Special section-assessment of schemes for earthquake prediction. Assessment of schemes for earthquake prediction: Editor's introduction

Geophysical Journal International

Volumn 131, Issue 3, 1997, Pages 413-420

  Evans, Russ ^a  

^a BRITISH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Deformation; Earthquake prediction; Faulting; Fractals; Fractures; Shear stress

Indexed keywords

EARTHQUAKE PRECURSOR; EARTHQUAKE PREDICTION; SEISMIC HAZARD;

EID: 0031406483     PISSN: 0956540X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-246x.1997.tb06585.x     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Aceves, R.L. & Park, S.K., 1997. Cannot earthquakes be predicted?, Science, in press.
2. Allen, C.R., 1976. Responsibilities in earthquake prediction, Bull. seism. Soc. Am., 66, 2069-2074.
3. Anderson, P.W., 1990. On the nature of physical laws, Physics Today, 43(12), 9.
4. Anderson, P.W., 1992. The Reverend Thomas Bayes, needles in haystacks, and the fifth force, Physics Today, 45(1), 9-11.
5. Bakun, W.H. & Lindh, A.G., 1985. The Parkfield, California, earthquake prediction experiment, Science, 229, 619-624.
6. Bernard, P., Pinettes, P., Hatzidimitrou, P.M., Scordilis, E.M., Veis, G. & Milas, P., 1997. From precursors to prediction: a few recent cases from Greece, Geophys. J. Int., 131, 467-477 (this issue).
7. Enomoto, Y., Tsutsumi, A., Fujinawa, Y., Kasahara, M. & Hashimoto, H., 1997. Candidate precursors of pulse-like geoelectric signals possibly related to recent seismic activities in Japan, Geophys. J. Int., 131, 485-494 (this issue).
8. Geller, R.J., 1996. Debate on evaluation of the VAN method: Editor's introduction, Geophys. Res. Lett., 23, 1291-1293.
9. Geller, R.J., 1997a. Earthquakes: thinking about the unpredictable, EOS, Trans. Am. geophys. Un., 78, 63, 66.
10. Geller, R.J., 1997b. Earthquake prediction: a critical review, Geophys. J. Int., 131, 425-450 (this issue)
11. Geller, R.J., Jackson, D.D., Kagan, Y.Y. & Mulargia, F., 1997a. Earthquakes cannot be predicted, Science, 275, 1616-1617.
12. Geller, R.J., Jackson, D.D., Kagan, Y.Y. & Mulargia, F., 1997b. Cannot earthquakes be predicted?, Science, 278, 488-490.
13. Hill, D.P. et al., 1993. Seismicity triggered by the magnitude 7.3 Landers, California, earthquake, Science, 260, 1617-1623.
14. Kagan, Y.Y., 1996. Comment on 'The Gutenberg-Richter distribution or characteristic earthquakes: which is it?' by Steven G. Wesnousky, Bull. seism. Soc. Am., 86, 274-285.
15. Kagan, Y.Y., 1997. Are earthquakes predictable?, Geophys,J. Int., 131, 505-525 (this issue).
16. Kuhn, T.S., 1962. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, University of Chicago Press.
17. Leary, P.C., 1997, Rock as a critical point system and the inherent implausibility of reliable earthquake prediction, Geophys. J. Int., 131, 451-466 (this issue).
18. Lighthill, J. (ed.), 1996. A Critical Review of VAN, World Scientific, Singapore.
19. Macelwane, J.B., 1946. Forecasting earthquakes, Bull. seism. Soc Am., 36,1-4; reprinted 1997 in Geophys. J. Int., 131, 421-422 (this issue).
20. Main, I., 1995. Earthquakes as critical phenomena: implications for probabilistic seismic hazard analysis, Bull. seism. Soc. Am 85, 1299-1308.
21. Main, I., 1996. Statistical physics, seismogenesis and seismic hazard Rev. Geophys., 34(4), 433-462.
22. Main, I., 1997. Long odds on prediction, Nature, 385, 19-20.
23. Matthews, R.A.J., 1997. Decision-theoretic limits on earthquake prediction, Geophys. J. Int., 131, 526-529 (this issue).
24. Michael, A.J., 1997. Testing prediction methods: earthquake clusterine versus the Poisson model, Geophys. Res. Lett., 24, 1891-1894.
25. Miller, S., 1997. Earthquakes: prediction and the media - a case study in public understanding of science, Geophys. J. Int., 131, 530-533 (this issue).
26. Mulargia, F., 1997. Retrospective validation of time association of precursors, Geophys. J. Int., 131, 500-504 (this issue).
27. Olson, R.S., Podesta, B. & Nigg, J.M., 1989. The Politics of Earthquake Prediction, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
28. Reid, H.F., 1910. The California Earthquake of April 19, 1906, Vol. II: The Mechanics of the Earthquake, Carnegie Instutition of Washington, Washington, DC.
29. Stark, P.B., 1997. Earthquake prediction; the null hypothesis, Geophys. J. Int., 131, 495-499 (this issue).
30. Stiros, S.C., 1997. Costs and benefits of earthquake prediction studies in Greece, Geophys. J. Int., 131, 478-484 (this issue).
31. Tsuruoka, H., Ohtake, M. & Sato, H., 1995. Statistical test of the tidal triggering of earthquakes: contribution of the ocean tide effect, Geophys. J. Int., 122, 183-194.
32. Varotsos, P. & Kulhánek, O. (eds), 1993. Special issue: measurements and theoretical models of the earth's electric field variations related to earthquakes, Tectonophysics, 224, 1-288.
33. Wesnousky, S.G., 1994. The Gutenberg-Richter distribution or characteristic earthquakes: which is it?, Bull, seism. Soc. Am., 84, 1940-1959.
34. Wesnousky, S.G., 1996. Reply to Yan Kagan's comment on 'The Gutenberg-Richter distribution or characteristic earthquakes: which is it?', Bull. seism. Soc. Am., 86, 286-291.
35. Wyss, M. (ed.), 1991. Evaluation of Proposed Earthquake Precursors, American Geophysical Union, Washington, DC.
36. Wyss, M., 1997a. Second round of evaluation of proposed earthquake precursors, Pageoph, 149, 3-16.
37. Wyss, M., 1997b. Cannot earthquakes be predicted?, Science, 278, 487-488.
38. Wyss, M. & Booth, D.C., 1997. The IASPEI procedure for the evaluation of earthquake precursors, Geophys. J. Int., 131, 423-424 (this issue).