Additionally, it identifies  
Figure 1: Tectonic setting of the Aegean–Anatolian region: the black and red lines represent the major thrust and faults in region, respectively; the black arrows represent the motion of the Aegean and Anatolian blocks; the red and yellow triangles are the volcanoes (Reprinted with permission from Ref. [30]). the conditions that allowed the rupture to jump from the Narli fault to the EAF and generated a delayed backpropagating rupture towards the southwest [32]. [PERSON] et al. [34] investigated the existence of a preparatory process for the first major earthquake, occurring on 6 February 2023, in southern Turkey by analysing the temporal evolution of seismic data from around 7500 EQs (ML \(\geq\) 1.5) along the EAF since 2014. These authors found that different segments of the EAF showed varying temporal patterns in nonclustered seismicity, which they interpret as changes in fault coupling. They also examined the Gutenberg-Richter \(b\)-value [35], fractal dimension, and energy rate of the earthquakes. The Amanos and Pazarckk fault segments exhibited a long-term trend from 2020 to 2022, suggesting a quiescence phase, followed by changes in EQ clustering and characteristics starting about eight months before the first major event. These findings confirm a long-lasting preparatory phase for the Kahramanmaras EQ and highlight the potential for detecting such phases to mitigate the seismic risk by identifying deviations from steady fault behaviour. About 8 months prior to the 2023 M7.8 Kahramanmaras EQ on the EAFZ, seismicity transients were noted [36]. These transients consisted of isolated spatio-temporal clusters within 65 km of the future epicentre, displaying non-Poissonian inter-event time statistics, magnitude correlations, and low \(b\)-values. Such patterns had not been observed locally since at least 2014. Despite this, only sparse seismic activity occurred near the epicentre in the weeks before the quake. The preparatory trends for this EQ align with patterns seen in laboratory stick-slip tests and numerical models of heterogeneous EQ ruptures involving multiple fault segments [36]. A recent study [37], observing strong geomagnetic storms before these EQs with long delays, proposed that the Turkish seismic events may be the result of the solar wind stimulation on the lithosphere processes. The surge in research following significant natural disasters, such as that in Turkey, illustrates how the scientific community intensifies its efforts to thoroughly investigate the underlying processes. Their goal is to better understand the phenomena occurring during the preparatory phases of such events and, ultimately, to develop methods for early detection. This aim requires a holistic approach [38] that embraces different fields of knowledge, traditionally even very far from each other (e.g., from seismology to atmospheric physics, and ionospheric and particle physics). Generally, anomalous behaviours may emerge, as a result of some kind of interaction, as a pattern that significantly deviates from the expected behaviour--e.g., seismic acceleration due to some significant change in the stress field during the earthquake preparation phase (e.g., [39]), resonant vibrations of magnetic field lines [18], or as outliers, i.e., extreme values emerging with respect to a previous trend or a background, such as peaks in the counting rate (CR) of Van Allen's belts' particle precipitation measured by satellites [40]. The fact that we have learned from the cases analysed in the literature is that, even when in the presence of a strong earthquake, not all observables known to be subject to coupling with the lithosphere through one of the \"channels\" show anomalies simultaneously, but the latter can appear at their own space-time scales, and this is a major concern. Nonetheless, our experience in this field is that a multidisciplinary approach is the only way to a deeper understanding of the physics behind the seismic event.