|
Detailed Reference Information |
Varotsos, P., Lazaridou, M. and Hadjicontis, V. (1996). Reply to “Earthquake prediction evaluation standards applied to the VAN Method,” by D. D. Jackson. Geophysical Research Letters 23: doi: 10.1029/96GL00916. issn: 0094-8276. |
|
Our earlier publications show that VAN method does not fail requirements (1) and (2) suggested by Jackson [1996>. No subjective ex-post facto decission was necessary for the evaluation of the success because, for the large majority of VAN predictions, the values of ΔM, Δr and Δt were published before the period 1987--1989 under discussion; in a few cases only (three out of 29), related with the observation of the new phenomenon of the SES electrical activity, the value of Δt was determined in 1988. Furthermore, a careful inspection-from physical point of view-shows that the three plausibility criteria, suggested by Jackson (to be obeyed by a candidate prediction technique), are actually met by VAN-method. ¿ American Geophysical Union 1996 |
|
|
|
BACKGROUND DATA FILES |
|
|
Abstract |
|
|
|
|
|
Keywords
Seismology, Seismic hazard assessment and prediction, Seismology, Earthquake parameters, Seismology, Instruments and techniques, Seismology, General or miscellaneous |
|
Publisher
American Geophysical Union 2000 Florida Avenue N.W. Washington, D.C. 20009-1277 USA 1-202-462-6900 1-202-328-0566 service@agu.org |
|
|
|