long swings in homicide

Post on 30-Dec-2015

41 Views

Category:

Documents

2 Downloads

Preview:

Click to see full reader

DESCRIPTION

Long Swings in Homicide. 1. 1. 1. Outline. Evidence of Long Swings in Homicide Evidence of Long Swings in Other Disciplines Long Swing Cycle Concepts: Kondratieff Waves More about ecological cycles Models. 2. 2. 2. Part I. Evidence of Long Swings in Homicide. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

111

Long Swings in Homicide

1

222

Outline

Evidence of Long Swings in Homicide

Evidence of Long Swings in Other Disciplines

Long Swing Cycle Concepts: Kondratieff Waves

More about ecological cycles

Models

2

333

Part I. Evidence of Long Swings in Homicide

US Bureau of Justice Statistics

Report to the Nation On Crime and Justice, second edition

California Department of Justice, Homicide in California

3

444

Bureau of Justice Statistics, BJS“Homicide Trends in the United States, 1980-2008”, 11-16-2011

“Homicide Trends in the United States”, 7-1-2007

4

555

Bureau of Justice Statistics

Peak to Peak: 50 years

5

666

Report to the Nation ….p.15

6

7

888

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000

HOMICIDECA HOMICIDEUSA

California

USA

Homicide and Non-negligent Manslaaaughter, Rates Per 100,000

999

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 00 05

HOMICIDE

California Homicide rate per 100,000: 1952-2007

1980

9

101010

Executions in the US 1930-2007

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs

Peak to Peak: About 65 years

10

111111

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

60 70 80 90 00 10 20 30 40

CAPRISONERS

California Prisoners: 1851-1945

121212

Part Two: Evidence of Long Swings In Other Disciplines

Engineering50 year cycles in transportation technology

50 year cycles in energy technology

Economic DemographySimon Kuznets, “Long Swings in the Growth of Population and Related Economic Variables”

Richard Easterlin, Population, labor Force, and Long Swings in Economic Growth

EcologyHudson Bay Company

131313

Cesare Marchetti

13

141414

Erie Canal

151515

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

-10 -5 0 5

RAILMILES

FR

EQ

UE

NC

Y

Mean

constructed

90%10%

1859

1890

1921

15

161616

Cesare Marchetti: Energy Technology: Coal, Oil, Gas,

Nuclear52 years 57 years 56 years

16

171717

181818

191919

Richard Easterlin

20 year swings

2020

Canadian Lynx and Snowshoe Hare, data from the Hudson Bay Company, nearly a century of annual data, 1845-1935

The Lotka-Volterra Model (Sarah Jenson and Stacy Randolph, Berkeley ppt., Slides 4-9)

Cycles in Nature

20

212121

2222

What Causes These Cycles in Nature?

At least two kinds of cyclesHarmonics or sin and cosine waves

Deterministic but chaotic cycles

22

232323

Part Three: Thinking About Long Waves In Economics

Kondratieff Wave

23

242424

Nikolai Kondratieff (1892-1938)Brought to attention in Joseph Schumpeter’s BusinessCycles (1939)

24

252525

2008-2014:Hard Winter

25

26262626

272727

Cesare Marchetti“Fifty-Year Pulsation In

Human Affairs”Futures 17(3):376-388

(1986)www.cesaremarchetti.org/arc

hive/scan/MARCHETTI-069.pdf Example: the construction of railroad miles is

logistically distributed

27

282828

Cesare Marchetti

28

292929

Theodore Modis

Figure 4. The data points represent the percentage deviation of energy consumption in the US from the natural growth-trend indicated by a fitted S-

curve. The gray band is an 8% interval around a sine wave with period 56 years. The black dots and black triangles show what happened after the graph was first

put together in 1988.[7] Presently we are entering a “spring” season. WWI occurred in late “summer” whereas WWII in late “winter”.29

3030

Part Four: More About Ecological Cycles

30

3131

Well Documented Cycles

31

3232

Similar Data from North Canada

32

333333

Weather: “The Butterfly Effect”

3434

The Predator-Prey Relationship

Predator-prey relationships have always occupied a special place in ecology

Ideal topic for systems dynamics

Examine interaction between deer and predators on Kaibab Plateau

Learn about possible behavior of predator and prey populations if predators had not been removed in the early 1900s

3535

NetLogo Predator-Prey Model

363636

Crime Generation

Crime Control

OffenseRate PerCapita

ExpectedCost ofPunishment

Schematic of the Criminal Justice System: Simultaneity

Causes ?

(detention,Deterrence, Rehabilitation,And revenge)

Expenditures

Weak Link

OF = f(CR, SV, CY, SE, MC)OF = f(CR, SV, CY, SE, MC)

CR = g(OF, L)CR = g(OF, L)

37Source: Report to the Nation on Crime and Justice

Expect

Get

3737

3838

Questions? How to Model?

3939

Part Five: The Lotka-Volterra Model

Built on economic conceptsExponential population growth

Exponential decay

Adds in the interaction effect

We can estimate the model parameters using regression

We can use simulation to study cyclical behavior

4040

Lotka-Volterra ModelLotka-Volterra Model

Vito Volterra Vito Volterra

(1860-1940)(1860-1940)

famous Italian famous Italian mathematicianmathematician

Retired from pure Retired from pure mathematics in 1920mathematics in 1920

Son-in-law: D’AnconaSon-in-law: D’Ancona

Alfred J. Lotka Alfred J. Lotka

(1880-1949)(1880-1949)

American mathematical American mathematical biologistbiologist

primary example: plant primary example: plant population/herbivorous population/herbivorous animal dependent on that animal dependent on that plant for foodplant for food

41414141

Predator-Prey1926: Vito Volterra, model of prey fish and predator fish in

the Adriatic during WWI

1925: Alfred Lotka, model of chemical Rx. Where chemical

concentrations oscillate

41

42424242

Applications of Predator-Prey

Resource-consumer

Plant-herbivore

Parasite-host

Tumor cells or virus-immune system

Susceptible-infectious interactions

42

43434343

Non-Linear Differential Equations

dx/dt = x(α – βy), where x is the # of some prey (Hare)

dy/dt = -y(γ – δx), where y is the # of some predator (Lynx)

α, β, γ, and δ are parameters describing the interaction of the two species

d/dt ln x = (dx/dt)/x =(α – βy), without predator, y, exponential growth at rate α

d/dt ln y = (dy/dt)/y = - (γ – δx), without prey, x, exponential decay like an isotope at rate

43

4444

California Population 1960-2007

0

5,000,000

10,000,000

15,000,000

20,000,000

25,000,000

30,000,000

35,000,000

40,000,000

1960

......

......

....

1962

......

......

....

1964

......

......

....

1966

......

......

....

1968

......

......

....

1970

......

......

....

1972

......

......

....

1974

......

......

....

1976

......

......

....

1978

......

......

....

1980

......

......

....

1982

......

......

....

1984

......

......

....

1986

......

......

....

1988

......

......

....

1990

......

......

....

1992

......

......

....

1994

......

......

....

1996

......

......

....

1998

......

......

....

2000

......

......

....

2002

......

......

....

2004

......

......

....

2006

……

……

..

Year

Po

pu

lati

on

Population Growth: P(t) = P(0)eat

4545

lnP(t) = lnP(1960) + at

16.4

16.6

16.8

17.0

17.2

17.4

17.6

60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 00 05 10 15

LNCAPOP

LnP(t) = ln[P(1960)e(at)] = lnP(0) + at

year

lnP(t)

4646

CA Population: exponential rate of growth, 1995-2007

is 1.4%Natural Logarithm of California Population Vs Time, 1995-2007

y = 0.0141x + 17.269

R2 = 0.9967

17.26

17.28

17.3

17.32

17.34

17.36

17.38

17.4

17.42

17.44

17.46

17.48

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Time

lnP

9t0

4747

Prey (Hare Equation)Hare(t) = Hare(t=0) ea*t , where a is the exponential growth rate

Ln Hare(t) = ln Hare(t=0) + a*t, where a is slope of ln Hare(t) vs. t

∆ ln hare(t) = a, where a is the fractional rate of growth of hares

So ∆ ln hare(t) = ∆ hare(t)/hare(t-1)=[hare(t) – hare(t-1)]/hare(t-1)

Add in interaction effect of predators; ∆ ln Hare(t) = a – b*Lynx

So the lynx eating the hares keep the hares from growing so fast

To estimate parameters a and b, regress ∆ hare(t)/hare(t-1) against Lynx

4848

Hudson Bay Co. Data: Snowshoe Hare & Canadian

Lynx, 1845-1935

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

1850 1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930

HARE LYNX

HudsonBay Company Data: Snowshoe Hare & Canadian Lynx, 1845-1935

4949

[Hare(1865)-Hare(1863)]/Hare(1864)

Vs. Lynx (1864) etc. 1863-1934{Hare(t+1)-Hare(t-1)]/Hare(t) Vs. Lynx(t), 1863-1934

y = -0.0249x + 0.7677R2 = 0.2142

-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

4

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Lynx

∆ hare(t)/hare(t-1) = 0.77 – 0.025 Lynx

a = 0.77, b = 0.025 (a = 0.63, b = 0.022)

5050

[Lynx(1847)-Lynx(1845)]/Hare(1846)

Vs. Lynx (1846) etc. 1846-1906[Lynx(t+1) - Lynx(t-1)]/Lynx(t) Vs. Hare(t) 1846-1906

y = 0.005x - 0.2412R2 = 0.1341

-1.5

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

Hare

∆ Lynx(t)/Lynx(t-1) = -0.24 + 0.005 Hare

c = 0.24, d= 0.005 ( c = 0.27,d = 0.006)

5151

Simulations: 1845-1935

Mathematica http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Lotka-VolterraEquations.html

Predator-prey equations

Predator-prey model

5252

5353

5454

Simulating the Model: 1900-1920

Mathematica a = 0.5, b = 0.02

c = 0.03, d= 0.9

5555

5656

5757

Part Six: A Lotka-Volterra Model For Homicide?

Do other violent crimes move with homicide?

58

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

90 00 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 00 10

CAHOMICIDEPER100K

20

30

40

50

60

90 00 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 00 10

CARAPEPER100K

59

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

2.75 3.00 3.25 3.50 3.75 4.00 4.25 4.50 4.75 5.00 5.25

Series: RATIORAPETOHOMICIDESample 1890 2012Observations 45

Mean 4.135116Median 4.203704Maximum 5.132353Minimum 2.868217Std. Dev. 0.509489Skewness -0.700057Kurtosis 3.363175

Jarque-Bera 3.922901Probability 0.140654

Distribution of Ratio of Rape to Homicide; Median

= 4.2

602.8

3.2

3.6

4.0

4.4

4.8

5.2

90 00 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 00 10

RATIORAPETOHOMICIDE

Ratio of Rapes to Homicides

61

100

200

300

400

500

90 00 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 00 10

CAROBBERYPER100K

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

90 00 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 00 10

CAHOMICIDEPER100K

6262

Part Six: A Lotka-Volterra Model For Homicide?

Do other violent crimes move with homicide?

We have a measure of the rabbits: homicides. How about a measure for the foxes (coyotes)?

63

0

40,000

80,000

120,000

160,000

200,000

60 70 80 90 00 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 00 10

CAPRISONERS

California Prisoners 1851-2009

64

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

60 70 80 90 00 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 00 10

LNCAPRISONERS

1919 1943

1976

Natural Logarithm of California Prisoners, 1851-2009

65

-0.4

0.0

0.4

0.8

1.2

1.6

2.0

2.4

60 70 80 90 00 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 00 10

DLNCAPRISONERS

Fractional Change in California Prisoners 1852-2009

66

Fractional Change in California Prisoners 1860-2009

Trough to trough 16 years, a half a cycle

67

Fractional Change in California Prisoners 1930-2009

Trough to trough 18 years, a half a cycle

68

0

100

200

300

400

500

90 00 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 00 10

PRISONPER100K

California Prisoners per 100,000 Population

69

70

71

top related