International Journal of

ADVANCED AND APPLIED SCIENCES

EISSN: 2313-3724, Print ISSN: 2313-626X

Frequency: 12

line decor
  
line decor

 Volume 13, Issue 3 (March 2026), Pages: 21-32

----------------------------------------------

 Original Research Paper

Prediction of large-scale earthquakes using precursor earthquakes: A regression study

 Author(s): 

Yu-Fan Fu, Zhong-Wei Zhang, Xin-Yue Yang, Shu Yuan *

 Affiliation(s):

College of Resources, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu 611130, China

 Full text

    Full Text - PDF

 * Corresponding Author. 

   Corresponding author's ORCID profile:  https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6565-6914

 Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

  https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2026.03.003

 Abstract

Earthquake prediction remains a major challenge in seismology, and no reliable method has yet been established. Previous studies suggest that large earthquakes (triggered earthquakes, TDEs) are often preceded by smaller events (triggering earthquakes, TGEs), but their quantitative relationship is unclear. In this study, we developed a prediction method based on four quadratic regression equations linking magnitude and distance between TGEs and TDEs, and three linear regression equations linking magnitude and time interval. The method was tested on 87 large earthquakes (M ≥ 6.6) from the past 100 years, including the 2023 Turkey (M7.8) and 2025 Myanmar (M7.7) events. Results show that 89% of epicenters and 63% of occurrence times were successfully predicted. For earthquakes of M ≥ 9.0 and those causing major casualties, the model achieved an accuracy within 100 km and 3 days, outperforming most existing approaches. Based on these results, we also propose a prediction for a future earthquake in Japan.

 © 2026 The Authors. Published by IASE.

 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

 Keywords

Earthquake prediction, Triggering earthquakes, Triggered earthquakes, Regression model, Seismology

 Article history

Received 22 April 2025, Received in revised form 5 January 2026, Accepted 27 February 2026

 Funding

This work was supported by the Sichuan Province Youth Science and Technology Innovation Team (20CXTD0062) to SY and the Applied Basic Research Program of Sichuan Province (2020YJ0410) to ZWZ. 

 Acknowledgment

No Acknowledgment. 

 Compliance with ethical standards

 Conflict of interest: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

 Citation:

Fu YF, Zhang ZW, Yang XY, and Yuan S (2026). Prediction of large-scale earthquakes using precursor earthquakes: A regression study. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 13(3): 21-32

  Permanent Link to this page

 Figures

  Fig. 1 Fig. 2 Fig. 3 Fig. 4 Fig. 5 Fig. 6

 Tables

  Table 1

 Supplementary files

  File 1

---------------------------------------------- 

 References (52)

  1. Akhoondzadeh M and Marchetti D (2022). Developing a fuzzy inference system based on multi-sensor data to predict powerful earthquake parameters. Remote Sensing, 14(13): 3203. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14133203   [Google Scholar]

  2. Banerjee A, Bhattacharjee M, Ghosh K, and Chatterjee S (2020). Synthetic minority oversampling in addressing imbalanced sarcasm detection in social media. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 79: 35995–36031. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-020-09138-4   [Google Scholar]

  3. Bao Z, Zhao J, Huang P, Yong S, and Wang X (2021). A deep learning-based electromagnetic signal for earthquake magnitude prediction. Sensors, 21(13): 4434. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21134434   [Google Scholar] PMid:34203508 PMCid:PMC8272143

  4. Berhich A, Belouadha FZ, and Kabbaj MI (2022). A location-dependent earthquake prediction using recurrent neural network algorithms. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 161: 107389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2022.107389   [Google Scholar]

  5. Beroza GC, Segou M, and Mousavi SM (2021). Machine learning and earthquake forecasting—next steps. Nature Communications, 12: 4761. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-24952-6   [Google Scholar] PMid:34362887 PMCid:PMC8346575

  6. Bletery Q and Nocquet JM (2023). The precursory phase of large earthquakes. Science, 381(6655): 297–301. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adg2565   [Google Scholar] PMid:37471540

