PRoTECT Webinars Session 3 - 17 July 2020
2:42PM Jul 24, 2020
Okay, so it's 10am. Now my computer so I suggest that we officially we officially start and with the second session of today So good morning everyone. And welcome to the second web seminar on the protection of public spaces in the framework of protect project. And my name is Tatiana Morales and I am the project manager at EFUS
thanks to those of you who participated in the session of yesterday, and I apologize for for repeating myself but for those who who didn't participate yesterday. I will take a few minutes to to do a short introduction and presenter efforts and in the seminar that we have been organizing today. So for those of you who don't know, the European forum for urban security efforts is the only European network of local and regional authorities that is dedicated to urban security. And it includes nearly 250 members from 16 European countries. In efforts we promote a balanced vision of urban security that combines prevention, sanction and social cohesion. And we provide support and inspiration for local elected officials and their teams, in all issues that relate to urban safety and security of public spaces has always been a central topic for municipalities and regional authorities. But specifically, the protection of public spaces has become an important topic for our network. Since terrorism has been a reality in many European countries and that continues threats to a great number of people. European cities. So that's why Air Force participates in projects like protect, and in other initiatives that seek to support and provide tools to look at authorities to prevent mitigate an act on various terrorist threats their public spaces. So in the framework of F was participation in the project together with deeds, that is the organization leading the project, we organize a series of events to promote the discussion and to share project results to ensure that the lessons learned can be
can reach other actors beyond the project Consortium. And normally we organize these sessions in situ, but given the current situation, we adapted ourselves in order to continue promoting debate on the subject. So we are organizing these web seminar entitled technological and human centered solutions. To predict public spaces against terrorist threats, and during the online seminar, we will promote the discussion on the role that local authorities can play in improving the protection of public spaces and the challenges they are confronted with, especially with regard to the use of new technologies. Also, we will feature the exchanges on best practices and technologies developed by law enforcement agencies. I look at authorities and European funded projects and private sectors. And these sessions will give local authorities insights on wide criteria to consider when selecting a solution to protect their public space. So the web seminar is divided into three sessions. As I was saying the first session that took place yesterday was a high level discussion where the panelists at the present To the European Commission, the local and regional governments in the framework of the Urban Agenda, and the practitioners field, discussed how to cooperate with a wide range of stakeholders in order to mitigate emerging challenges in protecting public spaces. And from the interesting discussions that we had. We had yesterday emerged that concrete venues, mechanisms and tools for enhancing cooperation at multiple levels between the local regional national and the European levels do exist and offer a number of possibilities for exchange and for dialogue. But the debate about how to make such cooperation effective is still needed and has to be seen as an ongoing debate, as a number of local authorities still experienced difficulties Establishing public private partnerships due to a series of legislative or administrative barriers and existing gaps in the regulatory framework for implementing and experimenting technologies, for instance, or the divergence in operational procedures and working culture of different stakeholders. So it appears that better coordination between the public and private security actors is key for the protection of semi public spaces like malls and examples on how these cooperation was effective were shared in the discussion yesterday. And it also was observed that in terms of technology adoption, some legislative and administrative obstacles to select and implement technologies for effective protection of public spaces also remain As a challenge for local authorities. And finally, the question of providing knowledge and training was discussed and knowledge and training to local authorities to ensure a better protection of public spaces remains a priority. And to do so, it is necessary to foster the exchange of best practices, as well as
provide training on how to implement a security assessment that allows to identify the potential vulnerabilities to develop and implement a security plan and to better identify and implement the solutions to mitigate such risks. So in continuation with the discussions of yesterday, and and, and this last point that was mentioned regarding best practices, the session of today is dedicated To good practices used to look by local authorities, we will have a presentation of an overview of the identified best practices by burn protect project that will be followed by two case studies implemented by the cities. And the third session that will take place tomorrow. At the same time will focus on some of the protect tools to support local authorities in the evaluation and selection of accurate solutions that respond to the mitigation of public spaces vulnerabilities. So in this session, the solutions that protect cities have selected to demonstrate in their public spaces will be announced. And before giving the floor to our invited speakers for today, our colleague Viviana from deeds, will present you some house rules and to ensure that we did we will have a Fluid discussion and a fluid session. And after that, and I will give the floor to Peter van de Crommert that we present in a few words to project. So, Vivian, the floor is yours. Thank you. Thank you,
Good morning, everyone. My name is Vivian I will be giving you some guidelines and I wanted to ask you to participate actively. We would love you to have some questions that we can ask our speakers. We have a q&a option which you can find below in the in the zoom window. You can use it and if you have a question, one of our hosts will reply inside the q&a window. If we think your a question is very interesting, or if you want to ask a question live you can see that to one of our hosts or one of our hosts will maybe ask you to ask them a question live and we can give you the floor inside the webinar. If you're experiencing any technical issues, don't hesitate to contact me. If you are having problems with the q&a option, you can also send me an email and I will help you as soon as I can. And now I will be giving the floor to Peter based on chords. Who I giving you who will be giving you a short presentation on the project project.
I'm sorry, I see some gorgeous
You are muted. unmute. Yes,
you can hear me.
Thank you. I was I was saying that this is
this webinar is replacing a protect seminar that we were supposed to have a couple of weeks ago in the beautiful city of Larissa in goose. But we have to do with the webinar, which actually also works fine. At least yesterday, protect that an hour. And it's also the name of course of the Digi humps program which is the isfp the internal security fence for police and we are executing this protect project since November 2018. And it will run until the end of this year.
Let me check which
real quick here
The goal of our projects and is that we are to find a way to to help the local authorities and in protecting their public spaces by putting them in place concepts which consists of tools, technology, training, ministrations that will give a good overview of situational awareness and if it comes to securing a public space is free in an after a terrorist threat. That's the overall goal that we have. And in the beginning, we draw a implementation plan, which had in total, I'm sorry, this is the the construction. As already mentioned, it's the Dutch Institute for technology safety and security and Ellen's is coordinating this this project. We were lucky to have five European cities to be involved in our tasks which are mainly focused on a vulnerability assessment and on a technology assessment. I will get to that later. But these five cities are in the core of our project, and they are supported by India to six that are below and which research institutes and National Police organizations companies with specific knowledge in this area and and of course, also jets that your anonymous Academy of data science of which case app is going to give a presentation after mine about the best practices that we found in our project.
Steps go into the next slide.
No, it's not working
there we go.
