Indicators of Intrinsic AGN Luminosity: a Multi-Wavelength Approach
Stephanie M. LaMassa, Timothy M. Heckman, Andrew Ptak, Lucimara, Martins, Vivienne Wild, Paule Sonnentrucker, Christy Tremonti

TL;DR
This study compares five different indicators of intrinsic AGN luminosity across two complete low-redshift type 2 AGN samples, revealing which proxies best reflect true luminosity and their relation to star formation activity.
Contribution
It provides a comprehensive multi-wavelength comparison of AGN luminosity proxies, identifying the most reliable indicators and assessing their relation to star formation and obscuration effects.
Findings
[OIV] and MIR are the most consistent proxies.
Hard X-ray and radio luminosities are systematically underestimated in Type 2 AGN.
No evidence that star formation enhances AGN emission line luminosities.
Abstract
We consider five indicators for intrinsic AGN luminosity: the luminosities of the [OIII]5007 line, the [OIV]25.89m line, the mid-infrared (MIR) continuum emission by the torus, and the radio and hard X-ray (E 10keV) continuum emission. We compare these different proxies using two complete samples of low-redshift type 2 AGN selected in a homogeneous way based on different indicators: an optically selected [OIII] sample and a mid-infrared selected 12m sample. We examine the correlations between all five different proxies, and find better agreement for the [OIV], MIR, and [OIII] luminosities than for the hard X-ray and radio luminosities. Next, we compare the ratios of the fluxes of the different proxies to their values in unobscured Type 1 AGN. The agreement is best for the ratio of the [OIV] and MIR fluxes, while the ratios of the hard X-ray to [OIII], [OIV], and…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
