predictivepolicing

38
The Los Angeles Predictive Policing Experiment Charlie Beck, Chief of Police Los Angeles Police Department

Upload: socialmediadna

Post on 24-May-2015

459 views

Category:

Technology


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Politiechef Charli Beck uit LA

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: PredictivePolicing

The Los Angeles Predictive Policing Experiment

Charlie Beck, Chief of Police Los Angeles Police Department

Page 2: PredictivePolicing

2

Page 3: PredictivePolicing

3

Page 4: PredictivePolicing

4

Page 5: PredictivePolicing

5

Predictive Policing Time Horizon Frequency of Statistical Review

2000 2005

2010

1995

1990 Monthly

Annually

Near

Real Time Real Time

Forecasting

Page 6: PredictivePolicing

6

“A place-based approach to crime analysis that utilizes

algorithm-driven crime forecasts to inform decision making

to prevent crime”

• Not individual-based

• Not arrest-based

• Risk-based Deployment of patrol resources

• Builds on community policing

• Builds on Hot Spots

• Offers more specificity

• Sets us up for better long term strategic analysis

Predictive Policing, Our Definition

Page 7: PredictivePolicing

7

How is this different? • Evidence-based rather than heuristic

• Forecasting versus Retrospective Compstat Look

• Reduces tendency to “chase the dots”

• Offers more specificity in time and space

• Should eliminate biases (arrests are not used)

• Leverages existing real-time data

• Not a massive multivariate model

• Uses Date, Time, Place and Type of crime

• Allows cops to problem solve in right place at right time

• Dosage findings should increase efficiency

Page 8: PredictivePolicing

8

The Los Angeles Predictive Policing Experiment

Questions to be answered…

Page 9: PredictivePolicing

9

Is it possible to predict crime?

If we predict it, can we prevent it?

If we prevent it,

how can we measure that?

Questions to be answered…

Page 10: PredictivePolicing

10

Jeff Brantingham

UCLA Anthropology

George Mohler

Santa Clara Mathematics

George Tita

UCI Criminology, Law and Society

Page 11: PredictivePolicing

11

Repeat Victimization

0

0.001

0.002

0.003

0.004

0.005

0.006

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

pro

ba

bil

ity

p(τ

)

days between repeat crimes (τ)

repeat crime is much more likely to happen in a short interval of time after the first event

Page 12: PredictivePolicing

12

Research Design: The LAPD Experiment

• Rigorous examination of both forecasting value and of dosage

• Careful design of experiment is crucial to determine if Predictive Policing “works”

• Several designs possible, but only one – randomization – represents the “gold standard” of scientific design

Page 13: PredictivePolicing

13

Daily Randomization • Foothill Division serves as both the treatment and

control area (seamless to the subjects)

• On random treatment days, the “daily mission” is determined by the Predictive Policing model; otherwise, mission is determined using existing methodology

• Experiment will run for a minimum of 6 months and evaluate whether total crimes lower on days when Predictive Policing model used

Page 14: PredictivePolicing

14

Page 15: PredictivePolicing

15

Foothill Patrol Area

Page 16: PredictivePolicing

16

Forecasting Tool Interface v 1.0

Page 17: PredictivePolicing

17

Daily Forecast Map

Page 18: PredictivePolicing

18

Carl St between Borden & Chivers Ave RD 1613

Pierce St and Borden Ave RD1613

Close-up View of Mission “Boxes”

Page 19: PredictivePolicing
Page 20: PredictivePolicing

20

• October 19, 2011: Training on production of forecasts and methodology begins

• November 6, 2011: Three month randomized study begins

• March 2012: Evaluation results

Continued iterative process to test both the algorithm as well

as the dosage and interventions.

The Timeline

Page 21: PredictivePolicing

21

Initial Observations… • Bottomline:

• How accurate are the forecasts?

• Versus random and versus state of the art

• How effective in crime fighting

• Crime numbers time series

• Dosage discussion

• Weekend vs. weekday finding

• Ease of use improvements

• 4 times per day by watch

• Roll out plans

Page 22: PredictivePolicing

22

Preliminary results

• soft numbers pending completion of statistical study

• focusing on weekdays only

• accuracy of PredPol algorithm vs. best-practice

• PredPol vs. independent control group: 10.6% vs. 9.8%

• PredPol applied to control group: 11.4% vs. 9.8%

• PredPol is 8-16% more accurate compared to best practice

Page 23: PredictivePolicing

23 Predictive Policing is promising in historical data analysis

Page 24: PredictivePolicing

24

66

60 65 67

40 43

40

51

37 42

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

week 1 week 2 week 3 week 4 week 5

Crime Numbers (Burg, BFMV & GTA)

Test Period Weeks 1 thru 5 - 2010 v. 2011

2010 avg.= 60

2011 avg.= 50

Test Period 2010 avg.= 60 Test Period 2011 avg.= 42

2010

20

11

Page 25: PredictivePolicing

25

Get Creative…

Securing Buy-In from Patrol

Page 26: PredictivePolicing

26

Patrol Activity (addressing forecasted mission areas)

Test Period Weeks 1 thru 5

Avg Hours in the Box per Week = 35 hrs

18 27

72

18

42 40 47

96

51

120

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

1 2 3 4 5

Avg Checks per Week = 71 checks

Occupy LA

= Hours “in the Box” per Week

= Checks per Week

Page 27: PredictivePolicing

28

New Version of Software… • Weekend vs. weekday finding

• Ease of use improvements

• 4 times per day by watch

• Roll out plans

Page 28: PredictivePolicing

29

Page 29: PredictivePolicing

30

Page 30: PredictivePolicing

31

Page 31: PredictivePolicing

The Los Angeles Predictive Policing Experiment

Charlie Beck, Chief of Police Los Angeles Police Department

Page 32: PredictivePolicing

33

Additional Slides if Needed

Page 33: PredictivePolicing

34

Foothill “dosage” evidence: Number of Unique Boxes Patrolled

mean

1SD

1SD

Page 34: PredictivePolicing

35

mean

1SD

1SD

Page 35: PredictivePolicing

36

mean

1SD

1SD

Page 36: PredictivePolicing

41

Santa Cruz • Very basic crime analysis prior to Predictive Policing

• Updated daily, the prediction maps identify “boxes” to be patrolled “when free”

• Promising results, but limited ability to do careful evaluation

• is this because Santa Cruz is now doing crime analysis where before they were not?

• no controlled comparisons

Page 37: PredictivePolicing

42

Page 38: PredictivePolicing

43