Table A.3.
Results of the statistical analysis.
| Quantity | Compared samples | # Measurements | # ULs | A-D pvalue pre-trial | Peto logrank pvalue pre-trial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LBLR/LEdd | Our sample vs. P21 | 32 vs. 658 | 20 vs. 336 | 7.00 × 10−4 | 3.10 × 10−3 |
| Our sample vs. P17 | 32 vs. 47 | 20 vs. − | 2.01 × 10−1 | 6.54 × 10−1 | |
| Our sample vs. S12 | 32 vs. 78 | 20 vs. 83 | 8.09 × 10−1 | 1.00 × 100 | |
| Lγ erg·s−1 | our sample vs. P21 | 24 vs. 1000 | 28 vs. − | 8.36 × 10−1 | 1.47 × 10−2 |
| our sample vs. P17 | 24 vs. 307 | 28 vs. 191 | 1.00 × 10−4 | 6.04 × 10−4 | |
| our sample vs. S12 | 24 vs. 100 | 28 vs. 61 | 5.51 × 10−2 | 4.13 × 10−1 | |
| our sample vs. BZCat | 24 vs. 1111 | 28 vs. 1666 | 1.44 × 10−1 | 1.72 × 10−2 | |
| our sample vs. 4LAC-DR3 | 24 vs. 1846 | 28 vs. − | 7.34 × 10−1 | 5.32 × 10−2 | |
| P1.4 GHz[W⋅Hz−1] | our sample vs. P21 | 52 vs. 914 | − vs. − | 8.50 × 10−2 | 3.57 × 10−2 |
| our sample vs. P17 | 52 vs. 416 | − vs. − | 2.10 × 10−2 | 1.03 × 10−2 | |
| our sample vs. S12 | 52 vs. 74 | − vs. − | 1.00 × 10−4 | 1.53 × 10−4 * | |
| our sample vs. BZCat | 52 vs. 2747 | − vs. − | 3.44 × 10−1 | 2.33 × 10−1 | |
| z | our sample vs. P21 | 49 vs. 1000 | 3 vs. − | 2.15 × 10−2 | 2.79 × 10−2 |
| our sample vs. P17 | 49 vs. 498 | 3 vs. − | 1.25 × 10−1 | 1.83 × 10−1 | |
| our sample vs. S12 | 49 vs. 162 | 3 vs. − | 1.00 × 10−4 | 1.52 × 10−5 * | |
| our sample vs. BZCat | 49 vs. 2753 | 3 vs. − | 6.82 × 10−1 | 9.42 × 10−1 | |
| our sample vs. 4LAC-DR3 | 49 vs. 1822 | 3 vs. − | 5.50 × 10−3 | 1.03 × 10−2 | |
| Lγ/LEdd | our sample vs. P21 | 14 vs. 658 | 38 vs. 342 | 7.95 × 10−2 | 5.94 × 10−1 |
| our sample vs. P17 | 14 vs. 37 | 38 vs. 466 | 1.04 × 10−3 | 1.41 × 10−2 | |
| our sample vs. S12 | 14 vs. 78 | 38 vs. 62 | 3.12 × 10−1 | 5.77 × 10−1 | |
| Ldisk [erg·s−1] | our sample vs. P21 | 32 vs. 658 | 20 vs. 342 | 9.19 × 10−2 | 6.06 × 10−1 |
| our sample vs. P17 | 32 vs. 47 | 20 vs. − | 6.90 × 10−3 | 1.32 × 10−2 | |
| our sample vs. S12 | 32 vs. 78 | 20 vs. 83 | 1.51 × 10−1 | 2.59 × 10−1 | |
| MBH[M⊙] | our sample vs. P21 | 32 vs. 658 | 20 vs. 342 | 1.08 × 10−2 | 4.66 × 10−4 |
| our sample vs. P17 | 32 vs. 47 | 20 vs. − | 5.00 × 10−4 | 1.70 × 10−6 * | |
| our sample vs. S12 | 32 vs. 78 | 20 vs. 83 | 2.31 × 10−2 | 3.48 × 10−1 | |
| rBLR[cm] | our sample vs. P21 | 32 vs. 658 | 20 vs. 342 | 1.02 × 10−1 | 5.68 × 10−1 |
| our sample vs. P17 | 32 vs. 47 | 20 vs. − | 7.67 × 10−3 | 1.14 × 10−2 | |
| our sample vs. S12 | 32 vs. 78 | 20 vs. 84 | 1.41 × 10−1 | 2.36 × 10−1 | |
| rDT[cm] | our sample vs. P21 | 32 vs. 658 | 20 vs. 342 | 9.75 × 10−2 | 5.72 × 10−1 |
| our sample vs. P17 | 32 vs. 47 | 20 vs. − | 7.76 × 10−3 | 1.18 × 10−2 | |
| our sample vs. S12 | 32 vs. 78 | 20 vs. 84 | 1.64 × 10−1 | 2.46 × 10−1 | |
Notes. Results of the Anderson-Darling and Peto logrank tests (see also Appendix D) performed on the candidate PeVatron blazars and the reference samples of Paliya et al. (2021, 2017), Sbarrato et al. (2012), Massaro et al. (2014), Ajello et al. (2022). The first column lists the physical property on which the test was applied. The second, third and fourth report the compared samples, with the corresponding number of measurements and the number of upper limits (ULs) excluded from the A-D and included in the Peto logrank. In the fifth and sixth columns, the pre-trial A-D and Peto logrank pvalues, respectively. The three cases in which the Peto logrank pvalue is considered statistically significant with the Benjamini-Hochberg method are highlighted with a * symbol (see text for further details).
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.