1: \documentclass{emulateapj}
2:
3: \newcommand \microjy{$\mu$Jy}
4: \newcommand \plagas{PLGs}
5: \newcommand \plaga{PLG}
6: \newcommand \spitzer{\textit{Spitzer}}
7: \newcommand \chandra{\textit{Chandra}}
8: \def\gsim{\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$}} \raise1pt\hbox{$>$}}}
9: \def\lsim{\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$}} \raise1pt\hbox{$<$}}}
10: \newcommand{\Msun}{\ensuremath{M_\odot}}
11: \newcommand{\Lsun}{\ensuremath{L_\odot}}
12:
13: \usepackage{lscape}
14:
15: \slugcomment{Accepted for publication in the Astrophysical Journal; 2008 June 26}
16: \shorttitle{\textit{Spitzer}--Selected AGN}
17: \shortauthors{DONLEY ET~AL}
18:
19: % --------------------------------------------------------------------
20: \begin{document}
21:
22: \title{\textit{Spitzer's} Contribution to the AGN Population}
23:
24: \author{J. L. Donley, \altaffilmark{1} G. H. Rieke, \altaffilmark{1}
25: P. G. P\'{e}rez-Gonz\'{a}lez, \altaffilmark{2,3} G. Barro\altaffilmark{2}}
26:
27: \altaffiltext{1}{Steward Observatory, University of Arizona, 933
28: North Cherry Avenue, Tucson, AZ 85721; jdonley@as.arizona.edu}
29: \altaffiltext{2}{Departamento de Astrof\'{\i}sica y CC. de la Atm\'osfera, Facultad de
30: CC. F\'{\i}sicas, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, 28040 Madrid,
31: Spain}
32: \altaffiltext{3}{Associate Astronomer at Steward Observatory, The University of Arizona}
33: % --------------------------------------------------------------------
34:
35: \begin{abstract}
36:
37: Infrared selection is a potentially powerful way to identify heavily
38: obscured AGN missed in even the deepest X-ray surveys. Using a
39: 24~\micron-selected sample in GOODS-S, we test the reliability and
40: completeness of three infrared AGN selection methods: (1) IRAC
41: color-color selection, (2) IRAC power-law selection, and (3) IR-excess
42: selection; we also evaluate a number of infrared excess approaches.
43: We find that the vast majority of non-power-law IRAC color-selected
44: AGN candidates in GOODS-S have colors consistent with those of
45: star-forming galaxies. Contamination by star-forming galaxies is most
46: prevalent at low 24~\micron\ flux densities ($\sim 100$~\microjy) and
47: high redshifts ($z\sim 2$), but the fraction of potential contaminants
48: is still high ($\sim 50\%$) at 500~\microjy, the highest flux density
49: probed reliably by our survey. AGN candidates selected via a simple,
50: physically-motivated power-law criterion (\plagas), however, appear to
51: be reliable. We confirm that the infrared excess methods successfully
52: identify a number of AGN, but we also find that such samples may be
53: significantly contaminated by star-forming galaxies. Adding only the
54: secure \textit{Spitzer}-selected \plaga, color-selected, IR-excess,
55: and radio/IR-selected AGN candidates to the deepest X-ray--selected
56: AGN samples directly increases the number of known X-ray AGN (84) by
57: $54-77\%$, and implies an increase to the number of
58: 24~\micron-detected AGN of $71-94\%$. Finally, we show that the
59: fraction of MIR sources dominated by an AGN decreases with decreasing
60: MIR flux density, but only down to $f_{\rm 24~\micron} =
61: 300$~\microjy. Below this limit, the AGN fraction levels out,
62: indicating that a non-negligible fraction ($\sim 10\%$) of faint
63: 24~\micron\ sources (the majority of which are missed in the X-ray)
64: are powered not by star formation, but by the central engine. The
65: fraction of all AGN (regardless of their MIR properties) exceeds 15\%
66: at all 24~\micron\ flux densities.
67:
68: \end{abstract}
69:
70: \keywords{galaxies: active --- infrared: galaxies --- X-rays: galaxies}
71:
72: % --------------------------------------------------------------------
73: \section{Introduction}
74:
75: Identifying complete and reliable samples of AGN has become a
76: necessity for extragalactic surveys, whether the goal be the selection
77: of AGN candidates or the removal of AGN ``contaminants''. Only when
78: armed with complete samples of AGN will we be able to determine the
79: role of obscured accretion in the build-up of the present day black
80: hole mass function, or accurately characterize the star-formation
81: history of the universe. Complete AGN samples are also required to
82: test proposed evolutionary theories in which black hole formation and
83: star-formation are intimately linked by merger and feedback processes
84: (e.g. Hopkins et al. 2006), ultimately producing the correlation
85: between black hole mass and bulge velocity dispersion (Ferrarese \&
86: Merritt 2000; Gebhardt et al. 2000). Unfortunately, the varied
87: luminosities, accretion rates, orientations, and intrinsic
88: obscurations of AGN prevent any one selection technique from reliably
89: identifying all of them. For instance, while current UV, optical, and
90: X-ray surveys are capable of detecting unobscured AGN, they miss many
91: of the obscured AGN and nearly all of the Compton-thick AGN thought to
92: dominate AGN number counts at both low and high redshift (e.g. Gilli
93: et al. 2007; Daddi et al. 2007a,b). Likewise, only 10-15\% of AGN are
94: radio-loud, making radio surveys relatively incomplete.
95:
96: The Multiband Imaging Photometer (MIPS; Rieke et al. 2004) and
97: Infrared Array Camera (IRAC; Fazio et al. 2004) instruments aboard
98: \textit{Spitzer} have provided sensitive surveys in multiple mid-IR bands.
99: Infrared selection with MIPS and IRAC data is being used widely to
100: select AGN candidates independently of their optical and/or X-ray
101: properties. In addition to identifying AGN in fields with little or
102: no X-ray data, infrared selection criteria are capable of identifying
103: heavily obscured AGN missed in even the deepest X-ray fields
104: (e.g. Donley et al. 2007). As such, IR selection has the potential to
105: complement traditional AGN selection methods and to yield a more
106: complete census of AGN activity.
107:
108: In this paper, we critically review the following infrared selection
109: criteria: (1) IRAC color-color selection, (2) IRAC power-law
110: selection, and (3) IR-excess selection. The first selection method
111: employs color cuts in two representations of IRAC 4-band mid-infrared
112: (MIR) color-color space (Lacy et al. 2004; Stern et al. 2005), the
113: second identifies AGN whose IRAC SEDs are well-fit by a power-law
114: (Alonso-Herrero et al. 2006, Donley et al. 2007), and the third
115: selects red galaxies with large infrared to UV/optical flux ratios
116: (Daddi et al. 2007a, Dey et al. 2008, Fiore et al. 2008, Polletta et
117: al. 2008). The first two criteria are based on the same principle:
118: the hot dust near an AGN's central engine reprocesses absorbed UV,
119: optical, and X-ray emission into short-wavelength MIR emission,
120: filling in the gap between the stellar emission that peaks near
121: 1.5~\micron\ and the long-wavelength dust emission features that
122: dominate the SEDs of star-forming galaxies. The color-color and
123: power-law selection criteria, however, differ in the range of mid-IR
124: characteristics they include as possible AGN indicators. The third
125: selection method identifies sources in which heavy obscuration with
126: reemission in the infrared diminishes the optical emission and/or
127: enhances the infrared emission.
128:
129: This paper utilizes improved spectral templates with a sample of
130: infrared color-selected, power-law galaxies (\plagas), and IR-excess
131: galaxies in the ultra-deep GOODS-S field to test the reliability and
132: completeness of these selection techniques over a wide range of sample
133: properties. From this analysis, we then quantify the contribution of
134: these approaches plus \textit{Spitzer} identification of
135: radio-intermediate and radio-loud AGN to the X-ray--selected AGN
136: population. The paper is organized as follows. In \S2, we describe
137: the selection of the color-selected, \plaga, and IR-excess samples.
138: The construction of high-reliability photometric redshifts is
139: described in \S3, as are the overall redshift properties of the
140: sample. In \S4, we briefly discuss the X-ray properties of our
141: MIPS-selected sample. The infrared color selection criteria of Lacy
142: et al. (2004) and Stern et al. (2005) are discussed in \S5, where we
143: compare and contrast the two selection criteria, investigate the
144: behavior in color space of the star-forming templates, determine the
145: redshift and flux dependencies of the color selection techniques, and
146: investigate the properties of the most secure color-selected AGN
147: candidates. In \S6, we discuss the
148: \plaga\ selection criteria, and in \S7 we investigate the
149: IR-excess sources. Finally, in \S8, we discuss the overall statistics
150: of AGN revealed by IR-based methods compared with X-ray--selected
151: samples. A summary is given in \S9. Throughout the paper, we assume
152: the following cosmology: ($\Omega_{\rm m}$,$\Omega_{\rm
153: \Lambda},H_0$)=(0.3, 0.7, 72~km~s$^{-1}$~Mpc$^{-1}$).
154:
155: \section{Sample Selection}
156:
157: \subsection{Multi-wavelength Data}
158:
159: We take as our initial GOODS-S sample all MIPS sources detected at
160: 24~\micron\ to a flux density of $f_{24~\micron} > 80.0$~\microjy. At
161: this flux limit, 99\% of the MIPS sample are detected to $> 10\sigma$.
162: There are several advantages to choosing a flux-limited MIPS
163: sample. First, AGN (and LIRGS/ULIRGS) tend to be bright at 24~\micron\
164: (e.g. Rigby et al. 2004). Selecting only those galaxies with
165: $f_{24~\micron} > 80.0$~\microjy\ therefore retains all but the
166: faintest AGN while excluding 50-60\% of IRAC-selected IR-normal
167: star-forming galaxies at all flux densities. Second, a MIPS
168: flux-limited sample is not subject to the complicated slope-dependent
169: selection bias present in IRAC selected samples due to the significant
170: variation in the sensitivity of the 4 IRAC bands (see Donley et
171: al. 2007). Third, this selection gives a complete and well-defined
172: sample of objects with extreme red $R - [24]$ colors.
173:
174: The MIPS 24~\micron\ catalog of the GOODS Legacy team (Dickinson et
175: al., in prep.) is comprised of 948 sources in the MIPS CDF-S Legacy
176: field with $f_{\nu} > 80.0$~\microjy. While this MIPS depth can be
177: obtained over the full CDF-S, we chose to limit this study to the
178: GOODS region to take advantage of the super-deep IRAC imaging. The
179: relative depths of the limiting MIPS flux and the super-deep IRAC
180: photometry ensure that essentially all MIPS sources have high S/N IRAC
181: SEDs, allowing us to study in an unbiased way the IRAC properties of
182: this flux-limited MIPS sample. To ensure that all AGN candidates have
183: sufficient X-ray coverage, we also required X-ray coverage of $T_{\rm
184: X} > 250$~ks from the deep $1~Ms$ CDF-S X-ray dataset (see Giacconi et
185: al. (2002) and Alexander et al. (2003)). Despite this relatively low
186: cut, 96\% of the final MIPS sample have $T_{\rm X} > 0.5$~Ms and 80\%
187: have $T_{\rm X} > 0.75$~Ms. The resulting sample was drawn from an
188: area of 195.3 sq. arcmin and contains 846 MIPS sources.
189:
190: The CDF-S is one of the best-imaged fields in the UV, optical, NIR,
191: and X-ray. We took advantage of this extensive multiwavelength dataset
192: by creating an aperture-matched catalog using the UV-NIR photometry of
193: Marzke et al. (1999, $RIz$), Vandame et al. (2001, $JK$), Arnouts et
194: al. (2002, $UU_{\rm p}BVRI$), COMBO17 (Wolf et al. 2004), Giavalisco
195: et al. (2004, $bvizJHK$), Le F{\`e}vre et al. (2004, $I$), and GALEX
196: ($FUV,NUV$) (see P{\'e}rez-Gonz{\'a}lez et al. 2005 and the UCM
197: Extragalactic
198: Database\footnote{http://t-rex.fis.ucm.es/~pgperez/Proyectos/databaseuse.en.html}
199: for more details). We then removed from our sample the 89 MIPS
200: sources that had multiple optical counterparts that were (1) within a
201: 2.5\arcsec\ search radius of the MIPS source and (2) separated by more
202: than 0.5\arcsec. (At $r < 0.5$\arcsec, it is difficult to distinguish
203: between multiple counterparts and an extended/irregular source with
204: multiple components.) While we do not restrict our sample to regions
205: covered by GOODS ACS imaging, 83\% of the MIPS sources in our sample
206: have deep ACS coverage.
207:
208: SExtractor-selected IRAC sources were similarly matched to the MIPS
209: sample after combining the super-deep IRAC data with data from the
210: deep, wide-area, \textit{Spitzer} Legacy Program (PI: van Dokkum) and
211: the MIPS-GTO IRAC program (see P{\'e}rez-Gonz{\'a}lez et al. 2008 for
212: further details). To ensure accurate MIR SEDs, we removed from the IR
213: \plaga\ and color-selected samples 32 sources with blended
214: IRAC or MIPS photometry. Of the remaining 725 MIPS sources that meet
215: our criteria, 713 (98\%) have unique IRAC counterparts within a
216: 2\arcsec\ search radius, and 699 (96\%) have $> 5\sigma$ IRAC
217: detections in all 4 IRAC bands, allowing us to determine accurately
218: the MIR colors of essentially all members of the MIPS-selected sample.
219: Of the 12 sources without IRAC counterparts, 6 were not detected due
220: to blending with a nearby source, 4 had badly centered MIPS positions,
221: and 2 had faint IRAC counterparts that fall below our catalog limit.
222:
223: \subsection{Power-law, color-selected, and IR-normal samples}
224:
225: After assigning IRAC counterparts, we separated the MIPS sample into
226: three subsets: IR \plagas, IR color-selected galaxies, and IR-normal
227: galaxies. We defined as \plagas\ sources whose 4-band IRAC photometry
228: is well-fit by a line of slope $\alpha \le -0.5$, where $f_{\nu}
229: \propto \nu^{\alpha}$ (Alonso-Herrero et al. 2006; Donley et al. 2007).
230: The effect of different cuts in $\alpha$ will be discussed in \S6. To
231: ensure a good fit, we required the chi-squared probability P${\chi}$
232: (the probability that the fit would yield a chi-squared greater than
233: or equal to the observed chi-squared) to exceed 0.1. P${\chi}$ tends
234: either to lie close to 0.5 (the probability that corresponds to a
235: reduced chi-squared of 1) or is very small (see Bevington \& Robinson
236: 2003). This selection, which identified 55 \plagas, was done using
237: the {\sc linfit} task in IDL. This task takes the following 4-band
238: input from IRAC:
239:
240: \begin{equation}
241: x=\rm{log}(\nu)
242: \end{equation}
243: \begin{equation}
244: y=\rm{log}(f_\nu)
245: \end{equation}
246: \begin{equation}
247: \Delta y=[1/\rm{ln}(10)]*\Delta f_{\nu}/f_{\nu}
248: \end{equation}
249:
250: \noindent
251: and returns the best fit slope, $\alpha$, and the chi-squared
252: probability, P${\chi}$. While sources selected via this method are
253: dominated by the AGN in the mid-IR, we do not require that the
254: power-law extend into the optical. Consequently, many
255: infrared-selected \plagas\ are dominated by stellar emission at
256: wavelengths short of $\sim 2$~\micron, where the reprocessed emission
257: from hot dust is suppressed because of dust sublimation.
258:
259:
260: Color-selected galaxies were defined as sources that meet the AGN IRAC
261: color-cuts of Lacy et al. (2004) or Stern et al. (2005), but that {\bf
262: do not meet the \plaga\ criterion}. As discussed in Alonso-Herrero et
263: al. (2006) and Donley et al. (2007), both the \plaga\ and IRAC color
264: cuts attempt to select luminous AGN that outshine their host galaxies
265: in the infrared, filling in the dip in a galaxy's SED between the
266: short-wavelength stellar emission feature and the long-wavelength dust
267: emission features. As such, the IRAC AGN color selection regions
268: contain, but also extend beyond, the power-law locus in color
269: space. While nearly all \plagas\ meet the IRAC AGN color selection
270: criteria, not all color-selected galaxies meet the \plaga\ criteria.
271: We therefore separate color-selected sources that can be identified
272: via a power-law fit (\plagas) from those that can not (color-selected
273: galaxies). The color-selected sample consists of 210 sources, 188 of
274: which meet the Lacy et al. criteria, 72 of which meet the Stern et
275: al. criteria, and 50 of which meet both criteria.
276:
277: Finally, we define IR-normal galaxies as sources that meet neither the
278: IRAC \plaga\ nor the color selection criteria; these sources comprise
279: the remaining 448 galaxies in the MIPS sample. As they are not the
280: focus of this study, we have not checked their IRAC and MIPS
281: photometry by eye. Instead, we estimate that the fraction of IR-normal
282: galaxies with blended IRAC or MIPS photometry is similar to that found
283: for the \plaga\ and color-selected samples, 11\%, or $\sim 50$
284: galaxies. We caution that IR-normal does \textit{not} mean purely
285: star-forming. Instead, 'IR-normal' only indicates that any mid-IR
286: emission from an AGN is overwhelmed by emission from the host-galaxy.
287: In fact, many Type 2 and Seyfert-luminosity AGN meet the IR-normal
288: criteria (Stern et al. 2005, Donley et al. 2007, Cardamone et
289: al. 2008).
290:
291:
292: \subsection{IR-Excess Galaxies}
293:
294: In addition to dividing the MIPS-selected sample into the 3
295: sub-samples discussed above, we identified IR-excess galaxies using
296: the criteria of Daddi et al. (2007a), Dey et al. (2008), Fiore et
297: al. (2008), and Polletta et al. (2008). (We also searched for bright
298: ULIRGS that met the IR-excess criteria of Yan et al. (2007), but found
299: none in our faint sample.) Daddi et al. (2007a) selected galaxies in
300: GOODS (with a $3 \sigma$ 24~\micron\ flux limit of 15-30~\microjy)
301: whose total MIR+UV star-formation rate (SFR) exceeds the
302: dust-corrected UV SFR by a factor of $>3$, and estimate that at least
303: $\sim 50\%$ of their sample are Compton-thick AGN. Dey et al. (2008)
304: select sources with $R-[24] \ge 14$ ($f_{\rm 24~\micron}/f_{R} \gsim
305: 1000$) and $f_{\rm 24~\micron} > 300$~\microjy, criteria which yield a
306: sample of both heavily obscured AGN and star-forming galaxies. Fiore
307: et al. similarly require that $f_{\rm 24~\micron}/f_{R} \ge 1000$, but
308: also include an optical/NIR criterion of $R-K > 4.5$ and extend their
309: selection to fainter 24~\micron\ fluxes of $f_{\rm 24~\micron} \ge
310: 40$~\microjy. They estimate from simulations that 80\% of the sources
311: selected via these criteria are obscured AGN. Polletta et al. (2008)
312: focus only on the most luminous AGN ($f_{\rm 24~\micron} \gsim 1$~mJy)
313: with large infrared to optical flux ratios, whose IRAC and MIPS colors
314: can be described by the following criteria: $f_{\rm 5.8}/f_{\rm 3.6} >
315: 2, f_{\rm 8.0}/f_{\rm 4.5} > 2$, and log $[f_{\rm 8.0}/f_{\rm 3.6}] +
316: \rm{log} [f_{\rm 24}/f_{\rm 3.6}] > 2$.
317:
318: Because IR-excess sources tend to be optically-faint, we use the
319: approach of Fiore et al. (2008, private communication) and estimate
320: the R-band magnitudes by interpolating the ACS v- and i-band data from
321: the MUSIC catalog (Grazian et al. 2006). Despite the inherent
322: uncertainties associated with this relatively simple method, the
323: interpolated R-band magnitudes are in excellent agreement with
324: ground-based R-band measurements for bright sources, and they greatly
325: improve upon the uncertain R-band estimations at faint flux densities.
