Please wait a minute...
Data Analysis and Knowledge Discovery  2018, Vol. 2 Issue (10): 27-36    DOI: 10.11925/infotech.2096-3467.2018.0763
Current Issue | Archive | Adv Search |
Risk Assessment and Decision Analysis of Civil Aviation Security with Risk Ranking and Decision Tree
Wen’gang Feng1,2,3(),Yan Li4,Fuhai Li4,Xin Wang1,2,Xiping Zhou1,2
1School of Criminal Investigation and Counter Terrorism, People’s Public Security University of China, Beijing 100038, China
2Research Centre for Civil Aviation Security, People’s Public Security University of China, Beijing 100038, China
3Police Science Postdoctoral Research Station, People’s Public Security University of China, Beijing 100038, China
4Public Security Bureau, Civil Aviation Administration of China, Beijing 100710, China
Download: PDF(740 KB)   HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
Abstract  

[Objective] This paper conducts risk assessment and decision-making analysis of civil aviation, aiming to address the security challenges facing this industry. [Methods] Based on the risk assessment results of civil aviation, we built the decision tree for civil aviation counter-terrorism, which examined the probabilities, deterrence effect, substitution effect, effectiveness of countermeasures and consequences of the potential civil aviation terrotist attacks. [Results] We evaluated the effects of various countermeasures based on the analysis of the potential terrorist attack threats. [Limitations] Only examined the proposed model with terrorist incidents happened in the past, which is difficult to measure future events. [Conclusions] This paper studies the attributes of possible terrorist attacks against the civil aviation system, including their probabilities, countermeasures, and the consequences.

Key wordsCivil Aviation Security      Terrorism Risk      Risk Assessment      Decision Analysis     
Received: 09 July 2018      Published: 12 November 2018

Cite this article:

Wen’gang Feng,Yan Li,Fuhai Li,Xin Wang,Xiping Zhou. Risk Assessment and Decision Analysis of Civil Aviation Security with Risk Ranking and Decision Tree. Data Analysis and Knowledge Discovery, 2018, 2(10): 27-36.

URL:

http://manu44.magtech.com.cn/Jwk_infotech_wk3/EN/10.11925/infotech.2096-3467.2018.0763     OR     http://manu44.magtech.com.cn/Jwk_infotech_wk3/EN/Y2018/V2/I10/27