As you can see, well the first workbench and the last one and a more general one to steal the whole consortium in the whole project. But the main and the most important work packages were the work packages of differentiability assessment, which we executed in 2019 by using a tool that was developed by dg home, a vulnerability assessment tool. We added a manual to that we changed a few things during our exercises because not using it in real life made us see some some improvements. And based on that vulnerability assessment tool and the results of that we actually draw our standard workpackage three
connections bit unstable. Can you repeat the last
Sorry for that they work back to three is based on the results of work packets to where the city's found vulnerabilities and that they then based on on their knowledge and the best practices that we wrote a request for information. Inviting solution providers are people organizations with ideas that could improve the safety and security and public spaces. So we are currently in that stage actually, tomorrow we will announce and the results of the request for information and we will announce vulgarization, I did give a demonstration in those five cities. As you saw the five cities are actually not that the big metrical cities that we all know we victim. They have about 200 to 500,000. citizens in their cities. So they are big, but not as big as, let's say Paris and London. It was on a purpose. So the last part of our project will be in actually the next half year, where we will organize demonstration events in the five cities where they will show in real life, how their products could work, and how their solutions and ideas might turn out. And in case of an event in crowded places.
So that's an
There you go. And of course This is all being done because we think that this project, and particularly also these webinars and the seminar we did earlier and the closing seminar we hope to do by the end of the year or actually it's postponed until the beginning of next year. We'll raise awareness at the authorities gone steps for an adaption of the technology in protecting public space. Thus bring them a higher security environment without going into good security feelings of people. So the sharing of best practices and lessons learned is of course, very important. We will get to that with the next speaker and also pretty important in closing the gap and the challenge that we have in securing our public spaces Also a permanent collaboration between the authorities and the law enforcement. As the channel already mentioned in the introduction, there are some challenges there because of legislative and legal constraints in sharing information with it's also a topic that's that's on the agenda of FDG. Home and other projects. So it is important that we work closely together, the law enforcement authorities and and the law enforcement, sorry, the law enforcement authorities and the municipalities, authorities. And again, I hope you have a good session. And I would like to give the floor back to the channel as your host for today.
Thank you for your yes
Go VPN to the slide presenting the speakers. I just wanted to mention that, as I was saying in the beginning this today's session will be dedicated to the discussion about the existing practices used at the local level for the protection of public spaces, as there is no single solution that's available, but on the contrary multiple methods and techniques that can be put in place to guarantee safety and security in public spaces that ranges from the architectural design in order to rethink the design of public spaces keeping security into account to
emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence and predictive surveillance. And also since whenever new technologies could appear to be expensive in cost or question about regarding the privacy, or when it could be difficult to rethink and reproject public spaces. Building an action plan in order to mitigate, prevent and manage crime events could be a viable solution. And the keynote speech will address such aspects in a moment. But also by having two case studies presentation in this session, we also wanted to focus on the best practices already or soon to be implemented as successful approaches to support stakeholders beat law enforcement agencies, business or society as a whole, to work together and adopt solutions to mitigate terrorist threats. So I would like to present the three speakers of this session and first of all to czapek as Kabila is a postal researcher at the University in Dublin University of Technology and the euronymous Academy of data science. In the Netherlands, His research interests lie mainly in cyber criminal activities monitoring in surf face, deep dark web, cyber threat intelligence, protection of cyber physical spaces, social network personnel, data security and profiling from social media activities and reading suffocation of personnel emotions, and just a phase actually involved in the project like perfect. I need that visor where he is an active contributor and researcher. And we have also inspector Nick Dutcher. It has worked in London as a metropolitan police officer for 25 years. He currently works as part of the protective Security Operations Command, which is part of counterterrorism police and inspector catchers area of work is designed to protect and prepare the done in respect of terror attacks, and he has presented on projects or later to police and local government internationally. And today seminar he will be the occasion to hear from it. And then we have Dr. Michael Rahman is a cognitive neuroscientists studying human face processing. She's funded by a Swiss National Science Foundation, promoting women in academia grants to investigate the mechanism of superior face recognition and integrating research into practice. Dr. Rahman works with the international law enforcement agencies and is an expert contributor to initiatives to enhance public safety. And she is the scientific adviser to the Berlin State Office of criminal investigation and together They have developed the Berlin model for Super recognizer identification, which we will talk about today. And Berlin model is also featured in the forthcoming best practice Handbook of the EU project safe see safer space for safer cities. And we have a Simon Rios and that has a bachelor's degree in social sciences from the Humboldt University of Berlin and in police service, as well as a master's degree in science management. And since 2017, he is working in the innovation management of the Berlin state Criminal Police office, where his job is to find and implement innovative and unconventional ways to successfully combat the crime of the future. So among other things, he is responsible for the establishment of a Center for Innovation in science. management and the new construction of the Berlin forensic Institute in the scientifically valid identification of super recognizers within the Berlin police. So this session will be divided into parts and we will start with the keynote from our partner from yet just a bit and after his presentation, we will have a 10 minutes of questions and answer from the audience. So again, I invite you to use the chat box to to ask your your questions. We will be taking some of them from the audience. Then we will go to the two case studies presentation, followed by a second moment of questions and answers from the audience. So thank you very much and giuseppa and the floor is yours.
Thank you for the presentation actually.
So, then just because Kareena and today we are going to see some best practices and solution for the protection of public space is related to of course the protect project. So related to those municipalities that the time or the industry project
I thought I can Okay, okay.
Okay. So we are going to see a brief introduction, the academia approach, hence the Technology Roadmap that that we delivered. We realized Of course, the municipalities approach and condemn. We started our our roadmap, then we will see some gap analysis in order to understand what are the gaps in longer academia market and when you see parties, okay, and then let's see, let's discuss some lesson learned. Okay, so let's go step by step into the main objectives of these of this task. Basically, we would like to show some best practices that are not always technology color related, okay. But why they're related to the protection of public spaces? Of course, we are trying to bring some innovative solution from all that logic them from the security domain, of course, and we would we would try to provide that technology hold market for the protection of your you have been is
Normally it takes like two seconds.
Okay? Even more oh no
I'm clicking but I cannot change the slide. Okay. Yeah probably I change the slide okay here just our poor just good to give you an introduction and do what we did basically we scraped the total of study so 112 studies of course, we started from from a bigger amount of studies and based on our on our queries okay. We decided for these 112 studies we are going from 2014 to 2019 almost so we are talking To cover as much as possible from the academia, okay? And of course we don't have only journal conference he saw whatever from the academia, but we have also report we have websites, we have also also from from the documents from the from the, from the from the internet, okay from the www. Basically they are discussing, of course, approaches for the for the approaches and solution for the protection of public spaces.
