Galaxy Evolu@on Workshop 2019 on June 5, 2019 at IPMU, Japan

Infrared View of SwiM/BAT AGN
Ichikawa et al. ’17, ApJ, 835, 74
Ichikawa et al. ’19, ApJ, 870, 31

Kohei Ichikawa (市川幸平)
FRIS fellow, Tohoku University
In collabora*on with

C. Ricci, Y. Ueda, F. Bauer, T. Kawamuro, M. J. Koss, K. Oh, D. J. Rosario, T. T. Shimizu, M.
Stalevski, L. Fuller, C. Packham, B. Trakhtenbrot, and the BASS team1

Galaxy Evolu@on Workshop 2019 on June 5, 2019 at IPMU, Japan

Infrared View of SwiM/BAT AGN
Ichikawa et al. ’17, ApJ, 835, 74
Ichikawa et al. ’19, ApJ, 870, 31

Kohei Ichikawa (市川幸平)
FRIS fellow, Tohoku University
In collabora*on with

C. Ricci, Y. Ueda, F. Bauer, T. Kawamuro, M. J. Koss, K. Oh, D. J. Rosario, T. T. Shimizu, M.
Stalevski, L. Fuller, C. Packham, B. Trakhtenbrot, and the BASS team2

Galaxy Evolu@on Workshop 2019 on June 5, 2019 at IPMU, Japan

Infrared View of SwiM/BAT AGN
Please check more details from here (in Japanese) or here (in English)

Ichikawa et al. ’17, ApJ, 835, 74
Ichikawa et al. ’19, ApJ, 870, 31

Compe**ve salary:5-6.5 million JPY/yr
Research grant:
2.5 million JPY/yr
Long term:
3+2(+2) yr
FRIS fellow, Tohoku University

Kohei Ichikawa (市川幸平)
In collabora*on with

C. Ricci, Y. Ueda, F. Bauer, T. Kawamuro, M. J. Koss, K. Oh, D. J. Rosario, T. T. Shimizu, M.
Stalevski, L. Fuller, C. Packham, B. Trakhtenbrot, and the BASS team3

Galaxy Evolu@on Workshop 2019 on June 5, 2019 at IPMU, Japan

Infrared dust proper@es of SwiM/
BAT Hard X-ray selected AGN
Ichikawa et al. ’17, ApJ, 835, 74
Ichikawa et al. ’19, ApJ, 870, 31

Kohei Ichikawa (市川幸平)
FRIS fellow, Tohoku University
In collabora*on with

C. Ricci, Y. Ueda, F. Bauer, T. Kawamuro, M. J. Koss, K. Oh, D. J. Rosario, T. T. Shimizu, M.
Stalevski, L. Fuller, C. Packham, B. Trakhtenbrot, and the BASS team4

Ac@ve Galac@c Nuclei (AGN)

Supermassive Black Hole (SMBH)

Rees 84;Antonucci & Miller 85; Urry & Padovani95

GalaxyAGN

dusty torus<10 pc~10 kpc(see Ichikawa+15, Burtscher+13)

5

Ac@ve Galac@c Nuclei (AGN)
Rees 84;Antonucci & Miller 85; Urry & Padovani95

GalaxySupermassive Black Hole (SMBH)

AGN

dusty torus~10 kpc<10 pc(see Ichikawa+15, Burtscher+13)

Why do we observe AGN for SMBH studies?

☑ AGN is a growing phase of SMBH
☑ easy to es*mate BH mass (e.g., single-epoch method; Kaspi+00,05)☑ Very, very bright in op*cal/UV (and also X-ray, IR!)
Lbol >= 1047 erg/s; which canbe observable up to z~7!
6

NLR

(Mid-)IR emission of AGN= nuclear dust

G

AGNs
o
b
scu
torus
-shap
ed

Nuclear (MIR) dust emijng region is compact w/ < 10pc

Urry & Padovani ’95

Detec
table

via o

7

NLR

(Mid-)IR emission of AGN= nuclear dust

G

AGNs
o
b
scu
torus
-shap
ed

Nuclear (MIR) dust emijng region is compact w/ < 10pc

Urry & Padovani ’95

Detec
table

Nenkova+08; Ramos Almeida+12
see also Tanimoto+19, Ogawa+19

via o

8

NLR

G

(Mid-)IR emission of AGN= nuclear dust

AGNs
o
b
scu
torus
-shap
ed

Nuclear (MIR) dust emijng region is compact w/ < 10pc

Urry & Padovani ’95

Detec
table

Nenkova+08; Ramos Almeida+12
see also Tanimoto+19, Ogawa+19

via oe.g., Hoenig+12, Wada+15,
Tazaki & Ichikawa submiSed

Sample size: limited to very nearby AGN (actually, mainly Circinus)

