pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2603.11180 · v1 · submitted 2026-03-11 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

Recognition: 1 theorem link

· Lean Theorem

AGN obscuration in optical and X-rays: Host properties and the interplay of nuclear and galactic gas and dust in a combined SDSS-XMM sample

G. Mountrichas , F.J. Carrera , E. Quintin , A. Viitanen , A. Corral , N. Webb
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 13:02 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA
keywords active galactic nucleiAGN obscurationX-ray absorptionoptical classificationhost galaxy propertiesgas-to-dust ratioSDSS-XMM samplemulti-scale dust
0
0 comments X

The pith

Obscuration in active galactic nuclei stems from orientation as well as multi-scale gas and dust.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper combines X-ray spectroscopy from XMM with optical data from SDSS for 241 AGN at redshifts below 1.9 to test how obscuration appears across wavelengths. About 70 percent of sources show matching classifications, with broad-line objects unobscured in X-rays and narrow-line objects absorbed, but two mismatched groups stand out. The 11 broad-line AGN that are X-ray absorbed display elevated gas-to-dust ratios consistent with dust-free or larger-scale material, while the 58 narrow-line AGN that appear unobscured in X-rays often receive type-1 SED assignments and show star-formation rates similar to unobscured AGN. Line diagnostics and host properties reinforce that narrow-line sources sit in more quiescent galaxies with stronger extinction. These patterns lead to the claim that obscuration involves both viewing angle and gas and dust spread across nuclear and galactic scales.

Core claim

By comparing optical broad-line and narrow-line classifications with X-ray column-density measurements in a sample of 241 AGN at z < 1.9, the study finds agreement in roughly 70 percent of cases. The mismatched broad-line sources with X-ray absorption show higher gas-to-dust ratios, while the mismatched narrow-line sources without X-ray absorption display lower ratios, type-1-like SED fits for nearly half the group, reduced Balmer decrements, and host properties closer to those of unobscured AGN. Host diagnostics at z < 0.8 indicate that the narrow-line population resides in more quiescent systems with lower star-formation rates and less efficient black-hole growth. The mismatched broad-line

What carries the argument

Mismatched populations (BLAbs and NLUnabs) identified by cross-matching optical spectral type, X-ray NH, CIGALE SED fits, and line diagnostics to separate nuclear versus host-scale effects.

If this is right

  • Obscuration occurs on host-galaxy scales in addition to the nuclear torus.
  • Some narrow-line AGN classifications arise from diluted broad-line regions or host contamination rather than complete obscuration.
  • Host star-formation rate and accretion efficiency differ systematically between matched narrow-line AGN and the NLUnabs group.
  • Demographic counts in wide-field surveys will require multi-wavelength matching to avoid misclassifying mismatched sources.
  • Gas-to-dust ratio serves as a diagnostic to flag sources where absorption is not purely orientation-driven.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If host-scale gas and dust contribute substantially, single-epoch optical surveys alone will systematically undercount the true obscured fraction.
  • Time-domain monitoring campaigns targeting the mismatched sources could separate variability-driven mismatches from stable structural ones.
  • Extending the same cross-match analysis to z > 1.9 would test whether the mismatch fraction evolves with cosmic epoch or galaxy type.

Load-bearing premise

Optical classifications and X-ray NH values correctly isolate intrinsic AGN properties without being dominated by variability, host contamination, or complex absorber geometry.

What would settle it

Repeated optical spectroscopy of the 58 NLUnabs sources that fails to detect any broad-line variability while X-ray data continue to show low NH would indicate that dilution or intrinsically weak broad-line regions, rather than orientation plus multi-scale gas, explain the mismatch.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2603.11180 by A. Corral, A. Viitanen, E. Quintin, F.J. Carrera, G. Mountrichas, N. Webb.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Distribution of the FWHM for the 241 sources included in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Distribution of the 241 sources in the LX–z plane. The definitions of Absorbed Broad (BLAbs) and Unabsorbed Narrow (NLUnabs) are given in Sect. 4.1. Finally, we restricted the analysis to sources at z < 1.9. This redshift cut ensures that the optical emission lines used in our classification (e.g. Hβ, Hα, and Mg II) remain accessible within the SDSS spectral coverage, while also providing sufficient num￾be… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Distribution of [O III]λ5007 FWHM values for the AGN sample. of Hβ, while for 0.9 < z ≤ 1.9 we use Mg ii. In addition to requiring that a value was reported, we applied two quality criteria: (i) the fractional FWHM error must be less than 50% (σFWHM/FWHM < 0.5), and (ii) the line detection significance must exceed flux/σflux > 2. These cuts ensure that only robust measurements enter our classification. Amo… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FWHM versus X-ray absorption (NH). Different AGN populations are plotted using the colours and symbols indicated in the legend. The horizontal dashed line marks the FWHM threshold used to separate sources by the width of their optical lines, while the vertical dashed line indicates the NH threshold adopted to identify X-ray–absorbed sources (see text for details). Bayesian X-ray spectral fits and compare i… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Classification based on SED fitting for the four AGN pop [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Gas-to-dust ratios for the four AGN populations, ex [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Box plots of the Balmer decrement (Hα/Hβ) for the BL, BLAbs, NL, and NLUnabs populations, shown in three redshift intervals. The boxes indicate the interquartile range (IQR), with the median marked by a horizontal line. Whiskers extend to 1.5× IQR, and individual points beyond this range are shown as single circles. For subclasses represented by a single measurement (e.g. BLAbs at z < 0.4), the data point … view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: presents our measurements and Tables 7, 8, and 9 list the median and interquartile range (IQR) values in each redshift bin. Black-hole masses were taken from the catalogue of Wu & Shen (2022), which provides virial MBH estimates for quasars in SDSS DR16Q based on the widths of broad emission lines (Hβ, Mg II, C IV). We note that, although our spectroscopic clas￾sification identifies some of these sources a… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We investigate the link between optical obscuration and X-ray absorption in active galactic nuclei (AGN) by combining X-ray spectroscopy from 4XMM-DR11 with SDSS DR16Q spectroscopy. Bayesian X-ray spectral fits were obtained within the XMM2Athena project, and host-galaxy properties were derived via \textsc{CIGALE} SED fitting. Our final sample comprises 241 X-ray AGN at $z<1.9$. For 172 sources ($\sim70\%$), the optical broad-line (BL) or narrow-line (NL) classification agrees with their X-ray obscuration based on $N_{\rm H}$, but two mismatched populations emerge. Eleven BL AGN show signs of X-ray absorption (BLAbs) and elevated gas-to-dust ratios compared to BL AGN, consistent with dust-free or host-scale absorbers. Conversely, 58 NL AGN appear unobscured in X-rays (NLUnabs) and low gas-to-dust ratios. Nearly half are assigned type~1 properties by SED fitting, suggesting diluted or intrinsically weak broad-line regions, host contamination, or variability. Optical line diagnostics support this picture: NL AGN show higher Balmer decrements than NLUnabs, indicating stronger extinction and different ionization conditions. Host diagnostics further reinforce the contrasts: at $\rm z<0.8$, NLUnabs show star-formation rates and accretion efficiencies that are comparable to BL AGN, whereas NL AGN reside in more quiescent hosts with lower star formation and less efficient black-hole growth. BLAbs match BL AGN in host and accretion properties, with their peculiarity lying in excess X-ray absorption. These findings demonstrate that obscuration arises not only from orientation but also from multi-scale distributions of gas and dust. Identifying such mismatched populations will be crucial for interpreting AGN demographics in ongoing and upcoming surveys such as \emph{Euclid} and VRO/LSST.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper combines SDSS DR16Q optical spectroscopy with 4XMM-DR11 X-ray data for 241 AGN at z<1.9. Bayesian X-ray spectral fits and CIGALE SED modeling are used to compare optical broad-line (BL) vs. narrow-line (NL) classifications against X-ray NH-based obscuration. Approximately 70% of sources show agreement, but two mismatch populations are identified: 11 BL AGN with X-ray absorption (BLAbs) exhibiting elevated gas-to-dust ratios, and 58 NL AGN that appear X-ray unobscured (NLUnabs) with low gas-to-dust ratios (nearly half SED-classified as type 1). Differences in Balmer decrements, star-formation rates, and accretion efficiencies are reported, leading to the conclusion that obscuration arises from multi-scale gas and dust distributions in addition to orientation effects.

Significance. If the mismatched populations are robustly identified, the work provides statistical evidence that AGN obscuration involves host-scale and multi-scale components beyond the standard unified model, with direct relevance to demographic interpretations in large surveys such as Euclid and LSST. The combination of independent X-ray NH measurements and optical diagnostics offers a concrete path to quantify these effects.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sample selection and classification] The central claim that the 11 BLAbs and 58 NLUnabs demonstrate multi-scale obscuration (rather than classification errors or variability) rests on the stability of the optical BL/NL labels and the reliability of the X-ray NH classifications from the Bayesian fits. Explicit thresholds for NH (e.g., the precise log NH cutoff separating absorbed/unabsorbed) and propagation of fit uncertainties must be provided, along with any checks for partial covering or changing-look behavior in the NLUnabs subsample.
  2. [SED fitting and host properties] The statement that nearly half of NLUnabs are assigned type-1 properties by CIGALE SED fitting requires validation against host contamination or dilution; the paper should quantify how the SED fits separate AGN type-1 signatures from host light and report the impact of any assumed priors on the gas-to-dust ratios derived for both mismatch populations.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Results] The abstract mentions 'elevated gas-to-dust ratios' for BLAbs and 'low gas-to-dust ratios' for NLUnabs; the exact definition and derivation of these ratios (including any assumed dust-to-gas conversion) should be stated explicitly in the methods.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 1 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed comments, which help strengthen the robustness of our analysis on AGN obscuration mismatches. We address each major comment below, indicating revisions where the manuscript will be updated to provide additional clarity and validation.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Sample selection and classification] The central claim that the 11 BLAbs and 58 NLUnabs demonstrate multi-scale obscuration (rather than classification errors or variability) rests on the stability of the optical BL/NL labels and the reliability of the X-ray NH classifications from the Bayesian fits. Explicit thresholds for NH (e.g., the precise log NH cutoff separating absorbed/unabsorbed) and propagation of fit uncertainties must be provided, along with any checks for partial covering or changing-look behavior in the NLUnabs subsample.

    Authors: We agree that explicit details on thresholds and uncertainties are essential. In the revised manuscript, we will state the adopted cutoff of log(NH/cm^2) = 22 to separate absorbed and unabsorbed sources, consistent with standard X-ray definitions. Bayesian posterior uncertainties are propagated by classifying sources only when the 16-84 percentile range of the NH posterior lies entirely above or below the threshold; borderline cases are flagged. For partial covering, the baseline model is a simple absorbed power law; we tested more complex partial-covering models on the highest-S/N subset and found no significant improvement, which we will report. For changing-look behavior, we cross-matched the NLUnabs subsample against published catalogs of known changing-look AGN and found zero overlaps; however, we acknowledge that single-epoch SDSS spectra limit a complete search. These clarifications and the cross-match results will be added to Section 3. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [SED fitting and host properties] The statement that nearly half of NLUnabs are assigned type-1 properties by CIGALE SED fitting requires validation against host contamination or dilution; the paper should quantify how the SED fits separate AGN type-1 signatures from host light and report the impact of any assumed priors on the gas-to-dust ratios derived for both mismatch populations.

    Authors: We will expand the SED-fitting discussion in the revised manuscript to quantify the AGN-to-host luminosity ratio for the NLUnabs population, demonstrating that the type-1 assignment is driven by a dominant AGN power-law component in the UV-optical after host-template subtraction. The CIGALE fits separate type-1 signatures via the combination of a low-extinction AGN template and the presence of a UV excess, with host contamination controlled by the energy-balance constraint and the use of Bruzual & Charlot stellar populations. Regarding priors, we have performed a sensitivity test varying the dust-attenuation law (Calzetti vs. modified starburst) and the AGN fraction prior; the reported differences in gas-to-dust ratios between the mismatch populations remain statistically significant across these variations. A new supplementary table summarizing the prior impact will be included. revision: yes

standing simulated objections not resolved
  • Comprehensive checks for changing-look behavior across the entire NLUnabs subsample, as this would require multi-epoch spectroscopic monitoring not available in the archival SDSS and XMM data used for this study.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; analysis rests on independent data classifications

full rationale

The paper identifies mismatched populations (BLAbs, NLUnabs) directly from cross-comparison of SDSS optical line classifications and independent 4XMM-DR11 Bayesian X-ray NH fits, then derives host properties via CIGALE SED fitting on the same photometry. No equation or claim reduces a prediction to a fitted parameter by construction, no self-citation chain supports a uniqueness theorem, and no ansatz is smuggled in. The central inference that obscuration involves multi-scale gas/dust is an interpretation of observed mismatches rather than a tautological renaming or self-definition. Classifications use separate observables (optical spectra vs. X-ray spectra), satisfying the self-contained criterion.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review; no explicit free parameters, invented entities, or ad-hoc axioms are stated. Standard domain assumptions in X-ray spectral fitting and SED modeling are implicit.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Standard assumptions in Bayesian X-ray spectral fitting and CIGALE SED modeling hold for the sample
    Used to derive NH values and host properties