I'm not in a heavy but I have 20 minutes So, the slides are going
Think Vivian it's better if you
Okay sit perfect. So, this is basically our taxonomy the taxonomy that we have been able to retrieve from our systematically there to help you what we have here just go next we have five main or
five main topics so
that the next slides okay we have the the encoded concepts that are basically the domain technology so domain I hear sweat we found technologies okay and then we have the cluster concept where we can see basically technologies okay available from from the academia. So, basically we started from this from this taxonomy as a as a start in order to understand What we have from the academia okay and what we can we can use from the academia okay. Okay, then we had to come up with with with the Technology Roadmap. So starting from this information, we have to build that Technology Roadmap, what is the technology because you have map is a strategic plan is a is a plan in order to show you what are the what are the steps into the technologies, okay? for the future, okay. So you see kind of futuristic technologies for the protection of public spaces, okay. So I hold the steps in order to hide to those technology. And basically this this one was our target what we tried To
do to build Okay.
What is the application of the technology
mapping input that
we use this Technology Roadmap in order to identify solution, as I said from the academia as well from the market, and that's well, we use the the basically the pursued a technology from the municipalities that impede in this. In this regard in this Technology Roadmap, we use as a knowledge we didn't use as a technologist pursued from the municipalities, but since that we believe that, that municipalities have a great knowledge about technologies and for the protection of public spaces, we decide to use doors pursued technologies From the municipalities as part of knowledge, and as part of the protection of the roadmap for the protection of public spaces, of course, the application of this roadmap is multiple as multiple action. It didn't finalize the developments in the Korean domain term. So in order to see what what kind of technologies we have, let's say today and tomorrow, or the technologies that are available, but are still too expensive, okay. So basically, this is the visa Technology Roadmap. So just to inform all of you that sees that we analyze the municipalities, we avoid any leak of critical information because you can see analysis from the, from the weaknesses from the from the problems that that municipalities handle and of course, an overview of the of the solutions that that the municipalities are pursued. So, in order to just let you know, we we anonymized some information in order to avoid any leakage of critical information. Let's go to next slide. So, here we have the vulnerabilities analysis. So, from the from the workshop that we had with with the municipality so basically we scraped all the all the documents that that have been built, been delivered by the municipalities in order to understand what are the most critical vulnerabilities. Basically, we found these main four categories, physical but here lack of physical body Here a best practice is a lack of best practices. So technical solution where we have more technological solutions okay and architecture may have been seen side of course you can see related some related the boonah VPC v3 three films from all the municipalities So, of course I'm not gonna give you information about what will never be that is connected to what Mr. boddy give a better a better overview. So basically you can see how basically all the all the connection among the different CDs okay. We have a lot of of vulnerabilities. They are architectural vulnerabilities there that that basically taking by all Three municipalities there he said differently the city before that there's a lack of physical barriers. So basically here we we map the Okay, all the CDs with the related vulnerabilities okay. And here's the here's the the final overview of these mapping the mapping procedure okay. So, what we had the what is the analysis of that of that mapping, we saw that most of the CDs basically
as a as a as an approach of the vulnerabilities that they have and looking mainly for technological solution and physical body is just you know that to go beeping these analysis, I would like to show you the next slide. This one, when you can see basically all the solution pursued by by them When you see parties and most of them they basically are looking for physical bodies and technological solution. Meanwhile we have that architectural solution and best practices solution solutions that are pursued by really few municipalities okay take in mind this this picture because we will be back on this on this analysis later on. But yeah just you know that to let you know that most of the municipalities are looking for physical but here's as their approaches as solutions and technological solutions. Okay, here we start adding our technological our roadmap for the technological solutions. As you can see, we decided to have the market, the market, side, the the municipality side, okay, and the academic side. You can see that Basically we do together he knows that to have a better overview about technological solution in the market overview you have basically real artificial intelligence solution. So, those solution that you can see that you can read in the artificial intelligence liking the surveillance liking internet technologies and real solution that are available today from from the markets actually okay. So, we have a lot of solution from from artificial intelligence for the surveillance as well for the surveillance we are talking about Dawn's ccpb and stuff like that. And the internet technologists when we have basically sensors Okay, this this is the main category from Thomas Park is you can see that mainly we have a technological approach. Okay, so the solution pursued by the municipality, The technological from the economic perspective, you have basically the torso there. Almost all the categories have been covered. This is for the technological solution. The same roadmap has been built also for her next slide for the four tools and best practices for the fourth layer so basically, as you can see here, it's a really different from the market. We have a lot of law enforcement technology. So we are talking about technologies that you can put in place and talking about scanners for body scanners I'm talking about doing killer so in order to, to to stop the key of the drones flying. I'm talking about liquid explosives detector. So basically technologies for the law enforcement agent See, on the other side, you see from the academia that even if we have a less amount of information, but there are more categories, we have government governance, where they are low and can information impact where the municipalities should be able to retrieve information about crime information around the CDC, okay, best practice solution, and therefore the law enforcement agency. We have crime security, crime analysis, crime management, so kind of departmental in charge of this kind of stuff, as well for the municipalities. We have mainly best practices, best practices solutions, okay. Next slide. Here in order to close the roadmap, we have architectural and by roadmap, we put them together. So here you see it. From the market, we have as well, a lot of a lot of solutions. Okay, so based on the physical barriers and the architectural solution solution from the municipalities as well, we have a lot of solutions that are basically can be overlap to the to the market solution. So we hit the panic button, the blocks that we need the most inexpensive solution in order to protect public spaces and from the academia as well, we have basically the main proposed solution. Let's go to the next slide.
