Our goal is to determine the structural differences between different categories of networks and to use these differences to predict the network category. Existing work on this topic has looked at social networks such as Facebook, Twitter, co-author networks etc. We, instead, focus on a novel data set that we have assembled from a variety of sources, including law-enforcement agencies, financial institutions, commercial database providers and other similar organizations. The data set comprises networks of "persons of interest" with each network belonging to different categories such as suspected terrorists, convicted individuals etc. We demonstrate that such "anti-social" networks are qualitatively different from the usual social networks and that new techniques are required to identify and learn features of such networks for the purposes of prediction and classification. We propose Cliqster, a new generative Bernoulli process-based model for unweighted networks. The generating probabilities are the result of a decomposition which reflects a network's community structure. Using a maximum likelihood solution for the network inference leads to a least-squares problem. By solving this problem, we are able to present an efficient algorithm for transforming the network to a new space which is both concise and discriminative. This new space preserves the identity of the network as much as possible. Our algorithm is interpretable and intuitive. Finally, by comparing our research against the baseline method (SVD) and against a state-of-the-art Graphlet algorithm, we show the strength of our algorithm in discriminating between different categories of networks.
Significant attention has been given to to the approach of studying criminal activity through an analysis of social networks @cite_36 , @cite_30 , and @cite_26 . @cite_36 discovered that two-thirds of criminals commit crimes alongside another person. @cite_30 demonstrated that charting social interactions can facilitate an understanding of criminal activity. @cite_26 investigated the importance of weak ties to interpret criminal activity.
@cite_36 @cite_26 @cite_30
2151486346 121858502 2163898372 1977186326
The aim of this paper is to investigate whether weak ties play an important role in explaining criminal activities. We first develop a model where individuals learn about crime opportunities by interacting with other peers. These interactions can take the form of either strong or weak ties. We find that increasing the percentage of weak ties induces more transitions from non-crime to crime and thus the crime rate in the economy increases. This is because, when the percentage of weak ties is high, delinquents and non-delinquents are in close contact with each other. We then test these predictions using the U.S. National Longitudinal Survey of Adolescent Health (AddHealth), which contains unique detailed informations on friendship relationships among teenagers. The theoretical predictions of our model are confirmed by the empirical analysis since we find that weak ties, as measured by friends of friends, have a positive impact on criminal activities. It is undoubtedly cliche to say that we are in the Age of Big Data Analytics or Data Science; every computing and IT publication you find talks about Big Data and companies no longer are interested in software engineers and analysts but instead they are looking for Data Scientists! In spite of the excessive use of the term, the truth of the matter is that data has never been more available and the increase in computation power allows for more sophisticated tools to identify patterns in the data and on the networks that governs these systems (complex networks). Crime is not different, the open data phenomena has spread to thousand of cities in the world, which are making data about crime activity available for any citizen to look at. Furthermore, new criminology studies argue that criminals typically commit crimes in areas in which they are familiar, usually close to home. Using this information we propose a new model based on networks to build links between crimes in close physical proximity. We show that the structure of the criminal activity can be partially represented by this spatial network of sites. In this paper we describe this process and the analysis of the networks we have constructed to find patterns in the underlying structure of criminal activity. In this paper, we perform an empirical analysis of the cyber criminal ecosystem on Twitter. Essentially, through analyzing inner social relationships in the criminal account community, we find that criminal accounts tend to be socially connected, forming a small-world network. We also find that criminal hubs, sitting in the center of the social graph, are more inclined to follow criminal accounts. Through analyzing outer social relationships between criminal accounts and their social friends outside the criminal account community, we reveal three categories of accounts that have close friendships with criminal accounts. Through these analyses, we provide a novel and effective criminal account inference algorithm by exploiting criminal accounts' social relationships and semantic coordinations. Sociologists since Simmel have been interested in social circles as essential features of friendship networks. Although network analysis has been increasingly used to uncover patterns among social relationships, theoretical explanations of these patterns have been inadequate. This paper presents a theory of the social organization of friendship ties. The approach is based upon Homans's concepts of activities, interactions, and sentiments and upon the concept of extra-network foci organizing social activities and interaction. The theory is contrasted with Heider's balance theory. Implications for transitivity, network bridges, and density of personal networks are discussed and presented as propositions. The focus theory is shown to help explain patterns of friendships in the 1965-66 Detroit Area Study. This paper is intended as a step toward the development of integrated theory to explain interrelationships between networks and other aspects of social structure. Implications for data analysis are discussed. Sociologists have long recognized the importance of patterns in networks of relations that connect individuals with each other. Simmel (1955) described modern society as consisting of loosely connected social circles of relationships. Granovetter (1973) has indicated the general significance of these social circles for communication, community organization, and social conflict. Various studies have supported this picture of the essential patterns in social networks, including Moreno's sociometry (1953), Milgram's "small world" experiments (1967), and Kadushin's observations (1966). Unfortunately, the study of social networks has often been carried out without concern for the origins in the larger social context. Most network analysis ends with description and labeling of patterns; and when explanations of patterns are offered, they frequently rely upon inherent tendencies within networks to become consistent, balanced, or transitive. As a consequence of such atheoretical and or self-contained network theoretical approaches, data are collected and data analysis techniques are devised for