This dataset is available on Brisbane City Council’s open data website – data.brisbane.qld.gov.au. The site provides additional features for viewing and interacting with the data and for downloading the data in various formats.

Monthly analytics reports for the Brisbane City Council website

Information regarding the sessions for Brisbane City Council website during the month including search terms used.

This dataset provides detailed insights and best practices for tracking and measuring local SEO performance across a range of critical metrics, including Google Business Profile engagement, local keyword rankings, website traffic from local searches, citation management, mobile optimization, and ROI calculation. The data is based on expert analysis and recommendations to help local businesses optimize their local search visibility and drive measurable results.

Code:

Packet_Features_Generator.py & Features.py

To run this code:

pkt_features.py [-h] -i TXTFILE [-x X] [-y Y] [-z Z] [-ml] [-s S] -j

-h, --help show this help message and exit -i TXTFILE input text file -x X Add first X number of total packets as features. -y Y Add first Y number of negative packets as features. -z Z Add first Z number of positive packets as features. -ml Output to text file all websites in the format of websiteNumber1,feature1,feature2,... -s S Generate samples using size s. -j

Purpose:

Turns a text file containing lists of incomeing and outgoing network packet sizes into separate website objects with associative features.

Uses Features.py to calcualte the features.

startMachineLearning.sh & machineLearning.py

To run this code:

bash startMachineLearning.sh

This code then runs machineLearning.py in a tmux session with the nessisary file paths and flags

Options (to be edited within this file):

--evaluate-only to test 5 fold cross validation accuracy

--test-scaling-normalization to test 6 different combinations of scalers and normalizers

Note: once the best combination is determined, it should be added to the data_preprocessing function in machineLearning.py for future use

--grid-search to test the best grid search hyperparameters - note: the possible hyperparameters must be added to train_model under 'if not evaluateOnly:' - once best hyperparameters are determined, add them to train_model under 'if evaluateOnly:'

Purpose:

Using the .ml file generated by Packet_Features_Generator.py & Features.py, this program trains a RandomForest Classifier on the provided data and provides results using cross validation. These results include the best scaling and normailzation options for each data set as well as the best grid search hyperparameters based on the provided ranges.

Data

Encrypted network traffic was collected on an isolated computer visiting different Wikipedia and New York Times articles, different Google search queres (collected in the form of their autocomplete results and their results page), and different actions taken on a Virtual Reality head set.

Data for this experiment was stored and analyzed in the form of a txt file for each experiment which contains:

First number is a classification number to denote what website, query, or vr action is taking place.

The remaining numbers in each line denote:

The size of a packet,

and the direction it is traveling.

negative numbers denote incoming packets

positive numbers denote outgoing packets

Figure 4 Data

This data uses specific lines from the Virtual Reality.txt file.

The action 'LongText Search' refers to a user searching for "Saint Basils Cathedral" with text in the Wander app.

The action 'ShortText Search' refers to a user searching for "Mexico" with text in the Wander app.

The .xlsx and .csv file are identical

Each file includes (from right to left):

The origional packet data,

each line of data organized from smallest to largest packet size in order to calculate the mean and standard deviation of each packet capture,

and the final Cumulative Distrubution Function (CDF) caluclation that generated the Figure 4 Graph.

This dataset includes data on the words and phrases input by users in search bars that look through the data catalog for relevant information. Catalog searches using the Discovery API are not included.

Each row in the dataset indicates the number of catalog searches made using the search term from the specified user segment during the noted hour.

• site member: users who have logged in and have been granted a role on the domain
• community user: users who have logged in but do not have a role on the domain
• anonymous: users who have not logged in to the domain

Data are updated by a system process at least once a day.

Please see Site Analytics: Catalog Search Terms for more detail.

This dataset originates from DataCamp. Many users have reposted copies of the CSV on Kaggle, but most of those uploads omit the original instructions, business context, and problem framing. In this upload, I’ve included that missing context in the About Dataset so the reader of my notebook or any other notebook can fully understand how the data was intended to be used and the intended problem framing.

Note: I have also uploaded a visualization of the workflow I personally took to tackle this problem, but it is not part of the dataset itself. Additionally, I created a PowerPoint presentation based on my work in the notebook, which you can download from here:
PPTX Presentation

Recipe Site Traffic

From: Head of Data Science
Received: Today
Subject: New project from the product team

Hey!

