analyze the current population survey (cps) annual social and economic supplement (asec) with r the annual march cps-asec has been supplying the statistics for the census bureau's report on income, poverty, and health insurance coverage since 1948. wow. the us census bureau and the bureau of labor statistics ( bls) tag-team on this one. until the american community survey (acs) hit the scene in the early aughts (2000s), the current population survey had the largest sample size of all the annual general demographic data sets outside of the decennial census - about two hundred thousand respondents. this provides enough sample to conduct state- and a few large metro area-level analyses. your sample size will vanish if you start investigating subgroups b y state - consider pooling multiple years. county-level is a no-no. despite the american community survey's larger size, the cps-asec contains many more variables related to employment, sources of income, and insurance - and can be trended back to harry truman's presidency. aside from questions specifically asked about an annual experience (like income), many of the questions in this march data set should be t reated as point-in-time statistics. cps-asec generalizes to the united states non-institutional, non-active duty military population. the national bureau of economic research (nber) provides sas, spss, and stata importation scripts to create a rectangular file (rectangular data means only person-level records; household- and family-level information gets attached to each person). to import these files into r, the parse.SAScii function uses nber's sas code to determine how to import the fixed-width file, then RSQLite to put everything into a schnazzy database. you can try reading through the nber march 2012 sas importation code yourself, but it's a bit of a proc freak show. this new github repository contains three scripts: 2005-2012 asec - download all microdata.R down load the fixed-width file containing household, family, and person records import by separating this file into three tables, then merge 'em together at the person-level download the fixed-width file containing the person-level replicate weights merge the rectangular person-level file with the replicate weights, then store it in a sql database create a new variable - one - in the data table 2012 asec - analysis examples.R connect to the sql database created by the 'download all microdata' progr am create the complex sample survey object, using the replicate weights perform a boatload of analysis examples replicate census estimates - 2011.R connect to the sql database created by the 'download all microdata' program create the complex sample survey object, using the replicate weights match the sas output shown in the png file below 2011 asec replicate weight sas output.png statistic and standard error generated from the replicate-weighted example sas script contained in this census-provided person replicate weights usage instructions document. click here to view these three scripts for more detail about the current population survey - annual social and economic supplement (cps-asec), visit: the census bureau's current population survey page the bureau of labor statistics' current population survey page the current population survey's wikipedia article notes: interviews are conducted in march about experiences during the previous year. the file labeled 2012 includes information (income, work experience, health insurance) pertaining to 2011. when you use the current populat ion survey to talk about america, subract a year from the data file name. as of the 2010 file (the interview focusing on america during 2009), the cps-asec contains exciting new medical out-of-pocket spending variables most useful for supplemental (medical spending-adjusted) poverty research. confidential to sas, spss, stata, sudaan users: why are you still rubbing two sticks together after we've invented the butane lighter? time to transition to r. :D

Abstract

The JPFHS is part of the worldwide Demographic and Health Surveys Program, which is designed to collect data on fertility, family planning, and maternal and child health. The primary objective of the Jordan Population and Family Health Survey (JPFHS) is to provide reliable estimates of demographic parameters, such as fertility, mortality, family planning, fertility preferences, as well as maternal and child health and nutrition that can be used by program managers and policy makers to evaluate and improve existing programs. In addition, the JPFHS data will be useful to researchers and scholars interested in analyzing demographic trends in Jordan, as well as those conducting comparative, regional or crossnational studies.

The content of the 2002 JPFHS was significantly expanded from the 1997 survey to include additional questions on women’s status, reproductive health, and family planning. In addition, all women age 15-49 and children less than five years of age were tested for anemia.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

• Household
• Children under five years
• Women age 15-49
• Men

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: 1) nonsampling errors and 2) sampling errors. Nonsampling errors are the result of mistakes made in implementing data collection and data processing, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding of the questions on the part of either the interviewer or the respondent, and data entry errors. Although numerous efforts were made during the implementation of the 2002 JPFHS to minimize this type of error, nonsampling errors are impossible to avoid and difficult to evaluate statistically.

Sampling errors, on the other hand, can be evaluated statistically. The sample of respondents selected in the 2002 JPFHS is only one of many samples that could have been selected from the same population, using the same design and expected size. Each of these samples would yield results that differ somewhat from the results of the actual sample selected. Sampling errors are a measure of the variability between all possible samples. Although the degree of variability is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.

A sampling error is usually measured in terms of the standard error for a particular statistic (mean, percentage, etc.), which is the square root of the variance. The standard error can be used to calculate confidence intervals within which the true value for the population can reasonably be assumed to fall. For example, for any given statistic calculated from a sample survey, the value of that statistic will fall within a range of plus or minus two times the standard error of that statistic in 95 percent of all possible samples of identical size and design.

If the sample of respondents had been selected as a simple random sample, it would have been possible to use straightforward formulas for calculating sampling errors. However, the 2002 JPFHS sample is the result of a multistage stratified design and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulas. The computer software used to calculate sampling errors for the 2002 JPFHS is the ISSA Sampling Error Module (ISSAS). This module used the Taylor linearization method of variance estimation for survey estimates that are means or proportions. The Jackknife repeated replication method is used for variance estimation of more complex statistics such as fertility and mortality rates.

