Sure! I'd be happy to provide you with an introduction to machine learning basics for beginners. Machine learning is a subfield of artificial intelligence (AI) that focuses on enabling computers to learn and make predictions or decisions without being explicitly programmed. Here are some key concepts and terms to help you get started:

1. Supervised Learning: In supervised learning, the machine learning algorithm learns from labeled training data. The training data consists of input examples and their corresponding correct output or target values. The algorithm learns to generalize from this data and make predictions or classify new, unseen examples.

2. Unsupervised Learning: Unsupervised learning involves learning patterns and relationships from unlabeled data. Unlike supervised learning, there are no target values provided. Instead, the algorithm aims to discover inherent structures or clusters in the data.

3. Training Data and Test Data: Machine learning models require a dataset to learn from. The dataset is typically split into two parts: the training data and the test data. The model learns from the training data, and the test data is used to evaluate its performance and generalization ability.

4. Features and Labels: In supervised learning, the input examples are often represented by features or attributes. For example, in a spam email classification task, features might include the presence of certain keywords or the length of the email. The corresponding output or target values are called labels, indicating the class or category to which the example belongs (e.g., spam or not spam).

5. Model Evaluation Metrics: To assess the performance of a machine learning model, various evaluation metrics are used. Common metrics include accuracy (the proportion of correctly predicted examples), precision (the proportion of true positives among all positive predictions), recall (the proportion of true positives predicted correctly), and F1 score (a combination of precision and recall).

6. Overfitting and Underfitting: Overfitting occurs when a model becomes too complex and learns to memorize the training data instead of generalizing well to unseen examples. On the other hand, underfitting happens when a model is too simple and fails to capture the underlying patterns in the data. Balancing the complexity of the model is crucial to achieve good generalization.

7. Feature Engineering: Feature engineering involves selecting or creating relevant features that can help improve the performance of a machine learning model. It often requires domain knowledge and creativity to transform raw data into a suitable representation that captures the important information.

8. Bias and Variance Trade-off: The bias-variance trade-off is a fundamental concept in machine learning. Bias refers to the errors introduced by the model's assumptions and simplifications, while variance refers to the model's sensitivity to small fluctuations in the training data. Reducing bias may increase variance and vice versa. Finding the right balance is important for building a well-performing model.

9. Supervised Learning Algorithms: There are various supervised learning algorithms, including linear regression, logistic regression, decision trees, random forests, support vector machines (SVM), and neural networks. Each algorithm has its own strengths, weaknesses, and specific use cases.

10. Unsupervised Learning Algorithms: Unsupervised learning algorithms include clustering algorithms like k-means clustering and hierarchical clustering, dimensionality reduction techniques like principal component analysis (PCA) and t-SNE, and anomaly detection algorithms, among others.

These concepts provide a starting point for understanding the basics of machine learning. As you delve deeper, you can explore more advanced topics such as deep learning, reinforcement learning, and natural language processing. Remember to practice hands-on with real-world datasets to gain practical experience and further refine your skills.

Utilize our machine learning datasets to develop and validate your models. Our datasets are designed to support a variety of machine learning applications, from image recognition to natural language processing and recommendation systems. You can access a comprehensive dataset or tailor a subset to fit your specific requirements, using data from a combination of various sources and websites, including custom ones. Popular use cases include model training and validation, where the dataset can be used to ensure robust performance across different applications. Additionally, the dataset helps in algorithm benchmarking by providing extensive data to test and compare various machine learning algorithms, identifying the most effective ones for tasks such as fraud detection, sentiment analysis, and predictive maintenance. Furthermore, it supports feature engineering by allowing you to uncover significant data attributes, enhancing the predictive accuracy of your machine learning models for applications like customer segmentation, personalized marketing, and financial forecasting.

Abstract

The application of machine learning has become commonplace for problems in modern data science. The democratization of the decision process when choosing a machine learning algorithm has also received considerable attention through the use of meta features and automated machine learning for both classification and regression type problems. However, this is not the case for multistep-ahead time series problems. Time series models generally rely upon the series itself to make future predictions, as opposed to independent features used in regression and classification problems. The structure of a time series is generally described by features such as trend, seasonality, cyclicality, and irregularity. In this research, we demonstrate how time series metrics for these features, in conjunction with an ensemble based regression learner, were used to predict the standardized mean square error of candidate time series prediction models. These experiments used datasets that cover a wide feature space and enable researchers to select the single best performing model or the top N performing models. A robust evaluation was carried out to test the learner's performance on both synthetic and real time series.