I have a new project for you from the product team. Should be an interesting challenge. You can see the background and request in the email below.

I would like you to perform the analysis and write a short report for me. I want to be able to review your code as well as read your thought process for each step. I also want you to prepare and deliver the presentation for the product team - you are ready for the challenge!

They want us to predict which recipes will be popular 80% of the time and minimize the chance of showing unpopular recipes. I don't think that is realistic in the time we have, but do your best and present whatever you find.

You can find more details about what I expect you to do here. And information on the data here.

I will be on vacation for the next couple of weeks, but I know you can do this without my support. If you need to make any decisions, include them in your work and I will review them when I am back.

Good Luck!

From: Product Manager - Recipe Discovery
To: Head of Data Science
Received: Yesterday
Subject: Can you help us predict popular recipes?

Hi,

We haven't met before but I am responsible for choosing which recipes to display on the homepage each day. I have heard about what the data science team is capable of and I was wondering if you can help me choose which recipes we should display on the home page?

At the moment, I choose my favorite recipe from a selection and display that on the home page. We have noticed that traffic to the rest of the website goes up by as much as 40% if I pick a popular recipe. But I don't know how to decide if a recipe will be popular. More traffic means more subscriptions so this is really important to the company.

Can your team: - Predict which recipes will lead to high traffic? - Correctly predict high traffic recipes 80% of the time?

We need to make a decision on this soon, so I need you to present your results to me by the end of the month. Whatever your results, what do you recommend we do next?

Look forward to seeing your presentation.

About Tasty Bytes

Tasty Bytes was founded in 2020 in the midst of the Covid Pandemic. The world wanted inspiration so we decided to provide it. We started life as a search engine for recipes, helping people to find ways to use up the limited supplies they had at home.

Now, over two years on, we are a fully fledged business. For a monthly subscription we will put together a full meal plan to ensure you and your family are getting a healthy, balanced diet whatever your budget. Subscribe to our premium plan and we will also deliver the ingredients to your door.

Example Recipe

This is an example of how a recipe may appear on the website, we haven't included all of the steps but you should get an idea of what visitors to the site see.

Tomato Soup

Servings: 4
Time to make: 2 hours
Category: Lunch/Snack
Cost per serving: $

Nutritional Information (per serving) - Calories 123 - Carbohydrate 13g - Sugar 1g - Protein 4g

Ingredients: - Tomatoes - Onion - Carrot - Vegetable Stock

Method: 1. Cut the tomatoes into quarters….

Data Information

The product manager has tried to make this easier for us and provided data for each recipe, as well as whether there was high traffic when the recipe was featured on the home page.

As you will see, they haven't given us all of the information they have about each recipe.

You can find the data here.

I will let you decide how to process it, just make sure you include all your decisions in your report.

Don't forget to double check the data really does match what they say - it might not.

The Catalog Search Terms dataset captures the words and phrases input by users in search bars that look through the data catalog for relevant information. Data can also be categorized by user segments.

The Repository Analytics and Metrics Portal (RAMP) is a web service that aggregates use and performance use data of institutional repositories. The data are a subset of data from RAMP, the Repository Analytics and Metrics Portal (http://rampanalytics.org), consisting of data from all participating repositories for the calendar year 2018. For a description of the data collection, processing, and output methods, please see the "methods" section below. Note that the RAMP data model changed in August, 2018 and two sets of documentation are provided to describe data collection and processing before and after the change.

Methods

RAMP Data Documentation – January 1, 2017 through August 18, 2018

Data Collection

RAMP data were downloaded for participating IR from Google Search Console (GSC) via the Search Console API. The data consist of aggregated information about IR pages which appeared in search result pages (SERP) within Google properties (including web search and Google Scholar).

Data from January 1, 2017 through August 18, 2018 were downloaded in one dataset per participating IR. The following fields were downloaded for each URL, with one row per URL:

url: This is returned as a 'page' by the GSC API, and is the URL of the page which was included in an SERP for a Google property.
impressions: The number of times the URL appears within the SERP.
clicks: The number of clicks on a URL which took users to a page outside of the SERP.
clickThrough: Calculated as the number of clicks divided by the number of impressions.
position: The position of the URL within the SERP.
country: The country from which the corresponding search originated.
device: The device used for the search.
date: The date of the search.

Following data processing describe below, on ingest into RAMP an additional field, citableContent, is added to the page level data.

