• Journal of Intelligence and Information Systems
• /
• v.24 no.1
• /
• pp.183-203
• /
• 2018

News articles are the most suitable medium for examining the events occurring at home and abroad. Especially, as the development of information and communication technology has brought various kinds of online news media, the news about the events occurring in society has increased greatly. So automatically summarizing key events from massive amounts of news data will help users to look at many of the events at a glance. In addition, if we build and provide an event network based on the relevance of events, it will be able to greatly help the reader in understanding the current events. In this study, we propose a method for extracting event networks from large news text data. To this end, we first collected Korean political and social articles from March 2016 to March 2017, and integrated the synonyms by leaving only meaningful words through preprocessing using NPMI and Word2Vec. Latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) topic modeling was used to calculate the subject distribution by date and to find the peak of the subject distribution and to detect the event. A total of 32 topics were extracted from the topic modeling, and the point of occurrence of the event was deduced by looking at the point at which each subject distribution surged. As a result, a total of 85 events were detected, but the final 16 events were filtered and presented using the Gaussian smoothing technique. We also calculated the relevance score between events detected to construct the event network. Using the cosine coefficient between the co-occurred events, we calculated the relevance between the events and connected the events to construct the event network. Finally, we set up the event network by setting each event to each vertex and the relevance score between events to the vertices connecting the vertices. The event network constructed in our methods helped us to sort out major events in the political and social fields in Korea that occurred in the last one year in chronological order and at the same time identify which events are related to certain events. Our approach differs from existing event detection methods in that LDA topic modeling makes it possible to easily analyze large amounts of data and to identify the relevance of events that were difficult to detect in existing event detection. We applied various text mining techniques and Word2vec technique in the text preprocessing to improve the accuracy of the extraction of proper nouns and synthetic nouns, which have been difficult in analyzing existing Korean texts, can be found. In this study, the detection and network configuration techniques of the event have the following advantages in practical application. First, LDA topic modeling, which is unsupervised learning, can easily analyze subject and topic words and distribution from huge amount of data. Also, by using the date information of the collected news articles, it is possible to express the distribution by topic in a time series. Second, we can find out the connection of events in the form of present and summarized form by calculating relevance score and constructing event network by using simultaneous occurrence of topics that are difficult to grasp in existing event detection. It can be seen from the fact that the inter-event relevance-based event network proposed in this study was actually constructed in order of occurrence time. It is also possible to identify what happened as a starting point for a series of events through the event network. The limitation of this study is that the characteristics of LDA topic modeling have different results according to the initial parameters and the number of subjects, and the subject and event name of the analysis result should be given by the subjective judgment of the researcher. Also, since each topic is assumed to be exclusive and independent, it does not take into account the relevance between themes. Subsequent studies need to calculate the relevance between events that are not covered in this study or those that belong to the same subject.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.24 no.1
• /
• pp.59-89
• /
• 2009

The objectives of the 1963 Tokyo Convention cover a variety of subjects, with the intention of providing safety in aircraft, protection of life and property on board, and promoting the security of civil aviation. These objectives will be treated as follows: first, the unification of rules on jurisdiction; second, the question of filling the gap in jurisdiction; third, the scheme of maintaining law and order on board aircraft; fourth, the protection of persons acting in accordance with the Convention; fifth, the protection of the interests of disembarked persons; sixth, the question of hijacking of aircraft; and finally some general remarks on the objectives of the Convention. The Tokyo Convention mainly deals with general crimes such as murder, violence, robbery on board aircraft rather than aviation terrorism. The Article 11 of the Convention deals with hijacking in a simple way. As far as aviation terrorism is concerned 1970 Hague Convention and 1971 Montreal Convention cover the hijacking and sabotage respectively. The Problem of national jurisdiction over the offence and the offender was as tangled at the Hague and Montreal Convention, as under the Tokyo Convention. Under the Tokyo Convention the prime base of jurisdiction is the law of the flag (Article 3), but concurrent jurisdiction is also allowed on grounds of: territorial principle, active nationality and passive personality principle, security of the state, breach of flight rules, and exercise of jurisdiction necessary for the performance of obligations under multilateral agreements (Article 4). No Criminal jurisdiction exercised in accordance with national law is excluded [Article 3(2)]. However, Article 4 of the Hague Convention(hereafter Hague Article 4) and Article 5 of the Montreal Convention(hereafter Montreal Article 5), dealing with jurisdiction have moved a step further, inasmuch as the opening part of both paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Hague Article 4 and the Montreal Article 5 impose an obligation on all contracting states to take measures to establish jurisdiction over the offence (i.e., to ensure that their law is such that their courts will have jurisdiction to try offender in all the circumstances covered by Hague Article 4 and Montreal Article 5). The state of registration and the state where the aircraft lands with the hijacker still on board will have the most interest, and would be in the best position to prosecute him; the paragraphs 1(a) and (b) of the Hague Article 4 and paragraphs 1(b) and (c) of the Montreal Article 5 deal with it, respectively. However, paragraph 1(b) of the Hague Article 4 and paragraph 1(c) of the Montreal Article 5 do not specify if the aircraft is still under the control of the hijacker or if the hijacker has been overpowered by the aircraft commander, or if the offence has at all occurred in the airspace of the state of landing. The language of the paragraph would probably cover all these cases. The weaknesses of Hague Article 4 and Montreal Article 5 are however, patent. The Jurisdictions of the state of registration, the state of landing, the state of the lessee and the state where the offender is present, are concurrent. No priorities have been fixed despite a proposal to this effect in the Legal Committee and the Diplomatic Conference, and despite the fact that it was pointed out that the difficulty in accepting the Tokyo Convention has been the question of multiple jurisdiction, for the reason that it would be too difficult to determine the priorities. Disputes over the exercise of jurisdiction can be endemic, more so when Article 8(4) of the Hague Convention and the Montreal Convention give every state mentioned in Hague Article 4(1) and Montreal Article 5(1) the right to seek extradition of the offender. A solution to the problem should not have been given up only because it was difficult. Hague Article 4(3) and Montreal Article 5(3) provide that they do not exclude any criminal jurisdiction exercised in accordance with national law. Thus the provisions of the two Conventions create additional obligations on the state, and do not exclude those already existing under national laws. Although the two Conventions do not require a state to establish jurisdiction over, for example, hijacking or sabotage committed by its own nationals in a foreign aircraft anywhere in the world, they do not preclude any contracting state from doing so. However, it has be noted that any jurisdiction established merely under the national law would not make the offence an extraditable one under Article 8 of the Hague and Montreal Convention. As far as international aviation terrorism is concerned 1988 Montreal Protocol and 1991 Convention on Marking of Plastic Explosives for the Purpose of Detention are added. The former deals with airport terrorism and the latter plastic explosives. Compared to the other International Terrorism Conventions, the International Aviation Terrorism Conventions do not have clauses of the passive personality principle. If the International Aviation Terrorism Conventions need to be revised in the future, those clauses containing the passive personality principle have to be inserted for the suppression of the international aviation terrorism more effectively. Article 3 of the 1973 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes Against Internationally Protected Persons, Including Diplomatic Agents, Article 5 of the 1979 International Convention against the Taking of Hostages and Article 6 of the 1988 Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Maritime Navigation would be models that the revised International Aviation Terrorism Conventions could follow in the future.