Table 1.
EBL scaling factors α and related uncertainties obtained for different EBL models.
| z | EBL model | α± | PWL | LP | EPWL | ELP |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| stat. err | [%] | [%] | [%] | [%] | ||
| all | FR17 |  |
74.5 | 15.9 | 9.6 | 0.0 |
| GIL12 |  |
74.2 | 15.1 | 10.7 | 0.0 | |
| DOM11 |  |
73.9 | 14.9 | 11.2 | 0.0 | |
| FR08 |  |
74.7 | 14.7 | 10.6 | 0.0 | |
| FSRQs | FR17 |  |
55.4 | 29.9 | 14.6 | 0.0 |
| (all) | GIL12 |  |
55.4 | 29.9 | 14.6 | 0.0 |
| 0.097 ≤ z ≤ 2.534 | DOM11 |  |
54.8 | 29.3 | 15.9 | 0.0 |
| FR08 |  |
56.7 | 28.7 | 14.6 | 0.0 | |
| BL Lacs | FR17 |  |
83.4 | 9.4 | 7.2 | 0.0 |
| (all) | GIL12 |  |
83.3 | 8.6 | 8.1 | 0.0 |
| 0.032 ≤ z ≤ 2.471 | DOM11 |  |
82.9 | 7.6 | 8.7 | 0.0 |
| FR08 |  |
83.3 | 8.2 | 8.5 | 0.0 | |
| 0 < z < 0.21 | FR17 |  |
85.8 | 8.5 | 5.7 | 0.0 |
| GIL12 |  |
85.8 | 8.1 | 6.1 | 0.0 | |
| DOM11 |  |
85.4 | 8.5 | 6.1 | 0.0 | |
| FR08 |  |
85.4 | 8.5 | 6.1 | 0.0 | |
| 0.21 ≤ z < 0.456 | FR17 |  |
85.4 | 4.9 | 9.8 | 0.0 |
| GIL12 |  |
84.6 | 4.9 | 10.6 | 0.0 | |
| DOM11 |  |
84.6 | 4.9 | 10.6 | 0.0 | |
| FR08 |  |
84.6 | 4.9 | 10.6 | 0.0 | |
| 0.456 ≤ z < 0.944 | FR17 |  |
65.9 | 23.6 | 10.2 | 0.4 |
| GIL12 |  |
66.1 | 24.2 | 9.3 | 0.4 | |
| DOM11 |  |
65.9 | 23.6 | 10.2 | 0.4 | |
| FR08 |  |
66.1 | 23.6 | 10.0 | 0.4 | |
| 0.944 ≤ z ≤ 2.534 | FR17 |  |
63.2 | 22.7 | 14.0 | 0.0 |
| GIL12 |  |
62.8 | 22.7 | 14.5 | 0.0 | |
| DOM11 |  |
61.6 | 22.1 | 16.3 | 0.0 | |
| FR08 |  |
64.5 | 21.5 | 14.0 | 0.0 | |
Notes. The reported α values are obtained using Eq. (11) as described in Sect. 5. Col. 1: redshift bins. Col. 2: EBL models: FR17 (Franceschini & Rodighiero 2017, 2018), GIL12 (Gilmore et al. 2012), DOM11 (Domínguez et al. 2011), FR08 (Franceschini et al. 2008). Col. 3: EBL normalization, α, and related statistical and systematic uncertainties. The systematic uncertainty includes the effect of the injected intrinsic spectral models, the σ threshold, and the flux scaling-factor (see Sect. 4.3). These effects were added in quadrature. Cols. 4, 5, 6, 7: percentage of final PWL, LP, EPWL, and ELP spectral intrinsic model, respectively, averaged over the results from the four different choices of starting model.
Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.
Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.
Initial download of the metrics may take a while.