## 4 Results and Discussion
### Interactions Prior to the Seismic Event  
In the first interval block (1-24 h), the input dataset was filtered in order to remove 1126 data points (58.6% of the set) with a correlation coefficient lower than 0.4. After the data were filtered, they were divided according to the correlation direction. A total of 475 data points showed positive correlations, whereas 319 data points showed negative correlations. Solely positive correlations were observed in channels 1, 3, and 4. On channel 1, a positive correlation was observed for the signals from probes 3 and 6. Channel 3--was formed by probes 3, 5, and 6. Channel 4 was obtained from probes 3 and 6. Solely negative correlations were observed between the signal from probe 2 and the signal from channel 1, between the signals from probes 2 and 3 and the signal from channel 2, and between the signal from probe 4 and the signal from channel 4. In the remaining cases, the correlations were mixed. Both positive and negative correlations were most frequently observed in channel 2. Between 1 and 24 h prior to the event, the observed correlations of the signals from channel 1 and the signals from probes 3 and 5 were opposite to the correlations observed for these probes on channel 2. This phenomenon was observed prior to three subsequent seismic events for the signal from channels 1 and 2, which correlated with the signal from probe 3. For probe 5, this phenomenon occurred prior to events no. 2 and 3. Identical interactions were observed for the signal on channels 3 and 4 correlated with the signal from probe 2 prior to events no. 2, 3, and 4. They were negative prior to event no. 4 and positive prior to events no. 2 and 3. The signals from these channels were positively correlated with the signal from probe 6 prior to events 2, 3, and 4 (Figure 20A). Such a situation may confirm the radon response to changes in the stress field associated with increased pore pressure and reduced effective stress in the fracture and fault zones. The emission from the rock mass, induced by the redistribution of compressional and extensional stresses, has been described in the work of [PERSON] and co-authors [44]. The analyses of the signals from 25 to 48 h prior to the seismic event included 547 data points with positive correlations and 355 data points with negative correlations. A total of 902 data points were analyzed, representing 47% of the input dataset. The signal from probe 4 was not related to the signal on channel 1. Solely positive correlations were observed between the signal from channel 1 and the signals from probes 3, 5, and 6. The signal from channel 3 was correlated with the signals from probes 2, 3, and 5. The signal from channel 4, on the other hand, was correlated only with the signal from probe 6. These relationships were observed for 24 h. Solely negative correlations were observed between the signals from probes 2 and 5 and the signal from channel 2, and between the signal from probe 4 and the signals from channels 3 and 4. On channel 2, this correlation persisted for 24 h. However, correlations in channels 3 and 4 were observed for 14 and 18 h, respectively. The signals from the remaining detector probes were correlated both positively and negatively with the signals from the channels that recorded tectonic activity. Such correlations were most frequently observed in channels 2 and 4. Between 25 and 48 h, an identical signal correlation was observed for probes 3, 5, and 6 on channel 1 and for probe 6 on channel 4 prior to events no. 1, 2  
Figure 20: (**A**) Comparison of the correlations between radon signals recorded by the probes and signals of tectonic activity in the rock mass observed on individual channels from 1 to 24 h before four seismic events, excluding correlation. Coefficients at a statistically insignificant level, i.e., <0.4. Correlation indicated with red line.