MX2007002982A - Multi-threat detection system. - Google Patents

Abstract

A method and system for efficiently screening for dangerous threatening items are presented. The system includes an object unit designed to hold the object and a test unit including equipment for subjecting the object to a combination of two or more tests. There are sensors located in the object unit, wherein each of the sensors reads data resulting from testing the object and generates an output signal. A computation unit receives the output signal from each of the sensors and processes the output signals in parallel to determine a risk factor based on parameters resulting from the two or more tests. The parallel acquisition and processing of the output signals enhances accuracy. By testing a "batch" of objects at once, the system improves throughput.

Description

MULTIPLE THREAT DETECTION SYSTEM CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED REQUESTS This patent application claims the benefit under 35 USC §119 (e) of Provisional Patent Application Number 60 / 608,689 filed on September 10, 2004 and the provisional patent application of E.U.A. number 60 / 680,313 filed on May 13, 2005. whose contents are incorporated herein by reference.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION This invention relates generally to a system for detecting the presence of a threatening article, and more particularly to a system for detecting the presence of a threatening article using a plurality of tests in parallel.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION Currently, check point security systems in public places such as airports or government buildings typically include some combination of an image generation test, a metal detector and a chemical test. The chemical test usually uses an explosive traces detection machine (ETD) that is placed on top of a table in which a swab or air sample is taken from the object (eg a bag) and is tested to determine if there are explosive materials in traces. Unfortunately, the security verification systems that are currently in use are not as reliable as they should be. For example, X-ray tests identify threatening items based on densities of objects and many innocuous objects have densities that are similar to those of some threatening items. Naturally, the rate of false negative results is high. With the image generation test that involves X-rays or CT scanning, the accuracy of the test depends to a large extent on the vigilance and judgment of the human operator who covers the images as the packages are scanned. Although several systems include automatic visual classification of suspicious items, surveillance and human judgment play a major role in these systems. Due to distractions, fatigue and natural limitation of the extent of human stress, a verification system that is too based on human judgment can not reach an optimal level of precision. Furthermore, since the image generation test is based mainly on the visualization of objects that are examined, a passenger can hide or hide a harmful threatening article and avoid detection by the image generation test.

Attempts have been made to increase the accuracy of a verification point security system using a combination of tests such as generation of mage, metal detector and a chemical test. Typically, tests are performed by using three separate computers and placing them close to each other. Objects are tested by separate teams separately and sequentially, one trial after another. For example, a security system at an airport can use an X-ray imaging test and submit only bags that are indicated as suspicious by the X-ray image test to a chemical test. Similarly, with respect to passengers, they must first be asked to pass through a preliminary metal detection portal and undergo a more rigorous metal screening test performed by a human operator only if an alarm is generated by the preliminary portal test. A problem with this type of serial / sequential combination of tests is that the overall accuracy depends to a large extent on the accuracy of each individual test and in some cases on the accuracy of the first test. For example, if the chemical test is not used unless a bag does not pass the X-ray generation test, the use of the chemical test is only useful if the X-ray image generation test accurately identifies the suspicious packages. If the operator who reviews the X-ray images does not consider a potentially dangerous item, the fact that the chemical test is available it easily does not change the fact that a potentially threatening item passes through the security system. Although the use of multiple tests on each passenger and baggage may be an obvious way to improve the accuracy of safety checks, such a solution is impractical because it results that passengers spend an unusual amount of time when traveling through a vehicle. of security verification points. In addition, such a system can be prohibitively expensive. For a practical implementation the accuracy of safety verification tests must be balanced-and compensated-with the need to move passengers through the system at a reasonable speed. In addition, if a test that provides a high rate of false positive results as the X-ray test is used as the first test, the flow of passengers is unnecessarily slowed down because many bags that do not contain a threatening item must be submitted to the second test. A system and method for moving passengers through a safety checkpoint at a reasonable speed without compromising the accuracy of safety verification tests is desired.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION In one aspect, the invention is a system for the systematic analysis of an object to determine if it is a threatening article. The system includes an object unit designed to maintain the object, and a test unit that includes equipment to subject the object to a combination of two or more tests. These are sensors that are located in one or both object units and the test unit, where each of the sensors reads data resulting from testing the object and generating an output signal. A computing unit receives the output signal from each of the sensors, processes the output signals individually to generate parameter values and combines the parameter values to determine a risk factor, where the risk factor indicates the probability of that the threatening article is present in the object. In another aspect, the system includes a test unit that includes equipment to subject the object to a combination of two or more tests and modular object units coupled to the test unit. Each of the object units is designed to hold an object, and the test unit tests the objects in different object units. A computing unit receives the signals transmitted from one or both of the object units and the test unit and determines a risk factor for each object in the different object units.