326: Because the MUSIC catalog is based on identifications at $z$ and $K$
327: (the latter of which is universally bright for the IR-excess sources),
328: the use of the MUSIC catalog for these sources also ensures that the
329: correct optical counterpart is chosen, as verified by a visual
330: inspection of the sources selected via the Fiore et al. criteria. The
331: only disadvantage of this method is that, of the 195.3 sq. arcmin of
332: our survey, only 132.7 sq. arcmin (68\%) are covered by the deep ISAAC
333: K-band data, which was also used in the selection of the Daddi et
334: al. sources. Our identification of the Dey et al., Daddi et al., and
335: Fiore et al. IR-excess samples is therefore limited to this region.
336:
337: Of the 465/713 sources in our MIPS-selected sample that lie in the
338: ISAAC field, 10 meet the Dey et al. criteria, 52 meet the Fiore et
339: al. criteria, and 42 lie in the Daddi et al. IR-excess sample (the
340: list of which was kindly provided by D. Alexander, private
341: communication 2008). In addition, 71 MIPS sources have red IR/optical
342: colors of $f_{\rm 24~\micron}/f_{R} \ge 1000$; we will refer to this
343: sample as 'IR-bright/optically-faint'. Of the full sample of 713
344: sources, 5 meet the Polletta et al. criteria. The properties of these
345: IR-excess galaxies, nearly all of which also meet the power-law or
346: color-selection criteria outlined above, will be discussed in more
347: detail in \S7.
348:
349: \section{Redshifts}
350:
351: While the redshift coverage in the CDF-S is amongst the highest in all
352: cosmological fields, only 34\% of the sources in our faint sample have
353: spectroscopic redshifts. As one of our main goals is to investigate
354: the redshift-dependency of infrared color selection, we require both
355: accurate and complete redshift information. However, the mean
356: magnitude of the sources without spectroscopic redshifts, $V\sim
357: 24.1$, is very faint, making further spectroscopic follow-up
358: challenging. We therefore supplement the spectroscopic redshifts with
359: photometric ones. The sources that are the focus of this study
360: generally have SEDs with weak stellar features and require extra care
361: to fit accurate photometric redshifts. To insure this accuracy, we
362: have used two complementary photo-z approaches and have incorporated
363: two stages of independent visual inspection by two reviewers, as
364: described in Appendix A. The final results, shown in Figure 1,
365: support the high accuracy and completeness of the adopted redshifts
366: for this faint sample.
367:
368: \begin{figure}
369: \epsscale{1}
370: \plotone{f1.eps}
371: \caption{Photometric vs. secure spectroscopic redshifts for
372: \plagas\ (navy stars), color-selected galaxies (red
373: triangles), and IR-normal galaxies (green crosses). Values are plotted
374: in log$(1+z)$. Dot-dashed and dotted lines give 10\% and 20\% errors
375: on $\Delta z$, respectively. 89\% of the sample have
376: $\Delta(z)$$<$0.1, and 95\% have $\Delta(z)$$<$0.2.}
377: \end{figure}
378:
379: Of the 713 MIPS-selected sources in our sample, 249 have secure
380: spectroscopic redshifts from the VVDS (Le F{\`e}vre et
381: al. 2004),VLT/FORS2 (Vanzella et al. 2006), K20 (Mignoli et al. 2005),
382: and Szokoly et al. (2004) redshift surveys. For our photometric
383: redshifts, the mean offset is $\overline{\Delta (z)} = 0.012$, where
384: $\Delta(z) = (z_p - z_s) / (1+z_s)$, and the dispersion is
385: $\sigma_{\rm z} = 0.15$, where $\sigma_{\rm z}^2 = (1/N) \sum \Delta
386: (z)^2$. Eighty-nine percent of the sample have $\Delta(z)$$<$0.1, and
387: 95\% have $\Delta(z)$$<$0.2. As shown in Table 1, while the redshift
388: completeness and accuracy are high for the IR-normal and
389: color-selected samples, they drop significantly for the \plaga\
390: sample. A comparison of their spectroscopic and photometric redshifts
391: illustrates some of the issues. Three of the four \plaga\ outliers are
392: best fit by a Type 1 QSO template, whose redshift is particularly
393: difficult to constrain. However, of the 18 \plagas\ for which only
394: photometric redshifts are available, only 2 (11\%) are fit by a Type 1
395: QSO template. The remainder show optical features/breaks that make
396: their redshift determination more secure. As such, we expect the
397: overall accuracy of the \plaga\ redshifts to be higher than one would
398: assume given the limited comparison with spectroscopic redshifts.
399:
400: With the addition of 400 photometric redshifts, computed as described
401: above, our redshift completeness is 91\%. The redshift distribution is
402: shown in Figure 2. Also plotted in Figure 2 is a redshift histogram
403: that incorporates typical errors in the photometric redshifts. To
404: produce this distribution, we simulated 10,000 redshift distributions
405: in which the photometric redshifts were randomly varied according to
406: the appropriate $\sigma$ given in Table 1. We plot in Figure 2 the
407: mean of the resulting distributions. Both redshift distributions show
408: a strong peak at $z=1$, and while the first shows a potential peak at
409: $z\sim 2$, we cannot confirm its presence due to the errors on the
410: photometric redshifts.
411:
412: \begin{figure*}
413: \epsscale{1}
414: \plottwo{f2a.eps}{f2b.eps}
415: \caption{Redshift distribution of the MIPS-selected sample. The plot on the left
416: gives the observed distribution, while the plot on the right
417: incorporates the typical errors on the photometric redshifts. From
418: lightest to darkest shading, the histograms represent all MIPS sources
419: in our sample, IR-normal galaxies, color-selected sources that meet
420: the Lacy et al. (2004) criteria, color-selected sources that meet the
421: Stern et al. (2005) criteria, and
422: \plagas.}
423: \end{figure*}
424:
425:
426: We separate the sample in Figure 2 into the \plaga, color-selected
427: (Lacy et al. and Stern et al.), and IR-normal subsamples. As
428: expected, the number of IR-normal galaxies peaks at $z=0.7$ (a
429: well-known redshift peak in the CDF-S) and at $z=1.1$ (another known
430: redshift peak). We also detect a peak at $z=0.3$ similar to that
431: found by Desai et al. (2008), whose strength increases if we apply
432: their cut of $f_{\rm 24~\micron} \ge 300$~\microjy. In the CDF-S,
433: however, this peak is dwarfed by the stronger peak at $z=0.7$, even at
434: large flux densities. The redshift distribution of the IR-normal
435: galaxies decreases rapidly at redshifts of $z > 1.2$, where only
436: highly luminous star-forming galaxies are detectable. In contrast, the
437: \plagas\ with redshift estimates have a relatively flat distribution
438: in redshift space, as was found for the \plagas\ in the CDF-N (Donley
439: et al. 2007).
440:
441: The redshift distributions of the (non-power-law) Lacy et al. and
442: Stern et al. selected samples differ significantly, both from the
443: IR-normal and \plaga\ samples, as well as from one another. The
444: Stern-selected galaxies peak at $z \sim 1.25$ whereas the
445: Lacy-selected galaxies show significant peaks at $z \sim 0.5$ and $z
446: \sim 2$, with very few galaxies falling in the $z<1$ regime originally
447: probed by these selection methods (see \S5). In addition, at $z \ge
448: 1.75$, nearly all (94\%) MIPS-selected sources meet the Lacy AGN
449: selection criteria, regardless of their nature. A large concentration
450: of galaxies at $z \sim 2$ was previously observed in this field by
451: Caputi et al. (2006), and in a brighter sample of MIPS sources by
452: Desai et al. (2008), and is most probably due to the 7.7~\micron\
453: aromatic feature passing through the 24~\micron\ band. This behavior
454: suggests that the mid-IR continua of the Lacy color-selected galaxies
455: contain substantial contributions from star-formation (e.g. Genzel et
456: al. 1998).
457:
458: Finally, the mean redshifts of the IR-excess samples are as follows:
459: $z=1.92 \pm 0.36$ for the Daddi et al. sources, $z=2.19 \pm 0.61$ for
460: the dust obscured galaxies (DOGs, Dey et al. 2008), $z=2.09 \pm 0.48$
461: for the Fiore-selected sources, $z=2.11$ for the one Polletta source
462: with a known redshift, and $z=2.05 \pm 0.49$ for the
463: IR-bright/optically-faint sources. As discussed above, this
464: concentration about a redshift of 2 (when not a design of the
465: selection as in Daddi et al. (2007)) is likely to be due at least in
466: part to the passage of the 7.7~\micron\ aromatic feature through the
467: MIPS 24~\micron\ band, suggesting a significant contribution from
468: star-formation.
469:
470: \section{X-ray Properties}
471:
472: Of the 713 MIPS sources, 109 (15\%) have X-ray counterparts in the
473: Alexander et al. (2003) or Giacconi et al. (2002) catalogs. Of these,
474: 25 are \plagas, 35 are color-selected galaxies (33 from the Lacy
475: criteria, and 12 from the Stern criteria), and 49 are IR-normal.
476: While the IR-normal galaxies therefore dominate the X-ray counts, the
477: fraction of such sources is low: only 11\% of the IR-normal galaxies
478: have X-ray counterparts, as compared to 17\% of the color-selected
479: galaxies and 45\% of the \plagas.
480:
481: We test for faint ($\ge 2\sigma$) X-ray emission from the MIPS sources
482: using the procedure outlined in Donley et al. (2005). The resulting
483: detection fractions for the \plaga, color-selected, IR-normal, and
484: IR-excess samples are given in Table 2. With the inclusion of the
485: weakly-detected X-ray sources, the detection fractions of the
486: IR-normal, color-selected, and \plaga\ samples increase to 40\%, 42\%,
487: and 64\%, respectively. As indicated in Table 2, however, while all
488: strongly and weakly-detected \plagas\ have AGN X-ray luminosities of
489: log~$L_{\rm x}$(ergs~s$^{-1}$)$ \ge 42$, the same is true for only
490: 74\% of the color-selected galaxies, and 34\% of the IR-normal
491: galaxies. Given the infrared luminosities implied by our 24~\micron\
492: selection criterion, the portion of the sample with log~$L_{\rm
493: x}$(ergs~s$^{-1}$)$ < 42$ will be heavily contaminated with
494: star-forming galaxies (Ranalli et al. 2003).
495:
496: While the X-ray detection fraction of \plagas\ is relatively low
497: (though significantly higher than that of the color-selected
498: galaxies), it is comparable to that of previously-selected samples
499: (Alonso-Herrero et al. 2006, Donley et al. 2007). Of the \plagas\ in
500: the 2~Ms CDF-N, 55\% had high-significance X-ray counterparts.
501: However, only 15\% remained undetected down to the 2.5$\sigma$
502: detection level, suggesting that many \plagas\ are likely to be
503: heavily obscured X-ray sources whose fluxes fall below the current
504: detection limits (Donley et al. 2007). In the CDF-S, only 45\% of the
505: \plagas\ have cataloged X-ray counterparts and 36\% remain undetected
506: down to $2\sigma$. This slightly lower detection fraction is due at
507: least in part to the lower X-ray exposure of the 1~Ms CDF-S, and will
508: be discussed further in \S6.
509:
510: The X-ray detection fraction of the luminous IR-excess sources
511: selected via the Polletta et al. (2008) sample is high (80\%).
512: However, the same can not be said for the remaining IR-excess samples:
513: only 30\% of the DOGs, 19\% of the Fiore et al. sources, and 15\% of
514: the sources with high 24~\micron\ to optical flux ratios have
515: cataloged X-ray counterparts. By definition, none of the Daddi et
516: al. sources have cataloged hard X-ray counterparts, although 3 have
517: soft-band counterparts. When the weakly-detected X-ray counterparts
518: are included, these numbers rise to 100\% for the Polletta sources,
519: 63\% for the DOGs, 44\% for the Daddi et al. sources, 43\% for the
520: Fiore et al. sources, and 42\% for the IR-bright/optically-faint
521: sources.
522:
523: \section{IRAC color-color selection}
524:
525: There are several reasons why a re-examination of the color-color
526: selection criteria is needed before applying these techniques to our
527: sample. First, thanks to the availability of high quality NIR and
528: \textit{Spitzer} MIR spectra and photometry, we can now construct more
529: accurate MIR templates for both AGN and star-forming galaxies than
530: were available when the Lacy et al. and Stern et al. AGN selection
531: criteria were initially defined. Second, the AGN selection criteria
532: of Lacy and Stern were initially designed for use with shallow
533: surveys, and have not yet been properly tested over a range of both
534: redshift and flux density (but see Cardamone et al. 2008). Third,
535: photometric redshift techniques for \textit{Spitzer}-detected galaxies
536: have advanced sufficiently to allow nearly complete redshift
537: estimation.
538:
539: The positions of the MIPS-selected sample in IRAC color space are
540: shown in Figure 3, where stars represent the \plagas\ and circles
541: represent the remaining MIPS sources. As expected, all
542: \plagas\ meet the Lacy criteria and all but 3 meet the Stern
543: criteria. The relatively large scatter of the \plagas\ on the Stern
544: plot probably arises in part from the use of adjacent color bands,
545: whereas the power-law fitting tends to smooth over noise.
546:
547: \begin{figure*}
548: \plottwo{f3a.eps}{f3b.eps}
549: \caption{Position in Lacy et al. (2004; left) and Stern et al. (2005; right)
550: color-space of the MIPS-selected sample, where \plagas\ are given as
551: stars. Blue filled circles represent color-selected galaxies that meet
552: both the Lacy et al. and Stern et al. criteria. Green triangles and
553: red squares represent sources that meet only the Lacy et al. or Stern
554: et al. criteria, respectively. The small open circles are IR-normal
555: galaxies. The shaded regions represent the AGN selection regions, and
556: the diagonal lines within are the loci of perfect power laws with
557: $\alpha = -0.5$ to $-3.0$.}
558: \end{figure*}
559:
560: \vspace*{1cm}
561: \subsection{Comparison of the IRAC color-color selection criteria}
562:
563: To illuminate the strengths and weaknesses of the two color-color
564: selection criteria in Figure 3, we separate the sources that meet both
565: the Lacy et al. (2004) and Stern et al. (2005) AGN selection criteria
566: from those that meet only one of the two criteria. The color-selected
567: sources that meet both criteria primarily define an extension of the
568: power-law locus to a blue slope of $\alpha = +0.5$ (recall that our
569: definition of \plagas\ includes only those sources with red slopes of
570: $\alpha < -0.5$). We will discuss in detail the effects of different
571: power-law slope criteria in
572: \S6.
573:
574: The Lacy-only sources occupy two regions in color-space. The first,
575: located in the lower portion of the Lacy diagram, corresponds to the
576: concentration in the upper-left corner of the Stern et al. selection
577: region. These sources were intentionally excluded from the Stern
578: selection region to minimize contamination from high-redshift ($z\sim
579: 2$) star-forming galaxies. The second concentration of Lacy-only
580: galaxies is scattered throughout the star-forming locus of the Stern
581: diagram. Are these normal, low-z star-forming galaxies, or obscured
582: AGN not selected by the Stern criteria?
583:
584: The Stern-only sources fall almost exclusively in the lower left
585: portion of the Stern wedge, and occupy the region dominated by
586: low-redshift IR-normal galaxies in the Lacy et al. color diagram,
587: suggesting that, like the Lacy criteria, the Stern et al. criteria are
588: likely to suffer from low-redshift star-forming galaxy contamination.
589: Because of the exclusion of $z \sim 2$ star-forming galaxies, however,
590: the Stern et al. criteria should perform better at high $z$. To test
591: this hypothesis, we next consider the evolution in IRAC color-space of
592: a number of high-quality star-forming and AGN templates.
593:
594: \vspace*{0.1cm}
595: \subsection{Star-forming Templates}
596:
597: As discussed above, the availability of high-quality near- and
598: mid-infrared data has allowed the construction of high-quality
599: star-forming SEDs, particularly for luminous and ultra-luminous
600: infrared galaxies (LIRGS and ULIRGS). In Figure 4, we plot the
601: redshift evolution of these templates in IRAC color-color space over
602: $z=0-4$, where purple and blue tracks represent the \textit{purely
603: star-forming} ULIRG and LIRG templates of Rieke et al. (2008, see
604: Table A1), green tracks represent the spiral and starburst templates of
605: Polletta et al. (2007) and Dale \& Helou (2002), and red tracks
606: represent the elliptical templates of Silva et al. (1998). Large
607: circles mark the tracks at $z=0$, and small circles mark each integer
608: redshift from $z = 1$ to 4.
609:
610: \begin{figure*}
611: \plottwo{f4a.eps}{f4b.eps}
612: \caption{Tracks in color-space of the \textit{purely star-forming} SEDs
613: of ULIRGS (purple, triangles), LIRGS (blue, squares), spirals and
614: starbursts (green, stars), and elliptical galaxies (red, circles),
615: from redshifts of $z=0$ (large symbols) to $z=4$. Small symbols mark
616: redshift intervals of 1. The power-law locus with $\alpha = -0.5$ to
617: $-3.0$ is shown as a line inside the shaded AGN selection regions. The
618: star-forming SEDs enter the AGN selection regions at both low and high
619: redshift.}
620: \end{figure*}
621:
622:
623: While the star-forming templates generally avoid the power-law locus
624: itself, they enter the Lacy and Stern selection regions at both low
625: and high redshifts, tracing out the same regions in color space
626: occupied by many of the color-selected AGN, particularly those
627: selected via only one of the two criteria. The templates therefore
628: suggest potential star-forming galaxy contamination of the
629: color-selected AGN, as previously predicted by Barmby et al. (2006),
630: Donley et al. (2007), and Cardamone et al. (2008), and indicate that
631: the current AGN selection regions may inadequately separate AGN and
632: star-forming galaxies.
633:
634: Our results can be compared with the simulations of Sajina, Lacy, \&
635: Scott (2005), who calculated mathematical models of galaxies from
636: three spectral components: stars, aromatic features, and a
637: continuum. For $0 < z < 1$, we agree with their Figure 8 (upper left)
638: that starburst luminosity galaxies do not significantly 'invade' the
639: Lacy AGN color wedge (see our Figure 4). However, we find that more
640: luminous galaxies can invade this wedge much more seriously (again see
641: Figure 4). The difference may arise because the inputs to their models
642: included few star-forming LIRGs and only one ULIRG (Arp 220, an
643: atypical case). Therefore, it is likely that the behavior of the most
644: luminous star forming galaxies is not captured as accurately in their
645: models as is that of lower luminosity ones. By $z = 1$, the typical
646: \textit{Spitzer} 24~\micron\ survey sensitivity limit reaches only to the
647: bottom of the LIRG range, so the Lacy AGN color wedge is more
648: susceptible to contamination than was concluded by Sajina et
649: al. (2005).
650:
651: \subsection{Redshift-dependent color selection}
652:
653: While the star-forming templates appear to trace quite well the
654: positions of many of the color-selected galaxies in color-color space,
655: Figure 4 covers a wide range of redshifts ($z=0-4$). To understand
656: better the overlap between the star-forming templates and the
657: color-selected galaxies (and \plagas), we must take the redshift
658: information into account. We therefore break the sample down into
659: smaller redshift bins, as shown in Figures 5 and 6. We overplot on the
660: color-color diagrams the redshift-appropriate colors of purely
661: star-forming galaxies. To simplify the plots, we do not plot each
662: galaxy track separately, as was done in Figure 3, but instead draw 1
663: $\sigma$ contours around the tracks, where $\sigma$ is taken to be the
664: median IRAC measurement error of the full MIPS sample. We find that,
665: unlike the \plagas, the majority of the color-selected AGN candidates
666: fall within or very close to the contours for star-forming galaxies of
667: similar redshifts. Thus, it is likely that their mid-IR SEDs are
668: dominated by star formation. This result suggests that simple mid-IR
669: color-color cuts cannot identify reliable AGN samples without also
670: including redshift-based or additional SED (e.g. power-law) criteria.