健康 社会经济 其他
精神损伤 平均经济损失值 可控制性
平均死亡数 最大经济损失值 风险特性的科学认识
最大死亡数 对社会影响 不确定性
平均受伤数 对政府影响
最大受伤数 对环境影响
较少重伤数
较多重伤数
对健康持续影响
变量名 描述 基数值 最大值 最小值
PT 恐怖分子发动攻击的概率 0.250 1 0
PK 刀斧砍杀攻击的概率 0.300 1 0
PE 爆炸物攻击的概率 0.200 1 0
PCF 纵火攻击的概率 0.200 1 0
PC 劫持交通工具攻击的概率 0.200 1 0
PA 暗杀攻击的概率 0.060 1 0
PB 生化武器攻击的概率 0.039 1 0
PN 核武器攻击的概率 0.001 1 0
IK 刀斧砍杀被阻断的概率 0.200 1 0
IE 爆炸物攻击被阻断的概率 0.100 1 0
ICF 纵火攻击被阻断的概率 0.200 1 0
IC 劫持交通工具被阻断概率 0.100 1 0
IA 暗杀被阻断的概率 0.010 1 0
IB 生化武器攻击被阻断的概率 0 1 0
IN 核武器攻击被阻断的概率 0 1 0
SK 刀斧砍杀攻击的成功概率 0.700 1 0
SE 爆炸物攻击的成功概率 0.700 1 0
SCF 纵火攻击的成功概率 0.700 1 0
SC 劫持交通工具的成功概率 0.500 1 0
SA 暗杀的成功概率 0.200 1 0
SB 生化武器攻击的成功概率 0.300 1 0
SN 核武器攻击的成功概率 0.100 1 0
变量名 描述 基数值 最大值 最小值
DK_I 提升难度降低刀斧砍杀的概率 0.45 1 0
DE_I 提升难度降低爆炸物的概率 0.25 0.50 0
DCF_I 提升难度降低纵火的概率 0.25 0.50 0
DC_I 提升难度降低劫持交通工具的概率 0.10 0.25 0
DA_I 提升难度降低暗杀的概率 0 0.25 0
DB_I 提升难度降低生化武器的概率 0 0.10 0
DN_I 提升难度降低核武器的概率 0 0.10 0
DK_D 减少收益降低刀斧砍杀的概率 0.25 0.50 0
DE_D 减少收益降低爆炸物的概率 0.10 0.25 0
DCF_D 减少收益降低纵火的概率 0.10 0.25 0
DC_D 减少收益降低劫持交通工具的概率 0.05 0.10 0
DA_D 减少收益降低暗杀的概率 0 0.10 0
DB_D 减少收益降低生化武器的概率 0 0.10 0
DN_D 减少收益降低核武器的概率 0 0.10 0
变量名 描述 基数值 最小值 最大值
SKOI_E 降低刀斧砍杀提升爆炸物攻击的概率 1.25 1 2
SKOI_CF 降低刀斧砍杀提升纵火攻击的概率 1.25 1 2
SEOI_K 降低爆炸物提升刀斧砍杀攻击的概率 1.50 1 2
SEOI_CF 降低爆炸物提升纵火攻击的概率 1.10 1 2
SCFOI_K 降低纵火提升刀斧砍杀攻击的概率 1 1 2
SCFOI_E 降低纵火提升爆炸物攻击的概率 1 1 2
变量名 描述 基数值 最大值 最小值
EK_ID 提升难度对于刀斧砍杀攻击有效性的概率 0.30 1 0
EE_ID 提升难度对于爆炸物攻击有效性的概率 0.20 0.80 0
ECF_ID 提升难度对于纵火攻击有效性的概率 0.20 0.80 0
EC_ID 提升难度对于劫持交通工具攻击有效性的概率 0.20 0.50 0
EA_ID 提升难度对于暗杀攻击有效性的概率 0.10 0.25 0
EB_ID 提升难度对于生化武器攻击有效性的概率 0 0.10 0
EN_ID 提升难度对于核武器攻击有效性的概率 0 0.10 0
EK_DE 减少收益对于刀斧砍杀攻击有效性的概率 0.20 1 0
EE_DE 减少收益对于爆炸物攻击有效性的概率 0.10 0.50 0
ECF_DE 减少收益对于纵火攻击有效性的概率 0.10 0.50 0
EC_DE 减少收益对于劫持交通工具攻击有效性的概率 0.10 0..25 0
EA_DE 减少收益对于暗杀攻击有效性的概率 0.05 0.25 0
EB_DE 减少收益对于生化武器攻击有效性的概率 0 0.10 0
EN_DE 减少收益对于核武器攻击有效性的概率 0 0.10 0
[1] Rozell D J.A Cautionary Note on Qualitative Risk Ranking of Homeland Security Threats[J]. Homeland Security Affairs, 2015, 11: 238-249.
[2] US Department of Homeland Security. DHS Budget-in-Brief FY 2013[R]. 2013.
[3] Bedford T, Cooke R.Probabilistic Risk Analysis: Foundations and Methods[M]. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2001.
[4] National Research Council.Department of Homeland Security Bioterrorism Risk Assessment: A Call for Change[M]. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2008.
[5] Parnell G S, Smith C M, Moxley F I.Intelligent Adversary Risk Analysis: A Bioterrorism Risk Management Model[J]. Risk Analysis, 2010, 30(1): 32-48.
doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2009.01319.x pmid: 20002893
[6] Merrick J, Parnell G.A Comparative Analysis of PRA and Intelligent Adversary Methods for Counterterrorism Risk Management[J]. Risk Analysis, 2011, 31(9):1488-1510.
doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01590.x pmid: 21418080
[7] Aven T, Guikema S.On the Concept and Definition of Terrorism Risk[J]. Risk Analysis, 2015, 35(12):2162-2171.
doi: 10.1111/risa.12518 pmid: 26649648
[8] Aven T, Renn O.The Role of Quantitative Risk Assessments for Characterizing Risk and Uncertainty and Delineating Appropriate Risk Management Options with Special Emphasis on Terrorism Risk[J]. Risk Analysis, 2009, 29(4): 587-600.