In yet another aspect, the invention is a method for the systematic analysis of an object to determine whether it presents a threatening article. The method allows to identify an object in an object unit that has multiple sensors located in it and to subject the object to a combination of tests to identify properties of the object. The output signals are read from the multiple sensors located in the object unit and the output signals are processed individually to generate parameter values. The parameter values are combined to determine a risk factor that indicates the probability that a threatening item is present in the object.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS Figure 1 is a block diagram illustrating the main components of a multiple threat detection system, according to the invention. Figure 2 is a block diagram of an exemplary embodiment of the multiple threat detection system. Figure 3 is a block diagram illustrating the modules of a computing unit for executing a method of identifying threatening items.

Figure 4 is an exemplary embodiment of a multiple threat detection system that includes a single test unit and multiple object units. Figure 5 is a block diagram showing the test unit and the object units. Figure 6 is another exemplary embodiment of the multiple threat detection system in which the object is a human being (or any other animal). Figure 7 is another exemplary embodiment of the multiple threat detection system for testing inanimate objects and humans.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE MODALITIES The embodiments of the invention are described herein in the context of a security system at a verification point. However, it is to be understood that the embodiments provided herein are only exemplary embodiments and that the scope of the invention is not limited to the applications of the embodiments described herein. For example, the system of the invention may be useful for automated small-package and mail testing, verification of packaged consumable items (eg, food, medications) among others.

The multiple threat detection system of the invention is useful for detecting the presence of various threatening items. A "threatening article" is any substance and / or a combination of substances and objects that may be of interest to the security system and that include but are not limited to explosives, explosive devices, improvised explosive devices, chemical warfare agents, substances industrial and other chemical substances that are considered dangerous, biological agents, contraband, drugs, weapons and radioactive materials. The invention provides an automated system for performing different types of tests for a systematic analysis of multiple threatening articles in a rapid manner, such that multiple objects can be examined in a relatively short period of time. In addition, the system of the invention decreases the dependence of human operators, using instead a computer unit that determines a risk factor based on the concurrent acquisition and processing of the different test results. Thus, the system provides a much-needed method to increase the accuracy of a security verification test without impairing performance. An "ionized radiation test", as used herein, is intended to include any form of test that emits ionized radiation such as nuclear radiation, X-ray or y-rays. Examples of X-ray methods include standard X-ray transmission, backscattering methods, double or multiple energy methods as well as CT scan. Examples of nuclear radiation source tests include methods such as thermal neutron analysis, pulsed rapid neutron analysis, backscatter and terahertz test, among others. "A non-ionizing test" includes methods that use a source of non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation (EM) such as that which exposes the material to an EM field by pulses and acquires the return pulse. These methods include the use of high millimeter waves, nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy, electron air resonance (ESR) and nuclear quadrapole resonance (NQR) among others. An additional potential non-ionizing source includes terahertz. In addition, "non-ionizing tests" also include methods used in the detection of conducting materials that subject an object to electromagnetic fields, either constant or pulsed, and detect the corresponding direction of changes in the field. "Chemical analysis" is intended to include methods for detecting substances that include ion mobility spectroscopy (IMS), ion trap mobility spectroscopy (ITMS), detection of uptake, chemiluminescence, gas chromatography / surface acoustic wave , thermo-redox, spectroscopic methods, selective polymeric sensors and MEM-based sensors among others. A "biological classification" classifies biological threats (eg organisms, molecules) according to the guidelines indicated at the level of potential danger associated with toxins, bio-regulators and Epidermally dangerous organisms (such as viruses, bacteria and fungi). A "biometric classification test" includes separate standard biometric methods such as fingerprints as well as behavioral and physiological parameters indicative of suspicious behavior. As used herein, the term "simultaneously" is intended to mean a partial or complete temporal overlap between two or more events of the same or different durations. For example; yes e! event A begins at time 0 and ends at time 10 and event B begins at time 2 and ends at time 10, event A and event B are happening simultaneously. Similarly, event C and event D both start at time 0 and end at time 7 are also happening simultaneously. On the other hand, the term "sequential" indicates that there is no temporal overlap between two or more events. If event E starts at time 0 and ends at time 6 and event F starts at time 7 and ends at time 10, events E and F are carried out