1: %%
2: %% Beginning of file 'sample.tex'
3: %%
4: %% Modified 2005 December 5
5: %%
6: %% This is a sample manuscript marked up using the
7: %% AASTeX v5.x LaTeX 2e macros.
8:
9: %% The first piece of markup in an AASTeX v5.x document
10: %% is the \documentclass command. LaTeX will ignore
11: %% any data that comes before this command.
12:
13: %% The command below calls the preprint style
14: %% which will produce a one-column, single-spaced document.
15: %% Examples of commands for other substyles follow. Use
16: %% whichever is most appropriate for your purposes.
17: %%
18:
19: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
20:
21: %% manuscript produces a one-column, double-spaced document:
22:
23: %%\documentclass[manuscript]{aastex}
24:
25: %% preprint2 produces a double-column, single-spaced document:
26:
27: %%\documentclass[preprint2]{aastex}
28:
29: %% Sometimes a paper's abstract is too long to fit on the
30: %% title page in preprint2 mode. When that is the case,
31: %% use the longabstract style option.
32:
33: %% \documentclass[preprint2,longabstract]{aastex}
34:
35: %% If you want to create your own macros, you can do so
36: %% using \newcommand. Your macros should appear before
37: %% the \begin{document} command.
38: %%
39: %% If you are submitting to a journal that translates manuscripts
40: %% into SGML, you need to follow certain guidelines when preparing
41: %% your macros. See the AASTeX v5.x Author Guide
42: %% for information.
43:
44: \newcommand{\vdag}{(v)^\dagger}
45: \newcommand{\myemail}{ikeda@astro.phys.sci.ehime-u.ac.jp}
46:
47: %% You can insert a short comment on the title page using the command below.
48:
49: \slugcomment{}
50:
51: %% If you wish, you may supply running head information, although
52: %% this information may be modified by the editorial offices.
53: %% The left head contains a list of authors,
54: %% usually a maximum of three (otherwise use et al.). The right
55: %% head is a modified title of up to roughly 44 characters.
56: %% Running heads will not print in the manuscript style.
57:
58: \shorttitle{Study on X-ray spectra of obscured AGNs}
59: \shortauthors{S. Ikeda et al.}
60:
61: %% This is the end of the preamble. Indicate the beginning of the
62: %% paper itself with \begin{document}.
63:
64: \begin{document}
65:
66: %% LaTeX will automatically break titles if they run longer than
67: %% one line. However, you may use \\ to force a line break if
68: %% you desire.
69:
70: \title{Study on X-ray Spectra of Obscured AGNs based on Monte Carlo simulation - an interpretation of observed wide-band spectra
71: %%Study on the connection between X-ray spectrum and structure of AGN based on Monte Carlo simulation
72: }
73:
74: %% Use \author, \affil, and the \and command to format
75: %% author and affiliation information.
76: %% Note that \email has replaced the old \authoremail command
77: %% from AASTeX v4.0. You can use \email to mark an email address
78: %% anywhere in the paper, not just in the front matter.
79: %% As in the title, use \\ to force line breaks.
80:
81: \author{Shinya Ikeda\altaffilmark{1}, Hisamitu Awaki\altaffilmark{1}, and Yuichi Terashima\altaffilmark{1}}
82: \affil{Department of Physics, Ehime University, Matsuyama, 790-8577, Japan}
83:
84: \email{awaki@astro.phys.sci.ehime-u.ac.jp}
85:
86: %\and
87:
88: %\author{anyone\altaffilmark{5}}
89: %\affil{There or thereabout}
90:
91: %% Notice that each of these authors has alternate affiliations, which
92: %% are identified by the \altaffilmark after each name. Specify alternate
93: %% affiliation information with \altaffiltext, with one command per each
94: %% affiliation.
95:
96: %% \altaffiltext{1}{Department of Physics, Ehime University, Matsuyama, 790-8577, Japan}
97:
98: %\altaffiltext{1}{Visiting Astronomer, Cerro Tololo Inter-American Observatory.
99: %CTIO is operated by AURA, Inc.\ under contract to the National Science
100: %Foundation.}
101: %\altaffiltext{2}{Society of Fellows, Harvard University.}
102: %\altaffiltext{3}{present address: Center for Astrophysics,
103: % 60 Garden Street, Cambridge, MA 02138}
104: %\altaffiltext{4}{Visiting Programmer, Space Telescope Science Institute}
105: %\altaffiltext{5}{Patron, Alonso's Bar and Grill}
106:
107: %% Mark off your abstract in the ``abstract'' environment. In the manuscript
108: %% style, abstract will output a Received/Accepted line after the
109: %% title and affiliation information. No date will appear since the author
110: %% does not have this information. The dates will be filled in by the
111: %% editorial office after submission.
112:
113: \pagebreak
114:
115: \begin{abstract}
116: Monte Carlo simulation is one of the best tools to study the complex spectra of Compton-thick AGNs
117: and to figure out the relation between their nuclear structures and X-ray spectra.
118: We have simulated X-ray spectra of Compton-thick AGNs obscured by an accretion torus
119: whose structure is characterized by a half-opening angle, an inclination angle of the torus relative to the observer, and a column
120: density along the equatorial plane. We divided the simulated spectra into three components:
121: one direct component, an absorbed reflection component and an unabsorbed reflection component. We
122: then deduced the dependencies of these components on the parameters describing the structure
123: of the torus. Our simulation results were
124: applied to fit the wide-band spectrum of the Seyfert 2 galaxy
125: Mrk 3 obtained by $Suzaku$. The spectral analysis indicates that we observe the nucleus along a line of sight
126: intercepting the torus near its edge,
127: and the column density along the equatorial plane was estimated to be
128: $\sim$10$^{24}$ cm$^{-2}$. Using this model, we can estimate the luminosities of
129: both the direct emission and the emission irradiating the surrounding matter.
130: This is useful to find the time variability and time lag between the direct and reflected light.
131:
132: \end{abstract}
133:
134: %% Keywords should appear after the \end{abstract} command. The uncommented
135: %% example has been keyed in ApJ style. See the instructions to authors
136: %% for the journal to which you are submitting your paper to determine
137: %% what keyword punctuation is appropriate.
138:
139: \keywords{galaxies: active --- galaxies: Seyfert --- radiative transfer --- X-rays: individual (Mrk3) }
140:
141: %% From the front matter, we move on to the body of the paper.
142: %% In the first two sections, notice the use of the natbib \citep
143: %% and \citet commands to identify citations. The citations are
144: %% tied to the reference list via symbolic KEYs. The KEY corresponds
145: %% to the KEY in the \bibitem in the reference list below. We have
146: %% chosen the first three characters of the first author's name plus
147: %% the last two numeral of the year of publication as our KEY for
148: %% each reference.
149:
150: %% Authors who wish to have the most important objects in their paper
151: %% linked in the electronic edition to a data center may do so by tagging
152: %% their objects with \objectname{} or \object{}. Each macro takes the
153: %% object name as its required argument. The optional, square-bracket
154: %% argument should be used in cases where the data center identification
155: %% differs from what is to be printed in the paper. The text appearing
156: %% in curly braces is what will appear in print in the published paper.
157: %% If the object name is recognized by the data centers, it will be linked
158: %% in the electronic edition to the object data available at the data centers
159: %%
160: %% Note that for sources with brackets in their names, e.g., [WEG2004] 14h-090,
161: %% the brackets must be escaped with backslashes when used in the first
162: %% square-bracket argument, for instance, \object[\[WEG2004\] 14h-090]{90}).
163: %% Otherwise, LaTeX will issue an error.
164:
165: \section{Introduction}
166:
167: Active galactic nuclei (AGN) emit huge amounts of energy as
168: a result of accretion of matter onto
169: supermassive black holes (hereafter SMBHs). Strong hard X-ray emission from these nuclei
170: %%is thought to be non-thermal, and
171: can be represented by power-law emission with a canonical photon
172: index of ${\sim}$1.9. The strong emission irradiates material around the SMBH, leading to
173: reprocessing of the emission. Observation of the reprocessed emission is conducive to revealing
174: the environment of the black hole, and hence
175: help to understand the problems of the fuel supply and evolution
176: of SMBHs.
177:
178: Compton-thick AGNs are suitable for the study of the reprocessed emission in AGNs, since
179: their reprocessed emission dominates over the direct emission below 10 keV due to large
180: column density $N_{\rm H}>10^{24}$ $\rm{cm^{-2}}$. In addition,
181: Compton-thick AGNs are thought to be abundant in the local universe \citep[e.g.,][]{risa99}.
182: Thus, these objects are important for understanding some key problems in AGN research, for example synthesis
183: modeling of the Cosmic X-ray Background \citep[e.g.,][]{ueda03} and the growth of AGNs.
184: However, their spectra are so complex that the detailed nature of Compton-thick AGNs has thus far been unclear.
185: There is another problem for spectral analyses of Compton-thick AGNs. The baseline model
186: based on previous observations, which consists of both a direct and a reflection
187: component, has been used to reproduce the complex X-ray spectra of Compton-thick AGNs
188: \citep[e.g.,][]{mz95, cappi99}. This model worked well for reproducing their spectra,
189: and has contributed to our understanding of AGN.
190: However, it is difficult to obtain information about the structure of the surrounding material from spectral
191: fitting with this baseline model because the reflection model was developed for an accretion disc geometry.
192: Thus, the reflection model does not match exactly with the actual reflection from the material around the black hole.
193: Therefore we need a model that represents actual X-ray emission from the surrounding material using detailed Monte Carlo simulations.
194:
195: Previous work that has investigated AGN X-ray spectra
196: by means of Monte Carlo simulations so far includes the following.
197: \citet{gf91} assumed a semi-infinite, plane-parallel configuration, and they calculated reflection from a plane-parallel slab. \citet{wf99} computed transmission through a homogeneous sphere of cold material with a radius determined by its column density.