Note: See detailed description of sample design in APPENDIX B of the survey report.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

The 2002 JPFHS used two questionnaires – namely, the Household Questionnaire and the Individual Questionnaire. Both questionnaires were developed in English and translated into Arabic. The Household Questionnaire was used to list all usual members of the sampled households and to obtain information on each member’s age, sex, educational attainment, relationship to the head of household, and marital status. In addition, questions were included on the socioeconomic characteristics of the household, such as source of water, sanitation facilities, and the availability of durable goods. The Household Questionnaire was also used to identify women who are eligible for the individual interview: ever-married women age 15-49. In addition, all women age 15-49 and children under five years living in the household were measured to determine nutritional status and tested for anemia.

The household and women’s questionnaires were based on the DHS Model “A” Questionnaire, which is designed for use in countries with high contraceptive prevalence. Additions and modifications to the model questionnaire were made in order to provide detailed information specific to Jordan, using experience gained from the 1990 and 1997 Jordan Population and Family Health Surveys. For each evermarried woman age 15 to 49, information on the following topics was collected:

1. Respondent’s background
2. Birth history
3. Knowledge and practice of family planning
4. Maternal care, breastfeeding, immunization, and health of children under five years of age
5. Marriage
6. Fertility preferences
7. Husband’s background and respondent’s employment
8. Knowledge of AIDS and STIs

In addition, information on births and pregnancies, contraceptive use and discontinuation, and marriage during the five years prior to the survey was collected using a monthly calendar.

Cleaning operations

Fieldwork and data processing activities overlapped. After a week of data collection, and after field editing of questionnaires for completeness and consistency, the questionnaires for each cluster were packaged together and sent to the central office in Amman where they were registered and stored. Special teams were formed to carry out office editing and coding of the open-ended questions.

Data entry and verification started after one week of office data processing. The process of data entry, including one hundred percent re-entry, editing and cleaning, was done by using PCs and the CSPro (Census and Survey Processing) computer package, developed specially for such surveys. The CSPro program allows data to be edited while being entered. Data processing operations were completed by the end of October 2002. A data processing specialist from ORC Macro made a trip to Jordan in October and November 2002 to follow up data editing and cleaning and to work on the tabulation of results for the survey preliminary report. The tabulations for the present final report were completed in December 2002.

Response rate

A total of 7,968 households were selected for the survey from the sampling frame; among those selected households, 7,907 households were found. Of those households, 7,825 (99 percent) were successfully interviewed. In those households, 6,151 eligible women were identified, and complete interviews were obtained with 6,006 of them (98 percent of all eligible women). The overall response rate was 97 percent.

Note: See summarized response rates by place of residence in Table 1.1 of the survey report.

Sampling error estimates

The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: 1) nonsampling errors and 2) sampling errors. Nonsampling errors are the result of mistakes made in implementing data collection and data processing, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding of the questions on the part of either the interviewer or the respondent, and data entry errors. Although numerous efforts were made during the implementation of the 2002 JPFHS to minimize this type of error, nonsampling errors are impossible to avoid and difficult to evaluate statistically.

Sampling errors, on the other hand, can be evaluated statistically. The sample of respondents selected in the 2002 JPFHS is only one of many samples that could have been selected from the same population, using the same design and expected size. Each of these samples would yield results that differ somewhat from the results of the actual sample selected. Sampling errors are a measure of the variability between all possible samples. Although the degree of variability is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.

A sampling error is usually measured in terms of the standard error for a particular statistic (mean, percentage, etc.), which is the square root of the variance. The standard error can be used to calculate confidence intervals within which the true value for the population can reasonably be assumed to fall. For example, for any given statistic calculated from a sample survey, the value of that statistic will fall within a range of plus or minus two times the standard error of that statistic in 95 percent of all possible samples of identical size and design.

If the sample of respondents had been selected as a simple random sample, it would have been possible to use straightforward formulas for calculating sampling errors. However, the 2002 JPFHS sample is the result of a multistage stratified design and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulas. The computer software used to calculate sampling errors for the 2002 JPFHS is the ISSA Sampling Error Module (ISSAS). This module used the Taylor linearization method of variance estimation for survey estimates that are means or proportions. The Jackknife repeated replication method is used for variance estimation of more complex statistics such as fertility and mortality rates.

Note: See detailed

What does PISA actually assess? This book presents all the publicly available questions from the PISA surveys. Some of these questions were used in the PISA 2000, 2003 and 2006 surveys and others were used in developing and trying out the assessment. After a brief introduction to the PISA assessment, the book presents three chapters, including PISA questions for the reading, mathematics and science tests, respectively. Each chapter presents an overview of what exactly the questions assess. The second section of each chapter presents questions which were used in the PISA 2000, 2003 and 2006 surveys, that is, the actual PISA tests for which results were published. The third section presents questions used in trying out the assessment. Although these questions were not used in the PISA 2000, 2003 and 2006 surveys, they are nevertheless illustrative of the kind of question PISA uses. The final section shows all the answers, along with brief comments on each question.

Abstract

The harmonized data set on health, created and published by the ERF, is a subset of Iraq Household Socio Economic Survey (IHSES) 2012. It was derived from the household, individual and health modules, collected in the context of the above mentioned survey. The sample was then used to create a harmonized health survey, comparable with the Iraq Household Socio Economic Survey (IHSES) 2007 micro data set.

----> Overview of the Iraq Household Socio Economic Survey (IHSES) 2012:

Iraq is considered a leader in household expenditure and income surveys where the first was conducted in 1946 followed by surveys in 1954 and 1961. After the establishment of Central Statistical Organization, household expenditure and income surveys were carried out every 3-5 years in (1971/ 1972, 1976, 1979, 1984/ 1985, 1988, 1993, 2002 / 2007). Implementing the cooperation between CSO and WB, Central Statistical Organization (CSO) and Kurdistan Region Statistics Office (KRSO) launched fieldwork on IHSES on 1/1/2012. The survey was carried out over a full year covering all governorates including those in Kurdistan Region.

