## 3 Data Analysis and Results  
In this paragraph, we present the findings based on the previously described methodology. The study is focused on the scaling properties of the aftershock sequences' temporal evolution, for the seven strong shallow earthquakes that took place over the previous five years in Greece (Table 1). The epicenters and focal mechanisms of these strong events are illustrated in Figure 1, with event numbers corresponding to the ones dictated in Table 1. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Event No.**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Date**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Time**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Lat.**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Long.**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Depth**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**\(M_{w}\)**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**\(M_{c}\)**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Database**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**No. of**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Duration**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**\(q\)**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**\(T_{q}\) (s)**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\(T_{c}\) (s)**} \\ \hline
1. Arkalochori & 27/09/21 & 06:17.21 & 35.15 & 25.27 & 10 & 6.0 & 2.5 & H.U.S.N. & 700 & 95 & 1.62 & 774 & \(7.8\times 10^{3}\) \\ \hline
2. Elassona & 03/03/21 & 10:16.08 & 39.73 & 22.22 & 10 & 6.3 & 2.5 & A.U.TH. & 676 & 33 & 1.62 & 231 & \(4.6\times 10^{3}\) \\ \hline
3. Samos & 30/10/20 & 11:51.25 & 37.91 & 26.84 & 10 & 7.0 & 2.5 & E.M.S.C. & 1158 & 64 & 1.63 & 220 & \(9.8\times 10^{3}\) \\ \hline
4. Parnitha & 19/07/19 & 11:13:15 & 38.13 & 23.53 & 14.97 & 5.1 & 1.0 & SL.-N.K.U.A. & 436 & 400 & 1.71 & 942 & \(175\times 10^{3}\) \\ \hline
5. Zakynthos & 25/10/18 & 22:54.50 & 37.35 & 20.49 & 13 & 6.6 & 2.1 & H.U.S.N. & 1668 & 366 & 1.68 & 1629 & \(5.6\times 10^{3}\) \\ \hline
6. Kos & 20/07/17 & 22:31:10 & 36.97 & 27.41 & 7.1 & 6.5 & 1.6 & K.O.E.R.I. & 6492 & 530 & 1.63 & 201 & \(15\times 10^{3}\) \\ \hline
7. Mytilene & 12/06/17 & 12:28:37 & 38.85 & 26.31 & 9 & 6.3 & 2.0 & E.M.S.C. & 1610 & 365 & 1.68 & 418 & \(11\times 10^{3}\) \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Results of all analyzed aftershock sequences, where \(M_{c}\) is the completeness magnitude of the catalogue used, \(q\) is the Tsallis entropic parameter of the interevent time distribution, \(T_{q}\) denotes the generalized scaled interevent time, and \(T_{c}\) is the cross-over point at which the transition from Tsallis to BG statistical mechanics occurs. Figure 1: Geographical distribution of the seven studied mainshocks. The index numbers depicted in this figure correspond to the event indices given in Table 1. The colors and sizes of the focal mechanisms (beachballs) are related to the depth and the magnitude of each event. The faults are visualized according to the GEM database [28]. For the purpose of the definition of the aftershock zone, an elliptical region was initially picked for every main shock based on the distribution of its aftershocks and consequently the catalogue for each aftershock sequence was obtained. In order to test the stability of our results, we examined creating catalogues of earthquakes with 20% greater major axes of the ellipse. Considering the spatial distribution of aftershocks, small changes do not affect the parameter estimations that we will consider below, since the majority of the aftershock events included in the elliptic area first selected. Subsequently, the catalogue was updated to include all earthquake event occurrences inside this zone and for a period of two to four months after the main shock (see Table 1). Following the creation of the catalogues, we estimated the magnitude of completeness (\(M_{c}\)) for each aftershock sequence using the frequency-magnitude distribution [29; 30]. It is worth noting that aftershock sequences can be depicted in terms of the modified parameters of the Gutenberg-Richter law [31; 32]. The locations of the seven shallow mainshocks are illustrated in Figure 1. The earthquake numbers are presented chronologically from most recent to oldest in the event indexes.