using a `MYTorus` edge-on reflection spectrum, obtained by fixing $\theta_{\rm obs}$ to 90. The relative strength of these two components (front and back-scattered) is encoded in two constants, namely A$_{\rm S90}$ and A$_{\rm S00}$, which are left free to vary. Their respective line components for this geometry are normalized with A$_{\rm L90}$ and A$_{\rm L00}$. Finally, in the most general case, the column density $N_{\rm H}$ obscuring the direct continuum can be decoupled from the column density responsible for the back-reflection or the forward-reflection or both. For the sake of simplicity, a single $N_{\rm H}$ value is adopted. Refer to @2012MNRAS.423.3360Y for an exhaustive example on the usage of the model in its decoupled mode. The `Torus` model does not decouple the three components, but has the opening angle as a free parameter, allowing the measurement of the covering factor (see [@2015ApJ...805...41B]). In the following, we always assume a nearly edge-on inclination of the reprocessor (i.e., we fix the inclination angle of the system, $\theta_{\rm obs}$, to   90), even if the toroidal geometry is slightly different between the two models. We first apply all these physical models alone; then, we concentrate on the best among them and refine it adding 