The present invention relates to technologies for assessing the threat status of luggage. The invention has numerous applications; in particular it can be used for scanning luggage at airport or other security check points.
As embodied and broadly described herein, the invention provides a method and a system for assessing a threat status of a piece of luggage. The method comprises the steps of scanning the piece of luggage with penetrating radiation to generate image data and processing the image data with a computing device to determine the presence of an objet represented by the image data. The method also includes further processing the image data to compensate the image data for interaction between the object and the penetrating radiation to produce compensated image data and then determine the threat status of the piece of luggage on the basis of compensated image data.
As embodied and broadly described herein, the invention also provides a method and a system for assessing a threat status of a piece of luggage that contains an object. The method includes scanning the piece of luggage with X-rays to generate image data and provide a computing device programmed with software for execution by a CPU. The computing device simulating an interaction between the object and X-rays to compute X-rays attenuation information and processing the X-ray attenuation information to reduce a signature of the object in the image data and generate compensated image data. The threat status of the piece of luggage is determined on the basis of the compensated image data.
As embodied and broadly described herein the invention also provides a method for assessing a threat status of a piece of luggage containing a laptop computer. The method includes scanning the piece of luggage with penetrating radiation to generate image data and processing the image data with a computing device programmed with software for execution by a CPU, for:
As embodied and broadly described herein, the invention also provides method and a system for visually enhancing an X-ray image to increase the likelihood of visually detecting the presence of explosive material hidden in an electronic device. The method includes scanning a piece of luggage containing an electronic device with X-rays to generate X-ray image data and process the X-ray image data with a computing device to:
As embodied and broadly described herein the invention also provides a system for assessing a threat status of a piece of luggage that contains an object. The system has an X-ray scanner for scanning the piece of luggage with X-rays to generate X-ray image data and a computing device programmed with software for execution by a CPU, for processing the X-ray image data to reduce a signature of the object in the X-ray image data and produce a compensated X-ray image data. The system also has a display device for displaying an image of the piece of luggage derived from the compensated X-ray image data. The computing device implements a user interface including a control, the computing device being responsive to actuation of the control to alter a degree of object signature reduction in the X-ray image.
A system for assessing a threat status of a piece of luggage that contains an object. The system has an X-ray scanner for scanning the piece of luggage with X-rays to generate X-ray image data and a computing device programmed with software for execution by a CPU, for processing the X-ray image data to reduce a signature of the object in the X-ray image data and produce a compensated X-ray image data. The system also has a display device for displaying an image of the piece of luggage derived from the compensated X-ray image data. The computing device implementing a user interface including a control, the computing device being responsive to actuation of the control to toggle the display device between a first mode and a second mode, the first mode and the second mode deferring by a degree of object signature reduction.
A system for assessing a threat status of a piece of luggage that contains an object having an X-ray scanner for scanning the piece of luggage with X-rays to generate X-ray image data and a computing device programmed with software for execution by a CPU, for processing the X-ray image data to reduce a signature of the object in the X-ray image data and produce a compensated X-ray image data. The computing device generates a composite image signal derived from the compensated X-ray image data including an overlay to illustrate a position of the object. The system also has a display device for displaying an image of the piece of luggage derived from the composite image signal.
As embodied and broadly described herein, the invention also provides a system for assessing a threat status of a piece of luggage that contains an object. The system including an X-ray scanner for scanning the piece of luggage with X-rays to generate X-ray image data and a computing device programmed with software for execution by a CPU, for processing the X-ray image data to reduce a visual presence of the object. The computing device implements a user interface including a control operable by a user to designate a location in the X-ray image where the object resides, the computing device being responsive to the control to processing the X-ray image data to reduce visual presence of the object at the location and generate compensated X-ray image data. The system also has a display device for displaying an image of the piece of luggage derived from the compensated X-ray image data.
A detailed description of examples of implementation of the present invention is provided hereinbelow with reference to the following drawings, in which:
In the drawings, embodiments of the invention are illustrated by way of example. It is to be expressly understood that the description and drawings are only for purposes of illustration and as an aid to understanding, and are not intended to be a definition of the limits of the invention.
Generally speaking, the process, which can be performed at a security checkpoint or at any other suitable location, would start with step 20, where the luggage is scanned with X-rays in order to derive X-ray attenuation data. The X-ray attenuation data conveys information about the interaction of the X-rays with the contents of the luggage. In a specific and non-limiting example of implementation, the X-ray attenuation data is contained in the X-ray image data, which is normally the output of an X-ray scan. Note that “X-ray image” data does not imply that the scanner necessarily produces an X-ray image for visual observation by an observer, such as the operator, on a display monitor. Examples of implementation are possible where the system can operate where the X-ray image data output by the X-ray scanner is not used to create an image on the monitor to be seen by the operator.
At step 22, the X-ray image data is output from the X-ray scanning apparatus and received by a suitable data processing device. The data processing device then performs suitable processing of the X-ray image data at step 24 which searches the X-ray image data for characterization features indicating the possible presence in the luggage of certain objects.
If characterization features are found in the X-ray image data the processing derives at step 26 properties of the object associated with the characterization features. The performance of step 26 may include interaction with a database 28 that maps respective objects or their characterization features and object properties. Examples of object properties include a nominal X-ray signature of the object such as the degree of X-ray attenuation and dimensions of the object among others.
At step 30 the object property derived at step 26 is used to compensate the X-ray image data such as to reduce or even eliminate the “presence” of the object in the X-ray image data. The thus compensated X-ray image data can then be processed to determine if the luggage is a security threat. The processing can be automatic, rely on a human operator or a combination of both. Automatic processing could involve a processing of the compensated attenuation information conveyed by the X-ray image data in order to determine the presence of prohibited materials, such as explosives, on the basis of material composition. Automatic processing could also involve a shape analysis of articles in the X-ray image to locate the presence of threatening articles, such as guns or stabbing objects.
A human operator can be involved in the threat assessment process by displaying the compensated image on a display to show the operator a “de-cluttered” view of the contents of the luggage, such that the operator can determine based on his/her judgement if a prohibited object is present in the luggage.
Both processes can also be run, in parallel or sequentially. In that scenario the involvement of the operator can be useful to validate the results of the automatic threat detection processing or to resolve cases where the automatic threat detection processing produces ambiguous results.
1) Scanning Luggage with X-rays
With reference to
The processing module 200 may be co-located with the X-ray scanner 100 or it may be remote from the X-ray scanner 100 and connected thereto by a communication link, which may be wireless, wired, optical, etc. The processing module 200 receives the X-ray image data signal 116 and executes the method briefly described in connection with
In the example shown, the de-cluttered X-ray image data is directed to a console 300 and/or to a security station 500, where the X-ray image can be shown to an operator 130 or other security personnel. The console 300 can be embodied as a piece of equipment that is in proximity to the X-ray scanner 100, while the security station 500 can be embodied as a piece of equipment that is remote from the X-ray scanner 100. The console 300 may be connected to the security station 500 via a communication link 124 that may traverse a data network (not shown).
The console 300 and/or the security station 500 may comprise suitable software and/or hardware and/or control logic to implement a graphical user interface (GUI) for permitting interaction with the operator 130. Consequently, the console 300 and/or the security station 500 may provide a control link 122 to the X-ray scanner 100, thereby allowing the operator 130 to control motion (e.g., forward/backward and speed) of the conveyor belt 114 and, as a result, to control the position of the suitcase contents 102 within the screening area of the X-ray scanner 100.
In accordance with a specific non-limiting embodiment, and with reference to
Generally speaking, X-rays are typically defined as electromagnetic radiation having wavelengths that lie within a range of 0.001 to 10 nm (nanometers) corresponding to photon energies of 120 eV to 1.2 MeV.
A detector 218 located generally along an extension of the path of the X-rays 206 receives photons emanating from the luggage 104. Some of the incoming photons (X-rays 206) will go straight through the luggage 104 while some will interact with the contents of the luggage 104. There are a number of interactions possible, such as:
The total attenuation shown in the graph of
The photoelectric absorption (
Compton scattering (
The diffraction phenomenon of the X-rays by a material with which they interact is related to the scattering effect described earlier. When the X-rays are scattered by the individual atoms of the material, the scattered X-rays may then interact and produce diffraction patterns that depend upon the internal structure of the material that is being examined.
The photons received by the detector 218 include photons that have gone straight through the suitcase 104 and its contents 102; these photons have not interacted in any significant matter with the suitcase 104. Others of the received photons have interacted with the suitcase 104 or its contents 102.
In accordance with a specific non-limiting embodiment of the present invention, the detector 218 may comprise a low-energy scintillator 208 and a high-energy scintillator 210. The low-energy scintillator 208 amplifies the intensity of the received photons such that a first photodiode array 212 can generate a low-energy image data 220. Similarly, the high-energy scintillator 210 amplifies the intensity of the received photons such that a second photodiode array 214 can generate a high-energy image data 222. The low-energy image data 220 and the high-energy image data 222 may be produced simultaneously or in sequence. In this example, the low-energy X-ray image data 220 and the high-energy X-ray image data 222 form the aforesaid X-ray image data signal 116.
Referring back to
The example of implementation shown in
The X-ray scanning apparatus 280 includes a scanning area 282 in which is carried the piece of luggage 284 by the conveyor belt 114 (not shown in
2) Identify Object Characterization Features
In one specific and non-limiting example of implementation the X-ray image data is processed to determine if it contains object characterization features which indicate the presence of certain objects in the piece of luggage. Several possible examples of implementation are possible. Those examples of implementation are discussed below.
(a) Determining Object Characterization Features in X-ray Data Conveying a Single View of the Piece of Luggage.
(b) Determining Object Characterization Features in X-ray Data Conveying a Two or More Views of the Piece of Luggage.
The image processing operation to identify shapes or shape components as described earlier can be performed on each view separately and the results then subjected a further processing to identify the type of object that may be present in the suitcase. This further processing is described below.
3) Determine Type/Nature of Object
The information on the shape or shape components as well as the location of the shapes or shape components extracted during the previous processing operation are further processed to try determining what types of objects may be present in the image. One possibility is to use a rules engine that tries to match shapes or shapes components to object types that one is expected to find in a suitcase.
This process is best illustrated in the flowchart of
When the X-ray image data conveys a single view of the suitcase 800, the processing is two dimensional, in the sense that the object determination operation will be done on the basis of an object shape/geometry from one point of view. In the case of multi view X-ray image data of the object, the processing takes into account object shape/geometries in three dimensions.
At step 2502, the processing module 200 generates a virtual model of the object. The generation of the virtual model is performed by the software executed by the processing module 200 which implements a series of logical rules. The rules use as an input characterization features or patterns to determine what the object likely is. The rules can be built in many different ways from simple logic designed to handle a limited number of object geometries or object types to a much more complex logic that can differentiate between many different object types and geometries.
For example, characterization features such as arcs can be assumed to indicate the presence of round objects, like coins in the suitcase or the suitcase wheels. Straight lines can indicate elongated rectangles such as the typical components used in the construction of the suitcase, such as the handlebars.
Therefore, the object characterization features appearing in the X-ray image constitute the basis on which the process determines what the object is. This process may operate by allocating the characterization features to a number of predetermined types of objects that may be commonly found in a suitcase. Some assumptions may be used to make conclusions as to the nature of the object. Those assumptions are implemented by a rules engine which processes the characterization features to try determining what type of object this might be. For example:
When the X-ray image data conveys more than one view, such as two or three views of the suitcase 800, all those views can be used to build a three dimensional virtual model of the object. In the instance where location information is present, which identifies the position of an object characterization feature in a given view, it is possible to correlate object characterization features from several views to object geometry information about the object in three dimensions. Taking the example of the coins, if one view shows the object as a disk and another view shows the object as relatively thin strip, then the object is likely a coin. In addition to correlating the object characterization features from different views, multiple views also allow to “see” an object of interest from a perspective that makes it easier to identity. For example, an object in a suitcase may be oriented in such a way that it shows a confusing image in a particular view. Take the example of a small cosmetics bottle. When seen from the bottom, the bottle is likely to appear in the X-ray image as a disk-shaped article, suggesting a coin. From a different view however, the height dimension will appear significant, allowing resolving the ambiguity (the object is not a coin).
Accordingly, the processing performed on X-ray images that convey more than a single view of the suitcase is likely to yield better results.
