Table A.1.
Number of sources rejected in the data quality cut process.
| XMM-Newton | Swift Only | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Catalog | Nstart | < 3σ | Underexp. | Γ ≤ 1.5 | Γ ≥ 3.0 | Nend | Nstart | < 3σ | Underexp. | Γ ≤ 1.5 | Γ ≥ 3.0 | Nend |
| Best+12 | 110 | 0 | 36 | 19 | 2 | 58 | 59 | 0 | 37 | 3 | 3 | 18 |
| Chandola+20 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Ching+17 | 38 | 0 | 13 | 10 | 1 | 16 | 18 | 1 | 12 | 1 | 1 | 4 |
| FRXCAT | 26 | 0 | 9 | 4 | 2 | 14 | 7 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 4 |
| Gendre+10 | 40 | 0 | 9 | 13 | 0 | 20 | 35 | 5 | 4 | 11 | 0 | 19 |
| GRG_catalog | 23 | 0 | 5 | 12 | 0 | 8 | 10 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 5 |
| Kosmaczewski+20 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 3 |
| Liao+20_I | 9 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| Liao+20_II | 16 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 9 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 4 |
| Macconi+20 | 26 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 23 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Mingo+19 | 15 | 0 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 8 | 11 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
| Miraghaei+17_FR | 16 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 7 | 9 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 3 |
| Miraghaei+17_FR_HL | 7 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| ROGUEI | 34 | 0 | 8 | 5 | 1 | 21 | 17 | 0 | 8 | 1 | 0 | 8 |
| Sobolewska+19a | 11 | 0 | 2 | 7 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 2 |
Notes.Column 1: Catalog name as defined in Sect. 3. Column 2: Number of sources that cross-matched with XMM-Newton (either X-ray and UV or just UV). Column 3: Number of sources that were rejected because the UV detection was < 3σ. Column 4: Number of sources that were rejected due to under exposure because either (a) the X-ray exposure time is less than 10 ks or (b) the uncertainty in a UV or X-ray flux measurement exceeds 100%. Column 5: Number of sources that had Γ≤1.5 and are identified as too obscured to be modeled by a power law. Column 6: Number of sources that had Γ≥3.0 and are identified as too physically far from what is seen in AGNs. Column 7: Number of sources remaining after subtracting the sources that were rejected by the data quality cuts in Cols. 3-6. Columns 8-13: Same as Cols. 2-7 but for Swift matches instead of XMM-Newton, except that Col. 10 is only sources that were rejected because the uncertainty in a UV or X-ray flux measurement exceeds 100% without an exposure requirement as with XMM-Newton.
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.