A PROBABILISTIC APPROACH TO RISK FORMALIZATION IN PHYSICAL PROTECTION SYSTEMS FOR SPECIAL PURPOSE FACILITIES
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36074/grail-of-science.17.04.2026.051Keywords:
physical protection systems, special purpose facilities, risk formalization, probabilistic approach, uncertainty, critical elements, scenario based assessment, Bayesian updating, sensitivity analysis, security decision supportSummary
Physical protection systems for special purpose facilities operate under conditions in which uncertainty, scenario variability, and differentiated exposure of critical elements significantly affect the adequacy of security assessment. Under such conditions, deterministic approaches based on fixed threat and protection parameters are not sufficient for decision-oriented risk analysis, especially in facilities where hostile actions may be intentional, adaptive, and operationally timed. The aim of this study is to develop a probabilistic framework for the formalization of risk in physical protection systems for special purpose facilities. The proposed approach treats risk not as an aggregate property of the protected object as a whole, but as a scenario based and critical element specific quantity formed through the interaction of threat realization probability, vulnerability, and consequence severity. The study systematizes the main sources of uncertainty affecting physical protection assessment, including variability of damaging factors, spatial uncertainty, uncertainty of adversary intent and capability, and changes in operational conditions. A structured system of input parameters is proposed, covering threat source and scenario descriptors, damaging factor intensity and dynamics, critical thresholds, spatial and temporal variables, and indicators of detection, delay, response, and command and control subsystems. The framework also incorporates Bayesian updating to revise the probability component when new operational information becomes available, thereby transforming risk from a static estimate into a dynamic decision support variable. In addition, interpretable parameter identification and sensitivity analysis are introduced to support model transparency and prioritization of protective measures under resource constraints. The results show that the proposed framework provides a more adequate methodological basis for physical protection assessment than undifferentiated deterministic approaches because it allows explicit representation of uncertainty, scenario specific differentiation, critical element level analysis, and subsystem-oriented prioritization. The study concludes that probabilistic risk formalization offers a scientifically grounded and operationally relevant basis for the design, evaluation, and improvement of physical protection systems for special purpose facilities, including military facilities operating in adaptive threat environments.
Downloads
Downloads
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Ramil Akhundov, Aziz Talibov, Elshan Hashimov
References
Akhundov, R., & Hashimov, E. (2026). Enhancing the physical protection of critical facilities through the integration of physical process models and machine learning. Grail of Science, 61, 722–731. https://doi.org/10.36074/grail-of-science.23.01.2026.083 DOI: https://doi.org/10.36074/grail-of-science.23.01.2026.083
Akhundov, R., & Hashimov, E. (2026). Modeling information processes and deriving measurable requirements in physical protection system design. Management Information System and Devices, 1(188), 5–16. https://doi.org/10.30837/0135-1710.2026.188.005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.30837/0135-1710.2026.188.005
Broder, J. F. (2006). Risk analysis and the security survey. Butterworth-Heinemann.
Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M., & Tone, K. (2000). Data envelopment analysis: A comprehensive text with models, applications, references, and DEA-Solver software. Kluwer Academic Publishers. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/b109347
Akhundov, R., & Hashimov, E. G. (2025). Quantitative categorization of facilities and modeling of potential adversaries. Grail of Science, 60, 469–482. https://doi.org/10.36074/grail-of-science.26.12.2025.049 DOI: https://doi.org/10.36074/grail-of-science.26.12.2025.049
Reniers, G. L. L., & Audenaert, A. (2014). Preparing for major terrorist attacks against chemical clusters: Intelligently planning protection measures with respect to domino effects. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 92(6), 583–589. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2013.04.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2013.04.002
Řehák, D., Senovsky, P., Hromada, M., & Lovecek, T. (2019). Complex approach to assessing resilience of critical infrastructure elements. International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, 25, 125–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcip.2019.03.003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcip.2019.03.003
Akhundov, R., Hashimov, E. G., & Islamov, I. (2026). Conceptual models of multi-level physical protection systems for special-purpose and critical infrastructure facilities. Grail of Science, 61, 591–608. https://doi.org/10.36074/grail-of-science.23.01.2026.066 DOI: https://doi.org/10.36074/grail-of-science.23.01.2026.066
Cozens, P., & Love, T. (2015). A review and current status of crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED). Journal of Planning Literature, 30(4), 393–412. https://doi.org/10.1177/0885412215595440 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0885412215595440
Akhundov, R., Hashimov, E. G., & Islamov, I. (2026). Methodological limitations of normative design of physical protection systems for critical and military facilities in a dynamic threat environment. International Scientific Journal Grail of Science, 62, DOI: https://doi.org/10.36074/grail-of-science.20.02.2026.096
–889.
