## 3 Results and Discussion
### Application
#### 3.2.2 Coulomb Stress Changes  
Coulomb stress changes trigger aftershocks and successive earthquakes when a large earthquake occurs. [PERSON] et al. (2012) [27] stated that an earthquake on a fault plane can trigger subsequent earthquakes at short distances from its hypocenter through Coulomb stress transformation. Previous studies [28; 29] had suggested that aftershocks can occur in areas with a high static \(\Delta\)CFS value and indicated that a location with a positive \(\Delta\)CFS could increase loading stress to make faults more susceptible to brittle failure. When the \(\Delta\)CFS is greater than 0.1 bar in some areas, subsequent earthquakes may occur in such areas ([30; 31]). On the basis of results from related studies, we calculated the \(\Delta\)CFS of the Meinong earthquake based on the inverted model to investigate the activities of aftershocks and determine the potential for subsequent earthquakes. In this study, [PERSON]'s method (1992) [25] was applied to calculate \(\Delta\)CFS at different depths, and the results are presented in Figure 7.  
Figure 7: Coulomb stress change (\(\Delta\)CFS) distributions at different depths (10–30 km). The star represents the hypocenter, and the yellow dots represent aftershocks. Areas with high \(\Delta\)CFS values were west, east, and north of the hypocenter. Coupled with aftershock activities, the \(\Delta\)CFS value could be used to explain the mainshock–aftershock relationship and the earthquake’s aftershock triggering mechanism.  
Three areas presented in Figure 7 are worthy of discussion. At depths below 20 km, some high \(\Delta\)CFS values of \(>\)0.1 bar gradually accumulated and formed a patch around the area at a longitude of 120.3\({}^{\circ}\) E to 120.4\({}^{\circ}\) E and latitude of 22.85\({}^{\circ}\) N to 23.1\({}^{\circ}\) N to the west of the hypocenter. Coincidentally, a cluster of aftershocks with depths of 22 to 30 km was located in this area. These aftershocks may be triggered by the mainshock, offering strong evidence that our derived result is meaningful and fits well with findings on the triggering mechanism. The second area located north of the hypocenter, with high \(\Delta\)CFS values of \(>\)0.1 bar, had a depth of 10-25 km, and some aftershocks were triggered here. [PERSON] et al. (2017) [32] suggested that a fault of northwest-to-southeast trend existed and that a north-dipping fault located north of the source area may have moved, affected by the initial shock. This suggestion agreed with our derived results. The third area within a longitude of 120.55\({}^{\circ}\) E to 120.65\({}^{\circ}\) E and latitude of 22.85\({}^{\circ}\) N to 23\({}^{\circ}\) N was located east of the hypocenter and formed a path with high \(\Delta\)CFS values (\(>\)0.1 bar) from depths of 10-25 km. [PERSON] et al. (2017) [4] demonstrated that aftershocks occurred within 10 days of the main shock and that the background seismicity was \(>\)2.0 M\({}_{\rm L}\). They also revealed that the area confined to a longitude of 120.5\({}^{\circ}\) E to 120.65\({}^{\circ}\) E and latitude of 22.85\({}^{\circ}\) N to 22.95\({}^{\circ}\) N had a cluster of aftershocks distributed at depths between 10 and 20 km. According to previous results, our derived \(\Delta\)CFS pattern seems to estimate the distributions of aftershocks successfully, indicating that our inverted source model is highly accurate.