The survey has six main objectives. These objectives are:

1. Provide data for poverty analysis and measurement and monitor, evaluate and update the implementation Poverty Reduction National Strategy issued in 2009.
2. Provide comprehensive data system to assess household social and economic conditions and prepare the indicators related to the human development.
3. Provide data that meet the needs and requirements of national accounts.
4. Provide detailed indicators on consumption expenditure that serve making decision related to production, consumption, export and import.
5. Provide detailed indicators on the sources of households and individuals income.
6. Provide data necessary for formulation of a new consumer price index number.

The raw survey data provided by the Statistical Office were then harmonized by the Economic Research Forum, to create a comparable version with the 2006/2007 Household Socio Economic Survey in Iraq. Harmonization at this stage only included unifying variables' names, labels and some definitions. See: Iraq 2007 & 2012- Variables Mapping & Availability Matrix.pdf provided in the external resources for further information on the mapping of the original variables on the harmonized ones, in addition to more indications on the variables' availability in both survey years and relevant comments.

Geographic coverage

National coverage: Covering a sample of urban, rural and metropolitan areas in all the governorates including those in Kurdistan Region.

Analysis unit

1- Household/family. 2- Individual/person.

Universe

The survey was carried out over a full year covering all governorates including those in Kurdistan Region.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

----> Design:

Sample size was (25488) household for the whole Iraq, 216 households for each district of 118 districts, 2832 clusters each of which includes 9 households distributed on districts and governorates for rural and urban.

----> Sample frame:

Listing and numbering results of 2009-2010 Population and Housing Survey were adopted in all the governorates including Kurdistan Region as a frame to select households, the sample was selected in two stages: Stage 1: Primary sampling unit (blocks) within each stratum (district) for urban and rural were systematically selected with probability proportional to size to reach 2832 units (cluster). Stage two: 9 households from each primary sampling unit were selected to create a cluster, thus the sample size of total survey clusters was 25488 households distributed on the governorates, 216 households in each district.

----> Sampling Stages:

In each district, the sample was selected in two stages: Stage 1: based on 2010 listing and numbering frame 24 sample points were selected within each stratum through systematic sampling with probability proportional to size, in addition to the implicit breakdown urban and rural and geographic breakdown (sub-district, quarter, street, county, village and block). Stage 2: Using households as secondary sampling units, 9 households were selected from each sample point using systematic equal probability sampling. Sampling frames of each stages can be developed based on 2010 building listing and numbering without updating household lists. In some small districts, random selection processes of primary sampling may lead to select less than 24 units therefore a sampling unit is selected more than once , the selection may reach two cluster or more from the same enumeration unit when it is necessary.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

----> Preparation:

The questionnaire of 2006 survey was adopted in designing the questionnaire of 2012 survey on which many revisions were made. Two rounds of pre-test were carried out. Revision were made based on the feedback of field work team, World Bank consultants and others, other revisions were made before final version was implemented in a pilot survey in September 2011. After the pilot survey implemented, other revisions were made in based on the challenges and feedbacks emerged during the implementation to implement the final version in the actual survey.

----> Questionnaire Parts:

The questionnaire consists of four parts each with several sections: Part 1: Socio – Economic Data: - Section 1: Household Roster - Section 2: Emigration - Section 3: Food Rations - Section 4: housing - Section 5: education - Section 6: health - Section 7: Physical measurements - Section 8: job seeking and previous job

Part 2: Monthly, Quarterly and Annual Expenditures: - Section 9: Expenditures on Non – Food Commodities and Services (past 30 days). - Section 10 : Expenditures on Non – Food Commodities and Services (past 90 days). - Section 11: Expenditures on Non – Food Commodities and Services (past 12 months). - Section 12: Expenditures on Non-food Frequent Food Stuff and Commodities (7 days). - Section 12, Table 1: Meals Had Within the Residential Unit. - Section 12, table 2: Number of Persons Participate in the Meals within Household Expenditure Other Than its Members.

Part 3: Income and Other Data: - Section 13: Job - Section 14: paid jobs - Section 15: Agriculture, forestry and fishing - Section 16: Household non – agricultural projects - Section 17: Income from ownership and transfers - Section 18: Durable goods - Section 19: Loans, advances and subsidies - Section 20: Shocks and strategy of dealing in the households - Section 21: Time use - Section 22: Justice - Section 23: Satisfaction in life - Section 24: Food consumption during past 7 days

Part 4: Diary of Daily Expenditures: Diary of expenditure is an essential component of this survey. It is left at the household to record all the daily purchases such as expenditures on food and frequent non-food items such as gasoline, newspapers…etc. during 7 days. Two pages were allocated for recording the expenditures of each day, thus the roster will be consists of 14 pages.

Cleaning operations

----> Raw Data:

Data Editing and Processing: To ensure accuracy and consistency, the data were edited at the following stages: 1. Interviewer: Checks all answers on the household questionnaire, confirming that they are clear and correct. 2. Local Supervisor: Checks to make sure that questions has been correctly completed. 3. Statistical analysis: After exporting data files from excel to SPSS, the Statistical Analysis Unit uses program commands to identify irregular or non-logical values in addition to auditing some variables. 4. World Bank consultants in coordination with the CSO data management team: the World Bank technical consultants use additional programs in SPSS and STAT to examine and correct remaining inconsistencies within the data files. The software detects errors by analyzing questionnaire items according to the expected parameter for each variable.