El Wely, I. C., & Chetaine, A. (2020). Analysis of physical protection system effectiveness of nuclear power plants based on performance approach. Annals of Nuclear Energy, 153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2020.107980 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2020.107980
Garcia, M. L. (2008). Design and evaluation of physical protection systems (2nd ed.). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2009-0-25612-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-055428-0.50005-1
Akhundov, R., Hashimov, E. G., & Islamov, I. (2026). Scenario oriented sufficiency criteria for physical protection systems provide a traceable path from threat classes to design requirements. Grail of Science, 63. https://doi.org/10.36074/grail-of-science.06.03.2026.074 DOI: https://doi.org/10.36074/grail-of-science.06.03.2026.074
Gündüz, M. Z., & Daş, R. (2020). Akıllı şebekelerde iletişim altyapısı ve siber güvenlik. Iğdır Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 10(2), 970–984. https://doi.org/10.21597/jist.655990 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21597/jist.655990
Hashimov, E., Akhundov, R., Talibov, A., & Islamov, I. (2026). Decision support for physical protection systems using route-level metrics and simulation-based evaluation. Grail of Science, 63, 531–542. https://doi.org/10.36074/grail-of-science.06.03.2026.059 DOI: https://doi.org/10.36074/grail-of-science.06.03.2026.059
Kaplan, S., & Garrick, B. J. (1981). On the quantitative definition of risk. Risk Analysis, 1(1), 11–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1981.tb01350.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1981.tb01350.x
Kostin, V., & Borovsky, A. (2020). Definition of basic violators for critically important objects using the information probability method and cluster analysis. In CEUR Workshop Proceedings (Vol. 2667, pp. 343–347). 6th International Conference Information Technology and Nanotechnology, Session Data Science, ITNT-DS 2020, Samara, Russian Federation.
Hashimov, E., Akhundov, R. G., Talibov, A. M., & Islamov, I. (2026). Constrained optimization of an integral security indicator for adaptive management of hazardous facilities. Grail of Science, 62, 1003–1014. https://doi.org/10.36074/grail-of-science.20.02.2026.109 DOI: https://doi.org/10.36074/grail-of-science.20.02.2026.109
Hashimov, E., et al. (2026). Research of the efficiency multiservice networks using MIMO technology. Advanced Information Systems, 10(1), 66–71. https://doi.org/10.20998/2522-9052.2026.1.08 DOI: https://doi.org/10.20998/2522-9052.2026.1.08
Kampova, K., Lovecek, T., & Řehák, D. (2020). Quantitative approach to physical protection systems assessment of critical infrastructure elements: Use case in the Slovak Republic. International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, 30, Article 100376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcip.2020.100376 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcip.2020.100376
Lovecek, T., Ristvej, J., & Simak, L. (2010). Critical infrastructure protection systems effectiveness evaluation. Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.2202/1547-7355.1613 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2202/1547-7355.1613
Mondal, S., Adak, B., & Mukhopadhyay, S. (2023). Functional and smart textiles for military and defence applications. In Smart and functional textiles (p. 397). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110759747-011
Rehak, D., Slivkova, S., Janeckova, H., Stuberova, D., & Hromada, M. (2022). Strengthening resilience in the energy critical infrastructure: Methodological overview. Energies, 15(14), Article 5276. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15145276 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/en15145276
Shoop, B., et al. (2006). Mobile detection assessment and response systems (MDARS): A force protection physical security operational success. In Unmanned Systems Technology VIII (Vol. 6230, pp. 668–678). SPIE. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1117/12.665939
Yang, J., Huang, L., Ma, H., Xu, Z., Yang, M., & Guo, S. (2022). A 2D-graph model-based heuristic approach to visual backtracking security vulnerabilities in physical protection systems. International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, 38, Article 100554. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcip.2022.100554 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcip.2022.100554
Zou, B., Yang, M., Zhang, Y., Benjamin, E.-R., Tan, K., Wu, W., & Yoshikawa, H. (2018). Evaluation of vulnerable path: Using heuristic path-finding algorithm in physical protection system of nuclear power plant. International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, 23, 90–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcip.2018.08.006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcip.2018.08.006
Downloads
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Categories
