The USDA Agricultural Research Service (ARS) recently established SCINet , which consists of a shared high performance computing resource, Ceres, and the dedicated high-speed Internet2 network used to access Ceres. Current and potential SCINet users are using and generating very large datasets so SCINet needs to be provisioned with adequate data storage for their active computing. It is not designed to hold data beyond active research phases. At the same time, the National Agricultural Library has been developing the Ag Data Commons, a research data catalog and repository designed for public data release and professional data curation. Ag Data Commons needs to anticipate the size and nature of data it will be tasked with handling. The ARS Web-enabled Databases Working Group, organized under the SCINet initiative, conducted a study to establish baseline data storage needs and practices, and to make projections that could inform future infrastructure design, purchases, and policies. The SCINet Web-enabled Databases Working Group helped develop the survey which is the basis for an internal report. While the report was for internal use, the survey and resulting data may be generally useful and are being released publicly. From October 24 to November 8, 2016 we administered a 17-question survey (Appendix A) by emailing a Survey Monkey link to all ARS Research Leaders, intending to cover data storage needs of all 1,675 SY (Category 1 and Category 4) scientists. We designed the survey to accommodate either individual researcher responses or group responses. Research Leaders could decide, based on their unit's practices or their management preferences, whether to delegate response to a data management expert in their unit, to all members of their unit, or to themselves collate responses from their unit before reporting in the survey. Larger storage ranges cover vastly different amounts of data so the implications here could be significant depending on whether the true amount is at the lower or higher end of the range. Therefore, we requested more detail from "Big Data users," those 47 respondents who indicated they had more than 10 to 100 TB or over 100 TB total current data (Q5). All other respondents are called "Small Data users." Because not all of these follow-up requests were successful, we used actual follow-up responses to estimate likely responses for those who did not respond. We defined active data as data that would be used within the next six months. All other data would be considered inactive, or archival. To calculate per person storage needs we used the high end of the reported range divided by 1 for an individual response, or by G, the number of individuals in a group response. For Big Data users we used the actual reported values or estimated likely values. Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: Appendix A: ARS data storage survey questions. File Name: Appendix A.pdfResource Description: The full list of questions asked with the possible responses. The survey was not administered using this PDF but the PDF was generated directly from the administered survey using the Print option under Design Survey. Asterisked questions were required. A list of Research Units and their associated codes was provided in a drop down not shown here. Resource Software Recommended: Adobe Acrobat,url: https://get.adobe.com/reader/ Resource Title: CSV of Responses from ARS Researcher Data Storage Survey. File Name: Machine-readable survey response data.csvResource Description: CSV file includes raw responses from the administered survey, as downloaded unfiltered from Survey Monkey, including incomplete responses. Also includes additional classification and calculations to support analysis. Individual email addresses and IP addresses have been removed. This information is that same data as in the Excel spreadsheet (also provided).Resource Title: Responses from ARS Researcher Data Storage Survey. File Name: Data Storage Survey Data for public release.xlsxResource Description: MS Excel worksheet that Includes raw responses from the administered survey, as downloaded unfiltered from Survey Monkey, including incomplete responses. Also includes additional classification and calculations to support analysis. Individual email addresses and IP addresses have been removed.Resource Software Recommended: Microsoft Excel,url: https://products.office.com/en-us/excel

Excel spreadsheets by species (4 letter code is abbreviation for genus and species used in study, year 2010 or 2011 is year data collected, SH indicates data for Science Hub, date is date of file preparation). The data in a file are described in a read me file which is the first worksheet in each file. Each row in a species spreadsheet is for one plot (plant). The data themselves are in the data worksheet. One file includes a read me description of the column in the date set for chemical analysis. In this file one row is an herbicide treatment and sample for chemical analysis (if taken). This dataset is associated with the following publication: Olszyk , D., T. Pfleeger, T. Shiroyama, M. Blakely-Smith, E. Lee , and M. Plocher. Plant reproduction is altered by simulated herbicide drift toconstructed plant communities. ENVIRONMENTAL TOXICOLOGY AND CHEMISTRY. Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Pensacola, FL, USA, 36(10): 2799-2813, (2017).

BackgroundMicrosoft Excel automatically converts certain gene symbols, database accessions, and other alphanumeric text into dates, scientific notation, and other numerical representations. These conversions lead to subsequent, irreversible, corruption of the imported text. A recent survey of popular genomic literature estimates that one-fifth of all papers with supplementary gene lists suffer from this issue.ResultsHere, we present an open-source tool, Escape Excel, which prevents these erroneous conversions by generating an escaped text file that can be safely imported into Excel. Escape Excel is implemented in a variety of formats (http://www.github.com/pstew/escape_excel), including a command line based Perl script, a Windows-only Excel Add-In, an OS X drag-and-drop application, a simple web-server, and as a Galaxy web environment interface. Test server implementations are accessible as a Galaxy interface (http://apostl.moffitt.org) and simple non-Galaxy web server (http://apostl.moffitt.org:8000/).ConclusionsEscape Excel detects and escapes a wide variety of problematic text strings so that they are not erroneously converted into other representations upon importation into Excel. Examples of problematic strings include date-like strings, time-like strings, leading zeroes in front of numbers, and long numeric and alphanumeric identifiers that should not be automatically converted into scientific notation. It is hoped that greater awareness of these potential data corruption issues, together with diligent escaping of text files prior to importation into Excel, will help to reduce the amount of Excel-corrupted data in scientific analyses and publications.

