IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i2p306-d196142.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk Analysis of Urban Dirty Bomb Attacking Based on Bayesian Network

Author

Listed:
  • Zheng Tang

    (School of Information Technology and Network Security, People’s Public Security University of China, Beijing 102628, China)

  • Yijia Li

    (School of Information Technology and Network Security, People’s Public Security University of China, Beijing 102628, China)

  • Xiaofeng Hu

    (School of Information Technology and Network Security, People’s Public Security University of China, Beijing 102628, China)

  • Huanggang Wu

    (School of International Police Studies, People’s Public Security University of China, Beijing 102628, China)

Abstract

Urban dirty bomb attacking is a type of unconventional terrorism threatening the urban security all through the world. In this paper, a Bayesian network of urban dirty bomb attacking is established to analyze the risk of urban dirty bomb attacking. The impacts of factors such as occurrence time, location, wind fields, the size of dirty bomb, emergency response and defense approaches on casualty from both direct blast and radiation-caused cancers are examined. Results show that sensitivity of casualty from cancers to wind fields are less significant; the impact of emergency response on the direct casualty from blast is not large; the size of the dirty bomb results in more casualties from cancers than that from bomb explosions; Whether an attack is detected by the police is not that related to normal or special time, but significantly depends on the attack location; Furthermore, casualty from cancers significantly depends on the location, while casualty from blast is not considerably influenced by the attacking location; patrol and surveillance are less important than security check in terms of controlling the risk of urban dirt bomb, and security check is the most effective approach to decreasing the risk of urban dirty bomb.