Let's see now what is the analysis from this roadmap and from what we have previously, okay, so for artificial intelligence, surveillance, and internet technologies in the in the first box, you can see that basically market and academia I call it anger, basically, almost All of them, okay? Even if you see that the academia has more or less amount of technology, so let's say you don't have to focus on that stuff because basically, I can stay that almost all the technologies that are from the market came from the academia. Okay? So the point is here is that you have a lot of different brands. Okay. So that's why the market has more, let's say technologies because the brands are really a lot, but basically always related to the same technology okay. So ccpb, artificial intelligence, and basically these these this type of technology, so I can state right now that the market could be could be seen as a subset of the academia, okay, where the academia is producing or is thinking about the technology and the market is producing these making the The technology available to the market. Okay. The next slide the next No, no, no, please look at the next square about layers governments and best practice this gives a really nice picture really nice information to get an email with we have a lot of the solution also from best practices and governments. Meanwhile, from the market basically, you cannot find any service, any service any company that can help you in applying best practices. Okay. Basically, from this analysis, we couldn't find any company that is trying to apply and helping municipalities in applying best practices. Meanwhile, we have the best practices from the academia and of course, the municipalities, the municipalities as well also seeking also pursuing a lot of best practices and last in the interview In the last square, we have physical but here architecture solution that basically have been recognized as a solution for mainly all the all the involved of the of the markets, academia and all the more actors okay. So basically here we don't have a great information. Next Next slide. So, what is the lesson learned just in order to conclude as also together was saying at the beginning, basically there is no one single bullet proof solution okay. So, we can talk a lot about about that, but there is I cannot tell you after my analysis that if you can find the if you can use this solution, you can have you can reach the best protection for your you have been is okay, so there are Multiple solution that means to work together, okay, in order to have a better protection of public spaces. Yeah. Next one. As I said, the market followed by the academia proposal, the majority of the tools and the techniques in the technology sorry. The problem is that the solution is not plug and play because you have to call the company Okay. And then they have to set up the whole environment, they have to train you because it's not something easy that you can that you can use at one time or like that, okay. There is a need or training period, and they are really costly. I mean, we are talking about a lot of money in order to have a CCTV for 360 degrees with the connection of artificial intelligence that can one Face Recognition algorithm so it's not anything really easy and is is really costly. Next one
physical body is an architectural approach is a result to be the most used and the most pursued one, they are indeed cheap. Okay. And they they have an high level of security the problem of these of this solution actually that's that is not the time to overhaul rethink our our who has done is because we cannot we cannot have these concrete concrete blocks in the city that basically, I mean, a lot of psychological studies demonstrated how big they create a feeling of fear into into the cities and Okay, we can fear with the with this with these bullets with this concrete that some people Could Happen now or or later Okay. So we need to rethink our approach in order to have this physical bar here. So integrated into the CDs like the architectural approach we can rethink also our square in order to have squares that can be controlled or can be yeah managed also from the from the from the municipality saw with the with, with the ccpp in a better way. Okay. Next one last, the last fine finger basically. And that's how we seen from the from the previous slide, we need to invest more time
best practices, the best practices actually regarding for my analysis I can state that basically seems like the people do not really care about best practices. But actually, in my opinion, and as I learned from from the from the analysis, it's the most important the cheap way in order to protect public spaces if we are able to group together, okay? The municipality, the layers, the firefighter, the healthcare departments, okay, working together and organizing together the approach on how to deal with a terroristic attack eventually. Okay. So if we can put together all these actors, making them working together for the protection of public spaces, I think that the best solution could be the best approach for Protection of public spaces more than it's really important that the municipalities start sharing the knowledge about best practices because at the moment, I can really say they can say that the municipality said the real act or send the real keeper of this knowledge, basically, it's only you at the moment that have the knowledge, the power, and you have the full overview for for the introduction of good best practices. Okay. So basically, that's it from, from my findings and from from our analysis. Thank you everybody for listening. And the next slide is if there are some questions.
Thank you very much, Giuseppe for this very interesting presentation and I think you gave a really comprehensive Overview of combining what's on the market the academia and what comes from municipalities. And important points, you mentioned that regarding the complementarity that needs to be a goal is there is no single valid solution that could really be effective for protection of public spaces. So, I would like now to take some questions that we have received for from the from the audience and I see some of right hand hands raised also. So there is
one question from the audience a
Are you looking for IWA 14 crash rates Street furniture solutions. I'm not I'm not sure if you if you if you can answer this question,
but I was reading another question from from the question and answer, chopped option. I can you repeat please but
if the question is from Steven finger, and he's asking, Are you looking for I w a 14 crash rated street furniture solutions? Maybe it's a
I'm not sure you you can answer actually the question.
No, I should see the idea.
And maybe we can come back to it later. But I see also to add a hand raised in the among the participants, and Jose and him Perez. I don't know if he wants To take the floor to ask your question.
You You can have your mic activated normally Now, can you hear us?
Or can you speak?
I don't think maybe if you have a question, try that in use the chat box
so that we can take it.
It's got the chat security.
Sorry. Yes, the q&a. Thank you, Peter. And, and also I was seeing a question raise a hand raised before from a insan median.
Now, you should be able to
take the floor.
But I don't see it working either. So
30 questioning the Fed I okay, so for the poll
on it now, if you if you want
to, I have to say that.
Yeah, you're asking something really detailed. We didn't go in that kind of detail because it would have been a scraping dock the liter to that. It seems. Okay. So basically for the best practices that we found from our film deleter most of the time, best practices from the European community, okay. So, in order to do what you are pointing out, actually bet that it's that it's something important and I can understand The importance of what you are pointing out. Basically, we should we should interview we should make an interview with the municipalities or at least we should have more municipalities involved in the, in the protector consortium in order to to directly ask, what are the good practices that they are really using? Okay. So well that we cannot we cannot we didn't make this distinction among best practice is that the data effectively and that that has a real impact and that outperformed with those that do not have the real impact, okay. Would have been something really into details. Okay. That that does efficient work would be really interesting. I mean, Peter, we can That's that that could be actually a good idea, a really good idea from my side that I'm a data scientist. And as a data scientist, that's that's a really good starting point. But we didn't we didn't go into that, that today's actually.
Thank you very much do that. Right.
I think for most of the questions, we based our best practice study on the vulnerabilities that were identified by the cities during their vulnerability assessment workshops. So didn't look at all possible vulnerabilities.
Peter, if I may continue to take two more questions perhaps before before going to the case studies presentation, I would ask Giuseppe to comment. If you Like, there is one question from Chris bechler concerning the governance. And indeed, as we mentioned, and Peter, you just said that there were a few practices collected from the cities in terms of governance.
I mean, we had only five CDs. So that's, that's why they're there. That's that's a good question, Chris. That's why I would like to, to push you. I mean, not all you but all the other municipalities in joining these kind of projects, because, actually, as you see, as I'm seeing, there are information from the government that I didn't tell or syllabi are different from, from what I had. So we are working with only five municipalities at the moment. That's why my analysis, it's mainly focusing on those five Let me see both of these, but not only because I try to be as wider as as possible. So that's that's that's the point. And there is the next question also an example of best practice.
We will be talking a bit in detail to case study. So there will be a good transition to answer this question. Perhaps just the last one comes from Steven severance to submit that as if the study conducted focus mainly on ramming bakels did you consider other type of terrorist attacks?
Yeah, basically into into the solution that we have. We have also technologies for her for her. Explosive for her, but it's not only terrorist attacks. I mean, we are focusing only on 36 attacks, but this is the protection of public spaces. Full stop. Guess whatever you like because in the modern tool you are using a CCTV with artificial intelligence. But basically you can you can protect with them and you like not only against against attacks, but also about people that are fighting from the street if you would like to recognize they face his or her there are also technologies to CCTV that are implementing software for the recognition of the of the plate of the car that mean a lot of cities a lot of sugar is the sky kind of technologies. But yeah, I mean the it's not only focusing on terrorist attacks per se, I mean, the DeSoto e6 attacks is the Leading the Leading field Okay, the leading discussion about these approach but basically these these technologies can be used in a lot of different contexts.
