Abstract
Self-exciting spatio-temporal point processes offer a flexible class of models that have found success in a range of applications. They involve a triggering effect that accounts for the clustering patterns observed in many natural and sociological applications. In this work, we focus on the key step of inferring or designing the form of the triggering function. In the inference setting, we use a nonparametric approach to fit a process to a range of datasets arising in criminology. By analysing this public domain data we find that the inferred trigger shape varies across different categories of crime. Motivated by these observations, and also by hypotheses from the criminology literature, we then propose a variation on the classical Epidemic-Type Aftershock Sequences trigger, which we call the Delayed Response trigger. After calibrating both parametric models, we show that Delayed Response is comparable with Epidemic-Type Aftershock Sequences in terms of predicting future events, and additionally provides an estimate of the time lag before the risk of triggering is maximised.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
In some literature the temporal aspect of this triggering function is written in the equivalent form \(\alpha e^{-\beta t}\), with the interpretation that each arrival increases the intensity by \(\alpha \), with this influence decaying at rate \(\beta \) [14]. We use the form \(\alpha \omega e^{-\omega t}\) because it has the useful property that each event is expected to trigger \(\alpha \) events.
References
Street and Site Plan Design Standards, City of Chicago. https://www.cityofchicago.org/dam/city/depts/cdot/StreetandSitePlanDesignStandards407.pdf, 2007. [Online; accessed 13-November-2018].
City of Chicago Data Portal. https://data.cityofchicago.org/Public-Safety/Crimes-2001-to-present/ijzp-q8t2/data, 2016. [Online; accessed 20-November-2016].
L. Bennett Moses and J. Chan. Algorithmic prediction in policing: assumptions, evaluation, and accountability. Policing and Society, 28(7):806–822, 2018.
H. Berestycki, S. Johnson, J. Ockendon, and M. Primicerio. Criminality. European Journal of Applied Mathematics, 21(4-5), 2010.
A. Bertozzi, S. Johnson, and M. Ward. Mathematical modelling of crime and security: Special issue of EJAM. European Journal of Applied Mathematics, 27(3):311–316, 2016.
A. A. Braga. The effects of hot spots policing on crime. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 578(1):104–125, 2001.
A. P. Dempster, N. M. Laird, and D. B. Rubin. Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (methodological), pages 1–38, 1977.
J. E. Douglas, R. K. Ressler, A. W. Burgess, and C. R. Hartman. Criminal profiling from crime scene analysis. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 4(4):401–421, 1986.
M. Egesdal, C. Fathauer, K. Louie, J. Neuman, G. Mohler, and E. Lewis. Statistical and stochastic modeling of gang rivalries in Los Angeles. SIAM Undergraduate Research Online, 3:72–94, 2010.
C. Gilmour. Self-exciting Point Processes and their Applications to Crime Data. PhD thesis, University of Strathclyde, 2019.
P. Grindrod. Mathematical Underpinnings of Analytics. Oxford University Press, 2015.
P. Hunt, J. Saunders, and J. S. Hollywood. Evaluation of the Shreveport predictive policing experiment. Rand Corporation, 2014.
T. Karppi. “The computer said so”: On the ethics, effectiveness, and cultural techniques of predictive policing. https://doi.org/10.1177.2056305118768296, May 2018. Social Media+ Society.
P. J. Laub, T. Taimre, and P. K. Pollett. Hawkes processes. arXiv:1507.02822, 2015.
E. Lewis, G. Mohler, P. J. Brantingham, and A. L. Bertozzi. Self-exciting point process models of civilian deaths in Iraq. Security Journal, 25(3):244–264, 2012.
D. Marsan and O. Lengliné. Extending earthquakes’ reach through cascading. Science, 319(5866):1076–1079, 2008.
A. Meijer and M. Wessels. Predictive policing: Review of benefits and drawbacks. International Journal of Public Administration, 42(12):1031–1039, 2019.
G. Mohler. Marked point process hotspot maps for homicide and gun crime prediction in Chicago. International Journal of Forecasting, 30(3):491–497, 2014.
G. O. Mohler, M. B. Short, P. J. Brantingham, F. P. Schoenberg, and G. E. Tita. Self-exciting point process modeling of crime. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 106(493):100–108, 2011.
G. O. Mohler, M. B. Short, S. Malinowski, M. Johnson, G. E. Tita, A. L. Bertozzi, and P. J. Brantingham. Randomized controlled field trials of predictive policing. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 110(512):1399–1411, 2015.
Y. Ogata. Statistical models for earthquake occurrences and residual analysis for point processes. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 83(401):9–27, 1988.
N. Polvi, T. Looman, C. Humphries, and K. Pease. The time course of repeat burglary victimization. The British Journal of Criminology, 31(4):411–414, 1991.
J. H. Ratcliffe, R. B. Taylor, A. P. Askey, K. Thomas, J. Grasso, K. J. Bethel, R. Fisher, and J. Koehnlein. The Philadelphia predictive policing experiment. Journal of Experimental Criminology, in press, 2020.
A. Reinhart. A review of self-exciting spatio-temporal point processes and their applications. Statistical Science, 33(3):299–318, 2018.
A. Reinhart and J. Greenhouse. Self-exciting point processes with spatial covariates: modelling the dynamics of crime. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series C (Applied Statistics), 67(5):1305–1329, 2018.
S. Tench, H. Fry, and P. Gill. Spatio-temporal patterns of ied usage by the provisional Irish republican army. European Journal of Applied Mathematics, 27(3):377–402, 2016.
A. Veen and F. P. Schoenberg. Estimation of space–time branching process models in seismology using an em–type algorithm. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 103(482):614–624, 2008.
C. J. Wu. On the convergence properties of the EM algorithm. The Annals of Statistics, pages 95–103, 1983.
S. F. C. K. Zipkin, J. and A. Bertozzi. Point-process models of social network interactions: Parameter estimation and missing data recovery. European Journal of Applied Mathematics, 27, 2016.
Acknowledgements
CG was supported by EPSRC Programme Grant EP/P020720/1. DJH was supported by grant EP/M00158X/1 from the EPSRC/RCUK Digital Economy Programme and by EPSRC Programme Grant EP/P020720/1. Illustrative R code may be downloaded from https://www.maths.ed.ac.uk/~dhigham/algfiles.html
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Gilmour, C., Higham, D.J. (2021). Modelling and Inferring the Triggering Function in a Self-Exciting Point Process. In: Al-Baali, M., Purnama, A., Grandinetti, L. (eds) Numerical Analysis and Optimization. NAO 2020. Springer Proceedings in Mathematics & Statistics, vol 354. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72040-7_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72040-7_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-72039-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-72040-7
eBook Packages: Mathematics and StatisticsMathematics and Statistics (R0)