Suggested Citation

  • Zheng Tang & Yijia Li & Xiaofeng Hu & Huanggang Wu, 2019. "Risk Analysis of Urban Dirty Bomb Attacking Based on Bayesian Network," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-12, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:2:p:306-:d:196142
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/2/306/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/2/306/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. H. Rosoff & D. Von Winterfeldt, 2007. "A Risk and Economic Analysis of Dirty Bomb Attacks on the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 533-546, June.
    2. Zhi Yuan & Nima Khakzad & Faisal Khan & Paul Amyotte, 2015. "Risk Analysis of Dust Explosion Scenarios Using Bayesian Networks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(2), pages 278-291, February.
    3. Francis, Royce A. & Guikema, Seth D. & Henneman, Lucas, 2014. "Bayesian Belief Networks for predicting drinking water distribution system pipe breaks," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 1-11.
    4. Cai, Baoping & Liu, Yu & Fan, Qian, 2016. "A multiphase dynamic Bayesian networks methodology for the determination of safety integrity levels," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 105-115.
    5. Chao Zhang & Jiansong Wu & Chao Huang & Bo Jiang, 2018. "A model for the representation of emergency cases," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 91(1), pages 337-351, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Xiao Zhang & Xiaofeng Hu & Yiping Bai & Jiansong Wu, 2020. "Risk Assessment of Gas Leakage from School Laboratories Based on the Bayesian Network," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(2), pages 1-18, January.
    2. Lina Han & Qing Ma & Feng Zhang & Yichen Zhang & Jiquan Zhang & Yongbin Bao & Jing Zhao, 2019. "Risk Assessment of An Earthquake-Collapse-Landslide Disaster Chain by Bayesian Network and Newmark Models," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-17, September.
    3. Rongchen Zhu & Xin Li & Xiaofeng Hu & Deshui Hu, 2019. "Risk Analysis of Chemical Plant Explosion Accidents Based on Bayesian Network," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-20, December.
    4. Rongchen Zhu & Xiaofeng Hu & Xin Li & Han Ye & Nan Jia, 2020. "Modeling and Risk Analysis of Chemical Terrorist Attacks: A Bayesian Network Method," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(6), pages 1-23, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rongchen Zhu & Xin Li & Xiaofeng Hu & Deshui Hu, 2019. "Risk Analysis of Chemical Plant Explosion Accidents Based on Bayesian Network," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-20, December.
    2. Tang, Kayu & Parsons, David J. & Jude, Simon, 2019. "Comparison of automatic and guided learning for Bayesian networks to analyse pipe failures in the water distribution system," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 186(C), pages 24-36.
    3. Pengxia Zhao & Tie Li & Biao Wang & Ming Li & Yu Wang & Xiahui Guo & Yue Yu, 2022. "The Scenario Construction and Evolution Method of Casualties in Liquid Ammonia Leakage Based on Bayesian Network," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-22, December.
    4. Jason R. W. Merrick & Laura A. McLay, 2010. "Is Screening Cargo Containers for Smuggled Nuclear Threats Worthwhile?," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 7(2), pages 155-171, June.
    5. HOSSAIN, Niamat Ullah Ibne & Amrani, Safae El & Jaradat, Raed & Marufuzzaman, Mohammad & Buchanan, Randy & Rinaudo, Christina & Hamilton, Michael, 2020. "Modeling and assessing interdependencies between critical infrastructures using Bayesian network: A case study of inland waterway port and surrounding supply chain network," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    6. Kiswendsida Abel Ouedraogo & Julie Beugin & El‐Miloudi El‐Koursi & Joffrey Clarhaut & Dominique Renaux & Frederic Lisiecki, 2018. "Toward an Application Guide for Safety Integrity Level Allocation in Railway Systems," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(8), pages 1634-1655, August.
    7. Barry Charles Ezell & Steven P. Bennett & Detlof Von Winterfeldt & John Sokolowski & Andrew J. Collins, 2010. "Probabilistic Risk Analysis and Terrorism Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(4), pages 575-589, April.
    8. Seth Guikema, 2020. "Artificial Intelligence for Natural Hazards Risk Analysis: Potential, Challenges, and Research Needs," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(6), pages 1117-1123, June.
    9. Robles-Velasco, Alicia & Cortés, Pablo & Muñuzuri, Jesús & Onieva, Luis, 2020. "Prediction of pipe failures in water supply networks using logistic regression and support vector classification," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    10. Meng, Huixing & Kloul, Leïla & Rauzy, Antoine, 2018. "Modeling patterns for reliability assessment of safety instrumented systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 111-123.
    11. Kabir, Golam & Tesfamariam, Solomon & Sadiq, Rehan, 2015. "Predicting water main failures using Bayesian model averaging and survival modelling approach," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 498-514.
    12. Chen, Thomas Ying-Jeh & Guikema, Seth David & Daly, Craig Michael, 2019. "Optimal pipe inspection paths considering inspection tool limitations," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 156-166.
    13. Gregory S. Parnell & Christopher M. Smith & Frederick I. Moxley, 2010. "Intelligent Adversary Risk Analysis: A Bioterrorism Risk Management Model," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(1), pages 32-48, January.
    14. Niyazi Onur Bakır, 2008. "A Decision Tree Model for Evaluating Countermeasures to Secure Cargo at United States Southwestern Ports of Entry," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 5(4), pages 230-248, December.
    15. Amrin, Andas & Zarikas, Vasileios & Spitas, Christos, 2018. "Reliability analysis and functional design using Bayesian networks generated automatically by an “Idea Algebra†framework," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 211-225.
    16. Jae Hun Kim & Juyeon Kim & Gunwoo Lee & Juneyoung Park, 2021. "Machine Learning-Based Models for Accident Prediction at a Korean Container Port," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-14, August.
    17. Haifeng Bian & Jun Zhang & Ruixue Li & Huanhuan Zhao & Xuexue Wang & Yiping Bai, 2021. "Risk analysis of tripping accidents of power grid caused by typical natural hazards based on FTA-BN model," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 106(3), pages 1771-1795, April.
    18. Michael Greenberg, 2011. "Risk analysis and port security: some contextual observations and considerations," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 187(1), pages 121-136, July.
    19. Hossain, Niamat Ullah Ibne & Nur, Farjana & Hosseini, Seyedmohsen & Jaradat, Raed & Marufuzzaman, Mohammad & Puryear, Stephen M., 2019. "A Bayesian network based approach for modeling and assessing resilience: A case study of a full service deep water port," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 378-396.
    20. Arman Nedjati & Mohammad Yazdi & Rouzbeh Abbassi, 2022. "A sustainable perspective of optimal site selection of giant air-purifiers in large metropolitan areas," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(6), pages 8747-8778, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:2:p:306-:d:196142. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.