:63 101+10:9?10:2 6.69E+04 6.57E+04 6.66E+04 1 189 374 15.7+5:34?3:71 18.5+4:86?4:67 35.7+7:32?5:71 3.64E+04 3.73E+04 3.68E+04 3 123 375 9.32+3:79?3:27 2.14+2:49?1:46 11.9+4:68?3:31 3.61E+04 3.57E+04 3.62E+04 9 139 376 9.53+4:73?2:65 9.18+3:92?3:14 20.5+6:15?4:06 3.63E+04 3.52E+04 3.59E+04 5 35 377 6.44+3:13?2:84 0.795+2:49?0:661 7.94+4?2:72 3.84E+04 3.84E+04 3.84E+04 8 8 378 4.32+2:84?2:25 2.07+2:56?1:39 5.71+3:87?2:11 3.85E+04 3.84E+04 3.85E+04 8 8 379 1.99+2:63?1:32 6.71+4:05?2:31 9.4+3:7?3:36 3.50E+04 3.54E+04 3.51E+04 3 3 380 <0.446 37.8+7:37?5:99 36.4+6:62?6:41 3.77E+04 3.85E+04 3.81E+04 8 8 194 Table A.2|Continued # nsoft nhard nfull tsoft thard tfull Field #s Detections 381 182+14:8?13:2 14.4+4:4?4:13 191+14:7?13:9 3.67E+04 3.67E+04 3.65E+04 3 35 382 6.48+3:1?2:87 1.01+2:28?0:878 7.55+4:39?2:33 3.72E+04 3.77E+04 3.73E+04 3 13 383 17.9+5:41?4:12 14.5+5:43?3:37 32.2+6:51?5:84 3.32E+04 3.24E+04 3.30E+04 3 35 384 7.48+3:29?3:08 6.85+3:91?2:45 13.9+4:96?3:58 3.73E+04 3.69E+04 3.72E+04 9 19 385 6.42+3:16?2:82 17.9+5:42?4:11 22.9+5:96?4:68 3.55E+04 3.47E+04 3.49E+04 8 8 386 6.61+4:15?2:21 <3.35 6.04+3:54?2:43 3.61E+04 3.69E+04 3.62E+04 3 39 387 10.9+4:54?3:15 1.16+2:13?1:03 14.1+4:73?3:8 3.36E+04 3.27E+04 3.31E+04 5 35 388 43.4+7:17?6:98 15.1+4:82?3:97 57.7+8:92?7:33 3.50E+04 3.36E+04 3.44E+04 9 89 389 0.486+1:34?0:486 7.51+4:43?2:29 7.24+3:52?2:84 3.62E+04 3.63E+04 3.64E+04 3 3 390 45.4+7:34?7:11 24.1+5:88?4:96 69.5+9:86?7:9 3.74E+04 3.62E+04 3.69E+04 9 189 391 9.79+4:47?2:91 2.68+3:23?1:34 13.6+5:21?3:33 3.87E+04 3.87E+04 3.87E+04 3 3 392 19+5:45?4:31 1.94+2:69?1:26 21.7+6:06?4:36 3.86E+04 3.80E+04 3.85E+04 3 3 393 173+14:5?12:8 76+9:8?8:65 247+16:3?16:1 3.60E+04 3.61E+04 3.59E+04 3 139 394 4.58+3:79?1:76 3.86+3:3?1:8 9.95+4:32?3:07 3.76E+04 3.74E+04 3.75E+04 9 9 395 12+4:54?3:44 6.81+3:96?2:4 18.8+5:66?4:1 3.86E+04 3.83E+04 3.86E+04 3 3 396 2.17+2:46?1:49 9.6+4:66?2:72 11.4+4?3:69 6.60E+04 6.43E+04 6.54E+04 1 1 397 21.8+5:92?4:5 20.9+5:79?4:41 45.9+7:89?6:7 6.70E+04 6.56E+04 6.66E+04 1 189 398 55.5+8:01?7:85 16.2+4:83?4:22 74+9:63?8:6 3.80E+04 3.72E+04 3.80E+04 8 89 399 15.9+5:15?3:9 6.55+4:22?2:15 21.2+5:48?4:73 3.70E+04 3.68E+04 3.68E+04 3 35 400 1.34+1:94?1:21 <3.85 2.91+2:99?1:57 3.42E+04 3.43E+04 3.44E+04 8 8 401 13.7+5:11?3:43 3.53+3:63?1:46 18.6+5:86?3:9 3.31E+04 3.19E+04 3.27E+04 5 5 402 <0.446 2.72+3:19?1:38 5.12+3:26?2:3 3.49E+04 3.59E+04 3.60E+04 8 8 403 1.92+2:71?1:24 7.59+4:35?2:38 6.86+3:9?2:46 3.85E+04 3.82E+04 3.84E+04 3 3 404 61+8:88?7:76 19.1+5:38?4:38 80.6+10:4?8:61 3.50E+04 3.41E+04 3.46E+04 5 35 405 7.87+4:07?2:65 0.532+2:76?0:398 10.3+3:99?3:39 3.76E+04 3.68E+04 3.75E+04 8 8 406 17.9+5:43?4:1 8.03+3:91?2:81 24.8+6:26?4:78 3.37E+04 3.15E+04 3.29E+04 5 5 407 3.84+3:31?1:78 0.635+2:65?0:501 7.33+3:44?2:92 3.77E+04 3.72E+04 3.76E+04 3 3 408 4.6+3:78?1:78 0.63+2:66?0:496 5.04+3:33?2:22 3.78E+04 3.77E+04 3.78E+04 9 9 409 13.1+4:56?3:71 1.24+2:05?1:11 16+5:06?3:99 3.77E+04 3.74E+04 3.76E+04 3 3 410 8.08+3:86?2:86 <5.4 7.98+3:96?2:76 3.84E+04 3.77E+04 3.82E+04 3 3 411 202+14:8?14:7 70.7+9:73?8:15 274+17:6?16:5 3.73E+04 3.62E+04 3.68E+04 9 189 412 11.2+4:24?3:45 3+2:91?1:66 14.8+5:17?3:62 3.39E+04 3.38E+04 3.36E+04 8 8 413 29.5+5:95?5:85 38.9+7:44?6:08 66.9+9:33?8:06 6.51E+04 6.38E+04 6.47E+04 1 189 414 54.2+8:15?7:57 25.6+6:56?4:67 76.5+9:29?9:16 3.47E+04 3.37E+04 3.43E+04 5 35 415 3.46+2:45?2:11 7.35+3:41?2:95 8.81+4:29?2:77 3.71E+04 3.69E+04 3.70E+04 3 3 416 1.45+1:84?1:32 3.87+3:28?1:81 5.82+3:76?2:22 3.76E+04 3.77E+04 3.76E+04 9 9 417 17.5+5:82?3:71 9.63+4:64?2:75 23.5+5:38?5:25 3.39E+04 3.31E+04 3.34E+04 9 89 418 24.9+6:18?4:86 12.9+4:81?3:46 38+7:18?6:18 6.55E+04 6.41E+04 6.51E+04 1 189 195 Table A.2|Continued # nsoft nhard nfull tsoft thard tfull Field #s Detections 419 19.7+5:86?4:12 4.17+2:98?2:11 24.3+5:65?5:18 3.74E+04 3.61E+04 3.72E+04 8 89 420 13.1+4:56?3:7 3.56+3:59?1:5 20.9+5:76?4:45 3.84E+04 3.81E+04 3.83E+04 9 189 421 4.94+3:43?2:12 6.7+4:07?2:29 11.5+3:93?3:76 3.70E+04 3.65E+04 3.69E+04 8 8 422 10.2+4:02?3:36 <6.27 9.71+4:55?2:83 3.40E+04 3.25E+04 3.34E+04 5 5 423 5.83+3:74?2:23 <12 5.6+3:98?2 3.41E+04 3.30E+04 3.36E+04 5 35 424 10.6+4:77?2:92 33.1+6:72?5:8 37.5+6:68?6:51 3.70E+04 3.70E+04 3.70E+04 9 139 425 4.7+3:67?1:88 0.828+2:46?0:694 6.45+3:12?2:85 3.72E+04 3.70E+04 3.71E+04 3 39 426 8.88+4:22?2:84 4.22+2:94?2:15 13.6+5:21?3:33 3.66E+04 3.57E+04 3.65E+04 3 3 427 9.99+4:27?3:11 2.78+3:13?1:44 12.1+4:45?3:53 3.49E+04 3.50E+04 3.47E+04 3 3 428 0.894+2:39?0:76 2.11+2:52?1:43 5.02+3:36?2:2 3.71E+04 3.69E+04 3.69E+04 3 3 429 7.76+4:18?2:55 1.51+3:12?0:835 10.4+3:89?3:49 3.44E+04 3.32E+04 3.39E+04 5 5 430 4.04+3:11?1:98 2.66+3:25?1:32 5.12+3:26?2:3 3.78E+04 3.72E+04 