To create the dataset, the top 10 countries leading in the incidence of COVID-19 in the world were selected as of October 22, 2020 (on the eve of the second full of pandemics), which are presented in the Global 500 ranking for 2020: USA, India, Brazil, Russia, Spain, France and Mexico. For each of these countries, no more than 10 of the largest transnational corporations included in the Global 500 rating for 2020 and 2019 were selected separately. The arithmetic averages were calculated and the change (increase) in indicators such as profitability and profitability of enterprises, their ranking position (competitiveness), asset value and number of employees. The arithmetic mean values of these indicators for all countries of the sample were found, characterizing the situation in international entrepreneurship as a whole in the context of the COVID-19 crisis in 2020 on the eve of the second wave of the pandemic. The data is collected in a general Microsoft Excel table. Dataset is a unique database that combines COVID-19 statistics and entrepreneurship statistics. The dataset is flexible data that can be supplemented with data from other countries and newer statistics on the COVID-19 pandemic. Due to the fact that the data in the dataset are not ready-made numbers, but formulas, when adding and / or changing the values in the original table at the beginning of the dataset, most of the subsequent tables will be automatically recalculated and the graphs will be updated. This allows the dataset to be used not just as an array of data, but as an analytical tool for automating scientific research on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and crisis on international entrepreneurship. The dataset includes not only tabular data, but also charts that provide data visualization. The dataset contains not only actual, but also forecast data on morbidity and mortality from COVID-19 for the period of the second wave of the pandemic in 2020. The forecasts are presented in the form of a normal distribution of predicted values and the probability of their occurrence in practice. This allows for a broad scenario analysis of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and crisis on international entrepreneurship, substituting various predicted morbidity and mortality rates in risk assessment tables and obtaining automatically calculated consequences (changes) on the characteristics of international entrepreneurship. It is also possible to substitute the actual values identified in the process and following the results of the second wave of the pandemic to check the reliability of pre-made forecasts and conduct a plan-fact analysis. The dataset contains not only the numerical values of the initial and predicted values of the set of studied indicators, but also their qualitative interpretation, reflecting the presence and level of risks of a pandemic and COVID-19 crisis for international entrepreneurship.

This article describes a free, open-source collection of templates for the popular Excel (2013, and later versions) spreadsheet program. These templates are spreadsheet files that allow easy and intuitive learning and the implementation of practical examples concerning descriptive statistics, random variables, confidence intervals, and hypothesis testing. Although they are designed to be used with Excel, they can also be employed with other free spreadsheet programs (changing some particular formulas). Moreover, we exploit some possibilities of the ActiveX controls of the Excel Developer Menu to perform interactive Gaussian density charts. Finally, it is important to note that they can be often embedded in a web page, so it is not necessary to employ Excel software for their use. These templates have been designed as a useful tool to teach basic statistics and to carry out data analysis even when the students are not familiar with Excel. Additionally, they can be used as a complement to other analytical software packages. They aim to assist students in learning statistics, within an intuitive working environment. Supplementary materials with the Excel templates are available online.

Spatial analysis and statistical summaries of the Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) provide land managers and decision makers with a general assessment of management intent for biodiversity protection, natural resource management, and recreation access across the nation. The PAD-US 3.0 Combined Fee, Designation, Easement feature class (with Military Lands and Tribal Areas from the Proclamation and Other Planning Boundaries feature class) was modified to remove overlaps, avoiding overestimation in protected area statistics and to support user needs. A Python scripted process ("PADUS3_0_CreateVectorAnalysisFileScript.zip") associated with this data release prioritized overlapping designations (e.g. Wilderness within a National Forest) based upon their relative biodiversity conservation status (e.g. GAP Status Code 1 over 2), public access values (in the order of Closed, Restricted, Open, Unknown), and geodatabase load order (records are deliberately organized in the PAD-US full inventory with fee owned lands loaded before overlapping management designations, and easements). The Vector Analysis File ("PADUS3_0VectorAnalysisFile_ClipCensus.zip") associated item of PAD-US 3.0 Spatial Analysis and Statistics ( https://doi.org/10.5066/P9KLBB5D ) was clipped to the Census state boundary file to define the extent and serve as a common denominator for statistical summaries. Boundaries of interest to stakeholders (State, Department of the Interior Region, Congressional District, County, EcoRegions I-IV, Urban Areas, Landscape Conservation Cooperative) were incorporated into separate geodatabase feature classes to support various data summaries ("PADUS3_0VectorAnalysisFileOtherExtents_Clip_Census.zip") and Comma-separated Value (CSV) tables ("PADUS3_0SummaryStatistics_TabularData_CSV.zip") summarizing "PADUS3_0VectorAnalysisFileOtherExtents_Clip_Census.zip" are provided as an alternative format and enable users to explore and download summary statistics of interest (Comma-separated Table [CSV], Microsoft Excel Workbook [.XLSX], Portable Document Format [.PDF] Report) from the PAD-US Lands and Inland Water Statistics Dashboard ( https://www.usgs.gov/programs/gap-analysis-project/science/pad-us-statistics ). In addition, a "flattened" version of the PAD-US 3.0 combined file without other extent boundaries ("PADUS3_0VectorAnalysisFile_ClipCensus.zip") allow for other applications that require a representation of overall protection status without overlapping designation boundaries. The "PADUS3_0VectorAnalysis_State_Clip_CENSUS2020" feature class ("PADUS3_0VectorAnalysisFileOtherExtents_Clip_Census.gdb") is the source of the PAD-US 3.0 raster files (associated item of PAD-US 3.0 Spatial Analysis and Statistics, https://doi.org/10.5066/P9KLBB5D ). Note, the PAD-US inventory is now considered functionally complete with the vast majority of land protection types represented in some manner, while work continues to maintain updates and improve data quality (see inventory completeness estimates at: http://www.protectedlands.net/data-stewards/ ). In addition, changes in protected area status between versions of the PAD-US may be attributed to improving the completeness and accuracy of the spatial data more than actual management actions or new acquisitions. USGS provides no legal warranty for the use of this data. While PAD-US is the official aggregation of protected areas ( https://www.fgdc.gov/ngda-reports/NGDA_Datasets.html ), agencies are the best source of their lands data.