The rules engine operating on single or multiple views X-ray images may use complex logic rules along with contextual information (such as for example if a laptop computer is assumed to be present, then a charging module should also appear somewhere in the image). Many different layers of logic can be integrated in the rules engine such that in addition to the object characterization features extracted from the X-ray image data, inferences can be made based on context to make reasonable assumptions as to what some objects might be. Non-limiting examples of contextual information can include:
Sub-step 2504 in the flowchart in
Sub-step 2504 is a conditional step which, if answered in the negative (no predetermined object type has been identified) terminates the process at step 2506. Otherwise, (a predetermined object type has been identified) leads to step 2508 at which a generic virtual model of the object is extracted from the database 28. The virtual model reflects in three dimensions the shape of the object. One possibility is to use a library of generic shapes stored in the database 28. For each type of object that the processing module 200 is capable to identify in the X-ray image on the basis of object characterization features, at least one generic virtual model is stored in the library of shapes. For instance, in the case of a laptop computer, the virtual model would be rectangular block.
The generic virtual model is then customized by the processing module 200, at step 2510 to fit the shape observed in the image. This is done by re-sizing the generic model such as to produce a model that more closely matches the object as seen in the X-ray image. The re-sizing can be done according to the information that is available on the object in the X-ray image. In the case of a single view image, dimensional information on the object may be available on two axes. In a multi view scenario, dimensions of the three axes may be available. For example, in the case of a laptop in the luggage, the object characterization features could allow determining the length and width dimensions of the laptop, thus allowing resizing the generic model along those two axes. If the X-ray image is a single view image, where no height dimension is available, then only a two dimension resizing is made and the adapted virtual model retains the height dimension of the generic virtual model. In the case of multi-view X-ray image data, then the resizing may be made on all three axes.
Once the type of object is determined and its virtual model generated, its material properties are assessed at step 2512. This operation may also involve the database 28. Specifically, the database 28 maps the type of objects with and indicator that can be used to compute the degree of X-ray attenuation the object will manifest. Accordingly, when the rules engine has identified the type object that exists in the X-ray image, it performs an interaction with the database 28 in order to determine what the indicator is. Note that in most applications the indicator does not need to be extremely precise and may be such as to compute an approximate degree of X-ray attenuation for the object.
For example, in the case of a laptop computer the indicator can be such that the computed attenuation value will be average for a typical laptop computer. The indicator may not be constant or the same for the entire object and may be expressed as a pattern, where the attenuation is not constant across the object. A pattern, in the case of a roller of a suitcase, would provide a certain attenuation value for the periphery of the roller and a different attenuation value for the center, to account for the presence of the bearing which is likely to absorb more X-rays due to the presence of metallic material.
Similarly, in the case of a laptop computer, the indicator could specify more attenuation in areas of the machine where more dense components are located, hence were more X-ray absorption takes place. Yet another possibility for a laptop computer, instead of treating the machine as a single unit, it is possible, once the presence of a laptop computer has been identified in the image, to consider different components of the laptop computer and allocate to the different components respective indicators. For example, a laptop computer is likely to have a series of components such as a battery, hard drive, keyboard and electronics board. The presence of each component in the image can be identified and an indicator associated to it independently of another component.
Accordingly, the database 28 is organized such as to map different objects to an indicator from which can be derived X-ray attenuation information.
One specific example of indicator is density information for the object. Since density determines to a significant extent the X-ray absorption, density information can be used to compute the X-ray attenuation due to the object. As indicated previously, the density information associated with a certain object may be a constant value, or may convey a density pattern assigning producing different attenuation levels to different parts of the object. Another example of an indicator is a value that provides a direct indication of the amount or degree of X-ray attenuation the object provides per unit volume.
4) Remove Contribution of Object in X-Ray Image Data
The purpose of this step, illustrated at
The first sub-step 2516 is to manipulate virtual model such as to correctly locate that virtual model in the suitcase environment. More specifically, the processing module 200 performs rotations of the virtual model or translations of the virtual model such that it matches the position of the real object in the suitcase. The manipulations on the virtual model are made with relation to the characterizing features seen in the X-ray image. Generally, the processing module would manipulate the virtual model in three dimensions such that it would appear to an observer that looks at the suitcase from the point of view of the X-ray source, to overlay the object shown in the X-ray image.
This operation may require constructing a virtual model of the entire scanning area of the X-ray scanner in which a virtual model of the suitcase is also created. The virtual model of the scanning area usually would need to be generated once and can be re-used for subsequent scanning cycles since the X-ray scanner 100 does not change, hence the virtual model would be also static. The model includes the three dimensional position of a number of different components, such as:
Once the orientation of the virtual model of the object relative to the virtual model of the scanning area is determined, it is possible to compute an approximation of the attenuation that the object would manifest in the image (sub-step 2518). Since the a priori X-ray attenuation information is available from the database 28, it is possible to compute the attenuation the object would manifest given its orientation. The degree of X-ray attenuation is determined largely by the nature of the material and the so called “path length” which is the thickness of the material through which the X-rays travel. The path length is a factor that depends on the orientation of the object in the scanning area. An object that is thin and flat will attenuate the X-rays differently, depending upon its position with respect to the X-ray source. If the object is located such that it is generally perpendicular to the direction according to which the X-ray source generates X-rays, the thickness of the material that the X-rays pass through is small by comparison to another orientation in which the X-rays travel through the object in a direction parallel to the plane of the object.
An example of scanning area modelisation is described in the Canadian patent application 2,696,031, filed on 2009-06-09 and entitled “Method and system for performing X-ray inspection of a product at a security checkpoint using simulation”. The contents of this patent application are hereby incorporated by reference.
However, in light of the fact that the orientation of the virtual model in the scanning area has been established such as to mach the orientation of the real object, to the processing module 200 geometrically computes the path length through the virtual model at different locations on the object. For example, in the case of any object, the path length will be the distance separating two interception points between an imaginary straight line along which an X-ray travels and the boundary of the object. Essentially, the first interception point is the point at which the X-ray enters the virtual model. The second interception point is the point at which the X-ray exits the virtual model. The distance between those points is the path length for that particular X-ray.