671: We discuss in Appendix B the individual redshift intervals.
672:
673: \begin{figure*}
674: \plotone{f5.eps}
675: \caption{Position in Lacy et al. (2004) color-space of the MIPS-selected sample,
676: as a function of redshift, where \plagas\ are shown as stars,
677: X-ray--cataloged sources are given by filled (red) symbols, and X-ray
678: weakly-detected sources are given as small cyan symbols. Overplotted
679: are the redshift-appropriate contours representing the IRAC colors of
680: purely star-forming templates, assuming no errors on the photometric
681: redshifts. The thick (purple) contours and dot-dashed (green)
682: contours in the $z=1.75-2.25$ redshift bin represent star-forming
683: galaxy templates for which 10\% errors were incorporated into the
684: redshift range, and AGN templates, respectively.}
685: \end{figure*}
686:
687: \begin{figure*}
688: \plotone{f6.eps}
689: \caption{Position in Stern et al. (2005) color-space of the MIPS-selected sample,
690: as a function of redshift. Symbols and contours are as described in
691: Figure 5.}
692: \end{figure*}
693:
694:
695: The summary of our findings can be found in Table 3, where we present
696: the overall fraction of color selected galaxies and \plagas\ that lie
697: outside the 1, 2, and 3$\sigma$ star-forming contours. The top half
698: of the table gives the fractions assuming no errors on the photometric
699: redshifts; the lower half incorporates 10\% errors which for clarity
700: are imposed on the templates rather than on the individual galaxy
701: measurements. For the \plagas, we give two percentages: the fraction
702: of sources that lie outside the star-forming contours in Lacy and
703: Stern color-space, respectively.
704:
705: As is clear from Table 3, the fraction of color-selected galaxies that
706: lie outside the star-forming contours is lower than that of the
707: \plagas\ by a factor of 2-10 at all three levels of significance. For
708: instance, while 57\% - 71\% of \plagas\ lie more than $3 \sigma$ from
709: the star-forming contours in Lacy color space, the same can be said
710: for only 5\%-10\% of the color-selected galaxies. In addition,
711: increasing the significance from 1$\sigma$ to 3$\sigma$ has a far
712: greater effect on the reliability of the color-selected galaxies than
713: on that of the \plagas, especially in Lacy color-space, indicating
714: that the color-selected galaxies lie noticeably closer to the
715: star-forming templates than do the \plagas, as expected. We note that
716: this analysis depends on the templates being used, as the addition or
717: removal of any one star-forming template will result in changes in the
718: numerical results presented above and in the table. The overall
719: trends discussed above, however, will remain the same.
720:
721: \subsection{Properties of Color-selected AGN candidates}
722:
723: While the majority of color-selected AGN candidates lie inside the
724: star-forming contours (see Table 3), a number of non-power-law
725: color-selected galaxies meet the AGN selection criteria and have
726: colors inconsistent with those of our star-forming templates. Are
727: these AGN, as predicted? How do their redshift distributions, X-ray
728: detection fractions, and numbers compare to those of the \plagas? In
729: the following discussion, we define as 'secure' color-selected
730: galaxies (and \plagas) those AGN candidates that lie $>1\sigma$ away
731: from the redshift-appropriate star-forming templates.
732:
733: As discussed above, and as shown in Figure 2, the redshift
734: distributions of the color-selected sources show a strong peak at $z =
735: 2.0$, attributed to the 7.7~\micron\ aromatic feature, a
736: star-formation indicator. In contrast, the \plagas\ have a relatively
737: flat redshift distribution, indicating little or no contribution from
738: aromatic features. If we do not account for errors in the photometric
739: redshifts, the resulting sample of 'secure' color-selected galaxies
740: retains the large $z=2$ peak, suggesting a large star-formation
741: contribution. If we incorporate 10\% errors on the redshifts of the
742: star-forming templates when selecting our secure candidates, however,
743: the redshift distributions of the remaining color-selected galaxies
744: become relatively flat, with mean redshifts of $z=1.59 \pm 0.83$ and
745: $z=1.62 \pm 0.84$ for the Lacy and Stern-selected sources,
746: respectively, suggesting that a significant fraction of the
747: high-redshift star-forming contaminants have been removed. For
748: comparison, the mean redshifts and rms ranges of the secure \plagas\
749: selected in Lacy and Stern color-space are $1.98 \pm 0.87$ and $2.09
750: \pm 0.78$.
751:
752: While the redshift distribution therefore suggests that many of the
753: star-forming contaminants have been rejected from the secure sample,
754: the X-ray detection fractions, shown in Table 4, suggest otherwise.
755: At distances of 1 and 2 $\sigma$ from the star-forming templates, the
756: X-ray detection fraction of the \plagas\ exceeds that of the
757: color-selected galaxies by factors of $>2-3$.
758: This factor, however, should be taken with reservations; X-ray sources
759: are far more likely to have spectroscopic redshift estimates, and are
760: therefore far more likely to be included in our secure sample, which
761: requires redshift information. While this has a minimal effect on the
762: color-selected galaxies, for which the redshift completeness is high,
763: it has a large effect on the \plagas, boosting their probable X-ray
764: detection fraction.
765:
766: A better comparison is therefore with the IR-normal galaxy population,
767: 11\% of which are detected in the X-ray. The X-ray detection
768: fractions of the secure color-selected AGN candidates (14-29\%),
769: exceed this value, but only by a factor of $\sim 1-3$. In comparison,
770: the full sample of \plagas\ has an X-ray detection fraction of 45\%,
771: which exceeds that of the IR-normal galaxies by a factor of 4. Only at
772: the highest significance, $3 \sigma$ from the star-forming contours,
773: does the X-ray detection fraction of the secure color-selected
774: galaxies approach that of the full \plaga\ sample.
775:
776:
777: This significant offset in X-ray detection fraction could be due
778: either to a difference in intrinsic luminosity or to lingering
779: contamination of the color-selected sample by star-forming galaxies.
780: While the average X-ray luminosity of the secure \plagas, log~$L_{\rm
781: x}$(ergs~s$^{-1}$)$ = 44.1$, exceeds that of the secure Lacy and
782: Stern-selected sources detected in the X-ray, log~$L_{\rm
783: x}$(ergs~s$^{-1}$)$ = 43.8$ and 43.9, respectively, the offset is
784: relatively small, suggesting that the large discrepancy in the X-ray
785: detection fractions is not driven primarily by a systematic offset in
786: X-ray luminosity of the relevant AGN. Instead, it likely arises from
787: the inclusion of star-forming galaxies, even in the $1\sigma$ 'secure'
788: color-selected population, suggesting that a larger cut in $\sigma$
789: (e.g. $3 \sigma$) is required to define a reasonably secure sample.
790:
791: Also shown in Table 4 are the total number of X-ray selected galaxies
792: in both the secure color-selected and \plaga\ samples. After applying
793: completeness corrections for the fraction of Lacy, Stern, and
794: \plaga\ X-ray sources that have redshifts and that can therefore be included in the
795: secure sample (94\%, 83\%, and 76\%, respectively), the number of
796: secure X-ray selected \plagas\ exceeds that of the secure
797: X-ray--detected color-selected galaxies, regardless of whether we
798: define the secure sample as those sources that lie 1, 2, or 3$\sigma$
799: from the star-forming contours. This indicates that \textit{the
800: \plaga\ selection criterion identifies the overwhelming majority of
801: secure AGN candidates in IRAC color-space.}
802:
803: \subsection{Flux dependency of color selection}
804:
805: While the Lacy and Stern AGN selection criteria were defined using
806: relatively shallow surveys, these selection techniques are now being
807: applied to samples with a range of flux densities (e.g. Cardamone et
808: al. 2008). How does the limiting flux affect the completeness and
809: reliability of AGN color selection? Are the problems discussed above
810: present in shallow as well as deep surveys?
811:
812: There are several reasons why we might expect to see a shift in
813: reliability with flux. First, the AGN fraction of MIPS sources
814: depends quite strongly on the 24~\micron\ flux density (e.g. Treister
815: et al. 2006, Brand et al. 2006). For instance, while only $\sim 4\%$
816: of MIPS sources at our flux limit of 80~\microjy\ are expected to be
817: AGN (Treister et al. 2006), the fraction at 5~mJy is more than an
818: order of magnitude greater ($\sim 45\%$). Therefore, MIPS-selected
819: shallow surveys should contain fewer star-forming galaxies, although
820: those that remain are likely to be LIRGs/ULIRGs that enter the AGN
821: selection region in greater numbers than spirals and starbursts (see
822: Figure 4).
823:
824: Second, many of the 'problem' sources that lie inside the AGN color
825: selection region but that also fall inside the star-forming contours
826: have moderately high-redshifts ($z>1.25$), and are therefore likely to
827: drop out of shallow surveys. While shallow samples may therefore
828: contain high-luminosity ULIRGS, the exclusion of lower-luminosity
829: high-redshift galaxies reduces the risk of contamination. Other flux
830: cuts, such as the $R$ magnitude $<21.5$ requirement of Stern et
831: al. (2005), also prevent contamination at high-$z$, as normal galaxies
832: at this magnitude are detected only to $z\sim0.6$.
833:
834: To investigate the effect of intermediate flux density cuts on the AGN
835: color selection, we show in Table 5 the fraction of 'secure'
836: color-selected and \plagas\ (those that lie outside the 1$\sigma$
837: star-forming contours) as a function of flux density. If we do not
838: incorporate errors in the photometric redshifts into our definition of
839: the secure sources, we find that the fraction of secure sources is
840: relatively constant at $\sim 50\%$ regardless of flux density. If we
841: allow errors on the photometric redshifts when constructing our
842: 'secure' sample, the reliability of Lacy-selected sources at $f\ge
843: 80$~\microjy\ drops to 29\%, and that of Stern-selected sources drops
844: to 21\%. At $f\ge 500$~\microjy, the fraction of secure sources
845: amongst both samples rises, but only to 50\%. Regardless of our
846: assumptions, therefore, the fraction of potential contaminants is
847: still high ($\sim 50\%$), even at the highest fluxes probed by our
848: survey. Because of the pencil-beam nature of the CDF-S survey, 95\% of
849: the sources in our sample have $f_{\rm 24~\micron} \le 600$~\microjy,
850: so our ability to comment on brighter samples is limited.
851:
852: It is also worth noting that the brightest MIPS sources tend to lie
853: above the power-law locus in Lacy color-space and to the right of the
854: power-law locus in Stern space, regions where we expect minimal
855: contamination from star-forming galaxies. Not surprisingly, these
856: sources are also almost always detected in the X-ray, suggesting that
857: these regions of IRAC color-space are the most secure.
858:
859: \subsection{Comparison with previous work}
860:
861: In a study of 77 AGN candidates selected from the \textit{Spitzer}
862: First-Look (Lacy et al. 2005) and SWIRE surveys (Lonsdale et al. 2003)
863: via the Lacy et al. (2004) criteria, Lacy et al. (2007) found that
864: 33\% are unobscured type 1 quasars, 44\% are type 2 AGN, and 14\% are
865: dust-reddened type 1 quasars. Only 9\% have star-forming or LINER
866: spectra. Is this relatively low contamination by star-forming
867: galaxies consistent with our findings?
868:
869: There are three main factors that lead to the high reliability of the
870: Lacy et al. (2007) sample. First, the sample members are very bright,
871: with a typical 24~\micron\ flux density of 5~mJy. As discussed above,
872: Treister et al. (2006) predict that 45\% of sources at this flux
873: density should be AGN, regardless of their MIR SEDs, compared to only
874: 4\% of sources at our flux limit of 80~\microjy. Indeed, of the
875: brightest 50 sources in the XFLS (whose median 24~\micron\ flux
876: density is 9.4 mJy), 58\% are optically classified as AGN (Lacy et
877: al. 2007). Thus, the sample from which these color-selected AGN was
878: drawn contains far fewer star-forming galaxies than the deeper GOODS
879: sample.
880:
881: Second, while the sources in the Lacy et al. (2007) sample have
882: redshifts ranging from $z=0.053$ to 4.27, the median redshift of the
883: sample is low: $z=0.6$. Only 5 color-selected sources have redshifts
884: in excess of $z=1.75$, the redshift above which nearly all sources in
885: our sample (AGN or star-forming) meet the Lacy et al. criteria. We
886: would therefore expect little or no contamination by
887: \textit{high-redshift} star-forming galaxies, the predominant source
888: of contamination in our faint sample.
889:
890: The third and most important reason for the high reliability of this
891: sample, however, is the high \plaga\ fraction of the Lacy-selected AGN
892: candidates. Of the 77 sources in the Lacy et al. (2007) sample, 59
893: are \plagas\ as defined in \S2. The 18 sources that are excluded by
894: the \plaga\ criteria include the only two starburst galaxies detected
895: in this subsample, one starburst/LINER, an unclassified high-redshift
896: galaxy with narrow UV emission lines, two composite galaxies, 8 Type 2
897: AGN (the identification of 4 of which were based on a BPT analysis), 3
898: reddened Type 1 AGN, and 1 Type 1 AGN. If we relax the probability
899: constraint of the \plaga\ criterion to P${\chi} > 0.01$, as was done
900: in Alonso-Herrero et al. (2006), we recover 69 of the 77 Lacy et
901: al. (2007) sources selected for optical follow-up. Excluded are the
902: two starburst galaxies, one high-z unidentified galaxy, three Type 2
903: AGN, one reddened Type 1 AGN, and 1 Type 1 AGN whose slope of $\alpha
904: = -0.41$ falls just short of our cut of $\alpha \le -0.5$. The high
905: reliability of this luminous color-selected sample is therefore
906: consistent with our findings in \S6 that while non-\plaga\
907: color-selected AGN are subject to contamination by star-forming
908: galaxies, sources selected via a power-law criterion are reliable.
909:
910:
911:
912: \section{IRAC Power-law selection}
913:
914: \begin{figure}
915: \epsscale{0.9}
916: \plotone{f7.eps}
917: \caption{Position in Lacy et al. (2004) color space of \plagas\
918: as a function of the power-law slope cut, $\alpha$. X-ray--detected
919: sources are shown as filled (red) symbols.}
920: \end{figure}
921:
922: \begin{figure}
923: \epsscale{0.9}
924: \plotone{f8.eps}
925: \caption{Position in Stern et al. (2004) color space of \plagas\
926: as a function of the power-law slope cut, $\alpha$. X-ray--detected
927: sources are shown as filled (red) symbols.}
928: \end{figure}
929:
930:
931:
932:
933: Thus far, we have focused primarily on the reliability of the AGN
934: color selection criteria of Lacy et al. (2004) and Stern et
935: al. (2005). In doing so, we have separated out the subset of sources
936: that meet the power-law criteria of Alonso-Herrero et al. (2006) and
937: Donley et al. (2007). Here, we discuss the \plaga\ selection
938: itself, in particular the consequences of various choices of limiting
939: power-law slope, $\alpha$.
940:
941: Our default cut of $\alpha < -0.5$ was chosen to match the spectral
942: indices of typical AGN (e.g. Alonso-Herrero et al. 2006, Donley et
943: al. 2007). In the optical, AGN have spectral slopes of $\alpha = 0.5$
944: to -2 (SDSS, Ivezi{\'c} et al. 2002), with a mean value of $\alpha
945: \sim -1$ (Neugebauer et al. 1979, Elvis et al. 1994). In the
946: IRAC bands, broad-line AGN exhibit similar slopes, with a mean value
947: of $\alpha = -1.07 \pm 0.53$ (Stern et al. 2005).
948:
949: In Figures 7 and 8, we plot \plagas\ selected via cuts in $\alpha$
950: ranging from +0.5 to -1.5. At high redshift ($z\sim 1.5-2$) the IRAC
951: bands trace the blue side of the stellar bump. It is therefore not
952: surprising that at the bluest slopes ($\alpha = +0.5$), the \plaga\
953: sample is dominated by the population of high redshift
954: X-ray--non-detected star-forming galaxies discussed above. As the
955: required slope reddens towards our cut of $\alpha < -0.5$, the
956: high-redshift star-forming galaxies gradually drop out of the sample,
957: and the X-ray detection fractions rise from 21\% at $\alpha=+0.5$ to
958: 30\%, 45\%, 67\%, 88\%, and 80\% at $\alpha = 0.0, -0.5, -1.0, -1.5,$
959: and -2.0. While choosing a redder cut in $\alpha$ therefore increases
960: the apparent reliability of the \plaga\ selection, it also decreases
961: the number of galaxies selected, and may exclude interesting heavily
962: obscured, X-ray--non-detected AGN like those seen in the CDF-N
963: (e.g. Donley et al. 2007).
964:
965: The X-ray--non-detected \plagas\ in the current sample tend to be the
966: faintest sources both in the IRAC bands and at 24~\micron, where their
967: mean flux density, 146~\microjy, is over a factor of 2 lower than that
968: of the X-ray--detected sample, 334~\microjy. The low X-ray detection
969: fraction of these faint sources may therefore be due simply to their
970: systematically lower fluxes. At $z>2.6-2.9$, however, the
971: star-forming ULIRG templates have IRAC SEDs that meet the \plaga\
972: criteria, although dropping the power-law slope criterion to $\alpha
973: \le -1.0$ and $\alpha \le -1.5$ raises this redshift range to
974: $z>2.74-3.92$ (depending on the template) and to $z>3.4-4.2$,
975: respectively (with the IRAS~22491-1808 template never reaching an
976: $\alpha$ of -1.5). It is therefore possible that the X-ray
977: non-detected \plagas\ (which tend not to have redshift estimates, to be
978: faint, and to lie at relatively high $\alpha$) are high-redshift
979: star-forming galaxies. To test this hypothesis, we plot in Figure 9
980: the ratio of the MIPS 24~\micron\ flux density to that of the
981: 3.6~\micron\ IRAC band. At the redshifts of interest ($z>2.6$), this
982: flux ratio allows a direct comparison of the hot dust emission at
983: 5-7~\micron\ to the stellar emission at $\sim 1$~\micron. Overplotted
984: on the colors of our MIPS-selected sample are the redshifted colors of
985: the AGN templates of Polletta et al. (2007, see Table 1) and the
986: purely star-forming LIRG and ULIRG templates of Rieke et al. (2008).
987: The mean colors of
988: \plagas\ without redshift estimates are given by large symbols placed
989: at $z=2.6$, the redshift above which contamination by star-forming
990: galaxies is possible. The circle, square, and triangle represent all
991: \plagas\ without redshifts, those that are detected in the X-ray, and
992: those that are not, respectively.
993:
994: \begin{figure}
995: \epsscale{1.1}
996: \plotone{f9.eps}
997: \caption{Observed 24~\micron\ to 3.6~\micron\ color as a function of redshift.