  7. Chen Y, Li L, Li J, and Li G (2008). Wenchuan earthquake: Way of thinking is changed. Episodes, 31(4): 374–377. https://doi.org/10.18814/epiiugs/2008/v31i4/001   [Google Scholar]

  8. Cisternas M, Atwater BF, Torrejón F et al. (2005). Predecessors of the giant 1960 Chile earthquake. Nature, 437: 404–407. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature03943   [Google Scholar] PMid:16163355

  9. Cyranoski D (2004). Earthquake prediction: A seismic shift in thinking. Nature, 431: 1032. https://doi.org/10.1038/4311032a   [Google Scholar] PMid:15510118

  10. Dascher-Cousineau K, Shchur O, Brodsky EE, and Günnemann S (2023). Using deep learning for flexible and scalable earthquake forecasting. Geophysical Research Letters, 50(17): e2023GL103909. https://doi.org/10.1029/2023GL103909   [Google Scholar]

  11. Delorey AA, Chao K, Obara K, and Johnson PA (2015). Cascading elastic perturbation in Japan due to the 2012 Mw 8.6 Indian Ocean earthquake. Science Advances, 1: e1500468. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1500468   [Google Scholar] PMid:26601289 PMCid:PMC4646803

  12. Denolle MA, Dunham EM, Prieto GA, and Beroza GC (2014). Strong ground motion prediction using virtual earthquakes. Science, 343(6169): 399–403. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1245678   [Google Scholar] PMid:24458636

  13. Eleftheriou A, Filizzola C, Genzano N, Lacava T, Lisi M, Pergola N, Scaffidi I, and Tramutoli V (2016). Long-term RST analysis of anomalous TIR sequences in relation with earthquakes occurred in Greece in the period 2004–2013. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 173: 285–303. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-015-1116-8   [Google Scholar]

  14. Elmeligy Abdelhamid SH, Kuhlman CJ, Marathe MV, Mortveit HS, and Ravi SS (2015). GDSCalc: A web-based application for evaluating discrete graph dynamical systems. PLOS ONE, 10(8): e0133660. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0133660   [Google Scholar] PMid:26263006 PMCid:PMC4532456

  15. Friedmann H (2012). Radon in earthquake prediction research. Radiation Protection Dosimetry, 149(2): 177–184. https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncr229   [Google Scholar] PMid:21669940

  16. Gambino S, Laudani A, and Mangiagli S (2014). Seismicity pattern changes before the M = 4.8 Aeolian Archipelago (Italy) earthquake of August 16, 2010. The Scientific World Journal, 2014: 531212. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/531212   [Google Scholar] PMid:24511288 PMCid:PMC3910363

  17. Hall S (2023). What Turkey's earthquake tells us about the science of seismic forecasting. Nature, 615: 388–389. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-00685-y   [Google Scholar] PMid:36878981

  18. Han R, Cai M, Chen T, Yang T, Xu L, Shen X, Li J, and Liu J (2022). Preliminary study on the generating mechanism of the atmospheric vertical electric field before earthquakes. Applied Sciences, 12(14): 6896. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12146896   [Google Scholar]

  19. Herrera VMV, Rossello EA, Orgeira MJ et al. (2022). Long-term forecasting of strong earthquakes in North America, South America, Japan, Southern China and Northern India with machine learning. Frontiers in Earth Science, 10: 905792. https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2022.905792   [Google Scholar]

  20. Huang F, Li M, Ma Y, Han Y, Tian L, Luan G, and Jin S (2017). Studies on earthquake precursors in China: A review for recent 50 years. Geodesy and Geodynamics, 8(1): 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geog.2016.12.002   [Google Scholar]

  21. Hubbard J and Shaw JH (2009). Uplift of the Longmen Shan and Tibetan plateau, and the 2008 Wenchuan (M = 7.9) earthquake. Nature, 458: 194–197. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature07837   [Google Scholar] PMid:19279635

  22. Jozinović D, Lomax A, and Stajduhar I (2020). Rapid prediction of earthquake ground shaking intensity using raw waveform data and a convolutional neural network. Geophysical Journal International, 222(2): 1379–1389. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggaa233   [Google Scholar]