----> Harmonized Data:

• The SPSS package is used to harmonize the Iraq Household Socio Economic Survey (IHSES) 2007 with Iraq Household Socio Economic Survey (IHSES) 2012.
• The harmonization process starts with raw data files received from the Statistical Office.
• A program is generated for each dataset to create harmonized variables.
• Data is saved on the household and individual level, in SPSS and then converted to STATA, to be disseminated.

Response rate

Iraq Household Socio Economic Survey (IHSES) reached a total of 25488 households. Number of households refused to response was 305, response rate was 98.6%. The highest interview rates were in Ninevah and Muthanna (100%) while the lowest rates were in Sulaimaniya (92%).

Each R script replicates all of the example code from one chapter from the book. All required data for each script are also uploaded, as are all data used in the practice problems at the end of each chapter. The data are drawn from a wide array of sources, so please cite the original work if you ever use any of these data sets for research purposes.

analyze the survey of consumer finances (scf) with r the survey of consumer finances (scf) tracks the wealth of american families. every three years, more than five thousand households answer a battery of questions about income, net worth, credit card debt, pensions, mortgages, even the lease on their cars. plenty of surveys collect annual income, only the survey of consumer finances captures such detailed asset data. responses are at the primary economic unit-level (peu) - the economically dominant, financially interdependent family members within a sampled household. norc at the university of chicago administers the data collection, but the board of governors of the federal reserve pay the bills and therefore call the shots. if you were so brazen as to open up the microdata and run a simple weighted median, you'd get the wrong answer. the five to six thousand respondents actually gobble up twenty-five to thirty thousand records in the final pub lic use files. why oh why? well, those tables contain not one, not two, but five records for each peu. wherever missing, these data are multiply-imputed, meaning answers to the same question for the same household might vary across implicates. each analysis must account for all that, lest your confidence intervals be too tight. to calculate the correct statistics, you'll need to break the single file into five, necessarily complicating your life. this can be accomplished with the meanit sas macro buried in the 2004 scf codebook (search for meanit - you'll need the sas iml add-on). or you might blow the dust off this website referred to in the 2010 codebook as the home of an alternative multiple imputation technique, but all i found were broken links. perhaps it's time for plan c, and by c, i mean free. read the imputation section of the latest codebook (search for imputation), then give these scripts a whirl. they've got that new r smell. the lion's share of the respondents in the survey of consumer finances get drawn from a pretty standard sample of american dwellings - no nursing homes, no active-duty military. then there's this secondary sample of richer households to even out the statistical noise at the higher end of the i ncome and assets spectrum. you can read more if you like, but at the end of the day the weights just generalize to civilian, non-institutional american households. one last thing before you start your engine: read everything you always wanted to know about the scf. my favorite part of that title is the word always. this new github repository contains t hree scripts: 1989-2010 download all microdata.R initiate a function to download and import any survey of consumer finances zipped stata file (.dta) loop through each year specified by the user (starting at the 1989 re-vamp) to download the main, extract, and replicate weight files, then import each into r break the main file into five implicates (each containing one record per peu) and merge the appropriate extract data onto each implicate save the five implicates and replicate weights to an r data file (.rda) for rapid future loading 2010 analysis examples.R prepare two survey of consumer finances-flavored multiply-imputed survey analysis functions load the r data files (.rda) necessary to create a multiply-imputed, replicate-weighted survey design demonstrate how to access the properties of a multiply-imput ed survey design object cook up some descriptive statistics and export examples, calculated with scf-centric variance quirks run a quick t-test and regression, but only because you asked nicely replicate FRB SAS output.R reproduce each and every statistic pr ovided by the friendly folks at the federal reserve create a multiply-imputed, replicate-weighted survey design object re-reproduce (and yes, i said/meant what i meant/said) each of those statistics, now using the multiply-imputed survey design object to highlight the statistically-theoretically-irrelevant differences click here to view these three scripts for more detail about the survey of consumer finances (scf), visit: the federal reserve board of governors' survey of consumer finances homepage the latest scf chartbook, to browse what's possible. (spoiler alert: everything.) the survey of consumer finances wikipedia entry the official frequently asked questions notes: nationally-representative statistics on the financial health, wealth, and assets of american hous eholds might not be monopolized by the survey of consumer finances, but there isn't much competition aside from the assets topical module of the survey of income and program participation (sipp). on one hand, the scf interview questions contain more detail than sipp. on the other hand, scf's smaller sample precludes analyses of acute subpopulations. and for any three-handed martians in the audience, ther e's also a few biases between these two data sources that you ought to consider. the survey methodologists at the federal reserve take their job...

