Figure 15.
The adopted bias (left) and halo mass (right) measurements from Table 3 compared to other recent results (comparison with the D14/D15 results can be seen in Fig. 6). Points have been shifted slightly in redshift where necessary for clarity. The grey band represents the range of results typical for optically selected unobscured quasars, largely from the SDSS. The Mendez et al. (2015) results utilize individual redshifts for a projected clustering measurement – note that their halo mass measurements fall outside of the plot range (though the obscured halo mass error bar can be seen), so the actual values are listed. While the Hickox et al. (2011) results agree well with what we find here, the Mendez et al. (2015) estimates are significantly lower. Obscured quasars have halo masses ∼2 times larger than unobscured quasars, with a significance of ∼2σ.

The adopted bias (left) and halo mass (right) measurements from Table 3 compared to other recent results (comparison with the D14/D15 results can be seen in Fig. 6). Points have been shifted slightly in redshift where necessary for clarity. The grey band represents the range of results typical for optically selected unobscured quasars, largely from the SDSS. The Mendez et al. (2015) results utilize individual redshifts for a projected clustering measurement – note that their halo mass measurements fall outside of the plot range (though the obscured halo mass error bar can be seen), so the actual values are listed. While the Hickox et al. (2011) results agree well with what we find here, the Mendez et al. (2015) estimates are significantly lower. Obscured quasars have halo masses ∼2 times larger than unobscured quasars, with a significance of ∼2σ.

Close
This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

Close

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

View Article Abstract & Purchase Options

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Close