This survey paper offers a thorough analysis of techniques and algorithms used in the identification of crime leaders within criminal networks. For each technique, the paper examines its effectiveness, limitations, potential for improvement, and future prospects. The main challenge faced by existing survey papers focusing on algorithms for identifying crime leaders and predicting crimes is effectively categorizing these algorithms. To address this limitation, this paper proposes a new methodological taxonomy that hierarchically classifies algorithms into more detailed categories and specific techniques. The paper includes empirical and experimental evaluations to rank the different techniques. The combination of the methodological taxonomy, empirical evaluations, and experimental comparisons allows for a nuanced and comprehensive understanding of the techniques and algorithms for identifying crime leaders, assisting researchers in making informed decisions. Moreover, the paper offers valuable insights into the future prospects of techniques for identifying crime leaders, emphasizing potential advancements and opportunities for further research. Here's an overview of our empirical analysis findings and experimental insights, along with the solution we've devised: (1) PageRank and Eigenvector centrality are reliable for mapping network connections, (2) Katz Centrality can effectively identify influential criminals through indirect links, stressing their significance in criminal networks, (3) current models fail to account for the specific impacts of criminal influence levels, the importance of socioeconomic context, and the dynamic nature of criminal networks and hierarchies, and (4) we propose enhancements, such as incorporating temporal dynamics and sentiment analysis to reflect the fluidity of criminal activities and relationships, which could improve the detection of key criminal figures as their roles or tactics evolve.

This review article delves deeply into the various machine learning (ML) methods and algorithms employed in discerning protein functions. Each method discussed is assessed for its efficacy, limitations, potential improvements, and future prospects. We present an innovative hierarchical classification system that arranges algorithms into intricate categories and unique techniques. This taxonomy is based on a tri-level hierarchy, starting with the methodology category and narrowing down to specific techniques. Such a framework allows for a structured and comprehensive classification of algorithms, assisting researchers in understanding the interrelationships among diverse algorithms and techniques. The study incorporates both empirical and experimental evaluations to differentiate between the techniques. The empirical evaluation ranks the techniques based on four criteria. The experimental assessments rank: (1) individual techniques under the same methodology subcategory, (2) different sub-categories within a same category, and (3) the broad categories themselves. Integrating the innovative methodological classification, empirical findings, and experimental assessments, the article offers a well-rounded understanding of ML strategies in protein function identification. The paper also explores techniques for multi-task and multi-label detection of protein functions, in addition to focusing on single-task methods. Moreover, the paper sheds light on the future avenues of ML in protein function determination.