doi: 10.1111/risk.2009.29.issue-4
[9] Willis H H.Guiding Resource Allocations Based on Terrorism Risk[J]. Risk Analysis, 2007, 27(3):597-606.
doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2007.00909.x pmid: 17640210
[10] Kumamoto H, Henley E J.Probabilistic Risk Assessment and Management for Engineers and Scientists[M]. New York: IEEE Press, 1996.
[11] Aven T.On the New ISO Guide on Risk Management Terminology[J]. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 2011, 96(7): 719-726.
doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2010.12.020
[12] Morgan M G.Categorizing Risks for Risk Ranking[J]. Risk Analysis, 2001, 20(1): 49-58.
[13] Willis H H, Moore M.Improving the Value of Analysis for Biosurveillance[J]. Decision Analysis, 2013, 11(1): 63-81.
doi: 10.1287/deca.2013.0283
[14] Willis H H, Gibson J M, Shih R A, et al.Prioritizing Environmental Health Risks in the UAE[J]. Risk Analysis, 2010, 30(12): 1842-1856.
doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01463.x pmid: 20723144
[15] Tambe M.Security and Game Theory: Algorithms, Deployed Systems, Lessons Learned[M]. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2011.
[16] Clemen R, Reilly T.Making Hard Decisions[M]. South-Western College Pub, 2013.
[17] Lundberg R, Willis H H.Deliberative Risk Ranking to Inform Homeland Security Strategic Planning[J]. Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, 2016, 13(1):1515-1530.
[18] Department of Homeland Security,Building A Resilient Nation,Mission 2013[EB/OL]. [2018-06-15].
[19] Lundberg R.Comparing Homeland Security Risks Using a Deliberative Risk Ranking Methodology[R]. UMI Number: 3575486. 2013.
[20] Howard R A, Abbas A E.Foundations of Decision Analysis[M]. New York: Pearson, 2015.
[21] Keeney R L, Winterfeldt V D.Practical Value Models Advances in Decision Analysis[M]. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007.
[22] Ezell B C.Probabilistic Risk Analysis and Terrorism Risk[J]. Risk Analysis, 2010, 30(4): 575-589.
doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01401.x pmid: 20522198
[1] Minghui Liu. Risk Assessment of Civil Aviation Terrorism Based on K-means Clustering[J]. 数据分析与知识发现, 2018, 2(10): 21-26.
[2] Wengang Feng,Jing Huang. Early Warning for Civil Aviation Security Checks Based on Deep Learning[J]. 数据分析与知识发现, 2018, 2(10): 46-53.
[3] Huang Shuiqing Mao Yihong Xiong Jian. Assessment of Information Security Risk in Digital Libraries[J]. 现代图书情报技术, 2010, 26(7/8): 33-38.
[4] Huang Shuiqing,Chen Shuangxi,Ren Ni. Research of Risk Assessment Model of Digital Library Information Security Based on ISO27001[J]. 现代图书情报技术, 2009, 25(6): 44-49.
[5] DAVID PEARSON. AONS II: Continuing the Trend Towards Preservation Software ‘Nirvana’[J]. 现代图书情报技术, 2008, 24(1): 42-49.
[6] Li Hui,Liu Dongsu,Wang Yu . A Security Management Framework for E-commerce Based on OWL[J]. 现代图书情报技术, 2006, 1(11): 69-72.
  Copyright © 2016 Data Analysis and Knowledge Discovery   Tel/Fax:(010)82626611-6626,82624938   E-mail:jishu@mail.las.ac.cn