Review article
Imaging in airport security: Past, present, future, and the link to forensic and clinical radiology

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jofri.2013.07.002Get rights and content

Abstract

After an introduction to the beginnings of x-ray screening of baggage 41 years ago, this review article gives an overview of the state-of-the-art in imaging in security at airports as well as an outlook into future developments in this area. The imaging technologies discussed range from dual-energy x-ray systems to computed tomography and terahertz scanners. A PubMed search of “radiology” and “airport” revealed 36 scientific articles covering interdisciplinary topics ranging between imaging in airport security and forensic/clinical imaging. Apart from relying on the same technologies, common research interests and initiatives appear to be most fruitful in human factors aspects that are concerned with x-ray and CT image interpretation. By sharing the knowledge between disciplines, scientists, practitioners, and regulators can learn and benefit from each other.

Introduction

The concept that societies seek to protect their key assets has not changed in the course of the centuries. However, the nature of these assets, as well as the means employed for protection against enemies, evolved dramatically. One piece of critical infrastructure in our modern society is personal transportation, the most effective one being transportation by air. It is therefore not surprising that our society devised a protection scheme for air transportation that employs the best and newest technology available.

In the era before 1972, Security Officers (SOs) at airports performed hand searches for baggage that was to be taken on board of airplanes. As air traffic increased, this proved more and more difficult, especially at peak times, considering that a thorough hand search of one piece of cabin baggage might take several minutes. In order to increase both the security level and the processing capacity of the security control, Peil constructed an “Apparatus for baggage inspection” that included “an x-ray and fluoroscopic examination unit”, which was patented in 1972 [1]. This patent marked the beginning of a new era in security control at airports, in which imaging was to play a key role. At first, security professionals applied this technology without much knowledge of what x-ray image interpretation requires from the human operators at airports. In 1990, however, the United States decided that aviation security should be improved through the optimization of human factors elements [2], because it had become clear that the best possible imaging device only fulfills its purpose in combination with proficient screeners that are able to interpret the images correctly and efficiently. This marks the starting point for the development of a substantial body of research in human factors in x-ray screening in airport security. It further prepared the grounds to the later development of sophisticated training and certification methods for x-ray screeners who work at airport security control checkpoints.

Section snippets

Screening of baggage

European law requires that all passengers as well as all their cabin baggage and hold baggage items undergo screening [3]. Most European airports have dual-energy x-ray systems in place in order to screen cabin baggage. These are either single or dual-view systems that provide the operator with one or two views (from different angles) of the baggage in pseudo-colors. The pseudo-colors should facilitate differentiation of materials, i.e., different colors represent different classes of

Imaging in airport security tomorrow

In the future, multi-view x-ray and CT technology for imaging in airport security will be developed further as the standards (i.e., minimum requirements), set by legislation for the devices used at airports, increase continually. Scanning times might become faster, resolution higher, and the costs of the devices lower. The trend also goes towards automated detection. Whereas for hold baggage, an automated first level of screening for explosives is already standard today, it can be expected

Interdisciplinary topics

The technology employed, the way of working, as well as the challenges encountered in imaging in airport security share similarities to forensic and clinical radiology. Vogel's pioneering work explains and illustrates different uses of imaging in security as seen from a radiologist's background [38], [39], [40], [41]. In order to more closely investigate interdisciplinary topics and links between these disciplines, the author performed a literature search in mid May 2013. The database PubMed

Conclusion

After an introduction on the beginnings of x-ray screening of baggage, this review article has given an overview of the state-of-the-art in imaging in security at airports as well as an outlook onto future developments in this area. It becomes evident that the two disciplines of imaging in airport security and forensic/clinical imaging can learn from each other. Apart from using the same technologies for imaging, research interests and initiatives converge in human factors aspects that are

Acknowledgements

The author cordially thanks Prof. Dr. Michael Thali, University of Zurich, for his kind support.

References (75)

  • S. Leschka et al.

    Differentiation of cocaine from heroine body packs by computed tomography: impact of different tube voltages and the dual-energy index

    Journal of Forensic Radiology and Imaging

    (2013)
  • L.E. Peil, Apparatus for baggage inspection, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Alexandria,...
  • Congress of the United States of America, Aviation Security Improvement Act of 1990,...
  • European Union, Regulation (EC) No 300/2008 of the European Parliament,...
  • S. Michel, S.M. Koller, M. Ruh, A. Schwaninger, Do “image enhancement” functions really enhance x-ray image...
  • B.A. Klock, Test and evaluation report for X-ray detection of threats using different X-ray functions, in: L.D. Sanson...
  • A. Schwaninger

    X-ray imagery: enhancing the value of the pixels

    Aviation Security International

    (2005)
  • J.M. Wolfe et al.

    Low target prevalence is a stubborn source of errors in visual search tasks

    Journal of Experimental Psychology, General

    (2007)
  • M.S. Fleck et al.

    Rare targets are rarely missed in correctable search

    Psychological Science

    (2007)
  • N.H. Mackworth

    The breakdown of vigilance during prolonged visual search

    Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

    (1948)
  • W.H. Teichner

    The detection of a simple visual signal as a function of time of watch

    Human Factors

    (1974)
  • K.M. Ghylin, C.G. Drury, R. Batta, L. Lin, Temporal effects in a security inspection task: Breakdown of performance...
  • A. Schwaninger, F. Hofer, O.E. Wetter, Adaptive computer-based training increases on the job performance of x-ray...
  • C. von Bastian et al.

    Do multi-view x-ray systems improve x-ray image interpretation in airport security screening?

    Zeitschrift für Arbeitswissenschaft

    (2008)
  • M. Mendes, A. Schwaninger, N. Strebel, S. Michel, Why laptops should be screened separately when conventional x-ray...
  • O.E. Wetter, M. Lipphardt, F. Hofer, External and internal influences on the security control process at airports, in:...
  • European Union, Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 711/2012,...
  • P. Mehta et al.

    Airport full-body screening. What is the risk?

    Archives of Internal Medicine

    (2011)
  • T. Orouji et al.

    Doses to the scanned individual and to the operator from an x-ray body scanner system

    Radiation Protection Dosimetry

    (2011)
  • A. Traut et al.

    Körperscanner: Sicherheiten und Unsicherheiten [body scanners: securities and insecurities]

    Forum Kriminalprävention

    (2010)
  • M. Nagenborg

    Körperscanner [body scanners]

  • A. Frimpong

    Introduction of full body image scanners at the airports: a delicate balance of protecting privacy and ensuring national security

    Journal of Transportation Security

    (2011)
  • D.A. Schauer

    Does security screening with backscatter x-rays do more good than harm?

    Radiology

    (2011)
  • F. Hofer et al.

    Operational and human factors issues of new security technology: two case studies

    Journal of Transportation Security

    (2012)
  • A. Bolfing et al.

    How image based factors and human factors contribute to threat detection performance in x-ray aviation security screening

  • F. Hofer, A. Schwaninger, Reliable and valid measures of threat detection performance in X-ray screening, in: L.D....
  • D. Hardmeier, F. Hofer, A. Schwaninger, The x-ray object recognition test (x-ray ort)—a reliable and valid instrument...
  • Cited by (44)

    • Evaluation of strategies to train visual search performance in professional populations

      2019, Current Opinion in Psychology
      Citation Excerpt :

      In general, experts search differently than novices, as seen across a number of realms from chess [33] to driving [34,35]. One key distinction is that experts generally use more consistent and systematic scan paths than novices [8]. This promotes more efficient coverage of the search field, increasing the probability that a target will be fixated, while also decreasing cognitive load [36,37].

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text