998: The tracks represent the AGN templates of Polletta et al. (2007, red)
999: (see Table A1), and the purely star-forming LIRG and ULIRG templates of
1000: Rieke et al. (2008, cyan). Triangles represent all sources in our
1001: sample with redshift estimates, and filled (red) triangles indicate a
1002: \plaga\ source. The mean colors of \plagas\ without redshift
1003: estimates are given by a large circle (all \plagas), a large square
1004: (X-ray--detected \plagas), and a large triangle (X-ray--non-detected
1005: \plagas). We arbitrarily placed these mean colors at a redshift of
1006: $z=2.6$, above which contamination of the \plaga\ sample by
1007: star-forming galaxies is possible. The colors of these sources,
1008: however, are consistent with AGN, not star-forming galaxies.}
1009: \end{figure}
1010:
1011:
1012: As can be seen in Figure 9, the X-ray--detected and
1013: X-ray--non-detected \plagas\ lacking redshifts have consistent
1014: 24~\micron\ to 3.6~\micron\ colors, suggesting that there is no
1015: significant difference between these two sub-samples. In addition,
1016: while the colors of these sources are consistent with those of AGN,
1017: they lie well above those of star-forming galaxies, not only at high
1018: redshift, but at all redshifts greater than $z \sim 0.6$. In other
1019: words, the \plagas\ that are undetected in the X-ray and that lack redshifts
1020: (preventing us from testing their reliability as in \S5.3) appear to
1021: have more hot dust emission than can be explained by purely
1022: star-forming templates, especially at high-z where star-forming
1023: contamination of the \plaga\ sample is most likely. This result
1024: suggests that these sources are more likely to be AGN than
1025: star-forming galaxies. Other lines of evidence, e.g. variability
1026: (Klesman \& Sarajedini 2007), and X-ray properties (Steffen et
1027: al. 2007), tend to support this conclusion. In addition, we note from
1028: Figure 9 that a number of the other galaxies at $z\sim2$ have colors
1029: slightly redder than those predicted by star-forming galaxies at this
1030: redshift. This behavior may be due to a minor issue with the
1031: templates, a small AGN contribution to the MIR flux density, or to
1032: reddening that exceeds that seen in our local LIRG/ULIRG templates.
1033:
1034: Finally, the segregation of the X-ray--detected and
1035: X-ray--non-detected sources about the power-law locus, seen in Figures
1036: 7 and 8, warrants discussion, as this was not seen in the CDF-N
1037: (Donley et al. 2007). This behavior appears to be due largely to the
1038: different selection methods and limiting fluxes of the two samples.
1039: While the CDF-N \plaga\ sample was selected on the basis of IRAC
1040: fluxes, the current sample was selected from a flux-limited MIPS
1041: sample with far deeper IRAC data. If we require the CDF-S sample to
1042: meet the IRAC detection limits of the CDF-N study, the
1043: \plaga\ sample size decreases by a factor of 2 and the X-ray detection
1044: fraction rises to 78\%. The segregation in the \plaga\ sample is also
1045: greatly reduced, due largely to the loss of many of the
1046: X-ray--non-detected sources. This high X-ray detection fraction of
1047: 78\%, however, is surprising as it is significantly higher than the
1048: 55\% found for the CDF-N \plaga\ sample. To test whether this change
1049: is a result of the much improved IRAC data, we recalculated the
1050: spectral properties of the galaxies in the CDF-N using the most
1051: current IRAC data, which now includes the super-deep GOODS-N coverage
1052: not previously available. Drawing \plagas\ from the same initial
1053: sample used in Donley et al. (2007), we find an updated X-ray
1054: detection fraction of 57\%, a value nearly identical to that found
1055: previously. For consistency with the current sample, we further
1056: restricted the \plaga\ sample to those sources detected in the
1057: super-deep GOODS field, where the X-ray exposure is generally higher.
1058: Doing so raises the X-ray detection fraction to 65\%. The remaining
1059: offset in the X-ray detection fractions of the IRAC flux-limited
1060: \plagas\ in the GOODS-N and GOODS-S fields, 13\%, therefore appears to
1061: be due primarily to cosmic variance and small number statistics.
1062:
1063: \section{IR-Excess Selection}
1064:
1065: \begin{figure*}
1066: \epsscale{1}
1067: \plottwo{f10a.eps}{f10b.eps}
1068: \caption{Position in Lacy et al. (left) and Stern et al. (right) color-space of the IR-excess
1069: sources.}
1070: \end{figure*}
1071:
1072: Both high-redshift star-forming galaxies and AGN can exhibit extremely
1073: red infrared to optical colors when heavily dust-obscured (e.g. Dey et
1074: al. 2008). While the relative fractions of AGN and star-forming
1075: galaxies among IR-excess samples is still a matter of debate, the
1076: fraction of dust-obscured galaxies (DOGs) with AGN-like power-law SEDs
1077: has been shown to decrease with decreasing flux from $\sim 70\%$ at $f
1078: = 1$~mJy to $\sim 20-25\%$ at $f \le 300$~\microjy\ (Dey et
1079: al. 2008). We might therefore expect a relatively small AGN fraction
1080: amongst the faint IR-excess sources in the GOODs fields, whose mean
1081: 24~\micron\ flux is 215~\microjy. Fiore et al. (2008), however,
1082: estimate that 80\% of their red, IR-excess galaxies are heavily
1083: obscured, Compton-thick AGN. Here, we probe the nature of the
1084: IR-excess sources and examine the overlap between the IR-excess
1085: galaxies and the X-ray, color-selected, and power-law samples
1086: discussed above.
1087:
1088: The positions of the IR-excess galaxies in Lacy and Stern IRAC
1089: color-space are shown in Figure 10, and their overlap with the X-ray,
1090: \plaga, and color-selected samples is given in Table 2. Of the 101
1091: IR-excess sources, 24 (24\%) are \plagas\ and all but 7 meet either
1092: the Lacy, Stern, or power-law criteria. At least 1/4 of the IR-excess
1093: galaxies therefore show evidence for AGN-heated dust (with the
1094: fraction rising to 100\% for the luminous AGN selected via the
1095: Polletta et al. (2008) criteria, as expected). Not all \plagas,
1096: however, have IR-excess colors. Of the 55 \plagas, only 44\% meet one
1097: or more of the IR-excess criteria. The same can be said for 33\% of
1098: the IRAC color-selected galaxies, but for only 2\% of the IR-normal
1099: galaxies.
1100:
1101:
1102: Of the IR-excess sources, only 15\% have cataloged X-ray counterparts,
1103: with the fraction rising to 45\% when weak ($\ge 2
1104: \sigma$) X-ray detections are considered (see Table 2). Of the X-ray--cataloged
1105: sources, 47\% are \plagas, 47\% are color-selected galaxies, and 1
1106: (6\%) is IR-normal. The statistics are quite different for those
1107: sources with no cataloged X-ray emission, where the power-law fraction
1108: drops to 19\% and the color-selected fraction rises to 73\%.
1109:
1110: While a strong argument can be made for the AGN nature of the 32
1111: IR-excess sources with cataloged X-ray counterparts and/or \plaga\
1112: SEDs, what can be said about the remaining IR-excess sources? As
1113: discussed in \S3, the concentration of the redshifts of these sources
1114: about $z=2$ may be due to the passage of the 7.7~\micron\ aromatic
1115: feature through the 24~\micron\ band, suggesting a significant
1116: contribution from star-formation. In addition, the vast majority of
1117: color-selected sources at $z=2$ (of which these are a subset) have
1118: IRAC colors consistent with those of star-forming galaxies or
1119: low-luminosity AGN whose IRAC SEDs are dominated by the host galaxy.
1120: In combination with the lack of significant X-ray emission, these
1121: facts suggest that the remaining 68\% of the IR-excess sample could be
1122: either star-forming galaxies, or extremely obscured AGN. To
1123: distinguish between these two possibilities, we consider in more
1124: detail the sources selected via the Daddi et al. and Fiore et
1125: al. criteria.
1126:
1127: \vspace*{0.5cm}
1128:
1129: \subsection{Daddi et al. (2007) Compton-thick AGN candidates}
1130:
1131: Of the 88 IR-excess AGN candidates selected in the ISAAC region of
1132: GOODS-S by Daddi et al. (2007a), the list of which was kindly provided
1133: by D. Alexander (private communication, 2008), 42 fall in our
1134: MIPS-selected sample. Twenty-three of the remaining 46 galaxies have
1135: MIPS fluxes that fall below our cut of $f_{\rm 24~\micron} \ge
1136: 80$~\microjy, and 6 galaxies lack MIPS and/or IRAC counterparts in our
1137: catalogs, indicating that they too are faint. Seven galaxies were
1138: excluded because of observable blending in the MIPS or IRAC bands, and
1139: an additional 10 were removed from our sample because of multiple
1140: optical counterparts.
1141:
1142: The positions of the Daddi et al. sources in IRAC color-space are
1143: shown in Figure 10. Thirty-eight of the 42 Daddi et al. sources in our
1144: sample meet the Lacy et al. IRAC color-selection criteria. Only 10
1145: meet the Stern et al. AGN selection criterion, and only 5 are
1146: \plagas\ (4 of which have relatively shallow slopes of only $\alpha \sim -0.6$).
1147: In addition, only 15 (36\%) meet any of the other IR-excess criteria.
1148: This is not surprising, as the MIR emission from the Daddi et
1149: al. IR-excess sources exceeds that of a typical star-forming galaxy by
1150: a factor of only $\gsim 3$ (Daddi et al. 2007b). Of the 42 IR-excess
1151: galaxies, 18 have IRAC colors that lie $>1 \sigma$ from the
1152: redshift-appropriate star-forming contours in either Lacy or Stern
1153: color-space. Only 3 and 1, however, have colors that lie outside the
1154: $2 \sigma$ and $3 \sigma$ contours, respectively. As discussed above,
1155: however, this indicates only that any AGN activity can not be
1156: identified on the basis of the MIR IRAC colors alone.
1157:
1158: To determine the nature of the Daddi et al. (2007) sources in our
1159: sample, we therefore turn to the X-ray data. While none of the
1160: IR-excess galaxies are individually detected in the hard X-ray band
1161: (by definition), 3 have soft X-ray detections and 13 have faint ($>
1162: 2\sigma$) X-ray counterparts. Twenty remain X-ray--undetected, and 6
1163: sources have a nearby X-ray counterpart that prevents an accurate test
1164: for low-$\sigma$ X-ray flux. Using the procedure outlined in Steffen
1165: et al. (2007), with the only change being our slightly different
1166: choice of source aperture radius, 2\arcsec, we coadded the three
1167: sources detected in the soft band, whose soft-band luminosities of
1168: $L_{\rm x} > 10^{42}$~ergs~s$^{-1}$ indicate that they are AGN. We
1169: verify that our stacking method reproduces the results of Daddi et
1170: al. (2007b) for the same sample of 59 IR-excess galaxies used in that
1171: work. While the coaddition of the 3 soft X-ray detected sources did
1172: not lead to a hard band detection, we place a $3\sigma$ limit on the
1173: hard-band flux that constrains their column density to $N_{\rm H}
1174: \lsim 2 \times 10^{22}$~cm$^{-2}$, assuming an intrinsic photon index
1175: of $\Gamma = 1.8$.
1176:
1177: A coaddition of the 13 weakly-detected sources leads to a $3.3 \sigma$
1178: hard-band detection, a $9.7 \sigma$ soft-band detection, a hardness
1179: ratio of $HR = -0.31$, and a photon index of $\Gamma = 1.4$. If we
1180: assume that these sources are AGN at their mean redshift of $z=1.81$,
1181: the hard to soft flux ratio corresponds to an obscured column density
1182: of $N_{\rm H} = 3.6 \times 10^{22}$~cm$^{-2}$. At this modest
1183: obscured yet Compton-thin column density, the observed soft band flux
1184: is only attenuated by a factor of 2, implying that the sources must
1185: have relatively low luminosities. Indeed, the rest-frame 2-10 keV
1186: absorption-corrected luminosity derived from the observed soft-band
1187: flux is only $L_{\rm x} = 1.6 \times 10^{42}$~ergs~s$^{-1}$.
1188:
1189: However, Daddi et al. (2007b) argue that the coadded soft X-ray flux
1190: of their full IR-excess sample can be attributed to star-formation.
1191: When they subtract this component from the detected fluxes, the
1192: hardness of the remaining X-ray emission implies a significantly
1193: larger (e.g. Compton-thick) column density as well as a larger
1194: absorption-corrected luminosity.
1195:
1196: To test the origin of the X-ray emission, we plot in Figure 11 the
1197: 2-10 keV luminosity and 25~\micron\ power ($\nu L \nu$) of a sample of
1198: starburst and AGN-dominated galaxies and ULIRGs drawn from
1199: Franceschini et al. (2003), Ranalli et al. (2003), and Persic et
1200: al. (2004). The 25~\micron\ luminosities were extracted from the IRAS
1201: Revised Bright Galaxy Sample (RBGS, Sanders et al. 2003) when
1202: available, and from ISO (Klaas et al. 2001) or the IRAS Faint Source
1203: Catalog otherwise. As both the hard X-ray and MIR flux densities of
1204: star-forming galaxies trace the current star-formation rate
1205: (e.g. Ranalli et al. 2003, Franceschini et al. 2003), these two
1206: luminosities are well correlated for starbursts and
1207: starburst-dominated ULIRGS (though there is a hint of a turnover to
1208: lower X-ray luminosities amongst the ULIRG sample). AGN, however,
1209: show an increased X-ray output for their observed 25~\micron\ flux
1210: density.
1211:
1212: \begin{figure}
1213: \epsscale{1.0}
1214: \plotone{f11.eps}
1215: \caption{Rest-frame 2-10 keV luminosity vs. rest-frame
1216: 25~\micron\ power. The small symbols represent the starburst and
1217: ULIRG samples of Franceschini et al. (2003), Ranalli et al. (2003),
1218: and Persic et al. (2004), where starburst dominated sources are given
1219: as squares and circles, and AGN-dominated sources are given by
1220: crosses. The solid line gives the best-fit linear relationship
1221: between the X-ray and 25~\micron\ luminosities of the
1222: star-formation-dominated sources. The large filled and open stars
1223: represent the full IR-excess and IR-normal samples from Daddi et
1224: al. (2007b), respectively, and the large squares represent the X-ray
1225: weakly- and non-detected members of the Daddi et al. sources in our
1226: sample. Because these sources comprise the brighter subset of the
1227: full Daddi et al. sample, we treat the full 25~\micron\ flux density
1228: (derived from the coadded 70~\micron\ flux density given by Daddi et
1229: al. (2007b)) as a lower-limit. }
1230: \end{figure}
1231:
1232:
1233:
1234: To compare the Daddi et al. sample to these local starburst and ULIRG
1235: samples, we convert the observed soft-band (rest frame $\sim 1.5-6$
1236: keV) luminosity to a rest-frame 2-10 keV luminosity, and the observed
1237: 70~\micron\ (rest-frame $\sim 23$~\micron) flux density given by Daddi
1238: et al. (2007b) to a rest-frame 25~\micron\ power. The mean
1239: luminosities of the full Daddi et al. (2007b) IR-normal and IR-excess
1240: samples fall on the best-fit correlation for star-forming galaxies,
1241: confirming that their observed soft X-ray flux can be attributed to
1242: star-formation. The X-ray luminosity of the X-ray weakly-detected
1243: IR-excess galaxies in our MIPS sample, however, is somewhat higher
1244: than predicted. The AGN origin of the soft X-ray emission is
1245: supported by the 2-10 keV luminosity implied by the soft X-ray flux,
1246: $L_{\rm x} = 1.6 \times 10^{42}$~ergs~s$^{-1}$. If the soft X-ray flux
1247: has a significant contribution from the AGN, then it cannot all be
1248: subtracted from the AGN spectrum, resulting in column densities lower
1249: than estimated by Daddi et al. (2007b).
1250:
1251: \begin{figure*}
1252: \plottwo{f12a.eps}{f12b.eps}
1253: \caption{Median SEDs of the full Daddi et al. (2007a,b) IR-normal
1254: and IR-excess GOODS-S samples, as given in Figure 4 of Daddi et
1255: al. (2007b). Overplotted are the \textit{purely star-forming} SEDs of
1256: the starburst galaxy M82 (left) and LIRG NGC 3256 (right) (The Rieke
1257: et al. (2008) templates only extend down to $\sim 0.4$~\micron). We
1258: have applied an additional reddening of $A_{\rm V} = 0.8$ to the
1259: NGC~3256 template. The open diamonds represents the flux that would be
1260: measured in the MIPS 24~\micron\ band when the bandpass is convolved
1261: with the SED. The optical-MIR SEDs of both the IR-normal and
1262: IR-excess sources are well-fit by star-forming SEDs. }
1263: \end{figure*}
1264:
1265:
1266:
1267:
1268:
1269: However, the indicated AGN contribution is modest, and is based on an
1270: average. Therefore, it is likely that there will be a significant
1271: range of star-formation--corrected absorbing columns, including some
1272: that are Compton thick. Indeed, Alexander et al. (2008) show that a
1273: sample of 6 spectroscopically-confirmed Compton-thick AGN would be
1274: selected via the Daddi et al. (2007) method, although 4 of the 6 have
1275: infrared excesses of a factor of $>100$, and thus represent the most
1276: extreme IR-excess sources.
1277:
1278: A coaddition of the 20 X-ray non-detected Daddi et al. sources in our
1279: sample leads only to a marginal $2.0 \sigma$ detection in the full
1280: band (0.5-8 keV), and $1.8 \sigma$ and $1.0 \sigma$ detections in the
1281: hard and soft bands, respectively. A $3 \sigma$ limit on the soft flux
1282: gives a 2-10 keV luminosity of $L_{\rm x} \le 3.8 \times
1283: 10^{41}$~ergs~s$^{-1}$, fully consistent with a star-forming origin
1284: (see Figure 11). (The 2-10 keV luminosity derived from the marginal
1285: full-band detection is even lower: $L_{\rm x} \le 2.2 \times
1286: 10^{41}$~ergs~s$^{-1}$). The near-detection in the hard-band, however,
1287: suggests that these sources may have relatively hard X-ray spectra.
1288: By coadding the weakly and non-detected sources, the photon index
1289: drops to $\Gamma = 1.04 ^{+0.16}_{-0.14}$, from a value of $\Gamma =
1290: 1.39 ^{+0.21}_{-0.17}$ measured for the weakly-detected sources. There
1291: is therefore marginal ($1 \sigma$) evidence that the X-ray
1292: non-detected sources have spectra harder than those of their
1293: weakly-detected counterparts. Does this hard spectrum confirm that
1294: these sources are AGN, or might there be another explanation?
1295:
1296: \subsubsection{A Star-formation Origin?}
1297:
1298: While it is well-known that heavily obscured AGN exhibit hard X-ray
1299: spectra, star-forming galaxies can also produce such spectra. As
1300: discussed in Persic \& Rephaeli (2002) and Persic et al. (2004), the
1301: hard ($>2-10$ keV) X-ray emission of star-forming galaxies is
1302: dominated by low and high-mass X-ray binaries (LMXBs, HMXBs), with the
1303: HMXB fraction increasing from $\sim 20\%$ at starburst luminosities to
1304: $\sim 100\%$ at ULIRG luminosities. As shown by White, Swank, \& Holt
1305: (1983), HMXBs have X-ray spectra with $\Gamma = 1.2 \pm 0.2$, a cutoff
1306: energy of 20 keV, and an $e$-folding energy of $\sim 12$ keV (see
1307: e.g. Persic \& Rephaeli 2002). At $z=2$, the 0.5-2 keV and 2-8 keV
1308: X-ray bands sample the rest-frame 1.5-6 keV and 6-24 keV X-ray bands,
1309: and therefore should be minimally affected by the power-law cutoff. A
1310: luminous star-forming galaxy undergoing an isolated burst of
1311: star-formation is therefore expected to display a hard X-ray spectrum
1312: of $\Gamma = 1.0-1.4$ over the energies observed in our sample. X-ray
1313: binary emission has been proposed as an explanation for the hard
1314: ($\Gamma \sim 1.0$) spectrum of Arp 220 (Iwasawa et al. 2001), the
1315: spectra of the apparently starburst-dominated ULIRGS of Ptak et
1316: al. (2003) and Teng et al. (2004), whose photon indices tend to lie at
1317: $\Gamma = 1.0-1.5$, and the starburst-dominated ULIRGS of Franceschini
1318: et al. (2003).