9

NLR

G

Geometry of (nuclear) dust emission

AGNs
o
b
scu
torus
-shap
ed

Nuclear (MIR) dust emijng region is compact w/ < 10pc

Urry & Padovani ’95

Detec
table

Nenkova+08; Ramos Almeida+12
see also Tanimoto+19, Ogawa+19

via oe.g., Hoenig+12, Wada+15,
Tazaki & Ichikawa in prep.

Q. How much do we know the (averaged) dust geometry?

CT (dust) / LIR (AGN)/Lbol (AGN)<latexit sha1_base64="(null)">(null)</latexit>

Our Goal: Obtaining CT(dust) using the complete AGN sample

10

Most of AGN are obscured

XRB indicates that most of AGN are obscured
Ueda+14

type-1 AGN
Compton-thintype-2 AGN

Compton-thick AGN☑ energy density peaks at ~30 keV
11Most of AGN are elusive (=obscured)
XRB indicates that most of AGN are obscured
Ueda+14

type-1 AGN
Compton-thintype-2 AGN

Compton-thick AGN☑ energy density peaks at ~30 keV☑ E>10 keV: best energy band to detect obscured (log NH>22) AGN

SwiM/BAT AGN (14-195 keV)

70 month catalog: 836 AGN (728 non-blazars)

FYI, 105 month catalog is public (see Oh et al., ’18) and 158 month catalog will be out in a year?

Ueda+14

Baumgartner+13 and… Ricci (incl. KI) et al. 2017

☑ most complete up to logNH=24.0 in the local Universe(Koss+16; Ricci+15)☑ 606 out of 728 have z info 13
and are located at |b|>10°

BASS

14

BASS=BAT AGN Spectroscopic Survey
Mul@-wavelength Follow-up of BAT-AGN
co-lead by M. Koss, C. Ricci, B. Trakhtenbrot, K. Oh☑ X-ray (Lx, NH, Γ) Ricci et al. (2017)☑ Op*cal Spec (MBH, λEdd) Koss et al. (2017)

Koss+16☑ NIR Spec (σ, MBH) Lamper* et al. (2017)by Courtesy of K. Oh

15

BASS=BAT AGN Spectroscopic Survey
Mul@-wavelength Follow-up of BAT-AGN
co-lead by M. Koss, C. Ricci, B. Trakhtenbrot, K. Oh☑ X-ray (Lx, NH, Γ) Ricci et al. (2017)☑ Op*cal Spec (MBH, λEdd) Koss et al. (2017)

Koss+16

X-ray power-law☑ NIR Spec (σ, MBH) Lamper* et al. (2017)by Courtesy of K. Oh

Baumgartner+13 and…

16

BASS=BAT AGN Spectroscopic Survey
Mul@-wavelength Follow-up of BAT-AGN
co-lead by M. Koss, C. Ricci, B. Trakhtenbrot, K. Oh☑ X-ray (Lx, NH, Γ) Ricci et al. (2017)☑ Op*cal Spec (MBH, λEdd) Koss et al. (2017)

X-ray power-law

Koss+16☑ NIR Spec (σ, MBH) Lamper* et al. (2017)
OpEcal Specby Courtesy of K. Oh

More studies and Data, see BASS website!
Today’s topic
Baumgartner+13 and…
☑ IR catalog (3-500 um) Ichikawa et al. (2017a), ApJ, 835, 74☑ IR SED Decomposi*on; Ichikawa et al. (2019), ApJ, 870, 31
17

IR counterparts of BAT AGN☑ 3-500 um IR data from WISE, AKARI, IRAS, and HerschelUeda+14(see Ichikawa+17 for more details)☑ 601/606 MIR (, NIR) and 402/606 FIR counterparts☑ suitable for the AGN dust/host galaxy studies☑ IR Data is already public.

hsp://iopscience.iop.org/0004-637X/835/1/74/suppdata/apjaa5154t1_mrt.txt
18

SED Decomposi@on in IR bands☑ SED Decomposi@on is done using simple AGN/(SB+stellar) templates
Ueda+14(see Mullaney+11 and Ichikawa+19 for more details)

host galaxy

AGN dust
Ichikawa+19

19

SED Decomposi@on in IR bands☑ SED Decomposi@on is done using simple AGN/(SB+stellar) templates
Ueda+14(see Mullaney+11 and Ichikawa+19 for more details)

host galaxy

AGN dust
Ichikawa+19☑ SED decomposi@on: 587/606 sources☑ Disentangling AGN/host galaxy (SB+stellar) component=> AGN IR emission w/o host galaxy contamina@on
20
FYI, All info incl. IR SEDs, decomposed
SEDs, MBH, Lx, bol are now publicComparison with high-spa@al resolu@on observa@ons
Ueda+14High spa@al.
resol. obs.
(Asmus+14,+15)

Ichikawa+17

L12um “Before” SED
decomposi@on☑ L12um(KI17) >= L12um(Asmus)
21Comparison with high-spa@al resolu@on observa@ons☑ SED Decomposi@on works well!
Ueda+14High spa@al.
resol. obs.

Ichikawa+19

L12um “a[er” SED
decomposi@on☑ SED decomposi@on reproduces L12um of 0.”3-0.”7 scale high spa@al
resolu@on observa@ons (Asmus+14;15)22

LIR(AGN) vs. L14-150keV
Our study+ type-1

LMIR/Lx (type-1) ~ LMIR/Lx (type-2)

Ichikawa+19a

× type-2

MIR emission: isotropic

log LMIR ∝ 1.06 log LX ∴ slope b=1.06 (+/-0.03)☑ b=0.9-1.1 from local/X-ray selected AGN(e.g., Gandhi+09; Ichikawa+12,+17; Asmus+15; Mateos+15)
23

Lbol dependence of R = LIR(AGN)/Lbol

Ichikawa+17a

Ichikawa+18
Ichikawa+19a☑ Very shallow Lbol dependence w/ log R = 4.5 - 0.12 log Lbol
24

R=LIR(AGN)/Lbol => CT(dust)
LIR(AGN) /Lbol vs. CT (see Stalevski+16)
type-1 AGN

25

type-2 AGN

Dust Covering factor (CT) vs. Lbol

Lx => Lbol (const) and LIR(AGN) /Lbol => CT (see Stalevski+16)
Ichikawa+18

26

Dust Covering factor (CT) vs. Lbol

Lx => Lbol (const) and LIR(AGN) /Lbol => CT (see Stalevski+16)
Ichikawa+19☑ CT (dust) : 0.4-0.6, very weak or almost independent of Lbol

(see also Merloni+14, Netzer+16, Stalevski+16, Mateos+17)27

Dust Covering factor (CT) vs. Lbol

Lx => Lbol (const) and LIR(AGN) /Lbol => CT (see Stalevski+16)
Ricci+17
Ichikawa+19

Ichikawa+17a☑ CT(dust) < CT (dust+gas) <= obtained from X-ray obs.
☑ There is a dust-free (X-ray) obscuring region28

Dust Covering factor (CT) vs. Lbol

Lx => Lbol (const) and Ltorus/Lbol => CT (dust) (see Stalevski+16)

Davies+15
Ichikawa+17a☑ CT(dust) < CT (dust+gas) <= obtained from X-ray obs.
☑ There is a dust-free (X-ray) obscuring region (in BLR?)
29(see also Markowitz+14; Davies+15; Liu+18)

Dust Covering factor (CT) vs. Lbol

Lx => Lbol (const) and Ltorus/Lbol => CT (dust) (see Stalevski+16)

Davies+15
Ichikawa+17a
Izumi, Wada+18☑ CT(dust) < CT (dust+gas) <= obtained from X-ray obs.
☑ There is a dust-free (X-ray) obscuring region (in BLR?)
30(see also Markowitz+14; Davies+15; Liu+18)