198: \citet{awaki91} and \citet{ghi94} computed X-ray spectra emitted from AGNs and assumed a torus
199: structure which has an open reflecting area characterized by
200: its half-opening angle.
201: However, these results were not applied
202: to make available convenient spectral-fitting models to reproduce the X-ray spectrum of,
203: for example, a Seyfert 2 galaxy.
204:
205: We assume surrounding material with a 3D torus configuration and then simulate a spectrum
206: from an AGN, considering the effect of Compton down-scattering and absorption.
207: Performing Monte Carlo simulations, we investigate the relation between continuum emissions and the structure of the torus.
208: Furthermore, the strength of iron line is important to reveal the existence of a hidden nucleus \citep[e.g.,][]{maiolino98}. Thus, we also investigate a dependency of the iron line
209: on the structure of the torus. We apply our simulation results to the spectral
210: fitting of the X-ray spectrum of Mrk 3 observed with $Suzaku$, thereby constraining the structure of
211: the torus in this Seyfert 2 galaxy.
212:
213:
214:
215: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
216:
217: \section{Model Definition and Calculation}
218:
219: %% In a manner similar to \objectname authors can provide links to dataset
220: %% hosted at participating data centers via the \dataset{} command. The
221: %% second curly bracket argument is printed in the text while the first
222: %% parentheses argument serves as the valid data set identifier. Large
223: %% lists of data set are best provided in a table (see Table 3 for an example).
224: %% Valid data set identifiers should be obtained from the data center that
225: %% is currently hosting the data.
226: %%
227: %% Note that AASTeX interprets everything between the curly braces in the
228: %% macro as regular text, so any special characters, e.g., "#" or "_," must be
229: %% preceded by a backslash. Otherwise, you will get a LaTeX error when you
230: %% compile your manuscript. Special characters do not
231: %% need to be escaped in the optional, square-bracket argument.
232:
233: \subsection{Basic Assumptions}
234: In our Monte Carlo simulation, we adopted a standard spherical coordinate system with the radial
235: distance ($r$) from the origin, the zenith angle (${\theta}$) from the Z-axis, and the azimuthal angle
236: (${\phi}$) from the X-axis. A primary radiation source was placed at the origin, and illuminates the
237: surrounding material.
238: The material was assumed to be neutral and cold (T ${\leq}$ $10^{6}$ K).
239:
240: We took into account photoelectric absorption, iron fluorescence, and Compton scattering in our simulation.
241: %%The photoelectric absorption cross-section, ${\sigma}_{\rm{abs}}$, was calculated by summing
242: %%photoelectric absorption cross-sections of H, He, C, N, O, Ne, Mg, Si, S, and Fe.
243: %%The cross-section of each element was deduced by using the NIST
244: %% XCOM database\footnote{http://physics.nist.gov/PhysRefData/Xcom/Text/XCOM.html} and
245: %% the cosmic elemental abundances of \citet{ag89}. Note that the cross-section by \citet{bm92} is not valid
246: %% for energies above 10 keV, and that the NIST cross-section in the 1--100 keV band is nearly equal to that by \citet{vern96} which is identified as $vern$ in $XSPEC$ (see Figure 1).
247: The photoelectric absorption cross-section, ${\sigma}_{\rm{abs}}$, was calculated by using the NIST
248: XCOM database \footnote{http://physics.nist.gov/PhysRefData/Xcom/Text/XCOM.html}
249: and
250: the cosmic elemental abundances of \citet{ag89}.
251: We also calculated the photoelectric absorption cross-section of Fe
252: for deciding iron absorption events.
253: Note that the cross-section by \citet{bm92} is not valid
254: for energies above 10 keV, and that the NIST cross-section in the 1--100
255: keV band is nearly equal to that by
256: \citet{vern96} which is identified as $vern$ in $XSPEC$ (see Figure 1).
257: %%
258: The Compton scattering cross-section, ${\sigma}_{\rm{es}}$, was calculated with the Klein-Nishina formula.
259: The number density of electrons, $n_{\rm{es}}$, for Compton scattering
260: was related to the effective hydrogen number density, $n_{\rm{H}}$, by $n_{\rm{es}}$ = 1.2 $n_{\rm{H}}$.
261:
262: We used the iron K-shell fluorescence yield of 0.34 \citep{bamby72} and a ratio 17:150
263: between the iron $\rm{K}_{\beta}$ and $\rm{K}_{\alpha}$ fluorescence line transition
264: probabilities \citep{kikoin76}. Although the iron $\rm{K}_{\alpha}$ fluorescence line consists
265: of two components, $\rm{K}_{\alpha1}$ and $\rm{K}_{\alpha2}$ at 6.404 and 6.391 keV,
266: respectively (for neutral iron) with a branching ratio of 2:1 \citep{bamby72}, we made no
267: distinction between $\rm{K}_{\alpha1}$ and $\rm{K}_{\alpha2}$ photons, adopting a
268: common value of 6.40 keV. The iron $\rm{K}_{\beta}$ line is 7.06 keV for neutral iron.
269:
270: \subsection{Monte Carlo Simulation}
271:
272: A cross section view of the adopted structure of the torus is illustrated in Figure 2. The center of the torus is
273: placed at the origin of the coordinate system, and the equatorial plane of the torus structure lies in the X-Y plane. The structure of
274: the torus is described by the following structure parameters: the half-opening angle ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$, the column density $N_{\rm{H}}$ along the equatorial plane, and inner ($r_{\rm{in}}$) and outer ($r_{\rm{out}}$) radii of the
275: torus. We assumed $r_{\rm{in}}$/$r_{\rm{out}}$ = 0.01 in our simulation. The angle
276: ${\theta}_{\rm i}$ in Figure 2 presents the inclination angle of the torus relative to the observer.
277:
278: A ray-trace method was adopted in our Monte Carlo simulation. The primary X-ray source was
279: assumed to emit photons with the energy spectrum, $I(E) \ {\propto} \ E^{-0.9} {\exp}(-E/E_{c})$, where
280: $E_{c}$ is a cut-off energy fixed at 360 keV. The spectrum is typical for Type 1 AGNs
281: \citep[e.g.,][]{madau94}.
282: The primary X-ray source was assumed to be isotropic.
283: Each photon from the primary source had both an initial energy and an initial direction of propagation.
284: In the case that a photon was injected into the torus, an interaction point of the photon was calculated by
285: using a random number (see below). If the Compton scattering occurred at that point,
286: the energy and the direction of photon was changed.
287: The photon was tracked until it escaped the torus structure, or until it was absorbed in the torus.
288: Note that when the photon with an energy above iron K-edge was absorbed by iron, a K-shell fluorescence
289: line was isotropically emitted with a probability of the K-shell fluorescence yield in our simulation, where
290: the iron absorption event was decided by using the ratio between the photoelectric absorption of iron and
291: $\sigma_{\rm abs}$.
292: Both energies and directions of propagation of all escaping photons were recorded in a photon list.
293: For a given observed torus inclination angle of ${\theta}_{\rm i}$ (see Figure 2),
294: we extracted photons whose zenith angles of propagation ranged within ${\theta}_{\rm i}$$\pm$
295: 1$^{\circ}$, from the photon list, and then
296: the extracted photons were accumulated into energy bins to form a spectrum.
297:
298: The photon transportation in the torus is a key technique in our Monte Carlo simulation.
299: The distance $l$ to the next interaction is determined by the probability $p$,
300: which is described as follows:
301:
302: \begin{equation}
303: p = \exp(-{\tau})={\int}_{0}^{l} {\exp}(-{\sigma}_{\rm tot}~ n_{\rm H})dl,
304: \label{eq:distance_1}
305: \end{equation}
306:
307: \noindent
308: where ${\tau}$ and $\sigma_{\rm{tot}}$ are an optical depth and the total cross section
309: of the interaction, respectively.
310: The ${\sigma}_{\rm{tot}}$ is comprised of the sum of ${\sigma}_{\rm{abs}}$ and ${\sigma}_{\rm{es}}$.
311: By inverting the cumulative probability function, $l$ is expressed as
312: \begin{equation}
313: l = \frac{ {\tau} } { n_{\rm{H}} {\sigma}_{\rm{tot} } }= -\frac{1}{n_{\rm{H}}{\sigma}_{\rm{tot}}}{\times}{\rm{ln}}(p).
314: \label{eq:distance_l}
315: \end{equation}
316:
317: \noindent
318: The distance $l$ is calculated from a uniform random number between 0
319: and 1 referred to as $p$.
320:
321: Another key in our simulation is Compton scattering. The scattering angle, ${\theta}_{\rm{scat}}$ (relative to its direction of propagation), is calculated by the differential cross-section for Compton scattering.
322: We assumed that the differential cross-section was proportional to (1+$\cos^{2}{\theta}_{\rm{scat}}$),
323: as for the Thomson differential cross-section, since this approximation is efficient for analysis of the $Suzaku$ data
324: below a few hundreds keV \citep[e.g.,][]{gf91}. We note that this assumption over-estimates back-scattering relative to forward
325: scattering at high energies. The effect of this approximation is seen in the reflection components,
326: and depends on the geometry and $N_{\rm H}$ of the torus. In order to estimate the effect, we performed a
327: simulation in the case of $\theta_{\rm oa}$=40$^{\circ}$, $\theta_{\rm i}$=41$^{\circ}$, and
328: $N_{\rm H}$=10$^{25}$ cm$^{-2}$, and found that the change of the reflection components
329: due to this assumption was $\sim$10\% at 100~keV.
330: %%At 100~keV, the back-scattering Klein-Nishina differential cross-section is $\sim 53\%$ of
331: %%the corresponding Thomson approximation.
