John Ioannidis and co-authors [1] created a publicly available database of top-cited scientists in the world. This database, intended to address the misuse of citation metrics, has generated a lot of interest among the scientific community, institutions, and media. Many institutions used this as a yardstick to assess the quality of researchers. At the same time, some people look at this list with skepticism citing problems with the methodology used. Two separate databases are created based on career-long and, single recent year impact. This database is created using Scopus data from Elsevier[1-3]. The Scientists included in this database are classified into 22 scientific fields and 174 sub-fields. The parameters considered for this analysis are total citations from 1996 to 2022 (nc9622), h index in 2022 (h22), c-score, and world rank based on c-score (Rank ns). Citations without self-cites are considered in all cases (indicated as ns). In the case of a single-year case, citations during 2022 (nc2222) instead of Nc9622 are considered.

To evaluate the robustness of c-score-based ranking, I have done a detailed analysis of the matrix parameters of the last 25 years (1998-2022) of Nobel laureates of Physics, chemistry, and medicine, and compared them with the top 100 rank holders in the list. The latest career-long and single-year-based databases (2022) were used for this analysis. The details of the analysis are presented below: Though the article says the selection is based on the top 100,000 scientists by c-score (with and without self-citations) or a percentile rank of 2% or above in the sub-field, the actual career-based ranking list has 204644 names[1]. The single-year database contains 210199 names. So, the list published contains ~ the top 4% of scientists. In the career-based rank list, for the person with the lowest rank of 4809825, the nc9622, h22, and c-score were 41, 3, and 1.3632, respectively. Whereas for the person with the No.1 rank in the list, the nc9622, h22, and c-score were 345061, 264, and 5.5927, respectively. Three people on the list had less than 100 citations during 96-2022, 1155 people had an h22 less than 10, and 6 people had a C-score less than 2.
In the single year-based rank list, for the person with the lowest rank (6547764), the nc2222, h22, and c-score were 1, 1, and 0. 6, respectively. Whereas for the person with the No.1 rank, the nc9622, h22, and c-score were 34582, 68, and 5.3368, respectively. 4463 people on the list had less than 100 citations in 2022, 71512 people had an h22 less than 10, and 313 people had a C-score less than 2. The entry of many authors having single digit H index and a very meager total number of citations indicates serious shortcomings of the c-score-based ranking methodology. These results indicate shortcomings in the ranking methodology.

This data layer produced by the National Center for Education Statistics’ (NCES) Education Demographic and Geographic Estimates (EDGE) program provides a geographic locale framework that classifies all U.S. territory into twelve categories ranging from Large Cities to Remote Rural areas. NCES uses this framework to describe the type of geographic area where schools and school districts are located. The criteria for these classifications are defined by NCES, but they rely on standard geographic areas developed and maintained by the U.S. Census Bureau. The 2014 NCES Locale boundaries are based on geographic areas represented in Census TIGER/Line 2014. The NCES EDGE program collaborates with the U.S. Census Bureau’s Education Demographic, Geographic, and Economic Statistics (EDGE) Branch to annually update the locale boundaries. For more information about the NCES locale framework, and to download the data, see: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/edge/Geographic/LocaleBoundaries. The classifications include:Large City (11): Territory inside an Urbanized Area and inside a Principal City with population of 250,000 or more.Midsize City (12): Territory inside an Urbanized Area and inside a Principal City with population less than 250,000 and greater than or equal to 100,000.Small City (13): Territory inside an Urbanized Area and inside a Principal City with population less than 100,000.Suburb – Large (21): Territory outside a Principal City and inside an Urbanized Area with population of 250,000 or more.Suburb - Midsize (22): Territory outside a Principal City and inside an Urbanized Area with population less than 250,000 and greater than or equal to 100,000.Suburb - Small (23): Territory outside a Principal City and inside an Urbanized Area with population less than 100,000.Town - Fringe (31): Territory inside an Urban Cluster that is less than or equal to 10 miles from an Urbanized Area.Town - Distant (32): Territory inside an Urban Cluster that is more than 10 miles and less than or equal to 35 miles from an Urbanized Area.Town - Remote (33): Territory inside an Urban Cluster that is more than 35 miles of an Urbanized Area.Rural - Fringe (41): Census-defined rural territory that is less than or equal to 5 miles from an Urbanized Area, as well as rural territory that is less than or equal to 2.5 miles from an Urban Cluster.Rural - Distant (42): Census-defined rural territory that is more than 5 miles but less than or equal to 25 miles from an Urbanized Area, as well as rural territory that is more than 2.5 miles but less than or equal to 10 miles from an Urban Cluster.Rural - Remote (43): Census-defined rural territory that is more than 25 miles from an Urbanized Area and is also more than 10 miles from an Urban Cluster.All information contained in this file is in the public _domain. Data users are advised to review NCES program documentation and feature class metadata to understand the limitations and appropriate use of these data.

Globally, about 25 percent of the population is under 15 years of age and 10 percent is over 65 years of age. Africa has the youngest population worldwide. In Sub-Saharan Africa, more than 40 percent of the population is below 15 years, and only three percent are above 65, indicating the low life expectancy in several of the countries. In Europe, on the other hand, a higher share of the population is above 65 years than the population under 15 years. Fertility rates The high share of children and youth in Africa is connected to the high fertility rates on the continent. For instance, South Sudan and Niger have the highest population growth rates globally. However, about 50 percent of the world’s population live in countries with low fertility, where women have less than 2.1 children. Some countries in Europe, like Latvia and Lithuania, have experienced a population decline of one percent, and in the Cook Islands, it is even above two percent. In Europe, the majority of the population was previously working-aged adults with few dependents, but this trend is expected to reverse soon, and it is predicted that by 2050, the older population will outnumber the young in many developed countries. Growing global population As of 2025, there are 8.1 billion people living on the planet, and this is expected to reach more than nine billion before 2040. Moreover, the global population is expected to reach 10 billions around 2060, before slowing and then even falling slightly by 2100. As the population growth rates indicate, a significant share of the population increase will happen in Africa.