sequentially. A "parameter", as used herein, is intended to include data and data set as well as functions, whether static or dynamic. A "threat determination function" as used herein is intended to include a function or set of functions that define a condition indicating the presence of a threat. These functions can be a static value, sets of static values or a dynamic calculation. Functions can be based on rules or based on a non-heuristic method such as a neural network. A "risk factor" indicates the likelihood that a threatening item is present in the object. A "set" of risk factors may include one or more risk factors. Figure 1 is a block diagram illustrating the main components of a multiple threat detection system 10 according to the invention. As shown, the multi-threat detection system 10 includes a test unit 20, a computing unit 40 and an object unit 60 which are coupled to each other. The object unit 60 has a mechanism that is designed to hold an object (for example a package or piece of luggage), which is to be examined. The test unit 20 includes various test sources and / or equipment such as a radiation source for an X-ray examination, a chemical analysis unit for a chemical test, RF coils and other magnetic field inductions for a non-test examination. ionizing The computing unit 40, which has a processor and a memory, is configured to receive data from the test unit 20 and the object unit 60 and processes the data to generate a risk factor. The risk factor indicates the probability that the object in the object unit 60 contains a threatening article. Optionally, there may be a communication unit that may include an interconnection unit with a user (not shown) that is coupled to the computing unit 40 so that the risk factor and the corresponding alert can be communicated to an operator of the multiple threat detection system. The tests that are incorporated into the test unit 20 can be any of the tests currently known for a systematic analysis of threatening articles and is not limited to the examples mentioned herein. There may also be a plurality of object units coupled to the test unit 20 and the computing unit 40 so that multiple objects can be examined at almost the same time. Figure 2 is a block diagram of an exemplary embodiment of a multiple threat detection system 10. The object unit 60 has one or more doors 61 through which an object 62 can be placed in the object unit 60 to be subjected to various tests. In some embodiments, the object 62 remains stationary on a platform in the object unit 60. In other embodiments, the object 62 is moved through the object unit 60 by a displacement mechanism 67. The displacement mechanism 67 may be coupled to a clamping mechanism 64 which may be a robotic mechanism that is capable of holding the object 62 and placing and rotating the object 62 at a desired location at a desired test angle. In the embodiment shown, the movement mechanism 67 is a type of pulley system, an x-y positioning system or a combination of the two, and is coupled to the securing mechanism 64. In an alternative modality, the mecha- The displacement unit can be a conveyor belt that carries the object 62 through different test stages. The object unit 60 includes an automated receiver 69 that automatically provides additional information about the owner of the object 62. In some embodiments, the additional information may include information regarding ticketing. In other embodiments, additional information about the owner, such as his name, citizenship, travel destination, etc., may also be made available by the automated receiver 69. The automated receiver 69 can be implemented with digital / magnetic labeling, RF tagging or other smart card scanning that identifies the owner / carrier of the object 62. This automatic reciprocal relationship between the object 62 and its owner / bearer makes it easy to identify the person responsible if a threatening article is found. The object unit 60 has one or more doors 61 through which the object can be extracted. In some modalities, doors 61 are automatically secured upon identification of a threatening item as part of operational safety protocols. In this exemplary embodiment, the ionized radiation test unit 20 has a subunit 22 of an X-ray source, a subunit 30 for chemical analysis, and a subunit 36 of a non-ionizing source. The X-ray examination is performed by an X-ray source 24 that generates a beam and directs it towards the object 62. Preferably, the X-ray source 24 is supported by a rotating mechanism 26 that allows the beam to be aimed at in different directions, and it may be desirable to adjust the direction of the beam according to the size and position of the object 62. A plurality of sensors 66 are located in the object unit 60 and placed to receive X-ray beams after they pass. through the object 62. Additional sensors 66 can be placed to also acquire backscattering radiation. The beam is received by the sensors 66 after they pass through the object 62. The sensors 66 generate output signals based on the received beam and feed the output signals to the computing unit 40. When X-rays are used as one of the tests the walls of the X-ray subunit 22 and the object unit 60 are shielded to retain the radiation within the object unit 60. A chemical analysis can be performed by taking a sample of the object 62 and by carrying out the analysis of the sample through a subunit 30 of chemical analysis. A path implemented by a flow device such as a rotational flow device 32 connects the clamping mechanism 64 to the chemical analysis sub-unit 30 so that the sample of the object 62 can be transported to the chemical analysis sub-unit. Chemical analysis can be based, for example, on ion mobility spectroscopy or newer methods such as selective polymers or MEM-based sensors. When ion mobility spectroscopy is used, the chemical analysis subunit 