Thank you. Thank you again, just I prefer this
keynote speech. We will upload the slides on the protect website later on. And I will now would like to give the floor to our next presentation will be Nick batcher and presenting the case study on the projects or survey after. So Nick, please. The floor is yours.
Thank you very much. Vivian. Would you mind pressing the buttons for me to save me about half an hour of shouting
offer so yes.
Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Giuseppe, your your presentation leads very nicely on to the aspect of protective security I would like to speak about and thank you for the invite. We're very much about investing in people. You've spoken about the, the blocks, and the steel and the iron, which all have a place to protect security, but they can only be seen as part of a puzzle must fit together provide Total Security or as close to total as you can get the blocks and the steel do a purpose, they do a job, but then they're not reactive. And they're essentially a problem to be solved by the terrorist by the hostile. So if someone really wants to get around a particular wall, eventually they're going to do it. So by introducing some investment in people which are intelligent, that can adapt, that aren't predictable, then you can increase the doubt in the mind of the hostile and ideally stop them acting in the first place. And equally, when Peter gave his introduction, he was talking about the scale of cities involved in this matter. I work in London, which is quite a large city. But the problem can't be looked at just In terms of population to the city, it's the event you're actually looking at protecting. If you think of Glastonbury in the southwest of England, hundreds of thousands of people send on a field, it's normally populated by cows.
So, one second, is there something covering your camera? I don't know, what is the
Is that better? Yeah.
Yes. So we wouldn't necessarily invest in protecting cows in the field. However, for two weeks, in the year, you have hundred thousand people that need protection. So you need a response that's scalable. And indeed, the investment, as Giuseppe mentioned in terms of physical barriers, is can be phenomenal in terms of cost. But if you invest in people, it's an investment that can be paid back over many, many years. So if we can move on to number two second slide, please. Vivian. Thank you very much. I'm sure we can all read it and these will get later later. So on to the next one, please. Thank you. Okay, so the problem is that any terrorist attack will require some level of work beforehand hostile reconnaissance, some sort of scouting the area. And our research has shown that depending on the size and scale and complexity of the attack, and the hostile reconnaissance period will be equally as large or as small. So if you're, and that's true of any crime, so if you're looking at shoplifting, your hostile reconnaissance might be limited to just a quick look over your shoulder to see if there's a security guard nearby. Equally, if you're looking at an attack on Buckingham Palace, then you're going to spend an awful lot longer, making sure you know exactly what's there, what the barriers to your success are. And this gives us an opportunity to frustrate the hostile to take away their ability to get the information they need to be successful, to take away the thought that they will be successful. And to give them the thought if they try this, they will be caught at any stage in their reconnaissance or when completing the act. And ideally, that will then deter them from committing that offense in the first place. And then they'll either go away or move on to something else. And again, if we can get a joint approach of bringing this jigsaw puzzle of protective security together, then you have a very secure society. And equally, the police cannot always be in one place at one time. So again, building on what Giuseppe said, we need to have a way of empowering people to look after themselves, of getting the nurses at hospitals, the doctors, hospitals, the firefighters going into places, rather down to the barista who makes coffee. Get them to realize that they are part of the solution. If you think of some of the largest squares in Europe, and if I see the Arc de Triomphe, the auditorium was a massive target. However, it can be surveilled. You can you can look at the artistry of a workout security provision, and one of a number of cafes or shops or the premises around that area. But the people within say, Starbucks, I'm guessing was test one there. And they're not going to be concerned about some of the attack in the auditorium to be concerned about someone stealing their tips jar, but they're not going to think the person sitting in the window, or with one cup of coffee for three hours with a laptop and a notepad is a threat to the auditorium. But if you get routinely police or city wardens, or anyone who cares coming in and speaking to that barista, to that manager and saying, hey, if you see something that's unusual, that's beyond the normal that's beyond the baseline for activity, either walk up to them and say hello, can I help you
or call the police
and again, studies have shown that the level of anxiety displayed by hostile actors terrorists, when they're on in this reconnaissance phase of the attack is is massive. They think that everyone speaking to them is from f5 or the CIA or any other this the state agencies that they are trying to avoid. So that one barista walking up saying hello, we can be enough to make them think. No, that's it. I'm off. And that's been backed up by studies through this with universities within England. Unfortunately, the much lower than if you look at a book stand these days you see a book written by an ex SS or navy seal. The terrorists do this as well. So quite happily, they've written it down for us. It's a good a good basis to work from.
Okay, next slide, please.
So as I've said the solution is to target hard and the sites to get flesh and blood working together to look after themselves. We get police officers to go in and say speak to the baristas. speak to the manager speak to the existing security guards at the bigger sites become a known entity become a regular piece of the community in that little area. And each area has its own community has its own subtleties and nuances. So you really have to work at this and repeat time and time and time again. Because the people that are there, they're going to know what's normal for that site. For me turning up at any other place in England, quite frankly, I'm not going to know what looks normal for there. But the security guard who spends his or her days standing outside that shop will know what's normal, they will know the rhythm of that place, they will understand what should happen, and constantly they will know what shouldn't happen. And again, we want to get them to have that power of confidence to walk forward and say hello, can I help you and to realize that their responsibility doesn't stop at their front door. Their responsibility goes on. into the gray space that's between all the multiple sites together that it's very difficult to identify who owns that space. But again, using the out of the tree, often example, if the person in Starbucks says hello, then they're also looking after the person on the other side of the arc. And they're also looking at the person and all the points of the compass, then marry up, and you're all looking after each other. Ultimately, and this is a sad indictment on the human species. Everything comes down to economics, any attack on the Austrian will hit revenue. So by looking after that central focus that draws people in, you're also saving your bank balance, which is a great motivator for some of the companies. And this approach is a national approach within the UK and it's gone International, Australia. also presented to my colleagues in Germany, Spain, America, The idea within the UK is if you look to the bottom right hand corner of the screen, you'll see that Project Server tool icon. That same icon is used everywhere that's adopted this approach. So if you start doing your hostile reconnaissance online where most of it starts, are protected sites, or have an online presence with us. And that little badge appears and it's the first time you'll see it.
