MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3187289091

Development of Hotzone Identification Models for Simultaneous Crime and Collision Reduction

2019· article· en· W3187289091 on OpenAlex
Seun Daniel Oluwajana

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueYorkSpace (York University) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicData-Driven Disease Surveillance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatisticsAkaike information criterionCollisionBayes' theoremResidualNegative binomial distributionBayesian probabilityMean squared errorMathematicsEconometricsGoodness of fitPoisson distributionComputer scienceAlgorithm
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research contributes to developing macro-level crime and collision prediction models using a new method designed to handle the problem of spatial dependency and over-dispersion in zonal data. 
\n
\nA geographically weighted Poisson regression (GWPR) model and geographically weighted negative binomial regression (GWNBR) model were used for crime and collision prediction. Five years (2009-2013) of crime, collision, traffic, socio-demographic, road inventory, and land use data for Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada were used. The need for geographically weighted models became clear when Moran's I local indicator test showed statistically significant levels of spatial dependency. A bandwidth is a required input for geographically weighted regression models. This research tested two bandwidths: 1) fixed Gaussian and 2) adaptive bi-square bandwidth and investigated which was better suited to the study's database. 
\n
\nThree crime models were developed: violent, non-violent and total crimes. Three collision models were developed: fatal-injury, property damage only and total collisions. The models were evaluated using seven goodness of fit (GOF) tests: 1) Akaike Information Criterion, 2) Bayesian Information Criteria, 3) Mean Square Error, 4) Mean Square Prediction Error, 5) Mean Prediction Bias, and 6) Mean Absolute Deviation. As the seven GOF tests did not produce consistent results, the cumulative residual (CURE) plot was explored. 
\n
\nThe CURE plots showed that the GWPR and GWNBR model using fixed Gaussian bandwidth was the better approach for predicting zonal level crimes and collisions in Regina. The GWNBR model has the important advantage that can be used with the empirical Bayes technique to further enhance prediction accuracy. 
\n
\nThe GWNBR crime and collision prediction models were used to identify crime and collision hotzones for simultaneous crime and collision reduction in Regina. The research used total collision and total crimes to demonstrate the determination of priority zones for focused law enforcement in Regina. Four enforcement priority zones were identified. These zones cover only 1.4% of the Citys area but account for 10.9% of total crimes and 5.8% of total collisions. The research advances knowledge by examining hotzones at a macro-level and suggesting zones where enforcement and planning for enforcement are likely to be most effective and efficient.

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.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.602
Threshold uncertainty score0.459

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.214 · 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