FREE counter and Web statistics from sitetracker.com
collision detection
content | discontent
send me yours
January 23, 2005
The real Numb3rs








We now officially live in the age of the forensic cop show -- where police rely not on brass knuckles to bring down perps, but on science. Ever since CSI swept prime time, networks have stumbled over each other to produce ever more procedural dramas where police scientists squint into microscopes and deliver mind-numbing lectures on the how the curl of human hair relates to the ovoid shape of its cross-section. Real-life cops and scientists have a love-hate relationship with these shows, because of two problems: a) The shows create an unrealistic sense of how accurate and easy-to-use these techniques are, and b) juries now expect to be treated to explanations as pat and simple as those in the shows, accompanied, bien sur, by lavish CGI animations.

Anyway, I was intrigued to hear about the premise of CBS's new procedural thriller (and 1337-speak titled) Numb3rs. According to the New York Times:

Charlie looks at a water sprinkler and has an Archimedes moment: he realizes that the same mathematical principle that allows him to track the path of drops to determine their point of origin could be applied to the distribution of crime scenes on a map. "Are you saying you can tell where the killer is?" Don says slowly and ponderously. His partner drills in the point, saying wonderingly, "If it works we have a whole new system of investigating criminal cases."

When I read this, a bell in my head went off -- because I realized this is "geographic profiling", a technique invented in 1990 by Vancouver police officer Kim Rossmo (pictured above). In the 80s, criminologists Paul and Patricia Brantingham had proved that serial criminals tend to stick close to home when they commit their crimes. Rossmo took this concept a step further, as a writeup on a criminologist web-site notes ...

Rossmo reasoned that if the serial criminal operates close to where he lives, it may be possible to approximate the location of his home by analyzing spatial patterns of the attacks. To test the theory, he wrote a program using proprietary algorithms and statistical analyses of serial crime data collected over several years. The program also incorporated a hunting typology of serial criminals based on the research. When later reviewing George B. Schaller's authoritative work, The Serengeti Lion, Rossmo found startling similarities in the hunting patterns of African lions and city-dwelling predators.

"Schaller's typology of how lions hunt matched almost perfectly with the hunting typology of the serial killer. Lions look for an animal that exhibits some indication of weakness -- the old, the very young, the infirm, the vulnerable. They will go to a watering hole and hang out because they know it is a draw for their potential targets. We see that all the time with criminal offenders; they go to target-rich environments to do their hunting. Spatial patterns are produced by serial killers as they search and attack. The system analyzes the geography of these, the victim encounter, the attack, the murder and body dumpsites."

Cool, eh? Which is why I was surprised to find that of the nearly two hundred stories written about the show in the last week, only one actually mentions Rossmo and his work -- and that was the New York Post quoting an observation in an online chat room.

Posted by Clive Thompson at January 23, 2005 02:37 PM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.collisiondetection.net/mt3/mt-tb.cgi/1091

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The real Numb3rs:

ยป Num3ers from FreshBlog
How come all these new shows are on CBS? Wouldn't you expect other networks to want NCIS or Num3ers as a challenge to CSI?... & wouldn't you expect CBS to want a couple of other non-forensic secretions dramas on their books? [Read More]

Tracked on January 24, 2005 6:42 PM

Comments

Here's another pattern that I think is pretty unpredictable. How come all these new shows are on CBS? Wouldn't you expect other networks to want NCIS or Num3ers as a challenge to CSI?... & wouldn't you expect CBS to want a couple of other non-forensic dramas on their books? Is every show on CBS going to involve DNA?

Posted by: jrfj44 at January 23, 2005 3:31 PM

Good question!

Posted by: Clive at January 23, 2005 4:37 PM

Clive, I'm surprised that you're surprised!

Perhaps the show's producers, in developing the new show, didn't purchase any one criminologist's life rights, or didn't hire Rossmo as a consultant, so his name wasn't in the press kit.

With so many cop shows on right now, every police procedural has to have a promotable special skill (this cop's blind! this cop's in the Army! these cops are high-tech crime scene scientists!)

this week, the cop's a MATH GENIUS.

gimmick! i suppose we should be grateful there are no shows about private investigators with talking cars...this year.

Posted by: J at January 24, 2005 11:47 PM

Dude, Knight Rider so rocked.

Posted by: Clive at January 25, 2005 11:29 AM

I recognized the show as a gimmick when I first saw the preview clips, but something about it caught my imagination, so I watched it anyway. and I enjoyed it! Of course, they treated math pretty much like they treat science in the CSI flavors--it looked a lot easier than it is. (Though how's this for a cover-your-asses excuse for how easy it was: he's a GENIUS. A GENIUS, I TELL YOU.)

I was kind of excited about how he got it wrong at first. It's rare that any formula (whether you're talking math or cooking) works out perfectly the first time.

And then he re-worked the formula to come up with two locations, but one was still the original location. This, of course, freaked me out, because I can't imagine that happening in real life. It's simple relativity: you can't ask the formula to find another possible location without expecting the first location to change.

And then (though I really did enjoy the show overall and I'll watch it again) it turns out that the first location was indeed correct, and the genius didn't get it wrong the first time. It was nice and catchy, but I was sad that the show lost the idea that it's okay to be wrong once in a while. Even if you're a GENIUS.

Posted by: jeremy at January 25, 2005 1:58 PM

I really gotta see the premier episode. Thanks for the recap!

Posted by: Clive at January 25, 2005 8:23 PM

My favourite of the New Criminalistics show is MEDIUM, where lovely Patricia Arquette rejiggers the scary modern day equilibrium of spirituality and science by solving horrifying crimes through the use of her psychic powers.

Posted by: Jonathan Hayes at January 27, 2005 8:12 AM

Jonathan, I'm with you. I think some of the ideas are pretty goofy, but I like how the show is written. And Arquette's character has a nice human-ness about her.

Posted by: jeremy at January 27, 2005 10:53 AM

Jonathan, I'm with you. I think some of the ideas are pretty goofy, but I like how the show is written. And Arquette's character has a nice human-ness about her.

Posted by: jeremy at January 27, 2005 10:53 AM

Posted by: http://www.online-poker-web.net at January 28, 2005 5:35 AM

2953 want to play online poker mate?

Posted by: online poker at January 29, 2005 5:43 AM

1516 want to play online poker mate?

Posted by: online poker at February 1, 2005 12:05 PM

3244 want to play online poker mate?

Posted by: online poker at February 2, 2005 3:35 AM

Posted by: payday loan at February 6, 2005 8:17 PM

Posted by: poker games at February 10, 2005 7:33 PM

Posted by: online poker at February 11, 2005 1:40 AM

Posted by: online poker at February 11, 2005 7:00 AM

Posted by: http://www.online-poker-e.com at February 11, 2005 7:32 PM

windmill windmill lighter holland windmill model windmill windmill festival windmill festival windmill blade windmill for sale tilting at windmill windmill part holland windmill break dance windmill holland windmill how to make a windmill how to make a windmill windmill for sale wooden windmill electric windmill windmill kit windmill blade

Posted by: windmill suite at March 12, 2005 11:42 AM

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

NOTE: If you posted a comment and you can't see it -- try refreshing your browser.


Remember me?