Orienta(on in quasars: EW[OIII] as an inclina(on indicator Susanna Bisogni Guido Risali( Alessandro Marconi Università degli Studi di Firenze INAF, Osservatorio Astrofisico di Arcetri Star(ng points Method Spectral Evidences Conclusions EW[OIII] orientation indicator
NLR
L[OIII]:
- no contamination from non-AGN
processes (Kauffmann et al. 2003)
- ISOTROPIC emission
(Mulchaey et al. 1994)
if compared to disk and BLR emissions
(di Serego Alighieri et al. 1997)
disk
#
Ldoss = Ldint cos #
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014
EW[OIII] orientation indicator
NLR
L[OIII]:
- no contamination from non-AGN
processes (Kauffmann et al. 2003)
- ISOTROPIC emission
(Mulchaey et al. 1994)
if compared to disk and BLR emissions
(di Serego Alighieri et al. 1997)
disk
#
Ldoss = Ldint cos #
EW[OIII] / f (#)
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014
EW[OIII] quasars distribution
intrinsic EW[OIII]
distribution
N
EW[OIII]
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014
EW[OIII] quasars distribution
intrinsic EW[OIII]
distribution
FLUX-LIMITED
sample
dN
/ EWoss3.5
d(EWoss )
N
observed EW[OIII]
distribution
EW[OIII]
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014
EW[OIII] quasars distribution
Risaliti et al.(2011)
intrinsic
FLUX-LIMITED
sample
observed
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014
EW[OIII] quasars distribution
Orientation effects in quasars
2225
Risaliti et al.(2011)
me shape it would have if one
instead of the observed ones
the sample is dominated by
our sample, and measure the
the line energy.
tion, θ , and derive a fictitious
y LF = LO × cos θ, and the
noring the actually measured
intrinsic
dN
/ EWoss3.5
d(EWoss )
FLUX-LIMITED
limit in terms
of doubly obsample
analogous to the one applied
large (106 ) number of times,
observed
ribution with a high-EW tail
± 0.01. We stress again that
function with the same shape
tified, since it is straightforulation with a given intrinsic
random cos θ correction, the
ion remains unchanged. This
y observed data.
on
sis is that, if we assume an
Figure 1. Distribution of EW([O III]) (red histogram) and best-fitting model
Bisogni,
Trieste
(black continuous line) for a sampleSusanna
of 6029 SDSS
quasars, AGN11
as defined in
the
23-26 September 2014
EW[OIII] quasars distribution
Orientation effects in quasars
2225
Risaliti et al.(2011)
me shape it would have if one
instead of the observed ones
the sample is dominated by
our sample, and measure the
the line energy.
tion, θ , and derive a fictitious
y LF = LO × cos θ, and the
noring the actually measured
intrinsic
dN
/ EWoss3.5
d(EWoss )
FLUX-LIMITED
limit in terms
of doubly obsample
analogous to the one applied
large (106 ) number of times,
ribution with a high-EW tail
± 0.01. We stress again that
function with the same shape
tified, since it is straightforulation with a given intrinsic
random cos θ correction, the
ion remains unchanged. This
y observed data.
on
sis is that, if we assume an
observed
Slope is not
a free
parameter!
Figure 1. Distribution of EW([O III]) (red histogram) and best-fitting model
Bisogni,
Trieste
(black continuous line) for a sampleSusanna
of 6029 SDSS
quasars, AGN11
as defined in
the
23-26 September 2014
The distributions of Fig. 3 do not show marked effects of different
isotropy degrees between broad lines and continuum, at variance
with the distribution of EW([O III]). This suggests (1) a flattened
structure of the broad-line region, in order to have (almost) the
same projection effects in both the continuum and line emission,
quasars a strong correlation between broad-line widths and radio
spectral index (considered an orientation indicator), suggesting a
flattened shape of the broad-line region.
