## 6 Conclusions  
Section 4 of the article estimates the magnitude of error due to the inaccuracy of eye-tracking devices and the natural head movements that occur when working with this technology. It was pointed out that discrepancies in determining the gaze focus position relative to the actual gaze focus position are significant. Section 5 of the article identifies the potential consequences of the error, affecting the ability of airport screening operators to assess their decisions correctly. It should be noted that due to the technology's disadvantages, it is not possible to achieve 100% success in determining the Hit Rate using this technology. However, given the nature of the problem, i.e., a 7% average error in the assessment of security control operators, eye-tracking technology may contribute to a partial reduction in the size of this error. This will be a significant advance in the assessment process of security control operators. These assumptions are based on the fact that the situations described in the article in Figures 7 and 8 in points (a), (b), and (e) occur where there is a probability equal to one or close to one in making a correct assessment by the system. This will allow for a more accurate assessment of the security control operators.  
In connection with the above, further research will be undertaken to verify the effectiveness of the assumptions adopted during the training sessions of security control operators. The exact impact of eye-tracking technology on the effectiveness of the assessment of security control operators will be assessed. A test image database will be prepared, in which TIP images with various prohibited objects will be created. A sensitivity analysis will be carried out to estimate the margin of error in eye indication that needs to be taken into account in order to achieve the highest possible precision of the \(HR\) indicator. On this basis, a logic model will be built to develop the final version of the system. As a final step, tests will be conducted on the precision of the system.  
**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, T.K.; methodology, A.K.; validation, A.K., E.M. and J.R.; formal analysis, T.K.; investigation, A.K., T.K., E.M. and J.R.; resources, E.M.; data curation, J.R.; writing--original draft preparation, T.K.; writing--review and editing, E.M. and J.R.; visualization, T.K.; supervision, A.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.  
**Funding:** This research was funded by National Centre for Research and Development grant number POIR.04.01.04-00-0127/19.  
**Institutional Review Board Statement:** According to Regulation (EU) No. 536/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014, particularly Article 2, the study presented in this paper does not meet the criteria for clinical or biomedical research. It did not involve any medical interventions, clinical procedures or the collection of personal, biometric or genetic data. It was purely observational, using a non-invasive eye-tracking device (eye tracker), without risk to participants.  
**Informed Consent Statement:** Informed consent for participation was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.  
**Data Availability Statement:** The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.  
**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflicts of interest.