The Nuclear Medicine National HQ System database is a series of MS Excel spreadsheets and Access Database Tables by fiscal year. They consist of information from all Veterans Affairs Medical Centers (VAMCs) performing or contracting nuclear medicine services in Veterans Affairs medical facilities. The medical centers are required to complete questionnaires annually (RCS 10-0010-Nuclear Medicine Service Annual Report). The information is then manually entered into the Access Tables, which includes: * Distribution and cost of in-house VA - Contract Physician Services, whether contracted services are made via sharing agreement (with another VA medical facility or other government medical providers) or with private providers. * Workload data for the performance and/or purchase of PET/CT studies. * Organizational structure of services. * Updated changes in key imaging service personnel (chiefs, chief technicians, radiation safety officers). * Workload data on the number and type of studies (scans) performed, including Medicare Relative Value Units (RVUs), also referred to as Weighted Work Units (WWUs). WWUs are a workload measure calculated as the product of a study's Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code, which consists of total work costs (the cost of physician medical expertise and time), and total practice costs (the costs of running a practice, such as equipment, supplies, salaries, utilities etc). Medicare combines WWUs together with one other parameter to derive RVUs, a workload measure widely used in the health care industry. WWUs allow Nuclear Medicine to account for the complexity of each study in assessing workload, that some studies are more time consuming and require higher levels of expertise. This gives a more accurate picture of workload; productivity etc than using just 'total studies' would yield. * A detailed Full-Time Equivalent Employee (FTEE) grid, and staffing distributions of FTEEs across nuclear medicine services. * Information on Radiation Safety Committees and Radiation Safety Officers (RSOs). Beginning in 2011 this will include data collection on part-time and non VA (contract) RSOs; other affiliations they may have and if so to whom they report (supervision) at their VA medical center.Collection of data on nuclear medicine services' progress in meeting the special needs of our female veterans. Revolving documentation of all major VA-owned gamma cameras (by type) and computer systems, their specifications and ages. * Revolving data collection for PET/CT cameras owned or leased by VA; and the numbers and types of PET/CT studies performed on VA patients whether produced on-site, via mobile PET/CT contract or from non-VA providers in the community. Types of educational training/certification programs available at VA sites * Ongoing funded research projects by Nuclear Medicine (NM) staff, identified by source of funding and research purpose. * Data on physician-specific quality indicators at each nuclear medicine service. Academic achievements by NM staff, including published books/chapters, journals and abstracts. * Information from polling field sites re: relevant issues and programs Headquarters needs to address. * Results of a Congressionally mandated contracted quality assessment exercise, also known as a Proficiency study. Study results are analyzed for comparison within VA facilities (for example by mission or size), and against participating private sector health care groups. * Information collected on current issues in nuclear medicine as they arise. Radiation Safety Committee structures and membership, Radiation Safety Officer information and information on how nuclear medicine services provided for female Veterans are examples of current issues.The database is now stored completely within MS Access Database Tables with output still presented in the form of Excel graphs and tables.