30 includes an ionization reaction chamber 28. An air flow is generated by means of a vacuum pump 33 to obtain a gas sample from the unit 60 of object. The gas sample travels through adjustable closure tubes 32 which have pores 63 for acquisition of particles in proximity to the object 60 to obtain gas samples. The rotational flow device 32 and the particle acquisition pores 63 provide a means for agitation of the gas in continuous contact and the acquisition of particles for continuous analysis while the object moves within the object unit 60 for further testing. The pores 63 for acquisition of particles can be placed on the clamping mechanism 64 which moves the object 62 through the object unit 60 such as the robotic arm or the conveyor belt mentioned above. The gas sample enters subunit 30 for chemical analysis. In an exemplary embodiment using the IMS method, the gas sample enters the ionization reaction chamber 28 through the rotational flow device 32 and is ionized by an ionization source. The ionized gas molecules are directed to a collector plate (not shown) which is located in the ionization reaction chamber 28 by an electric field within the chamber 28. The amount of ions that reach the collector plate as a function of the Time is measured and sent to the computing unit 40 in the form of one or more transmitted signals. A microprocessor in the chemical analysis subunit 30 can convert the amount of ions into a current before sending the current to the computing unit 40. IMS is a well-established method. Optionally, the chemical analysis sub-unit 30 contains an interconnection module 35 to a biological detection system. Whether incorporates a biological detection system within the test unit 20, a biological classification of the object can be obtained. A biological detection system that detects molecular materials can use one of the methods of chemical analysis. A system that is designed to identify an organism such as anthrax can use an automated DNA test based on an automated polymerase chain reaction (PCR) according to the current state of technology. The non-ionizing source subunit 36 may contain a radiofrequency (RF) source and / or a magnetic source, such as RF coils 38 and antennas for NQR and / or eddy current testing. These tests provide information regarding the chemical compositions of the object and information about the existence of metallic materials and other conductive materials. The magnetic sources can be a plurality of sources that vary in size and strength, so that the location of the threatening item can be detected as well as its presence. The radiofrequency waves and / or a magnetic field is directed to the object 62 and the sensors 66 receive the wave and / or the field after it passes through the object 62. For example, when the subunit 36 is a metal detector, the metal detector can transmit low intensity magnetic fields that interrogate the object 62 as it passes through the magnetic fields. A transmitter generates the magnetic field that reacts with the metallic objects in its field and the sensors 66 measure the response of this reaction. The sensors 66 send the result of the measurement to the computing unit 60. In addition to the X-ray examination, ion mobility spectrometry and the non-ionizing source test used in the embodiment of Figure 2, any other test can be used by the multi-threat detection system 10 if it is considered useful for the particular application. . In addition, the X-ray examination, the ion unit spectrometry and the non-ionizing source test can be replaced by different tests that are considered suitable by a person skilled in the art. Preferably, each of subunits 22, 30, 36 is designed to be replaceable independently of the other subunits. In this way, the substitution of one test with another will most likely be a matter of substituting one subunit with another. The sensors 66 can be a fused distribution sensor capable of collecting multiple information, either in parallel or in a multiplexed manner. The sensors in fused distribution are well known. The information collected can include any of the test results such as X-rays, terahertz rays, rays and, RF, chemical information, nuclear radiation and current information. The computing unit 40 includes a processor 42, a memory 44 and a power supply 46. Using a method of multiple variables such as the method described in the following with reference to Figure 3, the computing unit 40 determines the risk factor which indicates the probability that an object contains a threatening article. The computing unit 40 has a communication interconnect 50 through which it can send visual and / or audible warnings in any communication mode, preferably wirelessly, if an object is likely to contain a threatening article. There is at least one open interconnect 95 that allows the computing unit 40 to communicate with another apparatus, such as a platform for a human portal system or a platform for biometric entries. The open interconnect 95 can allow wired or wireless connections with these other devices. The chemical analysis test results can be sent directly from the collector plate in the chemical analysis sub unit 30 to the computing unit 40. However, if desired, data from the collector plate can be sent to one or more sensors 66 in the object unit 60 and sent to the computing unit 40 indirectly from the sensors 66. When other methods such as Passive sensors, the particles can be directed directly to the sensors 66. Other data, such as X-ray data are collected by the sensors 66 and sent to the computing unit 40. As used herein, the term "sensors" includes any type of device that is capable of producing a physical and electrical measurement and generating an output signal for the computing unit 40, such as the sensors 66 of the unit 20. of object and the collector plate in subunit 30 of chemical analysis.

