“Minority Report” - Has it arrived?

from JoeUser Forums

I’m assuming you remember the Tom Cruise movie “Minority Report” in which a computer spits out a ball with a crime alert before the crime happens?

That computer was hooked up to three people who hallucinated the crime or read the future… whatever.

 

Turns out Santa Cruz, CA Police have a computer on which a program does just that, without the three clairvoyants

 

Nothing magical. The computer is updated daily, and “predicts” the crime type, time and location based on “patterns” from the data it analyzes.

The program was derived from one which predicts aftershocks following earthquakes.

 

So, does it work?  Yes. Crime is down 27% from last July’s figures.

Only one problem I see with all this:  The computer depends on what data is entered into it. It can’t “predict” crimes of a type not entered into it. This means all crimes have to be reported equally for the model to be closer to perfect, only they aren’t. It’s not the same as earthquakes and seismic detectors. So some crimes get a positive bias, and some a negative one. Some will be more looked for and some looked for less. Same as common or rare diseases, only they may not be so common nor so rare.

The police dispatched are by the area, time and told to look for crime of type “X”.  I’m not saying they won’t look for crime of type “Y”, but if that crime occurs at a different place and time, will anyone be there to see it? The police are citing the money saved using this method. That will lead to fewer police. Mark my words. That will lead to less data, because the data is collected by arrests and reports by police officers. So, the models will lose predictive value.

It also seems to me the criminals could predict the same thing now they know how the police predict things… after all, local papers report crimes, arrests and complaints. Compiling crimes of a certain type shouldn’t be too much harder than reading the paper. They don’t need super Cray computers. Simple statistics programs should be enough to show time and/or place clustering if the computer is told to do so. Heck, they wouldn’t necessarily even need a computer. All they’d need is a grid map of a given area, and a “cube” above it with one axis being number of crime “X” and the other being hour of the day.

Source:  http://www.infopackets.com/news/technology/science/2011/20110822_computer_program_predicts_crime_locations_offenses.htm

51,351 views 27 replies
Reply #1 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

So.... they're using the information predicted by the model.... to establish the model.

 

 

Great thinking, boys.

 

 

 

 

Odd that it actually seems to be working and has cut crime by 27%... that cannot last.

I guess this just goes to show what happens when you cut the wrong stuff.

Reply #2 from Elemental Forums Top

If it helps them catch more criminals, I don't see the harm. The police are pretty good at keeping stuff to themselves (anyone remember COFEE?). You don't just need the model to perform an analysis, you also need the stats (which is far from "reading the paper").

The police are citing the money saved using this method. That will lead to fewer police. Mark my words. That will lead to less data, because the data is collected by arrests and reports by police officers.
End of quote

Maybe. We will see.

 

My guess is police use this to identify hotspots that aren't immediately obvious, and emerging trends so they can diverge them. There's no blind adherence, and they're just as capable as the next guy at realising the problems with such a model.

Ashes of the Singularity II
Reply #3 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Weren't the police all ready doing this with out the use of a computer?  Maybe all those 'Roll Calls' that we see on those police shows never took place.  'It's a hot summer night out there so be aware of that and check the parks out', 'Oh, and be careful out there.'  I really liked Hill Street Blues.  :sun:

Reply #4 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Quoting Heavenfall, reply 2
If it helps them catch more criminals, I don't see the harm.
End of Heavenfall's quote

No harm, but just pointing up an inherent bias which I hope they're aware of.... hey, me likes less crime.

Reply #5 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

I like effective police, and any technology that helps the police become more effective. My grandfather was a state trooper, and way too often the police forces get passed over in favor of the big men with big guns and little accountability.

The problem is that, as you pointed out in the original post, their statistical methodology is inherently flawed. They're using predictions to police certain areas more heavily, which will of course result in more crimes caught in those areas, and when that information is entered into the model it will of course assume that criminal activity has gone up there. Since this is apparently part of a system of budget cuts, that means cops are going to be pulled from other areas.

