A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

On determining specifications and selections of alternative technologies for airport checked-baggage security screening. | LitMetric

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.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2007.00966.xDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

security responses
12
cost effectiveness
12
two-device systems
12
technologies
9
alternative technologies
8
airport checked-baggage
8
security
8
checked-baggage security
8
security screening
8
systems
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!