Proposed Dataset

The dataset proposed here gives the results for 20 step ahead predictions for eight Machine Learning/Multi-step ahead prediction strategies for 5,842 time series datasets outlined here. It was used as the training data for the Meta Learners in this research. The meta features used are columns C to AE. Columns AH outlines the method/strategy used and columns AI to BB (the error) is the outcome variable for each prediction step. The description of the method/strategies is as follows:

Machine Learning methods:

• NN: Neural Network
• ARIMA: Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average
• SVR: Support Vector Regression
• LSTM: Long Short Term Memory
• RNN: Recurrent Neural Network

Multistep ahead prediction strategy:

• OSAP: One Step ahead strategy
• MRFA: Multi Resolution Forecast Aggregation

The purpose of data mining analysis is always to find patterns of the data using certain kind of techiques such as classification or regression. It is not always feasible to apply classification algorithms directly to dataset. Before doing any work on the data, the data has to be pre-processed and this process normally involves feature selection and dimensionality reduction. We tried to use clustering as a way to reduce the dimension of the data and create new features. Based on our project, after using clustering prior to classification, the performance has not improved much. The reason why it has not improved could be the features we selected to perform clustering are not well suited for it. Because of the nature of the data, classification tasks are going to provide more information to work with in terms of improving knowledge and overall performance metrics. From the dimensionality reduction perspective: It is different from Principle Component Analysis which guarantees finding the best linear transformation that reduces the number of dimensions with a minimum loss of information. Using clusters as a technique of reducing the data dimension will lose a lot of information since clustering techniques are based a metric of 'distance'. At high dimensions euclidean distance loses pretty much all meaning. Therefore using clustering as a "Reducing" dimensionality by mapping data points to cluster numbers is not always good since you may lose almost all the information. From the creating new features perspective: Clustering analysis creates labels based on the patterns of the data, it brings uncertainties into the data. By using clustering prior to classification, the decision on the number of clusters will highly affect the performance of the clustering, then affect the performance of classification. If the part of features we use clustering techniques on is very suited for it, it might increase the overall performance on classification. For example, if the features we use k-means on are numerical and the dimension is small, the overall classification performance may be better. We did not lock in the clustering outputs using a random_state in the effort to see if they were stable. Our assumption was that if the results vary highly from run to run which they definitely did, maybe the data just does not cluster well with the methods selected at all. Basically, the ramification we saw was that our results are not much better than random when applying clustering to the data preprocessing. Finally, it is important to ensure a feedback loop is in place to continuously collect the same data in the same format from which the models were created. This feedback loop can be used to measure the model real world effectiveness and also to continue to revise the models from time to time as things change.

For years, we have relied on population surveys to keep track of regional public health statistics, including the prevalence of non-communicable diseases. Because of the cost and limitations of such surveys, we often do not have the up-to-date data on health outcomes of a region. In this paper, we examined the feasibility of inferring regional health outcomes from socio-demographic data that are widely available and timely updated through national censuses and community surveys. Using data for 50 American states (excluding Washington DC) from 2007 to 2012, we constructed a machine-learning model to predict the prevalence of six non-communicable disease (NCD) outcomes (four NCDs and two major clinical risk factors), based on population socio-demographic characteristics from the American Community Survey. We found that regional prevalence estimates for non-communicable diseases can be reasonably predicted. The predictions were highly correlated with the observed data, in both the states included in the derivation model (median correlation 0.88) and those excluded from the development for use as a completely separated validation sample (median correlation 0.85), demonstrating that the model had sufficient external validity to make good predictions, based on demographics alone, for areas not included in the model development. This highlights both the utility of this sophisticated approach to model development, and the vital importance of simple socio-demographic characteristics as both indicators and determinants of chronic disease.

