MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406203380 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc123-40

A Study on the Application of Data Mining-based Crime Prediction Models in Criminal Justice

2024· article· en· W4406203380 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Liupeng Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime Patterns and Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceConstruct (python library)Node (physics)Raster graphicsFunction (biology)Data miningAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the social progress and technological development, China’s criminal activities gradually show the characteristics of specialization, networking, and hotspotting, which leads to the phenomenon of high incidence but low detection rate, and the prediction of the criminal phenomenon is particularly important. In this paper, we construct a graph self-encoder, and derive the formula of the GAE loss function from the corresponding reconstructed neighbor matrix and node feature loss function of GAE. The spatial channel attention mechanism is introduced to improve the performance of the model, and the time window dimension is mapped to the perceptual self-attention module, and the objective function is constructed by generating a collection of crime matrices for future time windows. A multi-raster layer analysis model is added to optimize the model, generate a risk map of criminal activities, quantify the risk value of each element, and form a spatio-temporal prediction effect. Comparison experiments are used to analyze the optimization effect of the model, and the absolute error of the optimized model is no more than 0.05 for four types of cases. The prediction results of the cases of property invasion in different time periods show that the number of cases occurring in the early hours of the morning is 508, and the average PEI index is 0.19, which is smaller compared with other time periods.

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)0.004
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.528
Threshold uncertainty score0.409

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial ComputingSame topicCrime Patterns and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207