And if you have a mind to
commit a terrorist attack, then you're going to be looking for the security provisions. So you'll go to the security page, or you'll have a look at Twitter or social media. And you were looking for the security it's around there. You'll be getting the pictures looking in the back of people's pictures and saying can you see a police officer? Can you see a street Warden? Can you see CCTV? They really go into that much detail. So we ourselves go on to Twitter, we go on to the social media and whenever we do a deployment of the site that we're we're protecting, we will put on there that we have been there state And this is what's happened with either arrested someone or we've worked with the security guards, or we've checked, the CCTV is working something positive that's designed to reassure the normal site user. But if you are there with that hostile intent, then you're going to pick up on the fact that this is this is more than just routine police patrol. And you're going to see that producer site. And then when you look for that teach to a link to the Scotland Yard web page where it goes into more detail. And again, it's done to build this anxiety in the mind of the hostile actor. So if you were to want to commit an offense in London, you'd have seen this ad online. If you're leaving Portsmouth in the south of England, you would see this at the train station, you would see it again, when you get off at the train station, you would see it every stage of the journey, ideally right up to the point that you're going to commit your historic connaissance and it's at that point ideally, the barista will walk forward and say Hello, can I help you or ideally, a police officer will be there as well. In which case you're going to be behaving significantly beyond the baseline of activity. Evolution will have kicked in, you will suddenly be a caveman. And you'll be facing a saber toothed Tiger adrenalin will be dumped into your system and you can't control it. And you stand out in a crowd. And it's at that point, the police officer who gets called or is there, can ask a few more questions.
I've probably gone completely off the track of the the
slides, no steps if you've moved forward, please. Vivian.
Thank you. So as I say a lot of this is about training. It's investment in people. And it's a jigsaw puzzle. So in London, we work together with other aspects of protective security. So there's a team that goes in and gives specialist training to staff at sites to CCTV operators to waiting staff to secure To managers, and again, gets them ready for what might happen, gives them the confidence to step forward and gets them prepared. Because unfortunately, their attack always does get through at some point and engage with literature. So we look at leaflets and videos, anything that can really push that little icon in the bottom right hand corner that project servitor to again, get it into people's minds so that when they see that they know that it's Project servitor and they they don't focus on the counterterrorism side of things they focus on. It's the police. I know why they're here. I'm not scared. I've got that reassurance. And again, going back to what Giuseppe said it's that balance between having people aware of what's there, protect them without scaring them. It's when you say, counterterrorism to people on the street. It's not too dissimilar to a certain shark on a beach. People really don't want to hear that and we don't want that. Stop people coming to these great sites around Europe. From the site, you need to have a bit of a buy in from them because they need to allow their staff to go and do this training. There's a financial aspect there. And in many places, people don't want to talk to the police. And we're quite lucky in the UK, we have a good tradition of talking to the public without using a power. I know that's not the same everywhere. But there are parts of Britain that people just do not want to talk to you. So that's a barrier as well. And again, as I said, try and generate this online footprint, this ability to get into the mind of a hostile actor from hundreds of miles away. We need to let people we will need people to allow us to get a footprint on their websites. So if they go go to the security page, then they will get a link to us. Or equally they will take to their social media and say the police project service or we're working here today and generate that routine aspect and police being there and working so This is an idea rather than a product to be bought. And the next slide, please.
Okay, this is a bit of an example, when I'm not together, the circular building, to the left to the center is Shakespeare's Globe, on the south bank of the Thames, and this is what we might do. So don't forget, if you're a hostile actor, you've already looked at this site because you've done your hostile reconnaissance online, you're aware about Project servitor is you've still thought, you know what, I can still have a bit of success here. When there's performance here, look how narrow that buyer is. Just to the north of the screen is the River Thames. It's real, real choke point, you'll get a few thousand people there for a short period of time. It's really crowded place. For a low technology bladed attack in a you can do a lot of damage very quickly. So if you're planning on this, you'll have you'll think I'll have Go. What you can see from this picture, unfortunately, is the building to the right hand side that curves around. There are three coffee shops there. So if you want to look at the security provision for the globe, you can just sit in those three coffee shops. So we need the people in those three coffee shops to be aware. As I said earlier on that the person with one cup of coffee for three hours isn't a threat to Starbucks or customers or whoever that may be. It's a threat across the road. And nearly three coffee shops need to talk to each other. To stop one person having a cup of coffee in one for an hour, then go next door then go next door. And this repeat going in the police officers going in and saying hello this is what we're about. This is what we need you to do. I can get you some bespoke training if you wanted. And here's how to get it. So I digress. A deployment will take about 20 minutes to half an hour. The excellent Yellow Jackets you see there a uniformed police officers. Half are looking East half looking west, the red dots plainclothes police officers. So if you're coming along that narrow choke point, and you've got hostile intent, you know that at any point you go even on, you're going to be spoken to by police. Because the police officers are overly friendly and happy. They get chosen because they can smile, and smile and smile and be nice and play with children take photographs. But you know, you're going to get spoken to by police, if you're going through there. And you know, that you've got a story, but your story might not stack up and again, that builds on the anxiety. So now you're starting to think or maybe I don't want to go there. So you'll turn off anything. Maybe not today. I'm going to try to go down towards where the police van is parked, or you're trying to know and go the other direction.
But Sorry, just to let you know that you have two minutes left.
Yep. So we're just reading.
The red dots are plainclothes officers that are trained to see people acting beyond the baseline. So your stand out, and then they will speak to you. So if you go to the next slide, and while that's loading, we must be remembered this only shows a guilty mind it doesn't show a terrorist. So you have to accept some people just don't want to talk to the police and then needs to be a next level of good police work and investigation to understand why someone does not speak to the police. You can all read that at your leisure in an excellent place.
So wherever you have lots of people, you have lots of crime.
I can't go into the counterterrorism stuff that we're dealing with for obvious reasons, but domestic crime, they can't help but walk through these crowded places either. And these are some of the items are taken off people recently. It's as you can see, you don't necessarily want people with those items on them walking down the street. And again, if you see these little taken off social media, so this gets put up online and it's telling some with hostile intent. If you come, you will be caught. We call these ones and You're no different. Again, building that anxiety making them think it's not worth it. And the next one, please. As I say, this is the messaging on boats, train stations, and the bottom left is about Shakespeare's Globe as well. So it's bespoke to that particular site. So you know, it's not just a generic printed off the internet live basically you have to be credible. And the next one, please. Here's some challenges as I've gone through most of these already high turnover staff, there is an investment required. And please, you've actually got to be credible and respond. You can't tell people if you call us we will come and then not come. So there's work within the police as well to make sure you do react when you've made a promise. And the next one please
and you will worry Tatiana
Thank you very much Nick for such an interesting presentation and for having mentioned very important as less than human presence, the need to establish regular community links and the fact that that is rather an approach to be adopted and then a solution to be but this is also what we want to discuss in these sessions, the importance of technological solutions, but also other aspects that must be taken into account. So, without further delay, I would like to give the floor to our next case study presentation, and just let the participants know that we might be taken five minutes more of your time to be able to take some questions in the end. So I wavelet thank you again, Nick, for the presentation. And Mike. It is And I let the floor to you to present the next case study.
Your mic is cut.
Okay, right now working.
I think something's happening because I activated the laser pointer and it's interfering with my presentation. Can you see my presentation or can you also see yourselves?