Although Figure 2 shows the test unit 20, the computing unit 40 and the object unit 60 as three separate components, the division is conceptual and the physical units do not necessarily need to coincide with the conceptual division. For example, the three units may be contained in a housing or the test unit 20 and the object unit 60 may be contained in the same housing while the computing unit 40 may be in a remote location. Figure 3 is a block diagram illustrating the modules of a computing unit 40 for executing a method of identifying a threatening article. As described in the above, the computing unit 40 receives data from the test unit 20 and / or the object unit 60. This data originates as raw data collected by the sensors 66 and / or the collection plate in ion mobility spectrometry (or other chemical sensor). As shown in the diagram, the method of the invention uses a set of functional modules 116, 118, 120, 122, 124, 126, 128, 206, 208 to process the various inputs from the sensors 66 and the sensor in the test unit 20 (e.g. the collector plate). Using these modules values are calculated for various parameters such as texture, density, electrical conductivity, molecular classification, location classification, radiation classification, visual classification, biological classification and biometric classification for object 62. When object 62 is somewhat similar To a packet that contains multiple streams, the components can be divided automatically according to with texture, density, conductivity, etc., so that each component is classified separately. In the particular embodiment of the threatening article identification method shown in Figure 3, the results of active radiation detection (for example X-rays) is used for the determination of texture classification, density classification, context classification of shape, classification of location and visual classification. The radioactive level of the object can be determined for radiation classification. Current data or induced EM magnetic field responses are used for parameters such as texture classification, conductivity classification and location classification. The magnetic response is used to calculate parameters such as molecular classification, density classification and location classification. Any result of chemical analysis is used for molecular classification. The output signals from the sensors 66 and the output signals from the chemical analysis sub-unit 30 are supplied to the different modules in parallel, so that the values for all the parameters of the classification areas such as texture, density, etc. ., can be determined substantially simultaneously. After the parameters are determined based on the values and functions for each of these classification areas, the values are processed collectively in a multiple variable data matrix module 300 to generate a risk factor. The 300 data matrix of The multiple variant distributes the plurality of classification parameters from the function matrices 116, 118, 120, 122, 124, 126, 128, 206, 208, 210 in a n dimensional data matrix. For example, the visual classification function matrix 124 can provide numerous display data [V] as a function of the number of (l..n) and the angle measurement (F) in the number of rotations performed by the mechanism 64 of clamping, so that a data form can be V = f (F) rí. Additionally, a series of display data [Vj related to density parameters [D] at each angle F can provide the set of parameters V = f (D, F, r>). Another set of parameters supplied within the multiple variable data array 300 can be conductivity ratings from the matrix 120 of conductivity classification functions and similarly provide an array of interrelated parameters, eg conductivity [Z ] that has variable intensities (i) as a function of the location (I) that provides a set of Z = f (i, l). These three exemplary functions, V = f (F, r >), V = f (D, F, p) and Z = f (i, l) can be distributed in a multi-variable data matrix 300 in such a way that that they provide multiple attributes for particular three-dimensional locations, as well as global attributes, through the object subjected to systematic analysis. More generally, all classification function matrix blocks will produce numerous sets of parameters, so that the n-dimensional parameter matrix occurs in block 310.

The n-dimensional parameter matrix generated in block 310 allows numerous calculations and processing of dependent and independent parameters to be performed in block 310. The parameters of the multi-variable data matrix module 300 are sent to the threat determination functions, which includes carrying out hybrid calculation sets. Hybrid calculations include combinations of rule-based and non-heuristic methods (such as a neural network or other organisms) K k awojawflvpo or vri íl I? O Real-world knowledge criteria and conditions (block 310). In some modalities an example of a decision based on a rule may combine tests of part or all of the parameters against thresholds. For example, a condition like "if the texture classification T (F, L) p >; 3, density classification T (F, L) n > 4, conductivity classification Z (i, l) 7 > 4, location classification > 3 and radiation classification > 1"can be used as a condition for determining a type of risk factor and possibly generating an alert.The calculations can be any simple or complex combination of the individual parameter values calculated by the test block 310 to determine the sets of Risk factors: Risk factor sets represent various categories of threats that are likely to be present in the object, for example, there may be a category of threat functions associated with the probability of a biological event which can produce a factor of risk for this category, it can also be a category of functions of threats associated with the probability of an explosive threat which can produce a risk factor for the category of explosives and there may still be a category of threat functions associated with the overall probability that it is produced by a combination of attributes not necessarily specific to the type of material. Different calculations can generate a number of risk factors within each category. Threat functions include test conditions and apply criteria that are based on pre-existing real-world knowledge of signals and signal combinations that identify threats. If a sufficiently high risk factor is determined that a pre-set set of threat thresholds is satisfied, depending on the modality, location, quantity and type of threatening items can be calculated (block 320) and can also be generated. alert (block 330). The fact that a risk factor is high enough to trigger an alert depends on sensitivity settings within the system, which has an implicit setting and is reconfigurable by the user. An "alert" may include a visual or auditory signal to notify the operator that a threatening item has been identified and may also include the acquisition of other operational actions such as locking / immobilizing the door 61 in the object unit 60. Optionally, a signal (e.g., a green light) can be generated to indicate that the object is free of threatening items (block 325).

