ArticleComputational urban science2025
Comparing XAI techniques for interpreting short-term burglary predictions at micro-places.
Article in Computational urban science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparing Machine Learning-Based Crime Predictions Across Micro-Geographic Units: Street Segments, Rectangular Grids, and Hexagonal Grids.Applied spatial analysis and policy · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study empirically compares multiple eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) techniques to interpret short-term (weekly) machine learning-based burglary predictions at the micro-place level in Ghent, Belgium. While previous research predominantly relies on SHAP to interpret spatiotemporal crime predictions, this is the first study to systematically evaluate SHAP alongside other XAI techniques, offering both global and local model interpretability within the context of crime prediction. Using data from 2014 to 2018 on residential burglary, repeat and near-repeat victimization, environmental features, socio-demographic indicators, and seasonal effects, we trained an XGBoost model with 76 features to predict weekly burglary hot spots. This model serves as a basis for comparing the interpretative power of different XAI techniques. Our results show that built environment and land use characteristics are the most consistent global predictors of burglary risk. However, their influence varies substantially at the local level, revealing the importance of spatial context. While global feature importance rankings are broadly aligned across XAI techniques, local explanations, especially between SHAP and LIME, often diverge. These discrepancies highlight the need for careful method selection when translating predictions into crime prevention strategies. In addition, this study demonstrates that short-term burglary risks are influenced by complex interactions and threshold effects between environmental and social disorganization features. We interpret these findings through the lens of criminological theory, and argue for more integrated approaches that go beyond examining the isolated effects of specific crime predictors. Finally, we call for greater attention to the methodological implications that arise from applying different interpretability techniques, particularly when machine learning model outputs are used to inform crime prevention and policy decisions. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43762-025-00185-x.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.