Table 2: The spectral parameters as measured separately by XMM-Newton and XRT, fitting the data both separately and together. For this fit, XRT data were selected from the same time interval covered by the XMM-Newton observation. Due to the limited statistics, $N_{\rm H}$ was frozen to the value derived by XMM-Newton when fitting XRT data. The errors are at 90% confidence level for a single parameter of interest.
Instrument $N_{\rm H}$ (10²¹ cm^-2) $\Gamma$ $\chi^2_\nu$ ( $\chi^2/$ d.o.f.)

EPIC $\rm 1.3^{+0.1}_{-0.1}$ $\rm 2.13^{+0.06}_{-0.06}$ 1.17 (222.5/190)

XRT 1.3 (frozen) $\rm 1.96^{+0.29}_{-0.27}$ 1.43 (11.4/8)

EPIC + XRT $\rm 1.3^{+0.1}_{-0.1}$ $\rm 2.09^{+0.05}_{-0.08}$ 1.18 (219.7/197)

**Table 2:** The spectral parameters as measured separately by XMM-*Newton* and XRT, fitting the data both separately and together. For this fit, XRT data were selected from the same time interval covered by the XMM-*Newton* observation. Due to the limited statistics, $N_{\rm H}$ was frozen to the value derived by XMM-*Newton* when fitting XRT data. The errors are at 90% confidence level for a single parameter of interest.
Instrument	$N_{\rm H}$ (10²¹ cm^-2)	$\Gamma$	$\chi^2_\nu$ ( $\chi^2/$ d.o.f.)
EPIC	$\rm 1.3^{+0.1}_{-0.1}$	$\rm 2.13^{+0.06}_{-0.06}$	1.17 (222.5/190)
XRT	1.3 (frozen)	$\rm 1.96^{+0.29}_{-0.27}$	1.43 (11.4/8)
EPIC + XRT	$\rm 1.3^{+0.1}_{-0.1}$	$\rm 2.09^{+0.05}_{-0.08}$	1.18 (219.7/197)

Source LaTeX | All tables | In the text