This data set contains the replication data and supplements for the article "Knowing, Doing, and Feeling: A three-year, mixed-methods study of undergraduates’ information literacy development." The survey data is from two samples: - cross-sectional sample (different students at the same point in time) - longitudinal sample (the same students and different points in time)Surveys were distributed via Qualtrics during the students' first and sixth semesters. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected and used to describe students' IL development over 3 years. Statistics from the quantitative data were analyzed in SPSS. The qualitative data was coded and analyzed thematically in NVivo. The qualitative, textual data is from semi-structured interviews with sixth-semester students in psychology at UiT, both focus groups and individual interviews. All data were collected as part of the contact author's PhD research on information literacy (IL) at UiT. The following files are included in this data set: 1. A README file which explains the quantitative data files. (2 file formats: .txt, .pdf)2. The consent form for participants (in Norwegian). (2 file formats: .txt, .pdf)3. Six data files with survey results from UiT psychology undergraduate students for the cross-sectional (n=209) and longitudinal (n=56) samples, in 3 formats (.dat, .csv, .sav). The data was collected in Qualtrics from fall 2019 to fall 2022. 4. Interview guide for 3 focus group interviews. File format: .txt5. Interview guides for 7 individual interviews - first round (n=4) and second round (n=3). File format: .txt 6. The 21-item IL test (Tromsø Information Literacy Test = TILT), in English and Norwegian. TILT is used for assessing students' knowledge of three aspects of IL: evaluating sources, using sources, and seeking information. The test is multiple choice, with four alternative answers for each item. This test is a "KNOW-measure," intended to measure what students know about information literacy. (2 file formats: .txt, .pdf)7. Survey questions related to interest - specifically students' interest in being or becoming information literate - in 3 parts (all in English and Norwegian): a) information and questions about the 4 phases of interest; b) interest questionnaire with 26 items in 7 subscales (Tromsø Interest Questionnaire - TRIQ); c) Survey questions about IL and interest, need, and intent. (2 file formats: .txt, .pdf)8. Information about the assignment-based measures used to measure what students do in practice when evaluating and using sources. Students were evaluated with these measures in their first and sixth semesters. (2 file formats: .txt, .pdf)9. The Norwegain Centre for Research Data's (NSD) 2019 assessment of the notification form for personal data for the PhD research project. In Norwegian. (Format: .pdf)

Original ELI5 vs. this Scorer ELI5 datasets

ELI5 means "Explain like I am 5" . It's originally a "long and free form" Question-Answering scraping from reddit eli5 subforum. Original ELI5 datasets (https://github.com/facebookresearch/ELI5) can be used to train a model for "long & free" form Question-Answering , e.g. by Encoder-Decoder models like T5 or Bart

Conventional performance evaluation : ROUGE scores

When we get a model, how can we estimate model performance (ability to give high-quality answers) ? Conventional methods are ROUGE-family metrics (see ELI5 paper linked above)

However, ROUGE scores are based on n-gram and and need to compare a generated answer to a ground-truth answer. Unfortunately, n-gram scoring cannot evaluate high-quality paraphrase answers.

Worse, the need to a ground-truth answer in order to compare and calculate (ROUGE) score. This scoring perspective is against the "spirit" of the "free form" question answering where there are many possible (non-paraphrase) valid and good answers .

To summarize, "creative & high-quality" answers cannot be estimated with ROUGE , which prevents us to construct (and estimate) creative models.

This dataset : to create a better scorer

This dataset, in contrast, is aimed for training a "scoring" (regression) model , which can predict an upvote score on each Q-A pair individually (not A-A pair like ROUGE) .

The data is simply a CSV file containing Q-A pairs and their scores. Each line contains Q-A texts (in Roberta format) and its upvote score (non-negative integer)

It is intended to be easy and direct to create scoring model with Roberta (or other Transformer models with changing separation token) .

CSV file

In the csv file, there is qa column and answer_score column Each row in qa is written in Roberta paired-sentences format -- Answer

With answer_score we have the following principle : - High quality answer related to its question should get high score (upvotes) - Low quality answer related to its question should get low score - Well written answer NOT related to its question should get 0 score

Each positive Q-A pair comes from the original ELI5 dataset (true upvote score). Each 0-score Q-A pair is constructed with details in the next subsection.

0-score construction details via RetriBERT & FAISS

The principle is contrastive training. We need somewhat high-quality 0-score pairs for model to generalize. Too easy 0-score pairs (e.g. a question with random answers will be too easy and a model will learn nothing)

Therefore, for each question, we try to construct two answers (two 0-score pairs) where each answer is related to the topic of the question, but does not answer the question.

This can be achieve by vectorizing all questions into vectors using RetriBERT and storing with FAISS. We can then measure a distance between two question vectors using cosine distance.

More precisely, for a question Q1, we choose two answers of related (but non-identical) questions Q2 and Q3 , i.e. answer A2 and A3, to construct Q1-A2 and Q1-A3 pairs of 0-score. Combining with the Q1-A1 pair of positive score, we will have 3 Q1 pairs , and 3 pairs for each questions in total. Therefore, from 272,000 examples of original ELI5 , in this dataset we have 3 times of its size = 816,000 examples .

Note that two question vectors that are very close can be the same (paraphrase) question , and two questions that are very far apart are totally different questions. Therefore, we need a threshold to determine not-too-close & not-too-far pair of questions so that we get non-identical but same-topic question pairs. In a simple experiment, a cosine distance of 10-11 of RetriBERT vectors seem work well, so we use this number as a threshold to construct a 0-score Q-A pair.

Baseline Model

roberta-base baseline with MAE 3.91 on validation set can be found here : https://www.kaggle.com/ratthachat/eli5-scorer-roberta-base-500k-mae391

Acknowledgements

Facebook AI team for creating original ELI5 dataset, and Huggingface NLP library for make us access this dataset easily . - https://github.com/facebookresearch/ELI5 - https://huggingface.co/nlp/viewer/

Inspiration

My project on ELI5 is mainly inspired from this amazing work of Yacine Jernite : https://yjernite.github.io/lfqa.html

The requests we receive at the Reference Desk keep surprising us. We'll take a look at some of the best examples from the year on data questions and data solutions.