Summary
SwiM/BAT (14-195 keV) AGN catalog☑ suitable sample of an unbiased census of AGN☑ BASS provides LX, NH, MBH, and λE☑ almost complete 3-500 um IR catalog(601/606 at MIR, 402 at FIR, see Ichikawa+17)

IR and X-ray proper@es of BAT AGN☑ CT(dust) < CT (dust+gas) => dust-free obscuring region☑ CT (obscured) is (on average) always larger than CT (unobscured)
see Ichikawa et al. (2017, 2019) for more details

Appendix

32

Consistency with dust polar emission☑ type-1/-2 has same distribu@on => isotropic emission☑ consistent with MIR polar emission or fountain model
obs: Honig+13,+14, see also Asmus+16
model: Wada 12, Wada+16

WISE IR color-color selec@on of AGN

Ichikawa+17

34

WISE IR color-color selec@on of AGN

Ichikawa+17

Stern+1235

WISE IR color-color selec@on of AGN
12
+
s
o
ate

Ichikawa+17

M

Stern+12☑ BAT-AGN do not always locate at

the IR selec*on areas of. Stern+12, Mateos+12

WISE IR color selec@ons miss some AGN popula@on(see also Mateos+12, 13; Gandhi+16; Kawamuro+16; Tanimoto+16)36

WISE IR color-color selec@on ofIchikawa+17
AGN☑ WISE IR color: insensi@ve to low-luminosity AGN
37

Dust Covering factor (CT) for un-/obscured AGN

Ichikawa+19☑ CT (obscured) is (on average) always larger than CT (unobscured)=> larger (line of sight) NH sources tend to have larger (geometrical) CT(see also Ramos Almeida+09;+11, Elitzur12, Ichikawa+15, Mateos+16, and Lanz+18)38

IR-Pure AGN candidates
We found 9 “IR-pure AGN” candidates

39

IR-Pure AGN candidates
We found 9 “IR-pure AGN” candidates

Ichikawa+19☑ FIR (up to ~100um) is dominated by AGN torus emission☑ IR-pure AGN shows the SED w/ f22um > f70um > f160um

40

IR-Pure AGN candidates
We found 9 “IR-pure AGN” candidates

Ichikawa+19☑ FIR (up to ~100um) is dominated by AGN torus emission☑ MBH, L14-150keV distribu@on is similar with the parent sample(<log MBH>=7.8, <log L14-150>=43.7)

Sugges*ng weaker SF ac@vi@es in the hostgood candidates of ﬁnal
41 stage AGN?

Success rate of WISE color selec@on
Frac@on of AGN w/ WISE selec@on

Ichikawa+17☑ WISE IR color: insensi@ve to low-luminosity AGN☑ <20% success rate for low-luminosity AGN of log Lx < 4342Comparison with high-spa@al resolu@on observa@ons☑ Decomposi@on works really well!
Ueda+14☑ Disentangling AGN/(SB+stellar) component☑ suitable for the AGN torus/hostgalaxy studies
43

AGN contribu@on as a func@on of LBAT

Ichikawa+18☑ At high LBAT end, contribu*on reaches~100% at 12um, 80% at MIR (5-40um), and 50% at total IR☑ At low LBAT end, contribu*on goes down to~20% at 12um, 20% at MIR (5-40um), and <10% at total IR
SED decomposi@on is 44
crucial for low-luminosity AGN

Dust Covering factor (CT) vs. Lbol

Lx => Lbol and CT ∝ LMIR/Lbol (see Stalevski+16) X-ray (corona)

MIR (torus)

X-ray (corona)
MIR (torus)

The
AstrophysicalJournalLetters, 747:L33 (3pp), 2012 March 10
strophysicalJournal Journal
Letters, Letters,
747:L33 (3pp),
2012
March
10MarchThe
747:L33(3pp),
2012
10arch
10 Astrophysical
Elitzur

1

1

1

1

1

2
2 2
2
2
The
AstrophysicalJournalLetters,
747:L33(3pp), 2012 March 10p), 2012 March 10

1

1

1
2
(a )

(b )

((ac))

(b )

2

1
2

2

1

1

1

1
2

2
Elitzur

2

2

1

1
2

El

2

2
( a( c
))

(b )

(b )

( c)