This child item describes a machine learning model that was developed to estimate public-supply water use by water service area (WSA) boundary and 12-digit hydrologic unit code (HUC12) for the conterminous United States. This model was used to develop an annual and monthly reanalysis of public supply water use for the period 2000-2020. This data release contains model input feature datasets, python codes used to develop and train the water use machine learning model, and output water use predictions by HUC12 and WSA. Public supply water use estimates and statistics files for HUC12s are available on this child item landing page. Public supply water use estimates and statistics for WSAs are available in public_water_use_model.zip. This page includes the following files: PS_HUC12_Tot_2000_2020.csv - a csv file with estimated monthly public supply total water use from 2000-2020 by HUC12, in million gallons per day PS_HUC12_GW_2000_2020.csv - a csv file with estimated monthly public supply groundwater use for 2000-2020 by HUC12, in million gallons per day PS_HUC12_SW_2000_2020.csv - a csv file with estimated monthly public supply surface water use for 2000-2020 by HUC12, in million gallons per day Note: 1) Groundwater and surface water fractions were determined using source counts as described in the 'R code that determines groundwater and surface water source fractions for public-supply water service areas, counties, and 12-digit hydrologic units' child item. 2) Some HUC12s have estimated water use of zero because no public-supply water service areas were modeled within the HUC. STAT_PS_HUC12_Tot_2000_2020.csv - a csv file with statistics by HUC12 for the estimated monthly public supply total water use from 2000-2020 STAT_PS_HUC12_GW_2000_2020.csv - a csv file with statistics by HUC12 for the estimated monthly public supply groundwater use for 2000-2020 STAT_PS_HUC12_SW_2000_2020.csv - a csv file with statistics by HUC12 for the estimated monthly public supply surface water use for 2000-2020 public_water_use_model.zip - a zip file containing input datasets, scripts, and output datasets for the public supply water use machine learning model version_history_MLmodel.txt - a txt file describing changes in this version

Identification of risk factors of treatment resistance may be useful to guide treatment selection, avoid inefficient trial-and-error, and improve major depressive disorder (MDD) care. We extended the work in predictive modeling of treatment resistant depression (TRD) via partition of the data from the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) cohort into a training and a testing dataset. We also included data from a small yet completely independent cohort RIS-INT-93 as an external test dataset. We used features from enrollment and level 1 treatment (up to week 2 response only) of STAR*D to explore the feature space comprehensively and applied machine learning methods to model TRD outcome at level 2. For TRD defined using QIDS-C16 remission criteria, multiple machine learning models were internally cross-validated in the STAR*D training dataset and externally validated in both the STAR*D testing dataset and RIS-INT-93 independent dataset with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.70–0.78 and 0.72–0.77, respectively. The upper bound for the AUC achievable with the full set of features could be as high as 0.78 in the STAR*D testing dataset. Model developed using top 30 features identified using feature selection technique (k-means clustering followed by χ2 test) achieved an AUC of 0.77 in the STAR*D testing dataset. In addition, the model developed using overlapping features between STAR*D and RIS-INT-93, achieved an AUC of > 0.70 in both the STAR*D testing and RIS-INT-93 datasets. Among all the features explored in STAR*D and RIS-INT-93 datasets, the most important feature was early or initial treatment response or symptom severity at week 2. These results indicate that prediction of TRD prior to undergoing a second round of antidepressant treatment could be feasible even in the absence of biomarker data.

The ML Methods dataset returned by the PapersWithCode API represents a machine learning method or model, such as a neural network architecture or an optimization algorithm. It contains various attributes that describe the method, including its ID, name, description, and the papers that introduce it.

Column Descriptors

• ID: A unique identifier for the method.
• Name: The name of the method, which typically describes its architecture or algorithm.
• Full Name: The full_name attribute of the Method dataset via the Papers with Code API represents the full name of a machine learning method, including any additional information such as version numbers or authors.
• Description: A detailed description of the method, which may include information about its design choices, implementation details, and performance characteristics.
• Paper: A list of Paper objects that introduce or describe the method

Use Case

The dataset can be used for NLP tasks, Data Analysis, Feature Engineering, etc. For instance, You could use clustering algorithms to group similar papers together based on their content.

