Schwaninger, Adrian
Lade...
E-Mail-Adresse
Geburtsdatum
Projekt
Organisationseinheiten
Berufsbeschreibung
Nachname
Schwaninger
Vorname
Adrian
Name
Schwaninger, Adrian
8 Ergebnisse
Suchergebnisse
Gerade angezeigt 1 - 8 von 8
- PublikationKey results of studies on 2D vs 3D hold baggage screening(15.11.2018) Schwaninger, Adrian; Hättenschwiler, Nicole; Merks, Sarah06 - Präsentation
- PublikationOn screen alarm resolution with explosive detection systems for cabin baggage screening(15.10.2018) Schwaninger, Adrian; Hättenschwiler, Nicole; Sterchi, Yanik; Mendes, Marcia; Hügli, David; Merks, Sarah06 - Präsentation
- PublikationSocio-technical approach and explosive detection systems for cabin baggage screening(04.10.2018) Sterchi, Yanik; Hättenschwiler, Nicole; Mendes, Marcia; Hügli, David; Merks, Sarah; Schwaninger, Adrian06 - Präsentation
- PublikationHuman-automation interaction during cabin baggage screening at airport security checkpoints(10/2018) Hügli, David; Merks, Sarah; Schwaninger, Adrian06 - Präsentation
- PublikationX-ray screening of hold baggage: Are the same visual-cognitive abilities needed for 2D and 3D imaging?(10/2018) Merks, Sarah; Hättenschwiler, Nicole; Zeballos, Melina; Schwaninger, Adrian; Pritchard, Daniel [in: 52th IEEE International Carnahan Conference on Security Technology]2D multi-view X-ray imaging technology is widely used for security screening of hold baggage at airports. Newer technology is based on 3D CT imaging. Such systems offer the possibility to rotate a bag around 360 degrees. With the transition from 2D multi-view to advanced CT imaging, the question arises whether airport security officers (screeners) need the same visualcognitive abilities when visually inspecting X-ray images of hold baggage. This study investigated the relationship between visualcognitive abilities and visual inspection performance of screeners. Screeners conducted a computer-based visual cognitive test battery (VCTB) and a simulated hold baggage screening task with 2D and 3D imaging. We found that aspects of processing speed and visual processing correlated significantly with visual inspection performance of screeners using 2D imaging technology. In comparison, performance of screeners that visually inspected 3D images showed less correlations with the VCTB. These results indicate that with the expected change from 2D to 3D imaging technology in airport security, visual-cognitive requirements of the screeners might change. Therefore, further studies need to elucidate in more detail what visual-cognitive skills future 3D screeners need as it could affect personnel selection and development.04 - Beitrag Sammelband oder Konferenzschrift
- PublikationAirport security X-ray screening of hold baggage: 2D versus 3D imaging and evaluation of an on-screen alarm resolution protocol(10/2018) Hättenschwiler, Nicole; Merks, Sarah; Schwaninger, Adrian; Pritchard, Daniel [in: 52th IEEE International Carnahan Conference on Security Technology]In airport security screening, passenger baggage that is transported in the hold of an aircraft (hold baggage) is screened using X-ray machines with explosive detection technology. Older systems are based on 2D multi-view imaging whereas newer systems are based on computer tomography (CT) that features 3D rotatable images (3D imaging). Regulators, airport operators and security providers currently discuss whether extensive and specific training is necessary for screeners who are used to 2D multi-view imaging before they start working with 3D imaging. Moreover, to facilitate the decision making of screeners, so called on-screen alarm resolution protocols (OSARP) are available for 3D imaging. However, their effectiveness has not been investigated yet. To address these issues, we compared the visual inspection performance of screeners using state-of-the-art 2D multi-view imaging versus 3D imaging versus 3D imaging following a specific on-screen alarm resolution protocol (OSARP). In a simulated hold baggage screening task, screeners had to decide whether X-ray images contained an improvised explosive device (IED) or not. Results showed that there was no difference in detection performance (d') between 2D and 3D imaging. Visual inspection with 3D imaging following an OSARP resulted in higher detection performance (d') compared to 2D and 3D imaging. In conclusion, screeners currently working with 2D multi-view technology do not need extensive and specific training to achieve comparable detection performance with 3D imaging. The application of an OSARP has the potential to further increase screeners’ detection performance (d') with 3D imaging.04B - Beitrag Konferenzschrift
- PublikationTechnology, human factors, and a holistic approach to checkpoint screening. Part II: A holistic approach to checkpoint screening(07/2018) Schwaninger, Adrian; Merks, Sarah; Hättenschwiler, Nicole; Sterchi, Yanik; Mendes, Marcia; Hügli, David06 - Präsentation
- PublikationTechnology, human factors, and a holistic approach to checkpoint screening. Part I: Technology and human factors(06/2018) Merks, Sarah; Schwaninger, Adrian; Hättenschwiler, Nicole; Sterchi, Yanik; Mendes, Marcia; Hügli, David06 - Präsentation