Note that no personally identifiable information is downloaded by RAMP. Google does not make such information available.

More information about click-through rates, impressions, and position is available from Google's Search Console API documentation: https://developers.google.com/webmaster-tools/search-console-api-original/v3/searchanalytics/query and https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/7042828?hl=en

Data Processing

Upon download from GSC, data are processed to identify URLs that point to citable content. Citable content is defined within RAMP as any URL which points to any type of non-HTML content file (PDF, CSV, etc.). As part of the daily download of statistics from Google Search Console (GSC), URLs are analyzed to determine whether they point to HTML pages or actual content files. URLs that point to content files are flagged as "citable content." In addition to the fields downloaded from GSC described above, following this brief analysis one more field, citableContent, is added to the data which records whether each URL in the GSC data points to citable content. Possible values for the citableContent field are "Yes" and "No."

Processed data are then saved in a series of Elasticsearch indices. From January 1, 2017, through August 18, 2018, RAMP stored data in one index per participating IR.

About Citable Content Downloads

Data visualizations and aggregations in RAMP dashboards present information about citable content downloads, or CCD. As a measure of use of institutional repository content, CCD represent click activity on IR content that may correspond to research use.

CCD information is summary data calculated on the fly within the RAMP web application. As noted above, data provided by GSC include whether and how many times a URL was clicked by users. Within RAMP, a "click" is counted as a potential download, so a CCD is calculated as the sum of clicks on pages/URLs that are determined to point to citable content (as defined above).

For any specified date range, the steps to calculate CCD are:

Filter data to only include rows where "citableContent" is set to "Yes."
Sum the value of the "clicks" field on these rows.

Output to CSV

Published RAMP data are exported from the production Elasticsearch instance and converted to CSV format. The CSV data consist of one "row" for each page or URL from a specific IR which appeared in search result pages (SERP) within Google properties as described above.

The data in these CSV files include the following fields:

url: This is returned as a 'page' by the GSC API, and is the URL of the page which was included in an SERP for a Google property.
impressions: The number of times the URL appears within the SERP.
clicks: The number of clicks on a URL which took users to a page outside of the SERP.
clickThrough: Calculated as the number of clicks divided by the number of impressions.
position: The position of the URL within the SERP.
country: The country from which the corresponding search originated.
device: The device used for the search.
date: The date of the search.
citableContent: Whether or not the URL points to a content file (ending with pdf, csv, etc.) rather than HTML wrapper pages. Possible values are Yes or No.
index: The Elasticsearch index corresponding to page click data for a single IR.
repository_id: This is a human readable alias for the index and identifies the participating repository corresponding to each row. As RAMP has undergone platform and version migrations over time, index names as defined for the index field have not remained consistent. That is, a single participating repository may have multiple corresponding Elasticsearch index names over time. The repository_id is a canonical identifier that has been added to the data to provide an identifier that can be used to reference a single participating repository across all datasets. Filtering and aggregation for individual repositories or groups of repositories should be done using this field.

Filenames for files containing these data follow the format 2018-01_RAMP_all.csv. Using this example, the file 2018-01_RAMP_all.csv contains all data for all RAMP participating IR for the month of January, 2018.

Data Collection from August 19, 2018 Onward

RAMP data are downloaded for participating IR from Google Search Console (GSC) via the Search Console API. The data consist of aggregated information about IR pages which appeared in search result pages (SERP) within Google properties (including web search and Google Scholar).

Data are downloaded in two sets per participating IR. The first set includes page level statistics about URLs pointing to IR pages and content files. The following fields are downloaded for each URL, with one row per URL:

url: This is returned as a 'page' by the GSC API, and is the URL of the page which was included in an SERP for a Google property.
impressions: The number of times the URL appears within the SERP.
clicks: The number of clicks on a URL which took users to a page outside of the SERP.
clickThrough: Calculated as the number of clicks divided by the number of impressions.
position: The position of the URL within the SERP.
date: The date of the search.

Following data processing describe below, on ingest into RAMP a additional field, citableContent, is added to the page level data.

The second set includes similar information, but instead of being aggregated at the page level, the data are grouped based on the country from which the user submitted the corresponding search, and the type of device used. The following fields are downloaded for combination of country and device, with one row per country/device combination:

country: The country from which the corresponding search originated.
device: The device used for the search.
impressions: The number of times the URL appears within the SERP.
clicks: The number of clicks on a URL which took users to a page outside of the SERP.
clickThrough: Calculated as the number of clicks divided by the number of impressions.
position: The position of the URL within the SERP.
date: The date of the search.

