Predicting crime before it occurs
But against the backdrop of statewide calls for reform, Berk was already quietly working on a fix: an algorithm that could spit out a prediction of how likely it is that a would-be parolee will re-offend. Berk had begun building a similar algorithm for Philadelphia’s criminal-justice system in 2006, the year Philadelphia logged the highest murder rate among major cities. At the time, Philadelphia’s Adult Probation and Parole Department had 295 officers supervising nearly 50,000 individuals. The department asked Berk to predict which of the 50,000 would commit a serious crime within two years. “Our vision was that every single person, when they walked through the door, would be scored by a computer,” says Ellen Kurtz, the department’s director of research. The department would then use the score—low-, medium-, or high-risk—to decide how intensively to supervise released offenders. Officers assigned to low-risk individuals would handle up to 400 cases, and those monitoring high-risk offenders would have about 50.
Drawing from criminal databases dating to the 1960s, Berk initially modeled the Philadelphia algorithm on more than 100,000 old cases, relying on three dozen predictors, including the perpetrator’s age, gender, neighborhood, and number of prior crimes. To develop an algorithm that forecasts a particular outcome—someone committing murder, for example—Berk applied a subset of the data to “train” the computer on which qualities are associated with that outcome. “If I could use sun spots or shoe size or the size of the wristband on their wrist, I would,” Berk said. “If I give the algorithm enough predictors to get it started, it finds things that you wouldn’t anticipate.” Philadelphia’s parole officers were surprised to learn, for example, that the crime for which an offender was sentenced—whether it was murder or simple drug possession—does not predict whether he or she will commit a violent crime in the future. Far more predictive is the age at which he (yes, gender matters) committed his first crime, and the amount of time between other offenses and the latest one—the earlier the first crime and the more recent the last, the greater the chance for another offense.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Nah, pre-crime doesn’t work. Ask Tom Cruise.
Good Solid B-Plus on February 22, 2012 at 6:03 PM
Like the Troubalert the Superfriends had?
radjah shelduck on February 22, 2012 at 6:06 PM
Well Algore did so well predicting climate change, so of course algorithms predicting crime should work equally as well.
Flange on February 22, 2012 at 6:07 PM
Minority Report.
NeoKong on February 22, 2012 at 6:07 PM
JJ Abrams already built it. It works quite well on Person of Interest.
Hostile Gospel on February 22, 2012 at 6:09 PM
Yup. Underrated movie, IMO.
“You don’t have to chase me.”
“You don’t have to run.”
“Everybody runs, Fletch.”
Good Solid B-Plus on February 22, 2012 at 6:10 PM
Here’s a prediction: This will all be determined to be racist in the near future.
rw on February 22, 2012 at 6:13 PM
Nail + Head = SMACK!
abobo on February 22, 2012 at 6:14 PM
Of course it will, that’s why they called it Minority Report.
Flange on February 22, 2012 at 6:15 PM
I don’t think I’m confortable with tracking people just because they register to vote as Democrats.
malclave on February 22, 2012 at 6:16 PM
Of course, if the algorithm were to include race, that would be profiling and disallowed./
OldEnglish on February 22, 2012 at 6:16 PM
Sorry, rw, the wife interrupted me and I neglected to refresh – honest!
OldEnglish on February 22, 2012 at 6:20 PM
It really isn’t even that hard. Just head towards your nearest Occupy encampment.
CW on February 22, 2012 at 6:21 PM
An algorithm based on White House visitor logs?
JeremiahJohnson on February 22, 2012 at 6:25 PM
If SCOAMF is re-elected, he will steal trillions from us and destroy the country. Hey, that’s what the Magic 8-Ball sez.
Rixon on February 22, 2012 at 6:28 PM
it’s really not so very complicated. 70% of all american crime is committed by 6% of its (convicted) criminals. 90% of all prisoners re-offend after release. certain crimes have known high recidivism rates-such as sex crimes and burglary/robbery/larceny.look at someone’s arrest record- not just their convictions. it’s obvious who will most likely to re-offend.
criminals re-offend because they are never adequately punished if charged at all. our legal system is dysfunctional and heavily weighted toward the criminal whose rights always trump those of his victims and society at large.
a life sentence does not mean life. violent sex crimes are rarely prosecuted, incredibly violent rapes are often pled down as are not completed assaults even when weapons are involved. even with DNA, rape offenses in many states have incredibly short statue of limitation.
our court system is a mess and heavily pro-criminal. our department of justice is now in the hands of anti-victim, anti-police, anti-rule of law racialists with a social justice approach to allowing the most vicious of criminals to re-offend -because no one should ever be incarcerated. because after all in every crime no matter how violent the real victim is always the perpetrator especially if he is from the protected classes. the real criminal is always society which is always racist and oppressive and, of course, the police trying to protect the rest of us from murderers and rapists- because the police are always fascists who like framing black men best of all or something.
the real question is- why not re-offend, you’ll do no time, generate decades long costly appeals if you are convicted and most every really awful crime you commit will be pled down to a lesser offense.
and tina trent’s exceptional crime victims media report which addresses this subject has been disappeared…. i want to know why.
mittens on February 22, 2012 at 7:08 PM
It used to be they’d count the bumps on your head. Today it’s algorithms.
Nothing ever really changes.
JellyToast on February 22, 2012 at 7:41 PM