332:
333: The azimuthal angle of the scattering, ${\phi}_{\rm{scat}}$, was randomly selected in the region
334: 0$^{\circ}$ ${\leq}$ ${\phi}_{\rm{scat}}$ $<$ 360$^{\circ}$.
335: The energy of the scattered photon was changed to be $E_{\rm in}$/(1+$\frac{E_{\rm in}}{mc^{2}}$(1$-$cos${\theta}_{\rm{scat}}$ )), where $m$ and $E_{\rm in}$ are electron mass and energy of the photon before Compton scattering, respectively \citep[e.g.,][]{rybicki}.
336:
337: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
338:
339: %% In this section, we use the \subsection command to set off
340: %% a subsection. \footnote is used to insert a footnote to the text.
341: %% Observe the use of the LaTeX \label
342: %% command after the \subsection to give a symbolic KEY to the
343: %% subsection for cross-referencing in a \ref command.
344: %% You can use LaTeX's \ref and \label commands to keep track of
345: %% cross-references to sections, equations, tables, and figures.
346: %% That way, if you change the order of any elements, LaTeX will
347: %% automatically renumber them.
348:
349: %% This section also includes several of the displayed math environments
350: %% mentioned in the Author Guide.
351:
352: \section{Results}
353:
354: \subsection{Simulation Results} \label{bozomath}
355:
356: Figure 3 is an example of a simulated AGN spectrum with $N_{\rm{H}}$ = $10^{24} \ \rm{cm}^{-2}$,
357: ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$ = 40$^{\circ}$, and ${\theta}_{\rm i}$ = 45$^{\circ}$.
358: We generated a total number of 2.5$\times$10$^{8}$ photons. %%with the spectrum $I(E)$.
359: The same number
360: of photons were generated for each run throughout this paper.
361: We separated the simulated spectrum into direct and reflection components, where
362: the direct component has no interaction with the surrounding material, while the reflection component
363: consists of X-ray photons reflected in the surrounding material. Since an reflection component,
364: which was modeled by $pexrav$ in XSPEC, was required in the $Suzaku$ spectrum of Mrk 3 by
365: \citet{awaki08}, we divided the simulated reflection component into two, which are referred to as
366: the reflection components 1 and 2.
367: The reflection component 2 consists of photons emitted from the inner wall of the torus without obscuration by the torus. The reflection component 1 consists of the rest of
368: the reflected photons (see Figure 2).
369: We have studied the parameter dependence of these three components based on the
370: simulations with various $N_{\rm{H}}$, ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$, and ${\theta}_{\rm i}$.
371:
372:
373: \subsection{Dependence of the Continuum Emission on the Structure Parameters}
374:
375: \subsubsection{$N_{\rm{H}}$ Dependence}
376: For studying the $N_{\rm{H}}$ dependence, we simulated spectra of the three components with
377: $N_{\rm{H}}$ = $5{\times}10^{23}, 10^{24}, 2{\times}10^{24}, 3{\times}10^{24}, 5{\times}10^{24}$,
378: and $10^{25} \ \rm{cm}^{-2}$, and the simulated components are shown in Figure 4.
379: In these runs, we set ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$ = 40$^{\circ}$ and ${\theta}_{\rm i}$ = 50$^{\circ}$.
380: All the three components, especially the direct component, show a dependence on $N_{\rm{H}}$.
381: It is expected
382: that the direct component is affected only by the column density ($N^{\rm ls}$) along our line of sight.
383: We compared the simulated direct components with the cut-off power-law models, which
384: were affected by both photoelectric absorption and Compton scattering (Figure 5).
385: It is found that the models were in good agreement with the simulated direct components.
386: Please note that the column density $N^{\rm ls}$ is a function of
387: $\theta_{\rm i}$, $\theta_{\rm oa}$ and the ratio $r_{\rm in}/r_{\rm out}$ (=$r$).
388: The ratio of $N^{\rm ls}$ to the $N_{\rm H}$ is described as
389:
390: \begin{equation}
391: N^{\rm ls}/N_{\rm H}=\frac{r(\cos\theta_{\rm i}-\cos\theta_{\rm oa})+\sin(\theta_{\rm i}-\theta_{\rm oa})}{(1-r)(r\cos\theta_{\rm i}+\sin(\theta_{\rm i}-\theta_{\rm oa})}.
392: \label{eq:NH}
393: \end{equation}
394:
395: \noindent
396: In the case of $r$=0.01, ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$ = 40$^{\circ}$, and
397: ${\theta}_{\rm i}$ = 50$^{\circ}$, for example, the value of $N^{\rm ls}/N_{\rm H}$ is deduced to be 0.97.
398:
399: \subsubsection{Dependence on the Half-opening Angle, ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$}
400:
401: Three components depended on the half-opening angle, ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$, but we discuss the
402: ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$-dependence of only the reflection components 1 and 2, since the
403: ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$-dependence of the direct component, which is affected by $N^{ls}$, has been
404: described by equation 3.
405:
406: The left panel in Figure 6 shows simulated spectra of the reflection component 1 for ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$ =
407: $10^{\circ} - 70^{\circ}$ in steps of 10$^{\circ}$. The values of $N_{\rm{H}}$ and ${\theta}_{\rm i}$ were
408: fixed at $10^{24} \ \rm{cm}^{-2}$ and $90^{\circ}$ in these runs, respectively.
409: The spectral shape of the reflection component 1 has a small dependence on ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$, and the
410: total photon count
411: in the reflection component 1 decreases with increasing $\theta_{\rm oa}$. We plot the total count
412: in Figure 7. Since
413: some photons emitted from the central source escape through the opening area of the torus, the intensity of
414: the reflection component 1 is dependent upon ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$. We compared the total counts of this
415: component with the covering fraction of the torus, $\cos \theta_{\rm oa}$. In the right panel in Figure 8,
416: we plot the normalized total counts, which are divided by the total counts in the case of spherical
417: distribution of the surrounding material. It is found
418: that the ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$-dependence of the reflection component 1 can be roughly explained
419: by the covering fraction of the surrounding material.
420: For large $N_{\rm H}$ of 10$^{25}$ cm$^{-2}$, the total counts do not
421: follow this $\theta_{\rm oa}$-dependence as for low $N_{\rm H}$ due to the absorption of the reflection component
422: by the torus itself.
423:
424:
425: The right panel in Figure 6 shows the ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$-dependence of the reflection component 2.
426: In these runs, we set ${\theta}_{\rm i}$=${\theta}_{\rm oa}$+1$^{\circ}$ in order to obtain a high intensity
427: of the reflection component 2 under the condition that the nucleus is obscured by the torus.
428: The total count of the
429: reflection component 2 are shown in Figure 7. It is found that
430: the reflection component 2 is to be zero at both ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$ =0 and 90$^{\circ}$, and has a
431: maximum intensity at ${\theta}_{\rm oa} \ {\sim} \ 30^{\circ}$.
432: The reflection component 2 is emitted from the visible inner wall of the torus.
433: Thus, this component vanishes at ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$ =0 due to there being no inner wall.
434: This component is also associated with the total number of photons injected into the torus from the central
435: source, which is related to the solid angle of the torus. Therefore,
436: the intensity of the reflection component 2 is associated with a combination of both apparent
437: size of the visible inner wall of the torus and solid angle of the torus, i.e.
438: $\cos \theta_{\rm oa} \cos (2\theta_{\rm oa}-\pi/2)$. The left panel in Figure 8 shows the total counts of the
439: reflection component 2 in $N_{\rm H}$=10$^{23}$, 10$^{24}$, and 10$^{25}$ cm$^{-2}$.
440: For the case of $N_{\rm H}$=10$^{25}$ cm$^{-2}$, the $\theta_{\rm oa}$-dependence is well
441: reproduced by the combination described as $\cos \theta_{\rm oa} \cos (2\theta_{\rm oa}-\pi/2)$,
442: since the reflection occurs mainly on the inner surface of the torus.
443:
444:
445: \subsubsection{Dependence on the Inclination Angle ${\theta}_{\rm i}$}
446:
447: We show simulated spectra of the reflection components for ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$=10$^{\circ}$ with
448: ${\theta}_{\rm i}$=$11^{\circ}$ to
449: $71^{\circ}$ in steps of 20$^{\circ}$ in Figure 9, and show the total counts at
450: ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$=10$^{\circ}$ and 30$^{\circ}$ against ${\theta}_{\rm i}$ from 1$^{\circ}$ to 89$^{\circ}$
451: in steps of 2$^{\circ}$ in Figure 10. In these runs, $N_{\rm{H}}$ was fixed at $10^{24} \ \rm{cm}^{-2}$.
452: The reflection component 1 has a weak ${\theta}_{\rm i}$-dependence (see Figure 9), and has a
453: similar intensity in ${\theta}_{\rm i}$ $>$ ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$ +10$^{\circ}$ (Figure 10). The
454: ${\theta}_{\rm i}$-dependence is consistent with the fact that the reflection component 1 depends on the
455: covering factor of the surrounding material as mentioned in the previous subsection.
456: The unified model of Seyfert galaxies predicts that ${\theta}_{\rm i}$ is larger than ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$
457: in Seyfert 2 galaxies. Thus, for most Seyfert 2 galaxies, the reflection component 1 should show a
458: small ${\theta}_{\rm i}$-dependence, and this component should depend on mainly $\theta_{\rm oa}$ and
459: $N_{\rm H}$ of the torus. In the case of $\theta_{\rm oa}$ $<$ $\theta_{\rm i}$ $<$ $\theta_{\rm oa}$+10$^{\circ}$,
460: the reflection component 1 should have a strong $\theta_{\rm i}$-dependence.
461:
462: The reflection component 2 shows a strong ${\theta}_{\rm i}$-dependence (Figure 9), because the component
463: is emitted from the visible inner wall, whose area is decreasing with increasing ${\theta}_{\rm i}$.