GSM8K - Grade School Math 8K Q&A

A Linguistically Diverse Dataset for Multi-Step Reasoning Question Answering

By Huggingface Hub [source]

About this dataset

This Grade School Math 8K Linguistically Diverse Training & Test Set is designed to help you develop and improve your understanding of multi-step reasoning question answering. The dataset contains three separate data files: the socratic_test.csv, main_test.csv, and main_train.csv, each containing a set of questions and answers related to grade school math that consists of multiple steps. Each file contains the same columns: question, answer. The questions contained in this dataset are thoughtfully crafted to lead you through the reasoning journey for arriving at the correct answer each time, allowing you immense opportunities for learning through practice. With over 8 thousand entries for both training and testing purposes in this GSM8K dataset, it takes advanced multi-step reasoning skills to ace these questions! Deepen your knowledge today and master any challenge with ease using this amazing GSM8K set!

More Datasets

For more datasets, click here.

Featured Notebooks

• 🚨 Your notebook can be here! 🚨!

How to use the dataset

This dataset provides a unique opportunity to study multi-step reasoning for question answering. The GSM8K Linguistically Diverse Training & Test Set consists of 8,000 questions and answers that have been created to simulate real-world scenarios in grade school mathematics. Each question is paired with one answer based on a comprehensive test set. The questions cover topics such as algebra, arithmetic, probability and more.

The dataset consists of two files: main_train.csv and main_test.csv; the former contains questions and answers specifically related to grade school math while the latter includes multi-step reasoning tests for each category of the Ontario Math Curriculum (OMC). In addition, it has three columns - Question (Question), Answer ([Answer]) – meaning that each row contains 3 sequential question/answer pairs making it possible to take a single path from the start of any given answer or branch out from there according to the logic construction required by each respective problem scenario; these columns can be used in combination with text analysis algorithms like ELMo or BERT to explore different formats of representation for responding accurately during natural language processing tasks such as Q&A or building predictive models for numerical data applications like measuring classifying resource efficiency initiatives or forecasting sales volumes in retail platforms..

To use this dataset efficiently you should first get familiar with its structure by reading through its documentation so you are aware all available info regarding items content definition & format requirements then study examples that best suits your specific purpose whether is performing an experiment inspired by education research needs, generate insights related marketing analytics reports making predictions over artificial intelligence project capacity improvements optimization gains etcetera having full access knowledge about available source keeps you up & running from preliminary background work toward knowledge mining endeavor completion success Support User success qualitative exploration sessions make sure learn all variables definitions employed heterogeneous tools before continue Research journey starts experienced Researchers come prepared valuable resource items employed go beyond discovery false alarm halt advancement flow focus unprocessed raw values instead ensure clear cutting vision behind objectives support UserHelp plans going mean project meaningful campaign deliverables production planning safety milestones dovetail short deliveries enable design interfaces session workforce making everything automated fun entry functioning final transformation awaited offshoot Goals outcome parameters monitor life cycle management ensures ongoing projects feedbacks monitored video enactment resources tapped Proficiently balanced activity sheets tracking activities progress deliberation points evaluation radius highlights outputs primary phase visit egress collaboration agendas Client cumulative returns records capture performance illustrated collectively diarized successive setup sweetens conditions researched environments overview debriefing arcane matters turn acquaintances esteemed directives social

Research Ideas

• Training language models for improving accuracy in natural language processing applications such as question answering or dialogue systems.
• Generating new grade school math questions and answers using g...

A random sample of households were invited to participate in this survey. In the dataset, you will find the respondent level data in each row with the questions in each column. The numbers represent a scale option from the survey, such as 1=Excellent, 2=Good, 3=Fair, 4=Poor. The question stem, response option, and scale information for each field can be found in the var "variable labels" and "value labels" sheets. VERY IMPORTANT NOTE: The scientific survey data were weighted, meaning that the demographic profile of respondents was compared to the demographic profile of adults in Bloomington from US Census data. Statistical adjustments were made to bring the respondent profile into balance with the population profile. This means that some records were given more "weight" and some records were given less weight. The weights that were applied are found in the field "wt". If you do not apply these weights, you will not obtain the same results as can be found in the report delivered to the Bloomington. The easiest way to replicate these results is likely to create pivot tables, and use the sum of the "wt" field rather than a count of responses.

Abstract

The documented dataset covers Enterprise Survey (ES) panel data collected in Malawi in 2009 and 2014, as part of Africa Enterprise Surveys roll-out, an initiative of the World Bank.

New Enterprise Surveys target a sample consisting of longitudinal (panel) observations and new cross-sectional data. Panel firms are prioritized in the sample selection, comprising up to 50% of the sample in the current wave. For all panel firms, regardless of the sample, current eligibility or operating status is determined and included in panel datasets.

Malawi ES 2014 was conducted between April 2014 and February 2015, Malawi ES 2009 was carried out in May - July 2009. The objective of the Enterprise Survey is to obtain feedback from enterprises on the state of the private sector as well as to help in building a panel of enterprise data that will make it possible to track changes in the business environment over time, thus allowing, for example, impact assessments of reforms. Through interviews with firms in the manufacturing and services sectors, the survey assesses the constraints to private sector growth and creates statistically significant business environment indicators that are comparable across countries.

Stratified random sampling was used to select the surveyed businesses. The data was collected using face-to-face interviews.

Data from 673 establishments was analyzed: 436 businesses were from 2014 ES only, 63 - from 2009 ES only, and 174 firms were from both 2009 and 2014 panels.

