MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4306404279 · doi:10.1186/s40163-022-00173-0

Theorizing globally, but analyzing locally: the importance of geographically weighted regression in crime analysis

2022· article· en· W4306404279 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCrime Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime Patterns and Interventions
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnemploymentGeographically Weighted RegressionProperty crimeRegression analysisWork (physics)Economic JusticeCriminologyUnit (ring theory)Criminal justiceGeographyViolent crimeRegressionEconomic geographyRegional scienceSociologyEconometricsPolitical scienceEconomicsEconomic growthPsychologyStatisticsMathematicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Theoretical relationships with crime across cities are explicitly or implicitly assumed to be the same in all places: a one-unit change in X leads to a β change in Y. But why would we assume the impact of unemployment, for example, is the same in wealthy and impoverished neighborhoods? We use a local statistical technique, geographically weighted regression, to identify local relationships with property crime. We find that theoretical relationships vary across the city, most often only being statistically significant in less than half of the city. This is important for the development of criminal justice policy and crime prevention, because these initiatives most often work in particular places potentially leading to a misallocation of scarce public resources.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.008
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.327 · 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