464: If we observe the source edge-on, i.e.; $\theta_{\rm i}$
465: =90$^{\circ}$, the area of the wall is apparently zero for the observer. On the other hand, if we observe the
466: source face-on, i.e.; $\theta_{\rm i}$=0$^{\circ}$, the projected area (i.e. the area projected onto the sky,
467: perpendicular to the line of sight) is largest. The $\theta_{\rm i}$-dependence of the reflection component
468: 2 is roughly explained only by that of the projected area.
469: Note that larger portion of the projected area, or the visible inner region, is obscured by
470: the near side of the torus with increasing $\theta_{\rm i}$ in $\theta_{\rm i}$ $>$ $\theta_{\rm oa}$.
471: The spectral shape of the reflection component 2 is also affected by ${\theta}_{\rm i}$ as shown in Figure 9.
472: With increasing $\theta_{\rm i}$, the low-energy cut off becomes more pronounced. This is because
473: only X-rays reflected from the visible inner region of the torus (see Figure 2) contribute to the reflection
474: component 2, as defined.
475: Some photons emitted from the central source enter the far side
476: of the torus and Compton scattered. A part of the scattered photons
477: are absorbed inside the torus before they ever reach the visible
478: inner region. Since the length of the path of such photons increases
479: with $\theta_{\rm i}$, more photons are absorbed before they reach
480: the visible region.
481: %%Some X-rays injected from the central source into the torus are absorbed before
482: %%they reach the visible inner region. For increasing $\theta_{\rm i}$, the distance to the visible region
483: %% from the central source is increasing, and more of the soft X-rays are absorbed before reflection.
484: As a result, we can see a ${\theta}_{\rm i}$-dependence on the spectral shape.
485:
486: \subsubsection{Note on dependence on $r_{\rm{in}}$/$r_{\rm{out}}$}
487:
488: The ratio $r_{\rm in}/r_{\rm out}$ (=$r$) was fixed at 0.01 in our simulation. We briefly discuss
489: the spectral dependence on this ratio.
490: We simulated the reflection components with different values of the ratio, 0.001, 0.01, 0.1, and 1. In these
491: runs, $N_{\rm{H}}$, ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$, and ${\theta}_{\rm i}$ were set to be $10^{24} \ \rm{cm}^{-2}$,
492: 40$^{\circ}$, and $41^{\circ}$, respectively.
493: The reflection component 1 shows a very weak dependence on this ratio,
494: since these simulations were carried out for the same ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$, and this component depends
495: mainly on the covering fraction of the torus.
496: On the other hand, the reflection component 2 below $\sim$ 4 keV depends on the ratio $r$
497: (Figure 11). Reflections occur more frequently than absorption at the inner
498: region of the torus. Thus, in the case of the small $r$,
499: the closest region to the source is obscured by the torus, since we consider the case of Seyfert 2 galaxies,
500: ${\theta}_{\rm i}$ $>$ ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$. This effect is also seen in the ${\theta}_{\rm i}$ dependence
501: of the reflection component 2 (see Figure 9).
502: This study indicates that it is difficult to produce a strong unabsorbed reflection-component in our
503: simple torus geometry with a small $r$ (=0.001).
504:
505: \subsection{X-ray luminosity absorbed by the torus}
506:
507: In our simulation, X-rays emitted from the central source were absorbed by the dusty torus.
508: %%It is useful to investigate the X-ray luminosity absorbed by the torus for understanding the correlation
509: %%between infrared and X-ray luminosites of AGNs, since the dusty torus is heated by optical, UV, and
510: %%X-ray photons from the central source.
511: It is important to compare the absorbed X-ray luminosity with the infrared luminosity, since
512: the infrared luminosity is a good indicator for the absorbing luminosity in the torus.
513: We estimated the fraction of the absorbed luminosity with respect to the intrinsic
514: source luminosity.
515: The intrinsic luminosity of the central X-ray source was calculated from the assumed spectrum in
516: section 2.2, and the absorbed X-ray luminosity was derived from the subtraction of an output luminosity from
517: the intrinsic luminosity, where the output luminosity was deduced from a total energy of the escaping
518: photons from the torus structure.
519: Figure 12 shows the absorbing fraction to the 1--100 keV intrinsic luminosity as a function of
520: $\theta_{\rm oa}$ in $N_{\rm H}$=10$^{22}$, 10$^{23}$, 10$^{24}$, and 10$^{25}$ cm$^{-2}$. The
521: dependence of the absorbing fraction is roughly explained by $\cos$ $\theta_{\rm oa}$, which displays the
522: covering fraction of the dusty torus. In the case of $N_{\rm H}$ = 1$\times$10$^{24}$ cm$^{-2}$ and
523: $\theta_{\rm oa}$=45$^{\circ}$, the absorbing fraction of 0.37 is obtained, and the absorbed luminosity is estimated to
524: be 1.1$\times$10$^{43}$ erg s$^{-1}$ for the 1--100 keV intrinsic luminosity of 3$\times$10$^{43}$ erg
525: s$^{-1}$, which corresponds to the 2--10 keV intrinsic luminosity of 1$\times$10$^{43}$ erg s$^{-1}$.
526:
527: The infrared luminosity has a good correlation with the 2--10 keV luminosity. By using the relation between
528: these luminosities by Mulchaey et al. (1994), the infrared luminosity for an AGN with the 2--10 keV X-ray luminosity of 1$\times$10$^{43}$
529: erg s$^{-1}$ is
530: estimated to be 10$^{44}$ erg s$^{-1}$, which is about 10 times larger than the absorbed X-ray luminosity.
531: The dust in the torus is heated by optical and UV photons as well as X-ray photons. Our study shows an estimation of the fraction of the absorbed X-ray luminosity to dust heating.
532: We indicate that the absorbed luminosity depends on the geometry of the torus, $\theta_{\rm oa}$ in
533: Figure 12. Lutz et al. (2004) pointed out that
534: the scatter in the relation between mid-infrared and absorption corrected hard X-ray luminosities was about
535: one order of magnitude, and that the scatter was likely caused by the geometry of the absorbing dust.
536: The scatter seen in the relation may be explained by the $\theta_{\rm oa}$-dependence of the absorbed
537: luminosity.
538:
539: \subsection{Dependence of the Iron-line Emission on the Structure Parameters}
540: A prominent iron line with an equivalent width of $>$ a few 100 eV is an important characteristic
541: of Seyfert 2 galaxies. The dependence of the equivalent width of the iron line on the structure parameters of the
542: torus have been studied in previous work \citep[e.g.,][]{awaki91, ghi94, levenson02}.
543: These studies were mainly
544: performed for the equivalent width relative to the total continuum emission, comprised of the
545: sum of the direct and reflection components. In our study, we have
546: investigated the equivalent width relative to the reflection component (hereafter $EW_{\rm ref}$) as
547: well as the equivalent width to the total continuum emission (hereafter $EW_{\rm tot}$). In Figures
548: 13 and 14, we plot the equivalent width as a function of $N_{\rm H}$ and $\theta_{\rm oa}$
549: respectively (note that for $\theta_{\rm oa}$=0 we use a spherical distribution instead of
550: using our simple torus model with $\theta_{\rm oa}$=0).
551:
552: The left panel in Figure 13 shows the $N_{\rm H}$-dependence of $EW_{\rm tot}$ fixed at
553: $\theta_{\rm oa}$=30$^{\circ}$. We found that the $N_{\rm H}$-dependence is similar to
554: those of previous studies, although our results are about 1.7 times
555: larger than those obtained by \citet{ghi94}. The difference may be caused by the difference
556: of iron abundance used in the simulations. The right panel in Figure 13 shows the $\theta_{\rm oa}$-dependence of $EW_{\rm tot}$.
557: %In Figure 13, we plot the equivalent width for the spherical distribution at $\theta_{oa}$=0, instead of
558: %$\theta_{oa}$=0 in our simple torus model.
559: The $EW_{\rm tot}$ in the Compton-thin region ( $N_{\rm H}$ $<$ 10$^{24}$ cm$^{-2}$)
560: decreases with increasing $\theta_{\rm oa}$. This
561: $\theta_{\rm oa}$-dependence is represented by a function of $\cos \theta_{\rm oa}$, similar to the
562: reflection component 1, since the iron line intensity is proportional to the
563: solid angle subtended by the surrounding matter at the source.
564:
565: The left panel in Figure 14 shows the $N_{\rm H}$-dependence of $EW_{\rm ref}$ for
566: $\theta_{oa}$=30$^{\circ}$. The $EW_{\rm ref}$ shows little $N_{\rm H}$ dependence in the
567: $N_{\rm H}$ $<$10$^{24}$ cm$^{-2}$, since the $EW_{\rm ref}$ is mainly
568: determined by the ratio
569: between the absorption and scattering cross-sections. In the Compton-thick region,
570: the $EW_{\rm ref}$ shows large $\theta_{\rm oa}$- and $\theta_{\rm i}$-dependences.
571: This is caused by the fact that the contribution of the reflection component 1 to the reflection continuum
572: at the iron band is decreasing with increasing $N_{\rm H}$ (see Figure 4).
573:
574: We noted that the $EW_{\rm ref}$ in the Compton-thick regime is
575: greater than 1000 eV in our simulations. Thus, observed lower values
576: of $EW_{\rm ref}$, less than 1000 eV, may indicate a low
577: metal abundance of iron.
578:
579:
580: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
581:
582: \section{Application to Observed Spectrum}
583:
584: By means of Monte Carlo simulations, we showed that the three continuum components depend on the
585: structure parameters of the torus, $N_{\rm{H}}$, $\theta_{\rm oa}$, and $\theta_{\rm i}$. Our study suggests
586: that we can estimate the structure of the torus by determining the three components in an observed
587: spectrum. We therefore made a new model for spectral fitting based on our simulations with 1$\times$
588: 10$^{9}$ photons in each run.
589: In our new model, the direct component is reproduced by $phabs*compcabs*(cutoffpl)$ in
590: $XSPEC$, where $compcabs$ is a new model that we made for representing Compton scattering,
591: and the two reflection components are reproduced by using table models, which
592: have parameters of photon index, $N_{\rm{H}}$, ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$, and $\theta_{\rm i}$, since the
593: reflection components are too complex to be represented by numerical expression. The table
594: models cover the ranges of photon index of $1.5-2.5$, $N_{\rm{H}}$ of
595: $10^{22}-10^{25} \ \rm{cm}^{-2}$, ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$ of $0^{\circ}-70^{\circ}$, and $\theta_{\rm i}$ of
596: $0-90^{\circ}$. The details of the parameters of the table models are listed in Table 1.
597:
598: The Suzaku satellite can obtain a wide-band spectrum with good quality \citep{mitsuda07}. We
599: applied the new model to the wide-band spectrum of Mrk 3 observed by the Suzaku satellite on 2005 October 22-23 during the SWG phase.
600: We obtained XIS and HXD spectra in the same manner as described by \citet{awaki08}, and
601: then simultaneously fitted the XIS and HXD spectra above 1 keV with the new model defined as follows:
602: \begin{equation}
603: I({\rm{ph \ s^{-1} \ cm^{-2} \ keV^{-1}}}) = PL1+ e^{-{\sigma}_{\rm a}N_{\rm{H1}}}e^{-{\sigma}_{\rm{es}}N_{\rm{H1}}}PL2+reflection1(N_{\rm EL})+reflection2(N_{\rm H2})+ELs,
604: \label{eq:baseline_model}
605: \end{equation}
606: where PL1 and PL2 are power law components with a high energy cut-off.
607: The high energy cutoffs of both PL1 and PL2 were fixed at 360 keV, which is consistent with
608: the cut-off energy ($E_{cut}$) of the power law component $E_{cut}$ $>$ 200 keV obtained by
609: \citet{cappi99}. $N_{\rm{H1}}$ is the column density along our line of sight. We used the absorption cross-section of $vern$ for ${\sigma}_{\rm a}$
610: in the $phabs$ model in $XSPEC$ v12.4. The abundances of \citet{ag89} were used. The ${\sigma}_{\rm{es}}$ is a Compton scattering cross-section, which is used in the $compcabs$ model.
611: %%We made a new model $compcabs$ in $XSPEC$ for representing Compton scattering.
612: %%The $compcabs$ is the same as the $cabs$ in $XSPEC$ except for the cross-section of the scattering.
613: The reflection components 1 and 2 in our simulation were reproduced by the two table models,
614: $reflection1$ and $reflection2$, respectively. We set their photon indices equal to that of PL2,
615: while we did not link their nomalizations to that of PL2, and their column densities along the equatorial plane
616: ($N_{\rm H2}$) were not linked to the column density ($N_{\rm H1}$) of PL2 in our spectral fit.
617: The emission lines (ELs) seen in the spectrum were represent by the sum of Gaussian components:
618: \begin{equation}
619: ELs=\sum_{\rm i} gauss(E_{\rm i}, {\sigma}_{\rm i}, N_{\rm i}),
620: \label{eq:baseline_model1}
621: \end{equation}
622: where $E_{\rm i}$, ${\sigma}_{\rm i}$, and $N_{\rm i}$ are the center energy, width, and intensity of the $i$-th line. We fixed $E_{\rm i}$ and ${\sigma}_{i}$ at the values obtained by \citet{awaki08}.
623:
624: We fitted the spectra with the new table models in the energy range from 1 to 70 keV.
625: Since the table models were generated from simulations, the table models have statistical deviations.
626: A typical standard deviation per 20 eV bin of the sum of $reflection$ 1 and 2 in
627: the 3--5 keV band is about 2\%, which is about 1/5 of the statistical error of the observed data in this
628: energy band. Due to the deviations of the table models, the $\chi^{2}$ will have a fluctuation of
629: about (bin number)$\times (\frac{1}{5})^{2}$, which is estimated to be about 5.
630: Thus, it is hard to find the best-fit parameters and their confidence regions with the $\chi^{2}$-fitting
631: procedure. We performed $\chi^{2}$-test with our table models on the
632: parameter grids of $\theta_{\rm oa}$ and $\theta_{\rm i}$ in order to examine whether we can obtain the
633: structure parameters from the spectral fit with the table models.
634: Table 2 lists the $\chi^{2}$ on the grids with 612 d.o.f.
635: The minimum $\chi^{2}$ ($\chi^{2}_{\rm min}$) was obtained for $\theta_{\rm i}$ $<$ $\theta_{\rm oa}$,
636: and the $\chi^{2}$ was more than $\chi^{2}_{\rm min}$ + 30 for
637: $\theta_{\rm i}$ $>$ $\theta_{\rm oa}$+3$^{\circ}$. Since the $\theta_{\rm i}$ must be larger than the
638: $\theta_{\rm oa}$ in our simple torus model (otherwise the $N_{\rm H1}$ becomes zero), the $\chi^{2}$
639: study indicates that we observed the Mrk 3 nucleus near the edge of the torus.
640: This is expected from the strong unabsorbed reflection component of Mrk 3 in the baseline model.
641:
642: On the other hand, we found that it is difficult to constrain the half-opening angle $\theta_{\rm oa}$
643: from the spectral analysis, since the shapes of the reflection components 1 and 2 show a little
644: $\theta_{\rm oa}$-dependence (Figure 6). Although their intensities depend on $\theta_{\rm oa}$ as shown in
645: Figure 7,
646: the intensities of the reflection components also depend on the luminosity of the central source.
647: Figure 15 shows the change of the normalization of the direct and reflection
648: components for $\theta_{\rm i}$=$\theta_{\rm oa}$+1$^{\circ}$. The normalization of the reflection
649: component is roughly proportional 1/$\cos \theta_{\rm oa}$. This relation indicates that the contribution
650: of the reflection components to the observed spectrum is nearly constant.
651: Furthermore, the spectral shape of the reflection component 1 in the 5--70 keV band is similar to
652: that of the direct component
653: at $N_{\rm H} \sim$10$^{24}$ cm$^{-2}$ (see Figure 3). As a result, it is hard to constrain
654: $\theta_{\rm oa}$, even if we link the intensities between the direct and
655: reflection components. We note that the iron EW is not helpful to find the $\theta_{\rm oa}$ of Mrk 3,
656: since $EW_{\rm ref}$ has a little dependence on $\theta_{\rm oa}$ in $N_{\rm H}$ $<$ 10$^{24}$
657: cm$^{-2}$.
658:
659: %% NH issue
660: In order to constrain $N_{\rm H2}$, we fitted the observed spectrum with our model on the grid
661: of $N_{\rm H2}$. Since we did not constrain the $\theta_{\rm oa}$ from the spectral fit, we
662: fixed $\theta_{\rm oa}$ at 50$^{\circ}$, and $\theta_{i}$ at $\theta_{\rm oa}$+1$^{\circ}$.
663: The value of $N_{\rm H1}$ was a free parameter in this fit.
664: We found that there is a $\chi^{2}$ minimum around
665: $\sim$10$^{24}$ cm$^{-2}$, and that the $\chi^{2}$ is greater than $\chi^{2}_{\rm min}$+30 for
666: $N_{\rm H2}$ $<$ 6$\times$10$^{23}$ and for $N_{\rm H2}$ $>$ 2$\times$10$^{24}$ cm$^{-2}$.
667: We found that we constrain the structure parameter $N_{\rm H}$ of the torus by using
668: our new model.
669:
670: %% real model
671: The opening angle may be estimated from the opening angle of the NLR. \citet{capetti95} found a NLR opening angle in Mrk 3 of $>$ $100^{\circ}$. The half opening angle of $>$$50^{\circ}$ is larger than
672: the estimation by \citet{ruiz01} due to the inclusion of all the Z-shape emission components in the NLR in the estimation of \citet{capetti95}.
673: We here set $\theta_{oa}$ = $50^{\circ}$ and $\theta_{\rm i}$ = $51^{\circ}$ in our spectral fit. Furthermore,
674: the column density $N_{\rm H1}$ was linked with $N_{\rm H2}$ by
675: $N_{\rm H1}$=0.74 $N_{\rm H2}$, by using the equation (3).
676: We obtained a small reduced $\chi^{2}$ value of 1.18 (d.o.f.=613), which is comparable to that with the
677: baseline model. Table 3 shows the best-fit parameters, and Figure 16 shows the best-fit spectrum.
678: %% gamma
679: The photon index of the power law component and the column density of $N_{\rm H1}$ were
680: estimated to be $\sim$1.82 and $\sim$1.1$\times$10$^{24}$ cm$^{-2}$, respectively.
681: %% flux and luminosity
682: The intrinsic luminosity of the power law component in the 2--10 keV band was estimated to be
683: 2.1$\times$10$^{43}$ erg s$^{-1}$, which is about 1.3 times that of the estimate with the baseline
684: model and is consistent with that obtained by using the model with $plcabs$ \citep{awaki08},
685: which describes the X-ray transmission, correctly taking into account Compton scattering
686: \citep{yaqoob97}. On the other hand, the intrinsic luminosity
687: irradiating the accretion torus is estimated to be 5.1$\times$10$^{43}$ erg s$^{-1}$ from the
688: normalization of the reflection component.
689: The discrepancy of the intrinsic luminosities between the direct and reflection
690: components may be arisen by a time lag of the reflection component, since the long time
691: variability of Mrk 3 has been reported and the distance of the accretion torus is estimated to be greater than
692: 1 pc from the center \citep[e.g.,][]{awaki00, awaki08}.
