Spatially embedded co-offence prediction using supervised learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Crime reduction and prevention strategies are essential to increase public safety and reduce the crime costs to society. Law enforcement agencies have long realized the importance of analyzing co-offending networks---networks of offenders who have committed crimes together---for this purpose. Although network structure can contribute significantly to co-offence prediction, research in this area is very limited. Here we address this important problem by proposing a framework for co-offence prediction using supervised learning. Considering the available information about offenders, we introduce social, geographic, geo-social and similarity feature sets which are used for classifying potential negative and positive pairs of offenders. Similar to other social networks, co-offending networks also suffer from a highly skewed distribution of positive and negative pairs. To address the class imbalance problem, we identify three types of criminal cooperation opportunities which help to reduce the class imbalance ratio significantly, while keeping half of the co-offences. The proposed framework is evaluated on a large crime dataset for the Province of British Columbia, Canada. Our experimental evaluation of four different feature sets show that the novel geo-social features are the best predictors. Overall, we experimentally show the high effectiveness of the proposed co-offence prediction framework. We believe that our framework will not only allow law enforcement agencies to improve their crime reduction and prevention strategies, but also offers new criminological insights into criminal link formation between offenders.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".