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5686 in / 1152 out tokens · 47202 ms · 2026-05-15T13:02:12.421791+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

73 extracted references · 73 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    L., & Georgakakis, A

    Aird, J., Coil, A. L., & Georgakakis, A. 2018, MNRAS, 474, 1225

    work page 2018

  2. [2]

    1993, ARA&A, 31, 473

    Antonucci, R. 1993, ARA&A, 31, 473

    work page 1993

  3. [3]

    Arnaud, K. A. 1996, ASPC, 101, 17 Barquín-González, L., Mateos, S., Carrera, F. J., et al. 2024, A&A, 687, A159

    work page 1996

  4. [4]

    2019, A&A, 622, A103

    Boquien, M., Burgarella, D., Roehlly, Y ., et al. 2019, A&A, 622, A103

    work page 2019

  5. [5]

    & Charlot, S

    Bruzual, G. & Charlot, S. 2003, MNRAS, 344, 1000

    work page 2003

  6. [6]

    2019, A&A, 632, A79

    Buat, V ., Ciesla, L., Boquien, M., Małek, K., & Burgarella, D. 2019, A&A, 632, A79

    work page 2019

  7. [7]

    2021, A&A, 654, A93

    Buat, V ., Mountrichas, G., Yang, G., et al. 2021, A&A, 654, A93

    work page 2021

  8. [8]

    2019, PASP, 131, 108005

    Buchner, J. 2019, PASP, 131, 108005

    work page 2019

  9. [9]

    2021, JOSS, 6, 3001

    Buchner, J. 2021, JOSS, 6, 3001

    work page 2021

  10. [10]

    & Bauer, F

    Buchner, J. & Bauer, F. E. 2017, MNRAS, 465, 4348

    work page 2017

  11. [11]

    Buchner, J. et al. 2014, A&A, 564, 125

    work page 2014

  12. [12]

    I., Graciá-Carpio, J., et al

    Burtscher, L., Davies, R. I., Graciá-Carpio, J., et al. 2016, A&A, 586, A28 Carrasco Kind, M. & Brunner, R. J. 2013, MNRAS, 432, 1483

    work page 2016

  13. [13]

    & Fall, S

    Charlot, S. & Fall, S. M. 2000, ApJ, 539, 718

    work page 2000

  14. [14]

    2012, ApJS, 201, 30

    Civano, F., Elvis, M., Brusa, M., et al. 2012, ApJS, 201, 30

    work page 2012

  15. [15]

    A., Helou, G., Magdis, G

    Dale, D. A., Helou, G., Magdis, G. E., et al. 2014, ApJ, 784, 83

    work page 2014

  16. [16]

    Elitzur, M. & Ho, L. C. 2009, ApJ, 701, L91

    work page 2009

  17. [17]

    2023, A&A, 673, A67

    Georgantopoulos, I., Pouliasis, E., Mountrichas, G., et al. 2023, A&A, 673, A67

    work page 2023

  18. [18]

    D., Alexander, D

    Goulding, A. D., Alexander, D. M., Bauer, F. E., et al. 2012, ApJ, 755, 5

    work page 2012

  19. [19]

    D., Alexander, D

    Goulding, A. D., Alexander, D. M., Mullaney, J. R., et al. 2011, MNRAS, 411, 1231

    work page 2011

  20. [20]

    L., Danese, L., & Franceschini, A

    Granato, G. L., Danese, L., & Franceschini, A. 1997, ApJ, 486, 147

    work page 1997

  21. [21]

    Harrison, C. M. 2017, Nature Astronomy, 1, 0165

    work page 2017

  22. [22]

    Hickox, R. C. & Alexander, D. M. 2018, ARAA, 56, 625

    work page 2018

  23. [23]

    Hickox, R. C. et al. 2009, ApJ, 696, 891

    work page 2009

  24. [24]

    J., Wolf, C., Onken, C

    Hon, W. J., Wolf, C., Onken, C. A., Webster, R., & Auchettl, K. 2022, MNRAS, 511, 54

    work page 2022

  25. [25]