693:
694: %%Although the normalization of the reflection component is consistent with that of the direct component
695: %%within 90\% error region,
696: %%The ratio of the 2--10 keV to [O$_{\rm III}$] $\lambda$5007 luminosities for Mrk 3 is about 2.3, which
697: %%is consistent with those for a sample of Seyfert 1 galaxies (Heckman et al. 2005).
698:
699:
700: \section{Summary and Conclusion}
701:
702: We simulated AGN spectra by using the ray-trace method, and made a new model for
703: fitting spectra of Compton-thick AGNs.
704: In our simulations we assumed an accretion torus surrounding a nucleus, which was
705: characterized by $\theta_{\rm oa}$, $\theta_{\rm i}$, $N_{\rm H}$, and the ratio of the inner and outer
706: radii of the torus.
707: We considered interactions of photoelectric absorption, iron fluorescence, and Compton scattering in
708: the simulation. The simulated spectra
709: were separated into three components: one direct component and two reflection components.
710:
711: The direct component consists of X-ray photons which have no interaction with the surrounding
712: material, and the component
713: is only affected by column density along our line of sight. In fact, the direct component was well modeled
714: with a cut-off power law emission affected by both photoelectric absorption and Compton scattering.
715: On the other hand, the reflection components had not only an $N_{\rm H}$-dependence but also both
716: $\theta_{\rm oa}$- and $\theta_{\rm i}$-dependences. The reflection component 1 shows a $\theta_{\rm oa}$-dependence, which is explained by the covering factor of the torus.
717: The reflection component 2 has dependence on both $\theta_{\rm oa}$ and $\theta_{\rm i}$.
718: The dependence of the reflection component 2 is roughly explained by the apparent size of the visible inner wall of the torus.
719:
720: We fitted the $Suzaku$ Mrk 3 spectrum with the new model based on our simulations, and found that the spectrum
721: could be represented by our model. The structure parameters of the torus of Mrk 3 were estimated
722: with the new model: $\theta_{\rm i}\sim \theta_{\rm oa}+1^{\circ}$ and $N_{\rm{H}} \sim 10^{24} \ \rm{cm}^{-2}$,
723: although it was hard to constrain $\theta_{\rm oa}$ from our spectral analysis.
724: We estimated the intrinsic luminosity of the direct component and the intrinsic luminosity irradiating the
725: surrounding matter. Assuming $\theta_{\rm oa}$=50$^{\circ}$ and $N_{\rm H1}$=0.76$N_{\rm H2}$,
726: the 2--10 keV luminosity of the direct component was estimated to be about 2/5 of that irradiating
727: the surrounding matter. This may be explained by time variability of Mrk 3 and time lag between
728: the direct and reflected lights.
729:
730: We demonstrated that we can bring out the structure of the torus from an observed X-ray spectrum
731: with our new model. The wide-band X-ray spectra will be helpful to determine the structure of AGNs.
732:
733:
734: \acknowledgments
735:
736: We also thank Drs. T. Yaqoob and K. Murphy for useful discussions and careful reading. We also thank
737: the anonymous referee for helpful comments and suggestions.
738: This study is carried out in part by the Grant support for Scientific Research of Ehime university (H.A.)
739: and the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (17740124 Y.T.) of the Ministry of Education, Culture,
740: Sports, Science and Technology.
741:
742:
743:
744:
745: %Figure ------
746:
747: \clearpage
748:
749:
750: \begin{figure}[!h]
751: \includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.32]{f1a.eps}
752: \includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.32]{f1b.eps}
753: \includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.32]{f1c.eps}
754: \caption{Photoabsorption cross-section of Carbon, Oxygen, and Iron. The open circles
755: indicate those obtained from the NIST database. The solid and dashed lines show those
756: by \citet{vern96} and \citet{bm92}, respectively.
757: Their cross-sections are referred to as $vern$ and $bcmc$ in $XSPEC$.
758: }
759: \end{figure}
760:
761: % structure image
762: \clearpage
763:
764: \begin{figure}[!h]
765: \includegraphics[angle=0,scale=1.0]{f2.eps}
766: \caption{A cross section view of the torus structure in our simulation. The primary X-ray source is located at the center of an obscuring torus. The torus structure is characterized by the half-opening angle ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$,
767: the inclination angle of the torus from an observer ${\theta}_{\rm i}$, the column density $N_{\rm{H}}$
768: along the equatorial plane, and the ratio of $r_{\rm{in}}$ to $r_{\rm{out}}$.
769: A simulated spectrum is separated into three components: one direct component and two reflection components. The two reflection components are referred as reflection component 1 and 2.
770: The reflection component 2 consists of reflection light from the visible inner wall of the torus.
771: The reflection component 1 consists of the rest of the reflection light.
772: }
773: \end{figure}
774:
775: % sample result
776:
777: \begin{figure}[!h]
778: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=.38]{f3.eps}
779: \caption{An example of our simulated AGN spectrum with $N_{\rm{H}}$ = $10^{24} \ \rm{cm}^{-2}$,
780: ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$ = 40$^{\circ}$, and ${\theta}_{\rm i}$ = 45$^{\circ}$.
781: The simulated spectrum is divided into three components : the direct component, the
782: reflection component 1, and the reflection component 2 as shown in this figure. The dashed line
783: displays the intrinsic source spectrum.}
784: \end{figure}
785:
786: %column density
787:
788: \begin{figure}[!h]
789: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=.2]{f4a.eps}
790: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=.2]{f4b.eps}
791: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=.2]{f4c.eps}
792: \caption{$N_{\rm{H}}$ dependence of the three components for ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$ = 40$^{\circ}$ and
793: ${\theta}_{\rm i}$ = 45$^{\circ}$. The column density has values of $N_{\rm{H}}$ = $5{\times}10^{23}, \ 10^{24}, \ 2{\times}10^{24}, \ 5{\times}10^{24} \ \rm{and} \ 10^{25} \ \rm{cm}^{-2}$. }
794: \end{figure}
795:
796: %compcabs
797:
798: \begin{figure}[!h]
799: \includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.5]{f5.eps}
800: \caption{Comparison between the simulated direct component and the cut-off power law model affected by
801: both photoelectric absorption and Compton scattering. }
802: \end{figure}
803:
804: %half-openingangle
805:
806: \begin{figure}[!h]
807: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=.30]{f6a.eps}
808: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=.30]{f6b.eps}
809: \caption{ ${\theta}_{oa}$-dependence of the reflection components 1 and 2. For the simulations
810: of the reflection component 1,
811: $N_{\rm{H}}$ and ${\theta}_{\rm i}$ were fixed at $10^{24} \ \rm{cm}^{-2}$, and $90^{\circ}$,
812: respectively. For the simulations of the reflection component 2,
813: ${\theta}_{\rm i}$ was fixed on $\theta_{\rm oa}$+1$^{\circ}$. }
814: \end{figure}
815:
816:
817: \begin{figure}[!h]
818: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=.40]{f7.eps}
819: \caption{Total counts of the reflection components 1 and 2
820: as a function of ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$. Open circles and open squares represent the reflection component 1,
821: and the reflection component 2, respectively.}
822: \end{figure}
823:
824:
825: \begin{figure}[!h]
826: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=.30]{f8a.eps}
827: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=.30]{f8b.eps}
828: \caption{The $\theta_{oa}$ dependence of the reflection component 1 (left) and 2 (right) for
829: various column densities, $N_{\rm H}$=10$^{23}$, 10$^{24}$, and 10$^{25}$ cm$^{-2}$.
830: The left panel shows the normalized count rate divided by that simulated in the spherical
831: distributed matter.
832: The solid lines in the left and right panels show the covering factor of the torus, $\cos \theta_{\rm oa}$,
833: and the combination of the covering factor and the apparent size of the visible inner wall,
834: $\cos \theta_{\rm oa}$ $\cos (2 \theta_{\rm oa}-\pi/2)$. }
835: \end{figure}
836:
837: %inclination angle
838:
839: \begin{figure}[!h]
840: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=.30]{f9a.eps}
841: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=.30]{f9b.eps}
842: \caption{The ${\theta}_{\rm i}$-dependence of the reflection components 1 (left) and 2 (right). In these simulations,
843: $N_{\rm{H}}$ and ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$ were set at $10^{24} \ \rm{cm}^{-2}$ and $10^{\circ}$,
844: respectively. }
845: \end{figure}
846:
847: \begin{figure}[!h]
848: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=.40]{f10.eps}
849: \caption{Total counts of the reflection components 1 and 2 in the 1~keV--300~keV band as a function of
850: ${\theta}_{\rm i}$. Open circles and squares show the total counts of the reflection component 1 and 2
851: at ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$=$10^{\circ}$, respectively. We also show the total counts for ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$=
852: $30^{\circ}$ by closed circles and squares. A curve of cos $\theta_ {\rm i}$ is plotted in the dotted line,
853: in order to show a $\theta_ {\rm i}$-dependence of the projected area. }
854: \end{figure}
855:
856:
857: %r_in
858: \begin{figure}[!h]
859: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=.40]{f11.eps}
860: \caption{Simulated spectra of the reflection component 2 for different
861: values of the ratio
862: $r=r_{\rm{in}}$/$r_{\rm{out}}$. }
863: \end{figure}
864:
865: %r_in
866: \begin{figure}[!h]
867: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=.80]{f12.eps}
868: \caption{The fraction of the absorbed luminosity with respect to the intrinsic source luminosity.
869: The fraction was estimated for $N_{\rm H}$=10$^{22}$, 10$^{23}$, 10$^{24}$, and 10$^{25}$ cm$^{-2}$.
870: We also plot a curve of $\cos$ $\theta_{\rm oa}$ in the dashed line, in order to display the covering factor of
871: the dusty torus. }
872: \end{figure}
873:
874:
875: %fe line
876:
877: \begin{figure}
878: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=.30]{f13a.eps}
879: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=.30]{f13b.eps}
880: \caption{Equivalent width of the iron K$\alpha$ line to the total continuum emission,
881: summed over the direct and reflection components. The left panel shows the $N_{\rm H}$ dependence
882: of the equivalent width for $\theta_{\rm oa}$=30$^{\circ}$, and the right panel shows
883: the dependence on $\theta_{\rm oa}$ for $N_{\rm H}$=10$^{22}$, 10$^{23}$, 10$^{24}$, and 10$^{25}$ cm$^{-2}$
884: from the bottom to the top (or from thin to thick lines). The open circles, squares, and triangles indicate the equivalent width
885: in the ranges $\theta_{\rm i}$=0--18$^{\circ}$, 60--63$^{\circ}$, and 81--84$^{\circ}$, respectively.
886: We plot the equivalent width for the spherical distribution at $\theta_{\rm oa}$=0, instead of using
887: our simple torus model with $\theta_{\rm oa}$=0.}
888: \end{figure}
889:
890: \begin{figure}[!h]
891: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=.30]{f14a.eps}
892: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=.30]{f14b.eps}
893: \caption{Equivalent width of the iron K$\alpha$ line to the reflection components 1+2.
894: Symbols are the same as in Figure 12. }
895: \end{figure}
896:
897: %ref2_vs_oa
898: \begin{figure}[!h]
899: \includegraphics[scale=.40]{f15.eps}
900: \caption{The normalization of the direct and reflection components as a function of $\theta_{\rm oa}$.
901: $\theta_{\rm i}$=$\theta_{\rm oa}$+1$^{\circ}$ is assumed.
902: The closed and open circles display their normalizations as shown in the figure.
903: The solid line indicates a curve proportional to 1/$\cos \theta_{\rm oa}$. }
904: \end{figure}
905:
906:
907: \begin{figure}[!h]
908: \begin{minipage}[t]{.47\textwidth}
909: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=.35]{f16a.eps}
910: \end{minipage}
911: \hfill
912: \begin{minipage}[t]{.47\textwidth}
913: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=.35]{f16b.eps}
914:
915: \end{minipage}
916: \caption{The wide-band spectrum of Mrk 3 observed with Suzaku fitted with our model (left), and
917: the unfolded X-ray spectrum (right).
918: The spectra in the left panel are obtained by the XIS-FI (black), XIS-BI (red), and HXD-PIN (green).
919: The energy range around the Si-K edge (1.875-1.845 keV) is ignored for spectral
920: fitting. The right panel shows continuum emission
921: from PL1, reflection 1, reflection 2 and heavily absorbed PL2.}
922: \end{figure}
923:
924: %residual
925: %\begin{figure}[!h]
926: %\includegraphics[angle=270,scale=.40]{image_forT/fig17.eps}
927: %\caption{Residuals of the observed data from the best-fit models.
928: %Panels (a), (b), (c), (d), and (e) show the residuals for the best-fit models fixed on $N_{\rm H2}$ = 1, 3, 5, 7, 10$\times$10$^{24}$ cm$^{-2}$, respectively.
929: %We plotted only XIS-FI and HXD-PIN data}
930: %\end{figure}
931:
932:
933: % Tables
934:
935: \clearpage
936:
937: \begin{table}
938: \begin{center}
939: \caption{Parameters and grids of table model}
940: \footnotesize
941: \begin{tabular}{cc}
942: \tableline\tableline
943: Parameters & Parameter grids \\
944: \tableline
945: Photon index & 1.5, 1.9, 2.5\\
946: $N_{\rm H}$ ($\times$10$^{22}$ cm$^{-2}$) & 1, 5, 10, 50, 100, 200, 300, 500, 700, 1000\\
947: half-opening angle ($^{\circ}$) & 0, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70 \\
948: inclination angle ($^{\circ}$)$^{a}$ & 1-- 89 in steps of 2 \\
949: \tableline
950: \end{tabular}
951: %% Any table notes must follow the \end{tabular} command.
952: \tablenotetext{a}{We selected X-rays within the inclination angle$\pm$ 1$^{\circ}$.}
953: \end{center}
954: \end{table}
955:
956: %\label{tbl-1}
957:
958:
959: \begin{table}
960: \begin{center}
961: \caption{$\chi^{2}$ on the parameter grid of $\theta_{\rm oa}$ and $\theta_{\rm i}$.}
962: \begin{tabular}{cccccccccc}
963: \tableline\tableline
964: $\theta_{i}-\theta_{\rm oa}$ & \multicolumn{9}{c}{$\theta_{\rm oa}$}\\
965: & 30$^{\circ}$ & 35$^{\circ}$ & 40$^{\circ}$ & 45$^{\circ}$ & 50$^{\circ}$ & 55$^{\circ}$ & 60$^{\circ}$ & 65$^{\circ}$ & 70$^{\circ}$ \\
966: \tableline
967: %%-2 & \it{706.6} & 706.5 & \it{705.4} & 709.3 & \it{700.4} & 700.3 & \it{707.7} & 706.9 & \it{708.1}\\
968: %%-1 & 709.3 & \it{709.8} & 706.5 & \it{708.4} & 701.2 & \it{705.7} & 709.1 & \it{704.9} & 708.2\\
969: %% 0 & \it{705.9} & 716.4 & \it{706.2} & 708.6 & \it{701.8} & 712.8 & \it{708.8} & 702.5 & \it{710.4}\\
970: %%+1 & 710.6 & \it{718.5} & 713.1 & \it{712.7} & 708.8 & \it{713.5} & 711.0 & \it{708.9} & 729.4\\
971: %%+2 & \it{722.7} & 742.3 & \it{740.1} & 738.7 & \it{730.4} & 739.8 & \it{737.1} & 745.3 & \it{753.6}\\
972: -2 & 704.6 & 706.7 & 706.2 & 702.1 & 701.9 & 700.8 & 706.6 & 703.3 & 706.3 \\
973: -1 & 701.6 & 705.9 & 705.7 & 702.8 & 700.2 & 703.2 & 708.9 & 704.0 & 706.2\\
974: 0 & 701.7 & 705.3 & 706.2 & 704.1 & 702.9 & 707.3 & 707.0 & 706.7 & 707.6\\
975: +1 & 705.1 & 710.2 & 711.5 & 708.8 & 711.8 & 710.2 & 713.4 & 713.6 & 723.6\\
976: +2 & 724.9 & 736.4 & 724.4 & 734.1 & 729.3 & 737.6 & 737.7 & 752.0 & 753.6\\
977: \tableline
978: \end{tabular}
979: %% Any table notes must follow the \end{tabular} command.
980: %\tablenotetext{a}{Sample footnote for table~\ref{tbl-2} that was
981: %generated with the \LaTeX\ table environment}
982: \end{center}
983: \end{table}
984: %\label{tbl-2}
985:
986: \begin{table}
987: \begin{center}
988: \caption{Best-fit model parameters.}
989: \footnotesize
990: \begin{tabular}{cccccccc}
991: \tableline\tableline
992: Photon Index & $N_{\rm H1}$ & $L_{\rm 2-10}^{\rm direct}$ & $N_{\rm H2}$ & $L_{\rm 2-10}^{\rm refl}$ & ${\theta}_{\rm oa}$ & ${\theta}_{\rm i}$ & ${\chi}^{2}$/(d.o.f.) \\
993: & (${\times}$$10^{24}$ $\rm{cm^{-2}}$) & ( erg s$^{-1}$ ) & (${\times}$$10^{24}$ $\rm{cm^{-2}}$) & ( erg s$^{-1}$ ) & ($^{\circ}$) & ($^{\circ}$) & \\
994: \tableline
995: 1.82 & 1.1& 2.1$\times10^{43}$ & 1.5 & 5.1$\times10^{43}$ &50(fixed) & 51(fixed) &726/613\\
996: \tableline
997: %\tablecomments{$N_{\rm H1}$ was fixed at the Galactic column density.}
998: \multicolumn{6}{l}{Note. --- $N_{\rm H1}$ was linked to $N_{\rm H2}$.}
999: \end{tabular}
1000: %% Any table notes must follow the \end{tabular} command.
1001: %\tablenotetext{a}{Sample footnote for table~\ref{tbl-2} that was
1002: %generated with the \LaTeX\ table environment}
1003: \end{center}
1004: \end{table}
1005:
1006:
1007: %\label{tbl-3}
1008:
1009:
1010:
1011: \pagebreak
1012: \clearpage
1013:
1014:
1015: %% The reference list follows the main body and any appendices.
1016: %% Use LaTeX's thebibliography environment to mark up your reference list.
1017: %% Note \begin{thebibliography} is followed by an empty set of
1018: %% curly braces. If you forget this, LaTeX will generate the error
1019: %% "Perhaps a missing \item?".
1020: %%
1021: %% thebibliography produces citations in the text using \bibitem-\cite
1022: %% cross-referencing. Each reference is preceded by a
1023: %% \bibitem command that defines in curly braces the KEY that corresponds
1024: %% to the KEY in the \cite commands (see the first section above).
1025: %% Make sure that you provide a unique KEY for every \bibitem or else the
1026: %% paper will not LaTeX. The square brackets should contain
1027: %% the citation text that LaTeX will insert in
1028: %% place of the \cite commands.
1029:
1030: %% We have used macros to produce journal name abbreviations.
1031: %% AASTeX provides a number of these for the more frequently-cited journals.
1032: %% See the Author Guide for a list of them.
1033:
1034: %% Note that the style of the \bibitem labels (in []) is slightly
1035: %% different from previous examples. The natbib system solves a host
1036: %% of citation expression problems, but it is necessary to clearly
1037: %% delimit the year from the author name used in the citation.
