You are provided with the abstract of a scientific paper and the abstracts of the papers it references. Your task is to write a Related Work section for the main paper. This section should concisely summarize and integrate the key points from the cited abstracts, reflecting how they relate to the main paper's contributions and context. In your summary, use numerical citation markers like [1], [2], etc., to refer to the corresponding papers.

Main Abstract:
The Atlanta Fire Rescue Department (AFRD), like many municipal fire departments, actively works to reduce fire risk by inspecting commercial properties for potential hazards and fire code violations. However, AFRD's fire inspection practices relied on tradition and intuition, with no existing data-driven process for prioritizing fire inspections or identifying new properties requiring inspection. In collaboration with AFRD, we developed the Firebird framework to help municipal fire departments identify and prioritize commercial property fire inspections, using machine learning, geocoding, and information visualization. Firebird computes fire risk scores for over 5,000 buildings in the city, with true positive rates of up to 71 in predicting fires. It has identified 6,096 new potential commercial properties to inspect, based on AFRD's criteria for inspection. Furthermore, through an interactive map, Firebird integrates and visualizes fire incidents, property information and risk scores to help AFRD make informed decisions about fire inspections. Firebird has already begun to make positive impact at both local and national levels. It is improving AFRD's inspection processes and Atlanta residents' safety, and was highlighted by National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) as a best practice for using data to inform fire inspections.

Cited Abstract(s):
[1]: Many school districts have developed successful intervention programs to help students graduate high school on time. However, identifying and prioritizing students who need those interventions the most remains challenging. This paper describes a machine learning framework to identify such students, discusses features that are useful for this task, applies several classification algorithms, and evaluates them using metrics important to school administrators. To help test this framework and make it practically useful, we partnered with two U.S. school districts with a combined enrollment of approximately 200,000 students. We together designed several evaluation metrics to assess the goodness of machine learning algorithms from an educator's perspective. This paper focuses on students at risk of not finishing high school on time, but our framework lays a strong foundation for future work on other adverse academic outcomes.

[2]: Classifying nodes in networks is a task with a wide range of applications. It can be particularly useful in anomaly and fraud detection. Many resources are invested in the task of fraud detection due to the high cost of fraud, and being able to automatically detect potential fraud quickly and precisely allows human investigators to work more efficiently. Many data analytic schemes have been put into use; however, schemes that bolster link analysis prove promising. This work builds upon the belief propagation algorithm for use in detecting collusion and other fraud schemes. We propose an algorithm called SNARE (Social Network Analysis for Risk Evaluation). By allowing one to use domain knowledge as well as link knowledge, the method was very successful for pinpointing misstated accounts in our sample of general ledger data, with a significant improvement over the default heuristic in true positive rates, and a lift factor of up to 6.5 (more than twice that of the default heuristic). We also apply SNARE to the task of graph labeling in general on publicly-available datasets. We show that with only some information about the nodes themselves in a network, we get surprisingly high accuracy of labels. Not only is SNARE applicable in a wide variety of domains, but it is also robust to the choice of parameters and highly scalable-linearly with the number of edges in a graph.

[3]: Context Predicting hospital readmission risk is of great interest to identify which patients would benefit most from care transition interventions, as well as to risk-adjust readmission rates for the purposes of hospital comparison. Objective To summarize validated readmission risk prediction models, describe their performance, and assess suitability for clinical or administrative use. Data Sources and Study Selection The databases of MEDLINE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception through March 2011, the EMBASE database was searched through August 2011, and hand searches were performed of the retrieved reference lists. Dual review was conducted to identify studies published in the English language of prediction models tested with medical patients in both derivation and validation cohorts. Data Extraction Data were extracted on the population, setting, sample size, follow-up interval, readmission rate, model discrimination and calibration, type of data used, and timing of data collection. Data Synthesis Of 7843 citations reviewed, 30 studies of 26 unique models met the inclusion criteria. The most common outcome used was 30-day readmission; only 1 model specifically addressed preventable readmissions. Fourteen models that relied on retrospective administrative data could be potentially used to risk-adjust readmission rates for hospital comparison; of these, 9 were tested in large US populations and had poor discriminative ability (c statistic range: 0.55-0.65). Seven models could potentially be used to identify high-risk patients for intervention early during a hospitalization (c statistic range: 0.56-0.72), and 5 could be used at hospital discharge (c statistic range: 0.68-0.83). Six studies compared different models in the same population and 2 of these found that functional and social variables improved model discrimination. Although most models incorporated variables for medical comorbidity and use of prior medical services, few examined variables associated with overall health and function, illness severity, or social determinants of health. Conclusions Most current readmission risk prediction models that were designed for either comparative or clinical purposes perform poorly. Although in certain settings such models may prove useful, efforts to improve their performance are needed as use becomes more widespread.
Risk prediction models have been widely used in many domains, including health care [3] , student performance evaluation [1] , and accounting fraud detection [2] . However, urban fire risk prediction has received relatively less attention, despite its obvious importance.