Now we see your presentation,
and it's all fine. Okay, thank you so much for the opportunity to speak here. It's been a really great workshop so far. What excellent presentations. Nick, I absolutely loved it and have so many questions afterwards. I think this is such a great opportunity to show the public how we try to think about problems and find solutions and actually make the public part of this entire process, which is something that I'm a really strong advocate for. And I know my colleague, Simon from the Berlin police, as well. So I really applaud you for this effort. And I think that we see more of these types of things in the future. So thanks a lot already. Right. So going to my talk, yes, super recognizes in policing the Berlin model for Super recognizer identification. So my name is Micah Ramon, and my colleagues you will be asked and I, we've been working on this topic for the past few years now. And it's really our brainchild, which we want to give you a little bit of information about and I would just like to point out that this talk now is a shortened version of the chapter that will be published in the forthcoming best practice Handbook of the project safety, which is an amazing project and you consortium project, which involves 11 different European countries, and which is all about exchanging best practices as well. So just some general aspects regarding this talk. It's a recorded session. And it's going to be available later online with captions. If you do have any questions, please take note of the slide number here on the bottom so that we can integrate as many questions as possible. And if I'm going too fast, or if there are any kind of technical or audio problems, please send a message to the moderator so that I can stop and rewind and you won't miss anything.
So just following on the structure that Nick previously had also incorporated all given introduction to the general problem, present the proposed solution as well as the results and then also briefly discuss about some challenges and lessons learned. So the reason why we're here is because we're all in some degree interested in enhancing security and public spaces or public safety in general. And as we all know, there are various ways by which this can be achieved or different types of solutions that are created. invented in pursuit of this overarching goal, such as technological but also human based factors. And with the increasing availability of technology, pretty much everyone in the world own cell phone or the majority of people, we have, on the one hand, a growing demand for image and video processing. And on the other hand, this also inevitably raises issues concerning automatic solutions, which could be implemented to deal with this increasing volume of image and video processing. And you know, these issues relate to privacy issues, data protection aspects and whatnot. And so if we, if we take these two aspects and consider them simultaneously, it makes sense that, you know, perhaps to direct a little bit more attention toward human solutions that are already implemented anyway. So that's also what I think Nick very nicely touched upon. And so this is in part the reason why there is nationally and internationally evidence increasing interest in Super recognizer deployment in policing. And this obviously isn't a problem per se. But there's a more fundamental aspect that I personally believe is problematic. And this relates to the fact that we currently don't have any empirical data, there is no analysis of implementing super recognizers in certain operational areas. And so this is actually then also associated with many open questions which we, at this point cannot yet answer. And you might be surprised because some of these questions are actually quite fundamental. And they can relate to the most basic question what is a super recognizer? Or how should we identify them? Who should be able to identify these super recognizers? And why should we actually implement them? Why should Why should they be deployed? What do we expect? By putting them into place? What is the actual outcome that we anticipate and that would justify desire to continue there in implementation. And in this talk, I'm going to focus on the two most basic ones very briefly, but I'm always happy to talk about related issues offline in any way can contact us at any given point. So these two aspects are the most fundamental. The first one, what is a super recognizer? It might seem trite, but it's actually a really important question. So what I did in, in preparation to the second workshop of the project, save see is that I conducted a public poll and I asked police practitioners as well as civilians, what they thought was a super recognizer. And I gave them five possible answers. So they could say, I think a super recognizer is someone who never forgets a face, or this is a large, small proportion of the population that can remember 80% of the faces they've ever encountered. Or maybe it's someone who was above average at face matching. One other alternative for responding was people who recognize others based on many different features such as posture, gait, voice facial information. And lastly, I don't know.
For me, the results were quite surprising. What we saw was that police practitioners generally responded that they thought that super recognizers were people who can recognize people so that they can use a multitude of different types of sources of information to recognize someone, whereas the definitions among the public were quite mixed. And in fact, the response that was chosen mostly was actually an empirically completely unfounded statement, which is being Yeah, spread in the media through private enterprises. So that's quite interesting to me, because it really shows that there are very different definitions among practitioners, researchers who have On Face processing when they think about super recognizers and civilians who have a mixed definition. And I always think that first creating a foundation of understanding has to be the basis for further work for it to be effective. And the second question, which I touched upon is how should super recognizers be identified? So let's say that we we came to an agreement that super recognizers are people who excel at face processing in some way. So we're focusing on this one aspect. Now, there are some issues because even within the academic community, there is no golden standard and people are free to choose whatever types of tests that assess face cognition that they want to. So in a fairly recent study by Philips at all, they basically said that someone would be considered as a super recognizer if they excelled at any lab test that has been reported in the super recognizer literature. For example, the classical phase matching test So the classical phase matching test it requires you to look at these two images are actually items from the original test. And what you're supposed to say is, is this the same person? Or is it two different people? What's problematic is that this test has also been used and applied to Prozac nozick, or people who suffer from so called face blindness. And what the authors found was that people who suffer from this impairment so who are considered face blind, actually show normal level of performances with this task. So this is obviously a little bit frustrating because you don't want to use a test that can't distinguish between impaired and normals to identify someone who excels at a given ability that that seems a little bit questionable, in my opinion. And finally, the question that anyone could ask him, especially from a practitioners point of view is how relevant are the tests that we develop in laboratory settings to answer questions that are of theoretical nature. how relevant are they actually to the real world? What are the type of tasks that police officers or law enforcement professionals are actually confronted with? And how does that map on to the tools that we have and that we use for our research? So these two this, this overarching questions of how super recognizers be identified is really problematic for me, because there's currently no consensus in terms of how to diagnose someone as a super recognizer. There's no, you know, consensus on definition, as well as on tests that have to or should be used. And also, some of the practices that are prevalent in research can also be questioned in terms of are the tests that people are using, actually the best ones. Are they sensitive enough in pursuit of the goal of wanting to identify super recognizer? And finally, are they even relevant for police tasks? So the problem really is that the existing methods that we would have at our disposal are not optimal to identify super recognizers. And most importantly, they're also not ideal to evaluate their later deployment. So what's needed is actually a solution for Super recognizer identification that's developed specifically to meet the demands of the police agency in question or police practitioners in general. And the proposed solution that we've been developing over the past years, is the Berlin model for Super recognizer identification.
What's unique about this is that it really is the outcome of a genuine collaborative process. So it really combines, you know, expertise, procedures from a scientific research background, as well as practices that are common to policing. And it really has resulted from ongoing and continued commission. munication between scientists and practitioners, it is a technology and systems human centered assessment tool. So it really rests on utilizing technology to identify individual differences in human ability and processing faces using police relevant psychometric testing, so tools that we would use in the lab but transferred into a police relevant context. And what's also very important is that is validated in a large scale representative cohort. So rather than using math online testing that anyone could, you know, participate in a given test 25 times without me as a researcher knowing what we are doing is creating a tool that would be validated within a cohort of police employees and our possible cohort size is actually the over 25,000 employees of the Berlin state police. In terms of the approach, it's a five step approach that we adopted for here. So in the very first instance, we sat down and we conducted a very careful task analysis. So this means what are the rules that super recognizes are expected to perform? It's not so much relevant for me to say what a super recognizer is, when I was talking to the police, I was interested in knowing what are you interested in? What do you want the people that you identify to be doing later because that's more relevant than the term of the label that I'm, you know, putting onto people. And what this task analysis revealed was that the predominantly the tasks of interest involved image search and comparison as well as some type of search and survey and surveillance activity, and image search and comparison could involve any type of analysis of image or video material in for instance, from The goal of grouping crime series or preventing crimes, but also, for instance, analyzing images where biometric solutions actually failed, because there are certain types of masking that people can apply, which make it impossible for automatic solutions to actually process these faces as being a face in the first instance. And of course, humans are not fooled by these types of things. Um, yeah, the other aspect that I mentioned was search and surveillance. And for instance, this is really relevant when it comes to, for example, monitoring or target search for wanted or known criminals at major events. And I'm not going to go into these details, because I think we've already heard a lot about that before. So the second step of this approach was the development. So here we really wanted to translate the tasks that we had identified previously into experiments. So if we know that this is what the person in question would have to do, or this is what they should shouldn't be doing because of their ability, then how do we translate that into a psychological experiment that we can actually test their ability for this task. And the third step, this was the tech. This involve technical implementation of the experiments that we thought and design theoretically and conceptually. And here, I would really like to send a shout out to our it wizards who are implementing everything and making it possible so that we have a technically a technical solution in order to actually perform this large scale testing among all these employees of the employees. Now finally, we're in the phase where we are going to pilot the solution. So we're going to test the test because any solution that you create in the first instance will never be ideal. You'll have to probe this, learn from it and then refine it to then actually develop the final tool which will be rolled out in fall and winter of this year. And so
With this tool, we believe that we have a state of the art assessment or face processing tool which combines both science and policing aspects. Critically it is police relevant because it uses real case material. And this material is embedded into professionally professionally relevant tasks. It is a scientific tool that means that it is validated and representative and large populations and cohorts. So I mentioned before this is not thanks to mass online repeated testing or whatever. Yeah, as well as procedures is exactly that procedures, the data and the results will be publicly and transparently communicated through scientific publications. So we are very much invested in making the entire process transparent and available to others because we we firmly believe that the questions and the challenges that we're confronted with are are not specific to a given city, state or country. But it's something that should be shared with the larger community in pursuit of the same goal. And so yes, tapping onto that we are actually heavily invested in making making this available for other agencies to use for free. Because what we want is to enable a widespread compare abilities. So we want to create some kind of a standard that other people could also use, because this is what's really critical in order to afterwards evaluate whether the deployment is effective. So in order to get information about the efficiency of this project, we need to make it available to other people so that they can get the same type of data from different places, and we all gather and then have an informed decision on whether it makes sense or not. So challenges and lessons learned. Yeah, so what we needed was really clarity, both in terms of definitions, expectations, and we were quite frustrated with a lack of transparency when it came To previously implemented procedures in the context of policing and research, and so we wanted to really embrace this, this idea of sharing everything in creation of police relevant and objective assessment tools. The challenges that we faced were inevitably related to the very strict data protection laws in Berlin. This is something that I believe is very important, and that's exactly the way that it should be. But of course, this is a challenge because it's time consuming. And then obviously, we're also a distributed interdisciplinary team. So I had no background in policing. And likewise, other people didn't have any background or expertise and empirical research, but coming together, this really created unique advantages as well. So what we really learned was that the solid work the good work that we need that can create the outcome and answers that we're genuinely interested in. It takes a lot of time. It takes time, effort, and most importantly, collaboration because the interdisciplinary work is really what creates these bilateral learning opportunities that will ultimately, which I firmly believe create a solution, which is much more sustainable, and will probably also be the most promising in terms of outcome. And, yes, looking into the future, I believe that the Berlin model will really provide a way to evaluate the deployment of super recognizers across different operational settings and tasks. And that
In this sense, it provides a way to to shape evidence informed practices and operations and I very consciously choose the word evidence informed because evidence can sometimes be conflicting. Yeah, you can have evidence a and you can have evidence Be and you can base something on evidence a and it's an evidence based practice. But I think really what we need is evidence informed practices that can that integrate all of the existing evidence and then make the most informed solution taking it forward into the future. And yeah, so with that, I would really like to thank all of you for listening. It's great to see 73 participants in the session, my funding body who makes it possible to have the amazing lab that I'm really fortunate to have the Berlin police for being willing to do this hard work over the years safety for, you know, supporting us as well with this chapter so that we can communicate this putting us in touch with protect and aphis. But finally, also the collaborator as my scientific collaborators, the participants from the public, I know that there's some super recognizers watching all these people, I find it difficult to just consider them as collaborators and participants because somehow they become friends. And so I'd like to thank you for all of your Yeah, for all of your support over the years. I really appreciate it. Yes. So if anyone wants to contact us, we are available. We're at your disposal. If you want to read more, I already mentioned the forthcoming safety chapter which will be publicly available to everyone. I, I believe I've recently submitted a paper that I'm also happy to share and talk about. And yeah, in general, please feel free to reach out and talk to us.
Thank you make it thank you very much for this presentation. Very interesting, and I'm very happy that we had the opportunity to hear from you and from Nick, this, this practices that I'm sure it contribute, they contribute greatly to what we mention is our initial goal of enhanced security in public spaces. So everybody Happy that vary in inspiration now, ideas emerged. And I'm also conscious of the challenges that emerged and that were also mentioned yesterday, for instance, the all the questions related to data protection and to practices was already mentioned. And it's good to see the continuation of this debate, because these are very, indeed very topical issues that that might be taken into account. So the debate is still ongoing in this sense. We will be happy to hear more from the safe See, deliverables, as you mentioned in the handbook. And we are happy also to see that the synergies between projects like safety and others might be created, thanks to this opportunity to exchange together and discuss around those topics. So thanks again to all of the three speakers of today for having shared their their views in their in their projects. And I just wanted to so to thank everyone and remind the audience that we will publish Of course, all these in protect website, the reports from the session as well as the PowerPoints. And we have our last session tomorrow, tomorrow morning, same time, where we will go into more details as far as the protect projects, our tools are concerned. So I invite you all to participate tomorrow morning in the last session. And thank you again for being for joining us today. right to have heard from you
and this is it. See Tomorrow morning for those who will participate. Thank you. Thank you very much.
Thank you. Bye bye