Raw data outputs 1-18 Raw data output 1. Differentially expressed genes in AML CSCs compared with GTCs as well as in TCGA AML cancer samples compared with normal ones. This data was generated based on the results of AML microarray and TCGA data analysis. Raw data output 2. Commonly and uniquely differentially expressed genes in AML CSC/GTC microarray and TCGA bulk RNA-seq datasets. This data was generated based on the results of AML microarray and TCGA data analysis. Raw data output 3. Common differentially expressed genes between training and test set samples the microarray dataset. This data was generated based on the results of AML microarray data analysis. Raw data output 4. Detailed information on the samples of the breast cancer microarray dataset (GSE52327) used in this study. Raw data output 5. Differentially expressed genes in breast CSCs compared with GTCs as well as in TCGA BRCA cancer samples compared with normal ones. Raw data output 6. Commonly and uniquely differentially expressed genes in breast cancer CSC/GTC microarray and TCGA BRCA bulk RNA-seq datasets. This data was generated based on the results of breast cancer microarray and TCGA BRCA data analysis. CSC, and GTC are abbreviations of cancer stem cell, and general tumor cell, respectively. Raw data output 7. Differential and common co-expression and protein-protein interaction of genes between CSC and GTC samples. This data was generated based on the results of AML microarray and STRING database-based protein-protein interaction data analysis. CSC, and GTC are abbreviations of cancer stem cell, and general tumor cell, respectively. Raw data output 8. Differentially expressed genes between AML dormant and active CSCs. This data was generated based on the results of AML scRNA-seq data analysis. Raw data output 9. Uniquely expressed genes in dormant or active AML CSCs. This data was generated based on the results of AML scRNA-seq data analysis. Raw data output 10. Intersections between the targeting transcription factors of AML key CSC genes and differentially expressed genes between AML CSCs vs GTCs and between dormant and active AML CSCs or the uniquely expressed genes in either class of CSCs. Raw data output 11. Targeting desirableness score of AML key CSC genes and their targeting transcription factors. These scores were generated based on an in-house scoring function described in the Methods section. Raw data output 12. CSC-specific targeting desirableness score of AML key CSC genes and their targeting transcription factors. These scores were generated based on an in-house scoring function described in the Methods section. Raw data output 13. The protein-protein interactions between AML key CSC genes with themselves and their targeting transcription factors. This data was generated based on the results of AML microarray and STRING database-based protein-protein interaction data analysis. Raw data output 14. The previously confirmed associations of genes having the highest targeting desirableness and CSC-specific targeting desirableness scores with AML or other cancers’ (stem) cells as well as hematopoietic stem cells. These data were generated based on a PubMed database-based literature mining. Raw data output 15. Drug score of available drugs and bioactive small molecules targeting AML key CSC genes and/or their targeting transcription factors. These scores were generated based on an in-house scoring function described in the Methods section. Raw data output 16. CSC-specific drug score of available drugs and bioactive small molecules targeting AML key CSC genes and/or their targeting transcription factors. These scores were generated based on an in-house scoring function described in the Methods section. Raw data output 17. Candidate drugs for experimental validation. These drugs were selected based on their respective (CSC-specific) drug scores. CSC is the abbreviation of cancer stem cell. Raw data output 18. Detailed information on the samples of the AML microarray dataset GSE30375 used in this study.

Excel sheets in order: The sheet entitled “Hens Original Data” contains the results of an experiment conducted to study the response of laying hens during initial phase of egg production subjected to different intakes of dietary threonine. The sheet entitled “Simulated data & fitting values” contains the 10 simulated data sets that were generated using a standard procedure of random number generator. The predicted values obtained by the new three-parameter and conventional four-parameter logistic models were also appeared in this sheet. (XLSX)

This dataset contains data collected during a study ("Towards High-Value Datasets determination for data-driven development: a systematic literature review") conducted by Anastasija Nikiforova (University of Tartu), Nina Rizun, Magdalena Ciesielska (Gdańsk University of Technology), Charalampos Alexopoulos (University of the Aegean) and Andrea Miletič (University of Zagreb) It being made public both to act as supplementary data for "Towards High-Value Datasets determination for data-driven development: a systematic literature review" paper (pre-print is available in Open Access here -> https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.10234) and in order for other researchers to use these data in their own work.

The protocol is intended for the Systematic Literature review on the topic of High-value Datasets with the aim to gather information on how the topic of High-value datasets (HVD) and their determination has been reflected in the literature over the years and what has been found by these studies to date, incl. the indicators used in them, involved stakeholders, data-related aspects, and frameworks. The data in this dataset were collected in the result of the SLR over Scopus, Web of Science, and Digital Government Research library (DGRL) in 2023.

Methodology

To understand how HVD determination has been reflected in the literature over the years and what has been found by these studies to date, all relevant literature covering this topic has been studied. To this end, the SLR was carried out to by searching digital libraries covered by Scopus, Web of Science (WoS), Digital Government Research library (DGRL).

These databases were queried for keywords ("open data" OR "open government data") AND ("high-value data*" OR "high value data*"), which were applied to the article title, keywords, and abstract to limit the number of papers to those, where these objects were primary research objects rather than mentioned in the body, e.g., as a future work. After deduplication, 11 articles were found unique and were further checked for relevance. As a result, a total of 9 articles were further examined. Each study was independently examined by at least two authors.

To attain the objective of our study, we developed the protocol, where the information on each selected study was collected in four categories: (1) descriptive information, (2) approach- and research design- related information, (3) quality-related information, (4) HVD determination-related information.

Test procedure Each study was independently examined by at least two authors, where after the in-depth examination of the full-text of the article, the structured protocol has been filled for each study. The structure of the survey is available in the supplementary file available (see Protocol_HVD_SLR.odt, Protocol_HVD_SLR.docx) The data collected for each study by two researchers were then synthesized in one final version by the third researcher.

