Advertisement

Decision Based Spatial Analysis of Crime

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2665)

Abstract

Spatial analysis of criminal incidents is an old and important technique used by crime analysts. However, most of this analysis considers the aggregate behavior of criminals rather than individual spatial behavior. Recent advances in the modeling of spatial choice and data mining now enable us to better understand and predict individual criminal behavior in the context of their environment. In this paper, we provide a methodology to analyze and predict the spatial behavior of criminals by combining data mining techniques and the theory of discrete choice. The models based on this approach are shown to improve the prediction of future crime locations when compared to traditional hot spot analysis.

Keywords

Spatial choice feature selection preference specification model-based clustering 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Ben-Akiva, M. and Lerman, S. (1985). Discrete choice analysis, theory and application to travel demand. the MIT press.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Besage, J. and Newell, J. (1991). The detection of clusters in rare diseases. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society A 154: 143–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bhat C. (1998) Incorporating observed and unobserved heterogeneity in urban work travel mode choice modeling. Transportation science, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 228–238, May.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bock, H. H. (1996). Probability models and hypothesis testing in partitioning cluster analysis. Clustering and Classification, Ed. By Arabie, P., Hubert, L., and DeSorte, G. World Science Publishers.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bowman, A. and Azzalini, A. (1997). Applied smoothing techniques for data analysis: the kernel approach with S-Plus illustrations. Oxford Statistical science series.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bozdogan, H. (1993) Choosing the number of component clusters in the mixture model using a new informational complexity criterion of the inverse Fisher information matrix. Information and Classification, Ed. By Opitz, O., Lausen, B., and Klar, R. 40–54. Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brown, D., Liu, H. and Xue, Y. (2001). Mining preferences from spatial-temporal data. Proceedings of first SIAM conference, 2001.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Clarke, R. and Cornish, D. (1985). Modeling offenders’ decisions: a framework for research and policy. Crime Justice: An Annual review of research, Vol. 6, Ed. By Tonry, M. and Morris, N. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cliff, A.D. and Ord, J.K. (1981). Spatial processes, models, and applications. London: Pion.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Engelman, L. and Hartigan, J.A. (1969). Percentage points of a test for clusters. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 64: 1674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Everitt, B. (1993). Cluster analysis. John Wiley & Sons. New York.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fotheringham, S. (1988) Consumer store choice and choice set definition. Marketing Science, Summer, 299–310.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fotheringham, S., Brunsdon, C. and Charlton, M. (2000). Quantitiative Geography. SAGE Publications Ltd.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fraley, C. and Raftery, A.E. (1998). How many clusters? Which clustering method? — Answers via model-based cluster analysis. The Computer Journal, 41(8): 578–588.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Graham, U. and Fingleton, B. (1985). Spatial data analysis by example. New York: John Wiley & Sons.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jain, A.K., Murty, M.N. and Flynn, P.J. (1999). ACM Computing Surveys, Vol. 31, No. 3, September, 264–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kposowa, A., and Breault, K.D. (1993) Reassessing the structural covariates for U.S. homicide rates: A county level study. Sociological Forces 26:27–46.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    McFadden, D. (1973). Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. Frontiers in Econometrics, 105–142. New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    McFadden, D. and Train, K. (1978). The goods/leisure tradeoff and disaggregate work trip mode choice models. Transportation research, 12, 349–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Openshaw, S., Charlton, M., Wymer, C. and Craft, A. (1987). A mark 1 geographical analysis machine for the automated analysis of point datasets. International Journal of Geographical Information Systems 1: 335–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Openshaw, S., A. Craft, A., Carlton, M. and Birch, J. (1988). Investigation of leukemia clusters by use of a geographical analysis machine. Lancet 1:272–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Osgood, W. (2000). Poisson-based regression analysis of aggregate crime rates. Journal of quantitative criminology. Vol. 16. No. 1.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ripley, B. D. (1981). Spatial statistics, John Wiley and Sons: New York.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rust, R. and Donthu, N. (1995). Capturing geographically localized misspecification error in retail store choice models. Journal of Marketing research, Vol. XXXII, 103–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Train, K. (1998). Recreational demand models with taste differences over people. Land economics, 74, 230–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Upton, G., and Fingleton, B. (1985). Spatial data analysis by example. New York: John Wiley & Sons.zbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Systems and Information EngineeringUniversity of VirginiaCharlottesvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations