Development of Hotzone Identification Models for Simultaneous Crime and Collision Reduction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".