Figure 4 is an exemplary embodiment of a multiple threat detection system 10 that includes a single test unit 20 and multiple object units 60a-60e. As shown, the test unit 20 is centrally located with respect to the object units 60 so that the object can be analyzed by the test unit 20 regardless of which object unit it is in. Preferably, there is a rotary mechanism in the test unit 20 which allows the ri -ip = >to adjust. r.r.i? n rip.l h "ar rtp n r" p iphi. p w.t-r -..., p -.n. . h ~ -a.QP - p - n. . r -. n -á «l. n vh > vjip- ~ t..nv P VQ P v, Y. «- mine ~ ru.Q. I -_. In. .-a > . Once all the object units have been filled, the test unit performs tests on the objects by rotating in increment between each object unit 60, as shown by the arrows. Some tests are done sequentially. For example, if an X-ray test is performed, the X-ray beam is directed from the test unit 20 to the multiple object units 60a-60e sequentially, for example, in a predetermined order. However, other tests can be performed simultaneously for the multi-object units 60a-60e. For example, if a chemical analysis test is performed, a sample of each of the objects in the multi-object units 60a-60e can be taken simultaneously, since each object unit has its own rotation flow device 32, fastening mechanism 64 and pores 63 for particle acquisition. Thus, based on the tests included in the particular modality, the general test may be partially sequential and partially simultaneous for the multiple object units 60a-60e. All the test data are sent to the computing unit 40, preferably as soon as they are obtained. The output signals of the sensors 66 (and the collection plate of the chemical analysis sub-unit 30, if applicable) can be processed by a single computing unit 40 or a plurality of computing units 40. When a single computing unit 40 is used, the computing unit 40 keeps the objects separate so that it provides five different results, one for each object 62. The embodiment of Figure 4 allows multiple objects to be processed quickly compared to a current security verification system where passengers form a single line and an object is processed each time (for example a suitcase). Thus, all the tests incorporated in the test unit 20 can be performed for each of the objects in the object units 60a-60e without harming the flow of traffic. The multiple threat detection system 10 of Figure 4 can be designed as a modular unit so that the number of object units 60 is adjustable. In this way, if a first area acquires a lot of traffic while the traffic in a second area has decreased, some of the object units of the second area can be used for the first area simply by separating them from the test unit 20 and join them to another test unit 20. This flexibility results in Additional cost savings for public entities that can use the multi-threat detection system 10. The object units 60a-60e are substantially identical to each other. Additionally, the platform on which the object 62 is placed in the object unit 60 may have a sensor, such as a weight sensor, the signals from the test unit 20 determine whether the particular object unit 60 is in use or do not. In this way, if only the object units 60a, 60b, 60d and 60e are used for some reason, the test unit 20 will not waste time sending test beams and sample collection of the empty object unit 60c and the system 10. it will automatically optimize your testing protocols. Although the particular embodiment shows that the units with hexagonal shapes for a honeycomb configuration, this is only an example and is not a limitation of the invention. Figure 5 is a block diagram showing the test unit 20 and the object units 60a-60e. In the particular embodiment, a single computing unit 40 is used for all of the object units 60a-60e. Each of the object units 60a-60e contains a mobile device, such as a mechanical mechanism, a multi-axis manipulator, a robotic mechanism or a conveyor belt and a sensor array, as described above with reference to the Figure 2. The test unit 20 has four subunits: a subunit of ionized radiation source, a subunit of chemical analysis, a subunit of non-ionizing radiation source and a subunit of magnetic field induction. Each of the object subunits 60a-60e is coupled to the test unit 20 and the computing unit 40. Figure 6 is another exemplary embodiment of a multiple threat detection system 10 wherein the object is a human being (or any other animal). In the particular embodiment shown, the test unit 20 has two object units 60a. 60b attached to it. Naturally, tests involving radiation will be used with caution, selecting appropriate radiation parameters when the "objects" to be tested are human beings. If desired, a camera may be installed somewhere in the test unit 20 or in the object unit 60a and / or 60b to obtain images of objects in order to obtain a biometric classification and / or transmit images to an operator . Figure 7 is another exemplary embodiment of the multiple threat detection system 10 for the analysis of inanimate objects and human beings. The particular mode has a test unit 20 with five object units 60a-60e for testing inanimate objects and a 60f portal for humans or animals to pass through. The test unit 20 performs analysis of objects and human beings that are in each of the object units 60a-60f. In some situations where the object unit 60f is placed too far away from the test unit 20, a separate test unit can be used for the object unit 60f.