Description of the data in this data set

Protocol_HVD_SLR provides the structure of the protocol Spreadsheets #1 provides the filled protocol for relevant studies. Spreadsheet#2 provides the list of results after the search over three indexing databases, i.e. before filtering out irrelevant studies

The information on each selected study was collected in four categories: (1) descriptive information, (2) approach- and research design- related information, (3) quality-related information, (4) HVD determination-related information

Descriptive information
1) Article number - a study number, corresponding to the study number assigned in an Excel worksheet 2) Complete reference - the complete source information to refer to the study 3) Year of publication - the year in which the study was published 4) Journal article / conference paper / book chapter - the type of the paper -{journal article, conference paper, book chapter} 5) DOI / Website- a link to the website where the study can be found 6) Number of citations - the number of citations of the article in Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science 7) Availability in OA - availability of an article in the Open Access 8) Keywords - keywords of the paper as indicated by the authors 9) Relevance for this study - what is the relevance level of the article for this study? {high / medium / low}

Approach- and research design-related information 10) Objective / RQ - the research objective / aim, established research questions 11) Research method (including unit of analysis) - the methods used to collect data, including the unit of analy-sis (country, organisation, specific unit that has been ana-lysed, e.g., the number of use-cases, scope of the SLR etc.) 12) Contributions - the contributions of the study 13) Method - whether the study uses a qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods approach? 14) Availability of the underlying research data- whether there is a reference to the publicly available underly-ing research data e.g., transcriptions of interviews, collected data, or explanation why these data are not shared? 15) Period under investigation - period (or moment) in which the study was conducted 16) Use of theory / theoretical concepts / approaches - does the study mention any theory / theoretical concepts / approaches? If any theory is mentioned, how is theory used in the study?

Quality- and relevance- related information
17) Quality concerns - whether there are any quality concerns (e.g., limited infor-mation about the research methods used)? 18) Primary research object - is the HVD a primary research object in the study? (primary - the paper is focused around the HVD determination, sec-ondary - mentioned but not studied (e.g., as part of discus-sion, future work etc.))

HVD determination-related information
19) HVD definition and type of value - how is the HVD defined in the article and / or any other equivalent term? 20) HVD indicators - what are the indicators to identify HVD? How were they identified? (components & relationships, “input -> output") 21) A framework for HVD determination - is there a framework presented for HVD identification? What components does it consist of and what are the rela-tionships between these components? (detailed description) 22) Stakeholders and their roles - what stakeholders or actors does HVD determination in-volve? What are their roles? 23) Data - what data do HVD cover? 24) Level (if relevant) - what is the level of the HVD determination covered in the article? (e.g., city, regional, national, international)

Format of the file .xls, .csv (for the first spreadsheet only), .odt, .docx

Licenses or restrictions CC-BY

For more info, see README.txt

Abstract

The documentation covers Enterprise Survey panel datasets that were collected in Slovenia in 2009, 2013 and 2019.

The Slovenia ES 2009 was conducted between 2008 and 2009. The Slovenia ES 2013 was conducted between March 2013 and September 2013. Finally, the Slovenia ES 2019 was conducted between December 2018 and November 2019. The objective of the Enterprise Survey is to gain an understanding of what firms experience in the private sector.

As part of its strategic goal of building a climate for investment, job creation, and sustainable growth, the World Bank has promoted improving the business environment as a key strategy for development, which has led to a systematic effort in collecting enterprise data across countries. The Enterprise Surveys (ES) are an ongoing World Bank project in collecting both objective data based on firms' experiences and enterprises' perception of the environment in which they operate.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

The primary sampling unit of the study is the establishment. An establishment is a physical location where business is carried out and where industrial operations take place or services are provided. A firm may be composed of one or more establishments. For example, a brewery may have several bottling plants and several establishments for distribution. For the purposes of this survey an establishment must take its own financial decisions and have its own financial statements separate from those of the firm. An establishment must also have its own management and control over its payroll.

Universe

As it is standard for the ES, the Slovenia ES was based on the following size stratification: small (5 to 19 employees), medium (20 to 99 employees), and large (100 or more employees).

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The sample for Slovenia ES 2009, 2013, 2019 were selected using stratified random sampling, following the methodology explained in the Sampling Manual for Slovenia 2009 ES and for Slovenia 2013 ES, and in the Sampling Note for 2019 Slovenia ES.

Three levels of stratification were used in this country: industry, establishment size, and oblast (region). The original sample designs with specific information of the industries and regions chosen are included in the attached Excel file (Sampling Report.xls.) for Slovenia 2009 ES. For Slovenia 2013 and 2019 ES, specific information of the industries and regions chosen is described in the "The Slovenia 2013 Enterprise Surveys Data Set" and "The Slovenia 2019 Enterprise Surveys Data Set" reports respectively, Appendix E.

For the Slovenia 2009 ES, industry stratification was designed in the way that follows: the universe was stratified into manufacturing industries, services industries, and one residual (core) sector as defined in the sampling manual. Each industry had a target of 90 interviews. For the manufacturing industries sample sizes were inflated by about 17% to account for potential non-response cases when requesting sensitive financial data and also because of likely attrition in future surveys that would affect the construction of a panel. For the other industries (residuals) sample sizes were inflated by about 12% to account for under sampling in firms in service industries.