3.76E+04 3 3 431 8.78+4:33?2:73 4.82+3:55?2 13.4+4:28?3:98 3.68E+04 3.58E+04 3.66E+04 8 8 432 5.05+3:32?2:23 0.502+2:79?0:368 7.2+3:56?2:8 3.49E+04 3.45E+04 3.46E+04 3 3 433 12+4:54?3:44 0.329+1:5?0:329 13.8+5?3:53 3.67E+04 3.67E+04 3.67E+04 9 19 434 5.49+2:89?2:67 4.19+2:96?2:13 9.19+3:92?3:15 3.74E+04 3.71E+04 3.73E+04 3 39 435 29+6:47?5:34 6.97+3:8?2:56 37+7:18?6:01 3.48E+04 3.52E+04 3.47E+04 3 3 436 7.62+4:31?2:41 2.04+2:59?1:36 7.95+3:99?2:73 3.74E+04 3.71E+04 3.72E+04 3 3 437 15.9+5:14?3:9 0.154+1:67?0:154 17.6+5:7?3:83 3.11E+04 3.10E+04 3.11E+04 9 9 438 73.7+9:9?8:33 28+6:33?5:29 98.5+11:5?9:46 3.78E+04 3.64E+04 3.68E+04 9 39 439 8.78+4:33?2:73 2.75+3:16?1:41 12.3+4:26?3:72 3.87E+04 3.85E+04 3.87E+04 9 19 440 1.71+2:92?1:03 6.93+3:84?2:52 7.56+4:38?2:34 3.88E+04 3.89E+04 3.88E+04 9 9 441 20.1+5:47?4:51 43+7:65?6:49 65.3+8:78?8:37 6.44E+04 6.29E+04 6.39E+04 1 19 442 28.1+6:28?5:34 5.64+3:93?2:04 37.3+6:88?6:32 3.77E+04 3.75E+04 3.76E+04 3 39 443 7.77+4:17?2:55 9.47+3:63?3:43 10.5+3:78?3:6 3.76E+04 3.71E+04 3.74E+04 9 9 444 34.5+7:44?5:43 4.79+3:58?1:97 38.6+7:65?5:87 2.81E+04 2.84E+04 2.80E+04 3 3 445 12.1+4:43?3:55 <3.89 11.7+4:85?3:13 3.63E+04 3.60E+04 3.63E+04 9 9 446 6.54+4:23?2:14 16+5:08?3:97 19+5:4?4:36 3.68E+04 3.60E+04 3.66E+04 8 8 447 2.91+3?1:57 9.74+4:53?2:86 12.8+4:92?3:34 3.76E+04 3.74E+04 3.75E+04 3 3 448 6.44+3:13?2:84 6.04+3:53?2:44 16.6+5:63?3:67 3.76E+04 3.73E+04 3.75E+04 3 39 449 3.45+2:46?2:11 0.541+2:75?0:407 6.78+3:99?2:38 3.82E+04 3.76E+04 3.79E+04 9 9 450 1.81+2:82?1:13 5.7+3:87?2:1 7.45+3:31?3:05 3.90E+04 3.91E+04 3.91E+04 9 9 451 15.7+5:42?3:63 9.04+4:07?3 23.1+5:73?4:9 3.66E+04 3.63E+04 3.64E+04 3 39 452 122+11:9?11:2 26.8+6:44?4:98 148+13:4?11:9 3.37E+04 3.26E+04 3.32E+04 5 35 453 5.64+3:94?2:03 1.65+2:98?0:973 8.45+3:48?3:24 3.67E+04 3.61E+04 3.61E+04 9 9 454 153+13:8?11:9 22.5+5:3?5:12 164+14:2?12:4 3.49E+04 3.41E+04 3.44E+04 3 35 455 6.06+3:52?2:46 9.05+4:05?3:01 14.1+4:68?3:85 3.64E+04 3.63E+04 3.64E+04 8 8 456 6.96+3:81?2:55 25.3+5:72?5:32 31.6+7:08?5:27 3.86E+04 3.80E+04 3.83E+04 9 189 196 Table A.2|Continued # nsoft nhard nfull tsoft thard tfull Field #s Detections 457 16.2+4:9?4:15 8.09+3:85?2:88 23.5+6:43?4:4 3.73E+04 3.61E+04 3.68E+04 9 39 458 4.95+3:43?2:13 1.12+2:16?0:99 8.36+3:58?3:14 3.93E+04 3.84E+04 3.89E+04 9 39 459 7.43+3:34?3:02 <6.11 6.73+4:03?2:33 3.42E+04 3.41E+04 3.42E+04 3 3 460 9.32+3:79?3:27 1.64+2:99?0:963 11.4+4:02?3:67 3.56E+04 3.56E+04 3.52E+04 9 9 461 3.7+3:46?1:63 4.74+3:63?1:92 7.16+3:6?2:76 3.12E+04 3.11E+04 3.08E+04 3 3 462 3+2:91?1:66 11.1+4:35?3:34 11.6+4:99?2:99 3.35E+04 3.33E+04 3.32E+04 3 3 463 54.2+8:2?7:53 18.9+5:55?4:21 75.1+9:56?8:78 3.66E+04 3.64E+04 3.65E+04 3 39 464 <3.43 5.99+3:59?2:39 5+3:37?2:18 3.40E+04 3.38E+04 3.39E+04 8 8 465 5.75+3:83?2:14 3.55+3:6?1:49 8.15+3:79?2:93 3.95E+04 3.95E+04 3.95E+04 9 9 466 3.57+3:58?1:51 10.6+4:83?2:86 13.5+5:32?3:21 3.58E+04 3.58E+04 3.58E+04 8 8 467 13.6+5:19?3:34 14+4:78?3:76 27.8+6:57?5:05 3.47E+04 3.50E+04 3.46E+04 8 8 468 16.1+5:02?4:03 4.47+2:68?2:41 19.3+5:16?4:6 3.40E+04 3.35E+04 3.38E+04 8 8 469 2.93+2:98?1:58 14.9+5:07?3:73 17.8+5:55?3:98 3.43E+04 3.33E+04 3.44E+04 9 9 470 13.1+4:61?3:65 <14.1 13.2+4:47?3:79 3.45E+04 3.36E+04 3.40E+04 3 3 471 232+16:6?14:8 149+13:4?12 374+19:9?19:8 3.24E+04 3.22E+04 3.23E+04 8 89 472 28+6:38?5:24 22.7+6:2?4:43 51.4+7:82?7:49 3.58E+04 3.47E+04 3.51E+04 9 39 473 7.58+4:36?2:37 1.24+2:05?1:1 9.49+3:61?3:45 3.54E+04 3.52E+04 3.54E+04 8 8 474 2.25+2:38?1:57 32.6+7:21?5:31 33.4+6:42?6:1 3.19E+04 3.09E+04 3.13E+04 3 3 475 17.9+5:45?4:08 6.6+4:16?2:2 25.7+6:42?4:81 2.53E+04 2.39E+04 2.53E+04 9 9 476 3.08+2:82?1:74 8.32+3:62?3:11 12+4:52?3:46 3.55E+04 3.41E+04 3.49E+04 3 3 477 9.56+4:7?2:69 1.98+2:65?1:31 10.9+4:49?3:2 3.48E+04 3.45E+04 3.47E+04 8 8 478 17.1+5:13?4:16 14.9+5:02?3:78 30.2+6:37?5:61 3.94E+04 3.79E+04 3.89E+04 9 9 479 23.8+6:19?4:65 17.3+4:88?4:41 40.9+7:55?6:29 3.80E+04 3.77E+04 3.78E+04 9 89 480 13+4:67?3:6 6.42+3:15?2:82 19.8+5:7?4:28 3.53E+04 3.37E+04 3.46E+04 3 3 481 46.3+7:53?7:06 20.6+6:1?4:11 62.3+8:66?8:11 3.53E+04 3.50E+04 3.52E+04 3 39 482 95.5+10:3?10:2 47.8+8:17?6:71 158+14?12:2 3.62E+04 3.51E+04 3.57E+04 9 39 483 0.905+2:38?0:771 6.29+3:29?2:69 8.67+4:43?2:63 3.91E+04 3.74E+04 3.86E+04 9 9 484 10+4:26?3:12 7.51+4:43?2:3 17.6+5:76?3:77 3.87E+04 3.70E+04 3.80E+04 9 9 485 4.04+3:11?1:98 5.44+2:93?2:62 8.88+4:22?2:84 3.94E+04 3.76E+04 3.87E+04 9 9 486 15.2+4:72?4:08 31.4+6:25?5:92 43.3+7:32?6:83 3.44E+04 3.41E+04 3.43E+04 8 8 487 16.1+4:96?4:09 4.07+3:08?2:01 20.5+5:07?4:92 3.70E+04 3.63E+04 3.66E+04 9 89 488 7.24+3:53?2:83 15+4:99?3:81 18.1+5:2?4:33 3.20E+04 3.27E+04 3.33E+04 8 8 489 3.94+3:22?1:87 0.878+2:41?0:744 