The above process can be repeated a number of times to compute the path length at different areas of the object such as to more precisely determine the X-ray attenuation pattern obtained in light of the particular object orientation.
In this example, the processing module uses a priori information about interaction between X-rays and the object, available in the database 28. The resulting X-ray attenuation information that is generated is synthetic information in the sense that it is not extracted directly from the image, rather it is computed by simulating how the object would interact with X-rays.
The removal of the X-ray attenuation that the real object manifests in the image is done by compensating the X-ray image data by using the synthetic attenuation information computed earlier. This is shown at step 2520. Assuming that the X-ray image data expresses attenuation information as gray levels, the compensation can be done by modifying the grey levels of the in the boundary of the object according to the attenuation pattern computed earlier in order to produce a compensated image that will show a lesser degree of attenuation within that boundary. Specifically, the compensation includes computing new attenuation values for each pixel within the boundary of the object, where the new attenuation value is the difference between the attenuation value of the original pixel reduced by the computed attenuation value caused by the object at that pixel location. The result of this operation is a compensated X-ray image in which the object has been “erased”. A complete erasure would occur if the computed attenuation matches precisely the real X-ray signature in the X-ray image data. While this is a desired objective, in most cases it is not necessary to fully “erase” an object. It may be sufficient to compensate the image up to an extent that other objects, previously obscured, are now sufficiently detailed allowing performing an adequate threat assessment of the suitcase.
Accordingly, applications of the invention are possible in which it is not necessary to implement the path length computation described earlier. It may suffice to assign to the virtual model a constant attenuation value, irrespective of its orientation, such as to compensate the X-ray image data to some extent and thus improve its clarity. In this example, the pixels within the boundary of the object will be compensated uniformly.
In
More specifically, the handlebars are composite structures, which appear in the X-ray image as nested rectangles, namely 1000a, 1000b and 1000c, where each rectangle is associated with a telescoping part of the handlebar. The handlebar 1002 is constructed in a similar fashion. The detection process as discussed earlier identifies each handlebar component separately and builds for each component an associated virtual model. The virtual models 1004a, 1004b and 1004c are associated with the components 1000a, 1000b and 1000c, respectively. The virtual models 1004a, 1004b and 1004c are then manipulated by the processing entity 200 such as to locate them one relative to the other as per the positioning of the original objects 1000a, 1000b and 1000c. The result of the manipulation of the virtual models 1004a, 1004b and 1004c is shown at 1008, where the models are nested according to the position of the original objects 1000a, 1000b and 1000c in the suitcase.
In this example, the X-ray image compensation process is such that the computed degree of attenuation associated with a handlebar 1000, 1002 is not uniform, rather it varies to take into account the increased attenuation due to the telescoping arrangement of the components 1000a, 1000b and 1000c. In this instance a first degree of attenuation is associated to the portion 1010, a second higher degree of attenuation is associated to the portion 1012 and a third even higher degree of attenuation is associated with the portion 1004 where the three components overlap. The virtual model of the handlebar takes into account the compounding X-ray attenuation effect due to the various components of the model. According to this arrangement, the zone of the X-ray image that is associated with the portion 1010 is compensated to a first degree, the zone of the image that is associated with the portion 1012 is compensated to a second higher degree and the zone of the image that is associated with the portion 1014 is compensated to a third yet higher degree. This example illustrates the possibility of providing virtual models of objects that are not merely made of uniform blocks, but represent the object by modeling independently respective components. In this situation, the handlebar is represented by a virtual model that has individual components which can be manipulated independently of one another by the processing module 200.
Yet another example of implementation is shown at
A significant advantage of this example is the ability to process luggage that contains electronic devices such as laptop computers, cell phones without the necessity to remove the electronic devices from the luggage. A person carrying such luggage at a security checkpoint would therefore simply put the luggage on the conveyor belt such that the luggage is scanned. The resulting X-ray image is processed as described earlier, with compensation implemented progressively until the clarity of the image improves to the point the operator is confident that the suitcase does not contain prohibited objects.
One example of a prohibited object which can be more easily detected with the present invention is sheet explosives. Explosive materials can be formed as thin sheets and those can be integrated in electronic devices, such as laptop computers. The ability of the present method to “remove” from the X-ray image components of the laptop computer that are known and expected to be found, would therefore leave the sheet explosive visible.
In the specific example shown, the user interface tools provide three types of functions. A first virtual button 2606 is provided to allow the operator to toggle the X-ray image between a compensated and a non-compensated view. The non-compensated view would be the original X-ray view in which the attenuation information due to the object is present. The compensated view is derived from the processing of the X-ray image information to produce an X-ray image from which some of all of the attenuation information due to the object has been removed. The toggle function may be useful for the operator to determine which image is best to assess if the suitcase contains dangerous items. Since the X-ray compensation process removes information from the image, circumstances may arise when the resulting image is not clearer or more desirable than the original image. Thus, by toggling between the two images, the operator may determine which one is best for the visual threat assessment process.
To toggle the X-ray image in response to the actuation of the tool 2606, the processing module 200 keeps in the memory 302 X-ray image data of each representation (non-compensated and compensated) and sends image signals according to what the operator wants to see, as indicated by the tool 2606.
A second virtual button 2608 is provided to increase the degree of X-ray compensation in the image. This may be useful in instances where the operator sees that the degree of X-ray compensation is not enough and more compensation would be desirable to further remove or diminish the visual presence of the object in the image. The processing module responds to a control signal received from the display 2600 by re-processing the X-ray image, this time applying more compensation within the boundaries of the object. One specific possibility is to run the compensation process but modifying the X-ray attenuation indicator associated with the object, such that a higher degree of X-ray attenuation is attributed to the object. The tool may be designed such that each time the virtual button 2608 is pressed, an incremental compensation run is performed by the processing module 200, to add an additional level of compensation. In this fashion, when the X-ray image appears in the display area 2602, it is provided with a base level of compensation and the operator increases the compensation incrementally by pressing on the virtual button 2608 the desired number of times to make the image as clear as possible for the visual threat examination.
The third virtual button 2610 is the reverse of the virtual button 2608 in that it decreases incrementally the X-ray compensation in the image in the boundary of the object.