For Slovenia 2013 ES, industry stratification was designed in the way that follows: the universe was stratified into one manufacturing industry, and two service industries (retail, and other services).

Finally, for Slovenia 2019 ES, three levels of stratification were used in this country: industry, establishment size, and region. The original sample design with specific information of the industries and regions chosen is described in "The Slovenia 2019 Enterprise Surveys Data Set" report, Appendix C. Industry stratification was done as follows: Manufacturing – combining all the relevant activities (ISIC Rev. 4.0 codes 10-33), Retail (ISIC 47), and Other Services (ISIC 41-43, 45, 46, 49-53, 55, 56, 58, 61, 62, 79, 95).

For Slovenia 2009 and 2013 ES, size stratification was defined following the standardized definition for the rollout: small (5 to 19 employees), medium (20 to 99 employees), and large (more than 99 employees). For stratification purposes, the number of employees was defined on the basis of reported permanent full-time workers. This seems to be an appropriate definition of the labor force since seasonal/casual/part-time employment is not a common practice, except in the sectors of construction and agriculture.

For Slovenia 2009 ES, regional stratification was defined in 2 regions. These regions are Vzhodna Slovenija and Zahodna Slovenija. The Slovenia sample contains panel data. The wave 1 panel “Investment Climate Private Enterprise Survey implemented in Slovenia” consisted of 223 establishments interviewed in 2005. A total of 57 establishments have been re-interviewed in the 2008 Business Environment and Enterprise Performance Survey.

For Slovenia 2013 ES, regional stratification was defined in 2 regions (city and the surrounding business area) throughout Slovenia.

Finally, for Slovenia 2019 ES, regional stratification was done across two regions: Eastern Slovenia (NUTS code SI03) and Western Slovenia (SI04).

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Personal Interview [capi]

Research instrument

Questionnaires have common questions (core module) and respectfully additional manufacturing- and services-specific questions. The eligible manufacturing industries have been surveyed using the Manufacturing questionnaire (includes the core module, plus manufacturing specific questions). Retail firms have been interviewed using the Services questionnaire (includes the core module plus retail specific questions) and the residual eligible services have been covered using the Services questionnaire (includes the core module). Each variation of the questionnaire is identified by the index variable, a0.

Response rate

Survey non-response must be differentiated from item non-response. The former refers to refusals to participate in the survey altogether whereas the latter refers to the refusals to answer some specific questions. Enterprise Surveys suffer from both problems and different strategies were used to address these issues.

Item non-response was addressed by two strategies: a- For sensitive questions that may generate negative reactions from the respondent, such as corruption or tax evasion, enumerators were instructed to collect the refusal to respond as (-8). b- Establishments with incomplete information were re-contacted in order to complete this information, whenever necessary. However, there were clear cases of low response.

For 2009 and 2013 Slovenia ES, the survey non-response was addressed by maximizing efforts to contact establishments that were initially selected for interview. Up to 4 attempts were made to contact the establishment for interview at different times/days of the week before a replacement establishment (with similar strata characteristics) was suggested for interview. Survey non-response did occur but substitutions were made in order to potentially achieve strata-specific goals. Further research is needed on survey non-response in the Enterprise Surveys regarding potential introduction of bias.

For 2009, the number of contacted establishments per realized interview was 6.18. This number is the result of two factors: explicit refusals to participate in the survey, as reflected by the rate of rejection (which includes rejections of the screener and the main survey) and the quality of the sample frame, as represented by the presence of ineligible units. The relatively low ratio of contacted establishments per realized interview (6.18) suggests that the main source of error in estimates in the Slovenia may be selection bias and not frame inaccuracy.

For 2013, the number of realized interviews per contacted establishment was 25%. This number is the result of two factors: explicit refusals to participate in the survey, as reflected by the rate of rejection (which includes rejections of the screener and the main survey) and the quality of the sample frame, as represented by the presence of ineligible units. The number of rejections per contact was 44%.

Finally, for 2019, the number of interviews per contacted establishments was 9.7%. This number is the result of two factors: explicit refusals to participate in the survey, as reflected by the rate of rejection (which includes rejections of the screener and the main survey) and the quality of the sample frame, as represented by the presence of ineligible units. The share of rejections per contact was 75.2%.

Maps of relative classifications (low to high) for six resilience indicators and two anthropogenic stressors and a map of final relative resilience scores for 78 sites in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. The six resilience indicators are: bleaching resistance, coral diversity, coral recruitment, herbivore biomass, macroalgae cover and temperature variability. The two anthropogenic stressors are fishing access and nutrients and sediments. The resilience score map compares sites across all four of the surveyed islands: Saipan, Tinian, Aguijan, and Rota.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the Excel population distribution across 18 age groups. It lists the population in each age group along with the percentage population relative of the total population for Excel. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population distribution of Excel by age. For example, using this dataset, we can identify the largest age group in Excel.