1319:
1320: While the hard X-ray properties of the IR-excess sources do not
1321: therefore require an AGN origin, can the same be said of their MIR
1322: properties? To test the nature of these sources, we first plot in
1323: Figure 12 the median SEDs of the full GOODS-S IR-normal and IR-excess
1324: samples, as given in Figure 4 of Daddi et al. (2007b). Although these
1325: high-redshift sources appear to be highly luminous (see Figure 11),
1326: there are indications that local templates for lower-luminosity
1327: galaxies are appropriate for them, at least in the optical--MIR (Rigby
1328: et al. 2008). It is therefore not surprising that the optical--MIR SED
1329: of the IR-normal galaxies is well-fit by the M82 SB template of
1330: Polletta et al. (2007). (The discrepancy between the observed SED and
1331: template at shorter wavelengths is likely due to a difference in the
1332: reddening and/or age of the stellar population.) The IR-excess SED is
1333: also very well fit by the \textit{purely star-forming} template of the
1334: LIRG NGC~3256 (Rieke et al. 2008), to which we have applied an
1335: additional reddening of $A_{\rm V} \sim 0.8$. While this does not rule
1336: out an AGN contribution to the Daddi et al. IR-excess sample, it does
1337: indicate that an AGN need not be present to produce the observed SEDs
1338: of the IR-excess sources, and that their IR-excesses may simply be due
1339: to strong aromatic emission associated with their systematically higher IR
1340: luminosities, as suggested by Daddi et al. (2007a).
1341:
1342:
1343: If these IR-excess sources are dominated by star-formation, then it
1344: appears either that their IR SFRs have been overestimated or that
1345: their UV-derived SFRs have been underestimated. The former scenario
1346: could be partially attributed to the larger than unity slope between
1347: 24~\micron\ luminosity and Pa$\alpha$-derived SFR (Alonso-Herrero et
1348: al. 2006, Calzetti et al. 2007), which indicates that as the SFR
1349: increases, an increasing fraction of the resulting light is emitted in
1350: the MIR. A simple proportional relationship between SFR and IR
1351: luminosity (e.g. that of Kennicutt 1998) will therefore increasingly
1352: overpredict the SFR for more luminous infrared galaxies.
1353:
1354: An underestimate in the UV-derived star-formation rates could be due
1355: to the inherent difficulties in determining accurate UV SFRs for
1356: luminous, heavily obscured galaxies (e.g. Goldader et al. 2002, Buat
1357: et al. 2005). While UV extinction is known to correlate with
1358: luminosity (see Goldader et al. 2002; Vijh, Witt, \& Gordon 2003; Buat
1359: et al. 2005), Daddi et al. (2007a) find no difference between the
1360: average derived $A_{\rm 1500}$ values of the IR-normal and IR-excess
1361: samples, despite the systematically higher 8~\micron\ luminosities of
1362: the IR-excess sample (see Figure 2 of Daddi et al. 2007b). Under the
1363: assumption that the radio emission arises purely from star-formation,
1364: the radio luminosities of the 16 radio-detected IR-excess galaxies
1365: similarly indicate the UV SFRs have been underestimated by a mean
1366: factor of 6.4, and a median factor of 3.5 (see Figure 12 of Daddi et
1367: al. 2007a). A stack of all IR-excess galaxies, however, leads to radio
1368: SFRs that are consistent with those derived in the UV.
1369:
1370: \subsubsection{Summary}
1371:
1372: We have divided the 42 Daddi et al. IR-excess galaxies in our
1373: MIPS-selected sample into three subsamples: those that are X-ray
1374: detected (3), those that are weakly-detected in the X-ray (13), and
1375: those that remain undetected in the X-ray down to $2 \sigma$ (20).
1376: (The remaining 6 sources lie too close to an X-ray source to test for
1377: faint emission.) The 3 X-ray detected sources are AGN with $L_{\rm x}
1378: > 10^{42}$~ergs~s$^{-1}$, but have relatively low obscuration ($N_{\rm
1379: H} \le 2 \times 10^{22}$~cm$^{-2}$).
1380:
1381: A coaddition of the weakly-detected sources leads to a hard ($\Gamma =
1382: 1.4$) X-ray detection. If these sources are obscured AGN, the
1383: hardness ratio implies a column density of $N_{\rm H} = 3.6 \times
1384: 10^{22}$~cm$^{-2}$. A hard detection, however, could be attributed
1385: either to obscured AGN activity or to star-formation via
1386: HMXBs. Furthermore, the median SED of the full Daddi et al. (2007b)
1387: IR-excess sample is consistent with that of a local star-forming LIRG,
1388: suggesting that the MIR emission alone also cannot be used to rule out
1389: a star-forming origin. A comparison of the X-ray and MIR luminosities
1390: of these weakly-detected sources does not conclusively distinguish
1391: between a star-forming or AGN origin for the X-ray emission. There are
1392: therefore 3 possible explanations for the members of this sample of
1393: IR-excess galaxies: (1) the sources are Compton-thick AGN whose soft
1394: X-ray emission can be attributed to star-formation and whose hard
1395: X-ray emission comes from the AGN, (2) they are relatively
1396: low-luminosity, Compton-thin AGN, whose soft X-ray emission can not be
1397: entirely attributed to star-formation, or (3) they are star-forming
1398: galaxies whose soft \textit{and} hard X-ray emission arise from
1399: star-formation. While the derived 2-10 keV X-ray luminosity of $\sim
1400: 10^{42}$~ergs~s$^{-1}$ suggests explanation (2), it is not
1401: sufficiently high to definitively rule out the remaining scenarios.
1402: It is likely that no single possibility applies to all 13 galaxies,
1403: but that the possibilities define the range of their behavior.
1404:
1405: The X-ray non-detected sources, when coadded alone and with the X-ray
1406: weakly-detected sample, also appear to have a relatively hard X-ray
1407: spectrum. Their X-ray luminosity, however, is significantly lower
1408: than that of the weakly-detected sources, $L_{\rm x} \le 3.8 \times
1409: 10^{41}$~ergs~s$^{-1}$. If the hard spectrum arises from HMXBs, the
1410: properties of this sample would be consistent with a star-formation
1411: origin.
1412:
1413: In summary, while we cannot rule out an obscured AGN origin for the
1414: Daddi et al. IR-excess sources in our MIPS-selected sample, their
1415: properties may also be consistent with a purely star-formation origin
1416: in the majority of cases. Further analysis, taking into account the
1417: additional 1 Ms of X-ray exposure in the CDF-S, is therefore required
1418: to establish their nature.
1419:
1420: \subsection{Fiore et al. (2008) Compton-thick AGN candidates}
1421:
1422: Fiore et al. (2008) select IR-excess galaxies with the following
1423: properties: $f_{\rm 24~\micron}/f_{R} \ge 1000$ and $R-K > 4.5$.
1424: Using the MUSIC catalogs (see \S2.3), we selected 64 sources that meet
1425: these criteria and that have 24~\micron\ flux densities $>
1426: 80$~\microjy. However, 9 of these sources were removed from our MIPS
1427: sample because of visible blending in the MIPS and/or IRAC bands (see
1428: \S 2), which may have been responsible for their anomalously high IR to
1429: optical flux ratios (unlike Grazian et al. (2006), we do not attempt
1430: to de-blend such sources). A visual inspection of the remaining
1431: sources led to the removal of 3 additional sources with blended K-band
1432: fluxes, leaving 52 high-quality IR-excess sources.
1433:
1434: The first Fiore criterion was designed to select obscured AGN with
1435: large X-ray to optical flux ratios (see their Figure 2) whose column
1436: densities tend to range from $N_{\rm H} = 10^{22}$ to
1437: $10^{23}$~cm$^{-2}$ (see Fiore et al. 2008 and references therein).
1438: The $R-K$ criterion ensures that only extremely red objects (EROs)
1439: fall in the sample. The AGN amongst ERO samples tend also to be X-ray
1440: obscured with $N_{\rm H} = 10^{22}-10^{24}$~cm$^{-2}$ (Brusa et
1441: al. 2005). Obscured AGN are therefore likely to be targeted by these
1442: criteria. However, these two selection criteria are known to identify
1443: both AGN and star-forming galaxies (e.g. Alexander et al. 2002,
1444: Doherty et al. 2005, Dey et al. 2008). We therefore examine whether
1445: these criteria are sufficiently stringent to exclude the possibility
1446: that the properties of these sources could arise from star formation.
1447:
1448: The first of the three main arguments for the Compton-thick AGN nature
1449: of the Fiore et al. sources is the ability of the obscured AGN
1450: template of IRAS 09104+41091 (Pozzi et al. 2007) to reproduce the
1451: extreme colors of these sources, and the comparable inability of the
1452: M82 and Arp~220 star-forming templates to do the same (see their
1453: Figure 3). When fitting SEDs to the sources in their sample, Fiore et
1454: al. find that only 36\% of their X-ray non-detected sources are
1455: best-fit by elliptical, spiral, M82, N6090, or Arp~220 star-forming
1456: templates. Of the sources in our MIPS-selected sample that meet the
1457: Fiore et al. criteria and have good redshift fits, we find an even
1458: lower fraction of sources best-fit by these templates: 20\%. However,
1459: as shown in Figure 13, the purely star-forming IRAS~22491 template of
1460: Polletta et al. (2007) satisfies the Fiore et al. criteria when modest
1461: additional reddening ($A_{\rm V} \le 1.2$) is allowed, indicating that
1462: the extreme colors of these sources can be reproduced not only by
1463: obscured AGN, but by highly reddened star-formation as well. Indeed,
1464: when we include this star-forming template, as well as the
1465: star-forming LIRG/ULIRG templates of Rieke et al. (2008), the fraction
1466: of Fiore sources in our sample best-fit by a star-forming template
1467: rises from 20\% to 66\%.
1468:
1469: \begin{figure}
1470: \epsscale{1.0}
1471: \plotone{f13.eps}
1472: \caption{Redshifted ($z=1.5-2.5$) tracks of the star-forming template
1473: IRAS~22491-1808 in Fiore et al. color space. Additional extinctions
1474: of $A_{\rm V} = $0.0, 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 1.0, and 1.2 were applied
1475: via the SMC (solid, Prevot et al. 1984, Bouchet et al. 1985) or
1476: Calzetti (dashed, Calzetti et al. 2000) extinction laws. The dotted
1477: lines represent the Fiore et al. (2008) selection criteria, and
1478: circles represent the 52 sources in our sample that meet those
1479: criteria. The 10 X-ray--detected sources are given as filled
1480: circles. The star-forming template enters the selection region with
1481: only a modest ($A_{\rm V} \sim 1$) amount of additional extinction. }
1482: \end{figure}
1483:
1484:
1485: The second argument for the Compton-thick nature of the Fiore et
1486: al. sources is the high fraction of heavily obscured AGN ($N_{\rm H} =
1487: 10^{23}-10^{26}$~cm$^{-2}$) required to reproduce the hardness ratios
1488: and counts of the stacked X-ray emission. Using a simulation, Fiore
1489: et al. (2007) estimate that 80\% of their sources are obscured AGN.
1490: The prediction for the X-ray non-cataloged sources in our sample is
1491: somewhat lower: $60\%^{+20\%}_{-40\%}$, although this fraction rises
1492: for the weakly-detected IR-excess sources to $80\%^{+10\%}_{-20\%}$
1493: (F. Fiore, private communication, 2008).
1494:
1495: To test this finding for the sources in our sample, we coadded the 36
1496: X-ray non-cataloged Fiore et al. sources that lie far enough from
1497: known X-ray sources to allow an accurate test for faint X-ray
1498: emission. The coaddition gave a soft detection (0.5-2 keV,
1499: 3.9$\sigma$), but only a weak hard detection (2-8 keV,
1500: 1.7$\sigma$). The resulting hardness ratio, $HR = (H-S)/(H+S) = -0.17$
1501: is only slightly harder than that of the 10 X-ray cataloged Fiore et
1502: al. sources, $HR = -0.21$, whose column densities fall in the
1503: unobscured to highly obscured (log $N_{\rm H}$~(cm$^{-2}$)$ = 23.9$)
1504: range (Tozzi et al. 2006), with a median value of log $N_{\rm
1505: H}$~(cm$^{-2}$)$ = 22.6$).
1506:
1507: If we stack only the 10 sources with weak X-ray counterparts (that
1508: also lie sufficiently far from known X-ray sources), however, we find
1509: a $5.3 \sigma$ hard-band detection, a $4.7 \sigma$ soft-band
1510: detection, and a hardness ratio of $HR = 0.33$, significantly harder
1511: than that of the X-ray cataloged sample. At a redshift of $z=2$, this
1512: $HR$ corresponds to a column density of $N_{\rm H} = 2.7 \times
1513: 10^{23}$~cm$^{-2}$. The observed photon index, $\Gamma = 0.33$,
1514: indicates an obscured AGN origin, as it is inconsistent even with the
1515: moderately hard spectra of HMXB-dominated star-forming galaxies
1516: ($\Gamma \sim 1.0-1.4$). Stacking the remaining 26
1517: X-ray--non-detected Fiore sources does not lead to a detection in any
1518: band. It therefore appears plausible, at least in this bright subset
1519: of the Fiore et al. sample, that the hard X-ray flux can be attributed
1520: to a small number of obscured, yet mostly Compton-thin, AGN, as
1521: opposed to a large number of obscured, Compton-thick AGN.
1522:
1523: The third argument for the AGN nature of the Fiore et al. sources is
1524: the significant (factor of 30) offset between the IR and UV-derived
1525: SFRs. However, the inherent difficulties in determining accurate UV
1526: SFRs for luminous, heavily obscured galaxies (e.g. Goldader et
1527: al. 2002, Buat et al. 2005), as well as the systematic uncertainties
1528: of factors of 10-30 in the TIR luminosity (Fiore et al. 2008), make
1529: this the weakest of the 3 arguments.
1530:
1531: Of the 52 Fiore et al. sources in our MIPS sample, 10 (19\%) are
1532: therefore X-ray--selected AGN, and 10 (19\%) are weakly detected in
1533: the X-ray, with coadded properties consistent with their being
1534: obscured AGN. As for the remaining 26 sources for which we can test
1535: for faint X-ray emission, we cannot rule out the presence of
1536: Compton-thick AGN. However, the lack of coadded hard counts from this
1537: X-ray non-detected sample, the significant fraction of such sources
1538: that can be fit by star-forming templates, and the Compton-thin nature
1539: of the X-ray--detected Fiore et al. sources all suggest that many of
1540: these sources, which make up the remaining 56\% of the sample, are
1541: instead star-forming galaxies.
1542:
1543: \section{Implications for IR Selection of AGN}
1544:
1545: Our evaluation of the performance of the infrared selection methods
1546: allows a preliminary estimate of the overall role of {\it
1547: Spitzer}-discovered AGN in the total population. Of the 109 X-ray
1548: sources in the MIPS-selected sample, 95 have redshifts, and of these,
1549: 73 (77\%) have AGN-like X-ray luminosities of (log~$L_{\rm
1550: x}$(ergs~s$^{-1}$)$ > 42$). We therefore assume a sample of 84 (77\%
1551: of 109) X-ray--selected AGN in the MIPS-selected sample. We now
1552: consider how many IR-selected AGN can be added to this total.
1553:
1554: \subsection{Infrared power-law and color-selected AGN}
1555:
1556: Of the 55 power-law AGN in our sample, 30 lack cataloged X-ray
1557: counterparts. If we assume that all of the X-ray weakly- and
1558: non-detected \plagas\ are AGN, the power-law selection criteria
1559: increases the number of known AGN (84) by 36\%. Of the 25/30 X-ray
1560: non-cataloged sources for which we could test for faint emission, 7
1561: (28\%) show weak X-ray emission at the $>2\sigma$ confidence level,
1562: and 18 show no sign of X-ray emission. Correcting for the 5 sources
1563: with nearby X-ray counterparts therefore gives an estimate of 8.4
1564: weakly-detected sources. To place a conservative lower-limit on the
1565: contribution of X-ray non-detected \plagas\ to the AGN population, we
1566: select as AGN those \plagas\ that are either weakly-detected in the
1567: X-ray (8.4) or that have extremely red slopes of $\alpha < -1.0$ (8,
1568: see \S6). Combining these two criteria results in a sample of 11.6 AGN
1569: candidates missed in the X-ray catalogs, for a contribution of 14\%.
1570: We therefore conclude that \plaga\ selection increases the number of
1571: known MIPS-detected AGN by $\sim 14-36\%$. Further adding the 3
1572: color-selected galaxies that lie outside the 3$\sigma$ star-forming
1573: contours and that lack cataloged X-ray counterparts (after correcting
1574: for the fraction with redshifts and for which the distance from the
1575: star-forming contours could therefore be determined) increases the
1576: contribution of IRAC-selected AGN to $\sim 18-40\%$.
1577:
1578: A search for weak X-ray emission from the full sample of
1579: color-selected galaxies results in the detection of 44 additional
1580: sources, 70\% of which have X-ray luminosities typical of AGN (see
1581: Table 2). Of these 30 AGN candidates, however, 19 (63\%) lie at
1582: $z>1.75$, the redshift above which nearly all (94\%) MIPS sources meet
1583: the Lacy et al. criterion, regardless of their nature
1584: (AGN/star-forming). Their selection as AGN candidates is therefore
1585: not primarily a function of their IRAC colors, but of their X-ray
1586: properties. As such, we do not add these additional $\sim 30$ AGN
1587: candidates to our \textit{Spitzer}-selected total.
1588:
1589: \subsection{Radio/Infrared-selected AGN}
1590:
1591: Radio/infrared selection, in which objects are selected for excess
1592: radio emission relative to that at 24~\micron, provides an alternative
1593: way to identify AGN independently of their optical and X-ray
1594: characteristics. In Donley et al. (2005), radio-excess AGN are
1595: defined as those sources with log~$f_{24~\micron}/f_{\rm 1.4 GHz} <
1596: 0$. Unlike \plagas, radio-excess AGN tend to lie at $z\sim 1$, have
1597: Seyfert-like X-ray luminosities of log~$L_{\rm x}$(ergs~s$^{-1}$)$
1598: \sim 42-43$, and have NIR SEDs dominated by the stellar bump (Donley et
1599: al. 2005). Of the \plagas\ detected in the CDF-N, only 3\% meet the
1600: radio-excess criteria (Donley et al. 2007). While there is therefore
1601: almost no overlap between these two AGN populations, their X-ray
1602: detection statistics are very similar: only 40\% of radio-excess AGN
1603: are cataloged in the 2~Ms CDF-N. If we consider only those
1604: radio-excess AGN with 24~\micron\ flux densities in excess of
1605: 80~\microjy, the X-ray detection fraction rises to $\sim 60\%$. At
1606: this flux limit, the CDF-N sample is complete to radio-excess AGN as
1607: defined by Donley et al. (2005).
1608:
1609: In the CDF-N, the X-ray and MIPS--detected radio-excess galaxies (with
1610: X-ray exposures greater than 1~Ms) account for 3\% of the total number
1611: of such sources, and their X-ray non-detected counterparts increase
1612: the number of known AGN by 2\%. Only 10-15\% of AGN, however, are
1613: radio-intermediate or radio-loud. This small observed sample of
1614: radio-excess AGN is therefore indicative of an underlying population
1615: at least 7 times larger, which would increase the known population of
1616: MIPS-detected AGN by $\sim 15\%$ if a way could be found to identify
1617: them.
1618:
1619: Martinez-Sansigre et al. (2006) also select high-redshift obscured AGN
1620: candidates via a 24~\micron\ and radio flux cut, although of the 21
1621: AGN candidates chosen by them, only 6 (29\%) are sufficiently radio
1622: loud to meet the infrared-to-radio selection criteria used above to
1623: define radio-excess AGN. Their selection, however, also includes a
1624: 3.6~\micron\ IRAC cut designed to select red galaxies. Because it is
1625: designed for use in shallow surveys, only three galaxies in the GOODS
1626: region of the CDF-N meet their MIPS and radio flux cuts (using the
1627: radio data of Richards 2000), and none are red enough to meet all
1628: three criteria. This selection method therefore does not contribute
1629: to the AGN sample in the deep CDF-S.