The standard Enterprise Survey topics include firm characteristics, gender participation, access to finance, annual sales, costs of inputs and labor, workforce composition, bribery, licensing, infrastructure, trade, crime, competition, capacity utilization, land and permits, taxation, informality, business-government relations, innovation and technology, and performance measures. Over 90 percent of the questions objectively measure characteristics of a country’s business environment. The remaining questions assess the survey respondents’ opinions on what are the obstacles to firm growth and performance.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

The primary sampling unit of the study is an 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 make 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

The whole population, or the universe, covered in the Enterprise Surveys is the non-agricultural private economy. It comprises: all manufacturing sectors according to the ISIC Revision 3.1 group classification (group D), construction sector (group F), services sector (groups G and H), and transport, storage, and communications sector (group I). Note that this population definition excludes the following sectors: financial intermediation (group J), real estate and renting activities (group K, except sub-sector 72, IT, which was added to the population under study), and all public or utilities sectors. Companies with 100% government ownership are not eligible to participate in the Enterprise Surveys.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

For the Malawi ES, multiple sample frames were used: a sample frame was built using data compiled from local and municipal business registries. Due to the fact that the previous round of surveys utilized different stratification criteria in the 2009 survey sample, the presence of panel firms was limited to a maximum of 50% of the achieved interviews in each stratum. That sample is referred to as the panel.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The following survey instruments were used for Malawi ES 2009 and 2014: - Manufacturing Module Questionnaire - Services Module Questionnaire

The survey is fielded via manufacturing or services questionnaires in order not to ask questions that are irrelevant to specific types of firms, e.g. a question that relates to production and nonproduction workers should not be asked of a retail firm. In addition to questions that are asked across countries, all surveys are customized and contain country-specific questions. An example of customization would be including tourism-related questions that are asked in certain countries when tourism is an existing or potential sector of economic growth. There is a skip pattern in the Service Module Questionnaire for questions that apply only to retail firms.

Cleaning operations

Data entry and quality controls are implemented by the contractor and data is delivered to the World Bank in batches (typically 10%, 50% and 100%). These data deliveries are checked for logical consistency, out of range values, skip patterns, and duplicate entries. Problems are flagged by the World Bank and corrected by the implementing contractor through data checks, callbacks, and revisiting establishments.

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 "Refusal to respond" (-8) as a different option from "Don't know" (-9). b- Establishments with incomplete information were re-contacted in order to complete this information, whenever necessary.

Survey non-response was addressed by maximizing efforts to contact establishments that were initially selected for interview. 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.

Question Paper Solutions of chapter Sample Space of Numerical and statistical Methods, 5th Semester , Bachelor of Computer Application 2020-2021

N.B. This is not real data. Only here for an example for project templates.

Project Title: Add title here

Project Team: Add contact information for research project team members

Summary: Provide a descriptive summary of the nature of your research project and its aims/focal research questions.

Relevant publications/outputs: When available, add links to the related publications/outputs from this data.

Data availability statement: If your data is not linked on figshare directly, provide links to where it is being hosted here (i.e., Open Science Framework, Github, etc.). If your data is not going to be made publicly available, please provide details here as to the conditions under which interested individuals could gain access to the data and how to go about doing so.

Data collection details: 1. When was your data collected? 2. How were your participants sampled/recruited?

Sample information: How many and who are your participants? Demographic summaries are helpful additions to this section.

Research Project Materials: What materials are necessary to fully reproduce your the contents of your dataset? Include a list of all relevant materials (e.g., surveys, interview questions) with a brief description of what is included in each file that should be uploaded alongside your datasets.

List of relevant datafile(s): If your project produces data that cannot be contained in a single file, list the names of each of the files here with a brief description of what parts of your research project each file is related to.

Data codebook: What is in each column of your dataset? Provide variable names as they are encoded in your data files, verbatim question associated with each response, response options, details of any post-collection coding that has been done on the raw-response (and whether that's encoded in a separate column).

Examples available at: https://www.thearda.com/data-archive?fid=PEWMU17 https://www.thearda.com/data-archive?fid=RELLAND14

The Research and Development Survey (RANDS) is a platform designed for conducting survey question evaluation and statistical research. RANDS is an ongoing series of surveys from probability-sampled commercial survey panels used for methodological research at the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). RANDS estimates are generated using an experimental approach that differs from the survey design approaches generally used by NCHS, including possible biases from different response patterns and sampling frames as well as increased variability from lower sample sizes. Use of the RANDS platform allows NCHS to produce more timely data than would be possible using traditional data collection methods. RANDS is not designed to replace NCHS’ higher quality, core data collections. Below are experimental estimates of reduced access to healthcare for three rounds of RANDS during COVID-19. Data collection for the three rounds of RANDS during COVID-19 occurred between June 9, 2020 and July 6, 2020, August 3, 2020 and August 20, 2020, and May 17, 2021 and June 30, 2021. Information needed to interpret these estimates can be found in the Technical Notes. RANDS during COVID-19 included questions about unmet care in the last 2 months during the coronavirus pandemic. Unmet needs for health care are often the result of cost-related barriers. The National Health Interview Survey, conducted by NCHS, is the source for high-quality data to monitor cost-related health care access problems in the United States. For example, in 2018, 7.3% of persons of all ages reported delaying medical care due to cost and 4.8% reported needing medical care but not getting it due to cost in the past year. However, cost is not the only reason someone might delay or not receive needed medical care. As a result of the coronavirus pandemic, people also may not get needed medical care due to cancelled appointments, cutbacks in transportation options, fear of going to the emergency room, or an altruistic desire to not be a burden on the health care system, among other reasons. The Household Pulse Survey (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/covid19/pulse/reduced-access-to-care.htm), an online survey conducted in response to the COVID-19 pandemic by the Census Bureau in partnership with other federal agencies including NCHS, also reports estimates of reduced access to care during the pandemic (beginning in Phase 1, which started on April 23, 2020). The Household Pulse Survey reports the percentage of adults who delayed medical care in the last 4 weeks or who needed medical care at any time in the last 4 weeks for something other than coronavirus but did not get it because of the pandemic. The experimental estimates on this page are derived from RANDS during COVID-19 and show the percentage of U.S. adults who were unable to receive medical care (including urgent care, surgery, screening tests, ongoing treatment, regular checkups, prescriptions, dental care, vision care, and hearing care) in the last 2 months. Technical Notes: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/covid19/rands/reduced-access-to-care.htm#limitations

