MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802115700 · doi:10.1111/cag.12463

Using tweets to understand changes in the spatial crime distribution for hockey events in Vancouver

2018· article· en· W2802115700 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Alina Ristea, Martin A. Andresen, Michael Leitner

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennes · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime Patterns and Interventions
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersAustrian Science FundJohns Hopkins University
KeywordsCrime analysisGeographyCartographyCriminologyHumanitiesSociologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of social media data for the spatial analysis of crime patterns during social events has proven to be instructive. This study analyzes the geography of crime considering hockey game days, criminal behaviour, and Twitter activity. Specifically, we consider the relationship between geolocated crime-related Twitter activity and crime. We analyze six property crime types that are aggregated to the dissemination area base unit in Vancouver, for two hockey seasons through a game and non-game temporal resolution. Using the same method, geolocated Twitter messages and environmental variables are aggregated to dissemination areas. We employ spatial clustering, dictionary-based mining for tweets, spatial autocorrelation, and global and local regression models (spatial lag and geographically weighted regression). Findings show an important influence of Twitter data for theft-from-vehicle and mischief, mostly on hockey game days. Relationships from the geographically weighted regression models indicate that tweets are a valuable independent variable that can be used in explaining and understanding crime patterns.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.192

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations19
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennesSame topicCrime Patterns and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207