“…Beyond the traditional designation of eruption styles based on visual observation of eruptions at type localities, eruption imaging and geophysical recording are currently pushing toward more quantitative definitions of explosive eruptions. Recent advances in eruption imaging, in particular, have extensively helped parameterizing explosive activity at several volcanoes, including, but not limited to, Stromboli (Italy) (e.g., Bombrun et al., 2015; Pering et al., 2020; Ripepe et al., 1993; Taddeucci, Scarlato, et al., 2012), Yasur (Vanuatu) (Gaudin et al., 2017; Simons, Cronin, Eccles, Bebbington, & Jolly, 2020; Simons, Cronin, Eccles, Jolly, et al., 2020; Spina et al., 2015), Reunion (France) (Edwards et al., 2020), Etna (Italy) (Pering et al., 2014; Pioli et al., 2022; Spina et al., 2017), Batu Tara (Indonesia) (Spina et al., 2021), Fuego (Guatemala) (Marchetti et al., 2009), Kilauea (USA) (Gestrich et al., 2022; Houghton et al., 2021; Mintz et al., 2021; Patrick et al., 2019), and Eyjafjallajökull and Fagradalsfjall (Iceland) (Dürig, Gudmundsson, Karmann, et al., 2015; Dürig, Gudmundsson, & Dellino, 2015; Lamb et al., 2022). These eruption imaging and geophysical studies have largely contributed to understanding the underlying processes and defining more systematically eruption styles of mafic explosive activity, mostly Hawaiian and Strombolian ones.…”