Announcement Beginning October 20, 2022, CDC will report and publish aggregate case and death data from jurisdictional and state partners on a weekly basis rather than daily. As a result, community transmission levels data reported on data.cdc.gov will be updated weekly on Thursdays, typically by 8 PM ET, instead of daily. This public use dataset has 7 data elements reflecting historical data for community transmission levels for all available counties. This dataset contains historical data for the county level of community transmission and includes updated data submitted by states and jurisdictions. Each day, the dataset is appended to contain the most recent day's data. This dataset includes data from January 1, 2021. Transmission level is set to low, moderate, substantial, or high using the calculation rules below. Currently, CDC provides the public with two versions of COVID-19 county-level community transmission level data: this dataset with the levels for each county from January 1, 2021 (Historical Changes dataset) and a dataset with the levels as originally posted (Originally Posted dataset), updated daily with the most recent day’s data. Methods for calculating county level of community transmission indicator The County Level of Community Transmission indicator uses two metrics: (1) total new COVID-19 cases per 100,000 persons in the last 7 days and (2) percentage of positive SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT) in the last 7 days. For each of these metrics, CDC classifies transmission values as low, moderate, substantial, or high (below and here). If the values for each of these two metrics differ (e.g., one indicates moderate and the other low), then the higher of the two should be used for decision-making. CDC core metrics of and thresholds for community transmission levels of SARS-CoV-2 Total New Case Rate Metric: "New cases per 100,000 persons in the past 7 days" is calculated by adding the number of new cases in the county (or other administrative level) in the last 7 days divided by the population in the county (or other administrative level) and multiplying by 100,000. "New cases per 100,000 persons in the past 7 days" is considered to have transmission level of Low (0-9.99); Moderate (10.00-49.99); Substantial (50.00-99.99); and High (greater than or equal to 100.00). Test Percent Positivity Metric: "Percentage of positive NAAT in the past 7 days" is calculated by dividing the number of positive tests in the county (or other administrative level) during the last 7 days by the total number of tests resulted over the last 7 days. "Percentage of positive NAAT in the past 7 days" is considered to have transmission level of Low (less than 5.00); Moderate (5.00-7.99); Substantial (8.00-9.99); and High (greater than or equal to 10.00). If the two metrics suggest different transmission levels, the higher level is selected. If one metric is missing, the other metric is used for the indicator. Transmission categories include: Low Transmission Threshold: Counties with fewer than 10 total cases per 100,000 population in the past 7 days, and a NAAT percent test positivity in the past 7 days below 5%; Moderate Transmission Threshold: Counties with 10-49 total cases per 100,000 population in the past 7 days or a NAAT test percent positivity in the past 7 days of 5.0-7.99%; Substantial Transmission Threshold: Counties with 50-99 total cases per 100,000 population in the past 7 days or a NAAT test percent positivity in the past 7 days of 8.0-9.99%; High Transmission Threshold: Counties with 100

In 2023, **** percent of Black people living in the United States were living below the poverty line, compared to *** percent of white people. That year, the total poverty rate in the U.S. across all races and ethnicities was **** percent. Poverty in the United States Single people in the United States making less than ****** U.S. dollars a year and families of four making less than ****** U.S. dollars a year are considered to be below the poverty line. Women and children are more likely to suffer from poverty, due to women staying home more often than men to take care of children, and women suffering from the gender wage gap. Not only are women and children more likely to be affected, racial minorities are as well due to the discrimination they face. Poverty data Despite being one of the wealthiest nations in the world, the United States had the third highest poverty rate out of all OECD countries in 2019. However, the United States' poverty rate has been fluctuating since 1990, but has been decreasing since 2014. The average median household income in the U.S. has remained somewhat consistent since 1990, but has recently increased since 2014 until a slight decrease in 2020, potentially due to the pandemic. The state that had the highest number of people living below the poverty line in 2020 was California.

Use this application to identify locale classifications for public, private, and postsecondary schools.What are locales? Locales are general geographic indicators that reflect the type of community where a school is located. NCES creates and uses the indicators for a variety of statistical purposes, and some educational programs use them to identify schools in specific types of areas.The locale data layer used in the Locale Lookup was produced by the National Center for Education Statistics’ (NCES) Education Demographic and Geographic Estimates (EDGE) program. The data provides a geographic locale framework that classifies all U.S. territory into twelve categories ranging from Large Cities to Remote Rural areas. NCES uses this framework to describe the type of geographic area where schools and school districts are located. The criteria for these classifications are defined by NCES, but they rely on standard geographic areas developed and maintained by the U.S. Census Bureau. The 2016 NCES Locale boundaries are based on geographic areas represented in Census TIGER/Line 2016. The NCES Education Demographic and Geographic Estimate (EDGE) program collaborates with the U.S. Census Bureau’s Education Demographic, Geographic, and Economic Statistics (EDGE) Branch to annually update the locale boundaries. For more information about the NCES locale framework, see: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/edge/Geographic/LocaleBoundaries. The classifications include:Large City (11): Territory inside an Urbanized Area and inside a Principal City with population of 250,000 or more.Midsize City (12): Territory inside an Urbanized Area and inside a Principal City with population less than 250,000 and greater than or equal to 100,000.Small City (13): Territory inside an Urbanized Area and inside a Principal City with population less than 100,000.Suburb – Large (21): Territory outside a Principal City and inside an Urbanized Area with population of 250,000 or more.Suburb - Midsize (22): Territory outside a Principal City and inside an Urbanized Area with population less than 250,000 and greater than or equal to 100,000.Suburb - Small (23): Territory outside a Principal City and inside an Urbanized Area with population less than 100,000.Town - Fringe (31): Territory inside an Urban Cluster that is less than or equal to 10 miles from an Urbanized Area.Town - Distant (32): Territory inside an Urban Cluster that is more than 10 miles and less than or equal to 35 miles from an Urbanized Area.Town - Remote (33): Territory inside an Urban Cluster that is more than 35 miles of an Urbanized Area.Rural - Fringe (41): Census-defined rural territory that is less than or equal to 5 miles from an Urbanized Area, as well as rural territory that is less than or equal to 2.5 miles from an Urban Cluster.Rural - Distant (42): Census-defined rural territory that is more than 5 miles but less than or equal to 25 miles from an Urbanized Area, as well as rural territory that is more than 2.5 miles but less than or equal to 10 miles from an Urban Cluster.Rural - Remote (43): Census-defined rural territory that is more than 25 miles from an Urbanized Area and is also more than 10 miles from an Urban Cluster.

