Constraining the properties of AGN host galaxies with spectral energy distribution modelling

By L. Ciesla, Vassilis Charmandaris, A. Georgakakis, E. Bernhard, Peter D Mitchell, V. Buat, D. Elbaz, E. Lefloc'h, C. Lacey, G. Magdis and 1 more. 2015

178 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Detailed studies of the spectral energy distribution (SED) of normal galaxies have increasingly been used to understand the physical mechanism dominating their integrated emission, mainly owing to the availability of high quality multi-wavelength data from the UV to the far-infrared (FIR). However, systems hosting dust-enshrouded nuclear starbursts and/or an accreting supermassive black hole (an active galactic nucleus or AGN) are especially challenging to study. This is due to the complex interplay between the heating by massive stars and the AGN, the absorption and emission of radiation from dust, as well as the presence of the underlying old stellar population. We used the latest release of CIGALE, a fast state-of-the-art galaxy SED-fitting model relying on energy balance, to study the influence of an AGN in a self consistent manner in estimating both the star formation rate (SFR) and stellar mass in galaxies, as well as to calculate the contribution of the AGN to the power output of the host. Using the semi-analytical galaxy formation model galform, we created a suite of mock galaxy SEDs using realistic star formation histories (SFH). We also added an AGN of Type-1, Type-2, or intermediate-type whose contribution to the bolometric luminosity can be variable. We performed an SED-fitting of these catalogues with CIGALE, assuming three different SFHs: a single-exponentially-decreasing (1τ-dec), a double-exponentially-decreasing (2τ-dec), and a delayed SFH. Constraining the overall contribution of an AGN to the total infrared luminosity (fracAGN) is very challenging for fracAGN< 20%, with uncertainties of ~5–30% for higher fractions depending on the AGN type, while FIR and sub-mm are essential. The AGN power has an impact on the estimation of M∗ in Type-1 and intermediate-type AGNs but has no effect on galaxies hosting Type-2 AGNs. We find that in the absence of AGN emission, the best estimates of M∗ are obtained using the 2τ-dec model but at the expense of realistic ages of the stellar population. The delayed SFH model provides good estimates of M∗ and SFR, with a maximum offset of 10% as well as better estimates of the age. Our analysis shows that the under-estimation of the SFR increases with fracAGN for Type-1 systems, as well as for low contributions of an intermediate AGN type, but it is quite insensitive to the emission of Type-2 AGNs up to fracAGN ~ 45%. A lack of sampling the FIR, or sub-mm domain systematically over-estimates the SFR (<20%), independent of the contribution of the AGN. Similarly, the UV emission is critical in accurately retrieving both the M∗ for Type-1 and intermediate- type AGN and the SFR of all three AGN types. We show that the presence of AGN emission introduces a scatter to the SFR-M∗ main sequence relation derived from SED-fitting, which is driven by the uncertainties on M∗. Finally, we used our mock catalogues to test the popular IR SED-fitting code DecompIR and show that fracAGN is under-estimated but that the SFR is recovered well for Type-1 and intermediate-types of AGN. The fracAGN, SFR, and LIR estimates of Type-2 AGNs are more problematic owing to a FIR emission disagreement between predicted and observed models.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics, Instrumentation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0fc5030a3ae23e50fcff1a4e024a284b23d393ed

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Astronomy and Astrophysics

In Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics

In Instrumentation

Citations in the corpus

x-cigale: fitting AGN/galaxy SEDs from X-ray to infrared (2020, methodology): “For the galaxy component, we adopt the model setting similar to that in Ciesla et al. (2015).”
Modelling and interpreting spectral energy distributions of galaxies with BEAGLE (2016, background): “…BEAGLE (this work) yes no no yes (+ photo-z) yes yes BEAGLE 2.0 (in preparation) yes yes yes yes (+ photo-z) yes yes Notes. a(Burgarella et al. 2005; Noll et al. 2009; Ciesla et al. 2015). b(da Cunha et al. 2008, 2015). c(Acquaviva et al. 2011, 2015). d(Han & Han 2012, 2014). intergalactic medium.”
Data Release 1 of the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (2025, unknown): “…bands is reemitted in the infrared; it estimates key galaxy and AGN properties such as stellar mass, star formation rate, and the AGN fraction ( the contribution of the AGN dusty torus to the total IR luminosity; e.g., L. Ciesla et al. 2015; S. Salim et al. 2018; G. Yang et al. 2020, 2022 ) .”
CIGALE: a python Code Investigating GALaxy Emission (2018, methodology): “We refer to Ciesla et al. (2015) for a presentation of the capabilities of CIGALE regarding AGNs. galaxies with a representative set of modules as described in Table 1, leading to a modest grid of 8164800 models.”
An Older, More Quiescent Universe from Panchromatic SED Fitting of the 3D-HST Survey (2018, background): “Emission from central active galactic nuclei (AGNs) is now built into many SED-fitting models (Berta et al. 2013; Ciesla et al. 2015; Calistro Rivera et al. 2016; Leja et al. 2018).”