» Articles » PMID: 35336391

How Realistic Is Threat Image Projection for X-ray Baggage Screening?

Overview
Journal Sensors (Basel)
Publisher MDPI
Specialty Biotechnology
Date 2022 Mar 26
PMID 35336391
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

At airports, security officers (screeners) inspect X-ray images of passenger baggage in order to prevent threat items (bombs, guns, knives, etc.) from being brought onto an aircraft. Because threat items rarely occur, many airports use a threat-image-projection (TIP) system, which projects pre-recorded X-ray images of threat items onto some of the X-ray baggage images in order to improve the threat detection of screeners. TIP is regulatorily mandated in many countries and is also used to identify officers with insufficient threat-detection performance. However, TIP images sometimes look unrealistic because of artifacts and unrealistic scenarios, which could reduce the efficacy of TIP. Screeners rated a representative sample of TIP images regarding artifacts identified in a pre-study. We also evaluated whether specific image characteristics affect the occurrence rate of artifacts. 24% of the TIP images were rated to display artifacts and 26% to depict unrealistic scenarios, with 34% showing at least one of the two. With two-thirds of the TIP images having been perceived as realistic, we argue that TIP still serves its purpose, but artifacts and unrealistic scenarios should be reduced. Recommendations on how to improve the efficacy of TIP by considering image characteristics are provided.

References
1.
Koller S, Drury C, Schwaninger A . Change of search time and non-search time in X-ray baggage screening due to training. Ergonomics. 2009; 52(6):644-56. DOI: 10.1080/00140130802526935. View

2.
Hattenschwiler N, Mendes M, Schwaninger A . Detecting Bombs in X-Ray Images of Hold Baggage: 2D Versus 3D Imaging. Hum Factors. 2018; 61(2):305-321. PMC: 6343424. DOI: 10.1177/0018720818799215. View

3.
Wolfe J, Horowitz T, Van Wert M, Kenner N, Place S, Kibbi N . Low target prevalence is a stubborn source of errors in visual search tasks. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2007; 136(4):623-38. PMC: 2662480. DOI: 10.1037/0096-3445.136.4.623. View

4.
Eckner J, Chandran S, Richardson J . Investigating the role of feedback and motivation in clinical reaction time assessment. PM R. 2011; 3(12):1092-7. PMC: 3643804. DOI: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2011.04.022. View

5.
Wolfe J, Horowitz T, Kenner N . Cognitive psychology: rare items often missed in visual searches. Nature. 2005; 435(7041):439-40. PMC: 4224304. DOI: 10.1038/435439a. View