skip to main content
10.1145/3170427.3174364acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Technology-assisted Investigative Search: A Case Study from an Illicit Domain

Authors Info & Claims
Published:20 April 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

For many, search engines like Google and Bing offer excellent facilities for satisfying information needs. However, a class of needs not currently addressed by generic search engines is investigative search, which has massive potential for using adaptive technology for social good. In this case study, we describe the challenges of investigative search in the online sex trafficking domain, along with the insights gained from user feedback in using a real-world investigative search system developed in our group.

References

  1. Marilyn Jager Adams, Yvette J Tenney, and Richard W Pew. 1995. Situation awareness and the cognitive management of complex systems. Human factors 37, 1 (1995), 85--104.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Charu C Aggarwal and ChengXiang Zhai. 2012. Mining text data. Springer Science & Business Media. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Chia-Hui Chang, Mohammed Kayed, Moheb R Girgis, and Khaled F Shaalan. 2006. A survey of web information extraction systems. IEEE transactions on knowledge and data engineering 18, 10 (2006), 1411--1428. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Surajit Chaudhuri, Umeshwar Dayal, and Vivek Narasayya. 2011. An overview of business intelligence technology. Commun. ACM 54, 8 (2011), 88--98. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Hsinchun Chen, Roger HL Chiang, and Veda C Storey. 2012. Business intelligence and analytics: From big data to big impact. MIS quarterly 36, 4 (2012). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Scott M Diamond and Marion G Ceruti. 2007. Application of wireless sensor network to military information integration. In Industrial Informatics, 2007 5th IEEE International Conference on, Vol. 1. IEEE, 317--322.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. DIG. Domain-specific Insight Graphs (DIG). http://usc-isi-i2.github.io/dig/. (2017). Accessed: 2017--10--10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. ELI5. Explain it Like I'm 5. https://pypi.python.org/pypi/eli5. (2017). Accessed: 2017--10--10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Mica R Endsley. 2016. Designing for situation awareness: An approach to user-centered design. CRC press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Qunying Huang and Yu Xiao. 2015. Geographic situational awareness: mining tweets for disaster preparedness, emergency response, impact, and recovery. ISPRS International Journal of GeoInformation 4, 3 (2015), 1549--1568.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Kyle Hundman, Thamme Gowda, Mayank Kejriwal, and Benedikt Boecking. 2017. Always Lurking: Understanding and Mitigating Bias in Online Human Trafficking Detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:1712.00846.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Rahul Kapoor, Mayank Kejriwal and Pedro Szekely. 2017. Using contexts and constraints for improved geotagging of human trafficking webpages. Proceedings of the Fourth International ACM Workshop on Managing and Mining Enriched GeoSpatial Data (p. 3). ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Mayank Kejriwal and Pedro Szekely. 2017. Information extraction in illicit web domains. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on World Wide Web. International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee, 997--1006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Mayank Kejriwal and Pedro Szekely. 2017. Knowledge graphs for social good: an entity-centric search engine for the human trafficking domain. IEEE Transactions on Big Data.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Shamanth Kumar, Geoffrey Barbier, Mohammad Ali Abbasi, and Huan Liu. 2011. TweetTracker: An Analysis Tool for Humanitarian and Disaster Relief. In ICWSM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. MEMEX. DARPA MEMEX. https://www.darpa.mil/program/memex. (2017). Accessed: 2017--10--10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Palantir. Palantir. https://www.palantir.com/. (2017). Accessed: 2017--10--10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Pedro Szekely, Craig A Knoblock, Jason Slepicka, Andrew Philpot, Amandeep Singh, Chengye Yin, Dipsy Kapoor, Prem Natarajan, Daniel Marcu, Kevin Knight, and others. 2015. Building and using a knowledge graph to combat human trafficking. In International Semantic Web Conference. Springer, 205--221.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. AI and Society. AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics and Society. http://www.aies-conference.com/. (2017). Accessed: 2017--10--10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Technology-assisted Investigative Search: A Case Study from an Illicit Domain

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CHI EA '18: Extended Abstracts of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      April 2018
      3155 pages
      ISBN:9781450356213
      DOI:10.1145/3170427

      Copyright © 2018 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 20 April 2018

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      CHI EA '18 Paper Acceptance Rate1,208of3,955submissions,31%Overall Acceptance Rate6,164of23,696submissions,26%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader