ArticleScientific data2025
A benchmark database of ten years of prospective next-day earthquake forecasts in California from the Collaboratory for the Study of Earthquake Predictability.
Article in Scientific data, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Select earthquake forecasting models demonstrate consistency with prospective decadal observations in California.Nature communications · 2026Article
- A benchmark database of ten years of prospective next-day earthquake forecasts in California from the Collaboratory for the Study of Earthquake Predictability.Scientific data · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Short-term seismicity forecasting models are increasingly developed and deployed for Operational Earthquake Forecasting (OEF) by government agencies and research institutions worldwide. To ensure their reliability, these forecasts must be rigorously tested against future observations in a fully prospective manner, allowing researchers to quantify model performance and build confidence in their predictive capabilities. The Collaboratory for the Study of Earthquake Predictability (CSEP) operated twenty-five fully automated M ≥ 3.95 seismicity models developed by nine research groups from Italy, California, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and Japan. Between August 2007 and August 2018, these models produced over 50,000 daily forecasts for California, each specifying expected earthquake rates on a predefined space-magnitude grid over 24-hour periods. In this article, we describe the forecast database, summarize the underlying models, and demonstrate how to access and evaluate the forecasts using the open-source pyCSEP Python toolkit. The forecast data are publicly available through Zenodo, and the pyCSEP software is openly available on GitHub. This unprecedented dataset of fully prospective earthquake forecasts provides a critical benchmark for developing and testing next-generation OEF models, fostering advancements in earthquake predictability research.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.