Note that no personally identifiable information is downloaded by RAMP. Google does not make such information available.

More information about click-through rates, impressions, and position is available from Google's Search Console API documentation: https://developers.google.com/webmaster-tools/search-console-api-original/v3/searchanalytics/query and https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/7042828?hl=en

Data Processing

Upon download from GSC, the page level data described above are processed to identify URLs that point to citable content. Citable content is defined within RAMP as any URL which points to any type of non-HTML content file (PDF, CSV, etc.). As part of the daily download of page level statistics from Google Search Console (GSC), URLs are analyzed to determine whether they point to HTML pages or actual content files. URLs that point to content files are flagged as "citable content." In addition to the fields downloaded from GSC described above, following this brief analysis one more field, citableContent, is added to the page level data which records whether each page/URL in the GSC data points to citable content. Possible values for the citableContent field are "Yes" and "No."

The data aggregated by the search country of origin and device type do not include URLs. No additional processing is done on these data. Harvested data are passed directly into Elasticsearch.

Processed data are then saved in a series of Elasticsearch indices. Currently, RAMP stores data in two indices per participating IR. One index includes the page level data, the second index includes the country of origin and device type data.

About Citable Content Downloads

Data visualizations and aggregations in RAMP dashboards present information about citable content downloads, or CCD. As a measure of use of institutional repository

Traffic analytics, rankings, and competitive metrics for test-ipv6.com as of September 2025

This Website Statistics dataset has four resources showing usage of the Lincolnshire Open Data website. Web analytics terms used in each resource are defined in their accompanying Metadata file.

• Website Usage Statistics: This document shows a statistical summary of usage of the Lincolnshire Open Data site for the latest calendar year.

• Website Statistics Summary: This dataset shows a website statistics summary for the Lincolnshire Open Data site for the latest calendar year.

• Webpage Statistics: This dataset shows statistics for individual Webpages on the Lincolnshire Open Data site by calendar year.

• Dataset Statistics: This dataset shows cumulative totals for Datasets on the Lincolnshire Open Data site that have also been published on the national Open Data site Data.Gov.UK - see the Source link.

  Note: Website and Webpage statistics (the first three resources above) show only UK users, and exclude API calls (automated requests for datasets). The Dataset Statistics are confined to users with javascript enabled, which excludes web crawlers and API calls.

These Website Statistics resources are updated annually in January by the Lincolnshire County Council Business Intelligence team. For any enquiries about the information contact opendata@lincolnshire.gov.uk.

health-check.jp is ranked #9816 in JP with 282.79K Traffic. Categories: Online Services. Learn more about website traffic, market share, and more!

Explore the dynamic Search Engine Marketing (SEM) market: drivers, trends, restraints, and forecasts. Discover key segments like PPC and web analytics, and leading companies shaping the future of online advertising.

Google is the leading search engine in South Africa. As of January 2023, almost ** percent of the searches on the web were conducted through this search engine. Its closest contender was Bing, with a share of *** percent. Yahoo! ranked third with a share of only *** percent.

test.mapnwea.org is ranked #13311 in US with 192.85K Traffic. Categories: . Learn more about website traffic, market share, and more!

Notice: You can check the new version 0.9.6 at the official page of Information Management Lab and at the Google Data Studio as well.

Description of the Report and Topic Justification

Now that the ICTs have matured, Information Organizations such as Libraries, Archives and Museums, also known as LAMs, proceed into the utilization of web technologies that are capable to expand the visibility and findability of their content. Within the current flourishing era of the semantic web, LAMs have voluminous amounts of web-based collections that are presented and digitally preserved through their websites. However, prior efforts indicate that LAMs suffer from fragmentation regarding the determination of well-informed strategies for improving the visibility and findability of their content on the Web (Vállez and Ventura, 2020; Krstić and Masliković, 2019; Voorbij, 2010). Several reasons related to this drawback. As such, administrators’ lack of data analytics competency in extracting and utilizing technical and behavioral datasets for improving visibility and awareness from analytics platforms; the difficulties in understanding web metrics that integrated into performance measurement systems; and hence the reduced capabilities in defining key performance indicators for greater usability, visibility, and awareness.

