MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6990150426

Crime Modeling and Mapping Using Geospatial Technologies Crime Modeling and Mapping Using Geospatial Technologies, edited by Michael Leitner Springer

2024· article· en· W6990150426 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDigitalCommons - Kennesaw State University (Kennesaw State University) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime Patterns and Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeospatial analysisCrime analysisCluster analysisGeomaticsGeographic information systemSpatial analysisCover (algebra)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Crime mapping and spatial analysis of crime remains one of the most active fields regarding the applications of geospatial technologies. Included in the book series of Geotechnologies and Environment by Springer, Crime modeling and Mapping Using Geospatial Technologies, edited by Michael Leitner, presents a rich collection of the latest research applying cutting edge geo-techniques to crime mapping and spatial analysis of crime. This book is made up of eighteen chapters which cover a broad range of topics such as spatial analysis of drug market areas, spatiotemporal clustering of crime hot spots, journey to crime, and campus crime. Whereas most chapters of this book focused on the analysis of crime occurred in U.S. cities, several chapters investigated the geography of criminal activity in Belgium, Canada, England, and Mexico. Each chapter addresses different problems and uses unique GIS-based approaches; yet, they are grouped into four sections according their emphases: Fundamental spatial problems, crime analysis, crime modeling, crime mapping, and applications and implementations. In fact, it may be more reasonable to classify those works by units of analysis (e.g., street crime, journey to crime, neighborhood crime, campus crime, and spatiotemporal clustering of crime) because mapping, analysis, and modeling of crime are techniques intertwined with each other and some chapters still fit well if being placed into other sections

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.006

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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 venueDigitalCommons - Kennesaw State University (Kennesaw State University)Same topicCrime Patterns and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207