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).

Distribution of doses of a volatile organic compound from inhalation of one consumer product, other near -field sources, far-field sources, and aggregate (total) exposure. In this instance, far-field scenarios account for several orders of magnitude of less of the predicted dose compared to near-field scenarios. This dataset is associated with the following publication: Vallero, D. Air Pollution Monitoring Changes to Accompany the Transition from a Control to a Systems Focus. Sustainability. MDPI AG, Basel, SWITZERLAND, 8(12): 1216, (2016).

Download Employee Travel Excel SheetThis dataset contains information about the employee travel expenses for the year 2021. Details are provided on the employee (name, title, department), the travel (dates, location, purpose) and the cost (expenses, recoveries). Expenses are broken down in separate tabs by Quarter (Q1, Q2, Q3 and Q4). Updated quarterly when expenses are prepared. Expenses for other years are available in separate datasets.

Sample data for exercises in Further Adventures in Data Cleaning.

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

Raw source data file with individual-level data in a single Excel file for each figure panel in a separate tab.

This is the Excel file for the PhD study of Jack Brimmell entitled: A longitudinal examination of executive function, visual attention, and soccer penalty performance.

Data A. Supporting data for Fig 1. Data B. Supporting data for Fig 2. Data C. Supporting data for Fig 4. Data D. Supporting data for Fig 5. Data E. Supporting data for Fig 6. Data F. Supporting data for Fig 7. Data G. Supporting data for Fig 8. Data H. Supporting data for Fig B in S1 Text. Data I. Supporting data for Fig C in S1 Text. Data J. Supporting data for Fig D in S1 Text. Data K. Supporting data for Fig E in S1 Text. (XLSX)

Excel file that contains data underlying all graphs.

Context

Raw data of real analytical use cases in a number of industries and companies is frequently provided in an Excel-based form. These files usually cannot be processed directly in machine learning models, but must first be cleaned and preprocessed. In this procedure, many different types of pitfalls may occur. This makes data preprocessing an essential time factor in the daily work of a data scientist.

Here, an Excel spreadsheet will be presented which in this form is closely oriented to a real case but contains only simulated figures for reasons of data and business results protection. The form and structure of the file correspond to a real case and could be encountered by a data scientist in a company in this way. Such a file can be the result of a download from a financial controlling system, e.g. SAP.

Content

The data includes information about sold goods resp. product units, the associated turnover and hours worked. This information is grouped by month, store and department of the retailer. Moreover, information about the sales area in a specific department as well as about the opening hours of the store is provided.

Possible objectives

The following goals of data cleansing might be addressed:

• Import the Excel-file
• Inspect the dataset
• Check data types and do meaningful modifications
• Handle missings/data gaps
• Find and solve data inconsistencies
• Rename columns for improved usage
• Join tables to a single one

Furthermore, the data can be investigated with regard to correlations between different features and/or a regression model.

License

GNU General Public License v3.0 - https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.en.html

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%.

The Delta Neighborhood Physical Activity Study was an observational study designed to assess characteristics of neighborhood built environments associated with physical activity. It was an ancillary study to the Delta Healthy Sprouts Project and therefore included towns and neighborhoods in which Delta Healthy Sprouts participants resided. The 12 towns were located in the Lower Mississippi Delta region of Mississippi. Data were collected via electronic surveys between August 2016 and September 2017 using the Rural Active Living Assessment (RALA) tools and the Community Park Audit Tool (CPAT). Scale scores for the RALA Programs and Policies Assessment and the Town-Wide Assessment were computed using the scoring algorithms provided for these tools via SAS software programming. The Street Segment Assessment and CPAT do not have associated scoring algorithms and therefore no scores are provided for them. Because the towns were not randomly selected and the sample size is small, the data may not be generalizable to all rural towns in the Lower Mississippi Delta region of Mississippi. Dataset one contains data collected with the RALA Programs and Policies Assessment (PPA) tool. Dataset two contains data collected with the RALA Town-Wide Assessment (TWA) tool. Dataset three contains data collected with the RALA Street Segment Assessment (SSA) tool. Dataset four contains data collected with the Community Park Audit Tool (CPAT). [Note : title changed 9/4/2020 to reflect study name] Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: Dataset One RALA PPA Data Dictionary. File Name: RALA PPA Data Dictionary.csvResource Description: Data dictionary for dataset one collected using the RALA PPA tool.Resource Software Recommended: Microsoft Excel,url: https://products.office.com/en-us/excel Resource Title: Dataset Two RALA TWA Data Dictionary. File Name: RALA TWA Data Dictionary.csvResource Description: Data dictionary for dataset two collected using the RALA TWA tool.Resource Software Recommended: Microsoft Excel,url: https://products.office.com/en-us/excel Resource Title: Dataset Three RALA SSA Data Dictionary. File Name: RALA SSA Data Dictionary.csvResource Description: Data dictionary for dataset three collected using the RALA SSA tool.Resource Software Recommended: Microsoft Excel,url: https://products.office.com/en-us/excel Resource Title: Dataset Four CPAT Data Dictionary. File Name: CPAT Data Dictionary.csvResource Description: Data dictionary for dataset four collected using the CPAT.Resource Software Recommended: Microsoft Excel,url: https://products.office.com/en-us/excel Resource Title: Dataset One RALA PPA. File Name: RALA PPA Data.csvResource Description: Data collected using the RALA PPA tool.Resource Software Recommended: Microsoft Excel,url: https://products.office.com/en-us/excel Resource Title: Dataset Two RALA TWA. File Name: RALA TWA Data.csvResource Description: Data collected using the RALA TWA tool.Resource Software Recommended: Microsoft Excel,url: https://products.office.com/en-us/excel Resource Title: Dataset Three RALA SSA. File Name: RALA SSA Data.csvResource Description: Data collected using the RALA SSA tool.Resource Software Recommended: Microsoft Excel,url: https://products.office.com/en-us/excel Resource Title: Dataset Four CPAT. File Name: CPAT Data.csvResource Description: Data collected using the CPAT.Resource Software Recommended: Microsoft Excel,url: https://products.office.com/en-us/excel Resource Title: Data Dictionary. File Name: DataDictionary_RALA_PPA_SSA_TWA_CPAT.csvResource Description: This is a combined data dictionary from each of the 4 dataset files in this set.