1. AGN
classificationinunifiedschemes.
(a) Ina smooth-density
torus,
everyone
1. AGN
classificationinunifiedschemes.
(a) such
In a smooth-density
torus,
locatedthe cone
opening,such as observer
1,edensity
1. Figure
AGN
classificationinunifiedschemes.
(a) Ina smooth-density
torus,
everyonelocatedtheinside
cone
opening,such
as observer
1, willsee
awill
typesee
1 losa
torus,
everyonelocatedinsidethe cone
opening,
asFigure
observer1,
will
seeeveryone
a type 1inside
source;outside(b)
Decreasing
thesource becomesatorus,
type
1the
AGp
outsidea atype2.1(b)
Decreasingthetorus factor,
covering
sourcea becomesa type
1 AGN
formorecoveringobservers.
(c) Inthea soft-edge
clumpy,soft-edge
ecea becomestype
2. (b)
Decreasing
thesourcethebecomes
atype
type2.1theAGN
for
moreforobservers.
(c) In afactor,
clumpy,torus, theprobabilit
type
AGN
fortorus
morecoveringobservers.
(c) Inthea factor,clumpy,soft-edge
torus,
probability
atorusdirectviewof the AGN decreases away from the axis, but is always finite.
directviewof decreases
the AGN decreases
from but
the isaxis,
but isfinite.
alwaysfinite.
viewof theAGN
away fromaway
the axis,alwaysysfinite.

C:
indicatorofgeometricaldust
obscura@onTreflection
with
R
=
2.2
.
While
this
finding contradicts simreflection
with
While
this finding
contradicts
tion
with
2.2R =. 2.2
While .thisfinding
contradictssim- simadicts
sim-R =
(+4.5
b)

+4.5
−1.1

((ac))

(+4.5
b)

( c)

LMIR ∝ Lbol CT <=> CT ∝ LMIR/Lbol
−1.1

−1.1

FigureAGN classificationin unified
schemes.
(a) such
In aforms
smooth-density
torus,
located insidecone opening,such as observer
ncr aforms
smooth-density
torus,
everyonelocatedthecone
as observer
1, willseeeveryone
a typesource;plisticof unification,
it is1precisely
thethebehavior
expected
plisticofforms
of 1.
unification,
it is inside
precisely
theopening,
behavior
expected
unification,itisprecisely
thebehavior
expected
expectedoutside aatype
2.1 (b)Decreasingthetorus covering
thesource becomestype 1 AGNfor
fora more observers. (c) In a clumpy, soft-edge
tor,from
the source
type
AGN
for more
observers.
(c) lightlyIna factor,clumpy,soft-edge
torus,
thea probability
fromits
realistic
formulation:
Seyfert1 and lightly obscured
its becomesrealistic
formulation:
Seyfert1
andobscured
its
realistic
formulation:
Seyfert1
andlightly
obscuredybut
obscured
direct view of the AGN decreases away from the axis, but is always finite.
is always finite.

2 correspondto different
anglesof intrinsically
Seyfert2 correspond to different viewing angles of intrinsicallyntrinsicallyert 2Seyfert
correspondto different
viewingviewing
angles of
intrinsicallysimilar
AGNs,
drawn
end
of thecovering
factordrawn
similarfrom the low end of the covering factor
+4.5
ring
factordrawn
arfrom
thefromlow
endof thecovering
factorAGNs,
reflection
withR =the2.2low.
While
thisfinding
contradicts
simingAGNs,
contradicts
sim−1.1
45
distribution,
thus
they conform,
onaverage,to simplistic
unifidistribution,
thusexpected
they conform, on average, to simplistic unifiistic
unifibution,
thus plistic
they
conform,
average,tounififorms of on
unification,
it issimplistic
precisely
the behavior

Dust Covering factor (CT) vs. Lbol
Lx => Lbol (Marconi+04) and CT ∝ LMIR/Lbol (see Stalevski+16)
Ichikawa+18

Ichikawa+17a☑ Diﬀerent bol-correc@on does not change the main result

46

Lbol dependence of Dust Covering factor (CT)Ichikawa+17a

Ichikawa+18☑ Small scaser of Lx-LIR rela@on gives a ﬂaser Lbol dependence of CT(dust)☑ This is because log LIR(AGN) ∝ 1.06log LX
47∴ slope b=1.06 (+/-0.03)