6.76+4:01?2:35 3.91E+04 3.78E+04 3.87E+04 9 9 490 4.47+2:69?2:4 7.42+3:34?3:02 10.7+4:69?3 3.62E+04 3.51E+04 3.57E+04 9 39 491 18.8+5:66?4:1 7.2+3:56?2:8 23.2+5:67?4:96 3.73E+04 3.58E+04 3.69E+04 9 9 492 15.7+5:38?3:67 2.72+3:19?1:38 20.3+5:25?4:74 3.52E+04 3.45E+04 3.51E+04 9 39 493 6.46+3:12?2:86 11.2+4:25?3:44 16+5:07?3:98 3.45E+04 3.39E+04 3.42E+04 3 3 494 4.61+3:77?1:79 <4.67 4.96+3:42?2:14 3.84E+04 3.71E+04 3.79E+04 9 9 197 Table A.2|Continued # nsoft nhard nfull tsoft thard tfull Field #s Detections 495 14+4:78?3:75 4.46+2:69?2:4 21.7+6:06?4:36 3.35E+04 3.18E+04 3.27E+04 9 9 496 42.1+7:42?6:57 37.8+7:45?5:91 76.4+9:34?9:12 3.86E+04 3.72E+04 3.81E+04 9 9 497 23.5+5:41?5:22 17.2+5:05?4:25 41.5+7?6:84 3.43E+04 3.35E+04 3.40E+04 9 89 498 9.03+4:07?2:99 6.95+3:82?2:55 14.8+5:18?3:62 3.34E+04 3.25E+04 3.30E+04 8 89 499 41+7:5?6:34 27.6+6:74?4:88 72.2+9:37?8:63 3.42E+04 3.34E+04 3.39E+04 3 39 500 4.84+3:53?2:02 19.2+5:19?4:57 23.6+6:34?4:5 3.38E+04 3.35E+04 3.37E+04 8 8 501 10+4:26?3:12 3.81+3:34?1:75 14.6+5:33?3:47 3.84E+04 3.72E+04 3.80E+04 9 9 502 2.82+3:09?1:48 16.5+4:6?4:45 21.6+6:16?4:26 3.84E+04 3.70E+04 3.79E+04 9 9 503 2.58+3:33?1:24 7.5+4:44?2:29 12.8+4:86?3:4 3.43E+04 3.40E+04 3.41E+04 3 3 504 6.06+3:52?2:46 0.682+2:61?0:548 5.71+3:87?2:11 3.06E+04 2.94E+04 2.98E+04 9 9 505 7.86+4:08?2:65 8.45+3:49?3:23 16.6+5:58?3:72 3.83E+04 3.64E+04 3.75E+04 9 9 506 25.8+6:38?4:85 3.15+2:76?1:81 30+6:51?5:48 3.75E+04 3.64E+04 3.71E+04 9 9 507 0.463+1:36?0:463 0.428+1:4?0:428 1.27+2:02?1:13 3.32E+04 3.20E+04 3.27E+04 9 9 508 0.552+2:74?0:418 5.81+3:77?2:21 5.81+3:77?2:21 3.80E+04 3.68E+04 3.75E+04 9 9 509 12.3+4:24?3:74 2.71+3:2?1:37 17.3+4:88?4:41 3.76E+04 3.58E+04 3.68E+04 9 9 510 5.83+3:75?2:22 8.16+3:78?2:95 12.1+4:48?3:5 3.75E+04 3.64E+04 3.71E+04 9 9 511 9.21+3:9?3:16 7.22+3:54?2:82 17.5+5:8?3:73 3.71E+04 3.58E+04 3.66E+04 9 9 512 27.3+5:98?5:44 9.52+4:74?2:65 35.3+6:64?6:22 3.50E+04 3.40E+04 3.45E+04 9 9 513 4.56+3:81?1:74 1.8+2:83?1:12 5.37+3:01?2:54 3.72E+04 3.64E+04 3.68E+04 9 9 514 32.3+6:39?5:96 14.7+5:24?3:55 47.6+8:38?6:51 1.80E+04 1.81E+04 1.75E+04 9 9 515 12+4:54?3:44 9.66+4:6?2:78 20.9+5:71?4:5 3.64E+04 3.44E+04 3.56E+04 9 9 516 7.14+3:62?2:74 11+4:39?3:3 18.4+4:95?4:57 3.57E+04 3.44E+04 3.52E+04 9 9 517 269+17:7?16:1 115+12?10:5 380+20:7?19:3 3.62E+04 3.44E+04 3.55E+04 9 9 518 14.1+4:73?3:81 33.9+7:03?5:66 41.4+7:08?6:75 3.61E+04 3.52E+04 3.57E+04 9 9 519 15.1+4:85?3:94 10.6+4:81?2:88 23.4+5:49?5:14 3.53E+04 3.38E+04 3.47E+04 9 9 520 2.78+3:13?1:43 16.6+5:63?3:66 20.4+5:09?4:89 3.51E+04 3.40E+04 3.46E+04 9 9 521 12.8+4:88?3:38 1.73+2:9?1:05 15.6+5:53?3:52 3.58E+04 3.49E+04 3.54E+04 9 9 522 13.6+5:27?3:27 3.39+2:52?2:05 16.8+5:37?3:92 3.58E+04 3.48E+04 3.53E+04 9 9 523 7.55+4:39?2:33 39.1+7:21?6:31 47.5+7:42?7:32 3.20E+04 3.03E+04 3.08E+04 9 9 524 20.5+6:14?4:06 5.57+4:01?1:97 27.6+6:75?4:87 3.14E+04 3.01E+04 2.94E+04 9 9 525 9.87+4:39?3 3.5+2:41?2:16 15.7+5:4?3:64 3.50E+04 3.39E+04 3.45E+04 9 9 198 Appendix B Blackhole mass and X-ray luminosity In this appendix I discuss the relationship between X-ray luminosity and black- hole mass. A strong correlation between the bolometric luminosity and the mass of supermassive blackhole in an AGN is expected if the supermassive blackhole radi- ates at a universal Eddington ratio. Surprisingly, using a compiled sample of AGNs with various mass estimates and optical luminosities, (Woo & Urry 2002) claimed that there is little correlation between blackhole mass and bolometric luminosity. However, the bolometric corrections these author used are too simple to deal with the complex extinction in the AGN. This probably explains in part the lack of correlation found in their study. Being mostly unafiected by absorption (Mushotzky 2004), and most likely coming from regions very close to the blackhole, the hard X-ray radiation should be a better indicator of the energy output of AGNs than the radiation in optical band. We will therefore test the correlation using X-ray luminosity. While spatially resolved kinematic methods provides very accurate mass esti- mates, the method is only limited to nearby galaxies. Very few blackhole mass can be measured directly. The best method to measure a sizable sample of blackhole mass in AGNs is reverberation mapping (Peterson 1993). The method assumes that the broad emission lines in AGNs are produced by gas clouds moving at virial veloc- ity v around the blackholes. The radius of the broad line region RBLR is obtained 199 by measuring the the time lag between the variation of the continuum ( presumably from the accretion disk) and the response to the variation in the broad emission lines. The blackhole mass is then MBH = v 2RBLR G : (B.1) Even though there has been evidence (Krolik 2001) that the broad line clouds are in- deed virialized, the existence of out ow could lead to an overestimation of blackhole mass from Equation B.1. We search the archive (using BROWSE on HEASARC database) for the hard X-ray uxes for the 36 broadline AGNs with reverberation mapping mass estimates compiled by Woo & Urry (2002). The ASCA, HEAO-1 catalogs are searched. In cases where there is no listing of hard X-ray uxes in these database, we use the ROSAT uxes and convert the 0.5{2 keV ux to 2{10 keV by assuming the source spectra can be described with a single power-law with a photo index of ? = 1:8. The redshift, blackhole mass, and the X-ray ux are listed in Table B.1. The rest frame 2{10 keV luminosity are calculated with the standard ?CDM cosmology. The K-correction is performed assuming a single power-law spectrum with ? = 1:8. We plot the blackhole mass versus X-ray luminosity in Figure 63. The data clearly shows a correlation between logMBH and logLx. Using linear regression we found logLx = (1:03?0:20)logMBH + 35:88: (B.2) This agrees perfectly with the same relation found in Barger et al. (2005). 200 Figure 63: The blackhole mass from reverberation mapping and their 2{10 keV luminosities. The solid line shows the best-flt. The dotted line shows the relation in Equation 6.21 (Barger et al. 2005). 201 Table B.1. X-ray uxes for AGNs Compiled in Woo & Urry (2002) name redshift f2?10 keVa log(MBH=Mfl) 3C120 0.033 4.5 7.42 3C390.3 0.056 1.7 8.55 AKN120 0.032 2.7 8.27 F9 0.047 2.3 7.91 IC4329a 0.016 6.9 6.77 Mrk79 0.022 1.0 7.86 Mrk110 0.035 2.8 6.82 Mrk335 0.026 .96 6.69 Mrk509 0.034 5.0 7.86 Mrk590 0.026 .70 7.2 Mrk817 0.032 ...... 7.6 NGC3227 0.004 2.8 7.64 NGC3516 0.009 4.5 7.36 NGC3783 0.01 6.7 6.94 NGC4051 0.002 2.0 6.13 NGC4151 0.003 21. 7.13 NGC4593 0.009 4.4 6.91 NGC5548 0.017 5.0 8.03 NGC7469 0.016 3.0 6.84 PG0026+129 .14 ...... 7.58 PG0052+251 0.16 ...... 8.41 PG0804+761 0.1 .95 8.24 PG0844+349 0.064 .24 7.38 PG0953+414 0.239 .27 8.24 PG1211+143 0.085 .28 7.49 PG1229+204 0.064 1.2 8.56 PG1307+085 0.155 ...... 7.9 PG1351+640 0.087 ...... 8.48 PG1411+442 0.089 ...... 7.57 202 Table B.1|Continued name redshift f2?10 keVa log(MBH=Mfl) PG1426+015 0.086 3.2 7.92 PG1613+658 0.129 .95 8.62 PG1617+175 0.114 ...... 7.88 PG1700+518 0.292 .043 8.31 PG2130+099 0.061 ...... 7.74 PG1226+023 0.158 15. 8.74 PG1704+608 0.371 1.2 8.23 aUnit: 10?11 ergcm?2 s?1 Appendix C Notes On Cosmology In this Appendix I will review the basic concepts and some commonly used equations in cosmology. The purpose is to provide needed context and tools to understand the results of our deep survey. C.1 Standard picture Modern cosmology is based on a minimal set of assumptions called the Cos- mological principle, which states that the universe is uniform and isotropic. This means for any observer \free falling" in the universe, at least on large enough scales, the universe looks the same no matter where you are or which direction you look at. In other words, the spacetime can be sliced into hypersurfaces of constant time. 203 This lead to the Robertson-Walker metric in Riemann geometry, ds2 = dt2?R2(t) ? dr2 1?kr2 +r 2(d 2 + sin2 d`2) ? ; (C.1) where k = ?1;0;1 correspond to open, closed and spatially at geometries. R(t) is the scaling factor and the coordinates (r; ;`) can be treated as angles. Let dx = dr=p1?kr2, the expansion velocity d(R(t)x) dt = _R RRx?H(t)d (C.2) where H(t) is the Hubble function. At present epoch, this gives the Hubble Law: v = H0d (C.3) where H0 is the Hubble constant. In the expanding universe, the observed wave- length of light from distant galaxies will be redshifted, and the redshift (z ???=?) can be found to be z = R0R(t) ?1: (C.4) By pluging Equation C.1 into Einstein equation and assume the universe is made of perfect uid, one gets the Friedman-Lema^itre Equation, H(t)2 = ( _R R) 2 = 8?G? 3 ? kc2 R2 + ?c2 3 ; (C.5) and ?R R = ?c2 3 ? 4?G 3 (?+ 3p=c 2); (C.6) where ? is the cosmological constant. Conservation of energy yields _? =?3H(t)(?+p=c2): (C.7) 204 To complete the equations, the equation of state is needed, which commonly assume the form p = wc2?: (C.8) In case of relativistic particle/radiation dominated equation of state, w = 1=3; in the matter dominated case, w = 0; and in the cosmological constant/dark energy dominated case, w =?1. From Equation C.7, we have ?/R?3(1+w) (C.9) We next introduce some commonly used cosmological parameters in the stan- dard model. By deflning the density parameter ?M = 8?G?03H2 0 ; (C.10) the normalized cosmological constant ?? = ?c 2 3H2; (C.11) and normalized Hubble function H(z) = H0E(z); (C.12) the Friedman Equation can be written as E(z)2 = ?M(1 +z)3 + ?? + (1??M ???)(1 +z)2; (C.13) where we have used Equation C.8 and Equation C.7 to eliminate ? and p. The evolution of ?M and ?? are simply ?M(z) = ?ME(z)2(1 +z)3 (C.14) 205 ??(z) = ??E(z)2 (C.15) Sometimes, we use the curvature density parameter ?k, which can be deflned using Friedman Equation, ?k = 1??M ???: (C.16) In Figure 64 we show the evolution of ?M and ?? in the ?CDM model. At z >> 1, ?M !1, approaching an Einstein{de Sitter model. Figure 64: The evolution of ?M (solid line) and ?? (dotted line). C.2 Cosmological distances The comoving distance is the distance between two objects if both are locked in the Hubble ow and measured at present epoch. The comoving distance can be obtained directly from the Robertson-Walker metric (Equation C.1). We flrst 206 look at the comoving distance of a galaxy at redshift of z. Along the line-of-sight (d = 0;d` = 0) we have ~r = Z r 0 dr 1?kr2 = Z t 0 c R(t)dt: (C.17) Using Equation C.12 and the deflnition of redshift, and scale ~r with R0, we have Dc = R0~r = cH 0 Z z 0 dz0 E(z0) (C.18) On the other hand, if the two objects are at the same redshift but are separated by some angle ??, then the the comoving distance D?? gives the separation of the two objects at the presnet epoch. When studying the large scale structure, we need to calculate the comoving distance between two objects in difierent directions and with difierent redshifts. It can be shown that (Matarrese et al. 1997), d = q ?D21 +D22 ?2?D1D2 cos ; (C.19) where ? = r 1 + ?k(H0D1c )2 + D1 cos D 2 ? 1? r 1 + ?k(H0D2c )2 ! : (C.20) In observational cosmology there are a few \distances" deflned so that the relations in the Euclidean space can be applied. If a galaxy has a physical size dl, and the anglular diameter is d?, we can deflne angular diameter distance so that dl = DAd?: (C.21) The luminosity distance is deflned so that a galaxy at redshift of z have luminosity of L, then the observed ux is f = L4?D2 L (C.22) 207 Figure 65: Comoving distance (solid line), angular size distance (dotted-line) and luminosity distance (dashed-line) as a function of redshift. We have chosen k = 0 and ?? = 0:73. (dotted line). These distances are related to the comoving distance in a simple way, DA = D1 +z (C.23) DL = D(1 +z) = (1 +z)2DA (C.24) The cosmological distances as a function of redshift in a ?CDM cosmology is shown in Figure 65. In some circumstances such as in the gravitational lensing equation, the an- gular distance between two objects at difierent redshifts need to be calculated. For ?k ?0, the angular distance of object 2 seen from object 1 is DA(z1;z2) = 11 +z 2 D2 q 1 + ?kD21H20=c2?D1 q 1 + ?kD22H20=c2 ? : (C.25) 208 This implies the reciprocity theorem: DA(z1;z2) DA(z2;z1) = 1 +z1 1 +z2: (C.26) When k = 0, Equation C.25 simplifles to DA(z1;z2) = 11 +z 2 (D2?D1): (C.27) 209 BIBLIOGRAPHY Adelberger, K. L., Steidel, C. C., Giavalisco, M., Dickinson, M., Pettini, M., & Kellogg, M. 1998, ApJ, 505, 18 Akiyama, M. 2005, ArXiv Astrophysics e-prints Akiyama, M., Ueda, Y., Ohta, K., Takahashi, T., & Yamada, T. 2003, ApJS, 148, 275 Akylas, A., Georgantopoulos, I., & Plionis, M. 2000, MNRAS, 318, 1036 Alexander, D. M., Bauer, F. E., Brandt, W. N., Schneider, D. P., Hornschemeier, A. E., Vignali, C., Barger, A. J., Broos, P. S., Cowie, L. L., Garmire, G. P., Townsley, L. K., Bautz, M. W., Chartas, G., & Sargent, W. L. W. 2003, AJ, 126, 539 Alexander, D. M., Brandt, W. N., Hornschemeier, A. E., Garmire, G. P., Schneider, D. P., Bauer, F. E., & Gri?ths, R. E. 2001, AJ, 122, 2156 Andreani, P. & Cristiani, S. 1992, ApJ, 398, L13 Baldi, A., Molendi, S., Comastri, A., Fiore, F., Matt, G., & Vignali, C. 2002, ApJ, 564, 190 Barger, A. J., Cowie, L. L., Capak, P., Alexander, D. M., Bauer, F. E., Fernandez, E., Brandt, W. N., Garmire, G. P., & Hornschemeier, A. E. 2003, AJ, 126, 632 Barger, A. J., Cowie, L. L., Mushotzky, R. F., Yang, Y., Wang, W.-H., Stefien, A. T., & Capak, P. 2005, AJ, 129, 578 210 Basilakos, S., Georgakakis, A., Plionis, M., & Georgantopoulos, I. 2004, ApJ, 607, L79 Bauer, F. E., Alexander, D. M., Brandt, W. N., Schneider, D. P., Treister, E., Hornschemeier, A. E., & Garmire, G. P. 2004, AJ, 128, 2048 Bertin, E. & Arnouts, S. 1996, A&AS, 117, 393 Brandt, W. N. & Hasinger, G. 2005, ArXiv Astrophysics e-prints Carrera, F. J., Fabian, A. C., & Barcons, X. 1997, MNRAS, 285, 820 Carroll, S. M., Press, W. H., & Turner, E. L. 1992, ARA&A, 30, 499 Cash, W. 1979, ApJ, 228, 939 Coil, A. L., Davis, M., Madgwick, D. S., Newman, J. A., Conselice, C. J., Cooper, M., Ellis, R. S., Faber, S. M., Finkbeiner, D. P., Guhathakurta, P., Kaiser, N., Koo, D. C., Phillips, A. C., Steidel, C. C., Weiner, B. J., Willmer, C. N. A., & Yan, R. 2004, ApJ, 609, 525 Cowie, L. L., Garmire, G. P., Bautz, M. W., Barger, A. J., Brandt, W. N., & Hornschemeier, A. E. 2002, ApJ, 566, L5 Cowie, L. L., Songaila, A., Hu, E. M., & Cohen, J. G. 1996, AJ, 112, 839 Croom, S. M., Boyle, B. J., Shanks, T., Smith, R. J., Miller, L., Outram, P. J., Loaring, N. S., Hoyle, F., & da ^Angela, J. 2005, MNRAS, 356, 415 Croom, S. M. & Shanks, T. 1996, MNRAS, 281, 893 211 Croom, S. M., Shanks, T., Boyle, B. J., Smith, R. J., Miller, L., Loaring, N. S., & Hoyle, F. 2001, MNRAS, 325, 483 da ^Angela, J., Outram, P. J., Shanks, T., Boyle, B. J., Croom, S. M., Loaring, N. S., Miller, L., & Smith, R. J. 2005, MNRAS, 360, 1040 Davis, M. & Peebles, P. J. E. 1983, ApJ, 267, 465 Dickey, J. M. & Lockman, F. J. 1990, ARA&A, 28, 215 Efron, B. 1982, The Jackknife, the Bootstrap, and Other Resampling Plans (Philadelphia: SIAM) Elvis, M., Wilkes, B. J., McDowell, J. C., Green, R. F., Bechtold, J., Willner, S. P., Oey, M. S., Polomski, E., & Cutri, R. 1994, ApJS, 95, 1 Fan, X., Strauss, M. A., Schneider, D. P., Gunn, J. E., Lupton, R. H., Yanny, B., Anderson, S. F., Anderson, J. E., Annis, J., Bahcall, N. A., Bakken, J. A., Bastian, S., Berman, E., Boroski, W. N., Briegel, C., Briggs, J. W., Brinkmann, J., Carr, M. A., Colestock, P. L., Connolly, A. J., Crocker, J. H., Csabai, I., Czarapata, P. C., Davis, J. E., Doi, M., Elms, B. R., Evans, M. L., Federwitz, G. R., Frieman, J. A., Fukugita, M., Gurbani, V. K., Harris, F. H., Heckman, T. M., Hennessy, G. S., Hindsley, R. B., Holmgren, D. J., Hull, C., Ichikawa, S., Ichikawa, T., Ivezi?c , ?Z., Kent, S., Knapp, G. R., Kron, R. G., Lamb, D. Q., Leger, R. F., Limmongkol, S., Lindenmeyer, C., Long, D. C., Loveday, J., MacKinnon, B., Mannery, E. J., Mantsch, P. M., Margon, B., McKay, T. A., Munn, J. A., Nash, T., Newberg, H. J., Nichol, R. C., Nicinski, T., Okamura, S., Ostriker, 212 J. P., Owen, R., Pauls, A. G., Peoples, J., Petravick, D., Pier, J. R., Pordes, R., Prosapio, A., Rechenmacher, R., Richards, G. T., Richmond, M. W., Rivetta, C. H., Rockosi, C. M., Sandford, D., Sergey, G., Sekiguchi, M., Shimasaku, K., Siegmund, W. A., Smith, J. A., Stoughton, C., Szalay, A. S., Szokoly, G. P., Tucker, D. L., Vogeley, M. S., Waddell, P., Wang, S., Weinberg, D. H., Yasuda, N., & York, D. G. 1999, AJ, 118, 1 Ferrarese, L. 2002, ApJ, 578, 90 Ferrarese, L. & Merritt, D. 2000, ApJ, 539, L9 Fiore, F., La Franca, F., Vignali, C., Comastri, A., Matt, G., Perola, G. C., Cappi, M., Elvis, M., & Nicastro, F. 2000, New Astronomy, 5, 143 Fischer, J.-U., Hasinger, G., Schwope, A. D., Brunner, H., Boller, T., Trumper, J., Voges, W., & Neizvestny, S. 1998, Astronomische Nachrichten, 319, 347 Freeman, P. E., Kashyap, V., Rosner, R., & Lamb, D. Q. 2002, ApJS, 138, 185 Fry, J. N. 1996, ApJ, 461, L65+ Gebhardt, K., Bender, R., Bower, G., Dressler, A., Faber, S. M., Filippenko, A. V., Green, R., Grillmair, C., Ho, L. C., Kormendy, J., Lauer, T. R., Magorrian, J., Pinkney, J., Richstone, D., & Tremaine, S. 2000, ApJ, 539, L13 Gehrels, N. 1986, ApJ, 303, 336 Giacconi, R., Gursky, H., Paolini, F. R., & Rossi, B. B. 1962, Physical Review Letters, 9, 439 213 Giacconi, R., Zirm, A., Wang, J., Rosati, P., Nonino, M., Tozzi, P., Gilli, R., Mainieri, V., Hasinger, G., Kewley, L., Bergeron, J., Borgani, S., Gilmozzi, R., Grogin, N., Koekemoer, A., Schreier, E., Zheng, W., & Norman, C. 2002, ApJS, 139, 369 Giavalisco, M. & Dickinson, M. 2001, ApJ, 550, 177 Gilli, R., Cimatti, A., Daddi, E., Hasinger, G., Rosati, P., Szokoly, G., Tozzi, P., Bergeron, J., Borgani, S., Giacconi, R., Kewley, L., Mainieri, V., Mignoli, M., Nonino, M., Norman, C., Wang, J., Zamorani, G., Zheng, W., & Zirm, A. 2003, ApJ, 592, 721 Gilli, R., Daddi, E., Zamorani, G., Tozzi, P., Borgani, S., Bergeron, J., Giacconi, R., Hasinger, G., Mainieri, V., Norman, C., Rosati, P., Szokoly, G., & Zheng, W. 2005, A&A, 430, 811 Giveon, U., Maoz, D., Kaspi, S., Netzer, H., & Smith, P. S. 1999, MNRAS, 306, 637 Grazian, A., Negrello, M., Moscardini, L., Cristiani, S., Haehnelt, M. G., Matarrese, S., Omizzolo, A., & Vanzella, E. 2004, AJ, 127, 592 Gursky, H. & Schwartz, D. A. 1977, ARA&A, 15, 541 Hamilton, A. J. S. 1992, ApJ, 385, L5 Harrison, F. A., Eckart, M. E., Mao, P. H., Helfand, D. J., & Stern, D. 2003, ApJ, 596, 944 214 Hasinger, G., Burg, R., Giacconi, R., Schmidt, M., Trumper, J., & Zamorani, G. 1998, A&A, 329, 482 Ho, L. C. 2005, ArXiv Astrophysics e-prints Hornschemeier, A. E., Bauer, F. E., Alexander, D. M., Brandt, W. N., Sargent, W. L. W., Vignali, C., Garmire, G. P., & Schneider, D. P. 2003, Astronomische Nachrichten, 324, 12 Ivezi?c, ?Z., Menou, K., Knapp, G. R., Strauss, M. A., Lupton, R. H., Vanden Berk, D. E., Richards, G. T., Tremonti, C., Weinstein, M. A., Anderson, S., Bah- call, N. A., Becker, R. H., Bernardi, M., Blanton, M., Eisenstein, D., Fan, X., Finkbeiner, D., Finlator, K., Frieman, J., Gunn, J. E., Hall, P. B., Kim, R. S. J., Kinkhabwala, A., Narayanan, V. K., Rockosi, C. M., Schlegel, D., Schneider, D. P., Strateva, I., SubbaRao, M., Thakar, A. R., Voges, W., White, R. L., Yanny, B., Brinkmann, J., Doi, M., Fukugita, M., Hennessy, G. S., Munn, J. A., Nichol, R. C., & York, D. G. 2002, AJ, 124, 2364 Kaiser, N. 1987, MNRAS, 227, 1 Kaufimann, G. & Haehnelt, M. 2000, MNRAS, 311, 576 Kaufimann, G. & Haehnelt, M. G. 2002, MNRAS, 332, 529 Kawara, K., Matsuhara, H., Okuda, H., Taniguchi, Y., Sato, Y., Sofue, Y., Waka- matsu, K., Oyabu, S., Sanders, D. B., & Cowie, L. L. 2004, A&A, 413, 843 215 Kim, D.-W., Cameron, R. A., Drake, J. J., Evans, N. R., Freeman, P., Gaetz, T. J., Ghosh, H., Green, P. J., Harnden, F. R., Karovska, M., Kashyap, V., Maksym, P. W., Ratzlafi, P. W., Schlegel, E. M., Silverman, J. D., Tananbaum, H. D., Vikhlinin, A. A., Wilkes, B. J., & Grimes, J. P. 2004, ApJS, 150, 19 Koekemoer, A. M., Moustakas, L., Alexander, D., Bauer, F., Bergeron, J., Brandt, W. N., Conselice, C., Chary, R., Yan, H., Cristiani, S., Dickinson, M., Grogin, N., Treister, E., Urry, C. M., Mainieri, V., Stern, D., & GOODS. 2004, American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, 205, Krolik, J. H. 1999, Active galactic nuclei : from the central black hole to the galactic environment (Active galactic nuclei : from the central black hole to the galactic environment /Julian H. Krolik. Princeton, N. J. : Princeton University Press, c1999.) |. 2001, ApJ, 551, 72 Kuraszkiewicz, J. K., Wilkes, B. J., Hooper, E. J., McLeod, K. K., Wood, K., Bjorkman, J., Delain, K. M., Hughes, D. H., Elvis, M. S., Impey, C. D., Lonsdale, C. J., Malkan, M. A., McDowell, J. C., & Whitney, B. 2003, ApJ, 590, 128 Kushino, A., Ishisaki, Y., Morita, U., Yamasaki, N. Y., Ishida, M., Ohashi, T., & Ueda, Y. 2002, PASJ, 54, 327 Landy, S. D. & Szalay, A. S. 1993, ApJ, 412, 64 Lonsdale, C., Polletta, M. d. C., Surace, J., Shupe, D., Fang, F., Xu, C. K., Smith, H. E., Siana, B., Rowan-Robinson, M., Babbedge, T., Oliver, S., Pozzi, F., 216 Davoodi, P., Owen, F., Padgett, D., Frayer, D., Jarrett, T., Masci, F., O?Linger, J., Conrow, T., Farrah, D., Morrison, G., Gautier, N., Franceschini, A., Berta, S., Perez-Fournon, I., Hatziminaoglou, E., Afonso-Luis, A., Dole, H., Stacey, G., Serjeant, S., Pierre, M., Gri?n, M., & Puetter, R. 2004, ApJS, 154, 54 Magliocchetti, M., Maddox, S. J., Jackson, C. A., Bland-Hawthorn, J., Bridges, T., Cannon, R., Cole, S., Colless, M., Collins, C., Couch, W., Dalton, G., de Propris, R., Driver, S. P., Efstathiou, G., Ellis, R. S., Frenk, C. S., Glazebrook, K., Lahav, O., Lewis, I., Lumsden, S., Peacock, J. A., Peterson, B. A., Sutherland, W., & Taylor, K. 2002, MNRAS, 333, 100 Manners, J. C., Johnson, O., Almaini, O., Willott, C. J., Gonzalez-Solares, E., Lawrence, A., Mann, R. G., Perez-Fournon, I., Dunlop, J. S., McMahon, R. G., Oliver, S. J., Rowan-Robinson, M., & Serjeant, S. 2003, MNRAS, 343, 293 Marshall, F. E., Boldt, E. A., Holt, S. S., Miller, R. B., Mushotzky, R. F., Rose, L. A., Rothschild, R. E., & Serlemitsos, P. J. 1980, ApJ, 235, 4 Matarrese, S., Coles, P., Lucchin, F., & Moscardini, L. 1997, MNRAS, 286, 115 Matt, G. 2002, Royal Society of London Philosophical Transactions Series A, 360, 2045 Mo, H. J., Jing, Y. P., & Boerner, G. 1992, ApJ, 392, 452 Mo, H. J. & White, S. D. M. 1996, MNRAS, 282, 347 Moretti, A., Campana, S., Lazzati, D., & Tagliaferri, G. 2003, ApJ, 588, 696 217 Mullis, C. R., Henry, J. P., Gioia, I. M., B?ohringer, H., Briel, U. G., Voges, W., & Huchra, J. P. 2004, ApJ, 617, 192 Mushotzky, R. 2004, How are AGN Found? (ASSL Vol. 308: Supermassive Black Holes in the Distant Universe), 53 Mushotzky, R. F., Cowie, L. L., Barger, A. J., & Arnaud, K. A. 2000, Nature, 404, 459 Navarro, J. F., Frenk, C. S., & White, S. D. M. 1997, ApJ, 490, 493 Nusser, A. & Davis, M. 1994, ApJ, 421, L1 Osmer, P. S. 1981, ApJ, 247, 762 Peebles, P. J. E. 1980, The large-scale structure of the universe (Research supported by the National Science Foundation. Princeton, N.J., Princeton University Press, 1980. 