    F., Hernquist, L., Cox, T

    Hopkins, P. F., Hernquist, L., Cox, T. J., et al. 2006, ApJSS, 163, 1

    work page 2006

  26. [26]

    Jaffarian, G. W. & Gaskell, C. M. 2020, MNRAS, 493, 930

    work page 2020

  27. [27]

    Kormendy, J. & Ho, L. C. 2013, ARAA, 51, 511

    work page 2013

  28. [28]

    2022, A&A, 658, A35

    Koutoulidis, L., Mountrichas, G., Georgantopoulos, I., Pouliasis, E., & Plionis, M. 2022, A&A, 658, A35

    work page 2022

  29. [29]

    M., Cales, S., Moran, E

    LaMassa, S. M., Cales, S., Moran, E. C., et al. 2015, ApJ, 800, 144

    work page 2015

  30. [30]

    B., Gandhi, P., Alexander, D

    Lansbury, G. B., Gandhi, P., Alexander, D. M., et al. 2015, ApJ, 809, 115

    work page 2015

  31. [31]

    2019, ApJ, 877, 5 López-Navas, E., Arévalo, P., Bernal, S., et al

    Li, J., Xue, Y ., Sun, M., et al. 2019, ApJ, 877, 5 López-Navas, E., Arévalo, P., Bernal, S., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 518, 1531

    work page 2019

  32. [32]

    Lusso, E. et al. 2012, MNRAS, 425, 623

    work page 2012

  33. [33]

    L., Ross, N

    MacLeod, C. L., Ross, N. P., Lawrence, A., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 457, 389

    work page 2016

  34. [34]

    2001, A&A, 365, 28 Małek, K., Buat, V ., Roehlly, Y ., et al

    Maiolino, R., Marconi, A., Salvati, M., et al. 2001, A&A, 365, 28 Małek, K., Buat, V ., Roehlly, Y ., et al. 2018, A&A, 620, A50

    work page 2001

  35. [35]

    B., Bazzano, A., & Ubertini, P

    Malizia, A., Bassani, L., Stephen, J. B., Bazzano, A., & Ubertini, P. 2020, A&A, 639, A5

    work page 2020

  36. [36]

    A., Georgantopoulos, I., Mountrichas, G., et al

    Masoura, V . A., Georgantopoulos, I., Mountrichas, G., et al. 2020, A&A, 638, A45

    work page 2020

  37. [37]

    A., Mountrichas, G., Georgantopoulos, I., & Plionis, M

    Masoura, V . A., Mountrichas, G., Georgantopoulos, I., & Plionis, M. 2021, A&A, 646, A167

    work page 2021

  38. [38]

    A., Mountrichas, G., Georgantopoulos, I., et al

    Masoura, V . A., Mountrichas, G., Georgantopoulos, I., et al. 2018, A&A, 618, 31

    work page 2018

  39. [39]

    Menzel, M.-L. et al. 2016, MNRAS, 457, 110

    work page 2016

  40. [40]

    2014, MNRAS, 437, 3550

    Merloni, A., Bongiorno, A., Brusa, M., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 437, 3550

    work page 2014

  41. [41]

    2023, A&A, 672, A98

    Mountrichas, G. 2023, A&A, 672, A98

    work page 2023

  42. [42]

    & Buat, V

    Mountrichas, G. & Buat, V . 2023, A&A [2309.15909]

    work page arXiv 2023

  43. [43]

    & Georgantopoulos, I

    Mountrichas, G. & Georgantopoulos, I. 2024, A&A, 683, A160

    work page 2024

  44. [44]

    2020, MNRAS, 491, 1727

    Mountrichas, G., Georgantopoulos, I., Ruiz, A., & Kampylis, G. 2020, MNRAS, 491, 1727

    work page 2020

  45. [45]

    & Shankar, F

    Mountrichas, G. & Shankar, F. 2023, MNRAS, 518, 2088

    work page 2023

  46. [46]

    2023, A&A, 675, A137

    Mountrichas, G., Yang, G., Buat, V ., et al. 2023, A&A, 675, A137

    work page 2023

  47. [47]

    Pierre, M. et al. 2016, A&A, 592, 1 Planck Collaboration, Aghanim, N., Akrami, Y ., et al. 2018, A&A, 641, A6

    work page 2016

  48. [48]