(v) Down et al. (2010) performed a detailed analysis of Hα profiles in a sample of radio-loud, high-z quasars, and found that the
EW[OIII] vs Broad Lines EWs
Hβ
Risaliti et al.(2011)
Mg II
C IV
Figure 3. Distributions of EW for three broad emission lines: Hβ (left), Mg II (centre) and C IV (right), with best-fitting models as described in the text and in
Table 2.
2010 The Authors, MNRAS 411, 2223–2229
C 2010 RAS
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society ⃝
⃝
C
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014
The distributions of Fig. 3 do not show marked effects of different
isotropy degrees between broad lines and continuum, at variance
with the distribution of EW([O III]). This suggests (1) a flattened
structure of the broad-line region, in order to have (almost) the
same projection effects in both the continuum and line emission,
quasars a strong correlation between broad-line widths and radio
spectral index (considered an orientation indicator), suggesting a
flattened shape of the broad-line region.
(v) Down et al. (2010) performed a detailed analysis of Hα profiles in a sample of radio-loud, high-z quasars, and found that the
EW[OIII] vs Broad Lines EWs
Hβ
Risaliti et al.(2011)
Mg II
C IV
Figure 3. Distributions of EW for three broad emission lines: Hβ (left), Mg II (centre) and C IV (right), with best-fitting models as described in the text and in
Table 2.
#
2010 The Authors, MNRAS 411, 2223–2229
C 2010 RAS
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society ⃝
⃝
C
LBLRobs = LBLRint cos #
V
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014
Missing torus?
intrinsic EW[OIII]
distribution
#max
EWoss3.5
N
EW[OIII]
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014
Missing torus?
intrinsic EW[OIII]
distribution
#max
EWoss3.5
N
EW[OIII]
#max
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014
Missing torus?
Orientation effects in quasars
2225
Risaliti et al.(2011)
distribution of our sample has the same shape it would have if one
could use the intrinsic flux/luminosity instead of the observed ones
(i.e. at any observed flux/luminosity the sample is dominated by
face-on objects).
(2) We extract a random object in our sample, and measure the
observed continuum luminosity LO at the line energy.
(3) We select a random disc orientation, θ , and derive a fictitious
doubly observed continuum luminosity LF = LO × cos θ, and the
max
analogous EWF = EW∗ / cos θ (thus ignoring the actually measured
value EWO ).
(4) We apply an arbitrary rejection limit in terms of doubly observed continuum flux and luminosity, analogous to the one applied
to the original sample.
(5) We repeat the procedure for a large (106 ) number of times,
and analyse the distribution of EWF .
#
The result of this exercise is a distribution with a high-EW tail
dN /dEW ∼ EW" , with " = −3.50 ± 0.01. We stress again that
here we assume an intrinsic luminosity function with the same shape
as the observed one. This is fully justified, since it is straightforward to show that starting from a population with a given intrinsic
luminosity function, and assuming a random cos θ correction, the
shape of the observed luminosity function remains unchanged. This
has been also checked with our doubly observed data.
3.1 A global fit to the EW distribution
The main result of the above analysis is that, if we assume an
isotropic emission of [O III], proportional to the intrinsic disc luminosity, and a random inclination of the disc with respect to the
Figure 1. Distribution of EW([O III]) (red histogram) and best-fitting model
(black continuous line) for a sample of 6029 SDSS quasars, as defined in the
text. The dashed blue line is a power law with slope " = −3.5 and arbitrary
normalization, shown for ease of comparison with the slope of the highSusanna
Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September
EW tail. The continuous light green curve is the total intrinsic distribution,
2014
Missing torus?
Orientation effects in quasars
2225
Risaliti et al.(2011)
distribution of our sample has the same shape it would have if one
could use the intrinsic flux/luminosity instead of the observed ones
(i.e. at any observed flux/luminosity the sample is dominated by
face-on objects).
(2) We extract a random object in our sample, and measure the
observed continuum luminosity LO at the line energy.
(3) We select a random disc orientation, θ , and derive a fictitious
doubly observed continuum luminosity LF = LO × cos θ, and the
analogous EWF = EW∗ / cos θ (thus ignoring the actually measured
value EWO ).
