决策支持系统的误报和误报对人机系统性能的影响:以机场安检机为例的研究。

IF 2 3区 工程技术 Q3 ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL
David Huegli, Alain Chavaillaz, Juergen Sauer, Adrian Schwaninger
{"title":"决策支持系统的误报和误报对人机系统性能的影响:以机场安检机为例的研究。","authors":"David Huegli, Alain Chavaillaz, Juergen Sauer, Adrian Schwaninger","doi":"10.1080/00140139.2025.2453546","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Decision support systems such as explosives detection systems for cabin baggage (EDSCB) at airport security checkpoints help screeners detect bombs by highlighting areas in X-ray images that might contain explosives. However, these systems are not perfect and can produce false alarms (i.e. alarm when no target is present) and miscues (i.e. a non-target is cued but the actual target is located elsewhere in the image). This study investigated the consequences of such automation errors in 112 professional airport security screeners who were supported by a simulated EDSCB with realistic X-ray images of cabin baggage. They had to detect bombs, guns, and knives under one of three experimental conditions: miscue prone, false alarm prone, or multiple failures (false alarms and miscues). Results showed that screeners missed more knives when the EDSCB provided miscues. We conclude that on-screen alarm resolution of EDSCB alarms in primary screening has the disadvantage that miscues can result in missing prohibited articles at airport security checkpoints. To avoid this problem, automated decision or clear instructions to screeners should be considered.</p><p><strong>Practitioner statement: </strong>Airport security screeners inspect X-ray images of cabin baggage through visual search and decision making with the help of explosives detection system for cabin baggage screening (EDSCB). The present experiment addresses whether EDSCB miscues affect operator performance and whether miscues are a problem when conducting EDSCB on-screen alarm resolution.</p>","PeriodicalId":50503,"journal":{"name":"Ergonomics","volume":" ","pages":"1-16"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effects of false alarms and miscues of decision support systems on human-machine system performance: a study with airport security screeners.\",\"authors\":\"David Huegli, Alain Chavaillaz, Juergen Sauer, Adrian Schwaninger\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00140139.2025.2453546\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Decision support systems such as explosives detection systems for cabin baggage (EDSCB) at airport security checkpoints help screeners detect bombs by highlighting areas in X-ray images that might contain explosives. However, these systems are not perfect and can produce false alarms (i.e. alarm when no target is present) and miscues (i.e. a non-target is cued but the actual target is located elsewhere in the image). This study investigated the consequences of such automation errors in 112 professional airport security screeners who were supported by a simulated EDSCB with realistic X-ray images of cabin baggage. They had to detect bombs, guns, and knives under one of three experimental conditions: miscue prone, false alarm prone, or multiple failures (false alarms and miscues). Results showed that screeners missed more knives when the EDSCB provided miscues. We conclude that on-screen alarm resolution of EDSCB alarms in primary screening has the disadvantage that miscues can result in missing prohibited articles at airport security checkpoints. To avoid this problem, automated decision or clear instructions to screeners should be considered.</p><p><strong>Practitioner statement: </strong>Airport security screeners inspect X-ray images of cabin baggage through visual search and decision making with the help of explosives detection system for cabin baggage screening (EDSCB). The present experiment addresses whether EDSCB miscues affect operator performance and whether miscues are a problem when conducting EDSCB on-screen alarm resolution.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50503,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ergonomics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-16\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ergonomics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2025.2453546\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ergonomics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2025.2453546","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

机场安检处的决策支持系统,如机舱行李爆炸物检测系统(EDSCB),通过在x射线图像中突出显示可能含有爆炸物的区域,帮助安检人员发现炸弹。然而,这些系统并不完美,可能会产生假警报(即当没有目标存在时发出警报)和误报(即非目标被提示,但实际目标位于图像的其他位置)。这项研究调查了112名专业机场安检人员的这种自动化错误的后果,这些安检人员由模拟的EDSCB和真实的机舱行李x射线图像提供支持。他们必须在三种实验条件之一下检测炸弹、枪支和刀具:容易出错、容易虚报或多次失败(虚报和误报)。结果表明,当EDSCB提供错误信息时,筛检者错过的刀具更多。我们得出结论,EDSCB报警器在初级筛查中的屏幕报警分辨率存在缺陷,即误报可能导致机场安检处的违禁物品丢失。为了避免这个问题,应该考虑自动决策或给筛选者明确的指示。从业人员声明:机场保安人员在手提行李检查爆炸物探测系统的帮助下,通过目测搜索和决策,检查手提行李的x光图像。本实验探讨了EDSCB误报是否会影响操作员的工作表现,以及误报在进行EDSCB屏幕报警解决时是否是一个问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effects of false alarms and miscues of decision support systems on human-machine system performance: a study with airport security screeners.

Decision support systems such as explosives detection systems for cabin baggage (EDSCB) at airport security checkpoints help screeners detect bombs by highlighting areas in X-ray images that might contain explosives. However, these systems are not perfect and can produce false alarms (i.e. alarm when no target is present) and miscues (i.e. a non-target is cued but the actual target is located elsewhere in the image). This study investigated the consequences of such automation errors in 112 professional airport security screeners who were supported by a simulated EDSCB with realistic X-ray images of cabin baggage. They had to detect bombs, guns, and knives under one of three experimental conditions: miscue prone, false alarm prone, or multiple failures (false alarms and miscues). Results showed that screeners missed more knives when the EDSCB provided miscues. We conclude that on-screen alarm resolution of EDSCB alarms in primary screening has the disadvantage that miscues can result in missing prohibited articles at airport security checkpoints. To avoid this problem, automated decision or clear instructions to screeners should be considered.

Practitioner statement: Airport security screeners inspect X-ray images of cabin baggage through visual search and decision making with the help of explosives detection system for cabin baggage screening (EDSCB). The present experiment addresses whether EDSCB miscues affect operator performance and whether miscues are a problem when conducting EDSCB on-screen alarm resolution.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ergonomics
Ergonomics 工程技术-工程:工业
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
12.50%
发文量
147
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Ergonomics, also known as human factors, is the scientific discipline that seeks to understand and improve human interactions with products, equipment, environments and systems. Drawing upon human biology, psychology, engineering and design, Ergonomics aims to develop and apply knowledge and techniques to optimise system performance, whilst protecting the health, safety and well-being of individuals involved. The attention of ergonomics extends across work, leisure and other aspects of our daily lives. The journal Ergonomics is an international refereed publication, with a 60 year tradition of disseminating high quality research. Original submissions, both theoretical and applied, are invited from across the subject, including physical, cognitive, organisational and environmental ergonomics. Papers reporting the findings of research from cognate disciplines are also welcome, where these contribute to understanding equipment, tasks, jobs, systems and environments and the corresponding needs, abilities and limitations of people. All published research articles in this journal have undergone rigorous peer review, based on initial editor screening and anonymous refereeing by independent expert referees.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信