  23. Kerr RA (2011). Earthquake prediction: A quake may have hinted that it was on the way. Science, 331(6019): 836. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.331.6019.836   [Google Scholar] PMid:21330502

  24. Klyuev RV, Morgoev ID, Morgoeva AD, Gavrina OA, and Martyushev NV (2022). Methods of forecasting electric energy consumption: A literature review. Energies, 15(23): 8919. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15238919   [Google Scholar]

  25. Kodaira S, Iinuma T, and Imai K (2021). Investigating a tsunamigenic megathrust earthquake in the Japan Trench. Science, 371(6534): eabe1169. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abe1169   [Google Scholar] PMid:33707238

  26. Lambert V, Lapusta N, and Faulkner D (2021). Scale dependence of earthquake rupture prestress in models with enhanced weakening: Implications for event statistics and inferences of fault stress. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 126(10): e2021JB021886. https://doi.org/10.1029/2021JB021886   [Google Scholar]

  27. Lin JW (2013). Ionospheric anomalies related to the (M = 7.3), August 27, 2012, Puerto earthquake, (M = 6.8), August 30, 2012 Jan Mayen Island earthquake, and (M = 7.6), August 31, 2012, Philippines earthquake: Two-dimensional principal component analysis. The Scientific World Journal, 2013: 271513. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/271513   [Google Scholar] PMid:23844386 PMCid:PMC3690271

  28. Liu C, Lay T, Wang R et al. (2023a). Complex multi-fault rupture and triggering during the 2023 earthquake doublet in southeastern Türkiye. Nature Communications, 14: 5564. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-41404-5   [Google Scholar] PMid:37689816 PMCid:PMC10492857

  29. Liu J, Zhang T, Gao CL, and Wang PX (2023b). Forecasting earthquake magnitude and epicenter by incorporating spatiotemporal priors into deep neural networks. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 61: 5911413. https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2023.3281784   [Google Scholar]

  30. Moro M, Saroli M, Stramondo S, Bignami C, Albano M, Cinti FR, and Falcucci E (2017). New insights into earthquake precursors from InSAR. Scientific Reports, 7(1): 12035. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-12058-3   [Google Scholar] PMid:28931843 PMCid:PMC5607348

  31. Mousavi SM and Beroza GC (2022). Deep-learning seismology. Science, 377(6607): eabm4470. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abm4470   [Google Scholar] PMid:35951699

  32. Mousavi SM and Beroza GC (2023). Machine learning in earthquake seismology. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, 51: 105–129. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-earth-071822-100323   [Google Scholar]

  33. Nandan S, Ouillon G, and Sornette D (2022). Are large earthquakes preferentially triggered by other large events? Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 127(8): e2022JB024380. https://doi.org/10.1029/2022JB024380   [Google Scholar]

  34. Nur A and Mavko G (1974). Postseismic viscoelastic rebound. Science, 183: 204–206. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.183.4121.204   [Google Scholar] PMid:17777265

  35. Parsons T, Segou M, and Marzocchi W (2014). The global aftershock zone. Tectonophysics, 618: 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2014.01.038   [Google Scholar]

  36. Peltzer G, Crampé F, and King G (1999). Evidence of nonlinear elasticity of the crust from the Mw7.6 Manyi (Tibet) earthquake. Science, 286(5438): 272–276. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.286.5438.272   [Google Scholar] PMid:10514367

  37. Pokharel B, Alvioli M, and Lim S (2021). Assessment of earthquake-induced landslide inventories and susceptibility maps using slope unit-based logistic regression and geospatial statistics. Scientific Reports, 11(1): 21333. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-00780-y   [Google Scholar] PMid:34716368 PMCid:PMC8556321

  38. Qian FY, Zhao BR, Qian W, Zhao J, and He SG (2009). Impending HRT wave precursors to the Wenchuan Ms8.0 earthquake and methods of earthquake impending prediction by using HRT wave. Science in China Series D: Earth Sciences, 52: 1572–1584. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11430-009-0124-x   [Google Scholar]