1630:
1631:
1632: \subsection{IR-excess Galaxies}
1633:
1634: As discussed above, the IR-excess samples of Daddi et al. (2007a), Dey
1635: et al. (2008), Polletta et al. (2008), and Fiore et al. (2008) contain
1636: various fractions of AGN and star-forming galaxies, with only the
1637: Polletta et al. selection criteria unquestionably identifying AGN. Of
1638: the Polletta et al. sources, however, 80\% are detected in the X-ray
1639: catalogs, and the remaining source is a weakly-detected
1640: \plaga, whose contribution to the AGN population has already been
1641: considered.
1642:
1643: Daddi et al. (2007a,b) conclude that at least 50\% of their IR-excess
1644: galaxies are Compton-thick AGN. If this hypothesis holds for the
1645: sources in our sample, the Daddi et al. selection criteria would
1646: contribute $\gsim 21$ AGN to the MIPS-selected sample in the ISAAC
1647: field, or $\gsim 31$ AGN to the full MIPS sample (as the ISAAC region
1648: comprises only 68\% of our full survey area). As discussed in \S7.1,
1649: however, it appears plausible that the properties of many of these
1650: sources can be attributed to star-formation. We therefore add only
1651: the weakly-detected galaxies, whose mean X-ray luminosity suggests a
1652: likely AGN origin. Of the 13 weakly-detected Daddi et al. IR-excess
1653: galaxies, 1 is a weakly-detected \plaga\ and 1 is a color-selected
1654: galaxy that lies $>3 \sigma$ from the star-forming contours, leaving
1655: 11 sources whose contribution is yet to be counted (or 12.6 when we
1656: correct for the sources for which we could not test for weak X-ray
1657: emission). Further scaling to the full sample region results in an
1658: additional contribution of 18.6 sources, or 22\%.
1659:
1660: F. Fiore (private communication, 2008) likewise concludes that $\sim
1661: 60\%$ of the X-ray non-cataloged sources in our sample are obscured
1662: AGN. If so, our MIPS sample in the ISAAC field should contain 25
1663: X-ray weakly or non-detected Fiore-selected AGN. Of the 36/42 X-ray
1664: non-cataloged Fiore sources in our sample (which do not lie too close
1665: to a known X-ray source to test for faint emission), however, only 10
1666: (28\%) are X-ray weakly-detected (with properties indicative of heavy
1667: obscuration). The remaining 26 sources show no evidence for X-ray
1668: emission, and have properties that may also be consistent with
1669: star-formation. We therefore only consider the contribution from the
1670: 10 weakly-detected sources. Of these 10 sources, 3 are
1671: weakly-detected power-law galaxies. Correcting for the ISAAC field of
1672: view (and the 6 sources for which we could not test for weak X-ray
1673: emission) results in an additional contribution of 12.0 AGN, or 14\%.
1674:
1675:
1676: \subsubsection{Combined Contribution}
1677:
1678: \begin{figure*}
1679: \epsscale{1}
1680: \plottwo{f14a.eps}{f14b.eps}
1681: \caption{Fraction of MIR-dominated AGN, and all AGN (regardless of their
1682: contribution to the MIR light), as a function of 24~\micron\ flux
1683: density. The full definitions of 'MIR-dominated' and 'X-ray AGN' are
1684: given in \S9. Error bars represent the $1\sigma$ errors on the source
1685: number counts, and the width of the bins. The MIR-selected sources
1686: missed in the X-ray comprise the majority of the MIR-dominated AGN at
1687: low flux densities, where the trend towards lower AGN fractions
1688: plateaus.}
1689: \end{figure*}
1690:
1691: By combining the contribution of reliable power-law, color-selected,
1692: radio/infrared, and IR-excess AGN candidates, we therefore estimate
1693: that \textit{Spitzer}--selected samples increase the known
1694: X-ray--selected AGN population by $\sim 54-77\%$, down to a
1695: 24~\micron\ flux density of 80~\microjy. In addition, the
1696: radio/infrared selection implies a $\sim 17\%$ contribution from
1697: radio-excess and radio-quiet AGN yet to be identified. The number of
1698: AGN with 24~\micron\ flux densities $>$ 80~\microjy\ is therefore
1699: $71-94\%$ larger than that of current samples detected both in the
1700: X-ray and at 24~\micron\ in the deepest X-ray fields.
1701:
1702: \section{AGN Fraction of the MIR Sample}
1703:
1704: We plot in Figure 14a the fraction of the MIPS sample comprised of
1705: MIR-dominated AGN as a function of 24~\micron\ flux density. We
1706: define as 'MIR-dominated' those AGN that (1) meet the
1707: \plaga\ criteria, provided that they are also X-ray--weakly-detected or
1708: have extremely red slopes of $\alpha < -1.0$ (these criteria were used
1709: above to place a conservative lower limit on the contribution from
1710: \plagas), (2) meet the IRAC color-color cuts of Lacy et al. (2004) or
1711: Stern et al. (2005) and lie outside the $3\sigma$ star-forming
1712: contours, (3) meet the Polletta et al. (2008) criteria, (4) meet the
1713: Fiore et al. (2008) criteria and are X-ray cataloged or
1714: weakly-detected, or (5) meet the Daddi et al. (2007) criteria and are
1715: X-ray cataloged or weakly-detected. As above, we define as X-ray AGN
1716: those sources with cataloged X-ray counterparts whose total X-ray
1717: luminosities (when redshifts are available) exceed
1718: $10^{42}$~ergs~s$^{-1}$. Because the \plaga, Daddi et al. (2007), and
1719: Fiore et al. (2008) selection criteria all identify AGN candidates
1720: with mean redshifts of $z\sim2$, the vast majority of the IR-selected
1721: AGN lie at high redshift regardless of their flux density.
1722:
1723: As shown by Brand et al. (2006), the fraction of MIR sources dominated
1724: by an AGN drops with decreasing flux density. We verify this trend,
1725: showing excellent agreement with the Brand et al. results (see Figure
1726: 13a), and confirm that it continues down to $\sim 300$~\microjy. At
1727: lower flux densities, however, the fraction of MIR-dominated X-ray AGN
1728: begins to decrease at a much lower rate, and that of all MIR-dominated
1729: AGN plateaus at a value of $\sim 10$\%. This indicates that a
1730: non-negligible fraction of faint MIR sources are not powered primarily
1731: by star-formation, but by their central engines. The significant
1732: number of faint 24~\micron\ sources that are AGN-dominated in the MIR
1733: is consistent with the finding of 6/19 such objects in the
1734: spectroscopy of faint 24~\micron\ sources by Rigby et al. (2008). At
1735: these low flux densities, it is also evident from Figure 14a that the
1736: majority of the MIR-dominated AGN are not detected in the X-ray. For
1737: instance, at 80~\microjy, the total number of MIR-dominated AGN
1738: outnumbers that of MIR-dominated X-ray AGN by a factor of $\sim 6$.
1739: Using only the X-ray emission as a probe of AGN activity will
1740: therefore result in a serious underestimation of the AGN contribution
1741: to the MIR flux density.
1742:
1743: Finally, we plot in Figure 14b the fraction of all AGN in the MIPS
1744: sample (not only those whose MIR flux is dominated by the AGN), as a
1745: function of MIPS 24~\micron\ flux density. To account for the
1746: contribution of the AGN amongst the 14 X-ray sources lacking
1747: redshifts, we randomly add 11, or 77\% (the AGN fraction of the X-ray
1748: sample), of these 14 X-ray sources to the X-ray AGN sample. We
1749: further supplement the AGN sample by including the assumed
1750: contribution from radio-excess and radio-quiet AGN, 17\%, or 14
1751: sources. Because these sources have not been individually identified
1752: in the CDF-S, we draw their flux densities randomly from the range of
1753: observed flux densities in the CDF-N ($80-300$~\microjy).
1754:
1755:
1756: The X-ray non-detected AGN still comprise the majority of all AGN at
1757: the lowest 24~\micron\ flux densities, and their contribution at
1758: larger flux densities is significant, raising the AGN fraction to
1759: $>15\%$ at all 24~\micron\ flux densities. As was seen for the
1760: MIR-dominated AGN, the total fraction of AGN rises with increasing MIR
1761: flux density, reaching a value of 37\% at $f_{\rm 24~\micron} \sim
1762: 800$~\microjy, 15\% higher than that of MIR-dominated AGN of the same
1763: flux density. The X-ray AGN fractions we find are somewhat higher
1764: than that of Treister et al. (2006). While the cause of this offset
1765: is not entirely clear, it is likely to be due at least in part to
1766: cosmic variance, as their 24~\micron\ sample was drawn from GOODS-N,
1767: and ours from GOODS-S. Once again, the vast majority of X-ray
1768: non-detected AGN at all flux densities lie at $z\sim2$, the mean
1769: redshift of the sources selected via the \plaga, Daddi et al. (2007),
1770: and Fiore et al. (2008) criteria. Only the radio-selected AGN samples
1771: lie at systematically lower redshifts of $z\sim1$.
1772:
1773: \section{Summary}
1774:
1775: Infrared selection of AGN is a powerful technique. Using new accurate
1776: star-forming and AGN templates along with a flux-limited MIPS-selected
1777: sample drawn from the GOODS-S field, we critically review three MIR
1778: selection criteria: (1) the IRAC color cuts of Lacy et al. (2004) and
1779: Stern et al. (2005), (2) the power-law galaxy (\plaga) selection
1780: technique of Alonso-Herrero et al. (2006) and Donley et al. (2007),
1781: and (3) the IR-excess selection criteria of Daddi et al. (2007a,b),
1782: Dey et al. (2008), Fiore et al. (2008), and Polletta et al. (2008).
1783: From this analysis, we then quantify the contribution of
1784: \textit{Spitzer}-selected AGN to the X-ray selected AGN
1785: population. The main conclusions of this paper are as follows:
1786:
1787: \begin{itemize}
1788:
1789: \item
1790: The majority of non-power-law IRAC color-selected AGN candidates have
1791: IR colors consistent with those of redshift-appropriate star-forming
1792: templates. In comparison, the majority of \plaga\ AGN candidates lie
1793: outside of the star-forming contours. PLG selection recovers the
1794: majority of high-quality AGN candidates.
1795:
1796: \item
1797: The reliability of AGN IRAC color-color selection improves with
1798: increasing flux as high-redshift star-forming galaxies fall out of the
1799: sample. Nevertheless, the fraction of potential star-forming
1800: contaminants is still high ($\sim 50\%$) at the highest fluxes probed
1801: by our survey ($f_{\rm 24~\micron} \sim 500$~\microjy).
1802:
1803: \item
1804: A comparison of the 24~\micron\ to 3.6~\micron\ colors of the X-ray
1805: non-detected \plagas\ to those of AGN and star-forming templates
1806: suggests that the X-ray non-detected \plagas, like their
1807: X-ray--detected counterparts, have more hot dust emission than can be
1808: explained by star-formation alone.
1809:
1810: \item
1811: An analysis of the Daddi et al. (2007) IR-excess sources in our MIPS
1812: sample indicates that while these sources may be Compton-thick AGN, it
1813: is also possible that they are low-luminosity, Compton-thin AGN and/or
1814: luminous, highly-reddened star-forming galaxies.
1815:
1816: \item
1817: An X-ray stacking analysis of the sources selected via the Fiore et
1818: al. (2008) criteria indicate that $\sim 42\%$ of the sources are
1819: consistent with being obscured AGN, and that the remaining 58\% may be
1820: star-forming galaxies.
1821:
1822: \item
1823: Adding secure \textit{Spitzer}-selected power-law, color-color,
1824: radio/IR, and IR-excess AGN candidates to the deepest X-ray
1825: samples directly increases the number of known AGN by $\sim 54-77\%$,
1826: and implies a total increase of $71-94$\%. This fraction excludes the
1827: full contributions from the Daddi et al. and Fiore et al. AGN
1828: candidates, whose nature is still uncertain.
1829:
1830: \item
1831: The fraction of MIR sources dominated by an AGN decreases with
1832: decreasing flux density, but only down to a 24~\micron\ flux density
1833: of $\sim 300$~\microjy. Below this limit, the AGN fraction levels out
1834: at $\sim 10\%$. This indicates that a non-negligible fraction of faint
1835: 24~\micron\ sources are primarily powered not by star-formation, but
1836: by the central engine. In addition, the majority of AGN at low
1837: 24~\micron\ flux densities are missed in the X-ray, indicating that
1838: X-ray emission alone cannot be used to identify AGN, especially
1839: amongst faint IR samples.
1840:
1841: \end{itemize}
1842:
1843: \vspace*{0cm}
1844:
1845: \acknowledgments
1846:
1847: We thank M. Polletta for providing templates, M. Dickinson, and
1848: D. Alexander for providing the list of Daddi et al. (2007a,b)
1849: sources. We also thank D. Alexander, F. Fiore, M. Lacy,
1850: D. Stern, and the anonymous referee for discussions and comments that
1851: improved the paper. Finally, we thank Caltech/JPL for support through
1852: contract 1255094 to the University of
1853: Arizona. P.~G. P.-G. acknowledges support from the Spanish Programa
1854: Nacional de Astronom\'{\i}a y Astrof\'{\i}sica under grant AYA
1855: 2006--02358 and AYA 2006--15698--C02--02, and from the Ram\'on y Cajal
1856: Program financed by the Spanish Government and the European Union.
1857:
1858:
1859:
1860:
1861: % --------------------------------------------------------------------
1862: \clearpage
1863: \newpage
1864: \begin{thebibliography}{}
1865:
1866: \bibitem[Alexander et al.(2002)]{2002AJ....123.1149A} Alexander,
1867: D.~M., Vignali, C., Bauer, F.~E., Brandt, W.~N., Hornschemeier, A.~E.,
1868: Garmire, G.~P., \& Schneider, D.~P.\ 2002, \aj, 123, 1149
1869:
1870: \bibitem[Alexander et al.(2003)]{2003AJ....126..539A} Alexander,
1871: D.~M., et al.\ 2003, \aj, 126, 539
1872:
1873: \bibitem[Alexander et al.(2008)]{2008arXiv0803.0636A} Alexander, D.~M., et
1874: al.\ 2008, ArXiv e-prints, 803, arXiv:0803.0636
1875:
1876: \bibitem[Alonso-Herrero et al.(2006)]{2006ApJ...640..167A}
1877: Alonso-Herrero, A., et al.\ 2006, \apj, 640, 167
1878:
1879: \bibitem[Arnouts et al.(2002)]{2002yCat..33790740A} Arnouts, S.,
1880: Vandame, B., Benoist, C., Groenewegen, M.~A.~T., da Costa, L.,
1881: Schirmer, M., Mignani, R.~P., \& Slijkhuis, R.\ 2002, VizieR Online
1882: Data Catalog, 337, 90740
1883:
1884: \bibitem[Barmby et al.(2006)]{2006ApJ...642..126B} Barmby, P., et
1885: al.\ 2006, \apj, 642, 126
1886:
1887: \bibitem[Bevington \& Robinson(2003)]{2003drea.book.....B} Bevington,
1888: P.~R., \& Robinson, D.~K.\ 2003, Data reduction and error analysis for
1889: the physical sciences, 3rd ed., by Philip R.~Bevington, and Keith
1890: D.~Robinson.~Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill, ISBN 0-07-247227-8, 2003.
