Jennifer J. Xu
Abstract
Knowledge about the structure and organization of criminal networks is important for both crime investigation and the development of effective strategies to prevent crimes. However, except for network visualization, criminal network analysis remains primarily a manual process. Existing tools do not provide advanced structural analysis techniques that allow extraction of network knowledge from large volumes of criminal-justice data. To help law enforcement and intelligence agencies discover criminal network knowledge efficiently and effectively, in this research we proposed a framework for automated network analysis and visualization. The framework included four stages: network creation, network partition, structural analysis, and network visualization. Based upon it, we have developed a system called CrimeNet Explorer that incorporates several advanced techniques: a concept space approach, hierarchical clustering, social network analysis methods, and multidimensional scaling. Results from controlled experiments involving student subjects demonstrated that our system could achieve higher clustering recall and precision than did untrained subjects when detecting subgroups from criminal networks. Moreover, subjects identified central members and interaction patterns between groups significantly faster with the help of structural analysis functionality than with only visualization functionality. No significant gain in effectiveness was present, however. Our domain experts also reported that they believed CrimeNet Explorer could be very useful in crime investigation.
- Aldenderfer, M. S. and Blashfield R. K. 1984. Cluster Analysis. Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, CA.Google Scholar
- Anderson, T., Arbetter, L., Benawides, A., and Longmore-Etheridge, A. 1994. Security works. Sec. Manage. 38, 17--20.Google Scholar
- Arabie, P., Boorman, S. A., and Levitt, P. R. 1978. Constructing blockmodels: How and why. J. Math. Psych. 17, 21--63.Google Scholar
- Baker, W. E. and Faulkner R. R. 1993. The social organization of conspiracy: Illegal networks in the heavy electrical equipment industry. Amer. Soc. Rev. 58, 837--860.Google Scholar
- Berkowitz, S. D. 1982. An Introduction to Structural Analysis: The Network Approach to Social Research. Butterworth, Toronto, Ont., Canada.Google Scholar
- Breiger, R. L. 2004. The analysis of social networks. In Handbook of Data Analysis, M. A. Hardy and A. Bryman, Eds. Sage Publications, London, U.K. 505--526.Google Scholar
- Breiger, R. L., Boorman, S. A., and Arabie, P. 1975. An algorithm for clustering relational data, with applications to social network analysis and comparison with multidimensional scaling. J. Math. Psych. 12, 328--383.Google Scholar
- Burt, R. S. 1976. Positions in networks. Soc. Forces 55, 93--122.Google Scholar
- Burt, R. S. 1980. Models of network structure. Ann. Rev. Soc. 6, 79--141.Google Scholar
- Chen, H. and Lynch, K. J. 1992. Automatic construction of networks of concepts characterizing document databases. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybernet. 22, 885--902.Google Scholar
- Chen, H., Zeng, D., Atabakhsh, H., Wyzga, W., and Schroeder, J. 2003. Coplink: Managing law enforcement data and knowledge. Commun. ACM 46, 28--34. Google Scholar
- Cook, J. S. and Cook, L. L. 2003. Social, ethical and legal issues of data mining. In Data Mining: Opportunities and Challenges, J. Wang, Ed. Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, PA, 395--420. Google Scholar
- Dantzig, G. 1960. On the shortest route through a network. Manage. Sci. 6, 187--190.Google Scholar
- Davidson, R. and Harel, D. 1996. Drawing graphs nicely using simulated annealing. ACM Trans. Graph. 15, 301--331. Google Scholar
- Day, W. H. E. and Edelsbrunner, H. 1984. Efficient algorithms for agglomerative hierarchical clustering methods. J. Class. 1, 7--24.Google Scholar
- Defays, D. 1977. An efficient algorithm for a complete link method. Comput. J. 20, 364--366.Google Scholar
- Dijkstra, E. 1959. A note on two problems in connection with graphs. Numer. Math. 1, 269--271.Google Scholar
- Evan, W. M. 1972. An organization-set model of interorganizational relations. In Interorganizational Decision-Making, M. Tuite, R. Chisholm, and M. Radnor, Eds. Aldine Publishers, Chicago, IL, 181--200.Google Scholar
- Floyd, R. W. 1962. Algorithm 97: Shortest path. Commun. ACM 5, 345--370. Google Scholar
- Freeman, L. 1979. Centrality in social networks: Conceptual clarification. Soc. Netw. 1, 215--239.Google Scholar
- Freeman, L. 2000. Visualizing social networks. J. Soc. Struct. 1. (Electronic journal; go to http://www.heinz.cmu.edu/project/INSNA/joss/index1.html.)Google Scholar
- Galaskiewicz, J. and Krohn, K. 1984. Positions, roles, and dependencies in a community interorganization system. Sociolog. Quart. 25, 527--550.Google Scholar
- Garton, L., Haythornthwaite, C., and Wellman, B. 1999. Studying online social networks. In Doing Internet Research, S. Jones, Ed. Sage Publications, London, UK, 75--105.Google Scholar
- Gibson, D., Kleinberg, J. M., and Ragha-Van, P. 1998. Inferring Web communities from link topology. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia (Pittsburgh, PA, June), R. Akscyn, Ed. ACM Press, New York, NY, 225--234. Google Scholar
- Goldberg, H. G. and Senator, T. E. 1998. Restructuring databases for knowledge discovery by consolidation and link formation. In Proceedings of 1998 AAAI Fall Symposium on Artificial Intelligence and Link Analysis (Orlando, FL, Oct.). AAAI Press, Menlo Park, CA.Google Scholar
- Harper, W. R. and Harris, D. H. 1975. The application of link analysis to police intelligence. Hum. Fact. 17, 157--164.Google Scholar
- Hauck, R. V., Atabakhsh, H., Ongvasith, P., Gupta, H., and Chen, H. 2002. Using Coplink to analyze criminal-justice data. IEEE Comput. 35, 30--37. Google Scholar
- Jain, A. K. and Dubes, R. C. 1998. Algorithms for Clustering Data. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. Google Scholar
- Jain, A. K., Murty, M. N., and Flynn, P. J. 1999. Data clustering: A review. ACM Comput. Surv. 31, 264--323. Google Scholar
- Johnson, S. C. 1967. Hierarchical clustering schemes. Psychometrika 32, 241--254.Google Scholar
- Jordan, P. W. 1998. An Introduction to Usability, Taylor and Francis, Bristol, PA.Google Scholar
- King, B. 1967. Step-wise clustering procedures. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 62, 86--101.Google Scholar
- Kleinberg, J. M. 1999. Authoritative sources in a hyperlinked environment. J. Assoc. Comput. Mach. 46, 604--632. Google Scholar
- Klerks, P. 2001. The network paradigm applied to criminal organizations: Theoretical nitpicking or a relevant doctrine for investigators? Recent developments in the Netherlands. Connections 24, 53--65.Google Scholar
- Krebs, V. E. 2001. Mapping networks of terrorist cells. Connections 24, 43--52.Google Scholar
- Kruskal, J. B. 1964. Nonmetric multidimensional scaling: A numerical method. Psychometrika 29, 115--128.Google Scholar
- Kruskal, J. B. and Wish, M. 1978. Multidimensional Scaling. Sage, Beverly Hills, CA.Google Scholar
- Lance, G. N. and Williams, W. T. 1967. A general theory of classificatory sorting strategies: II. Clustering systems. Comput. J. 10, 271--277.Google Scholar
- Lorrain, F. P. and White, H. C. 1971. Structural equivalence of individuals in social networks. J. Math. Soc. 1, 49--80.Google Scholar
- McAndrew, D. 1999. The structural analysis of criminal networks. In The Social Psychology of Crime: Groups, Teams, and Networks. D. Canter and L. Alison, Eds. Dartmouth Publishing, Aldershot, UK, 53--94.Google Scholar
- Murtagh, F. 1984. A survey of recent advances in hierarchical clustering algorithms which use cluster centers. Comput. J. 26, 354--359.Google Scholar
