ReviewFrontiers in artificial intelligence2026
Rethinking criminal profiling through cognitive artificial intelligence.
Review in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Introduction: Traditional criminal investigation often struggles to integrate dispersed and heterogeneous information, delaying the identification of serial or escalating patterns. Advances in artificial intelligence (AI) and cognitive computing offer data-driven approaches for cross-source correlation and temporal anomaly detection. Methods: A focused narrative review of peer-reviewed literature on AI applications in forensic analysis, pattern detection, and investigative support was conducted using major multidisciplinary databases. Selected studies were synthesized into two analytical dimensions: evidence correlation and anomaly detection, and further examined through a retrospective case-based illustration. Results: AI-based approaches support the linkage of low-level traces with higher-level events, enabling structured reconstruction and large-scale pattern identification. Machine learning models integrate heterogeneous data into operational representations, achieving high predictive performance under controlled conditions, often reported above 90% accuracy. Statistical and learning-based methods also detect temporal compression, behavioral drift, and cross-source anomalies, revealing patterns that may remain fragmented under manual analysis. Retrospective examination of historically fragmented cases highlights longitudinal regularities, including shrinking inter-event intervals, increasing severity, and the accumulation of weak signals that become meaningful when analyzed jointly. Discussion: AI contributes primarily at a methodological level by enabling continuous integration and re-evaluation of investigative signals, supporting more data-informed and longitudinally grounded profiling practices. However, a gap persists between high performance in controlled settings and limited validation in real-world contexts. Future research should prioritize empirical benchmarking using operational datasets, the development of explainable and auditable systems, and governance frameworks ensuring transparent, accountable, and human-supervised deployment.
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.