1. Extragalatic Surveys, Cambridge MA, Nov 6-8, 2006 Vincenzo Mainieri G. Hasinger, N. Cappelluti, M. Brusa, F. Civano, A. Comastri, M. Elvis, A. Finoguenov, F. Fiore, R. Gilli, J. Silverman, C. Vignali & XMM-COSMOS team Obscured and unobscured AGN in the XMM-COSMOS Survey

2. Extragalatic Surveys, Cambridge MA, Nov 6-8, 2006 The XMM-COSMOS survey (PI G. Hasinger) See Marcella Brusa’s talk on Tuesday Area = 2 deg 2 Flux limits: [0.5-2] keV -> 7.0x10 -16 cgs [2-10] keV -> 3.3x10 -15 cgs [5-10] keV -> 1.0x10- 14 cgs 1390 point-like X-ray sources (Cappelluti et al. 2006) 1.4 deg

3. Extragalatic Surveys, Cambridge MA, Nov 6-8, 2006 The sample 135 sources Identified (z) > 100 counts (0.3-10 keV) Point-like 715 X-ray sources in the 12F Optical Classification (Magellan&zCOSMOS): 86 BL AGN, 49 not BL AGN

4. Extragalatic Surveys, Cambridge MA, Nov 6-8, 2006 The sample 135 sources Identified (z) > 100 counts (0.3-10 keV) Point-like 715 X-ray sources in the 12F Faint Bright  free N H free  = 2.0 N H free 180

5. Extragalatic Surveys, Cambridge MA, Nov 6-8, 2006 Spectra extraction 1.Define source and background extraction regions (off-axis angle, S/N, nearby sources) 2.Extract spectrum and background for each single pointing 3.Combine spectrum and background coming from different pointings

6. Extragalatic Surveys, Cambridge MA, Nov 6-8, 2006 X-ray zoo [0.5-2] [2-4.5] [4.5-10] keV PL APL APL+soft APL+Fe

7. Extragalatic Surveys, Cambridge MA, Nov 6-8, 2006  vs N H N H gal =[2.5-2.9] x 10 20 cm -2 Bright sample: 82 sources = 2.06 ± 0.08 does not change with N H does not change with z

8. Extragalatic Surveys, Cambridge MA, Nov 6-8, 2006 N H distribution Bright + Faint sample 24% are absorbed No BL AGN has N H >10 22 cm -2 9% of BL AGN have N H >N H gal 1 Compton thick candidate

9. Extragalatic Surveys, Cambridge MA, Nov 6-8, 2006 Comparison between X-ray and optical classification BLAGN 76% NLAGN 19% NLAGN 41% Gal 34% Gal 5% X-ray unabsorbedX-ray absorbed 2/3of NLAGN do not show X-ray absorption: 80% z>0.4 --> H  outside 50% have MgII inside but not enough S/N BLAGN 25% NLAGN 41% Gal 34%

10. Extragalatic Surveys, Cambridge MA, Nov 6-8, 2006 X-ray spectral properties catalogue

11. Extragalatic Surveys, Cambridge MA, Nov 6-8, 2006 Compare HR and N H values 90% of the sources with N H >10 22 cm -2 have HR>-0.3 The only source outside this box shows soft excess in its X-ray spectra 99% of the sources with N H <10 22 cm -2 have HR<-0.3

12. Extragalatic Surveys, Cambridge MA, Nov 6-8, 2006 X/O vs NH A tool to select obscured AGN: 60% X/O>10 are obscured (to be compare with the 23% for the full sample) High-z candidates?

13. Extragalatic Surveys, Cambridge MA, Nov 6-8, 2006 QSO-2 candidates X-ray surveys are finding the radio quiet population of QSO-2 They are spanning a large redshift range: [0.7-2.4] R-K ~ 4-5 (Vega) Two are detected at 20cm: 540±24  Jy -> 9.8x10 23 W/Hz 52±11  Jy -> 1.5x10 23 W/Hz For the other two: F 20cm (4.5  ) ~ 50  Jy

14. Extragalatic Surveys, Cambridge MA, Nov 6-8, 2006 xid=122 xid=70 xid=2237 z=2.418 z=0.688 z=0.941 Composite Sy2

15. Extragalatic Surveys, Cambridge MA, Nov 6-8, 2006 Guainazzi, Matt & Perola 2005 Local (z=0) sample of Compton thick sources Hasinger et al. 2006 Compton-thick

16. Extragalatic Surveys, Cambridge MA, Nov 6-8, 2006 25 arcsec ACS/HST z=0.1248 (SDSS spectrum) pexrav+gauss …only 131 counts Compton-thick

17. Extragalatic Surveys, Cambridge MA, Nov 6-8, 2006 Conclusions Best models in the 12F: PL (76%), APL (20%), other (Fe,pexrav,etc..) 4% =2.06±0.08 (from 82 sources) No correlation between  and N H or z We are building the observed N H distribution for a large and uniform sample of AGN 4 new QSO-2: their SED is well reproduced by a composite Sy2 spectrum Significant detection of FeK  in three objects, one new Compton-thick candidate …more to come: the XMM-Newton data are all in hand and the spectroscopic follow-up is rapidly proceeding (Magellan & zCOSMOS) Mainieri et al 2006, submitted to Apj (COSMOS ApJS issue)