\begin{table}%t1 \caption{\label{tab:phav}Best-fit results for different models.} \par %\centering \par \begin{tabular}{lllllll} \hline \hline \noalign{\smallskip} Parameter & \texttt{FDCUT} & & \texttt{NPEX} & & \texttt{CompTT}$_{\rm fix23}$ & \texttt{CompTT}\\ \hline \noalign{\smallskip} $N_{\rm H}$\tablefootmark{e} & $4.9_{\rm -0.6}^{+0.6}$ & & $3.5_{\rm -0.4}^{+0.4}$ & & $0.0_{\rm -0.0}^{+0.4}$ & $0.2_{\rm -0.2}^{+0.5}$\\ $E_{22}$\tablefootmark{b} & \textit{22.76}\tablefootmark{a} & & \textit{22.76}\tablefootmark{a} & & \textit{22.76}\tablefootmark{a} & $23.5_{\rm -0.8}^{+1.5}$\\ $\sigma_{22}$\tablefootmark{b} & \textit{1.8}\tablefootmark{a} & & \textit{1.8}\tablefootmark{a} & & \textit{1.8}\tablefootmark{a} & $4.6_{\rm -1.1}^{+1.9}$\\ $\tau_{22}$ & $0.02_{\rm -0.01}^{+0.01}$ & & $0.032_{\rm -0.01}^{+0.01}$ & & $0.05_{\rm -0.01}^{+0.01}$ & $0.09_{\rm -0.02}^{+0.04}$\\ $E_{{\rm cyc}}$\tablefootmark{b} & $55.1_{\rm -1.5}^{+1.6}$ & & $55.2_{\rm -1.5}^{+1.6}$ & & $52.9_{\rm -1.4}^{+1.7}$ & $55.5_{\rm -2.1}^{+2.5}$\\ $\sigma_{{\rm cyc}}$\tablefootmark{b} & $10.4_{\rm -1.0}^{+1.1}$ & & $11.8_{\rm -1.1}^{+1.2}$ & & $10.2_{\rm -1.2}^{+1.5}$ & $13.3_{\rm -2.0}^{+2.2}$\\ $\tau_{\rm cyc}$ & $0.8_{\rm -0.1}^{+0.1}$ & & $0.9_{\rm -0.1}^{+0.2}$ & & $0.6_{\rm -0.1}^{+0.1}$ & $0.9_{\rm -0.2}^{+0.3}$\\ $\Gamma$ & $0.73_{\rm -0.06}^{+0.05}$ & $\Gamma_1$ & $0.16_{\rm -0.03}^{+0.03}$ & & & \\ $E_{{\rm cut}}$\tablefootmark{b} & $16.5_{\rm -2.9}^{+2.5}$ & $\Gamma_2$ & $-2.0$ & $\tau$ & $6.0_{\rm -0.1}^{+0.1}$ & $6.0_{\rm -0.2}^{+0.2}$\\ $E_{{\rm fold}}$\tablefootmark{b} & $12.0_{\rm -0.5}^{+0.5}$ & $A_2$\tablefootmark{c} & $0.16_{\rm -0.02}^{+0.02}$ & $T_0$\tablefootmark{b} & $1.47_{\rm -0.03}^{+0.02}$ & $1.44_{\rm -0.05}^{+0.04}$\\ & & $kT$\tablefootmark{b} & $7.9_{\rm -0.3}^{+0.3}$ & & $7.2_{\rm -0.2}^{+0.2}$ & $7.7_{\rm -0.3}^{+0.4}$\\ $E_{{\rm Fe}}$\tablefootmark{b} & $6.5_{\rm -0.1}^{+0.1}$ & & $6.45_{\rm -0.08}^{+0.07}$ & & $6.4_{\rm -0.09}^{+0.02}$ & $6.4_{\rm -0.09}^{+0.02}$\\ $\sigma_{{\rm Fe}}$\tablefootmark{b} & ${\le}0.4$ & & ${\le}0.3$ & & ${\le}0.3$ & ${\le}0.3$\\ $A_{{\rm Fe}}$\tablefootmark{d} & $3_{\rm -1}^{+3}$ & & $3.2_{\rm -0.7}^{+0.7}$ & & $2.7_{\rm -0.3}^{+0.3}$ & $2.7_{\rm -0.3}^{+0.3}$\\ $A_{{\rm Cu}}$\tablefootmark{d} & $2_{\rm -2}^{+2}$ & & $1_{\rm -0.3}^{+0.3}$ & & & \\ $A_{\Gamma,1,\texttt{CompTT}}$\tablefootmark{c} & $22_{\rm -1}^{+2}$ & & $10.7_{\rm -0.7}^{+0.7}$ & & $10.1_{\rm -0.2}^{+0.2}$ & $9.8_{\rm -0.3}^{+0.3}$\\ $\chi_{{\rm red}/{\rm d.o.f.}}$ & 1.04/83 & & 0.85/83 & & 1.08/84 & 0.72/82\\[2pt] \hline \end{tabular} \tablefoot {An emission line (\textit{Cu}) with energy and width fixed at 8.04~keV and 0.01~keV was added to \texttt{FDCUT} and \texttt{NPEX} models. All models include also an absorption like feature at ${\sim}23$~keV for PCA to account for similar residuals seen in Crab spectra (with the line energy and width fixed to those obtained from Crab fits). For \texttt{CompTT} model the $\chi^2$ may be improved by allowing the line parameters to vary (last column). \\ \tablefoottext{a}{Parameter frozen during the fit;} \tablefoottext{b}{[keV];} \tablefoottext{c}{[$10^{-2}$~ph~keV$^{-1}$~cm$^{-2}$~s$^{-1}$];} \tablefoottext{d}{[$10^{-3}$~ph~cm$^{-2}$~s$^{-1}$];} \tablefoottext{e}{[atoms~cm$^{-2}$].}} \end{table}