<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/nlm-dtd/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd">
<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" article-type="research-article" specific-use="SMUR" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">EGUsphere</journal-id>
<journal-title-group>
<journal-title>EGUsphere</journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">EGUsphere</abbrev-journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">EGUsphere</abbrev-journal-title>
</journal-title-group>
<issn pub-type="epub"></issn>
<publisher><publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
<publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/egusphere-2026-5171</article-id>
<title-group>
<article-title>How much of a regional Coulomb stress map survives its own uncertainty? An audit with forecast-skill validation for T&amp;uuml;rkiye</article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Vural</surname>
<given-names>Mehmet Sait</given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">
<sup>1</sup>
</xref>
</contrib>
</contrib-group><aff id="aff1">
<label>1</label>
<addr-line>Department of Computer Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Natural Sciences, Gaziantep Islam Science and Technology University, Gaziantep, Türkiye</addr-line>
</aff>
<pub-date pub-type="epub">
<day>25</day>
<month>09</month>
<year>2026</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>2026</volume>
<fpage>1</fpage>
<lpage>31</lpage>
<permissions>
<copyright-statement>Copyright: &#x000a9; 2026 Mehmet Sait Vural</copyright-statement>
<copyright-year>2026</copyright-year>
<license license-type="open-access">
<license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri"  xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p>
</license>
</permissions>
<self-uri xlink:href="https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2026/egusphere-2026-5171/">This article is available from https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2026/egusphere-2026-5171/</self-uri>
<self-uri xlink:href="https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2026/egusphere-2026-5171/egusphere-2026-5171.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2026/egusphere-2026-5171/egusphere-2026-5171.pdf</self-uri>
<abstract>
<p>Static Coulomb stress transfer is increasingly automated over open catalogues and fault databases rather than built by hand for single events. We ask how much of such a result survives its own inputs. For T&amp;uuml;rkiye we resolve the stress imparted by 46 Mw &amp;ge; 6 earthquakes between 1990 and 2026 onto 6,970 sub-segments of the mapped active-fault network, screening each across 25 parameter combinations. Three silent failure modes emerge. First, 44 records of the GEM Global Active Faults Database store a central rake 180&amp;deg; from the circular midpoint of their own bounds; all lie in two source compilations, one being the principal North Anatolian Fault strand south of Istanbul, where it reverses the stress change from &amp;minus;0.029 to +0.251 MPa. Second, anchoring ruptures on catalogue centroids rather than mapped traces displaces them by a median of 18.4 km; across 27 testable events this flips the sign on a median of 11.9 % of segments against 2.0 % for a rake &amp;plusmn;15&amp;deg; and dip &amp;plusmn;10&amp;deg; perturbation, and is the larger of the two in 20 of them. Third, sign stability rises from 74.3 % to 89.5 % between 1 and 50 kPa. A pseudo-prospective test against subsequent seismicity gives a segment-weighted AUC of 0.711 for Mw &amp;lt; 7 sources, but clustering leaves an effective sample of 42, one event supplies 38 % of it, an event-equal estimate gives 0.589 &amp;plusmn; 0.112, and distance matching leaves 0.655 with an interval spanning 0.5. Screening improves the estimate by +0.016 (95 % paired bootstrap [+0.001, +0.051]; one-sided p = 0.020). The forecast evidence is suggestive rather than strong; the two input-integrity findings do not depend on it. Coulomb maps should be published with an explicit statement of which parts are interpretable.</p>
</abstract>
<counts><page-count count="31"/></counts>
</article-meta>
</front>
<body/>
<back>
</back>
</article>