MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2514803558 · doi:10.3390/ijgi5090162

Analyzing Local Spatio-Temporal Patterns of Police Calls-for-Service Using Bayesian Integrated Nested Laplace Approximation

2016· article· en· W2514803558 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Hui Luan, Matthew Quick, Jane Law

Bibliographic record

VenueISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime Patterns and Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersChina Scholarship CouncilUniversity of Waterloo
KeywordsBayesian probabilityLaplace's methodService (business)EveningGeographyLaplace transformBayesian inferenceComputer scienceSpace (punctuation)MorningSpacetimeCartographyMathematicsArtificial intelligenceBusinessMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research investigates spatio-temporal patterns of police calls-for-service in the Region of Waterloo, Canada, at a fine spatial and temporal resolution. Modeling was implemented via Bayesian Integrated Nested Laplace Approximation (INLA). Temporal patterns for two-hour time periods, spatial patterns at the small-area scale, and space-time interaction (i.e., unusual departures from overall spatial and temporal patterns) were estimated. Temporally, calls-for-service were found to be lowest in the early morning (02:00–03:59) and highest in the evening (20:00–21:59), while high levels of calls-for-service were spatially located in central business areas and in areas characterized by major roadways, universities, and shopping centres. Space-time interaction was observed to be geographically dispersed during daytime hours but concentrated in central business areas during evening hours. Interpreted through the routine activity theory, results are discussed with respect to law enforcement resource demand and allocation, and the advantages of modeling spatio-temporal datasets with Bayesian INLA methods are highlighted.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.664
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.004
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.310 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISPRS International Journal of Geo-InformationSame topicCrime Patterns and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207