1891:
1892: \bibitem[Bolzonella et al.(2000)]{2000A&A...363..476B} Bolzonella,
1893: M., Miralles, J.-M., \& Pell{\'o}, R.\ 2000, \aap, 363, 476
1894:
1895: \bibitem[Bouchet et al.(1985)]{1985A&A...149..330B} Bouchet, P., Lequeux,
1896: J., Maurice, E., Prevot, L., \& Prevot-Burnichon, M.~L.\ 1985, \aap,
1897: 149, 330
1898:
1899: \bibitem[Brand et al.(2006)]{2006ApJ...644..143B} Brand, K., et al.\
1900: 2006, \apj, 644, 143
1901:
1902: \bibitem[Brusa et al.(2005)]{2005A&A...432...69B} Brusa, M., et al.\
1903: 2005, \aap, 432, 69
1904:
1905: \bibitem[Buat et al.(2005)]{2005ApJ...619L..51B} Buat, V., et al.\
1906: 2005, \apjl, 619, L51
1907:
1908: \bibitem[Calzetti et al.(2000)]{2000ApJ...533..682C} Calzetti, D.,
1909: Armus, L., Bohlin, R.~C., Kinney, A.~L., Koornneef, J., \&
1910: Storchi-Bergmann, T.\ 2000, \apj, 533, 682
1911:
1912: \bibitem[Calzetti et al.(2007)]{2007ApJ...666..870C} Calzetti, D., et al.\ 2007, \apj, 666, 870
1913:
1914: \bibitem[Caputi et al.(2006)]{2006ApJ...637..727C} Caputi, K.~I., et
1915: al.\ 2006, \apj, 637, 727
1916:
1917: \bibitem[Cardamone et al.(2008)]{2008ApJ...680..130C} Cardamone, C.~N., et al.\ 2008, \apj, 680, 130
1918:
1919: \bibitem[Daddi et al.(2007)]{2007ApJ...670..156D} Daddi, E., et al.\
1920: 2007a, \apj, 670, 156
1921:
1922: \bibitem[Daddi et al.(2007)]{2007ApJ...670..173D} Daddi, E., et al.\
1923: 2007b, \apj, 670, 173
1924:
1925: \bibitem[Dale \& Helou(2002)]{2002ApJ...576..159D} Dale, D.~A., \&
1926: Helou, G.\ 2002, \apj, 576, 159
1927:
1928: \bibitem[Desai et al.(2008)]{2008ApJ...679.1204D} Desai, V., et al.\ 2008, \apj, 679, 1204
1929:
1930: \bibitem[Dey et al.(2008)]{2008ApJ...677..943D} Dey, A., et al.\
1931: 2008, \apj, 677, 943
1932:
1933: \bibitem[Doherty et al.(2005)]{2005MNRAS.361..525D} Doherty, M.,
1934: Bunker, A.~J., Ellis, R.~S., \& McCarthy, P.~J.\ 2005, \mnras, 361,
1935: 525
1936:
1937: \bibitem[Donley et al.(2005)]{2005ApJ...634..169D} Donley, J.~L.,
1938: Rieke, G.~H., Rigby, J.~R., \& P{\'e}rez-Gonz{\'a}lez, P.~G.\ 2005,
1939: \apj, 634, 169
1940:
1941: \bibitem[Donley et al.(2007)]{2007ApJ...660..167D} Donley, J.~L.,
1942: Rieke, G.~H., P{\'e}rez-Gonz{\'a}lez, P.~G., Rigby, J.~R., \&
1943: Alonso-Herrero, A.\ 2007, \apj, 660, 167
1944:
1945: \bibitem[Elvis et al.(1994)]{1994ApJS...95....1E} Elvis, M., et al.\
1946: 1994, \apjs, 95, 1
1947:
1948: \bibitem[Fazio et al.(2004)]{2004ApJS..154...10F} Fazio, G.~G., et
1949: al.\ 2004, \apjs, 154, 10
1950:
1951: \bibitem[Ferrarese \& Merritt(2000)]{2000ApJ...539L...9F} Ferrarese,
1952: L., \& Merritt, D.\ 2000, \apjl, 539, L9
1953:
1954: \bibitem[Fiore et al.(2008)]{2008ApJ...672...94F} Fiore, F., et al.\
1955: 2008, \apj, 672, 94
1956:
1957: \bibitem[Franceschini et al.(2003)]{2003MNRAS.343.1181F}
1958: Franceschini, A., et al.\ 2003, \mnras, 343, 1181
1959:
1960: \bibitem[Gebhardt et al.(2000)]{2000ApJ...539L..13G} Gebhardt, K., et
1961: al.\ 2000, \apjl, 539, L13
1962:
1963: \bibitem[Genzel et al.(1998)]{1998ApJ...498..579G} Genzel, R., et
1964: al.\ 1998, \apj, 498, 579
1965:
1966: \bibitem[Giacconi et al.(2002)]{2002ApJS..139..369G} Giacconi, R., et
1967: al.\ 2002, \apjs, 139, 369
1968:
1969: \bibitem[Giavalisco et al.(2004)]{2004ApJ...600L..93G} Giavalisco,
1970: M., et al.\ 2004, \apjl, 600, L93
1971:
1972: \bibitem[Gilli et al.(2007)]{2007A&A...463...79G} Gilli, R.,
1973: Comastri, A., \& Hasinger, G.\ 2007, \aap, 463, 79
1974:
1975: \bibitem[Goldader et al.(2002)]{2002ApJ...568..651G} Goldader, J.~D.,
1976: Meurer, G., Heckman, T.~M., Seibert, M., Sanders, D.~B., Calzetti, D.,
1977: \& Steidel, C.~C.\ 2002, \apj, 568, 651
1978:
1979: \bibitem[Grazian et al.(2006)]{2006A&A...449..951G} Grazian, A., et al.\ 2006, \aap, 449, 951
1980:
1981: \bibitem[Hopkins et al.(2006)]{2006ApJS..163....1H} Hopkins, P.~F.,
1982: Hernquist, L., Cox, T.~J., Di Matteo, T., Robertson, B., \& Springel,
1983: V.\ 2006, \apjs, 163, 1
1984:
1985: \bibitem[Ivezi{\'c} et al.(2002)]{2002AJ....124.2364I} Ivezi{\'c},
1986: {\v Z}., et al.\ 2002, \aj, 124, 2364
1987:
1988: \bibitem[Iwasawa et al.(2001)]{2001MNRAS.326..894I} Iwasawa, K., Matt, G.,
1989: Guainazzi, M., \& Fabian, A.~C.\ 2001, \mnras, 326, 894
1990:
1991: \bibitem[Kennicutt(1998)]{1998ApJ...498..541K} Kennicutt, R.~C., Jr.\ 1998, \apj, 498, 541
1992:
1993: \bibitem[Klaas et al.(2001)]{2001A&A...379..823K} Klaas, U., et al.\ 2001, \aap, 379, 823
1994:
1995: \bibitem[Klesman \& Sarajedini(2007)]{2007ApJ...665..225K} Klesman,
1996: A., \& Sarajedini, V.\ 2007, \apj, 665, 225
1997:
1998: \bibitem[Lacy et al.(2004)]{2004ApJS..154..166L} Lacy, M., et al.\
1999: 2004, \apjs, 154, 166
2000:
2001: \bibitem[Lacy et al.(2005)]{2005ApJS..161...41L} Lacy, M., et al.\
2002: 2005, \apjs, 161, 41
2003:
2004: \bibitem[Lacy et al.(2007)]{2007AJ....133..186L} Lacy, M., Petric,
2005: A.~O., Sajina, A., Canalizo, G., Storrie-Lombardi, L.~J., Armus, L.,
2006: Fadda, D., \& Marleau, F.~R.\ 2007, \aj, 133, 186
2007:
2008: \bibitem[Le F{\`e}vre et al.(2004)]{2004A&A...428.1043L} Le
2009: F{\`e}vre, O., et al.\ 2004, \aap, 428, 1043
2010:
2011: \bibitem[Lonsdale et al.(2003)]{2003PASP..115..897L} Lonsdale, C.~J.,
2012: et al.\ 2003, \pasp, 115, 897
2013:
2014: \bibitem[Mart{\'{\i}}nez-Sansigre et al.(2006)]{2006MNRAS.370.1479M}
2015: Mart{\'{\i}}nez-Sansigre, A., Rawlings, S., Lacy, M., Fadda, D.,
2016: Jarvis, M.~J., Marleau, F.~R., Simpson, C., \& Willott, C.~J.\ 2006,
2017: \mnras, 370, 1479
2018:
2019: \bibitem[Marzke et al.(1999)]{1999ASPC..191..148M} Marzke, R., et
2020: al.\ 1999, Photometric Redshifts and the Detection of High Redshift
2021: Galaxies, 191, 148
2022:
2023: \bibitem[McGregor(1987)]{1987ApJ...312..195M} McGregor, P.~J.\ 1987,
2024: \apj, 312, 195
2025:
2026: \bibitem[Mignoli et al.(2005)]{2005A&A...437..883M} Mignoli, M., et
2027: al.\ 2005, \aap, 437, 883
2028:
2029: \bibitem[Neugebauer et al.(1979)]{1979ApJ...230...79N} Neugebauer,
2030: G., Oke, J.~B., Becklin, E.~E., \& Matthews, K.\ 1979, \apj, 230, 79
2031:
2032: \bibitem[P{\'e}rez-Gonz{\'a}lez et al.(2005)]{2005ApJ...630...82P}
2033: P{\'e}rez-Gonz{\'a}lez, P.~G., et al.\ 2005, \apj, 630, 82
2034:
2035: \bibitem[]{} P{\'e}rez-Gonz{\'a}lez et al. 2008, ApJ, in press
2036:
2037: \bibitem[Persic \& Rephaeli(2002)]{2002A&A...382..843P} Persic, M., \& Rephaeli, Y.\ 2002, \aap, 382, 843
2038:
2039: \bibitem[Persic et al.(2004)]{2004A&A...419..849P} Persic, M.,
2040: Rephaeli, Y., Braito, V., Cappi, M., Della Ceca, R., Franceschini, A.,
2041: \& Gruber, D.~E.\ 2004, \aap, 419, 849
2042:
2043: \bibitem[Polletta et al.(2007)]{2007ApJ...663...81P} Polletta, M., et
2044: al.\ 2007, \apj, 663, 81
2045:
2046: \bibitem[Polletta et al.(2008)]{2008ApJ...675..960P} Polletta, M.,
2047: Weedman, D., H{\"o}nig, S., Lonsdale, C.~J., Smith, H.~E., \& Houck,
2048: J.\ 2008, \apj, 675, 960
2049:
2050: \bibitem[Pozzi et al.(2007)]{2007A&A...468..603P} Pozzi, F., et al.\
2051: 2007, \aap, 468, 603
2052:
2053: \bibitem[Prevot et al.(1984)]{1984A&A...132..389P} Prevot, M.~L.,
2054: Lequeux, J., Prevot, L., Maurice, E., \& Rocca-Volmerange, B.\ 1984,
2055: \aap, 132, 389
2056:
2057: \bibitem[Ptak et al.(2003)]{2003ApJ...592..782P} Ptak, A., Heckman, T.,
2058: Levenson, N.~A., Weaver, K., \& Strickland, D.\ 2003, \apj, 592, 782
2059:
2060: \bibitem[Ranalli et al.(2003)]{2003A&A...399...39R} Ranalli, P.,
2061: Comastri, A., \& Setti, G.\ 2003, \aap, 399, 39
2062:
2063: \bibitem[Richards(2000)]{2000ApJ...533..611R} Richards, E.~A.\ 2000,
2064: \apj, 533, 611
2065:
2066: \bibitem[Richards et al.(2003)]{2003AJ....126.1131R} Richards, G.~T.,
2067: et al.\ 2003, \aj, 126, 1131
2068:
2069: \bibitem[Rieke et al.(2004)]{2004ApJS..154...25R} Rieke, G.~H., et
2070: al.\ 2004, \apjs, 154, 25
2071:
2072: \bibitem[Rieke et al.(2008)]{} Rieke, G.~H., et
2073: al.\ 2008, in prep.
2074:
2075: \bibitem[Rigby et al.(2004)]{2004ApJS..154..160R} Rigby, J.~R., et
2076: al.\ 2004, \apjs, 154, 160
2077:
2078: \bibitem[Rigby et al.(2008)]{2008ApJ...675..262R} Rigby, J.~R., et
2079: al.\ 2008, \apj, 675, 262
2080:
2081: \bibitem[Sajina et al.(2005)]{2005ApJ...621..256S} Sajina, A., Lacy,
2082: M., \& Scott, D.\ 2005, \apj, 621, 256
2083:
2084: \bibitem[Sanders et al.(2003)]{2003AJ....126.1607S} Sanders, D.~B., Mazzarella,
2085: J.~M., Kim, D.-C., Surace, J.~A., \& Soifer, B.~T.\ 2003, \aj, 126,
2086: 1607
2087:
2088: \bibitem[Silva et al.(1998)]{1998ApJ...509..103S} Silva, L., Granato,
2089: G.~L., Bressan, A., \& Danese, L.\ 1998, \apj, 509, 103
2090:
2091: \bibitem[Steffen et al.(2007)]{2007ApJ...667L..25S} Steffen, A.~T.,
2092: Brandt, W.~N., Alexander, D.~M., Gallagher, S.~C., \& Lehmer, B.~D.\
2093: 2007, \apjl, 667, L25
2094:
2095: \bibitem[Stern et al.(2005)]{2005ApJ...631..163S} Stern, D., et al.\
2096: 2005, \apj, 631, 163
2097:
2098: \bibitem[Szokoly et al.(2004)]{2004ApJS..155..271S} Szokoly, G.~P.,
2099: et al.\ 2004, \apjs, 155, 271
2100:
2101: \bibitem[Teng et al.(2005)]{2005ApJ...633..664T} Teng, S.~H., Wilson, A.~S.,
2102: Veilleux, S., Young, A.~J., Sanders, D.~B., \& Nagar, N.~M.\ 2005, \apj, 633, 664
2103:
2104: \bibitem[Tozzi et al.(2006)]{2006A&A...451..457T} Tozzi, P., et al.\
2105: 2006, \aap, 451, 457
2106:
2107: \bibitem[Treister et al.(2006)]{2006ApJ...640..603T} Treister, E., et
2108: al.\ 2006, \apj, 640, 603
2109:
2110: \bibitem[Vandame et al.(2001)]{2001astro.ph..2300V} Vandame, B., et
2111: al.\ 2001, ArXiv Astrophysics e-prints, arXiv:astro-ph/0102300
2112:
2113: \bibitem[Vanzella et al.(2006)]{2006A&A...454..423V} Vanzella, E., et
2114: al.\ 2006, \aap, 454, 423
2115:
2116: \bibitem[Vijh et al.(2003)]{2003ApJ...587..533V} Vijh, U.~P., Witt,
2117: A.~N., \& Gordon, K.~D.\ 2003, \apj, 587, 533
2118:
2119: \bibitem[White et al.(1983)]{1983ApJ...270..711W} White, N.~E., Swank, J.~H., \& Holt, S.~S.\ 1983, \apj, 270, 711
2120:
2121: \bibitem[Wolf et al.(2004)]{2004A&A...421..913W} Wolf, C., et al.\
2122: 2004, \aap, 421, 913
2123:
2124: \bibitem[Yan et al.(2007)]{2007ApJ...658..778Y} Yan, L., et al.\ 2007, \apj, 658, 778
2125:
2126: \end{thebibliography}
2127: \clearpage
2128:
2129:
2130:
2131: \begin{centering}
2132: \begin{deluxetable}{lcccrrrr}
2133: \centering
2134: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}
2135: \tablewidth{0pt}
2136: \tablecaption {Photometric Redshifts}
2137: \tablehead{
2138: \colhead{Sample} &
2139: \colhead{N$_{\rm srcs}$} &
2140: \colhead{N$_{\rm z}$} &
2141: \colhead{N$_{\rm{spec}}$} &
2142: \colhead{$\Delta$z} &
2143: \colhead{$\sigma_{\rm z}$} &
2144: \colhead{\% with} &
2145: \colhead{\% with} \\
2146: \colhead{} &
2147: \colhead{} &
2148: \colhead{} &
2149: \colhead{} &
2150: \colhead{} &
2151: \colhead{} &
2152: \colhead{$\Delta z > 0.10$} &
2153: \colhead{$\Delta z > 0.20$}
2154: }
2155: \startdata
2156: All & 713 & 649 & 249 & 0.012 & 0.15 & 11.3\% & 4.6\% \\
2157: IR-Normal & 448 & 424 & 187 & 0.012 & 0.12 & 7.2\% & 2.8\% \\
2158: Color-Selected & 210 & 196 & 51 & 0.015 & 0.10 & 20.4\% & 4.1\% \\
2159: Power-law & 55 & 29 & 11 &-0.013 & 0.48 & 40.0\% & 40.0\% \\
2160: \enddata
2161: \end{deluxetable}
2162: \end{centering}
2163:
2164:
2165: %\begin{landscape}
2166: \begin{deluxetable}{lcccccccc}
2167: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}
2168: \tablewidth{0pt}
2169: \tablecaption {X-ray Detection Statistics}
2170: \tablehead{
2171: \colhead{} &
2172: \colhead{MIPS\tablenotemark{a}} &
2173: \colhead{MIPS/ISAAC} &
2174: \colhead{Daddi et al.} &
2175: \colhead{Dey et al.} &
2176: \colhead{Fiore et al.} &
2177: \colhead{Polletta et} &
2178: \colhead{$f_{24~\micron}/f_{\rm R}$} &
2179: \colhead{All} \\
2180: \colhead{} &
2181: \colhead{Sample} &
2182: \colhead{Sample} &
2183: \colhead{(2007)} &
2184: \colhead{(2008)} &
2185: \colhead{(2008)} &
2186: \colhead{al. (2008)} &
2187: \colhead{$> 1000$} &
2188: \colhead{IR-Excess}
2189: }
2190: \startdata
2191: Total & 713 & 465 & 42 & 10 & 52 & 5 & 71 & 101 \\
2192:
2193: \hline
2194: X-rays & 109 & 76 & 3 & 3 & 10 & 4 & 11 & 15 \\
2195: \hline
2196: Power & 25 (100\%) & 14 & 0 & 3 & 4 & 4 & 4 & 7 \\
2197: Color & 35 (79\%) & 28 & 3 & 0 & 5 & 0 & 6 & 7 \\
2198: Normal & 49 (65\%) & 34 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 1 \\
2199:
2200: \hline
2201: % 2-sigma
2202: Weak X-rays & 157 & 125 & 13 & 2 & 10 & 1 & 16 & 26 \\
2203: \hline
2204: Power & 7 (100\%) & 5 & 1 & 1 & 3 & 1 & 4 & 4 \\
2205: Color & 44 (70\%) & 35 & 11 & 1 & 7 & 0 & 11 & 20 \\
2206: Normal & 106 (19\%) & 85 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 2 \\
2207:
2208: \hline
2209: % 2-sigma
2210: No X-rays & 361 & 226 & 21 & 3 & 26 & 0 & 38 & 51 \\
2211: \hline
2212: Power & 18 & 12 & 3 & 0 & 7 & 0 & 9 & 11 \\
2213: Color & 109 & 72 & 15 & 3 & 19 & 0 & 28 & 36 \\
2214: Normal & 234 & 142 & 3 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 4 \\
2215:
2216: \enddata
2217: \tablenotetext{a}{The fraction of X-ray sources with AGN X-ray luminosities of log~$L_{\rm
2218: x}$(ergs~s$^{-1}$)$ > 42$ is given in parentheses.}
2219: \tablecomments{The sum of the weakly and non-detected sources does not equal the full number of X-ray non-cataloged sources. The difference represents the number of sources that
2220: lie too close to a known X-ray counterpart to test for faint X-ray
2221: emission.}
2222: \end{deluxetable}
2223: %\end{landscape}
2224:
2225:
2226: \begin{centering}
2227: \begin{deluxetable}{lccc}
2228: \centering
2229: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}
2230: \tablewidth{0pt}
2231: \tablecaption{Fraction of sources that lie outside the star-forming contours}
2232: \tablehead{
2233: \colhead{Selection} &
2234: \colhead{$1 \sigma$} &
2235: \colhead{$2 \sigma$} &
2236: \colhead{$3 \sigma$}
2237: }
2238: \startdata
2239:
2240: Lacy & 52\% & 21\% & 10\% \\
2241: Stern & 40\% & 18\% & 8\% \\
2242: Power-law & 93\%,82\% & 79\%,61\% & 71\%,43\% \\
2243: \hline \\
2244: Lacy & 29\% & 12\% & 5\% \\
2245: Stern & 22\% & 5\% & 0\% \\
2246: Power-law & 71\%,68\% & 61\%,46\% & 57\%,39\% \\
2247:
2248:
2249: \enddata
2250: \tablecomments{The upper portion of the table assumes no errors on the photometric redshifts. The lower portion assumes 10\% errors. The two values given for the \plagas\ represent the fraction of sources that lie outside the star-forming contours in Lacy and Stern color-space, respectively.}
2251:
2252:
2253: \end{deluxetable}
2254: \end{centering}
2255:
2256: \begin{centering}
2257: \begin{deluxetable}{llrlrlr}
2258: \centering
2259: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}
2260: \tablewidth{0pt}
2261: \tablecaption{X-ray detection fraction (and total number) of sources that lie outside the star-forming contours}
2262: \tablehead{
2263: \colhead{Selection} &
2264: \multicolumn{2}{c}{$1 \sigma$} &
2265: \multicolumn{2}{c}{$2 \sigma$} &
2266: \multicolumn{2}{c}{$3 \sigma$}
2267: }
2268: \startdata
2269:
2270: Lacy & 21\% &(19) & 26\% &(10) & 42\% &(8) \\
2271: Power-law (Lacy) & 70\% &(19) & 83\% &(19) & 90\% &(19) \\
2272: Stern & 19\% &(5) & 25\% &(3) & 40\% &(2) \\
2273: Power-law (Stern) & 67\% &(16) & 72\% &(13) & 85\% &(11) \\
2274: \hline \\
2275: Lacy & 29\% &(15) & 36\% &(8) & 67\% & (6) \\
2276: Power-law (Lacy) & 81\% &(17) & 89\% &(16) & 88\% & (15) \\
2277: Stern & 14\% &(2) & 0\% &(0) & 0\% & (0) \\
2278: Power-law (Stern) & 80\% &(16) & 86\% &(12) & 82\% & (9) \\
2279:
2280: \enddata
2281: \tablecomments{The upper portion of the table assumes no errors on the photometric redshifts. The lower portion assumes 10\% errors.}
2282: \end{deluxetable}
2283: \end{centering}
2284:
2285:
2286: \begin{centering}
2287: \begin{deluxetable}{ccccccc}
2288: \centering
2289: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}
2290: \tablewidth{0pt}
2291: \tablecaption{Percent of secure color-selected galaxies vs. 24~\micron\ flux}
2292: \tablehead{
2293: \colhead{24~\micron\ flux cut} &
2294: \colhead{Lacy} &
2295: \colhead{Stern} &
2296: \colhead{Power-law} \\
2297: \colhead{(\microjy)} &
2298: \colhead{} &
2299: \colhead{}
2300: }
2301: \startdata
2302: 80 & 52\% & 40\% & 93\%, 82\% \\
2303: 100 & 54\% & 44\% & 96\%, 84\% \\
2304: 150 & 53\% & 43\% & 94\%, 78\% \\
2305: 200 & 60\% & 63\% & 100\%, 76\% \\
2306: 300 & 53\% & 25\% & 100\%, 72\% \\
2307: 400 & 52\% & 50\% & 100\%, 66\% \\
2308: 500 & 56\% & 50\% & 100\%, 71\% \\
2309: \tableline
2310: 80 & 29\% & 21\% & 72\%, 68\% \\
2311: 100 & 29\% & 24\% & 76\%, 72\% \\
2312: 150 & 25\% & 21\% & 73\%, 63\% \\
2313: 200 & 32\% & 27\% & 92\%, 76\% \\
2314: 300 & 31\% & 25\% & 90\%, 72\% \\
2315: 400 & 39\% & 50\% & 88\%, 66\% \\
2316: 500 & 50\% & 50\% & 85\%, 71\% \\
2317:
2318: \enddata
2319: \tablecomments{The upper portion of the table assumes no errors on the photometric redshifts. The lower portion assumes 10\% errors. The two values given for the \plagas\ represent the fraction of sources that lie outside the star-forming contours in Lacy and Stern color-space, respectively.}
2320: \end{deluxetable}
2321: \end{centering}
2322:
2323:
2324: \appendix
2325:
2326: \begin{centering}
2327: \begin{deluxetable}{lll}
2328: \centering
2329: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}
2330: \tablewidth{0pt}
2331: \tablenum{1}
2332: \tablecaption {A1: Photometric Redshift Templates}
2333: \tablehead{
2334: \colhead{Template} &
2335: \colhead{Type} &
2336: \colhead{Ref}
2337: }
2338: \startdata
2339: Ell2 & 2 Gyr old elliptical & (2) \\
2340: Ell5 & 5 Gyr old elliptical & (2) \\
2341: Ell13 & 13 Gyr old elliptical & (2) \\
2342: S0 & Spiral 0 & (1) \\
2343: Sa & Spiral a & (1) \\
2344: Sb & Spiral b & (1) \\
2345: Sc & Spiral c & (1) \\
2346: Sd & Spiral d & (1) \\
2347: Sdm & Spiral dm & (1) \\
2348: M82 & Starburst & (1) \\
2349: NGC 6090 & LIRG/Starburst & (1) \\
2350: ESO320-G030 & LIRG/Starburst & (3) \\
2351: NGC 1614 & LIRG/Starburst & (3) \\
2352: NGC 2639 & LIRG/Starburst & (3) \\
2353: NGC 3256 & LIRG/Starburst & (3) \\
2354: NGC 4194 & LIRG/Starburst & (3) \\
2355: Arp 220 & ULIRG/Starburst & (1) \\
2356: Arp 220 & ULIRG/Starburst & (3) \\
2357: IRAS 12112+0305 & ULIRG/Starburst & (3) \\
2358: IRAS 14348-1447 & ULIRG/Starburst & (3) \\
2359: IRAS 17208-0014 & ULIRG/Starburst & (3) \\
2360: IRAS 22491-1808 & ULIRG/Starburst & (3) \\
2361: IRAS 22491-1808 & ULIRG/Starburst & (1) \\
2362: \tableline
2363: Mrk 231 & ULIRG/Seyfert 1 & (1) \\
2364: Sey1.8 & Seyfert 1.8 & (1) \\
2365: TQSO1 & Type 1 QSO & (1) \\
2366: Sey2 & Seyfert 2 & (1) \\
2367: NGC 6240 & Starburst/Seyfert 2 & (1) \\
2368: IRAS 19254-7245 & ULIRG/Seyfert 2 & (1) \\
2369: IRAS 20551-4250 & ULIRG/Buried AGN & (1) \\
2370: QSO2 & Type 2 QSO & (1) \\
2371: \enddata
2372: \tablerefs{(1) Polletta et al. (2007), (2) Silva et al. (1998), (3) Rieke et al. (2008)}
2373: \end{deluxetable}
2374: \end{centering}
2375:
2376:
2377: \section{Appendix A: Photometric Redshift Techniques}
2378:
2379: \noindent We used two methods to determine photometric redshifts. The
2380: first utilizes the extensive high-resolution template set of
2381: P\'erez-Gonz\'alez et al. (2008), which was created by fitting stellar
2382: population synthesis and dust emission models to the $\sim$1500
2383: galaxies in the CDF-N and CDF-S with secure spectroscopic redshifts.
