Passenger Profiling and Screening for Aviation Security in the Presence of Strategic Attackers

Huseyin Cavusoglu (), Young Kwark (), Bin Mai () and Srinivasan Raghunathan ()
Additional contact information
Huseyin Cavusoglu: Jindal School of Management, University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, Texas 75080
Young Kwark: Jindal School of Management, University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, Texas 75080
Bin Mai: College of Business, Bowie State University, Bowie, Maryland 20715
Srinivasan Raghunathan: Jindal School of Management, University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, Texas 75080

Decision Analysis, 2013, vol. 10, issue 1, 63-81

Abstract: Passenger profiling enables the Transportation Security Administration to target costly inspection effort toward passengers that have an incentive to attack. On the other hand, critics point out that attackers may game the profiler by manipulating their attributes and behavior, making the profiler ineffective. We examine how passenger profiling impacts airport security operations when the profiler is vulnerable to gaming by attackers. We consider the no-profiling setup and two profiling setups. In the no-profiling setup, all passengers are sent through a screening device, and those that raise an alarm are physically inspected. In the first profiling setup, all classified attackers are physically inspected and classified normal passengers are sent through a screening device, and those that raise an alarm are physically inspected. In the second profiling setup, every passenger, regardless of the profiler's classification, is sent through a screening device and those that raise an alarm are inspected, but the screening devices are configured differently for classified attackers and classified normal passengers. We find that, regardless of the profiling setup, the optimal profiling setup performs at least as good as the no-profiling setup on key performance measures such as total expected security cost, inspection rate of normal passengers, and attacker detection rate even when the profiler is vulnerable to attackers' gaming. The benefit from profiling increases if the profiler becomes less vulnerable. Although neither profiling setup dominates the other on these performance measures, we find that each setup has different desirable properties.

Keywords: passenger profiling; screening devices; inspection; configuration; faking; airport security (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2013
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (14)

Downloads: (external link)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/deca.1120.0258 (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:inm:ordeca:v:10:y:2013:i:1:p:63-81

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Decision Analysis from INFORMS Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Asher ().