Reader Comments

Post a new comment on this article


Posted by JonathanTouboul on 20 Oct 2010 at 17:15 GMT

Following remarks that we had from a number of readers, we would like to provide here clarifications to replicate the analysis of the above paper.

1) While it was stated in the paper that using two different methods to calculate the size of avalanches gave equivalent results, our presentation was inaccurate as to which of the methods were used in the tables and figures. We clarify that Figures 3,4,5 were done using the size defined as the total
number of events (peaks) within each avalanche (coefficients
provided in Table 2), while the results of the statistical analysis presented on Table 1 correspond to the case of the size defined as cumulated event amplitudes within each avalanche. As stated in the paper, the results obtained with both definitions of size were equivalent and all of our conclusions are valid for either of them. The corresponding plots are not provided in the text and can be provided upon request.

2) We clarify that the logarithms used in some of the figures were natural logarithms (Figs 3 to 7, Fig. 10), while in other figures, the logarithms were on base 10 (Figs 8 and 9).

We apologize for the trouble that these missing precisions
could have caused to readers interested in replicating our
analysis in detail, and we remain available for any further

No competing interests declared.