IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v27y2007i5p1299-1310.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On Determining Specifications and Selections of Alternative Technologies for Airport Checked‐Baggage Security Screening

Author

Listed:
  • Qianmei Feng

Abstract

Federal law mandates that every checked bag at all commercial airports be screened by explosive detection systems (EDS), explosive trace detection systems (ETD), or alternative technologies. These technologies serve as critical components of airport security systems that strive to reduce security risks at both national and global levels. To improve the operational efficiency and airport security, emerging image‐based technologies have been developed, such as dual‐energy X‐ray (DX), backscatter X‐ray (BX), and multiview tomography (MVT). These technologies differ widely in purchasing cost, maintenance cost, operating cost, processing rate, and accuracy. Based on a mathematical framework that takes into account all these factors, this article investigates two critical issues for operating screening devices: setting specifications for continuous security responses by different technologies; and selecting technology or combination of technologies for efficient 100% baggage screening. For continuous security responses, specifications or thresholds are used for classifying threat items from nonthreat items. By investigating the setting of specifications on system security responses, this article assesses the risk and cost effectiveness of various technologies for both single‐device and two‐device systems. The findings provide the best selection of image‐based technologies for both single‐device and two‐device systems. Our study suggests that two‐device systems outperform single‐device systems in terms of both cost effectiveness and accuracy. The model can be readily extended to evaluate risk and cost effectiveness of multiple‐device systems for airport checked‐baggage security screening.

Suggested Citation

  • Qianmei Feng, 2007. "On Determining Specifications and Selections of Alternative Technologies for Airport Checked‐Baggage Security Screening," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(5), pages 1299-1310, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:27:y:2007:i:5:p:1299-1310
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2007.00966.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2007.00966.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2007.00966.x?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Julie L. Virta & Sheldon H. Jacobson & John E. Kobza, 2003. "Analyzing the Cost of Screening Selectee and Non‐Selectee Baggage," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(5), pages 897-908, October.
    2. Sheldon H. Jacobson & Tamana Karnani & John E. Kobza & Lynsey Ritchie, 2006. "A Cost‐Benefit Analysis of Alternative Device Configurations for Aviation‐Checked Baggage Security Screening," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(2), pages 297-310, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mark G. Stewart & John Mueller, 2013. "Terrorism Risks and Cost‐Benefit Analysis of Aviation Security," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(5), pages 893-908, May.
    2. Nie, Xiaofeng, 2019. "The impact of conditional dependence on checked baggage screening," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 278(3), pages 883-893.
    3. Yan, Xihong & Ren, Xiaorong & Nie, Xiaofeng, 2022. "A budget allocation model for domestic airport network protection," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 82(PB).
    4. Hunt, Kyle & Agarwal, Puneet & Zhuang, Jun, 2021. "Technology adoption for airport security: Modeling public disclosure and secrecy in an attacker-defender game," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).

    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. Nie, Xiaofeng, 2019. "The impact of conditional dependence on checked baggage screening," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 278(3), pages 883-893.
    2. Yan, Xihong & Ren, Xiaorong & Nie, Xiaofeng, 2022. "A budget allocation model for domestic airport network protection," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 82(PB).
    3. Yonghua Ji & Subodha Kumar & Vijay Mookerjee, 2016. "When Being Hot Is Not Cool: Monitoring Hot Lists for Information Security," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 897-918, December.
    4. 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.
    5. Aniruddha Bagchi & Jomon Aliyas Paul, 2014. "Optimal Allocation of Resources in Airport Security: Profiling vs. Screening," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 62(2), pages 219-233, April.
    6. Mark G. Stewart & John Mueller, 2013. "Terrorism Risks and Cost‐Benefit Analysis of Aviation Security," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(5), pages 893-908, May.
    7. Xiaofeng Nie & Rajan Batta & Colin G. Drury & Li Lin, 2009. "The Impact of Joint Responses of Devices in an Airport Security System," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(2), pages 298-311, February.
    8. Hunt, Kyle & Agarwal, Puneet & Zhuang, Jun, 2021. "Technology adoption for airport security: Modeling public disclosure and secrecy in an attacker-defender game," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).
    9. Mark G. Stewart & John Mueller, 2018. "Risk and economic assessment of U.S. aviation security for passenger-borne bomb attacks," Journal of Transportation Security, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 117-136, December.
    10. Huseyin Cavusoglu & Young Kwark & Bin Mai & Srinivasan Raghunathan, 2013. "Passenger Profiling and Screening for Aviation Security in the Presence of Strategic Attackers," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 10(1), pages 63-81, March.
    11. Sheldon H. Jacobson & Tamana Karnani & John E. Kobza & Lynsey Ritchie, 2006. "A Cost‐Benefit Analysis of Alternative Device Configurations for Aviation‐Checked Baggage Security Screening," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(2), pages 297-310, April.
    12. Laura A. McLay & Sheldon H. Jacobson & John E. Kobza, 2006. "A multilevel passenger screening problem for aviation security," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(3), pages 183-197, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:riskan:v:27:y:2007:i:5:p:1299-1310. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.