Seismo-ionospheric anomalies before M7.2 Haiti earthquake of August 14, 2021, from GPS-TEC

Comparative analysis of detected ionospheric anomalies with earthquake magnitudes: A case study of the earthquakes of March 4, 2021.

“…For statistical analysis of TEC irregularity, the moving median (MM) approach was adopted which utilizes quartile-based method (Liu et al, 2009;Thomas et al, 2021;Akpan, et al, 2022).…”

“…9, if absolute value of Dx is greater than or equal to 1.5 (i.e., |Dx | ≥ 1.5), then the actions of x are considered anomalous. Anomalous variations were then detected in the measured In this research, anomalous days were selected using the following conditions |∆TEC|≥ 1.5, Dst < −30 nT, kp >3 and F10.7 >100 SFU (Thomas et al, 2022).…”

“…Among various precursory phenomena studied on earthquake predictions, the ionospheric anomalies before, during and after strong earthquakes have been widely reported (Ibanga, et al, 2018;Akpan et al, 2019;Thomas et al, 2020Thomas et al, , 2021Thomas et al, , 2022 with lots of potentials. However, in all studied work, there has been no direct comparison of detected anomalies with the magnitude of the seismic event.…”

“…Due to how complex earthquake-preparation processes are, deciphering genuine earthquake indicators from abnormal geophysical signals is still a global challenge. A lot of scientists have claimed to predict earthquakes/tsunamis by observing multiple indirect precursors such as recording strange behaviors in animals, observing a surge in temperature, discharge of radon gas, and observing the change in seismicity patterns of the region (Shi et al, 2019;Thomas et al, 2021). Others have tried direct prediction techniques with extensive methodological analysis agreeable with measured parameters or/and seismic precursor parameters of earthquake preparation zones.…”