(4) We apply an arbitrary rejection limit in terms of doubly observed continuum flux and luminosity, analogous to the one applied
to the original sample.
(5) We repeat the procedure for a large (106 ) number of times,
and analyse the distribution of EWF .
The result of this exercise is a distribution with a high-EW tail
dN /dEW ∼ EW" , with " = −3.50 ± 0.01. We stress again that
here we assume an intrinsic luminosity function with the same shape
as the observed one. This is fully justified, since it is straightforward to show that starting from a population with a given intrinsic
luminosity function, and assuming a random cos θ correction, the
shape of the observed luminosity function remains unchanged. This
has been also checked with our doubly observed data.
3.1 A global fit to the EW distribution
The main result of the above analysis is that, if we assume an
isotropic emission of [O III], proportional to the intrinsic disc luminosity, and a random inclination of the disc with respect to the
Figure 1. Distribution of EW([O III]) (red histogram) and best-fitting model
(black continuous line) for a sample of 6029 SDSS quasars, as defined in the
text. The dashed blue line is a power law with slope " = −3.5 and arbitrary
normalization, shown for ease of comparison with the slope of the highSusanna
Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September
EW tail. The continuous light green curve is the total intrinsic distribution,
2014
Star(ng points Method Spectral Evidences Conclusions Spectra Stacking
12.000 quasars
from SDSS DR 7th
Orientation effects in quasars
2225
Figure 1. Distribution of EW([O III]) (red histogram) and best-fitting model
(black continuous line) for a sample of 6029 SDSS quasars, as defined in the
text. The dashed blue line is a power law with slope " = −3.5 and arbitrary
normalization, shown for ease of comparison with the slope of the highEW tail. The continuous light green curve is the total intrinsic distribution,
obtained adding two Gaussian components (the dark green, dotted curves).
The continuous light green and black curves have the same normalization.
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014
Spectra Stacking
12.000 quasars
from SDSS DR 7th
Orientation effects in quasars
2225
Figure 1. Distribution of EW([O III]) (red histogram) and best-fitting model
(black continuous line) for a sample of 6029 SDSS quasars, as defined in the
text. The dashed blue line is a power law with slope " = −3.5 and arbitrary
normalization, shown for ease of comparison with the slope of the highEW tail. The continuous light green curve is the total intrinsic distribution,
obtained adding two Gaussian components (the dark green, dotted curves).
The continuous light green and black curves have the same normalization.
No red
spectra!
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014
Star(ng points Method Spectral Evidences Conclusions Narrow Lines
voss = vout cos #
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014
Narrow Lines
[OIII] (EW[OIII])
1.0
(1 6)Å
[OIII] 5007Å
(6 12)Å
(12 25)Å
(25 50)Å
(50 100)Å
0.8
(100 250)Å
flux
voss = vout cos #
0.6
low
EW[OIII]
0.4
0.2
high
EW[OIII]
0.0
4970
4980
4990
5000
5010
5020
5030
5040
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014
Narrow Lines
[OIII] blue component velocity
0
(1 6)Å
(6 12)Å
(12 25)Å
−100
(25 50)Å
(50 100)Å
voss = vout cos #
vel[OIII] (blue) (km/s)
(100 250)Å
−200
−300
−400
blue
−500
0.0
0.5
1.0
log(EW[OIII])
1.5
2.0
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014
Broad Lines
#
V
voss = vrot sin #
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014
Broad Lines
H broad (EW[OIII])
1.0
(1 6)Å
Hß
(6 12)Å
(12 25)Å
(25 50)Å
0.8
(50 100)Å
(100 250)Å
voss = vrot sin #
flux
0.6
0.4
high
EW[OIII]
0.2
low
EW[OIII]
0.0
4600
4700
4800
4900
5000
5100
5200
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014
Broad Lines
voss = vrot sin #
FWHM(H broad)
(H broad)
EW[OIII]
5500
5500
(1 6)Å
(1 6)Å
(6 12)Å
(6 12)Å
(12 25)Å
5000
(25 50)Å
(50 100)Å
(50 100)Å
(100 250)Å
(100 250)Å
4500
(km/s)
FWHM (km/s)
(12 25)Å
5000
(25 50)Å
4500
4000
4000
3500
3500
3000
3000
FWHM (Hß)
2500
EW[OIII]
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
log(EW[OIII])
2.0
Sigma (Hß)
2.5
2500
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
log(EW[OIII])
2.0
2.5
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014
Broad Lines
voss = vrot sin #
FWHM(H broad)
(H broad)
EW[OIII]
5500
5500
(1 6)Å
(1 6)Å
(6 12)Å
(6 12)Å
(12 25)Å
5000
(25 50)Å
(50 100)Å
(50 100)Å
(100 250)Å
(100 250)Å
4500
(km/s)
FWHM (km/s)
(12 25)Å
5000
(25 50)Å
4500
4000
Same results for
Ha and MgII !!!
