IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jorssa/v180y2017i3p689-722.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Interpretable classification models for recidivism prediction

Author

Listed:
  • Jiaming Zeng
  • Berk Ustun
  • Cynthia Rudin

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Jiaming Zeng & Berk Ustun & Cynthia Rudin, 2017. "Interpretable classification models for recidivism prediction," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 180(3), pages 689-722, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:180:y:2017:i:3:p:689-722
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/rssa.12227
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard Berk & Lawrence Sherman & Geoffrey Barnes & Ellen Kurtz & Lindsay Ahlman, 2009. "Forecasting murder within a population of probationers and parolees: a high stakes application of statistical learning," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 172(1), pages 191-211, January.
    2. N. Tollenaar & P. G. M. van der Heijden, 2013. "Which method predicts recidivism best?: a comparison of statistical, machine learning and data mining predictive models," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 176(2), pages 565-584, February.
    3. Hoffman, Peter B., 1994. "Twenty years of operational use of a risk prediction instrument: The United States parole commission's salient factor score," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 22(6), pages 477-494.
    4. Friedman, Jerome H., 2002. "Stochastic gradient boosting," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 367-378, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Xiaochen Hu & Xudong Zhang & Nicholas Lovrich, 2021. "Public perceptions of police behavior during traffic stops: logistic regression and machine learning approaches compared," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 355-380, May.
    2. Kristian Lum & David B. Dunson & James Johndrow, 2022. "Closer than they appear: A Bayesian perspective on individual‐level heterogeneity in risk assessment," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 185(2), pages 588-614, April.
    3. Beau Coker & Cynthia Rudin & Gary King, 2021. "A Theory of Statistical Inference for Ensuring the Robustness of Scientific Results," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(10), pages 6174-6197, October.
    4. Cynthia Rudin & Berk Ustun, 2018. "Optimized Scoring Systems: Toward Trust in Machine Learning for Healthcare and Criminal Justice," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 48(5), pages 449-466, October.
    5. Toru Kitagawa & Shosei Sakaguchi & Aleksey Tetenov, 2021. "Constrained Classification and Policy Learning," Papers 2106.12886, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2023.
    6. Dragos Florin Ciocan & Velibor V. Mišić, 2022. "Interpretable Optimal Stopping," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(3), pages 1616-1638, March.
    7. Jon Kleinberg & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2019. "Simplicity Creates Inequity: Implications for Fairness, Stereotypes, and Interpretability," NBER Working Papers 25854, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Emilio Carrizosa & Cristina Molero-Río & Dolores Romero Morales, 2021. "Mathematical optimization in classification and regression trees," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 29(1), pages 5-33, April.
    9. Margrét Vilborg Bjarnadóttir & David B. Anderson & Ritu Agarwal & D. Alan Nelson, 2022. "Aiding the prescriber: developing a machine learning approach to personalized risk modeling for chronic opioid therapy amongst US Army soldiers," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 25(4), pages 649-665, December.
    10. Kai Feng & Han Hong & Ke Tang & Jingyuan Wang, 2023. "Statistical Tests for Replacing Human Decision Makers with Algorithms," Papers 2306.11689, arXiv.org.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Guido Vittorio Travaini & Federico Pacchioni & Silvia Bellumore & Marta Bosia & Francesco De Micco, 2022. "Machine Learning and Criminal Justice: A Systematic Review of Advanced Methodology for Recidivism Risk Prediction," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-13, August.
    2. Kigerl, Alex & Hamilton, Zachary & Kowalski, Melissa & Mei, Xiaohan, 2022. "The great methods bake-off: Comparing performance of machine learning algorithms," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    3. Cynthia Rudin & Berk Ustun, 2018. "Optimized Scoring Systems: Toward Trust in Machine Learning for Healthcare and Criminal Justice," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 48(5), pages 449-466, October.
    4. Mansoor, Umer & Jamal, Arshad & Su, Junbiao & Sze, N.N. & Chen, Anthony, 2023. "Investigating the risk factors of motorcycle crash injury severity in Pakistan: Insights and policy recommendations," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 21-38.
    5. Bissan Ghaddar & Ignacio Gómez-Casares & Julio González-Díaz & Brais González-Rodríguez & Beatriz Pateiro-López & Sofía Rodríguez-Ballesteros, 2023. "Learning for Spatial Branching: An Algorithm Selection Approach," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 35(5), pages 1024-1043, September.
    6. Akash Malhotra, 2018. "A hybrid econometric-machine learning approach for relative importance analysis: Prioritizing food policy," Papers 1806.04517, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2020.
    7. Nahushananda Chakravarthy H G & Karthik M Seenappa & Sujay Raghavendra Naganna & Dayananda Pruthviraja, 2023. "Machine Learning Models for the Prediction of the Compressive Strength of Self-Compacting Concrete Incorporating Incinerated Bio-Medical Waste Ash," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-22, September.
    8. Tim Voigt & Martin Kohlhase & Oliver Nelles, 2021. "Incremental DoE and Modeling Methodology with Gaussian Process Regression: An Industrially Applicable Approach to Incorporate Expert Knowledge," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(19), pages 1-26, October.
    9. Wen, Shaoting & Buyukada, Musa & Evrendilek, Fatih & Liu, Jingyong, 2020. "Uncertainty and sensitivity analyses of co-combustion/pyrolysis of textile dyeing sludge and incense sticks: Regression and machine-learning models," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 463-474.
    10. Zhu, Haibin & Bai, Lu & He, Lidan & Liu, Zhi, 2023. "Forecasting realized volatility with machine learning: Panel data perspective," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 251-271.
    11. Spiliotis, Evangelos & Makridakis, Spyros & Kaltsounis, Anastasios & Assimakopoulos, Vassilios, 2021. "Product sales probabilistic forecasting: An empirical evaluation using the M5 competition data," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    12. Zhang, Ning & Li, Zhiying & Zou, Xun & Quiring, Steven M., 2019. "Comparison of three short-term load forecast models in Southern California," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    13. Smyl, Slawek & Hua, N. Grace, 2019. "Machine learning methods for GEFCom2017 probabilistic load forecasting," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 1424-1431.
    14. Barzin,Samira & Avner,Paolo & Maruyama Rentschler,Jun Erik & O’Clery,Neave, 2022. "Where Are All the Jobs ? A Machine Learning Approach for High Resolution Urban Employment Prediction inDeveloping Countries," Policy Research Working Paper Series 9979, The World Bank.
    15. Eike Emrich & Christian Pierdzioch, 2016. "Volunteering, Match Quality, and Internet Use," Schmollers Jahrbuch : Journal of Applied Social Science Studies / Zeitschrift für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin, vol. 136(2), pages 199-226.
    16. Kusiak, Andrew & Zheng, Haiyang & Song, Zhe, 2009. "On-line monitoring of power curves," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 1487-1493.
    17. Zhu, Siying & Zhu, Feng, 2019. "Cycling comfort evaluation with instrumented probe bicycle," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 217-231.
    18. Catherine Ikae & Jacques Savoy, 2022. "Gender identification on Twitter," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(1), pages 58-69, January.
    19. Martijn Kagie & Michiel Van Wezel, 2007. "Hedonic price models and indices based on boosting applied to the Dutch housing market," Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(3‐4), pages 85-106, July.
    20. Matthias Bogaert & Michel Ballings & Dirk Van den Poel, 2018. "Evaluating the importance of different communication types in romantic tie prediction on social media," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 263(1), pages 501-527, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:180:y:2017:i:3:p:689-722. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rssssea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.