IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/annopr/v187y2011i1p23-4310.1007-s10479-010-0681-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impact of measurement error on container inspection policies at port-of-entry

Author

Listed:
  • Yada Zhu
  • Mingyu Li
  • Christina Young
  • Minge Xie
  • Elsayed Elsayed

Abstract

Containers arriving at a port-of-entry are inspected using sensors and devices to detect drugs, weapons, nuclear materials and other illegal cargo. Measurement errors associated with the inspection process may result in higher misclassification of containers. In this paper, we propose and formulate three inspection policies for containers at port-of-entry assuming the presence of sensor measurement errors. The optimization of the policies is carried out and the performance of each in terms of misclassification probabilities is compared. In each of the policies, the optimum settings are determined by minimizing the probability of false rejection while limiting the probability of false acceptance to a specified tolerance level. The results show that repeat inspections improve performance in terms of correct container classification. Expressions are presented for container misclassification in a single station, as well as in systems with several inspection stations arranged in different configurations such as series, parallel, series-parallel and parallel-series. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Suggested Citation

  • Yada Zhu & Mingyu Li & Christina Young & Minge Xie & Elsayed Elsayed, 2011. "Impact of measurement error on container inspection policies at port-of-entry," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 187(1), pages 23-43, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:187:y:2011:i:1:p:23-43:10.1007/s10479-010-0681-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s10479-010-0681-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10479-010-0681-6
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10479-010-0681-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ramirez-Marquez, Jose Emmanuel, 2008. "Port-of-entry safety via the reliability optimization of container inspection strategy through an evolutionary approach," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 93(11), pages 1698-1709.
    2. E. Boros & L. Fedzhora & P. B. Kantor & K. Saeger & P. Stroud, 2009. "A large‐scale linear programming model for finding optimal container inspection strategies," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(5), pages 404-420, August.
    3. Lawrence M. Wein & Alex H. Wilkins & Manas Baveja & Stephen E. Flynn, 2006. "Preventing the Importation of Illicit Nuclear Materials in Shipping Containers," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(5), pages 1377-1393, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nedialko Dimitrov & Dennis Michalopoulos & David Morton & Michael Nehme & Feng Pan & Elmira Popova & Erich Schneider & Gregory Thoreson, 2011. "Network deployment of radiation detectors with physics-based detection probability calculations," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 187(1), pages 207-228, July.
    2. Laura McLay & Jamie Lloyd & Emily Niman, 2011. "Interdicting nuclear material on cargo containers using knapsack problem models," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 187(1), pages 185-205, July.
    3. Stuart Van Weele & Jose Emmanuel Ramirez-Marquez, 2012. "Optimization of inspection for dual contraband using a genetic algorithm," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 226(5), pages 508-525, October.
    4. Ana Concho & José Ramirez-Marquez, 2012. "Optimal design of container inspection strategies considering multiple objectives via an evolutionary approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 196(1), pages 167-187, July.
    5. Endre Boros & Noam Goldberg & Paul Kantor & Jonathan Word, 2011. "Optimal sequential inspection policies," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 187(1), pages 89-119, July.
    6. Zhang, Chi & Ramirez-Marquez, José Emmanuel & Wang, Jianhui, 2015. "Critical infrastructure protection using secrecy – A discrete simultaneous game," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(1), pages 212-221.
    7. Pourakbar, M. & Zuidwijk, R.A., 2018. "The role of customs in securing containerized global supply chains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 271(1), pages 331-340.
    8. Vicki Bier & Naraphorn Haphuriwat, 2011. "Analytical method to identify the number of containers to inspect at U.S. ports to deter terrorist attacks," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 187(1), pages 137-158, July.
    9. Stuart Weele & Jose Ramirez-Marquez, 2011. "Optimization of container inspection strategy via a genetic algorithm," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 187(1), pages 229-247, July.
    10. Romero, Pablo & Graneri, Jorge & Viera, Omar & Moscatelli, Sandro & Tansini, Libertad, 2016. "A Multi-Tree Committee to assist port-of-entry inspection decisions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 253(1), pages 170-177.
    11. Concho, Ana Lisbeth & Ramirez-Marquez, Jose Emmanuel, 2010. "An evolutionary algorithm for port-of-entry security optimization considering sensor thresholds," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 255-266.
    12. Jason R. W. Merrick & Laura A. McLay, 2010. "Is Screening Cargo Containers for Smuggled Nuclear Threats Worthwhile?," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 7(2), pages 155-171, June.
    13. David Madigan & Sushil Mittal & Fred Roberts, 2011. "Efficient sequential decision‐making algorithms for container inspection operations," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 58(7), pages 637-654, October.
    14. Chi Zhang & Jose Ramirez-Marquez, 2013. "Protecting critical infrastructures against intentional attacks: a two-stage game with incomplete information," IISE Transactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(3), pages 244-258.
    15. Gary M. Gaukler & Chenhua Li & Yu Ding & Sunil S. Chirayath, 2012. "Detecting Nuclear Materials Smuggling: Performance Evaluation of Container Inspection Policies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(3), pages 531-554, March.
    16. Henry H. Willis & Tom LaTourrette, 2008. "Using Probabilistic Terrorism Risk Modeling for Regulatory Benefit‐Cost Analysis: Application to the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative in the Land Environment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(2), pages 325-339, April.
    17. Niyazi Bakır, 2011. "A Stackelberg game model for resource allocation in cargo container security," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 187(1), pages 5-22, July.
    18. Michael P. Atkinson & Lawrence M. Wein, 2008. "TECHNICAL NOTE---Spatial Queueing Analysis of an Interdiction System to Protect Cities from a Nuclear Terrorist Attack," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 56(1), pages 247-254, February.
    19. Nagurney, Anna & Shukla, Shivani & Nagurney, Ladimer S. & Saberi, Sara, 2018. "A game theory model for freight service provision security investments for high-value cargo," Economics of Transportation, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 21-28.
    20. Ramirez-Marquez, Jose E. & Rocco, Claudio M. & Levitin, Gregory, 2011. "Optimal network protection against diverse interdictor strategies," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(3), pages 374-382.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:187:y:2011:i:1:p:23-43:10.1007/s10479-010-0681-6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.