Another possible tool which may be provided to the operator is a depiction of the boundary of the object in the image in the display area 2602. This boundary can be presented in colors or in a manner to make it more visually distinct from other articles in the image and it is useful to show the operator where the object on the basis of which the compensation was made, resides in relation the remainder of the suitcase contents. This operation is performed by the processing module 200 on the basis of the virtual model of the object generated during the X-compensation operation. The processing module 200 performs additional processing that superposes the outline of the virtual model over the characterizing features of the object appearing in the X-ray image to produce a composite image that is then shown in the display area 2602. This provides the operator with the ability to visually determine if the object removal operation from the image is sound. If the boundary depicted in the image does not make sense, indicating that the processing module 200 has performed an erroneous operation, then the operator can toggle via the virtual button 2606 to the non-compensated view to perform the visual threat assessment operation.
Although various embodiments have been illustrated, this was for the purpose of describing, but not limiting, the invention. Various modifications will become apparent to those skilled in the art and are within the scope of this invention, which is defined more particularly by the attached claims.
This application is a National Phase Entry of international PCT patent application No. PCT/CA2010/000916 file on Jun. 15, 2010 by Optosecurity et al. designating the United States and claiming the benefit of priority under 35 USC §119(e) based on U.S. provisional patent application No. 61/186,998 filed Jun. 15, 2009 and based on U.S. provisional patent application No. 61/230,435 filed Jul. 31, 2009. The contents of the above noted applications are incorporated herein by reference.
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind | 371c Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
PCT/CA2010/000916 | 6/15/2010 | WO | 00 | 12/13/2011 |
Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
WO2010/145016 | 12/23/2010 | WO | A |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3342397 | Duitsman | Sep 1967 | A |
3589511 | Britt | Jun 1971 | A |
3609045 | Stein | Sep 1971 | A |
3673394 | Hartmann | Jun 1972 | A |
4075700 | Blay | Feb 1978 | A |
4392237 | Houston | Jul 1983 | A |
4454949 | Flum | Jun 1984 | A |
4497065 | Tisdale et al. | Jan 1985 | A |
4709333 | Crawford | Nov 1987 | A |
4727562 | Belanger | Feb 1988 | A |
4864142 | Gomberg | Sep 1989 | A |
4870666 | Lonn et al. | Sep 1989 | A |
4927022 | Wilson | May 1990 | A |
4962515 | Kopans | Oct 1990 | A |
4974247 | Friddell | Nov 1990 | A |
4985906 | Arnold | Jan 1991 | A |
5027378 | Fujii et al. | Jun 1991 | A |
5044002 | Stein | Aug 1991 | A |
5056124 | Kakimoto et al. | Oct 1991 | A |
5400381 | Steude et al. | Mar 1995 | A |
5428657 | Papanicolopoulos et al. | Jun 1995 | A |
5442672 | Bjorkholm et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
5490218 | Krug et al. | Feb 1996 | A |
5524133 | Neale et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
5557108 | Tumer | Sep 1996 | A |
5568262 | LaChapelle et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5600303 | Husseiny et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
5600700 | Krug et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
5602890 | Gray et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
5692029 | Husseiny et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5768334 | Maitrejean et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5838758 | Krug et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5864600 | Gray et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5974111 | Krug et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
6018562 | Willson | Jan 2000 | A |
6026171 | Hiraoglu et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6041132 | Isaacs et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6054712 | Komardin et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6069936 | Bjorkholm | May 2000 | A |
6078642 | Simanovsky et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6088423 | Krug et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6122344 | Beevor | Sep 2000 | A |
6175655 | George et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6201850 | Heumann | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6542574 | Grodzins | Apr 2003 | B2 |
6654445 | Shepherd et al. | Nov 2003 | B2 |
6707381 | Maloney | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6707879 | McClelland et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6721387 | Naidu et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6721391 | McClelland et al. | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6753527 | Yamagishi et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6763083 | Fernandez | Jul 2004 | B2 |
6840120 | Sakairi et al. | Jan 2005 | B2 |
6952163 | Huey et al. | Oct 2005 | B2 |
7033070 | Azami | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7065175 | Green | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7092485 | Kravis | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7149339 | Veneruso | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7154985 | Dobbs et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7164750 | Nabors et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7257188 | Bjorkholm | Aug 2007 | B2 |
7260254 | Highnam et al. | Aug 2007 | B2 |
7274768 | Green | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7317390 | Huey et al. | Jan 2008 | B2 |
7355402 | Taicher et al. | Apr 2008 | B1 |
7386093 | Wu et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7508908 | Hu et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7614788 | Gatten | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7684605 | Klingenbeck-Regn | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7727567 | Heuft | Jun 2010 | B2 |
7787681 | Zhang et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7789401 | Ambrefe, Jr. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
7840360 | Micheels et al. | Nov 2010 | B1 |
7869637 | Baumgart et al. | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7873201 | Eilbert et al. | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7945017 | Chen et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
8090150 | Garms | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8116428 | Gudmundson et al. | Feb 2012 | B2 |
8150105 | Mian et al. | Apr 2012 | B2 |
8260020 | Garms | Sep 2012 | B2 |
8831331 | Gudmundson et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
8867816 | Bouchard et al. | Oct 2014 | B2 |
8879791 | Drouin et al. | Nov 2014 | B2 |
20010033636 | Hartick et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
20020097833 | Kaiser et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20030062373 | Holland | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20040016271 | Shah et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040101097 | Wakayama et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040232092 | Cash | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040252024 | Huey et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050036689 | Mahdavieh | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050058242 | Peschmann | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050078801 | Georgeson et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050111618 | Sommer, Jr. et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050117700 | Peschmann | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050173284 | Ambrefe, Jr. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050193648 | Klein et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050226360 | Kaucic et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050238232 | Ying et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20060013464 | Ramsay et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060022140 | Connelly et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060054682 | de la Huerga | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060078085 | Zanker | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060086794 | Knowles et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060098773 | Peschmann | May 2006 | A1 |