However, all the object units and both test units can still feed signals to a single computing unit 40. The invention allows the detection of threatening articles with increased accuracy compared to the presently available system. Although the currently available systems use a separate equipment sequence, each equipment uses only one test and generates a test result based on only one test, the system of the invention is based on a combination of a plurality of parameters. Thus, although a pump that has a low level of explosives and a small amount of conductive material can escape detection by the current system because both materials are present in quantities below threshold levels, the object can be captured by the system of the invention due to the presence of a certain combination of indicative materials in the neighborhood parameters included in the threat determination functions which can trigger an alarm. The use of combinations of parameters allows greater flexibility and increased accuracy in detecting the presence of threatening items. The invention also allows the detection of a general threatening article. This is different from the current system that targets specific items / materials such as explosives, drugs, weapons, etc. By detecting the presence of a general combination of potentially threatening materials, the system of the invention becomes more difficult to create than pass dangerous new creative devices through the security system. Although the foregoing has been with reference to particular embodiments of the invention, it will be appreciated by those skilled in the art that changes may be made in this embodiment without departing from the principles and spirit of the invention.

Claims (1)

1. NOVELTY OF THE INVENTION CLAIMS 1. - A system for a systematic analysis of an object to determine if it is a threatening article, the system is characterized because it comprises: an object unit designed to retain the object, a unit Ho np lo a ni 10 O? I li r. nara cnmetor to r > I have one or more tests; sensors located in at least one of the object unit and the test unit, wherein the sensors read data resulting from testing the object and generating output signals corresponding to the data and a computing unit that receives the signals from output of the sensors, process the output signals individually to generate parameter values and combine the parameter values to determine a set of risk factors, where the set of risk factors indicates a probability that the object is present in the threatening article. 2 - The system according to claim 1, further characterized in that two or more tests are performed simultaneously. 3. The system according to claim 1, further characterized in that two or more tests are carried out sequentially. 4. - The system according to claim 1, further characterized in that the computing unit processes the output signals of different sensors simultaneously. 5. The system according to claim 1, further characterized in that the tests are selected from tests of ionizing radiation, chemical analysis and non-ionizing tests. 6. The system according to claim 1, character- merged 7. The system according to claim 1, further characterized in that the computing unit determines a set of parameters that include one or more of texture, density, electrical conductivity, molecular classification, location, visual classification, radioactive potential, class biological and biometric class of the object based on the signal emitted from each of the sensors. 8. The system according to claim 7, further characterized in that an output signal of one of the sensors is used to determine values for multiple parameters. 9. The system according to claim 1, further characterized in that the computing unit has a threat determination function that includes conditions that determine the set of risk factors, the system also comprises a unit of interconnection to generate an alert if one or more risk factors are determined from the set of risk factors. 10. The system according to claim 1, further characterized in that it comprises a movement mechanism in the object unit for moving the object to a desired location in the object unit. 11. The system according to claim 1, further characterized in that it comprises a mechanism of rotation in the unit of ninnotion rinnrío olm anicmn HQ rntaH? N mantipnp to nhiotn \ / In h rto to adjust the angle of the object to tests. 12. The system according to claim 1, further characterized in that the object unit is a first object unit and the object is a first object, further comprising a second object unit designed to maintain a second object, wherein the test unit performs tests of the first object and the second object. 13. The system according to claim 12, further characterized in that the second object unit is a modular unit that is detectable from the test unit. 14. The system according to claim 12, further characterized in that the test unit has a mechanism that allows the test unit to test the first object and the second object sequentially. 15. - The system according to claim 12, further characterized in that the test unit performs the test of the first object and the second object simultaneously. 16. The system according to claim 12, also characterized because the first object is an inanimate object and the second object is a human being. 17. The system according to claim 1, further characterized in that the object unit is a first object unit5 e! object is a first object and the test unit is a first test unit, characterized in that it also comprises: a second object unit designed to hold the second object; and a second test unit includes equipment for subjecting the second object to a combination of two or more tests; wherein the computing unit receives output signals from the second object unit and the second test unit as well as from the first object unit and the first test unit. 18. The system according to claim 1, further characterized in that the test unit comprises subunits, wherein each of the subunits confers a unique test equipment and is independently replaceable with a different subunit. 19. The system according to claim 1, further characterized in that it comprises a camera in either the test unit or the object unit to obtain an image of the object. 20. - The system according to claim 17, further characterized in that the object is a human being. 21. The system according to claim 1, further characterized in that the object unit comprises an automated receiver that identifies the owner of the object and provides information about the owner. 22. A system for the systematic analysis of an object for Hot-wire or a "ring-wire" or "ring-wire" includes: a test unit that includes equipment to subject the object to a combination of two or more tests; object units coupled to the test unit, wherein each of the object units is designed to hold an object, and wherein the test unit performs tests on the objects in the different object units; and a computing unit that receives output signals from at least one of the object units and the test unit, and determines a risk factor for each object in the different object units. 23. The system according to claim 22, further characterized in that the test unit performs one of the tests simultaneously on the different objects in the object units. 24. The system according to claim 22, further characterized in that the test unit performs one of the tests sequentially on the different objects in the object units, according to a predetermined order. 25. - The system according to claim 22, further characterized in that some of the tests are performed simultaneously on the different objects and other tests are performed sequentially on the different objects according to a predetermined order. 26. The system according to claim 22, further characterized in that the combination of two or more tests are performed simultaneously on one of the objects. 27. The system according to claim 22, further characterized in that the combination of two or more tests are performed sequentially on one of the objects. 28. The system according to claim 22, further characterized in that each of the object units includes a movement mechanism for moving the object within each of the object units. 29. The system according to claim 22, further characterized in that each of the object units includes a set of sensors. 30. The system according to claim 29, further characterized in that the set of sensors is a fused sensor arrangement. 31. The system according to claim 22, further characterized in that it comprises a portal coupled to the test unit, where the portal is designed for a human being to pass through and be tested by the unit of evidence. 32. The system according to claim 31, further characterized in that the test unit is a first test unit, further comprising a second test unit coupled to the portal for testing the human being, wherein the computer unit it receives output signals from the object units, the first test unit, the portal and the second test unit. 33.- A method for the systematic analysis of an object to determine if it is a threatening article, the method is characterized in that it comprises: identifying an object in an object unit that has multiple sensors located therein; submit the object to a combination of tests to identify properties of the object; read the output signals of the multiple sensors; process the output signals individually to generate parameter values; and combining the parameter values to determine a risk factor that indicates the probability that a threatening article is present in the object. 34.- The method according to claim 33, further characterized by comprising subjecting the object to a combination of tests simultaneously. The method according to claim 33, further characterized by comprising subjecting the object to a combination of tests sequentially. 36. - The method according to claim 33, further characterized in that the processing of the different output signals comprises processing the output signals simultaneously. 37. The method according to claim 33, further characterized in that it comprises selecting the combination of tests from ionizing radiation tests, chemical analysis and non-ionizing tests. 38.- The method according to claim 33. further characterized in that it comprises determining values for a set of parameters based on the output signals, where the set of parameters includes one or more of texture, density, electrical conductivity, classification visual, molecular class, location, radioactive potential, biological class and biometric class. 39. The method according to claim 38, further characterized in that it comprises determining values for multiple parameters of the use of an output signal of the output signals. The method according to claim 38, further characterized in that it comprises determining the risk factor by combining values for the set of parameters according to the preexisting threat determination functions. 41.- The method according to claim 33, further characterized in that it comprises generating an alert based on the risk factor. 42. - The method according to claim 33, further characterized in that it comprises moving the object within the object unit to properly place the object for the different tests. 43.- The method according to claim 33, further characterized in that the object is a first object and the object unit is a first unit of object, which further comprises performing the tests of a second object in a second unit of object after performing the nrna oc rlal Q? the rurínri ra i? r.írJoH io 44. - The method according to claim 33, further characterized in that the object is a first object and the object unit is a first object unit, further comprising performing the test of a second object in a second object unit while the first object is tested. 45. The method according to claim 33, further characterized in that it comprises obtaining a picture of the object.