Geophysics and environmental risk
Institutions monitoring seismic, volcanic, or other environmental hazards work with continuous instrument data that must be reviewed quickly, but a judgement issued too quickly, or without a clear expert behind it, carries its own risk. This page sets out how such a workflow would be planned and run on inTheEU Assist, not a record of a completed deployment.
How the workflow would be structured
Instrument data (seismic activity logs, ground deformation readings, gas or fluid measurements, or other monitoring feeds the institution already collects) would be ingested on a defined schedule or on demand, and scoped to the institution's own tenant. An agent configured for the workflow would summarise what changed against the institution's own reference patterns and thresholds, producing a proposed assessment tied to the specific data window it was drawn from.
Nothing in this workflow classifies a hazard level, issues a warning, or reaches any external system on its own. Each proposed assessment is entered with a status of proposed, and stays there until a named expert reviews it.
Where human approval sits
A proposed assessment would move from proposed to reviewed to approved or rejected, and only an approved assessment is treated as part of the institution's record. The reviewing scientist's sign-off, and the specific data window it was checked against, would be independently verifiable afterwards, without relying on the institution's own internal logs.
What this draws on today, and what it does not
Scheduled and on-demand data ingestion, the proposed-to-approved review lifecycle, and the signed audit chain tying an assessment back to its source data and its reviewer are working parts of the platform. What is not part of this: any pre-built seismological, volcanological, or environmental hazard model. The interpretation of what a given reading means would remain with the institution's own scientists throughout; any domain-specific analysis capability would be developed alongside them, using their own reference data and thresholds, not supplied as an off-the-shelf model.
Some of the architecture underlying this capability set is documented in filings still in progress. This page describes what the platform is designed to do, at a level appropriate for planning a pilot, not an implementation specification.
Platform features and interface are subject to continuous improvement. Descriptions in this guide may not reflect the exact layout or wording of the latest released version.