Release Date: 2018-08-10.[NOTE: Includes firms with payroll at any time during 2016. Employment reflects the number of paid employees during the March 12 pay period. Data are based on Census administrative records, and the estimates of business ownership by gender, ethnicity, race, and veteran status are from the 2016 Annual Survey of Entrepreneurs. Detail may not add to total due to rounding or because a Hispanic firm may be of any race. Moreover, each owner had the option of selecting more than one race and therefore is included in each race selected. Respondent firms include all firms that responded to the characteristic(s) tabulated in this dataset and reported gender, ethnicity, race, or veteran status or that were publicly held or not classifiable by gender, ethnicity, race, or veteran status. Percentages are for respondent firms only and are not recalculated when the dataset is resorted. Percentages are always based on total reporting (defined above) within a gender, ethnicity, race, veteran status, and/or industry group for the characteristics tabulated in this dataset. Firms with more than one domestic establishment are counted in each geographic area and industry in which they operate, but only once in the U.S. and state totals for all sectors. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see Survey Methodology.]..Table Name. . Statistics for U.S. Employer Firms by New Funding Relationships Attempted by Sector, Gender, Ethnicity, Race, Veteran Status, and Years in Business for the U.S., States, and Top 50 MSAs: 2016. ..Release Schedule. . This file was released in August 2018.. ..Key Table Information. . These data are related to all other 2016 ASE files.. Refer to the Methodology section of the Annual Survey of Entrepreneurs website for additional information.. ..Universe. . The universe for the 2016 Annual Survey of Entrepreneurs (ASE) includes all U.S. firms with paid employees operating during 2016 with receipts of $1,000 or more which are classified in the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) sectors 11 through 99, except for NAICS 111, 112, 482, 491, 521, 525, 813, 814, and 92 which are not covered. Firms with more than one domestic establishment are counted in each geographic area and industry in which they operate, but only once in the U.S. total.. In this file, "respondent firms" refers to all firms that reported gender, ethnicity, race, or veteran status for at least one owner or returned a survey form with at least one item completed and were publicly held or not classifiable by gender, ethnicity, race, and veteran status.. ..Geographic Coverage. . The data are shown for:. . United States. States and the District of Columbia. The fifty most populous metropolitan areas. . ..Industry Coverage. . The data are shown for the total of all sectors (00) and the 2-digit NAICS code level.. ..Data Items and Other Identifying Records. . Statistics for U.S. Employer Firms by New Funding Relationships Attempted by Sector, Gender, Ethnicity, Race, Veteran Status, and Years in Business for the U.S., States, and Top 50 MSAs: 2016 contains data on:. . Number of firms with paid employees. Sales and receipts for firms with paid employees. Number of employees for firms with paid employees. Annual payroll for firms with paid employees. Percent of respondent firms with paid employees. Percent of sales and receipts of respondent firms with paid employees. Percent of number of employees of respondent firms with paid employees. Percent of annual payroll of respondent firms with paid employees. . The data are shown for:. . Gender, ethnicity, race and veteran status of respondent firms. . All firms. Female-owned. Male-owned. Equally male-/female-owned. Hispanic. Equally Hispanic/non-Hispanic. Non-Hispanic. White. Black or African American. American Indian and Alaska Native. Asian. Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander. Some other race. Minority. Equally minority/nonminority. Nonminority. Veteran-owned. Equally veteran-/nonveteran-owned. Nonveteran-owned. All firms classifiable by gender, ethnicity, race, and veteran status. Publicly held and other firms not classifiable by gender, ethnicity, race, and veteran status. . . Years in business. . All firms. Firms less than 2 years in business. Firms with 2 to 3 years in business. Firms with 4 to 5 years in business. Firms with 6 to 10 years in business. Firms with 11 to 15 years in business. ...

