Space-time Clusters of Crime in Stockholm, Sweden
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the study is to detect geographical clustering of offences over time using Kulldorff’s scan test (SaTScan version 9.01; Kulldorff, 2010) and police recorded data over Stockholm city, the capital of Sweden. This technique has a rigorous inference theory for identifying statistically significant clusters. The space–time scan statistics are used in a single retrospective analysis using data from 1st January 2006 to 31st December 2009. A four years’ dataset is collapsed into ‘one year’. All space-time dimensions of the data are kept except ‘year’. Clusters over the hours of the day, weekday and weekend and by seasons were tested. Total population but also day-time and night-time populations were used as reference. Findings show clear distinct patterns of concentration for violence (assault and threat) and property crimes (theft, robbery and burglary) over time and space. Whilst property crimes tend to happen more often in the afternoons in the center and regional commercial centers in the southern and western parts of Stockholm, violence takes place more often in the night, and is heavily concentrated in large parts of the city center. Weekends are more targeted than weekdays for both offences. Regardless of day of the week, the main urban core of the city contains the most likely cluster that extends to commercial and socially disorganized areas in the west and south Stockholm. Whilst property crime levels do not show significant differences over the seasons, violent crimes levels do (winter and summer). The most likely clusters tend to be fairly constant in space over time. The article ends with implications of the results for both research and practice.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".