20060115044 | Wu et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060133566 | Li et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060187221 | Lakare et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060193434 | Green | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060203960 | Schlomka et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060239402 | Hu et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060257005 | Bergeron et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070003009 | Gray | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070013519 | Chung et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070041612 | Perron et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070041613 | Perron et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070058037 | Bergeron et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070098142 | Rothschild et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070132580 | Ambrefe, Jr. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070133743 | Johnson et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070152033 | Hind et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070168467 | Hu et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070192850 | Cowburn | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070217571 | Teslyar et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070297560 | Song et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080056443 | Hu et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080062262 | Perron et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080063140 | Awad | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080116267 | Barber | May 2008 | A1 |
20080138475 | Heuft | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080152082 | Bouchard et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080167552 | Bouchevreau et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080170660 | Gudmundson et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080181473 | Garty et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080240578 | Gudmundson et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080253627 | Boyden et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080283761 | Robinson et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080312768 | Ewing et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090003514 | Edic et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090060135 | Morton | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090123051 | Tamai et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090146061 | Manneschi | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090168963 | Harding | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090175411 | Gudmundson et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090180591 | Baumgart | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090196396 | Doyle et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090252295 | Foland | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20100027741 | Doyle et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100046704 | Song et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100074483 | Janes | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100127169 | Whittum et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100208972 | Bouchard et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100220910 | Kaucic et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100277312 | Edic et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100284514 | Zhang et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100329532 | Masuda et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110007870 | Roux et al. | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110172972 | Gudmundson et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110243299 | Sugita et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20120093367 | Gudmundson et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120275646 | Drouin et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20140198899 | Ziskin et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140211980 | Bouchard et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140241495 | Gudmundsun et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140321729 | Gudmundson et al. | Oct 2014 | A1 |
20150010128 | Drouin et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2574402 | Jan 2006 | CA |
2623812 | May 2007 | CA |
2651728 | Apr 2008 | CA |
2692662 | Mar 2010 | CA |
2709468 | Mar 2010 | CA |
2696031 | May 2010 | CA |
2676913 | Nov 2010 | CA |
2666838 | Dec 2010 | CA |
2700553 | Apr 2011 | CA |
2690163 | Aug 2011 | CA |
2189785 | May 2010 | EP |
2696196 | Feb 2012 | EP |
2696196 | Feb 2014 | EP |
2331944 | Mar 2014 | EP |
2334565 | Mar 2014 | EP |
2420683 | May 2006 | GB |
2441551 | Mar 2008 | GB |
2006214725 | Aug 2006 | JP |
WO9412855 | Jun 1994 | WO |
WO9802763 | Jan 1998 | WO |
WO9945371 | Sep 1999 | WO |
WO03052398 | Jun 2003 | WO |
WO 2004054329 | Jun 2004 | WO |
WO2006119603 | Nov 2006 | WO |
WO2008009134 | Jan 2008 | WO |
WO2008019473 | Feb 2008 | WO |
WO2008034232 | Mar 2008 | WO |
WO2008036456 | Mar 2008 | WO |
WO2008040119 | Apr 2008 | WO |
WO2008119151 | Oct 2008 | WO |
WO2009024818 | Feb 2009 | WO |
WO2009043145 | Apr 2009 | WO |
WO2009046529 | Apr 2009 | WO |
WO2009114928 | Sep 2009 | WO |
WO2009127353 | Oct 2009 | WO |
WO2010025538 | Mar 2010 | WO |
WO2010025539 | Mar 2010 | WO |
WO2010028474 | Mar 2010 | WO |
WO2010145016 | Dec 2010 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Examiner's Report mailed on Nov. 7, 2012 in connection with European patent application No. 08876865.0, 3 pages. |
Examiner's Report mailed on Jan. 16, 2013 in connection with Canadian patent application No. 2,697,586, 3 pages. |
Examiner's Report mailed on Feb. 4, 2013 in connection with Canadian patent application No. 2,677,439, 2 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action issued on Mar. 1, 2013 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 12/681,826, 32 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action issued on Feb. 28, 2013 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 13/063,869, 52 pages. |
Restriction Requirement issued on Mar. 11, 2013 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 12/680,625, 6 pages. |
Notice of Allowance issued on Dec. 2, 2013 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 12/680,625—9 pages. |
Extended European Search Report issued on Dec. 18, 2013 in connection with European patent application No. 13191619.9—6 pages. |
Notice of Allowance issued on Jan. 16, 2014 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 13/313,635—10 pages. |
Notice of Allowance issued on Feb. 21, 2014 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 12/864,988—7 pages. |
Notice of Allowance issued on Mar. 17, 2014 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 13/387,578—8 pages. |
European Search Report mailed on Apr. 14, 2014 in connection with Europeant Patent Application No. 10788557.6—8 pages. |
International Search Report mailed on Jan. 10, 2008 in connection with International Patent Application PCT/CA2007/001658, 6 pages. |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority mailed on Jan. 10, 2008 in connection with International Patent Application PCT/CA2007/001658, 12 pages. |
Informal Communication with the Applicant mailed on Sep. 22, 2008 in connection with International Patent Application PCT/CA2007/001658, 4 pages. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability mailed on Dec. 17, 2008 in connection with International Patent Application PCT/CA2007/001658, 7 pages. |
International Search Report mailed on Jan. 14, 2008 in connection with International Patent Application PCT/CA2007/001749, 4 pages. |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority mailed on Jan. 14, 2008 in connection with International Patent Application PCT/CA2007/001749, 4 pages. |
International Search Report mailed on Nov. 20, 2008 in connection with International Patent Application PCT/CA2008/001591, 6 pages. |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority mailed on Nov. 20, 2008 in connection with International Patent Application PCT/CA2008/001591, 6 pages. |
International Search Report mailed on Dec. 4, 2008 in connection with International Patent Application PCT/CA2008/001721, 5 pages. |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority mailed on Dec. 4, 2008 in connection with International Patent Application PCT/CA2008/001721, 5 pages. |
International Search Report mailed on Dec. 5, 2008 in connection with International Patent Application PCT/CA2008/001792, 5 pages. |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority mailed on Dec. 5, 2008 in connection with International Patent Application PCT/CA2008/001792, 5 pages. |
International Search Report mailed on Jun. 4, 2009 in connection with International Patent Application PCT/CA2008/002025, 5 pages. |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority mailed on Jun. 4, 2009 in connection with International Patent Application PCT/CA2008/002025, 6 pages. |
International Search Report mailed on Jul. 6, 2009 in connection with International Patent Application PCT/CA2009/000395, 4 pages. |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority mailed on Jul. 6, 2009 in connection with International Patent Application PCT/CA2009/000395, 4 pages. |
International Search Report mailed on Aug. 6, 2009 in connection with International Patent Application PCT/CA2009/000401, 4 pages. |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority mailed on Aug. 6, 2009 in connection with International Patent Application PCT/CA2009/000401, 8 pages. |
International Search Report mailed on Nov. 10, 2009 in connection with International Patent Application PCT/CA2009/000811, 7 pages. |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority mailed on Nov. 10, 2009 in connection with International Patent Application PCT/CA2009/000811, 3 pages. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability mailed on Feb. 1, 2010 in connection with International Patent Application PCT/CA2008/001792, 3 pages. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability mailed on Apr. 15, 2010 in connection with International Patent Application PCT/CA2008/001721, 6 pages. |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority mailed on Sep. 22, 2010 in connection with International Patent Application PCT/CA2010/000916, 6 pages. |
International Search Report mailed on Sep. 22, 2010 in connection with International Patent Application PCT/CA2010/000916, 4 pages. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability mailed on Sep. 21, 2010 in connection with International Patent Application PCT/CA2008/001591, 7 pages. |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority mailed on Nov. 19, 2010 in connection with International Patent Application PCT/CA2010/001200, 6 pages. |
International Search Report mailed on Nov. 19, 2010 in connection with International Patent Application PCT/CA2010/001200, 5 pages. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability mailed on Jan. 12, 2011 in connection with International Patent Application PCT/CA2009/000401, 15 pages. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability mailed on Oct. 24, 2011 in connection with International Patent Application PCT/CA2010/000916, 17 pages. |
Office Action mailed on Jul. 29, 2009 in connection with Canadian Patent Application 2,651,728, 6 pages. |
Office Action mailed on Jul. 10, 2009 in connection with Canadian Patent Application 2,666,838, 3 pages. |
Office Action mailed on Nov. 3, 2009 in connection with Canadian Patent Application 2,666,838, 5 pages. |
Office Action mailed on Jan. 28, 2010 in connection with Canadian Patent Application 2,676,913, 2 pages. |
Office Action mailed on Jan. 28, 2010 in connection with Canadian Patent Application 2,666,838, 5 pages. |
Office Action mailed on Mar. 2, 2010 in connection with Canadian Patent Application 2,676,903 4 pages. |
Office Action mailed on Mar. 19, 2010 in connection with Canadian Patent Application 2,651,728 2 pages. |
Office Action mailed on Mar. 31, 2010 in connection with Canadian Patent Application 2,690,163—3 pages. |
Office Action mailed on May 5, 2010 in connection with Canadian Patent Application 2,676,913—2 pages. |
Office Action mailed on May 14, 2010 in connection with Canadian Patent Application 2,690,831—3 pages. |
Office Action mailed on Jun. 7, 2010 in connection with Canadian Patent Application 2,692,662—3 pages. |
Office Action mailed on Jun. 30, 2010 in connection with Canadian patent application 2,696,031—2 pages. |
Office Action mailed on Jun. 28, 2010 in connection with Canadian patent application 2,697,525—3 pages. |
Office Action mailed on Aug. 5, 2010 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 12/385,253—18 pages. |
Office Action mailed on Aug. 12, 2010 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 12/311,522—17 pages. |
Office Action mailed on Aug. 31, 2010 in connection with Canadian patent application 2,690,831—2 pages. |
Office Action mailed on Aug. 31, 2010 in connection with Canadian patent application 2,692,662—3 pages. |
Office Action mailed on Sep. 30, 2010 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 12/311,031—8 pages. |
Office Action mailed on Oct. 6, 2010 in connection with Canadian patent application 2,696,031—2 pages. |
Office Action mailed on Oct. 29, 2010 in connection with Canadian Patent Application 2,651,728—6 pages. |
Office Action mailed on Oct. 28, 2010 in connection with Canadian Patent Application 2,676,903—2 pages. |
Office Action mailed on Nov. 2, 2010 in connection with Canadian Patent Application 2,690,163—1 page. |
Office Action mailed on Nov. 17, 2010 in connection with Canadian Patent Application 2,709,468—2 pages. |
Examiner's Report mailed on Jan. 31, 2011 in connection with Canadian Patent Application 2,697,525—2 pages. |
Office Action mailed on Feb. 10, 2011 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 12/680,622—10 pages. |
Office Action mailed on Feb. 8, 2011 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 12/385,253—14 pages. |
Office Action mailed on Feb. 9, 2011 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 12/311,522—11 pages. |
Office Action mailed on Mar. 2, 2011 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 12/311,031—9 pages. |
Examiner's Report mailed on Mar. 29, 2011 in connection with Canadian Patent Application 2,725,626—5 pages. |
Examiner's Report mailed on Mar. 29, 2011 in connection with Canadian Patent Application 2,690,831—2 pages. |