Release Date: 2017-07-13.[NOTE: Includes firms with payroll at any time during 2015. Employment reflects the number of paid employees during the March 12 pay period. Data are based on Census administrative records, and the estimates of business ownership by gender, ethnicity, race, and veteran status are from the 2015 Annual Survey of Entrepreneurs. Detail may not add to total due to rounding or because a Hispanic firm may be of any race. Moreover, each owner had the option of selecting more than one race and therefore is included in each race selected. Respondent firms include all firms that responded to the characteristic(s) tabulated in this dataset and reported gender, ethnicity, race, or veteran status or that were publicly held or not classifiable by gender, ethnicity, race, or veteran status. Percentages are for respondent firms only and are not recalculated when the dataset is resorted. Percentages are always based on total reporting (defined above) within a gender, ethnicity, race, veteran status, and/or industry group for the characteristics tabulated in this dataset. Firms with more than one domestic establishment are counted in each geographic area and industry in which they operate, but only once in the U.S. and state totals for all sectors. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see Survey Methodology.]..Table Name. . Statistics for U.S. Employer Firms by Total Sales of 10 Percent or More by Customer Categories by Sector, Gender, Ethnicity, Race, Veteran Status, and Years in Business for the U.S., States, and Top 50 MSAs: 2015. ..Release Schedule. . This file was released in July 2017.. ..Key Table Information. . These data are related to all other 2015 ASE files.. Refer to the Methodology section of the Annual Survey of Entrepreneurs website for additional information.. ..Universe. . The universe for the 2015 Annual Survey of Entrepreneurs (ASE) includes all U.S. firms with paid employees operating during 2015 with receipts of $1,000 or more which are classified in the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) sectors 11 through 99, except for NAICS 111, 112, 482, 491, 521, 525, 813, 814, and 92 which are not covered. Firms with more than one domestic establishment are counted in each geographic area and industry in which they operate, but only once in the U.S. total.. In this file, "respondent firms" refers to all firms that reported gender, ethnicity, race, or veteran status for at least one owner or returned a survey form with at least one item completed and were publicly held or not classifiable by gender, ethnicity, race, and veteran status.. ..Geographic Coverage. . The data are shown for:. . United States. States and the District of Columbia. The fifty most populous metropolitan areas. . ..Industry Coverage. . The data are shown for the total of all sectors (00) and the 2-digit NAICS code level.. ..Data Items and Other Identifying Records. . Statistics for U.S. Employer Firms by Total Sales of 10 Percent or More by Customer Categories by Sector, Gender, Ethnicity, Race, Veteran Status, and Years in Business for the U.S., States, and Top 50 MSAs: 2015 contains data on:. . Number of firms with paid employees. Sales and receipts for firms with paid employees. Number of employees for firms with paid employees. Annual payroll for firms with paid employees. Percent of respondent firms with paid employees. Percent of sales and receipts of respondent firms with paid employees. Percent of number of employees of respondent firms with paid employees. Percent of annual payroll of respondent firms with paid employees. . The data are shown for:. . Gender, ethnicity, race and veteran status of respondent firms. . All firms. Female-owned. Male-owned. Equally male-/female-owned. Hispanic. Equally Hispanic/non-Hispanic. Non-Hispanic. White. Black or African American. American Indian and Alaska Native. Asian. Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander. Some other race. Minority. Equally minority/nonminority. Nonminority. Veteran-owned. Equally veteran-/nonveteran-owned. Nonveteran-owned. All firms classifiable by gender, ethnicity, race, and veteran status. Publicly held and other firms not classifiable by gender, ethnicity, race, and veteran status. . . Years in business. . All firms. Firms less than 2 years in business. Firms with 2 to 3 years in business. Firms with 4 to 5 years in business. Firms with 6 to 10 years in business. Firms wi...

This data layer produced by the National Center for Education Statistics’ (NCES) Education Demographic and Geographic Estimates (EDGE) program provides a geographic locale framework that classifies all U.S. territory into twelve categories ranging from Large Cities to Remote Rural areas. NCES uses this framework to describe the type of geographic area where schools and school districts are located. The criteria for these classifications are defined by NCES, but they rely on standard geographic areas developed and maintained by the U.S. Census Bureau. The 2016 NCES Locale boundaries are based on geographic areas represented in Census TIGER/Line 2016. The NCES Education Demographic and Geographic Estimate (EDGE) program collaborates with the U.S. Census Bureau’s Education Demographic, Geographic, and Economic Statistics (EDGE) Branch to annually update the locale boundaries. For more information about the NCES locale framework, and to download the data, see: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/edge/Geographic/LocaleBoundaries. The classifications include:Large City (11): Territory inside an Urbanized Area and inside a Principal City with population of 250,000 or more.Midsize City (12): Territory inside an Urbanized Area and inside a Principal City with population less than 250,000 and greater than or equal to 100,000.Small City (13): Territory inside an Urbanized Area and inside a Principal City with population less than 100,000.Suburb – Large (21): Territory outside a Principal City and inside an Urbanized Area with population of 250,000 or more.Suburb - Midsize (22): Territory outside a Principal City and inside an Urbanized Area with population less than 250,000 and greater than or equal to 100,000.Suburb - Small (23): Territory outside a Principal City and inside an Urbanized Area with population less than 100,000.Town - Fringe (31): Territory inside an Urban Cluster that is less than or equal to 10 miles from an Urbanized Area.Town - Distant (32): Territory inside an Urban Cluster that is more than 10 miles and less than or equal to 35 miles from an Urbanized Area.Town - Remote (33): Territory inside an Urban Cluster that is more than 35 miles of an Urbanized Area.Rural - Fringe (41): Census-defined rural territory that is less than or equal to 5 miles from an Urbanized Area, as well as rural territory that is less than or equal to 2.5 miles from an Urban Cluster.Rural - Distant (42): Census-defined rural territory that is more than 5 miles but less than or equal to 25 miles from an Urbanized Area, as well as rural territory that is more than 2.5 miles but less than or equal to 10 miles from an Urban Cluster.Rural - Remote (43): Census-defined rural territory that is more than 25 miles from an Urbanized Area and is also more than 10 miles from an Urban Cluster.All information contained in this file is in the public domain. Data users are advised to review NCES program documentation and feature class metadata to understand the limitations and appropriate use of these data.

Abstract

The dataset contains eddy-covariance data from five i-Box stations in the Austrian Inn Valley, which have been processed to 5-min statistics. The i-Box is a long-term measurement platform, including a small network of eddy-covariance stations in the lower Inn Valley, to study boundary-layer processes in mountainous terrain. More information about the i-Box can be found at https://www.uibk.ac.at/acinn/research/atmospheric-dynamics/projects/innsbruck-box-i-box.html.en and in Rotach et al. (2017).