  39. Rundle JB, Stein S, Donnellan A, Turcotte DL, Klein W, and Saylor C (2021). The complex dynamics of earthquake fault systems: New approaches to forecasting and nowcasting of earthquakes. Reports on Progress in Physics, 84: 076801. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6633/abf893   [Google Scholar] PMid:33857928 PMCid:PMC9787018

  40. Rundle JB, Tiampo KF, Klein W, and Martins JSS (2002). Self-organization in leaky threshold systems: The influence of near-mean field dynamics and its implications for earthquakes, neurobiology, and forecasting. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 99(1): 2514–2521. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.012581899   [Google Scholar] PMid:11875204 PMCid:PMC128570

  41. Shao B, Hou G, and Shen J (2021). Inter-episodes earthquake migration in the Bohai-Zhangjiakou Fault Zone, North China: Insights from numerical modeling. PLOS ONE, 16(5): e0251606. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0251606   [Google Scholar] PMid:34010347 PMCid:PMC8133458

  42. Steinmann R, Seydoux L, Beaucé É, and Campillo M (2022). Hierarchical exploration of continuous seismograms with unsupervised learning. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 127(1): e2021JB022455. https://doi.org/10.1029/2021JB022455   [Google Scholar] PMid:35864916 PMCid:PMC9285886

  43. Tehseen R, Farooq MS, and Abid A (2021). A framework for the prediction of earthquake using federated learning. PeerJ Computer Science, 7: e540. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.540   [Google Scholar] PMid:34141879 PMCid:PMC8176529

  44. Tramutoli V, Aliano C, Corrado R, Filizzola C, Genzano N, Lisi M, Martinelli G, and Pergola N (2013). On the possible origin of thermal infrared radiation (TIR) anomalies in earthquake-prone areas observed using robust satellite techniques (RST). Chemical Geology, 339: 157–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemgeo.2012.10.042   [Google Scholar]

  45. Velasco AA, Hernandez S, Parsons T, and Pankow K (2008). Global ubiquity of dynamic earthquake triggering. Nature Geoscience, 1: 375–379. https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo204   [Google Scholar]

  46. Vigny C, Simons WJ F, Abu S, Bamphenyu R, Satirapod C, Choosakul N, Subarya C, Socquet A, Omar K, Abidin HZ, and Ambrosius BAC (2005). Insight into the 2004 Sumatra-Andaman earthquake from GPS measurements in Southeast Asia. Nature, 436: 201–206. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature03937   [Google Scholar] PMid:16015320

  47. Wang X, Zhong Z, Yao Y, Li Z, Zhou S, and Zhang Y (2023). Small earthquakes can help predict large earthquakes: A machine learning perspective. Applied Sciences, 13(11): 6424. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13116424   [Google Scholar]

  48. Wei C, Zhang Y, Guo X, Hui S, Qin M, and Ma W (2013). Thermal infrared anomalies of several strong earthquakes. The Scientific World Journal, 2013: 208407. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/208407   [Google Scholar] PMid:24222728 PMCid:PMC3809928

  49. Xu XL, Chen W, and Sun YF (2019). Over-sampling algorithm for imbalanced data classification. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 30(6): 1182–1191. https://doi.org/10.21629/JSEE.2019.06.12   [Google Scholar]

  50. Yousefzadeh M, Hosseini SA, and Farnaghi M (2021). Spatiotemporally explicit earthquake prediction using deep neural network. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 144: 106663. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2021.106663   [Google Scholar]

  51. Yue Y, Chen F, and Chen G (2022). Statistical and comparative analysis of multi-channel infrared anomalies before earthquakes in China and the surrounding area. Applied Sciences, 12(16): 7958. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12167958   [Google Scholar]

  52. Zhang M, Liu M, Feng T, Wang RJ, and Zhu WQ (2022). LOC-FLOW: An end-to-end machine learning-based high-precision earthquake location workflow. Seismological Research Letters, 93(5): 2426–2438. https://doi.org/10.1785/0220220019   [Google Scholar]