The specific approach you take will depend on your research question and the tools and techniques you are familiar with.

Dataset Name: Online Store Dataset

Description: The Online Store dataset is a comprehensive collection of 500 rows of synthetic e-commerce product data. Designed to simulate an online retail environment similar to major e-commerce platforms like Amazon, this dataset includes a diverse range of attributes for each product. The dataset provides valuable insights into product characteristics, pricing, stock levels, and customer feedback, making it ideal for analysis, machine learning, and data visualization projects.

Features:

ID: Unique identifier for each product. Product_Name: Name of the product, generated using random words to simulate real-world product names. Category: Product category (e.g., Electronics, Clothing, Books, Home, Toys, Sports). Price: Product price, ranging from $10 to $500. Stock: Number of items available in stock. Rating: Customer rating of the product (1 to 5 stars). Reviews: Number of customer reviews. Brand: Brand of the product. Date_Added: Date when the product was added to the catalog. Discount: Percentage discount applied to the product. Use Cases:

Data Analysis: Explore trends and patterns in e-commerce product data. Machine Learning: Build and train models for product recommendation, pricing strategies, or customer segmentation. Data Visualization: Create visualizations to analyze product categories, pricing distribution, and customer reviews. Notes:

The data is synthetic and randomly generated, reflecting typical attributes found in e-commerce platforms. This dataset can be used for educational purposes, practice, and experimentation with various data analysis and machine learning techniques.

Groundwater is a vital resource in the Mississippi embayment of the central United States. An innovative approach using machine learning (ML) was employed to predict groundwater salinity—including specific conductance (SC), total dissolved solids (TDS), and chloride (Cl) concentrations—across three drinking-water aquifers of the Mississippi embayment. A ML approach was used because it accommodates a large and diverse set of explanatory variables, does not assume monotonic relations between predictors and response data, and results can be extrapolated to areas of the aquifer not sampled. These aspects of ML allowed potential drivers and sources of high salinity water that have been hypothesized in other studies to be included as explanatory variables. The ML approach integrated output from a groundwater-flow model and water-quality data to predict salinity, and the approach can be applied to other aquifers to provide context for the long-term availability of groundwater resources. The Mississippi embayment includes two principal regional aquifer systems; the surficial aquifer system, dominated by the Quaternary Mississippi River Valley Alluvial aquifer (MRVA), and the Mississippi embayment aquifer system, which includes deeper Tertiary aquifers and confining units. Based on the distribution of groundwater use for drinking water, the modeling focused on the MRVA, middle Claiborne aquifer (MCAQ), and lower Claiborne aquifer (LCAQ). Boosted regression tree (BRT) models (Elith and others, 2008; Kuhn and Johnson, 2013) were developed to predict SC and Cl to 1-kilometer (km) raster grid cells of the National Hydrologic Grid (Clark and others, 2018) for 7 aquifer layers (1 MRVA, 4 MCAQ, 2 LCAQ) following the hydrogeologic framework of Hart and others (2008). TDS maps were created using the correlation between SC and TDS. Explanatory variables for the BRT models included attributes associated with well location and construction, surficial variables (such as soils and land use), and variables extracted from a MODFLOW groundwater flow model for the Mississippi embayment (Haugh and others, 2020a; Haugh and others, 2020b). Prediction intervals were calculated for SC and Cl by bootstrapping raster-cell predictions following methods from Ransom and others (2017). For a full description of modeling workflow and final model selection see Knierim and others (2020).

Microsoft Excel

from: https://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/datasets/car+evaluation

1. Title: Car Evaluation Database

2. Sources: (a) Creator: Marko Bohanec (b) Donors: Marko Bohanec (marko.bohanec@ijs.si) Blaz Zupan (blaz.zupan@ijs.si) (c) Date: June, 1997

3. Past Usage:

   The hierarchical decision model, from which this dataset is derived, was first presented in

   M. Bohanec and V. Rajkovic: Knowledge acquisition and explanation for multi-attribute decision making. In 8th Intl Workshop on Expert Systems and their Applications, Avignon, France. pages 59-78, 1988.