1038: %% See the natbib documentation for more details and options.
1039:
1040: \begin{thebibliography}{}
1041: \bibitem[Anders \& Grevesse(1989)]{ag89} Anders, E., \& Grevesse, N. 1989, \gca, 197, 214
1042: \bibitem[Awaki et al.(1991)]{awaki91} Awaki, H., Koyama, K., Inoue, H., \& Halpern, J. P. 1991, \pasj, 43, 195
1043: \bibitem[Awaki et al.(2000)]{awaki00} Awaki, H., Koyama, K., Inoue, H., \& Halpern, J. P. 2000, \apj, 43, 195
1044: \bibitem[Awaki et al.(2008)]{awaki08} Awaki, H. et al. 2008, \pasj, 60, S293
1045: \bibitem[Balucinska-Church \& McCammon (1992)]{bm92} Balucinska-Church, M., \& McCammon, D.
1046: 1992, \apj, 400, 699
1047: \bibitem[Bambynek et al.(1972)]{bamby72} Bambynek, W., Crasemann, B., Fink, R. W., Freund, H.-U., Mark, H., Swift, C. D., Price, R. E., \& Rao, P. V. 1972, $Rev. Mod. Phys.$, 44, 716
1048: \bibitem[Capetti et al.(1995)]{capetti95} Capetti, A., Macchetto, F., Axon, D.J., Sparks, W.B., \& Boksenberg, A. 1995, \apj, 448, 600
1049: \bibitem[Cappi et al.(1999)]{cappi99} Cappi, M. et al. 1999, \aap, 344, 857
1050: \bibitem[George \& Fabian(1991)]{gf91} George, I. M., \& Fabian, A. C. 1991, \mnras, 352, 369
1051: \bibitem[Ghisellini et al.(1994)]{ghi94} Ghisellini, G., Haardt, F., \& Matt, G. 1994, \mnras, 267, 743
1052: \bibitem[Heckman et al.(2005)]{heckman05} Heckman, T. M., Ptak, A., Hornschemeier, A.,
1053: \& Kauffmann, G. 2005, \apj, 634, 161
1054: %%\bibitem[Henke et al.(1982)]{henke82} Henke, B.L., Lee, P., Tanaka, T.J., Shimabukuro, R.L. and Fujikawa, B.K., 1982, $Atomic \ Data \ and \ Nuclear \ Data \ Tables$, 27, 1
1055: \bibitem[Kikoin(1976)]{kikoin76} Kikoin I. K. 1976, $Tables \ of \ Physical \ Quantities, \ Atomizdat, \ Moscow$
1056: \bibitem[Levenson et al.(2002)]{levenson02} Levenson, N.A., Krolik, J.H., Zycki, P.T., Heckman, T.M., Weaver, K.A., Awaki, H., \& Terashima, Y. 2002, \apj, 573, L81
1057: \bibitem[Lutz et al.(2004)]{lutz04} Lutz, D., Maiolino, R., Spoon, H. W. W., \& Moorwood, F. M. 2004, \aap, 418, 465
1058: \bibitem[Madau et al.(1994)]{madau94} Madau, P., Ghisellini, G., \& Fabian, A.C. 1994, \mnras, 270, 17
1059: \bibitem[Magdziarz \& Zdziarski (1995)]{mz95} Magdziarz, P., \& Zdziarski, A.A., 1995, \mnras, 273, 837
1060: \bibitem[Maiolino et al.(1998)]{maiolino98} Maiolino, R., Salvati, M., Dadina, M., Della Ceca, R., Matt, G., Risaliti, G., \& Zamorani, G. 1998, \aap, 338, 781
1061: \bibitem[Mitsuda et al.(2007)]{mitsuda07} Mitsuda, K. et al. 2007, \pasj, 59, S1
1062: \bibitem[Mulchaey et al.(1994)]{mulchaey94} Mulchaey, J. S., Koratkar, A., Ward, M. J., Wilson, A. S., Whittle, M., Antonucci, R. J., Kinney, A. L., \& Hurt, T. 1994, \apj, 436, 586
1063: \bibitem[Risaliti et al.(1999)]{risa99} Risaliti, G., Maiolono, R., \& Salvati, M. 1999, \apj, 522, 157
1064: \bibitem[Ruiz et al.(2001)]{ruiz01} Ruiz, J.R., Crenshaw, D.M., Kraemer, S.B., Bower, G.A., Gull, T.R., Hutchings, J.B., Kaiser, M.E., \& Weistrop, D. 2001, \aj, 122, 2961
1065: \bibitem[Rybicki \& Lightman(1979)]{rybicki} Rybicki, G. B., \& Lightman, A. P., 1979, $Radiative \ processes \ in \ Astrophysics$, Wilkey, New York.
1066: \bibitem[Ueda et al.(2003)]{ueda03} Ueda, Y., Akiyama, M., Ohta, K., \& Miyaji, T., 2003, \apj, 598, 886
1067: \bibitem[Verner et al. (1996)]{vern96}Verner, D.A., Ferland, G. J., Korista, K. T., \& Yakovlev, D. G. 1996,
1068: \apj, 465, 487
1069: \bibitem[Wilman \& Fabian(1999)]{wf99} Wilman, R. J., \& Fabian, A. C., 1999, \mnras, 309, 862
1070: \bibitem[Yaqoob (1997)]{yaqoob97} Yaqoob, T., 1997, \apj, 479, 184
1071: \end{thebibliography}
1072:
1073: \clearpage
1074:
1075: %% Use the figure environment and \plotone or \plottwo to include
1076: %% figures and captions in your electronic submission.
1077: %% To embed the sample graphics in
1078: %% the file, uncomment the \plotone, \plottwo, and
1079: %% \includegraphics commands
1080: %%
1081: %% If you need a layout that cannot be achieved with \plotone or
1082: %% \plottwo, you can invoke the graphicx package directly with the
1083: %% \includegraphics command or use \plotfiddle. For more information,
1084: %% please see the tutorial on "Using Electronic Art with AASTeX" in the
1085: %% documentation section at the AASTeX Web site,
1086: %% http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AAS/AASTeX.
1087: %%
1088: %% The examples below also include sample markup for submission of
1089: %% supplemental electronic materials. As always, be sure to check
1090: %% the instructions to authors for the journal you are submitting to
1091: %% for specific submissions guidelines as they vary from
1092: %% journal to journal.
1093:
1094: %% This example uses \plotone to include an EPS file scaled to
1095: %% 80% of its natural size with \epsscale. Its caption
1096: %% has been written to indicate that additional figure parts will be
1097: %% available in the electronic journal.
1098:
1099:
1100: %% Here we use \plottwo to present two versions of the same figure,
1101: %% one in black and white for print the other in RGB color
1102: %% for online presentation. Note that the caption indicates
1103: %% that a color version of the figure will be available online.
1104: %%
1105:
1106:
1107:
1108: %% This figure uses \includegraphics to scale and rotate the still frame
1109: %% for an mpeg animation.
1110:
1111:
1112:
1113: %% If you are not including electonic art with your submission, you may
1114: %% mark up your captions using the \figcaption command. See the
1115: %% User Guide for details.
1116: %%
1117: %% No more than seven \figcaption commands are allowed per page,
1118: %% so if you have more than seven captions, insert a \clearpage
1119: %% after every seventh one.
1120:
1121: %% Tables should be submitted one per page, so put a \clearpage before
1122: %% each one.
1123:
1124: %% Two options are available to the author for producing tables: the
1125: %% deluxetable environment provided by the AASTeX package or the LaTeX
1126: %% table environment. Use of deluxetable is preferred.
1127: %%
1128:
1129: %% Three table samples follow, two marked up in the deluxetable environment,
1130: %% one marked up as a LaTeX table.
1131:
1132: %% In this first example, note that the \tabletypesize{}
1133: %% command has been used to reduce the font size of the table.
1134: %% We also use the \rotate command to rotate the table to
1135: %% landscape orientation since it is very wide even at the
1136: %% reduced font size.
1137: %%
1138: %% Note also that the \label command needs to be placed
1139: %% inside the \tablecaption.
1140:
1141: %% This table also includes a table comment indicating that the full
1142: %% version will be available in machine-readable format in the electronic
1143: %% edition.
1144:
1145:
1146:
1147: %% If you use the table environment, please indicate horizontal rules using
1148: %% \tableline, not \hline.
1149: %% Do not put multiple tabular environments within a single table.
1150: %% The optional \label should appear inside the \caption command.
1151:
1152:
1153:
1154: %% If the table is more than one page long, the width of the table can vary
1155: %% from page to page when the default \tablewidth is used, as below. The
1156: %% individual table widths for each page will be written to the log file; a
1157: %% maximum tablewidth for the table can be computed from these values.
1158: %% The \tablewidth argument can then be reset and the file reprocessed, so
1159: %% that the table is of uniform width throughout. Try getting the widths
1160: %% from the log file and changing the \tablewidth parameter to see how
1161: %% adjusting this value affects table formatting.
1162:
1163: %% The \dataset{} macro has also been applied to a few of the objects to
1164: %% show how many observations can be tagged in a table.
1165:
1166:
1167: %% Tables may also be prepared as separate files. See the accompanying
1168: %% sample file table.tex for an example of an external table file.
1169: %% To include an external file in your main document, use the \input
1170: %% command. Uncomment the line below to include table.tex in this
1171: %% sample file. (Note that you will need to comment out the \documentclass,
1172: %% \begin{document}, and \end{document} commands from table.tex if you want
1173: %% to include it in this document.)
1174:
1175: %% \input{table}
1176:
1177: %% The following command ends your manuscript. LaTeX will ignore any text
1178: %% that appears after it.
1179:
1180: \end{document}
1181:
1182: %%
1183: %% End of file `sample.tex'.
1184: