# Analysis of Information Availability for Seismic and Volcanic Monitoring Systems: A Review
## 4 Discussion
Therefore, it is a partial solution for RQ1 and RQ2 because it requires exhaustive processes for the certification of seismic stations that will be members of global networks, which do not include the total of local networks for specific regional monitoring. This is useful for strong earthquake detection. On the other hand, in this case, the diversity of monitoring stations is not considered either. * It is important to note that the information contained in the metadata is not included in the seismic data formats and standards for seismic data exchange. However, the information contained in those archives could contribute to the identification of failures in instrumental networks. Therefore, as one of the solutions to RQ2, it is possible to include metadata in real-time data acquisition and processing systems. This will decrease interruptions or failures in the monitoring stations and may contribute to improving the availability of information. * Some studies have identified fundamental advances related to data compression algorithms. Some of them could help to send information employing transmission media with limited capacity. However, these possible solutions for RQ2 may apply to specific formats only, and may require additional mechanisms for acquisition systems and additional format conversion processes in relation to their computational cost. * Solutions to improve the availability of information based only on investment in the infrastructure for satellite transmission and external services may require very high monetary costs because the instrumental networks comprise hundreds of monitoring points. Furthermore, this does not guarantee a nearby backup channel, and the seismological data center will probably require an internet link managed by outsourcing services. As a consequence, it shows a vulnerability in the availability of the information due to the dependence on external service providers and backup connections. With the aforementioned, RQ3 can be partially answered because the use of satellite communications for real-time seismic monitoring is one of the most recent alternatives. However, several seismological centers do not have sufficient financial resources to implement these services. * Latency in monitoring networks can be reduced by software upgrades in data-loggers and setting seismic equipment. However, this partial solution for RQ3 does not apply to every manufacturer's brand of data-loggers. Moreover, compatibility with software versions may need to be checked. * Through Obspy Python, multiple functions have been developed for the processing and reconstruction of seismic data. These solutions are applied in post-acquisition and processing. This may improve the compatibility of formats. Therefore, these frameworks could be used to develop seismic data recovery mechanisms. With Python functions, it is possible to contribute to reduced seismic data gaps in the acquisition and processing systems of seismological data centers. Therefore, in response to RQ2 and RQ3, several of the related works detailed in Table 5 can be used to consolidate a new solution that includes access to monitoring networks and transmission media.