   Within machine-learning, this dataset was used for the evaluation of HINT (Hierarchy INduction Tool), which was proved to be able to completely reconstruct the original hierarchical model. This, together with a comparison with C4.5, is presented in

   B. Zupan, M. Bohanec, I. Bratko, J. Demsar: Machine learning by function decomposition. ICML-97, Nashville, TN. 1997 (to appear)

4. Relevant Information Paragraph:

   Car Evaluation Database was derived from a simple hierarchical decision model originally developed for the demonstration of DEX (M. Bohanec, V. Rajkovic: Expert system for decision making. Sistemica 1(1), pp. 145-157, 1990.). The model evaluates cars according to the following concept structure:

   CAR car acceptability . PRICE overall price . . buying buying price . . maint price of the maintenance . TECH technical characteristics . . COMFORT comfort . . . doors number of doors . . . persons capacity in terms of persons to carry . . . lug_boot the size of luggage boot . . safety estimated safety of the car

   Input attributes are printed in lowercase. Besides the target concept (CAR), the model includes three intermediate concepts: PRICE, TECH, COMFORT. Every concept is in the original model related to its lower level descendants by a set of examples (for these examples sets see http://www-ai.ijs.si/BlazZupan/car.html).

   The Car Evaluation Database contains examples with the structural information removed, i.e., directly relates CAR to the six input attributes: buying, maint, doors, persons, lug_boot, safety.

   Because of known underlying concept structure, this database may be particularly useful for testing constructive induction and structure discovery methods.

5. Number of Instances: 1728 (instances completely cover the attribute space)

6. Number of Attributes: 6

7. Attribute Values:

   buying v-high, high, med, low maint v-high, high, med, low doors 2, 3, 4, 5-more persons 2, 4, more lug_boot small, med, big safety low, med, high

8. Missing Attribute Values: none

9. Class Distribution (number of instances per class)

   class N N[%]

   unacc 1210 (70.023 %) acc 384 (22.222 %) good 69 ( 3.993 %) v-good 65 ( 3.762 %)

Geothermal power plants typically show decreasing heat and power production rates over time. Mitigation strategies include optimizing the management of existing wells - increasing or decreasing the fluid flow rates across the wells - and drilling new wells at appropriate locations. The latter is expensive, time-consuming, and subject to many engineering constraints, but the former is a viable mechanism for periodic adjustment of the available fluid allocations. Data and supporting literature from a study describing a new approach combining reservoir modeling and machine learning to produce models that enable strategies for the mitigation of decreased heat and power production rates over time for geothermal power plants. The computational approach used enables translation of sets of potential flow rates for the active wells into reservoir-wide estimates of produced energy and discovery of optimal flow allocations among the studied sets. In our computational experiments, we utilize collections of simulations for a specific reservoir (which capture subsurface characterization and realize history matching) along with machine learning models that predict temperature and pressure timeseries for production wells. We evaluate this approach using an "open-source" reservoir we have constructed that captures many of the characteristics of Brady Hot Springs, a commercially operational geothermal field in Nevada, USA. Selected results from a reservoir model of Brady Hot Springs itself are presented to show successful application to an existing system. In both cases, energy predictions prove to be highly accurate: all observed prediction errors do not exceed 3.68% for temperatures and 4.75% for pressures. In a cumulative energy estimation, we observe prediction errors that are less than 4.04%. A typical reservoir simulation for Brady Hot Springs completes in approximately 4 hours, whereas our machine learning models yield accurate 20-year predictions for temperatures, pressures, and produced energy in 0.9 seconds. This paper aims to demonstrate how the models and techniques from our study can be applied to achieve rapid exploration of controlled parameters and optimization of other geothermal reservoirs. Includes a synthetic, yet realistic, model of a geothermal reservoir, referred to as open-source reservoir (OSR). OSR is a 10-well (4 injection wells and 6 production wells) system that resembles Brady Hot Springs (a commercially operational geothermal field in Nevada, USA) at a high level but has a number of sufficiently modified characteristics (which renders any possible similarity between specific characteristics like temperatures and pressures as purely random). We study OSR through CMG simulations with a wide range of flow allocation scenarios. Includes a dataset with 101 simulated scenarios that cover the period of time between 2020 and 2040 and a link to the published paper about this project, where we focus on the Machine Learning work for predicting OSR's energy production based on the simulation data, as well as a link to the GitHub repository where we have published the code we have developed (please refer to the repository's readme file to see instructions on how to run the code). Additional links are included to associated work led by the USGS to identify geologic factors associated with well productivity in geothermal fields. Below are the high-level steps for applying the same modeling + ML process to other geothermal reservoirs: 1. Develop a geologic model of the geothermal field. The location of faults, upflow zones, aquifers, etc. need to be accounted for as accurately as possible 2. The geologic model needs to be converted to a reservoir model that can be used in a reservoir simulator, such as, for instance, CMG STARS, TETRAD, or FALCON 3. Using native state modeling, the initial temperature and pressure distributions are evaluated, and they become the initial conditions for dynamic reservoir simulations 4. Using history matching with tracers and available production data, the model should be tuned to represent the subsurface reservoir as accurately as possible 5. A large number of simulations is run using the history-matched reservoir model. Each simulation assumes a different wellbore flow rate allocation across the injection and production wells, where the individual selected flow rates do not violate the practical constraints for the corresponding wells. 6. ML models are trained using the simulation data. The code in our GitHub repository demonstrates how these models can be trained and evaluated. 7. The trained ML models can be used to evaluate a large set of candidate flow allocations with the goal of selecting the most optimal allocations, i.e., producing the largest amounts of thermal energy over the modeled period of time. The referenced paper provides more details about this optimization process

