10.07.2015 Views

X-ray Study of Low-mass Young Stellar Objects in the ρ Ophiuchi ...

X-ray Study of Low-mass Young Stellar Objects in the ρ Ophiuchi ...

X-ray Study of Low-mass Young Stellar Objects in the ρ Ophiuchi ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

7.2. LUMINOSITY FUNCTION 977.2 Lum<strong>in</strong>osity FunctionFig. 7.2.— Normalized X-<strong>ray</strong> lum<strong>in</strong>osity functions <strong>of</strong> class I (dashed), class II (dash-dotted), andclass III (solid) sources <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> (a) quiescent and (b) flare phases. The mean value (Mean) andstandard deviation (σ) <strong>of</strong> log[< L X >] <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> unit <strong>of</strong> ergs s −1 for each class are shown <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> figures.Paren<strong>the</strong>ses <strong>in</strong>dicate errors <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> mean values.We calculate <strong>the</strong> X-<strong>ray</strong> lum<strong>in</strong>osity function for <strong>the</strong> detected X-<strong>ray</strong> sources <strong>of</strong> class I, II, andIII+III c (Figure 7.2), us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> ASURV statistical s<strong>of</strong>tware package (rev.1.2) 1 based on <strong>the</strong> maximumlikelihood Kaplan-Meier estimator <strong>in</strong> order to exam<strong>in</strong>e <strong>the</strong> differences along <strong>the</strong> evolutionalstages. The lum<strong>in</strong>osity function <strong>of</strong> class I seems to be shifted toward <strong>the</strong> higher values than those<strong>of</strong> class II and III+III c both <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> quiescent and flare phases.To be more quantitative, we estimate <strong>the</strong> significance level us<strong>in</strong>g two nonparametric two-sampletests <strong>in</strong> ASURV; <strong>the</strong> Gehan’s generalized Wilcoxon test (GW) and <strong>the</strong> logrank test (Feigelson &Nelson, 1985). The results are given <strong>in</strong> Table 7.2, where blank (...) <strong>in</strong>dicates that <strong>the</strong> significancelevel is less than 90 %. From Table 7.2, we see that both <strong>the</strong> GW and logrank tests for <strong>the</strong> < L X >difference between class I and <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>rs <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> flares show <strong>the</strong> marg<strong>in</strong>al significance level <strong>of</strong> ∼94 %.We fur<strong>the</strong>r should note that <strong>the</strong> effect <strong>of</strong> “undetected” fa<strong>in</strong>t flares <strong>of</strong> class I can not be ignored; ifwe assume an undetected class I has < L X > smaller than 10 30 ergs s −1 which is near <strong>the</strong> detectionthreshold <strong>of</strong> a class I flare, and add this source to <strong>the</strong> GW and logrank test sample, <strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong>relevant significance level is largely reduced to < 90 %. We hence conclude that <strong>the</strong> higher < L X ><strong>of</strong> class I than class II+III dur<strong>in</strong>g flares is marg<strong>in</strong>al.On <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand, from Table 7.2, we see no significant difference between class II andIII+III c source <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> flare phase. This is contrary to <strong>the</strong> results <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Taurus-Auriga-Perseus1 see http://www.astro.psu.edu/statcodes.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!