435 p.) Peterson, B. M. 1993, PASP, 105, 247 Popowski, P. A., Weinberg, D. H., Ryden, B. S., & Osmer, P. S. 1998, ApJ, 498, 11 Pounds, K. A. 1979, Royal Society of London Proceedings Series A, 366, 375 Puchnarewicz, E. M., Mason, K. O., Romero-Colmenero, E., Carrera, F. J., Hasinger, G., McMahon, R., Mittaz, J. P. D., Page, M. J., & Carballo, R. 1996, MNRAS, 281, 1243 Revnivtsev, M., Sazonov, S., Jahoda, K., & Gilfanov, M. 2004, A&A, 418, 927 218 Reynolds, C. S. & Nowak, M. A. 2003, Phys. Rep., 377, 389 Richards, G. T., Fan, X., Schneider, D. P., Vanden Berk, D. E., Strauss, M. A., York, D. G., Anderson, J. E., Anderson, S. F., Annis, J., Bahcall, N. A., Bernardi, M., Briggs, J. W., Brinkmann, J., Brunner, R., Burles, S., Carey, L., Castander, F. J., Connolly, A. J., Crocker, J. H., Csabai, I., Doi, M., Finkbeiner, D., Friedman, S. D., Frieman, J. A., Fukugita, M., Gunn, J. E., Hindsley, R. B., Ivezi?c, ?Z., Kent, S., Knapp, G. R., Lamb, D. Q., Leger, R. F., Long, D. C., Loveday, J., Lupton, R. H., McKay, T. A., Meiksin, A., Merrelli, A., Munn, J. A., Newberg, H. J., Newcomb, M., Nichol, R. C., Owen, R., Pier, J. R., Pope, A., Richmond, M. W., Rockosi, C. M., Schlegel, D. J., Siegmund, W. A., Smee, S., Snir, Y., Stoughton, C., Stubbs, C., SubbaRao, M., Szalay, A. S., Szokoly, G. P., Tremonti, C., Uomoto, A., Waddell, P., Yanny, B., & Zheng, W. 2001, AJ, 121, 2308 Sadler, E. M., Jackson, C. A., Cannon, R. D., McIntyre, V. J., Murphy, T., Bland- Hawthorn, J., Bridges, T., Cole, S., Colless, M., Collins, C., Couch, W., Dalton, G., De Propris, R., Driver, S. P., Efstathiou, G., Ellis, R. S., Frenk, C. S., Glaze- brook, K., Lahav, O., Lewis, I., Lumsden, S., Maddox, S., Madgwick, D., Norberg, P., Peacock, J. A., Peterson, B. A., Sutherland, W., & Taylor, K. 2002, MNRAS, 329, 227 Sandage, A. R. 1971, in Pontiflciae Academiae Scientiarum Scripta Varia, Proceed- ings of a Study Week on Nuclei of Galaxies, held in Rome, April 13-18, 1970, Amsterdam: North Holland, and New York: American Elsevier, 1971, edited by D.J.K. O?Connell., p.271, 271{+ 219 Schmidt, M. 1968, ApJ, 151, 393 Schmidt, M. 1969, in Quasars and high-energy astronomy, 55{+ |. 1970, ApJ, 162, 371 Schneider, D., Fan, X., Hall, P., Jester, S., Richards, G., Stoughton, C., Strauss, M., Subbarao, M., vanden Berk, D., Anderson, S., Brandt, W., Gunn, J., Trump, J., York, D., & York, D. 2004, in ASP Conf. Ser. 311: AGN Physics with the Sloan Digital Sky Survey, 425 Seljak, U. 2002, MNRAS, 337, 774 Shafer, R. A. & Fabian, A. C. 1983, in IAU Symp. 104: Early Evolution of the Universe and its Present Structure, 333{342 Shanks, T. & Boyle, B. J. 1994, MNRAS, 271, 753 Shanks, T., Fong, R., Boyle, B. J., & Peterson, B. A. 1987, MNRAS, 227, 739 Shaver, P. A. 1984, A&A, 136, L9+ Sheth, R. K., Mo, H. J., & Tormen, G. 2001, MNRAS, 323, 1 Shields, G. A., Gebhardt, K., Salviander, S., Wills, B. J., Xie, B., Brotherton, M. S., Yuan, J., & Dietrich, M. 2003, ApJ, 583, 124 Spergel, D. N., Verde, L., Peiris, H. V., Komatsu, E., Nolta, M. R., Bennett, C. L., Halpern, M., Hinshaw, G., Jarosik, N., Kogut, A., Limon, M., Meyer, S. S., Page, 220 L., Tucker, G. S., Weiland, J. L., Wollack, E., & Wright, E. L. 2003, ApJS, 148, 175 Stefien, A. T., Barger, A. J., Capak, P., Cowie, L. L., Mushotzky, R. F., & Yang, Y. 2004, AJ, 128, 1483 Treyer, M., Scharf, C., Lahav, O., Jahoda, K., Boldt, E., & Piran, T. 1998, ApJ, 509, 531 Veilleux, S. 2002, in ASP Conf. Ser. 284: AGN Surveys, 111{+ Veron, P. & Hawkins, M. R. S. 1995, A&A, 296, 665 Veron-Cetty, M.-P. & Veron, P. 1984, A Catalogue of quasars and active nuclei (ESO Scientiflc Report, Garching: European Southern Observatory (ESO), 1984) Vikhlinin, A. & Forman, W. 1995, ApJ, 455, L109+ Vikhlinin, A., Forman, W., Jones, C., & Murray, S. 1995, ApJ, 451, 553 Wake, D. A., Miller, C. J., Di Matteo, T., Nichol, R. C., Pope, A., Szalay, A. S., Gray, A., Schneider, D. P., & York, D. G. 2004, ApJ, 610, L85 Ward, M., Penston, M. V., Blades, J. C., & Turtle, A. J. 1980, MNRAS, 193, 563 Weisskopf, M. C., Aldcroft, T. L., Bautz, M., Cameron, R. A., Dewey, D., Drake, J. J., Grant, C. E., Marshall, H. L., & Murray, S. S. 2003, Experimental Astron- omy, 16, 1 221 White, R. L., Becker, R. H., Gregg, M. D., Laurent-Muehleisen, S. A., Brotherton, M. S., Impey, C. D., Petry, C. E., Foltz, C. B., Chafiee, F. H., Richards, G. T., Oegerle, W. R., Helfand, D. J., McMahon, R. G., & Cabanela, J. E. 2000, ApJS, 126, 133 Woo, J. & Urry, C. M. 2002, ApJ, 579, 530 Worsley, M. A., Fabian, A. C., Bauer, F. E., Alexander, D. M., Hasinger, G., Mateos, S., Brunner, H., Brandt, W. N., & Schneider, D. P. 2005, MNRAS, 357, 1281 Wyithe, J. S. B. & Loeb, A. 2003, ApJ, 595, 614 Yang, Y., Mushotzky, R. F., Barger, A. J., Cowie, L. L., Sanders, D. B., & Stefien, A. T. 2003, ApJ, 585, L85 Yang, Y., Mushotzky, R. F., Stefien, A. T., Barger, A. J., & Cowie, L. L. 2004, AJ, 128, 1501 Zickgraf, F.-J., Engels, D., Hagen, H.-J., Reimers, D., & Voges, W. 2003, A&A, 406, 535 222