Data description

Station locations

The present dataset contains processed data from five i-Box stations located in the Austrian Inn Valley. The Inn Valley is an approximately southwest-northeast oriented valley in the western part of Austria, with a depth of about 2000 m and a width of about 2 km at the valley floor. The locations of the sites are shown in the overview figure i-Box_sites.pdf.

• VF0 is located at the almost flat valley floor. The site is surrounded by grassland and agricultural fields. (47.305°N, 11.622°E, 545 m MSL)

• SF8 is located at the foot of the north sidewall next to a steep embankment between an agricultural field and a concrete parking lot. (47.326°N, 11.652°E, 575 m MSL)

• SF1 is located on an almost flat plateau running along the northern valley sidewall. The site is mainly surrounded by grassland and agricultural fields. (47.317°N, 11.616°E, 829 m MSL)

• NF10 is located on an approximately 10 deg slope on the south sidewall, covered by grassland. (47.300°N, 11.673°E, 930 m MSL)

• NF27 is located on a steep, grass-covered slope on the south sidewall, with a slope angle of about 25 deg. (47.288°N, 11.631°E, 1009 m MSL)

Further information about station locations can be found in Rotach et al. (2017) and Lehner et al. (2021).

Temporal coverage

The dataset contains processed data between 2014 and 2020. Some instruments were replaced and new instruments were added during this period. Data gaps occur as a result of instrument malfunctions and maintenance.

Instrumentation

Each station is equipped with at least one sonic anemometer and a gas analyzer. The instrumentation usually consists of a CSAT3 sonic anemometer (Campbell Scientific, USA) and KH20 Krypton hygrometer (Campbell Scientific) or an EC150 open-path infrared gas analyzer (Campbell Scientific). In 2020, several of the instruments were replaced with an Irgason (Campbell Scientific), which combines an open-path infrared gas analyzer with a sonic anemometer. Pressure, air temperature, and humidity used for calculating flux corrections are measured with Setra 278 sensors (Setra Systems, USA) and Rotronic HC2A-S temperature and humidity probes (Rotronic, Switzerland).

• VF0: CSAT3 and EC150 at 4.0 m, CSAT3 at 8.7 m, CSAT3 and KH20 (until July 2020) or Irgason (since July 2020) at 16.9 m

• SF8: CSAT3 at 6.1, CSAT3 and KH20 (until September 2020) or Irgason (since September 2020) at 11.2 m

• SF1: CSAT3 and KH20 (until June 2020) or Irgason (since June 2020) at 6.8 m

• NF10: CSAT3 and KH20 (until June 2020) or Irgason (since June 2020) at 5.7 m

• NF27: CSAT3 at 1.5 (since September 2017), CSAT3 and KH20 (until November 2016) or Irgason (since September 2017) 6.8 m

Further information about the instrumentation can be found in Rotach et al. (2017), Lehner et al. (2021), and in the ACINN database:

• VF0: https://acinn-data.uibk.ac.at/pages/i-box-kolsass.html

• SF8: https://acinn-data.uibk.ac.at/pages/i-box-terfens.html

• SF1: https://acinn-data.uibk.ac.at/pages/i-box-eggen.html

• NF10: https://acinn-data.uibk.ac.at/pages/i-box-weerberg.html

• NF27: https://acinn-data.uibk.ac.at/pages/i-box-hochhaeuser.html

Data processing

Raw 20-Hz data were quality controlled and rotated into a streamline coordinate system using double rotation before block averaging the data to 5-min statistics, without previous filtering. Flux corrections were applied to the turbulence statistics, including a frequency response correction (Aubinet et al. 2012) with spectral models following Moore (1986), Højstrup (1981), and Kaimal et al. (1972); a sonic heat-flux correction of the vertical heat flux and the temperature variance (Schotanus et al. 1983); a WPL correction of the vertical moisture flux (Webb et al. 1980); and an Oxygen correction of the vertical moisture flux for data from Krypton hygrometers (van Dijk et al. 2003).

The quality control procedures include the removal of data during periods of instrument malfunction as indicated by the instruments’ quality flags, a despiking, the removal of data points exceeding 30 m s^-1 for the horizontal wind components, 10 m s^-1 for the vertical wind velocity, and 50 g m³ for water vapor density, and the removal of sonic temperature data outside the range -20 – 40°C. The removed data are replaced with random values drawn from a Gaussian distribution, with its mean and standard deviation calculated over a 30-s data window.

Quality flags are based on the criteria described in Stiperski and Rotach (2016):

• -1: More than 10% of the raw data within the averaging period are replaced during the quality control.

• 0: More than 90% of the raw data fulfill the quality control criteria.

• 1: In addition to fulfilling the quality control criteria, the skewness is within the range -2–2 and the kurtosis is less than 8.

• 2: In addition to the above criteria, the stationarity test by Foken and Wichura (1996) is below 30% and the uncertainty is less than 50% based on Stiperski and Rotach (2016) and Wyngaard (1973)

Data files

• i-Box_sites.pdf contains a map of the i-Box stations.

• list_variables.pdf contains a list of variable names with a short description.

• SITENAME_5min.zip contains the processed turbulence statistics, split into yearly files. There is more than one file per year if the instrumentation changed during the year or because of memory restrictions during the processing.

Acknowledgments

Data processing was performed in the framework of the TExSMBL (Turbulent Exchange in the Stable Mountain Boundary Layer) project funded by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) under grant V 791-N. Data were processed on the LEO HPC infrastructure of the University of Innsbruck.