2384: When applied to all spectroscopically-detected IRAC-selected galaxies
2385: in the GOODS-N and GOODS-S, this template library returns photometric
2386: redshifts with $\Delta(z)$$<$0.1 for 88\% of the sources, and
2387: $\Delta(z)$$<$0.2 for 96\%, where $\Delta(z) = (z_p - z_s) / (1+z_s)$
2388: ( P\'erez-Gonz\'alez et al. 2008). Because this method relies on
2389: star-forming templates, however, we do not expect it to provide
2390: equally reliable photometric redshifts for galaxies in which the
2391: stellar features are dominated by emission from an AGN.
2392:
2393: Our second method is based on the chi-squared minimization routine
2394: {\sc HYPERZ} (Bolzonella, Miralles, \& Pell{\'o} 2000). With a suite
2395: of normal star-forming, LIRG/ULIRG, \textit{and} AGN templates, we can
2396: better account for the range of sources expected in our 24~\micron\
2397: selected sample, albeit with a smaller template library. To create
2398: this library, we started with a sample of 10 star-forming templates
2399: and 8 AGN templates from Silva et al. (1998) and Polletta et
2400: al. (2007). The Polletta et al. AGN templates cover a range of
2401: intrinsic obscurations (Type 1 and Type 2) and luminosities (Sey/QSO).
2402: We then supplemented this sample with 10 empirical star-forming LIRG
2403: and ULIRG templates. The full template sample is listed in Table
2404: 1. The LIRG and ULIRG templates, described in detail in Rieke et
2405: al. (2008, in prep.), significantly improve upon previous
2406: semi-empirical templates by constraining the SEDs between 1 and
2407: 6~\micron\ with 2MASS and IRAC photometry and by basing the SEDs from
2408: 5 to 35~\micron\ on IRS spectra.
2409:
2410: Using this template library, we ran HYPERZ on all robust optical--MIR
2411: data for the IR-normal and color-selected galaxies. For the \plagas,
2412: we removed all photometry longward of 3.6~\micron\ (IRAC channel
2413: 1). Including the full \textit{Spitzer} photometry for \plagas\
2414: provided little or no additional constraint on potential redshifts,
2415: and limited severely the SEDs for which a good fit could be found. We
2416: allowed $z$ to vary from 0 to 4 and $A_v$ to vary from 0 to 1.2.
2417: While its shape is still relatively unconstrained, a number of studies
2418: have suggested that the extinction curve of AGN most closely resembles
2419: that of the SMC (e.g. Richards et al. 2003). We therefore assumed by
2420: default the SMC extinction curve of Bouchet et al. (1985) for the
2421: \plagas\ and color-selected galaxies. For the IR-normal galaxies, we
2422: assume the Calzetti (2000) extinction curve, as this curve was modeled
2423: to represent the extinction properties of starburst galaxies. To
2424: prevent unrealistic redshift solutions, we applied the redshift- and
2425: model-dependent absolute magnitude cuts of Polletta et al. (2007).
2426: Finally, to increase the weight of the IRAC photometry, which solely
2427: defines the red slope of the stellar bump, we set the errors on the
2428: IRAC photometry to the measurement errors, as opposed to the total
2429: photometric errors. This procedure is acceptable because many types
2430: of photometric error will have similar effects on the four IRAC bands,
2431: so we are making use of the overall internal consistency expected for
2432: the data.
2433:
2434: To improve the likelihood of obtaining a good fit for each source, we
2435: then varied a number of these assumptions, and examined by eye the
2436: resulting fits to choose the most convincing redshift solution. This
2437: visual inspection is an important characteristic of our work, and was
2438: made possible by the relatively small number of sources in our sample.
2439: First, each \plaga\ and color-selected galaxy was fit by both the SMC
2440: and Calzetti extinction laws. In most cases, the resulting redshift
2441: fits and solutions varied only slightly (in which case we chose the
2442: SMC-derived fit), but for some galaxies, one of the two extinction
2443: laws provided a clearly superior fit as determined by a visual
2444: inspection. Second, if the absolute magnitude of the resulting
2445: best-fit template did not meet the redshift-dependent absolute
2446: magnitude cut of Polletta et al. (2007), we allowed $M_{\rm B}$ to
2447: vary between -23.7 to -17 for star-forming templates and -28.8 to -19
2448: for AGN templates (e.g. Polletta et al. 2007). Third, we allowed the
2449: IRAC errors to increase to their total estimated values by adding a
2450: 10\% error to the flux; in only 4 cases did this lead to a better fit.
2451: Finally, for the \plagas, we explored fits that did not include the
2452: 3.6~\micron\ IRAC channel; only 2 sources benefited from this change.
2453:
2454:
2455: The final step in our redshift estimation was an independent review of
2456: the redshifts by two authors. By examining by eye the resulting
2457: redshift fits, we chose for each \plaga\ and color-selected galaxy the
2458: best HYPERZ redshift. We then compared this to the redshift fit from
2459: the P\'erez-Gonz\'alez et al. (2008) technique, and replaced the
2460: former with the latter if it clearly provided a better fit. For the
2461: IR-normal galaxies, we use the P\'erez-Gonz\'alez et al. (2008)
2462: redshifts by default, as these are optimized for normal galaxies. We
2463: do, however, remove unconvincing redshift fits, and substitute a solid
2464: HYPERZ redshift if available. For all sources, we only assign a
2465: photometric redshift if a convincing fit exists. We rejected 76
2466: sources with poor data or other problems that compromise our redshift
2467: determination. The photometric redshifts classified as being of high
2468: quality are summarized in Table 1 and shown in Figure 1.
2469:
2470: \section{Appendix B: Redshift-dependent Color Selection}
2471:
2472: \subsubsection{$z=0-0.25$}
2473:
2474: The lowest redshift bin contains no \plagas\
2475: and 2 color-selected galaxies, both of which are detected in the
2476: X-ray, but with low observed X-ray luminosities of log~$L_{\rm
2477: x}$(ergs~s$^{-1}$)$ = 41.3$ and log~$L_{\rm x}$(ergs~s$^{-1}$)$ =
2478: 40.9$, indicative of powerful starbursts or very low-luminosity AGN.
2479:
2480: \subsubsection{$z=0.25-0.75$}
2481:
2482: The second redshift bin contains 3 \plagas, 27 Lacy-selected galaxies,
2483: and 4 Stern-selected galaxies. Of the Lacy and Stern-selected sources,
2484: only 41\% and 25\% are detected in the X-ray, respectively, compared
2485: to 100\% of the \plagas. The average observed 0.5-8 keV X-ray
2486: luminosity of the X-ray--detected color-selected galaxies, log~$L_{\rm
2487: x}$(ergs~s$^{-1}$)$ = 43.0$, is consistent with AGN activity, but is
2488: an order of magnitude less than that of the \plagas\ in this redshift
2489: bin, log~$L_{\rm x}$(ergs~s$^{-1}$)$ = 44.1$. This is not surprising,
2490: as power-law selection preferentially identifies the most luminous AGN
2491: where the emission from the central engine is able to overpower that
2492: of the host galaxy (Donley et al. 2007). The AGN that lie amongst the
2493: color-selected sample clearly represent a less luminous AGN population
2494: than those selected via the \plaga\ criteria. Furthermore, of the 27
2495: Lacy-selected (and 4 Stern-selected) galaxies, only 11 (2) lie outside
2496: the $1\sigma$ star-forming contours in their respective color-space,
2497: with the number dropping to 3 and 1 (2 and 0) at $2\sigma$ and
2498: $3\sigma$. This suggests that the majority of the color-selected
2499: sources in this redshift bin have infrared colors indicative of
2500: IR-normal galaxies. While all of the \plagas\ lie outside even the
2501: $3\sigma$ contours in the Lacy color-space, they lie inside the
2502: contours in Stern-space, due primarily to the Sdm template of Polletta
2503: et al. (2007), whose strong 3.3~\micron\ aromatic feature passes
2504: through the 4.5~\micron\ IRAC band at $z \sim 0.4$, causing the
2505: template to enter the Stern AGN selection region at $z=0.23-0.51$. Of
2506: the 2 \plagas\ whose colors overlap with this template, both have
2507: spectroscopic redshifts of $z>0.67$, and would therefore be 'safe' if
2508: we considered smaller redshift bins. Removing this template, however,
2509: would have no effect on the number of Lacy or Stern-selected sources
2510: that lie outside the $1\sigma$ contours.
2511:
2512: \subsubsection{$z=0.75-1.25$}
2513:
2514: We find a higher proportion of secure color-selected galaxies in the
2515: $z=0.75-1.25$ bin, with 10/12 of the Lacy-selected sources and 6/13 of
2516: the Stern-selected sources lying outside the $1\sigma$ star-forming
2517: contours. This is not surprising, as it is at $z \sim 1$ that the
2518: star-forming contours are best separated from the AGN selection
2519: region. If we extend our test to $2\sigma$, however, the numbers drop
2520: significantly, to 5/12 and 1/13. The majority of the Stern-selected
2521: galaxies in this redshift bin fill the lower-left corner of the AGN
2522: selection region, the region populated by the Stern-only sources whose
2523: Lacy colors place them in the star-forming locus of color-space.
2524: These star-forming galaxies are likely responsible for the fact that
2525: this is the only redshift bin in which the Stern-selected sources
2526: outnumber the Lacy-selected sources. Of the 5 \plagas\ in this
2527: redshift bin, all lie outside the $1 \sigma$ star-forming contours in
2528: both Lacy and Stern color-space, and while only 3 lie outside of the
2529: $2\sigma$ contours in Stern color-space, all lie outside of the
2530: $2\sigma$ and $3\sigma$ colors in Lacy color-space.
2531:
2532: \subsubsection{$z=1.25-1.75$}
2533:
2534: The number of color-selected galaxies rises significantly in the
2535: $z=1.25-1.75$ redshift bin. The fraction of potential IR-selected
2536: AGN, however, is by far the lowest at these redshifts, with only 6/38
2537: Lacy-selected sources and 3/31 Stern-selected sources falling outside
2538: the $1\sigma$ star-forming contours. In addition, only 3/38 Lacy
2539: sources and 4/31 Stern sources have X-ray counterparts, further
2540: suggesting that nearly all of the color-selected sources at this
2541: redshift are star-forming galaxies, and not AGN. In contrast, the 2
2542: \plagas\ found in this redshift bin fall outside of the
2543: $1\sigma$ contours in both the Lacy and Stern plots, and both are
2544: detected in the X-ray.
2545:
2546: \subsubsection{$z=1.75-2.25$}
2547:
2548: The largest number of Lacy-selected sources, 77, is found in the
2549: $z=1.75-2.25$ bin. In addition, an extraordinarily high fraction,
2550: 50/77, lie outside of the $1\sigma$ star-forming contours, a
2551: surprising fact given the X-ray detection fraction of only 9\%. Have
2552: we discovered a significant population of $z\sim2$ obscured AGN
2553: similar to those claimed by Daddi et al. (2007), or is there another
2554: explanation for this population?
2555:
2556: The AGN contours (shown in green) provide a better match to the IR
2557: colors of these color-selected galaxies than do the star-forming
2558: templates (shown in blue). At this redshift, the primary difference
2559: between the IRAC regions of the star-forming and the low-luminosity
2560: AGN templates is the strength of the CO index, which is stronger in
2561: the star-forming galaxies than in the AGN. The MIPS--selected sources
2562: therefore may have smaller CO indices than those of our local
2563: templates. One explanation for this offset is that an underlying AGN
2564: continuum has diluted this feature. A lower CO index, however, could
2565: also be attributed to evolution in the metallicity of the
2566: LIRGS/ULIRGS. At 1/3 solar metallicity, the CO index drops by 4-6
2567: percentage points (McGregor 1987), causing the contours to shift
2568: upwards in Lacy color space by $\sim 0.08$. While this lessens this
2569: offset between the colors of star-forming contours and the observed
2570: galaxies, it cannot fully account for the observed discrepancy. Thus,
2571: if a change in the CO index is invoked for the offset, it is likely
2572: that AGN continua are also present.
2573:
2574: However, other possible explanations exist.
2575: If we incorporate into the contours a 10\% error in (1+z) (recall that
2576: the measured $\sigma$ for our photometric redshift fits was 0.15 and
2577: that 11\% of the sources in our spectroscopic redshift sample have
2578: photometric errors $> 10\%$) the resulting contours are far-better
2579: matched to the IR-colors of the color-selected galaxies. Of the Lacy-
2580: and Stern-selected galaxies, only 17\% and 9\% now lie outside of the
2581: $1\sigma$ contours, with the numbers dropping to 8\% and 0\% at
2582: $2\sigma$ and 4\% and 0\% at $3\sigma$, respectively.
2583:
2584: The templates with which the photometric redshifts were best fit can
2585: provide further insight into the sources in this redshift bin. Of the
2586: 90 non-\plagas\ in the $z\sim 2$ bin, 75 (86\%) are best fit by a
2587: star-forming ULIRG template, 9 (10\%) are best fit by a ULIRG/hidden
2588: AGN template, 1 (1\%) is best-fit by a type 2 AGN template, and 1
2589: (1\%) is best fit by a type 1 AGN template. In contrast, all of the
2590: \plagas\ in this redshift range are best-fit by a type 2 AGN template.
2591: Therefore, while we can not rule out the possibility that we have
2592: detected a sample of high-redshift, heavily obscured AGN, the
2593: extremely low X-ray detection fraction of 9\%, the much improved fit
2594: of the contours for which 10\% errors in the photometric redshifts
2595: were included, and the overwhelming fraction of sources for which a
2596: purely star-forming ULIRG provided the best fit to the SED suggest
2597: that it is more likely that the vast majority of color-selected
2598: galaxies in this redshift bin are star-forming galaxies, not AGN.
2599:
2600: \subsubsection{$z>2.25$}
2601:
2602: The number of color-selected galaxies in the remaining two redshift
2603: bins is relatively low: 18 Lacy-selected sources and 5 Stern selected
2604: sources. Of these, a large fraction (61\% and 80\%, respectively) lie
2605: outside of the star-forming contours, which cover a comparatively
2606: small portion of the color-space. At $2\sigma$ and $3\sigma$, the
2607: fractions drop to 39\% and 11\% (Lacy) and 20\% and 0\% (Stern). At
2608: these redshifts, the X-ray detection fractions of both the
2609: color-selected sources and the \plagas\ are low: 17\% for
2610: the Lacy sources, 40\% for the Stern sources, and 23\% for the
2611: \plagas. At $z=2.5$, an unobscured AGN with $\Gamma
2612: = 2$ requires a rest-frame 0.5-8 keV luminosity of log~$L_{\rm
2613: x}$(ergs~s$^{-1}$)$ = 42.8$ to meet the flux limit within 1$^{\prime}$
2614: of the CDF-S aimpoint. At $z=3$, the required value rises to
2615: log~$L_{\rm x}$(ergs~s$^{-1}$)$ = 43.0$, suggesting that if these
2616: sources are AGN, they must have low luminosities, or high obscuring
2617: columns.
2618:
2619: \subsubsection{$z={\rm unknown}$}
2620:
2621: Not all sources in our sample have redshift estimates. The redshift
2622: completeness for the Lacy and Stern color-selected samples is high
2623: (93\% and 90\%, respectively), but we have high-quality redshifts for
2624: only 49\% of the \plagas. The difficulty in fitting redshifts to
2625: these sources stems largely from their faint fluxes: the power-law
2626: (color-selected) galaxies without redshifts are significantly fainter,
2627: $V=26.2$ ($25.3$), than those with redshift estimates, $V=25.4$
2628: ($V=24.9$), suggesting that these sources may preferentially lie at
2629: high redshift.
2630:
2631: The last panels of Figures 5 and 6 show the IRAC colors of
2632: sources without redshift estimates. Overplotted are the star-forming
2633: contours for $z=0-4$. Of the sources without redshifts, all but 1 lie
2634: inside the Lacy selection region and all but 9 lie inside the Stern
2635: selection region. This is not surprising, as sources with non-stellar
2636: continua are the hardest sources to fit. Of the 13 Lacy-selected
2637: sources, 5 lie outside the $1\sigma$ star-forming contours, and 2 have
2638: X-ray counterparts. Of the 26 \plagas, 11 lie outside the $1\sigma$
2639: star-forming contours, and 6 are X-ray--detected. There is a
2640: noticeable concentration of X-ray non-detected \plagas\ towards the
2641: red end of the power-law locus. These sources are discussed in
2642: more detail in \S6.
2643:
2644:
2645: \end{document}
2646:
2647:
2648: