Detecting Bombs in X-Ray Images of Hold Baggage: 2D Versus 3D Imaging

Objective: This study compared the visual inspection performance of airport security officers (screeners) when screening hold baggage with state-of-the-art 3D versus older 2D imaging. Background: 3D imaging based on computer tomography features better automated detection of explosives and higher baggage throughput than older 2D X-ray imaging technology. Nonetheless, some countries and airports hesitate to implement 3D systems due to their lower image quality and the concern that screeners will need extensive and specific training before they can be allowed to work with 3D imaging. Method: Screeners working with 2D imaging (2D screeners) and screeners working with 3D imaging (3D screeners) conducted a simulated hold baggage screening task with both types of imaging. Differences in image quality of the imaging systems were assessed with the standard procedure for 2D imaging. Results: Despite lower image quality, screeners’ detection performance with 3D imaging was similar to that with 2D imaging. 3D screeners revealed higher detection performance with both types of imaging than 2D screeners. Conclusion: Features of 3D imaging systems (3D image rotation and slicing) seem to compensate for lower image quality. Visual inspection competency acquired with one type of imaging seems to transfer to visual inspection with the other type of imaging. Application: Replacing older 2D with newer 3D imaging systems can be recommended. 2D screeners do not need extensive and specific training to achieve comparable detection performance with 3D imaging. Current image quality standards for 2D imaging need revision before they can be applied to 3D imaging.

[1]  Anina N. Rich,et al.  Why do we miss rare targets? Exploring the boundaries of the low prevalence effect. , 2008, Journal of vision.

[2]  J. M. Wolfe,et al.  2.16 – Visual Search , 2008 .

[3]  Nick Donnelly,et al.  High or low target prevalence increases the dual-target cost in visual search. , 2010, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[4]  Andre Mouton,et al.  A review of automated image understanding within 3D baggage computed tomography security screening. , 2015, Journal of X-ray science and technology.

[5]  Elizabeth A. Bretz.  9/11: One year later: slow takeoff , 2002 .

[6]  Diana Hardmeier,et al.  Visual Cognition Abilities in X-Ray Screening , 2008 .

[7]  K. M. Ghylina,et al.  Two-component model of security inspection : application and findings , 2006 .

[8]  Adrian Schwaninger,et al.  Threat image projection: enhancing performance? , 2011 .

[9]  M. Tarr,et al.  Rotation direction affects object recognition , 2004, Vision Research.

[10]  Geoffrey Harding,et al.  X-ray scatter tomography for explosives detection , 2004 .

[11]  J. S. Caygill,et al.  Current trends in explosive detection techniques. , 2012, Talanta.

[12]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[13]  Douglas H. Harris,et al.  How to Really Improve Airport Security , 2002 .

[14]  Diana Hardmeier,et al.  Aviation Security Screeners Visual Abilities & Visual Knowledge Measurement , 2005 .

[15]  Neil A. Macmillan,et al.  Detection Theory: A User's Guide , 1991 .

[16]  A. Schwaninger,et al.  Adaptive Computer-Based Training Increases on the Job Performance of X-Ray Screeners , 2007, 2007 41st Annual IEEE International Carnahan Conference on Security Technology.

[17]  A. Schwaninger,et al.  Towards a model for estimating image difficulty in X-ray screening , 2005, Proceedings 39th Annual 2005 International Carnahan Conference on Security Technology.

[18]  U. Neisser.  VISUAL SEARCH. , 1964, Scientific American.

[19]  Arthur F Kramer,et al.  Visual Skills in Airport-Security Screening , 2004, Psychological science.

[20]  Maneesha Singh,et al.  Explosives detection systems (EDS) for aviation security , 2003, Signal Process..

[21]  Nick Donnelly,et al.  The impact of Relative Prevalence on dual-target search for threat items from airport X-ray screening. , 2010, Acta psychologica.

[22]  S. Holm.  A Simple Sequentially Rejective Multiple Test Procedure , 1979 .

[23]  Najla Megherbi Bouallagu,et al.  A comparison of 3D interest point descriptors with application to airport baggage object detection in complex CT imagery , 2013, Pattern Recognit..

[24]  Adrian Schwaninger,et al.  Increasing Efficiency In Airport Security Screening , 2004, WIT Transactions on The Built Environment.

[25]  Adrian Schwaninger,et al.  Evaluation of CBT for increasing threat detection performance in X-ray screening , 2004 .

[26]  M. Tarr,et al.  Visual Object Recognition , 1996, ISTCS.

[27]  Adrian Schwaninger,et al.  Evaluating the two-component inspection model in a simplified luggage search task , 2009, Behavior research methods.

[28]  O. Wetter,et al.  Imaging in airport security: Past, present, future, and the link to forensic and clinical radiology , 2013 .

[29]  Florian Jentsch,et al.  Understanding Performance and Cognitive Efficiency when Training for X-Ray Security Screening , 2006 .

[30]  S. Mitroff,et al.  Rare Targets Are Rarely Missed in Correctable Search , 2007, Psychological science.

[31]  Naomi M. Kenner,et al.  Low target prevalence is a stubborn source of errors in visual search tasks. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[32]  Jonas Sin-Heng Lau,et al.  The prevalence effect is determined by past experience, not future prospects , 2010, Vision Research.

[33]  Kait Clark,et al.  Overcoming hurdles in translating visual search research between the lab and the field. , 2012, Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation.

[34]  K. Morgan,et al.  The Internet Society: Advances in Learning, Commerce and Security (Advances in Information and Communication Technologies, 1) , 2004 .

[35]  Peter A. Hancock,et al.  Defeating Terrorism: What Can Human Factors/Ergonomics Offer? , 2002 .

[36]  Jeremy M. Wolfe,et al.  26.5 brief comms NEW , 2005 .

[37]  Nancy Jean Strantz.  Aviation Security and Pan Am Flight 103: What Have We Learned , 1990 .

[38]  Jeremy M Wolfe,et al.  Prevalence effects in newly trained airport checkpoint screeners: trained observers miss rare targets, too. , 2013, Journal of vision.

[39]  Jason S McCarley,et al.  Effects of response bias and judgment framing on operator use of an automated aid in a target detection task. , 2011, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[40]  Najla Megherbi Bouallagu,et al.  Object Recognition using 3D SIFT in Complex CT Volumes , 2010, BMVC.

[41]  Isaac N. Bankman,et al.  Handbook of medical imaging , 2000 .

[42]  Adrian Schwaninger,et al.  Can laptops be left inside passenger bags if motion imaging is used in X-ray security screening? , 2013, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[43]  F Hofer,et al.  Using threat image projection data for assessing individual screener performance , 2005 .

[44]  J. Wolfe,et al.  Varying Target Prevalence Reveals Two Dissociable Decision Criteria in Visual Search , 2010, Current Biology.

[45]  Adrian Schwaninger,et al.  Airport Security Screener Competency: A Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Analysis , 2013 .

[46]  Diana Hardmeier,et al.  Use It and Still Lose It , 2010 .

[47]  P. Verghese.  Visual Search and Attention A Signal Detection Theory Approach , 2001, Neuron.

[48]  Adrian Schwaninger,et al.  A statistical approach for image difficulty estimation in x-ray screening using image measurements , 2007, APGV.

[49]  Colin G Drury,et al.  Change of search time and non-search time in X-ray baggage screening due to training , 2009, Ergonomics.

[50]  CENTRALISED IMAGE PROCESSING : THE IMPACT ON SECURITY CHECKPOINTS , 2017 .

[51]  Adrian Schwaninger,et al.  How Image Based Factors and Human Factors Contribute to Threat Detection Performance in X-Ray Aviation Security Screening , 2008, USAB.

[52]  K Wells,et al.  A review of X-ray explosives detection techniques for checked baggage. , 2012, Applied radiation and isotopes : including data, instrumentation and methods for use in agriculture, industry and medicine.

[53]  Jason S. McCarley.  Response Criterion Placement Modulates the Benefits of Graded Alerting Systems in a Simulated Baggage Screening Task , 2009 .

[54]  Elena Rusconi,et al.  XRIndex: a brief screening tool for individual differences in security threat detection in x-ray images , 2015, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[55]  Neil A. Macmillan,et al.  Detection theory: A user's guide, 2nd ed. , 2005 .

[56]  Stefan Roth,et al.  Object Detection in Multi-view X-Ray Images , 2012, DAGM/OAGM Symposium.

[57]  Adrian Schwaninger,et al.  Do multiview X-ray systems improve X-ray image interpretation in airport security screening ? , 2011 .

[58]  D. M. Green,et al.  Signal detection theory and psychophysics , 1966 .

[59]  Diana Hardmeier,et al.  Investigating training, transfer and viewpoint effects resulting from recurrent CBT of X-Ray image interpretation , 2008 .

[60]  Florian Jentsch,et al.  Perceptual training for visual search , 2013, Ergonomics.

[61]  Stephen R. Mitroff,et al.  Multiple-Target Visual Search Errors , 2015 .

[62]  Adam T. Biggs,et al.  Improving the Efficacy of Security Screening Tasks: A Review of Visual Search Challenges and Ways to Mitigate Their Adverse Effects , 2015 .

[63]  Kyle R. Cave,et al.  The effects of increasing target prevalence on information processing during visual search , 2015, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[64]  Diana Hardmeier,et al.  Increased detection performance in airport security screening using the x - ray ort as pre - employm , 2006 .