Tarefa crb_papers.q014

Veredito

Pergunta feita ao analista

Did cities that adopted CompStat in 1994 experience a change in the share of total arrests that were minor (Part II) offenses from 1993 to 1995 relative to cities that had not yet adopted (1996+)?

Valores esperados e de onde vêm

Verificações

Caminho de referência e caminho do agente

A chamada de referência ao lado da chamada que deu a resposta, argumento por argumento.

Trajetória

Cada evento na ordem em que aconteceu: turnos do modelo, chamadas de ferramentas, guardas, transformações e pontuação.

1. 0Início

   Did cities that adopted CompStat in 1994 experience a change in the share of total arrests that were minor (Part II) offenses from 1993 to 1995 relative to cities that had not yet adopted (1996+)?

   ds_0008 (agent)

   | Variable Name | Description | | --- | --- | | SHAREPT2 | Proportion (0–1) of a department’s total arrests in a given calendar year that fall under Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Part II offense categories. Part II includes drug abuse violations, simple assault, fraud/forgery, stolen property, vandalism, weapons violations, prostitution, disorderly conduct, and other non‑index offenses. Computed as Part II arrests divided by all arrests reported for that year. | | HASCOMPSTAT | Binary indicator (0/1) that the police department operated a CompStat‑style performance/metrics management system in that year. “CompStat‑style” covers systems that regularly compile incident/arrest statistics, visualize patterns, and use management meetings for accountability once implemented and in subsequent years. | | AGENCY | Text identifier for the municipal police department/jurisdiction (e.g., “PHOENIX”). Serves as the unit index across years and corresponds to the primary city police agency reporting to the UCR program. | | YEAR | Calendar year of observation, aligning with UCR annual reporting (1990–2013). | | PART2arrests | Annual count of arrests recorded for UCR Part II offenses by the department. Includes adult and juvenile arrests as submitted to the UCR program. Integer count. | | POP | Resident population of the city for that year, based on UCR population figures (census-based estimates used by UCR for rate calculations). | Dataset Context: This file is a municipal police department–by–year panel for large U.S. cities covering 1990–2013. It merges administrative statistics from the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program with hand-collected information on whether and when departments used CompStat‑style metrics management. UCR provides standardized definitions, monthly submissions from local agencies, and annual tabulations of arrests and population. Part II arrests span a wide set of non‑index offenses—such as drug violations, simple assault, property and public‑order offenses—that are often more discretionary than index (Part I) crimes. The population series comes from UCR’s census‑based annual estimates and is commonly used to construct per‑capita measures. CompStat‑style systems began spreading among U.S. police departments in the mid‑1990s alongside advances in data systems and the broader rise of performance management in public administration. These systems typically feature frequent data reviews, mapping and trend visualization, and management meetings focused on recent activity. Adoption timing in this dataset was compiled from public sources such as department websites, press releases, and news archives, and is coded as “on” starting in the first documented year of operation. Each row represents a department-year and includes: the department identifier, the year, the count of arrests for UCR Part II offenses, the share of all arrests that are Part II, whether a CompStat‑style system was in use, and the city’s population. Because arrests are administrative measures of police activity and recording practices, they are not the same as offenses known to police or victimization; nonetheless, UCR’s standardized categories enable comparisons across cities and over time. The panel captures a period of substantial organizational change in U.S. municipal policing, during which many large departments modernized data systems and management processes while continuously reporting arrest totals to the UCR program.

   file 44d92e04bfa13eb2ab33b50c943cce8cda89582240c42d68917d74656dd90212 · frame —

   ref_adopt (reference)

   file 44d92e04bfa13eb2ab33b50c943cce8cda89582240c42d68917d74656dd90212 · frame —

   1. select {"columns":["SHAREPT2","HASCOMPSTAT","AGENCY","YEAR"]}
   2. dropna {"columns":["YEAR","HASCOMPSTAT","SHAREPT2","AGENCY"]}
   3. filter {"query":"HASCOMPSTAT == 1"}
   4. collapse {"aggs":[{"column":"YEAR","fn":"min","name":"adopt"}],"by":["AGENCY"]}

   ref_panel (reference)

   file 44d92e04bfa13eb2ab33b50c943cce8cda89582240c42d68917d74656dd90212 · frame —

   1. select {"columns":["SHAREPT2","HASCOMPSTAT","AGENCY","YEAR"]}
   2. dropna {"columns":["YEAR","HASCOMPSTAT","SHAREPT2","AGENCY"]}
   3. filter {"query":"YEAR in [1993, 1995]"}
   4. merge {"how":"inner","on":["AGENCY"],"with":"ref_adopt"}
   5. merge {"how":"left","on":["AGENCY"],"with":"ref_years"}
   6. filter {"query":"(adopt == 1994 or adopt >= 1996) and nyears == 2"}
   7. derive {"args":{"cmp":"eq","column":"YEAR","value":1995},"name":"Post","op":"indicator"}
   8. derive {"args":{"cmp":"eq","column":"adopt","value":1994},"name":"Treat","op":"indicator"}
   9. derive {"args":{"columns":["Treat","Post"]},"name":"Treat_Post","op":"interaction"}

   ref_years (reference)

   file 44d92e04bfa13eb2ab33b50c943cce8cda89582240c42d68917d74656dd90212 · frame —

   1. select {"columns":["SHAREPT2","HASCOMPSTAT","AGENCY","YEAR"]}
   2. dropna {"columns":["YEAR","HASCOMPSTAT","SHAREPT2","AGENCY"]}
   3. filter {"query":"YEAR in [1993, 1995]"}
   4. collapse {"aggs":[{"column":"SHAREPT2","fn":"count","name":"n"}],"by":["AGENCY","YEAR"]}
   5. collapse {"aggs":[{"column":"n","fn":"count","name":"nyears"}],"by":["AGENCY"]}
2. 1Turno do modelo
   call_b57e53derules-1Fim: tool_use0 ms0 de entrada · 0 de saída · 0 de raciocínio · 0 em cache

   Chamadas pedidas

   • submit_answer (meta-ferramenta)

     {
       "answer": "Pelas regras deste roteador não identifiquei um desenho que responda à pergunta; nenhuma estimativa foi feita.",
       "caveats": [],
       "figure_refs": []
     }

   Mensagens (formato neutro)Instruções do sistemaFerramentas oferecidas
3. 2Guarda
   resposta aceita

   Números encontrados

   —

   Sem lastro

   —

   Não citados

   —

   1 nova(s) tentativa(s) restante(s)
4. 3Resposta

   Pelas regras deste roteador não identifiquei um desenho que responda à pergunta; nenhuma estimativa foi feita.

   Figuras citadas: — · Parada: answered
5. 4Pontuação
   #0resposta com lastropassouobrigatóriaevery number backed
6. 5Pontuação
   #1figura da resposta próximafalhouobrigatóriano answer figure: the answer cites no effect of an estimator call
7. 6Pontuação
   #2figura da resposta próximafalhouregistradano answer figure: the answer cites no effect of an estimator call
8. 7Pontuação
   #3figura da resposta próximafalhouregistradano answer figure: the answer cites no effect of an estimator call

Épocas × verificações

Tentativas

Cada tentativa é seu próprio arquivo e é publicada; só a última de cada época é pontuada.

• época 1, tentativa 1falhoupontuada(exibindo)

Downloads desta tarefa