- Press, W. H., Teukolsky, S. A., Vetterling, W. T., and Flannery, B. P. 1992. Numerical Recipes in C, 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. Google Scholar
- Ronfeldt, D. and Arquilla, J. 2001. What next for networks and netwars? In Networks and Netwars: The Future of Terror, Crime, and Militancy, J. Arquilla and D. Ronfeldt, Eds. Rand Press, Santa Monica, CA, 311--361.Google Scholar
- Roussinov, D. G. and Chen, H. 1999. Document clustering for electronic meetings: An experimental comparison of two techniques. Decis. Supp. Syst. 27, 67--79. Google Scholar
- Saether, M. and Canter, D. V. 2001. A structural analysis of fraud and armed robbery networks in Norway. In Proceedings of the 6th International Investigative Psychology Conference (Liverpool, UK, Jan.).Google Scholar
- Sahami, M., Yusufali, S., and Baldonado, Q. W. 1998. SONIA: A service for organizing networked information autonomously. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM International Conference on Digital Libraries (Pittsburgh, PA, June). Google Scholar
- Scott, J. 1991. Social Network Analysis. Sage Publications, London, UK.Google Scholar
- Sibson, R. 1973. Slink: An optimally efficient algorithm for the single-line cluster method. Comput. J. 16, 30--45.Google Scholar
- Sneath, P. H. A. 1957. The application of computers to taxonomy. J. Gen. Microbiol. 17, 201--226.Google Scholar
- Sparrow, M. K. 1991. The application of network analysis to criminal intelligence: An assessment of the prospects. Soc. Netw. 13, 251--274.Google Scholar
- Torgerson, W. S. 1952. Multidimensional scaling: Theory and method. Psychometrika 17, 401--419.Google Scholar
- Voorhees, E. M. 1986. Implementing agglomerative hierarchical clustering algorithms for use in document retrieval. Inform. Process. Manage. 22, 465--476. Google Scholar
- Ward Jr., J. H. 1963. Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective function. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 58, 236--244.Google Scholar
- Wasserman, S. and Faust, K. 1994. Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
- Wellman, B. 1988. Structural analysis: From method and metaphor to theory and substance. In Social structures: A network approach, B. Wellman and S. D. Berkowitz, Eds. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 19--61.Google Scholar
- White, H. C., Boorman, S. A., and Breiger, R. L. 1976. Social structure from multiple networks: I. Blockmodels of roles and positions. Amer. J. Soc. 81, 730--780.Google Scholar
- Young, F. W. 1987. Multidimensional Scaling: History, Theory, and Applications. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- CrimeNet explorer: a framework for criminal network knowledge discovery
Recommendations
Fighting organized crimes: using shortest-path algorithms to identify associations in criminal networks
Effective and efficient link analysis techniques are needed to help law enforcement and intelligence agencies fight organized crimes such as narcotics violation, terrorism, and kidnapping. In this paper, we propose a link analysis technique that uses ...
Mining Criminal Networks from Chat Log
WI-IAT '12: Proceedings of the The 2012 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Joint Conferences on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology - Volume 01Cyber criminals exploit opportunities for anonymity and masquerade in web-based communication to conduct illegal activities such as phishing, spamming, cyber predation, cyber threatening, blackmail, and drug trafficking. One way to fight cyber crime is ...
Visualization in law enforcement
CHI EA '05: CHI '05 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing SystemsVisualization techniques have proven to be critical in helping crime analysis. By interviewing and observing Criminal Intelligence Officers (CIO) and civilian crime analysts at the Tucson Police Department (TPD), we found that two types of tasks are ...
Comments