References

Aubinet M, Vesala T, D P (eds) (2012) Eddy Covariance. A practical guide to measurements and data analysis. Springer, Dordrecht, DOI 10.1007/978-94-007-2351-1

Højstrup J (1981) A simple model for the adjustment of velocity spectra in unstable conditions downstream of an abrupt change in roughness and heat flux. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 21:341–356, DOI 10.1007/bf00119278

Kaimal JC, Wyngaard JC, Izumi Y, Coté OR (1972) Spectral characteristics of surface-layer turbulence. Q J R M Soc 98:563–589, DOI 10.1002/qj.49709841707

Lehner M, Rotach MW, Sfyri E, Obleitner F (2021) Spatial and temporal variations in near-surface energy fluxes in an Alpine valley under synoptically undisturbed and clear-sky conditions. Q J R M Soc 147:2173–2196, DOI 10.1002/qj.4016

Moore CJ (1986) Frequency response corrections for eddy correlation systems. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 37:17–35, DOI 10.1007/BF00122754

Rotach MW, Stiperski I, Fuhrer O, Goger B, Gohm A, Obleitner F, Rau G, Sfyri E, Vergeiner J (2017) Investigating exchange processes over complex topography—the Innsbruck Box (i-Box). Bull Amer Meteorol Soc 98:787–805, DOI 10.1175/BAMS-D-15-00246.1

Schotanus P, Nieuwstadt FTM, de Bruijn HAR (1983) Temperature measurement with a sonic anemometer and its application to heat and moisture fluxes. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 26:81–93, DOI 10.1007/BF00164332

Stiperski, I. and Rotach, M.W. (2016) On the measurement of turbulence over complex mountainous terrain. Boundary-Layer Meteorology, 159, 97–121. DOI 10.1007/s10546-015-0103-z.

Van Dijk A, Kohsiek W, de Bruin HAR (2003) Oxygen sensitivity of Krypton and Lyman-α hygrometers. J Atmos Ocean Technol 20:143–151, DOI 10.1175/1520-0426(2003)020¡0143:OSOKAL¿2.0.CO;2

Webb EK, Pearman GI, R L (1980) Correction of flux measurements for density effects due to heat and water vapour transfer. Q J R M Soc 106:85–100, DOI 10.1002/qj.49710644707

Wyngaard, J.C. (1973). On surface layer turbulence. In D.A. Haugen (Ed.), Workshop on Micrometeorology, American Meteorological Society, pp. 101–150.

Release Date: 2016-09-23..Table Name. . Statistics for U.S. Employer Firms by Whether the Business Did Select Research and Development Activities by Sector, Gender, Ethnicity, Race, Veteran Status, and Years in Business for the U.S., States, and Top 50 MSAs: 2014. ..Release Schedule. . This file was released in September 2016.. ..Key Table Information. . These data are related to all other 2014 ASE files.. Refer to the Methodology section of the Annual Survey of Entrepreneurs website for additional information.. ..Universe. . The universe for the 2014 Annual Survey of Entrepreneurs (ASE) includes all U.S. firms with paid employees operating during 2014 with receipts of $1,000 or more which are classified in the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) sectors 11 through 99, except for NAICS 111, 112, 482, 491, 521, 525, 813, 814, and 92 which are not covered. Firms with more than one domestic establishment are counted in each geographic area and industry in which they operate, but only once in the U.S. total.. In this file, "respondent firms" refers to all firms that reported gender, ethnicity, race, or veteran status for at least one owner or returned a survey form with at least one item completed and were publicly held or not classifiable by gender, ethnicity, race, and veteran status.. ..Geographic Coverage. . The data are shown for:. . United States. States and the District of Columbia. The top fifty most populous metropolitan areas. . ..Industry Coverage. . The data are shown for the total of all sectors (00) and the 2-digit NAICS code level.. ..Data Items and Other Identifying Records. . Statistics for U.S. Employer Firms by Whether the Business Did Select Research and Development Activities by Sector, Gender, Ethnicity, Race, Veteran Status, and Years in Business for the U.S., States, and Top 50 MSAs: 2014 contains data on:. . Number of firms with paid employees. Sales and receipts for firms with paid employees. Number of employees for firms with paid employees. Annual payroll for firms with paid employees. Percent of respondent firms with paid employees. Percent of sales and receipts of respondent firms with paid employees. Percent of number of employees of respondent firms with paid employees. Percent of annual payroll of respondent firms with paid employees. . The data are shown for:. . Gender, ethnicity, race and veteran status of respondent firms. . All firms. Female-owned. Male-owned. Equally male-/female-owned. Hispanic. Equally Hispanic/non-Hispanic. Non-Hispanic. White. Black or African American. American Indian and Alaska Native. Asian. Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander. Some other race. Minority. Equally minority/nonminority. Nonminority. Veteran-owned. Equally veteran-/nonveteran-owned. Nonveteran-owned. All firms classifiable by gender, ethnicity, race, and veteran status. Publicly held and other firms not classifiable by gender, ethnicity, race, and veteran status. . . Years in business. . All firms. Firms less than 2 years in business. Firms with 2 to 3 years in business. Firms with 4 to 5 years in business. Firms with 6 to 10 years in business. Firms with 11 to 15 years in business. Firms with 16 or more years in business. . . Whether the business did select research and development activities in 2014. . All firms. All firms with reported R&D activity. Did not conduct work that might lead to a patent. Conducted work that might lead to a patent. Did not develop and test prototypes that were derived from scientific research or technical findings. Developed and tested prototypes that were derived from scientific research or technical findings. Did not produce findings that could be published in academic journals or presented at scientific conferences. Produced findings that could be published in academic journals or presented at scientific conferences. Did not apply scientific or technical knowledge in a way that has never been done before. Applied scientific or technical knowledge in a way that has never been done before. Did not create new scientific research or technical solutions that can be generalized to other situations. Created new scientific research or technical solutions that can be generalized to other situations. Did not conduct work to discover previously unknown scientific facts,...