4000
3500
3500
3000
3000
FWHM (Hß)
2500
EW[OIII]
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
log(EW[OIII])
2.0
Sigma (Hß)
2.5
2500
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
log(EW[OIII])
2.0
2.5
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014
IR (torus) SEDs
1.4
No. 1, 2008
AGN DUSTY TORI. II. OBSERVATIONAL IMPLICATIONS
low
1.3
163
EW[OIII]
log( * f )
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.9
(1 6)Å
high
EW[OIII]
(6 12)Å
(12 25)Å
0.8
(25 50)Å
(50 100)Å
(100 250)Å
0.7
0.0
Nenkova
et al.(2008)
Fig. 3.— Model spectra for a torus of clouds, each with optical depth $
V ¼ 60.
Radial distribution with q ¼ 1 out to Y ¼ 30, with N 0 ¼ 5 clouds along radial
equatorial rays (see eq. [2]). The angular distribution is sharp edged in the top
panel, and Gaussian in the bottom one (cf. Fig. 1); both have a width parameter
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
log( )
Fig. 4.— Observations of type 1 and type 2 sources compared with clumpy
torus model spectra. The type 1 composite data are from Sanders et al. (1989),
Elvis et al. (1994), Hao et al. (2007), and Netzer et al. (2007). The type 2 data are
from the following sources: (a) Mason et al. (2006); (b) various observations with
1.0
1.2
1.4
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014
IR (torus) SEDs
1.4
low
EW[OIII]
1.3
log( * f )
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.9
(1 6)Å
high
EW[OIII]
(6 12)Å
(12 25)Å
0.8
(25 50)Å
(50 100)Å
(100 250)Å
0.7
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
log( )
1.0
1.2
1.4
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014
FeII and EV1
EIGENVECTOR 1
Boroson&Green (1992)
Hß-[OIII]
Face-on
(1-6)Å
(6-12)Å
(12-25)Å
Edge-on
(25-50)Å
(50-100)Å
(100-250)Å
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014
Star(ng points Method Spectral Evidences Conclusions Conclusions
Bisogni et al. in prep.
* Behaviours of both narrow and broad lines components
* Torus emission
* Eigenvector 1
PERSPECTIVES
* Better understanding of Unified Model components
geometry and kinematics
* Corrections in BH virial masses estimations
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014
Orienta(on in quasars: EW[OIII] as an inclina(on indicator Susanna Bisogni Guido Risali( Alessandro Marconi Università degli Studi di Firenze INAF, Osservatorio Astrofisico di Arcetri Woss (˚
A)
Woss (˚
A)
θ
◦)
Inverse (inclination) distribution
(1 − 6)
3.0
0.90
25.5
(6 − 12)
9.0
0.91
25.1
(12 − 25)
18.5
0.88
28.1
(25 − 50)
38.5
0.61
52.1
(50 − 100)
75.0
0.30
72.5
(100 − 250)
175.0
0.13
82.6
es (EWoss ) of the ranges (∆EWoss ) in which the SDSS sample was divided in paper2; for these values
stribution has been computed and the corresponding mean values (cos θ and θ) has been evaluated.