Source: Kaggle users Data analysis: Student's placement scores with their years to join the club. The file includes some worksheets such as raw data, summary data, pivot table and a chart, SMART questions and SOW. In the chart: You can see the connection between student's placement scores and their time to join the club. The table involves 5 columns, and then it was added more two columns (Year and Time_Join_Club) so that you can calculate the number of years in which the students have joined the club.

Math_Score| Reading_Score| Writing_Score |Placement_Score |Club_Join_Date|Year | Time _Join_Club|

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic changed the way many industries work, including contact centres, with some employees working from home and new on-site restrictions/measures in place representing even greater challenges for employers around staff engagement and wellbeing. This study aimed to understand the interplay of individual, social, environmental and organisational factors influencing physical activity and sedentary behaviour in UK contact centre employees, how the pandemic impacted these factors, and their relevance for the future of hybrid working.MethodsIndividual interviews (n = 33) were conducted with participants (staff working full and part time, on site and from home) from four UK contact centres. A topic guide based on the ecological model was developed to understand current barriers and facilitators to physical activity and (reducing) sedentary behaviour during and outside of working hours. Thematic analysis was carried out using a codebook and a deductive coding approach to identify themes.ResultsThree key insights are provided. First, participants felt they were generally sitting more and moving less since the first UK-wide lockdown. Second, factors which negatively impacted on these behaviours were evident across all levels of the ecological model. These included individual and social barriers (e.g., lack of motivation and preferable physical activity options) as well as environmental and organisational barriers (e.g., poor home office setup, back-to-back virtual meetings). There were a mix of new and existing barriers (exacerbated by the pandemic) and several of these were linked to homeworking. Third, organisational support requirements (e.g., homeworking ergonomic support) and existing facilitators (such as the provision of informational support and flexible working arrangements) were identified.ConclusionSolutions to reduce sedentary behaviours and increase physical activity in contact centres need to address barriers from the individual to the organisational level. Whilst the study was undertaken in the UK, the results are like to be applicable globally.Trial registrationClinical trial registration: The trial for the wider project has been registered on the ISRCTN database: http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN11580369.

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.

The National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) is conducted annually by the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The main objective of the NHIS is to monitor the health of the United States population through the collection and analysis of data on a broad range of health topics. The NHIS contains many similar questions every year. The repeated items are called "core questions." Beginning with a new NHIS design in 1997, these core questions were divided into three components -- Family, Sample Adult, and Sample Child. The 2012 NHIS data release consists of six core data files, a paradata file, the three Disability Questions Tests files, a Functioning and Disability file, and two Complementary and Alternative Medicine files. Users may see the Survey Description document for more details. The 2012 NHIS contains the core questions, as well as enhanced questions on health care access and utilization. Supplemental topics are covered in the following questionnaires: the Family questionnaire covers subjects of food security; the Sample Adult questionnaire covers subjects of immunization, complementary and alternative medicine, non-cigarette tobacco use, voice, speech, and language; and the Sample Child questionnaire covers subjects of mental health, mental health services, immunization, complementary and alternative medicine, balance, voice, speech, and language. Along with the 2012 NHIS core data files are the Disability Questions Tests 2012 files which contain person-level data collected via a field test of six disability questions. These supplemental questions appeared on the NHIS, at the end of the Family, Sample Adult, and Sample Child Cores. The Disability Questions Tests 2012 files are released as three separate files. A fourth disability supplement was also fielded in 2012 as part of the Sample Adult Core and is called "Adult Functioning and Disability Level." The Adult and Child Alternative Health Supplement files were intended to expand on knowledge of alternative medical services. Questions focus on how often various types of alternative therapies are used, the associated costs, and the reasons they are used. Lastly, the Paradata Level file contains information about the survey and data collection processes; included are data on response rates, keystrokes, interview times, and number of contact attempts.

1) Data Introduction • The Power BI Sample Data is a financial sample dataset provided for Power BI practice and data visualization exercises that includes a variety of financial metrics and transaction information, including sales, profits, and expenses.

2) Data Utilization (1) Power BI Sample Data has characteristics that: • This dataset consists of numerical and categorical variables such as transaction date, region, product category, sales, profit, and cost, optimized for aggregation, analysis, and visualization. (2) Power BI Sample Data can be used to: • Revenue and Revenue Analysis: Analyze sales and profit data by region, product, and period to understand business performance and trends. • Power BI Dashboard Practice: Utilize a variety of financial metrics and transaction data to design and practice dashboards, reports, visualization charts, and more directly at Power BI.