This statistic shows the median household income in the United States from 1990 to 2023 in 2023 U.S. dollars. The median household income was 80,610 U.S. dollars in 2023, an increase from the previous year. Household incomeThe median household income depicts the income of households, including the income of the householder and all other individuals aged 15 years or over living in the household. Income includes wages and salaries, unemployment insurance, disability payments, child support payments received, regular rental receipts, as well as any personal business, investment, or other kinds of income received routinely. The median household income in the United States varies from state to state. In 2020, the median household income was 86,725 U.S. dollars in Massachusetts, while the median household income in Mississippi was approximately 44,966 U.S. dollars at that time. Household income is also used to determine the poverty line in the United States. In 2021, about 11.6 percent of the U.S. population was living in poverty. The child poverty rate, which represents people under the age of 18 living in poverty, has been growing steadily over the first decade since the turn of the century, from 16.2 percent of the children living below the poverty line in year 2000 to 22 percent in 2010. In 2021, it had lowered to 15.3 percent. The state with the widest gap between the rich and the poor was New York, with a Gini coefficient score of 0.51 in 2019. The Gini coefficient is calculated by looking at average income rates. A score of zero would reflect perfect income equality and a score of one indicates a society where one person would have all the money and all other people have nothing.

Release Date: 2018-08-10.[NOTE: Includes firms with payroll at any time during 2016. Employment reflects the number of paid employees during the March 12 pay period. Data are based on Census administrative records, and the estimates of business ownership by gender, ethnicity, race, and veteran status are from the 2016 Annual Survey of Entrepreneurs. Detail may not add to total due to rounding or because a Hispanic firm may be of any race. Moreover, each owner had the option of selecting more than one race and therefore is included in each race selected. Respondent firms include all firms that responded to the characteristic(s) tabulated in this dataset and reported gender, ethnicity, race, or veteran status for at least one owner and were not publicly held or not classifiable by gender, ethnicity, race, and veteran status. The 2016 Annual Survey of Entrepreneurs asked for information for up to four persons owning the largest percentage(s) of the business. Percentages are for owners of respondent firms only and are not recalculated when the dataset is resorted. Percentages are always based on total reporting (defined above) within a gender, ethnicity, race, veteran status, and/or industry group for the characteristics tabulated in this dataset. Firms with more than one domestic establishment are counted in each geographic area and industry in which they operate, but only once in the U.S. and state totals for all sectors. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see Survey Methodology.]..Table Name. . Statistics for Owners of Respondent Employer Firms by Reasons for Owning the Business by Sector, Gender, Ethnicity, Race, Veteran Status, and Years in Business for the U.S., States, and Top 50 MSAs: 2016. ..Release Schedule. . This file was released in August 2018.. ..Key Table Information. . These data are related to all other 2016 ASE files.. Refer to the Methodology section of the Annual Survey of Entrepreneurs website for additional information.. ..Universe. . The universe for the 2016 Annual Survey of Entrepreneurs (ASE) includes all U.S. firms with paid employees operating during 2016 with receipts of $1,000 or more which are classified in the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) sectors 11 through 99, except for NAICS 111, 112, 482, 491, 521, 525, 813, 814, and 92 which are not covered. Firms with more than one domestic establishment are counted in each geographic area and industry in which they operate, but only once in the U.S. total.. For Characteristics of Business Owners (CBO) data, all estimates are of owners of firms responding to the ASE. That is, estimates are based only on firms providing gender, ethnicity, race, or veteran status; or firms not classifiable by gender, ethnicity, race, and veteran status that returned an ASE online questionnaire with at least one question answered. The ASE online questionnaire provided space for up to four owners to report their characteristics.. CBO data are not representative of all owners of all firms operating in the United States. The data do not represent all business owners in the United States.. ..Geographic Coverage. . The data are shown for:. . United States. States and the District of Columbia. The fifty most populous metropolitan areas. . ..Industry Coverage. . The data are shown for the total of all sectors (00) and the 2-digit NAICS code level.. ..Data Items and Other Identifying Records. . Statistics for Owners of Respondent Employer Firms by Reasons for Owning the Business by Sector, Gender, Ethnicity, Race, Veteran Status, and Years in Business for the U.S., States, and Top 50 MSAs: 2016 contains data on:. . Number of owners of respondent firms with paid employees. Percent of number of owners of respondent firms with paid employees. . The data are shown for:. . Gender, ethnicity, race and veteran status of owners of respondent firms. . All owners of respondent firms. Female. Male. Hispanic. Non-Hispanic. White. Black or African American. American Indian and Alaska Native. Asian. Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander. Some other race. Minority. Nonminority. Veteran. Nonveteran. . . Years in business. . All firms. Firms less than 2 years in business. Firms with 2 to 3 years in business. Firms with 4 to 5 years in business. Firms with 6 to 10 years in business. Firms with 11 to 15 years in business. Firms with 16 or more years in business. . . Owner's reasons for owning the business. . Wanted to be my own boss: Not important. ...

Editor’s Choice

• The global biopharmaceuticals market size is expected to be worth around USD 566 billion by 2032 from USD 263 billion in 2022, growing at a CAGR of 8.2% during the forecast period from 2022 to 2032.
• The overall success rate for phase I trials is around 16%, while for phase II trials it is around 10%. Phase III trials, which involve larger patient populations, have a success rate of around 25%.
• The average cost of bringing a new drug to market is projected to be around USD 2.6 billion.
• The National Genome Institute estimates that the cost of sequencing a human genome has fallen from around USD 100 million in 2001 to less than USD 1,000 in recent years.
• In 2020, WIPO received over 23,500 biotechnology-related patent applications, demonstrating the growing innovation and research in the field.
• The US biotechnology industry employed over 2.1 million people in 2020, including direct and indirect jobs.

Article: Implementing a Functional Precision Medicine Tumor Board for Acute Myeloid Leukemia

Cancer Discovery, DOI: 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-21-0410

Data Types:

1. Clinical summary

2. Drug response data

3. Exome-sequencing data

4. RNA-sequencing data

1. Clinical summary

File_0: Common sample annotation including patient and sample IDs, stage of the disease, tissue type and availability of different data types.

File_1.1: Clinical data for 186 AML patients including clinical diagnosis, disease classification, gender, age at diagnosis, treatments, cytogenetic and molecular details. The description of the variables/column titles is given below the clinical data.

File_1.2: Description of the clinical variables in File_1.1.

2. Drug response data for 164 AML patient samples and 17 healthy samples

File_2: Drug library details for 515 chemical compounds. The compound collection includes drugs names, drug class defined by molecular targets or mode of action, concentration range used for drug testing, supplier information, solvent information and vendor information.

File_3: Drug response data including selective drug sensitivity scores (sDSS) for 515 compounds across 181 samples (164 AML patient samples and 17 healthy control samples). The DSS is modified area under the curve values and are calculated as shown in Yadav et al publication (1). The selective drug sensitivity scores (sDSS) is healthy control normalized DSS that gives estimated cancer-selective drug responses. The higher the sDSS values indicate drug sensitivities and negative sDSS values represent drug resistance.

Note: We recommend using selective DSS values instead of raw values (% inhibition, IC50, DSS given in the online manuscript supplementary data).

Note: If the value is missing, the drug was not tested for that given sample.

File_4: Drug sensitivity and resistance testing (DSRT) assay details for 181 samples (164 AML patient samples and 17 healthy control samples). The information includes medium (MCM or CM) used for the drug testing, % cell viability after 72 h without drug testing and blast cell percentage of each sample.

Note: Column E is the ratio of luminescence values at 72 h and 0 h. The fold change in the cell viability without drug treatment was calculated as % cell viability. That is why the value could be more than 100% e.g. 70% cell viability meaning that 30% cells died during 72 h and 300% cell viability meaning that cells grew 3 times in 72 h incubation period.

3. Exome-sequencing data for 225 AML patient samples

Note: The number of samples in the manuscript is 226. The correct number used in the analyses is 225.

Mutation data. The cancer specific gene list was prepared by combining AML related genes from TCGA(2) (n=23), InToGen(3) (n=32), Papaemmanuil et al.(4) (n=111) and Census database(5) (n=616). Out of these genes, we found 340 genes as mutated across 225 AML patient samples. The mutation was called with P-values less than 0.05.

File_5: VAF (variant allele frequency) of 340 cancer-specific genes across 225 AML patient samples. The VAF was calculated using paired skin samples as a control from the same AML patient.

File_6: Binary data for 57 cancer specific genes frequently mutated (a given mutation detected in 5 or more samples) across 225 AML patient samples.

4. RNA-sequencing data for 163 AML patient samples and 4 healthy

CPM (count per million) data: The CPM values are batch corrected values used for direct comparison of gene expression.

File_7: Log2CPM values for 18,202 protein coding genes across 167 samples (163 AML patient samples and 4 healthy CD34+ samples).

File_8: Raw read count data RNA-seq library information for all 60,619 genes across 167 samples (163 AML patient samples and 4 healthy CD34+ samples). The raw read count data was used to calculate differential gene expression.

File_9: RNA-seq library information including RNA extraction method and sequencing library preparation information for 167 samples (163 AML patient samples and 4 healthy CD34+ samples).

References

1. Yadav B, Pemovska T, Szwajda A, Kulesskiy E, Kontro M, Karjalainen R, et al. Quantitative scoring of differential drug sensitivity for individually optimized anticancer therapies. Scientific Reports 2014;4:5193.

2. Ley TJ, Miller C, Ding L, Raphael BJ, Mungall AJ, Robertson A, et al. Genomic and epigenomic landscapes of adult de novo acute myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med 2013;368(22):2059-74.

3. Gonzalez-Perez A, Perez-Llamas C, Deu-Pons J, Tamborero D, Schroeder MP, Jene-Sanz A, et al. IntOGen-mutations identifies cancer drivers across tumor types. Nature Methods 2013;10(11):1081-2.

4. Papaemmanuil E, Gerstung M, Bullinger L, Gaidzik VI, Paschka P, Roberts ND, et al. Genomic classification and prognosis in acute myeloid leukemia. New England Journal of Medicine 2016;374(23):2209-21.

5. Tate JG, Bamford S, Jubb HC, Sondka Z, Beare DM, Bindal N, et al. COSMIC: the Catalogue Of Somatic Mutations In Cancer. Nucleic Acids Research 2019;47(D1):D941-D7.

Ireland, Italy, and Germany had some of the highest household electricity prices worldwide, as of March 2025. At the time, Irish households were charged around 0.45 U.S. dollars per kilowatt-hour, while in Italy, the price stood at 0.43 U.S. dollars per kilowatt-hour. By comparison, in Russia, residents paid almost 10 times less. What is behind electricity prices? Electricity prices vary widely across the world and sometimes even within a country itself, depending on factors like infrastructure, geography, and politically determined taxes and levies. For example, in Denmark, Belgium, and Sweden, taxes constitute a significant portion of residential end-user electricity prices. Reliance on fossil fuel imports Meanwhile, thanks to their great crude oil and natural gas production output, countries like Iran, Qatar, and Russia enjoy some of the cheapest electricity prices in the world. Here, the average household pays less than 0.1 U.S. dollars per kilowatt-hour. In contrast, countries heavily reliant on fossil fuel imports for electricity generation are more vulnerable to market price fluctuations.

In 2023, an estimate of 27.8 million Colombian adults had a net worth of less than 10 thousand U.S. dollars. In contrast, the total net assets of approximately 38 thousand people above 18 years old in the South American country surpassed one million dollars. Colombia is among the most unequal countries in Latin America.