Posts Tagged ‘Search Planning’

The POD of a Search Dog

January 28th, 2010

I wrote a short piece last week entitled “The POD of a Search Dog is 100%” and promised to give my thoughts on the subject at a later date. It is interesting to note that the two commenters – Daryl Toogood and Johnnie Walker – highlighted the two main issues I wanted to cover with regard to calculating PODs for search dogs.

Essentially I see two issues here.

The first is whether searching to 100% is a useful tactic, or whether as Johnnie noted “that it has slowed people down”. If you, as a dog handler, are trying to ensure you do not possibly miss the misper – do you spend too much time in any one area? Remember that search, like many other things, complies with that pesky law of diminishing returns. For each unit of search you put in, you get less out each time in added POD.

You would often do better (find more mispers!) by travelling further at a quicker rate.

The second issue here is calculating the POD of a search dog. As Daryl Toogood stated;

I would challenge any dog handler that gives a POD for their dog no matter whether it be 1% or 100% as I am not confident of the system for calculating the POD of a Dog. [Read more here...]

But this leaves search management and the search planning team a very large problem!

In order to best utilise their search resources search planners are required to decide whether to re-search a search sector, or put it aside for now and search somewhere else. Get it wrong and they potentially leave the misper to die in an area that could have been searched. How can we expect them to make such an important decision with so little clue!

I think that I will be revisiting this – both of these issues need discussing in further detail – but feel free to add your thoughts.

  • Share/Bookmark

Elements of the Optimal Search Problem

January 19th, 2010

Lawrence Stone defined the elements of the optimal search problem in his 1986 book, Theory of Optimal Search.

This was paraphrased extremely well by Cooper, Frost and Robe in their 2003 report – Compatibility of Land SAR Procedures with Search Theory as quoted below;

A probability density distribution on search object location and state (so the probability of containment, POC (a.k.a. POA for “probability of area”), for any subset of the possible locations and states can be estimated),

A detection function relating the probability of detecting (POD) the object if it is in a searched area to the density of the searching effort expended there,

A known finite amount of available searching effort, and

An optimization criterion of maximizing probability of finding the object in a desirable state (probability of success or POS) subject to the constraint on effort availability.

I will endeavour to simplify further. In order to need and/or use the mathematics of search theory you require four essential elements.

  1. The ability to predict the likelihood that an object is in any particular search area or region. This might be done using sophisticated computer software working with the latest missing person behaviour statistics, or could be as simple as a coming up with a consensus within the search planning team.
  2. The ability to calculate the likelihood a given search resource will have of finding the object if it in the area being searched – unfortunately we can’t ask how many clues would you have found! [See my definition of POD for a brief explanation of why]
  3. A limited but known amount of search resource – when do you ever get too much search resource?
  4. A method of calculating the best way to use the search resource to maximise the chances of finding the search object as quickly as possible.

I’ll look in detail at each of these in further posts.

  • Share/Bookmark

Do the police suspend vulnerable missing persons searches too quickly?

October 24th, 2009

I awoke this morning with the need to write another quick post here – on the suspension of searching. I obviously discussed it slightly yesterday with the idea that we should search areas where outstanding high risk mispers could be; however, my recent revision of missing person behaviour statistics has obviously made me think more about this.

I want to start, however, with a quote that many find surprising.

As a general principle, searching should take place throughout the day and night. This will be determined by the circumstances but in all cases where a full managed search is undertaken, there must be valid reasons why it is not continued throughout the full 24 hours.
ACPO Guidance on the Managment, Recording and Investigation of Missing Persons, 2005

How many ALSAR Units’ local police expect them to continue searching for a full 24 hour period? How many Units are asked to return for a second day?

It seems to me, that often the police attitude is that they “must” do a search and “clear” a few high probability areas to show that they have done something. There seem to exist a large number of those dangerous rationalisations that we teach our on our basic search courses within the police. [That sounds very harsh - there are a number of very, very good police officers who are dedicated and passionate about finding missing persons in the same way that search volunteers are - And I do recognise this!]

But the reality is the police very often run out of the will (and a great deal of this is about the political will to carry on search operations that are very man-power intensive), the man-power and the budget to actually do more than this initial search. A quick look at the ALSAR stats shows how few searches actually result is a find. Many are well outside the area and still mobile, but there remain still a few potentially still alive, lying just outside our search areas. How do I know?

Take a look at Koester’s Lost Person Behavior - Survivability ;

Dementia – just 5% will die within 24 hours, 35% will die over the next 48 hours or so but 60% will still be alive at this point. Even after 96 hours, 46% will still be alive.

Despondents – 25% will kill themselves within 24 hours, but there will still be 19% alive after 72 hours.

Koester writes a very clear warning about using these statistics;

Survivability statistics must not be the major criteria for deciding to suspend a search… It may be appropriate to use survival statistics as the sole reason to prolong a search.
Lost Person Behavior, 2008

And I think my thinking neatly ties in with this last sentence – should we start using these survival statistics to persuade our local police to continue search operations for longer than our present 4-6 hour searches?

Should we start expecting searches to last 2 or 3 operational periods if nothing is found and planning accordingly?

  • Share/Bookmark