EW1∗ (˚
A)
σ1 (˚
A)
EW2∗ (˚
A)
˚
σ2 (A)
α
N
8.0 ± 0.3
4 ± 0.3
17 ± 1
11 ± 0.8
0.67 ± 0.01
Table 2:
EW
Best parameters values for the double gaussian
EW([OIII]) intrinsic distribution as reported in paper1.
EW1∗ , EW2∗ , σ1 and σ2 represent respectively mean value
and standard deviation for the two gaussians; α is the relative weight of the first gaussian in the intrinsic distribution,
that is α = N1 /(N1 + N2 ), with N1 and N2 normalizations
of the two gaussians.
the emitting regions, in the light of our position
September
2014
with Susanna
respect Bisogni,
to the AGN11
sourceTrieste
axis,23-26
inquiring
on the
EW[OIII] quasars distribution
intrinsic EW[OIII]
distribution
IDEAL
ISOTROPIC CASE
dN
/ EWoss2
d(EWoss )
N
EW[OIII]
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014
Inverse (inclination) distribution
(°)
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
(1 6)Å
10
(6 12)Å
(12 25)Å
(25 50)Å
(50 100)Å
8
P(cos( )|EWoss)
(100 250)Å
6
4
2
0
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
cos( )
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014
Inverse (inclination) distribution
(°)
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
(1 6)Å
10
(6 12)Å
(12 25)Å
(25 50)Å
(50 100)Å
8
P(cos( )|EWoss)
(100 250)Å
6
4
2
0
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
cos( )
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014
Inverse (inclination) distribution
(°)
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
(1 6)Å
10
(6 12)Å
(12 25)Å
(25 50)Å
(50 100)Å
8
P(cos( )|EWoss)
(100 250)Å
6
4
2
0
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
cos( )
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014
Narrow Lines
[OIII] principal component velocity
0
(1 6)Å
(6 12)Å
(12 25)Å
−20
(25 50)Å
(50 100)Å
voss = vout cos #
vel[OIII] (princ) (km/s)
(100 250)Å
−40
−60
−80
principal
−100
0.0
0.5
1.0
log(EW[OIII])
1.5
2.0
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014
Broad Lines
H broad (EW[OIII])
1.0
(1 6)Å
Ha
(6 12)Å
(12 25)Å
(25 50)Å
0.8
(50 100)Å
(100 250)Å
voss = vrot sin #
flux
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
6300
6400
6500
6600
6700
6800
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014
Broad Lines
voss = vrot sin #
FWHM(H broad)
(H broad)
FWHM (Ha)
3000
Sigma (Ha)
3000
2500
EW[OIII]
2500
(km/s)
FWHM (km/s)
EW[OIII]
(1 6)Å
2000
1500
(1 6)Å
2000
(6 12)Å
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
log(EW[OIII])
2.0
(6 12)Å
(12 25)Å
(12 25)Å
(25 50)Å
(25 50)Å
(50 100)Å
(50 100)Å
(100 250)Å
(100 250)Å
2.5
1500
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
log(EW[OIII])
2.0
2.5
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014
Broad Lines
MgII broad (EW[OIII])
(1 6)Å
1.0
MgII
(6 12)Å
(12 25)Å
(25 50)Å
0.8
(50 100)Å
(100 250)Å
voss = vrot sin #
flux
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
2650
2700
2750
2800
2850
2900
2950
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014
Broad Lines
voss = vrot sin #
FWHM(MgII broad)
EW[OIII]
(MgII broad)
(1 6)Å
(1 6)Å
(6 12)Å
4000
(6 12)Å
4000
(12 25)Å
(12 25)Å
(25 50)Å
(25 50)Å
(50 100)Å
(50 100)Å
(100 250)Å
(100 250)Å
3500
(km/s)
FWHM (km/s)
3500
3000
3000
2500
2500
2000
2000
Sigma (MgII)
FWHM (MgII)
1500
EW[OIII]
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
log(EW[OIII])
2.0
2.5
1500
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
log(EW[OIII])
2.0
2.5
Susanna Bisogni, AGN11 Trieste 23-26 September 2014