Reply #6 from Sins Forums Top

Here's a recent related article on quantum computing which relates to this.  It's about the ability of a computer to determine quantum probabilities and provide accurate answers: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/07/110731170028.htm:

And for a fun look...semi-related: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/05/080505072755.htm

Simple lesson here with both of these is , "Just because a computer says it's true doesn't make it so."

 

Reply #7 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

I read the Times piece behind the b*og blurb you linked.

The data input isn't biased, it's the full database of reported crimes. It will miss unreported crimes, but it doesn't seem like there's potential for a given police force to go 'crime shopping' until they have the day's prediction report, and every force has to make decisions about allocating resources regardless of fancy software. 

Re crooks beating them at their own game, if a criminal group can manage to collect all the relevant data and build their own predictive model, odds are they aren't the kind of group who could get caught with 'predictive policing' in the first place. The crooks cited in the Times article were classically 'petty.'

As far as this tech leading to fewer cops on the beat, pish and tosh. Those creepy camera networks are far more likely to do that sort of harm to community policing. The cops in the Santa Cruz experiment only work those 'hot spots' when they're not on a call.

Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top

Computers, even the best, are still constrained by what is fed into them.  But if you feed the correct data in, at least it will crunch it a lot faster than humans can.  How does that help?  Well, if there is a neighborhood that is high crime, you do not need a computer to tell you that.  However, it can help with the infrequent crimes.

Reply #9 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

Quoting Dr, reply 8
However, it can help with the infrequent crimes.
End of Dr's quote
Small sample size = inaccurate data. Especially with relatively infrequent, yet sensationalized crimes such as spree killings.

The problem with this system is that the cops are both stopping crime and reporting crime. It is thus impossible to measure crime rates without affecting them.

Reply #10 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

Quoting Scoutdog, reply 9
The problem with this system is that the cops are both stopping crime and reporting crime. It is thus impossible to measure crime rates without affecting them.
End of Scoutdog's quote

I love seeing anyone point out too-small sample problems, but I just don't get what you are saying about the reporting. Would you have the database exclude arrests made by beat cops who went to an area because of a 'hot spot' report?

That seems counterproductive, unless you're talking about a notoriously corrupt police force such as LAPD and NYPD have been many times in the past. If the cops in Santa Cruz are rotten, those silly Banana Slugs at UC Santa Cruz are not doing their jobs as uppity students.

Reply #11 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

Quoting GW, reply 10
I love seeing anyone point out too-small sample problems, but I just don't get what you are saying about the reporting. Would you have the database exclude arrests made by beat cops who went to an area because of a 'hot spot' report?
End of GW's quote
Unless factored out of the calculation at some point, that would cause a feedback loop in which areas designated by the software as high-crime stay designated as high-crime forever because of the increase in reports and arrests by the extra cops assigned there.

Reply #12 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Quoting GW, reply 7
The data input isn't biased, it's the full database of reported crimes. It will miss unreported crimes...
End of GW's quote

Exactly. Like rape (under reported), and larceny by telephone/email, etc. (shame preventing reporting).

Quoting GW, reply 7
Re crooks beating them at their own game, if a criminal group can manage to collect all the relevant data and build their own predictive model, odds are they aren't the kind of group who could get caught with 'predictive policing' in the first place. The crooks cited in the Times article were classically 'petty.'
End of GW's quote

They don't have to look at 'all crimes'. Just the type they wish to perform and the area they want to perpetrate it in.. The timing will become obvious.

 

Reply #13 from Elemental Forums Top

I'm not really sure what the bugaboo is here. This is taking the place of a crime statistician who is using internal crime maps to tell cops where they should be adding more patrols and what crimes to look for. People should be focusing on how this data is interpreted by the cops, which isn't really a technology issue I think. All this can lead to is more responsive (or perhaps spatisically responsive) change of police presence. Real-time beat scheduling, if you will.

Because I honestly don't think you need to tell an experienced beat cop that x crime is likely to happen in y bad neighborhood. Their response would probably be "no shit." This might just add some more finely tuned information, like it's most likely to occur between 2am and 5am. Something a $5,000 contracted crime statistician could have told them after a 2 month survey.

Reply #14 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

Quoting Scoutdog, reply 11
Unless factored out of the calculation at some point, that would cause a feedback loop in which areas designated by the software as high-crime stay designated as high-crime forever because of the increase in reports and arrests by the extra cops assigned there.
End of Scoutdog's quote

This assumes that policing has no effect on criminal activity, which ain't quite right. Except, again, in cases where cops are corrupt and will somehow keep up arrests even though they've worked neighborhood X or parking garage Y so much that only truly idiotic or drug-addled crooks keep working them.

If that sort of 'eternal high-crime area' happens, it ain't the cops' fault. It's the community's failure to address chronic problems in a specific population--something like a lack of homeless shelters or methadone clinics. Successful professional crooks avoid the cops, or buy them off if they have to.

Nenjin might be overestimating the skill level of the average experienced beat cop, but I agree with the general point about this software basically being yet another form of 'expert in a can.' Now that's a whole different problem for the political economy, especially for those of us who are more or less what Microsoft calls "knowledge workers." 

Reply #15 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Quoting Scoutdog, reply 1
Odd that it actually seems to be working and has cut crime by 27%.
End of Scoutdog's quote

I've watched The Wire, so I know exactly how those figures are lower....;p

Reply #16 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

Quoting GW, reply 14
This assumes that policing has no effect on criminal activity, which ain't quite right. Except, again, in cases where cops are corrupt and will somehow keep up arrests even though they've worked neighborhood X or parking garage Y so much that only truly idiotic or drug-addled crooks keep working them.

If that sort of 'eternal high-crime area' happens, it ain't the cops' fault. It's the community's failure to address chronic problems in a specific population--something like a lack of homeless shelters or methadone clinics. Successful professional crooks avoid the cops, or buy them off if they have to.
End of GW's quote
Point. But the reduction in actual crime will be counterbalanced by the fact that more of those criminals are being caught. Especially in terms of small property crimes and drug use, much of it goes unreported, so the police can dig down quite a ways before they hit the bottom of the supply. Add to that the fact that some criminals are desperate enough or dumb enough to continue to act in an area with a high police presence simply because it's nearby, and you get a situation where the ability of increased policing to amply crime reporting can easily slow or even counteract the actual reduction in crime.

Reply #17 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Jafo, reply 15

Quoting Scoutdog, reply 1Odd that it actually seems to be working and has cut crime by 27%.

I've watched The Wire, so I know exactly how those figures are lower....
End of Jafo's quote

 

Bingo! Wire was excellent. Stats games, that's all it's about.

Reply #18 from WinCustomize Forums Top

While criminals are predictable in the fact that they WILL offend, they are unpredictable in that often crimes are spontaneous, spur of the moment things that they themselves have little control over.

And that's just one side of it.  There are the big-time crims who plan things meticulously, and their general thinking, in this day and age of electronic surveillance, etc, would be strike when least expected at a place they're least expected at... one with the least population [to identify them/get in the way] and one where law enforcement would take some time reaching.  These criminals are generally harder to catch, much less predict.

Them there's the criminal, who up until some life altering moment was merely the guy/gal next door... who, for some inexplicable reason, snaps and commits a crime they are otherwise incapable of.  These sorts of crimes can happen in any home/building/locale at any time, day or night, and are less predictable than the covertly planned 'intelligent' crime.

So yes, Doc, you are entirely correct in your hypothesis that this kind of 'policing' is not only inadequate but dangerous.  Yes, it may be able to predict to some degree gang related crimes, armed robberies [of liquor/drug stores], domestic violence and B&E's in certain areas, but these other events are too random to accurately generate computer models on.  That leaves it to guesswork and assumptions.... both highly dangerous practices when dealing with flesh and blood lives.

Furthermore, what about the unspoken crimes?  As you say, these are not factored in and therefore are unlikely to decrease as a result of police following computer generated patterns... something that could lead to fewer police on the ground because officials smugly think they have crime licked. at 20 something percent down.  No, police need to be present in all quarters and vigilant.

Sadly, I think somebody {officials] has been watching too many TV cop shows and movies.  While some may be based on true cases/experiences, etc, real life cops don't have scripts and foregone conclusions to work with.  Sure, utilise technology when it serves your purpose, but don't rely on it as being the be all and end all of police work, too many people depend on the "serve and protect" to leave their fates entirely to electronics.

Reply #19 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Quoting starkers, reply 18
So yes, Doc, you are entirely correct in your hypothesis that this kind of 'policing' is not only inadequate but dangerous.
End of starkers's quote

Like 'profiling'.

Some 'academic' determines the serial killer has a mum complex, is male, and comes from a disfunctional family.

Like....BRILLIANT, EINSTEIN....;p

Gonna get a grant from a University to do research on...."if I stick my toe in the ocean.....will it get wet?"

 

That show 'Criminal Minds' with a WHOLE bunch of disfunctional mum-complex profilers all chasing ONE CASE [while all the others clearly fester] is truly pathetic drivel aimed at the semi-conscious.

At least Cracker was half decent - yet another example of the English being 'better at it'...;)

Reply #20 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Quoting Jafo, reply 19
At least Cracker was half decent - yet another example of the English being 'better at it'...
End of Jafo's quote

Like 'Wire in the Blood' 'Waking the Dead' and 'The Shadow Line' {among others] great examples of Brit 'crime' TV at its best.

one of the things that truly pisses me off with 'Criminal Minds'... the fact that one profiler starts to explain shit to the cops/family/friends, etc, then another takes over part way through... then another... then another.  For me, that's just another lousy excuse to get US actors speaking parts and get more money than they're worth... or deserve.   At least with 'Cracker' he laid it on the line himself.

That's another reason I can't stand those US news services and 'morning' 'entertainment' shows.   One starts and another finishes the story/topic at hand.  That shits me to tears.  For frig sake, it they ALL have to open their mouths on air, give them EACH a story/topic.  This switching presenter mid-story for dramatic effect is crap.

*rant off* temporarily. :-"

Reply #21 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Quoting Jafo, reply 19
"if I stick my toe in the ocean.....will it get wet?"
End of Jafo's quote

Depends... there *could* be one of them shark fellas about... and then you'd have to call your toe [long distance] to ask.  ;P  

I agree, though - there seems to be little or no common sense, does there?

I do agree with you about the profiling stuff. Sometimes it seems to work, though.

Reply #22 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Oh, and another obstacle to effective and honest police work.... politics.  All too often police commissioners [and other hierarchy cops] are political plants and mouthpieces for influential figures, both political and business alike.  They're there to sweep upper crust stuff under the carpet and make shit "go away".  They're there as minders so you can't get to the people at the top... hence those at the top remain unaccountable and immune from public scrutiny.

So yeah, is this computer generated 20%+ reduction in crime just a smoke screen to distract people from the real issues and corruption of those they're supposed to trust?  Cos at the end of the day they're only statistics and serve also to mask crime that is not so well known/obvious.

Reply #23 from JoeUser Forums Top

Quoting Scoutdog, reply 9
Small sample size = inaccurate data. Especially with relatively infrequent, yet sensationalized crimes such as spree killings.
End of Scoutdog's quote

I did not mean with crimes that are infrequent, but with areas that are not constantly having crime.  As I indicated, if you have a housing project with rampant crime, you do not need a computer.  But if you have some guy robbing houses, the computer will help predict where he will strike next.  No matter how random we try to be, there is usually a pattern.

Reply #24 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Quoting Dr, reply 23
No matter how random we try to be, there is usually a pattern.
End of Dr's quote

That is correct though finding the pattern might prove very difficult.

Reply #25 from Elemental Forums Top
August 24, 2011 1:18:46 from WinCustomize Forums WinCustomize Forums
Quoting Jafo,
reply 19
"if I stick my toe in the ocean.....will it get wet?"

Depends... there *could* be one of them shark fellas about... and then you'd have to call your toe [long distance] to ask.  ;P

 

Well, with all the 'land-sharks' claiming to deliver 'candy-grams,' or  'flowers,' or 'pizza,' you might get your toe taken off and relocated to a 'far away place with a strange sounding name,' without even getting to the water.  Predict that?