In this enriched and updated technical report, the authors proceed into an examination of 504 unique websites of Libraries, Archives and Museums from all over the world. It is noted that the current report has been expanded by up to 14,81% of the prior one Version 0.9.5 of 439 domains examinations. The report aims to visualize the performance of the websites in terms of technical aspects such as their adequacy to metadata description of their content and collections, their loading speed, and security. This constitutes an important stepping-stone for optimization, as the higher the alignment with the technical compliencies, the greater the users’ behavior and usability within the examined websites, and thus their findability and visibility level in search engines (Drivas et al. 2020; Mavridis and Symeonidis 2015; Agarwal et al. 2012).

One step further, within this version, we include behavioral analytics about users engagement with the content of the LAMs websites. More specifically, web analytics metrics are included such as Visit Duration, Pages per Visit, and Bounce Rates for 121 domains. We also include web analytics regarding the channels that these websites acquire their users, such as Direct traffic, Search Engines, Referral, Social Media, Email, and Display Advertising. SimilarWeb API was used to gather web data about the involved metrics.

In the first pages of this report, general information is presented regarding the names of the examined organizations. This also includes their type, their geographical location, information about the adopted Content Management Systems (CMSs), and web server software types of integration per website. Furthermore, several other data are visualized related to the size of the examined Information Organizations in terms of the number of unique webpages within a website, the number of images, internal and external links and so on.

Moreover, as a team, we proceed into the development of several factors that are capable to quantify the performance of websites. Reliability analysis takes place for measuring the internal consistency and discriminant validity of the proposed factors and their included variables. For testing the reliability, cohesion, and consistency of the included metrics, Cronbach’s Alpha (a), McDonald’s ω and Guttman λ-2 and λ-6 are used.
- For Cronbach’s, a range of .550 up to .750 indicates an acceptable level of reliability and .800 or higher a very good level (Ursachi, Horodnic, and Zait, 2015). - McDonald’s ω indicator has the advantage to measure the strength of the association between the proposed variables. More specifically, the closer to .999 the higher the strength association between the variables and vice versa (Şimşek and Noyan, 2013). - Gutman’s λ-2 and λ-6 work verifiably to Cronbach’s a as they estimate the trustworthiness of variance of the gathered web analytics metrics. Low values less than .450 indicate high bias among the harvested web metrics, while values higher than .600 and above increase the trustworthiness of the sample (Callender and Osburn, 1979). -Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) and Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity indicators are used for measuring the cohesion of the involved metrics. KMO and Bartlett’s test indicates that the closer the value is to .999 amongst the involved items, the higher the cohesion and consistency of them for potential categorization (Dziuban and S...

In March 2024, search platform Google.com generated approximately 85.5 billion visits, down from 87 billion platform visits in October 2023. Google is a global search platform and one of the biggest online companies worldwide.

This dataset contains network traffic logs captured by Burp-Suite, aimed at classifying web requests as either good or bad based on their characteristics. The dataset is designed for the task of predicting whether incoming requests are legitimate (good) or malicious (bad), aiding in the detection and prevention of web-based attacks.

List of bad words to check in the URL path

badwords = ['sleep', 'uid', 'select', 'waitfor', 'delay', 'system', 'union', 'order by', 'group by', 'admin', 'drop', 'script']

This is a web map used for testing search and rescue workflows. See the SAR and First Responders Geospatial Tookit for more information. You can search for this map in Explorer for ArcGIS to view the data.

Web Analytics Platform Market Outlook

According to our latest research, the global web analytics platform market size reached USD 7.6 billion in 2024 and is anticipated to grow at a robust CAGR of 17.8% from 2025 to 2033. By the end of the forecast period, the market is projected to achieve a value of USD 25.4 billion by 2033. The primary growth factor driving this expansion is the increasing demand for actionable insights from digital channels, which has encouraged organizations across industries to invest heavily in data-driven marketing and customer engagement strategies.

A significant catalyst for the web analytics platform market’s growth is the rapid adoption of digital transformation initiatives among enterprises. As businesses strive to enhance their online presence and improve customer experiences, the need to understand user behavior across websites, mobile apps, and social media platforms has become paramount. Web analytics platforms offer comprehensive tools for tracking, analyzing, and interpreting user interactions, enabling organizations to optimize content, personalize marketing efforts, and maximize conversion rates. The integration of advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence and machine learning further amplifies the capability of these platforms, allowing for predictive analytics and more precise targeting. This technological evolution has made web analytics indispensable for organizations seeking to maintain a competitive edge in the digital economy.

Another key growth driver is the exponential rise in e-commerce and digital advertising expenditures worldwide. Retailers and brands increasingly rely on web analytics platforms to monitor campaign performance, evaluate customer journeys, and allocate budgets more efficiently. The proliferation of multichannel marketing strategies, encompassing email, social media, search engines, and display advertising, has added complexity to digital marketing efforts. Web analytics platforms address this complexity by offering unified dashboards and cross-channel attribution models, which help marketers gain a holistic view of their campaigns’ effectiveness. Furthermore, the growing emphasis on data privacy and compliance has prompted vendors to enhance their solutions with robust security features, ensuring organizations can leverage analytics without compromising regulatory obligations.

The surge in remote work and digital collaboration, particularly following the global pandemic, has accelerated the adoption of cloud-based web analytics platforms. Organizations are increasingly favoring solutions that offer scalability, flexibility, and seamless integration with existing business systems. Cloud deployment models facilitate real-time data access and collaboration across geographically dispersed teams, supporting agile decision-making and faster response to market trends. Additionally, the democratization of analytics—through user-friendly interfaces and self-service features—has empowered non-technical users to derive insights independently, further broadening the market’s addressable base. These trends collectively underscore the sustained momentum of the web analytics platform market.

From a regional perspective, North America continues to dominate the web analytics platform market, accounting for the largest revenue share in 2024, followed by Europe and Asia Pacific. The presence of major technology vendors, high digital adoption rates, and mature online retail ecosystems contribute to North America’s leadership. Meanwhile, Asia Pacific is witnessing the fastest growth, driven by burgeoning internet penetration, rapid e-commerce expansion, and increasing investments in digital infrastructure across emerging economies such as China and India. Europe maintains a strong position due to stringent data privacy regulations, which have spurred demand for compliant analytics solutions. Latin America and the Middle East & Africa are also experiencing steady growth, albeit from a smaller base, as businesses in these regions accelerate their digital transformation journeys.

Component Analysis

The web analytics platform market by component is primarily segmented into software and services. The software segment dominates the market, reflecting the critical role of analytics engines, dashboards, and data visualization tools in extracting actionable insights from vast digital datasets. Modern web analytics software is equipped with advanced features suc

Considering dataset description

The user wants an improved description of the "online_shoppers_intention" dataset. I'll base the rewrite on metadata like 12,330 sessions, collected over a year, and incorporate details about the dataset’s purpose, data components, and possible uses. I could consider writing it as a cohesive paragraph or bullet points. I'll need to include citations too—let's search for further details on OpenML. Once I find that, I'll craft a clearer, more thorough description.

Thought for 5 seconds

Overview The Online Shoppers Purchasing Intention dataset captures 12,330 distinct web‐session records collected over a one‐year span from an e-commerce site, with each session belonging to a different visitor to prevent user‐ or campaign-specific biases. Originally published in 2017 and licensed under CC BY 4.0, it was curated by Sakar et al. for benchmarking classifiers on independent and identically distributed tabular data.

Features

• Numerical (10):

  • Administrative, Informational, ProductRelated (counts of pages visited) and their corresponding _Duration fields (total time in seconds spent on those pages).
  • BounceRates, ExitRates (average session‐level bounce and exit rates) and PageValues (average monetary value of pages preceding a purchase).
  • SpecialDay (normalized [0 – 1] indicator of how close the visit was to major shopping holidays, e.g. Valentine’s Day).

• Categorical (7):

  • Month (Aug – Sep), OperatingSystems (8 codes), Browser (13 codes), Region (9 codes), TrafficType (20 codes), VisitorType (“New_Visitor,” “Returning_Visitor,” “Other”), and Weekend (True/False).

Target and Class Distribution

• Revenue (False/True) denotes whether the session ended in a purchase.
• Of the 12,330 sessions, 84.5 % (10,422) did not result in revenue, while 15.5 % (1,908) did.

Intended Use This dataset is ideal for developing and comparing binary classification models—ranging from multilayer perceptrons and LSTM networks to tree-based methods—to predict online purchasing intention in a controlled, time-invariant setting.

search-owl.com is ranked #2259 in DE with 1.61M Traffic. Categories: . Learn more about website traffic, market share, and more!