Office Action mailed on Apr. 20, 2011 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 12/311,031—20 pages. |
Examiner's Report mailed on May 2, 2011 in connection with Canadian patent application 2,692,662—3 pages. |
European Search Report mailed on Jun. 9, 2011 in connection with European patent application No. EP2007815851.6—6 Pages. |
Notice of allowance mailed on May 5, 2011 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 12/385,253—8 pages. |
Notice of allowance mailed on May 6, 2011 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 12/311,522—7 pages. |
Notice of allowance mailed on May 6, 2011 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 12/680,622—8 pages. |
Examiner's Report mailed on Jul. 5, 2011 in connection with Canadian patent application 2,696,031—2 pages. |
Examiner's Report issued on Jul. 19, 2011 in connection with Canadian patent application 2,651,728—2 pages. |
Examiner's Report mailed on Aug. 10, 2011 in connection with Canadian Patent Application 2,725,626—4 pages. |
Examiner's Report mailed on Sep. 2, 2011 in connection with Canadian Patent Application 2,737,075—3 pages. |
Notice of allowance mailed on Sep. 15, 2011 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 12/311,031. |
Benjamin, R., “Object-Based 3D X-Ray Imaging for Second-line Security Screening”, London, 1995, (Abstract). |
PinPoint TM Threat Identification Software, http://www.guardiantechintl.com/security.php?npage=pinpoint, Jul. 25, 2005, 4 pages. |
“Secure Flight Passenger Screening Program”, http://www.globalsecurity.org/security/systems/passenger—screen.htm, Oct. 28, 2005, 6 pages. |
Optosecurity, “Security Technology Overview: Advanced Vehicle Verification & Threat Identification”, 1 page. |
Airport Magazine, Solutions, Products, Services, vol. 7, Mar. 2006, 5 pages. |
Page, D. L. et al., “Perception-based 3D Triangle Mesh Segmentation Using Fast Marching Watersheds.”, Proc. Intl. Conf. on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, vol. II, pp. 27-32, Madison, WI, Jun. 2003. |
Freud et al., “Simulation of X-ray NDT Imaging Techniques”, Proceedings of the 15th World Conference on Non-Destructive Testing, Rome, Oct. 15-21, 2000, http://www.ndt.net/article/wcndt00/papers/idn256/idn256.htm, pages consulted on Dec. 3, 2009, 7 pages. |
Gao et al., “Application of X-ray CT to liquid security inspection: System analysys and beam hardening correction”, Nuclear Instruments & Methods in Physics Research, Section-A:Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipement, Elsevier, Amsterdam, NL, vol. 579, No. 1, pp. 395-399, Aug. 8, 2007. |
Xie et al., “Simulation of X-ray Imaging Systems for Luggage Inspection”, Second Explosives Detection Symposium and Aviation Security Conference, Nov. 12-15, 1996, pp. 248-253. |
U.S. Statutory Invention Registration No. H2001 H—Newman, Oct. 5, 2004. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability mailed on Nov. 22, 2011 in connection with International Patent Application PCT/CA2010/001200, 12 pages. |
Dreisetel, Pia et al. “Detection of liquid explosives using tomosynthetic reconstruction in multiview dual-energy x-ray systems”,1st EU Conference on the Detection of Explosives, held in Avignon, France, from Mar. 14-16, 2011. |
Notice of intent to grant issued on Apr. 11, 2013 in connection with European patent application No. 08876865.0—5 pages. |
Notice of intent to grant issued on May 14, 2013 in connection with European patent application No. 09810945.7—5 pages. |
Restriction Requirement issued on Jun. 14, 2013 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 12/864,988—6 pages. |
Examiner's Report mailed on May 29, 2013 in connection with European Patent Application No. 09839849.8—6 pages. |
Examiner's Report mailed on Jul. 22, 2013 in connection with Canadian Patent Application 2,737,075—3 pages. |
Examiner's Report mailed on Jul. 23, 2013 in connection with Canadian Patent Application 2,677,439—2 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action issued on Aug. 14, 2013 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 12/680,625—9 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action issued on Sep. 25, 2013 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 13/313,635—7 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action issued on Oct. 31, 2013 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 12/864,988—14 pages. |
Final Office Action issued on Nov. 14, 2013 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 13/063,869—50 pages. |
Xiang Li et al., “A numerical simulator in VC++ on PC for iterative image reconstruction”, Journal of X-ray Science and Technology, vol. 11, No. 2, Jan. 1, 2003, pp. 61-70, XP055063644, issn: 0895-3996. |
Search Report mailed on Feb. 17, 2012 in connection with European Patent Application No. 08835738.9—7 pages. |
Search Report mailed on Feb. 1, 2012 in connection with European Patent Application No. 08876865.0—7 pages. |
Search Report mailed on Jul. 18, 2012 in connection with European Patent Application No. 09839849.8—8 pages. |
Examiner's Report mailed on Jul. 18, 2012 in connection with European Patent Application No. 09810945.7—4 pages. |
Examiner's Report mailed on Aug. 31, 2012 in connection with European patent application No. 2007815851.6—6 pages. |
Bottigli et al., “Voxel-based Monte Carlo Simulation of X-Ray imaging and spectroscopy experiments”, Spectrochimia Acta. Part B: Atomic Spectroscopy, vol. 59, No. 10-11—Oct. 8, 2004, pp. 1747-1754, XP004598270. |
Sluser M et al., “Model-based probabilistic relaxation segmentation applied to threat detection in airport x-ray imagery”, Electrical and Computer Engineering, 1999 IEEE Canadian Conference on Edmonton, Alta., Canada, May 9-12, 1999, pp. 720-726, vol. 2, XP032158352. |
Search Report mailed on Nov. 10, 2011 in connection with European Patent Application No. 09810945.7—7 pages. |
European Search Report mailed on Apr. 14, 2014 in connection with European Patent Application No. 10788557.6—8 pages. |
Notice of Allowance issued on Jun. 9, 2014, in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 12/864,988—7 pages. |
Examiner's Report mailed on Jul. 9, 2014 in connection with European Patent Application No. 09839849.8—3 pages. |
Examiner's Report mailed on Jun. 26, 2014 in connection with European Patent Application No. 07815851.6—4 pages. |
Examiner's Report mailed on Jul. 15, 2014 in connection with Canadian Patent Application No. 2,677,439—2 pages. |
Notice of Allowance issued on Jun. 25, 2014 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 13/387,578—8 pages. |
Examiner's Report mailed on Aug. 5, 2014 in connection with Canadian Patent Application No. 2,737,075—3 pages. |
Restriction Requirement issued on Sep. 11, 2014 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 14/244,213—6 pages. |
Office Action issued on Nov. 20, 2014 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 14/244,213, 10 pages. |
Examiners Report issued on Apr. 9, 2015 in connection with European Patent Application 07815851.6, 3 pages. |
Examiners Report issued on Apr. 7, 2015 in connection with Canadian Patent Application No. 2,697,586, 6 pages. |
Notice of Allowance issued on Jul. 7, 2015 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 14/496,676-8 pages. |
Examiner's Report issued on Jun. 29, 2015 in connection with Canadian Patent Application No. 2,677,439-3 pages. |
Examiner's Report mailed on Jul. 17, 2015 in connection with Canadian Patent Application 2,737,075-6 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action issued on Jul. 2, 2015 in connection with U.S. Appl. No. 13/063,869-37 pages. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20120093367 A1 | Apr 2012 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61186998 | Jun 2009 | US | |
61230435 | Jul 2009 | US |