Antibacterial drugs (AD) change the metabolic status of bacteria, contributing to bacterial death. However, antibiotic resistance and the emergence of multidrug-resistant bacteria increase interest in understanding metabolic network (MN) mutations and the interaction of AD vs MN. In this study, we employed the IFPTML = Information Fusion (IF) + Perturbation Theory (PT) + Machine Learning (ML) algorithm on a huge dataset from the ChEMBL database, which contains

155,000 AD assays vs >40 MNs of multiple bacteria species. We built a linear discriminant analysis (LDA) and 17 ML models centered on the linear index and based on atoms to predict antibacterial compounds. The IFPTML-LDA model presented the following results for the training subset: specificity (Sp) = 76% out of 70,000 cases, sensitivity (Sn) = 70%, and Accuracy (Acc) = 73%. The same model also presented the following results for the validation subsets: Sp = 76%, Sn = 70%, and Acc = 73.1%. Among the IFPTML nonlinear models, the k nearest neighbors (KNN) showed the best results with Sn = 99.2%, Sp = 95.5%, Acc = 97.4%, and Area Under Receiver Operating Characteristic (AUROC) = 0.998 in training sets. In the validation series, the Random Forest had the best results: Sn = 93.96% and Sp = 87.02% (AUROC = 0.945). The IFPTML linear and nonlinear models regarding the ADs vs MNs have good statistical parameters, and they could contribute toward finding new metabolic mutations in antibiotic resistance and reducing time/costs in antibacterial drug research.

This model archive contains the input data, model code, and model outputs for machine learning models that predict daily non-tidal stream salinity (specific conductance) for a network of 459 modeled stream segments across the Delaware River Basin (DRB) from 1984-09-30 to 2021-12-31. There are a total of twelve models from combinations of two machine learning models (Random Forest and Recurrent Graph Convolution Neural Networks), two training/testing partitions (spatial and temporal), and three input attribute sets (dynamic attributes, dynamic and static attributes, and dynamic attributes and a minimum set of static attributes). In addition to the inputs and outputs for non-tidal predictions provided on the landing page, we also provide example predictions for models trained with additional tidal stream segments within the model archive (TidalExample folder), but we do not recommend our models for this use case. Model outputs contained within the model archive include performance metrics, plots of spatial and temporal errors, and Shapley (SHAP) explainable artificial intelligence plots for the best models. The results of these models provide insights into DRB stream segments with elevated salinity, and processes that drive stream salinization across the DRB, which may be used to inform salinity management. This data compilation was funded by the USGS.

This raster file represents land of various geographic locations within the state of Idaho classified as either “irrigated” with a cell value of 1 or “non-irrigated” with a cell value of 0 at various spatial resolutions (typically 10-meter or 30-meter). These classifications were determined at the pixel level by a Random Forest supervised machine learning methodology. Random Forest models are often used to classify large datasets accurately and efficiently by assigning each pixel to one of a pre-determined set of labels or groups. The model works by using decision trees that split the data based on characteristics that make the resulting groups as different from each other as possible. The model “learns” the characteristics that correlate to each label based on manually classified data points, also known as training data. A variety of data can be supplied as input to the Random Forest model for it to use in making its classification determinations. Irrigation produces distinct signals in observational data that can be identified by machine learning algorithms. Additionally, datasets that provide the model with information on landscape characteristics that often influence whether irrigation is present are also useful. Examples of input data may include: top-of-atmosphere reflectance data from Landsat 5, Landsat7, Landsat8, or Landsat9; United States Geological Survey National Elevation Dataset (USGS NED) data; and Height Above Nearest Drainage (HAND) data. The final model results are manually reviewed prior to release, however, no extensive ground truthing process is implemented. The raster data behind these footprints may be downloaded as a zip file from ArcGIS Online or IDWR's Data Hub. Links to access the data are provided in the pop-up for each dataset.

The dataset contains information about appeal cases heard at the Supreme Court of Nigeria (SCN) between the years 1962 to 2022. The dataset was extracted from case files that were provided by The Prison Law Pavillion; a data archiving firm in Nigeria. The dataset originally consisted of documentation of the various appeal cases alongside the outcome of the judgment of the SCN. Feature extraction techniques were used to generate a structured dataset containing information about a number of annotated features. Some of the features were stored as string values while some of the features were stored as numeric values. The dataset consists of information about 14 features including the outcome of the judgment. 13 features are the input variables among which 4 are stored as strings while the remaining 9 were stored as numeric values. Missing values among the numeric values were represented using the value -1. Unsupervised and Supervised machine learning algorithms can be applied to the dataset for the purpose of extracting important information required for gaining a better understanding of the relationship that exists among the features and with respect to predicting the target class which is the outcome of the SCN judgment.

Malaria is the leading cause of death in the African region. Data mining can help extract valuable knowledge from available data in the healthcare sector. This makes it possible to train models to predict patient health faster than in clinical trials. Implementations of various machine learning algorithms such as K-Nearest Neighbors, Bayes Theorem, Logistic Regression, Support Vector Machines, and Multinomial Naïve Bayes (MNB), etc., has been applied to malaria datasets in public hospitals, but there are still limitations in modeling using the Naive Bayes multinomial algorithm. This study applies the MNB model to explore the relationship between 15 relevant attributes of public hospitals data. The goal is to examine how the dependency between attributes affects the performance of the classifier. MNB creates transparent and reliable graphical representation between attributes with the ability to predict new situations. The model (MNB) has 97% accuracy. It is concluded that this model outperforms the GNB classifier which has 100% accuracy and the RF which also has 100% accuracy. Methods Prior to collection of data, the researcher was be guided by all ethical training certification on data collection, right to confidentiality and privacy reserved called Institutional Review Board (IRB). Data was be collected from the manual archive of the Hospitals purposively selected using stratified sampling technique, transform the data to electronic form and store in MYSQL database called malaria. Each patient file was extracted and review for signs and symptoms of malaria then check for laboratory confirmation result from diagnosis. The data was be divided into two tables: the first table was called data1 which contain data for use in phase 1 of the classification, while the second table data2 which contains data for use in phase 2 of the classification. Data Source Collection Malaria incidence data set is obtained from Public hospitals from 2017 to 2021. These are the data used for modeling and analysis. Also, putting in mind the geographical location and socio-economic factors inclusive which are available for patients inhabiting those areas. Naive Bayes (Multinomial) is the model used to analyze the collected data for malaria disease prediction and grading accordingly. Data Preprocessing: Data preprocessing shall be done to remove noise and outlier. Transformation: The data shall be transformed from analog to electronic record. Data Partitioning The data which shall be collected will be divided into two portions; one portion of the data shall be extracted as a training set, while the other portion will be used for testing. The training portion shall be taken from a table stored in a database and will be called data which is training set1, while the training portion taking from another table store in a database is shall be called data which is training set2. The dataset was split into two parts: a sample containing 70% of the training data and 30% for the purpose of this research. Then, using MNB classification algorithms implemented in Python, the models were trained on the training sample. On the 30% remaining data, the resulting models were tested, and the results were compared with the other Machine Learning models using the standard metrics. Classification and prediction: Base on the nature of variable in the dataset, this study will use Naïve Bayes (Multinomial) classification techniques; Classification phase 1 and Classification phase 2. The operation of the framework is illustrated as follows: i. Data collection and preprocessing shall be done. ii. Preprocess data shall be stored in a training set 1 and training set 2. These datasets shall be used during classification. iii. Test data set is shall be stored in database test data set. iv. Part of the test data set must be compared for classification using classifier 1 and the remaining part must be classified with classifier 2 as follows: Classifier phase 1: It classify into positive or negative classes. If the patient is having malaria, then the patient is classified as positive (P), while a patient is classified as negative (N) if the patient does not have malaria.
Classifier phase 2: It classify only data set that has been classified as positive by classifier 1, and then further classify them into complicated and uncomplicated class label. The classifier will also capture data on environmental factors, genetics, gender and age, cultural and socio-economic variables. The system will be designed such that the core parameters as a determining factor should supply their value.

Dataset Description: Best XGBoost Model for Obesity Prediction

The dataset comprises a trained XGBoost model, "best_xgb_model.pkl," specifically designed for predicting obesity levels based on individual characteristics and behaviors. This model has undergone thorough optimization and hyperparameter tuning to achieve the highest accuracy in predicting obesity across different levels.

Features: - The dataset does not include raw features but encapsulates the learned patterns and relationships within the XGBoost model.

Target Variable: - Obesity Level: The model is trained to predict different levels of obesity based on a set of input features.

Model Characteristics: - Algorithm: Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) was selected as the algorithm of choice for its superior performance in predicting obesity levels. - Hyperparameter Tuning: The model's hyperparameters have been carefully tuned to achieve optimal performance in terms of accuracy, precision, recall, and F1 score.

Use Case: - The dataset is intended for deployment in applications where real-time predictions or batch predictions of obesity levels are required. - Health professionals, researchers, and organizations focused on obesity management can benefit from integrating this model into their systems.

File Information: - File Format: best_xgb_model.pkl - Model Loading: The model can be loaded using Python's joblib or pickle libraries.

Note: This dataset serves as a valuable tool for anyone seeking a pre-trained, optimized model for obesity prediction. Users can seamlessly integrate the model into their applications, making informed decisions related to health and lifestyle based on predicted obesity levels.

This dataset contains product prices from Amazon Canada, with a focus on price prediction. With a good amount of data on what price points sell the most, you can train machine learning models to predict the optimal price for a product based on its features and product name.

If you find this dataset useful, make sure to show your appreciation by upvoting! ❤️✨

Inspirations

This dataset is a superset of my Amazon Canada product price dataset. Another inspiration is this competition that awareded 100K Prize Money

What To Do?

• Your objective is to create a prediction model that will assist sellers in pricing their products within the optimal price range to generate the most sales.
• The dataset includes various data points, such as the number of reviews, rating, best seller status, and items sold last month.
• You can select specific factors (e.g., over 100 reviews = optimal price for the product) and then divide the dataset into products priced optimally vs products priced unoptimally.
• By utilizing techniques like vectorizing product names and features, you can train a model to provide the optimal price for a product, which sellers or businesses might find valuable.

How to know if a product sells?

• I would prefer to use the number of reviews as a metric to determine if a product sells. More reviews = more sales, right?
• According to one source only 1-2% of buyers leave a review
• So if we multiply the reviews for a product by 50x, then we would get a good understanding how many units has sold.
• If we then multiple the product price by number of units sold, we'd get the total revenue generated by the product

How is this useful?

• Sellers and businesses can leverage your model to determine the optimal price for their products, thereby maximizing sales.
• Businesses can assess the profitability of a product and plan their supply chain accordingly.