Key observations

The largest age group in Excel, AL was for the group of age 45 to 49 years years with a population of 74 (15.64%), according to the ACS 2018-2022 5-Year Estimates. At the same time, the smallest age group in Excel, AL was the 85 years and over years with a population of 2 (0.42%). Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2018-2022 5-Year Estimates

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2018-2022 5-Year Estimates

Age groups:

• Under 5 years
• 5 to 9 years
• 10 to 14 years
• 15 to 19 years
• 20 to 24 years
• 25 to 29 years
• 30 to 34 years
• 35 to 39 years
• 40 to 44 years
• 45 to 49 years
• 50 to 54 years
• 55 to 59 years
• 60 to 64 years
• 65 to 69 years
• 70 to 74 years
• 75 to 79 years
• 80 to 84 years
• 85 years and over

Variables / Data Columns

• Age Group: This column displays the age group in consideration
• Population: The population for the specific age group in the Excel is shown in this column.
• % of Total Population: This column displays the population of each age group as a proportion of Excel total population. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Excel Population by Age. You can refer the same here

Dataset

This dataset was created by Chandra Shekhar

Released under Other (specified in description)

Contents

This dataset corresponds to a database of datasets that are relevant for the development of coastal development scenarios and impact assessments GBR. It corresponds to a list of all the datasets that were sourced as part of project 9.4. It contains basic information about each dataset along with the license that each dataset was obtained under and where the data can be sourced. This database is an excellent starting point for any others looking at obtaining data relevant for coastal management.

Methods:

Datasets were sourced from a large and various. They are presented in the database in their raw condition as downloaded or obtained. The database includes all metadata that was associated with them. The database is currently hosted on a server at the Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies at James Cook University as is backed up weekly.

Format:

Coastal_zone_GIS_database.xlsx This is an excel file containing name and full description of all datasets. Each row corresponds to a different GIS file (either shapefile or raster). When dataset can be downloaded from a website with or without an open access licence, the link is included. For others, the best contact point is included.

This dataset contains FEMA applicant-level data for the Individuals and Households Program (IHP). All PII information has been removed. The location is represented by county, city, and zip code. This dataset contains Individual Assistance (IA) applications from DR1439 (declared in 2002) to those declared over 30 days ago. The full data set is refreshed on an annual basis and refreshed weekly to update disasters declared in the last 18 months. This dataset includes all major disasters and includes only valid registrants (applied in a declared county, within the registration period, having damage due to the incident and damage within the incident period). Information about individual data elements and descriptions are listed in the metadata information within the dataset.rnValid registrants may be eligible for IA assistance, which is intended to meet basic needs and supplement disaster recovery efforts. IA assistance is not intended to return disaster-damaged property to its pre-disaster condition. Disaster damage to secondary or vacation homes does not qualify for IHP assistance.rnData comes from FEMA's National Emergency Management Information System (NEMIS) with raw, unedited, self-reported content and subject to a small percentage of human error.rnAny financial information is derived from NEMIS and not FEMA's official financial systems. Due to differences in reporting periods, status of obligations and application of business rules, this financial information may differ slightly from official publication on public websites such as usaspending.gov. This dataset is not intended to be used for any official federal reporting. rnCitation: The Agency’s preferred citation for datasets (API usage or file downloads) can be found on the OpenFEMA Terms and Conditions page, Citing Data section: https://www.fema.gov/about/openfema/terms-conditions.rnDue to the size of this file, tools other than a spreadsheet may be required to analyze, visualize, and manipulate the data. MS Excel will not be able to process files this large without data loss. It is recommended that a database (e.g., MS Access, MySQL, PostgreSQL, etc.) be used to store and manipulate data. Other programming tools such as R, Apache Spark, and Python can also be used to analyze and visualize data. Further, basic Linux/Unix tools can be used to manipulate, search, and modify large files.rnIf you have media inquiries about this dataset, please email the FEMA News Desk at FEMA-News-Desk@fema.dhs.gov or call (202) 646-3272. For inquiries about FEMA's data and Open Government program, please email the OpenFEMA team at OpenFEMA@fema.dhs.gov.rnThis dataset is scheduled to be superceded by Valid Registrations Version 2 by early CY 2024.

This excel contains results from the 2017 State of Narragansett Bay and Its Watershed Technical Report (nbep.org), Chapter 4: "Population." The methods for analyzing population were developed by the US Environmental Protection Agency ORD Atlantic Coastal Environmental Sciences Division in collaboration with the Narragansett Bay Estuary Program and other partners. Population rasters were generated using the USGS dasymetric mapping tool (see http://geography.wr.usgs.gov/science/dasymetric/index.htm) which uses land use data to distribute population data more accurately than simply within a census mapping unit. The 1990, 2000, and 2010 10m cell population density rasters were produced using Rhode Island state land use data, Massachusetts state land use, Connecticut NLCD land use data, and U.S. Census data. To generate a population estimate (number of persons) for any given area within the boundaries of this raster, NBEP used the the Zonal Statistics as Table tool to sum the 10m cell density values within a given zone dataset (e.g., watershed polygon layer). Results presented include population estimates (1990, 2000, 2010) as well as calculation of percent change (1990-2000;2000-2010;1990-2010).

This repository contains a collection of data about 454 value chains from 23 rural European areas of 16 countries. This data is obtained through a semi-automatic workflow that transforms raw textual data from an unstructured MS Excel sheet into semantic knowledge graphs.In particular, the repository contains:MS Excel sheet containing different value chains details provided by MOuntain Valorisation through INterconnectedness and Green growth (MOVING) European project;454 CSV files containing events, titles, entities and coordinates of narratives of each value chain, obtained by pre-processing the MS Excel sheet454 Web Ontology Language (OWL) files. This collection of files is the result of the semi-automatic workflow, and is organized as a semantic knowledge graph of narratives, where each narrative is a sub-graph explaining one among the 454 value chains and its territory aspects. The knowledge graph is based on the Narrative Ontology, an ontology developed by Institute of Information Science and Technologies (ISTI-CNR) as an extension of CIDOC CRM, FRBRoo, and OWL Time.Two CSV files that compile all the possible available information extracted from 454 Web Ontology Language (OWL) files.GeoPackage files with the geographic coordinates related to the narratives.The HTML files that show all the different SPARQL and GeoSPARQL queries.The HTML files that show the story maps about the 454 value chains.An image showing how the various components of the dataset interact with each other.

This dataset includes mercury and other constituent concentration and physical properties data for surface sediment, pore water and surface water collected as part of the South San Francisco Bay Salt Pond Restoration Phase 1 (2010 to 2018) studies. The overarching focus of these studies was to monitor mercury (Hg) biogeochemistry in both sediment and water in response to management actions associated with the conversion of former salt producing ponds to contemporary wetland habitat. The two primary management actions included the breaching of Pond A6 during December 2010, and the construction and operation of an adjustable tidal control structure (TCS) associated with the Pond A5/A7/A8 Complex beginning in June 2011. The TSC that reconnects the Complex to Alviso Slough (specifically referred to as the A8-TCS), a historically Hg contaminated waterway that represents the terminus of watershed drainage that includes the New Almaden mercury mining district. The A8-TCS consists of eight gates, each five feet wide. During the initial testing period (starting in June 2011) only one gate was opened, and the structure was closed again during the winter-spring months (from December until the following June). Over the subsequent seven years, the number of gates open was increased to three (15 feet, June 2012), to five (25 feet, September 2014), and eventually to all eight (40 feet, June 2017). Beginning in 2014 the A8-TCS was opened year-round. Field sampling occurred in both ponds and sloughs. In addition to sampling within the Complex ponds, two control ponds (A3N and A16) were also sampled. Similarly, in addition to sampling within Alviso Slough, two nearby control sloughs (Mallard Slough a.k.a Artesian Slough and Guadalupe Slough) were sampled (beginning in 2014 for Guadalupe Slough). Sediment sampling was conducted for the period of May 2010 through August 2011, which represents the period immediately prior to and immediately after the two above mentioned management actions. Additional sediment sampling was conducted in Mallard Slough exclusively during the August- September period 2011-2013, 2015, and 2017. Surface water sampling was conducted during three periods. The first period was in conjunction with the sediment sampling (May 2010 through August 2011). The second period involved a unique series of high temporal resolution sampling events conducted at a single site in mid-Alviso Slough, when water samples were collected hourly over a 25-hour period to capture the Hg dynamics associated with two full tidal cycles. A total of five such high-resolution ‘diel’ sampling events were conducted between May 2012 and February 2013, which included each of the four seasons and the annual ‘first flush’ event associated with the initiation of the 2012-13 rainy season. The third period, from February 2014 through February 2018, represents when all ponds and sloughs were again sampled (akin to the first period). This third period also represents when the A8-TCS was sequentially opened from 15 feet (3 gates open) to 40 feet (all 8 gates open), and when the A8-TCS management transitioned from being closed during the winter months to being opened year-round, beginning in 2014. This data release includes five data tables given both as Excel (.xlxs) and machine readable 'comma-separated values' format (.csv): 1) ‘SBSP.Data.Dictionary_2010-18’, the Data Dictionary, which provides definitions and details related to the other four data tables and includes analytical methods citations; 2) ‘SBSP.SED_2010-17’, the surface sediment analytical dataset; 3) ‘SBSP.SW_2010-18’, the primary surface water analytical dataset; 4) ‘SBSP.SW_Diel_2012-13’, the surface water diel sampling dataset; 5) ‘SBSP.QA_2010-18’, quality assurance data summary for the sediment and water datasets.

The objective of this project was to develop system designs for programs to monitor travel time reliability and to prepare a guidebook that practitioners and others can use to design, build, operate, and maintain such systems. Generally, such travel time reliability monitoring systems will be built on top of existing traffic monitoring systems. The focus of this project was on travel time reliability. The data from the monitoring systems developed in this project – from both public and private sources –included, wherever cost-effective, information on the seven sources of non-recurring congestion. This data was used to construct performance measures or to perform various types of analyses useful for operations management as well as performance measurement, planning, and programming. The datasets in the attached ZIP file support SHRP 2 reliability project L38B, "Pilot testing of SHRP 2 reliability data and analytical products: Minnesota." This report can be accessed via the following URL: https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/3608 This ZIP file package, which is 22.1 MB in size, contains 6 Microsoft Excel spreadsheet files (XLSX). This file package also contains 3 Comma Separated Value files (CSV). The XLSX and CSV files can be opened using Microsoft Excel 2010 and 2016. The CSV files can be opened using most available text editing programs.