Slashdot Mirror
London's Crime Hot Spots Predicted Using Mobile Phone Data
KentuckyFC (1144503) writes A growing number of police forces around the world are using data on past crimes to predict the likelihood of crimes in the future. These predictions can be made more accurate by combining crime data with local demographic data about the local population. However, this data is time consuming and expensive to collect and so only updated rarely. Now a team of data experts have shown how combing crime data with data collected from mobile phones can make the prediction of future crimes even more accurate. The team used an anonymised dataset of O2 mobile phone users in the London metropolitan area during December 2012 and January 2013. They then used a small portion of the data to train a machine learning algorithm to find correlations between this and local crime statistics in the same period. Finally, they used the trained algorithm to predict future crime rates in the same areas. Without the mobile phone data, the predictions have an accuracy of 62 per cent. But the phone data increases this accuracy significantly to almost 70 per cent. What's more, the data is cheap to collect and can be gathered in more or less real time. Whether the general population would want their data used in this way is less clear but either way Minority Report-style policing is looking less far-fetched than when the film appeared in 2002.
More phones in an area = more people. More people = more crime.
"Don't belong. Never join. Think for yourself. Peace." V.Stone, Microsoft Corporation
Crime reduction is certainly a worthy reward, but as the article says, lots of people might not be too happy with having their information shared this way.
Especially considering that said "information sharing" leads to a mere 8% increase in accuracy.
Let's hope it is truly anonymous (which I doubt) and see how it goes.
Let's assume that it's not, and see how it's used nefariously. That's not cynicism, that's realism.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
The "machine learning algorithm" is a euphemism for three hairless teenagers floating in pools of milk.
Watch out for the spiders.
I'm sorry, but your opinion seems to be wrong.
62% to 70% isn't exactly groundbreaking for something that varies greatly. This increase looks suspiciously like selecting results for passing a statistical test instead of using a statistical test to verify the significance of a given result. Relevant xkcd: Significant.
Also, there is no such thing as anonymised phone data.
This just in: If you track the location of criminal's cell phones you can predict areas at higher risk for crime.
Expounding on your statistics point as I agree that there is no significant increase in accuracy, notice the key phrase in the article.
The team used an anonymised dataset of O2 mobile phone users in the London metropolitan area during December 2012 and January 2013. They then used a small portion of the data to train a machine learning algorithm to find correlations between this and local crime statistics in the same period.
In other words, they took everything they gathered and pulled a subset that matched criteria that would back the claim that they could detect future crimes.
Computers can surely show what law enforcement already knows. E.G. That area is a known crime area. Computers don't make tea leaf reading possible, which is the claim that both Governments and Tech companies peddling software claim. Even worse, this type of technology does absolutely nothing to address the problems that actually cause most criminal activities. It exacerbates those problems because the economy this generates does not transfer down to desperate and impoverished people.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Yes, it is. Your "privacy" is not worth a human life. And no, you don't get to have any say in the matter.
Sayeth the Anonymous Coward.
Why not include your name, address, and contact info on every post? after all, your "privacy" is not worth the chance that you might someday take a human life, right jackass?
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Speaking of accuracy, it went from 62% to 70%. While indeed that is eight percentage points, it's a nearly 13% improvement.
News to me considering the founders of the United States fought a war partially over this. Ever hear of the Bill of Rights?
This is not like Minority Report at all. It predicts which locations at which times have a higher probability of a crime committing. It does not predict the particular crime, transgressor, or victim. It won't actually stop any crime from happening. The best it can do is allow a police force to more intelligently deploy their forces. They will be more able to rapidly respond to crimes after they happen, since statistically, they will more often have officers already dispatched to the nearby crime area.
"Love heals scars love left." -- Henry Rollins
As far as the 8% being insignificant, if the 8% is cheap to gain then I view that as significant.
As for public data being collectively aggregated without permission - that's another story.
Hell, they should be handing out cell phones for free they use your data for so much nowadays.
I refuse to sign