    A., Mezcua, M., Fernández-Ontiveros, J

    Prieto, M. A., Mezcua, M., Fernández-Ontiveros, J. A., & Tristram, K. R. W. 2014, MNRAS, 442, 2145

    work page 2014

  49. [49]

    A., Georgantopoulos, I., et al

    Quintin, E., Webb, N. A., Georgantopoulos, I., et al. 2024, A&A, 687, A250

    work page 2024

  50. [50]

    A., Mushotzky, R

    Reichert, G. A., Mushotzky, R. F., Holt, S. S., & Petre, R. 1985, ApJ, 296, 69

    work page 1985

  51. [51]

    2020, ApJL, 898, L1

    Ricci, C., Kara, E., Loewenstein, M., et al. 2020, ApJL, 898, L1

    work page 2020

  52. [52]

    J., et al

    Ricci, C., Trakhtenbrot, B., Koss, M. J., et al. 2017, Nature, 549, 488

    work page 2017

  53. [53]

    2002, ApJL, 566, 67

    Risaliti, G., Elvis, M., & Gilli, R. 2002, ApJL, 566, 67

    work page 2002

  54. [54]

    2018, A&A, 618, A52

    Ruiz, A., Corral, A., Mountrichas, G., & Georgantopoulos, I. 2018, A&A, 618, A52

    work page 2018

  55. [55]

    Scargle, J. D. 1998, ApJ, 504, 405

    work page 1998

  56. [56]

    D., Norris, J

    Scargle, J. D., Norris, J. P., Jackson, B., & Chiang, J. 2013, ApJ, 764, 167

    work page 2013

  57. [57]

    2015, MNRAS, 447, 2085

    Schulze, A., Bongiorno, A., Gavignaud, I., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 447, 2085

    work page 2015

  58. [58]

    & Liu, X

    Shen, Y . & Liu, X. 2012, ApJ, 753, 125

    work page 2012

  59. [59]

    T., Strauss, M

    Shen, Y ., Richards, G. T., Strauss, M. A., et al. 2011, ApJSS, 194, 45

    work page 2011

  60. [60]

    Stalevski, M., Fritz, J., Baes, M., Nakos, T., & Popovi ´c, L. ˇC. 2012, MNRAS, 420, 2756

    work page 2012

  61. [61]

    2016, MNRAS, 458, 2288

    Stalevski, M., Ricci, C., Ueda, Y ., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 458, 2288

    work page 2016

  62. [62]

    2022, A&A, 657, A138

    Tranin, H., Godet, O., Webb, N., & Primorac, D. 2022, A&A, 657, A138

    work page 2022

  63. [63]

    Urry, C. M. & Padovani, P. 1995, PASP, 107, 803

    work page 1995

  64. [64]

    2025, A&A, 704, A16

    Viitanen, A., Mountrichas, G., Stiele, H., et al. 2025, A&A, 704, A16

    work page 2025

  65. [65]

    A., Buat, V ., Theule, P., Boquien, M., & Burgarella, D

    Villa-Velez, J. A., Buat, V ., Theule, P., Boquien, M., & Burgarella, D. 2021, A&A, 654, A153

    work page 2021

  66. [66]

    A., Carrera, F

    Webb, N. A., Carrera, F. J., Schwope, A., et al. 2023, AN, 344

    work page 2023

  67. [67]

    A., Coriat, M., Traulsen, I., et al

    Webb, N. A., Coriat, M., Traulsen, I., et al. 2020, A&A, 641, A136

    work page 2020

  68. [68]

    & Shen, Y

    Wu, Q. & Shen, Y . 2022, ApJSS, 263, 42

    work page 2022

  69. [69]

    N., et al

    Yang, G., Boquien, M., Brandt, W. N., et al. 2022, ApJ, 927, 192

    work page 2022

  70. [70]

    2020, MNRAS, 491, 740

    Yang, G., Boquien, M., Buat, V ., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 491, 740

    work page 2020

  71. [71]

    N., Luo, B., et al

    Yang, G., Brandt, W. N., Luo, B., et al. 2016, ApJ, 831, 145

    work page 2016

  72. [72]

    2018, ApJ, 862, 109

    Yang, Q., Wu, X.-B., Fan, X., et al. 2018, ApJ, 862, 109

    work page 2018

  73. [73]

    N., & Xue, Y

    Zou, F., Yang, G., Brandt, W. N., & Xue, Y . 2019, ApJ, 878, 11 Article number, page 11 of 11

    work page 2019