Parcel file includes information such as current values, ownership information, situs address and abbreviated legal.Instructions for Opening in Microsoft Excel: When opening this file in Microsoft Excel, the ParcelNumber should be treated as a text field because parcel numbers can have leading zeros. Use the following procedure:1. Do not open the file directly, start Excel with an empty workbook.2. Click the "Data" tab, then click the "From Text" button in the ribbon.3. Navigate to the saved CSV file and click the Import button.4. The "Delimited" radio button should be selected so click "Next".5. Check only the "Comma" check box and click "Next".6. Click the ParcelNumber field to select it in the "Data Preview" pane then select the "Text" radio button to define that column as a text column.7. Change any other columns as desired and click the "Finish" button to import.When the Text driver is used to open a file, the format of the text file is determined by using a schema information file (schema.ini) which is included with this download to correctly identify the column types.

Excel file with primary data used to assemble figures.

The spreadsheet includes for each day and for each subject the sleep-related variables measured by sleep logs and wrist actigraphy, as well as compliance data. Sheet 1 has definitions for variable headings in the table and relevant descriptions. For reference, between-subjects variables are reported in Table 2. (XLSX)

The Delta Produce Sources Study was an observational study designed to measure and compare food environments of farmers markets (n=3) and grocery stores (n=12) in 5 rural towns located in the Lower Mississippi Delta region of Mississippi. Data were collected via electronic surveys from June 2019 to March 2020 using a modified version of the Nutrition Environment Measures Survey (NEMS) Farmers Market Audit tool. The tool was modified to collect information pertaining to source of fresh produce and also for use with both farmers markets and grocery stores. Availability, source, quality, and price information were collected and compared between farmers markets and grocery stores for 13 fresh fruits and 32 fresh vegetables via SAS software programming. Because the towns were not randomly selected and the sample sizes are relatively small, the data may not be generalizable to all rural towns in the Lower Mississippi Delta region of Mississippi. Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: Delta Produce Sources Study dataset . File Name: DPS Data Public.csvResource Description: The dataset contains variables corresponding to availability, source (country, state and town if country is the United States), quality, and price (by weight or volume) of 13 fresh fruits and 32 fresh vegetables sold in farmers markets and grocery stores located in 5 Lower Mississippi Delta towns.Resource Software Recommended: Microsoft Excel,url: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/excel Resource Title: Delta Produce Sources Study data dictionary. File Name: DPS Data Dictionary Public.csvResource Description: This file is the data dictionary corresponding to the Delta Produce Sources Study dataset.Resource Software Recommended: Microsoft Excel,url: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/excel

Excel sheet with data of the original research 'Evaluation of simple and cost-effective hematological inflammatory biomarkers in type 2 diabetes and their correlation with glycemic control'

Corresponding figure numbers are indicated in each Excel worksheet. (XLSX)

This dataset is associated with the forthcoming publication entitled, "Microbial volatile organic compounds mediate attraction by a primary but not secondary stored product insect pest in wheat", and includes data on grain damage from near infrared spectroscopy, behavioral data from wind tunnel and release-recapture experiments, as well as volatile characterization of headspace from moldy grain. For all files, incubation intervals 9, 18, and 27 d represent how long grain was incubated after being tempered to a grain moisture of 12, 15, or 19% or left untempered (ctrl; 10.8% grain moisture). TSO = Trece storgard oil; empty = negative control (no stimulus), LGB = lesser grain borer (Rhzyopertha dominica), and RFB = red flour beetle (Tribolium castaneum). Note: The resource 'GC/MS Grain MVOC Headspace Data' was added 2021-08-04 with the deletion of some compounds as unlikely natural compounds and potential contaminants. This is the dataset that undergirds the non-metric multidimensional scaling analysis. See the included file list for more information about methods and results of each file in this dataset. Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: GC-MS/Headspace Data. File Name: tvw_final_gc_ms_data.csvResource Software Recommended: Microsoft Excel,url: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/excel Resource Title: Microbial damage on wheat evaluated with near-infrared spectroscopy. File Name: tvw_nearinfrared_sorting_damaged_grain_fungal_exp.csvResource Software Recommended: Microsoft Excel,url: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/excel Resource Title: Release-Recapture Datasets with LGB & RFB. File Name: tvw_rr_lgb_rfb_microbial_cues.csvResource Software Recommended: Microsoft Excel,url: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/excel Resource Title: Wind tunnel response by RGB & LGB. File Name: tvw_wt_lgb_rfb_data_microbial_cues.csvResource Software Recommended: Microsoft Excel,url: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/excel Resource Title: GC/MS Grain MVOC Headspace Data. File Name: taylor_headspace_final_data_peer_reviewed_ag_commons.csvResource Software Recommended: Microsoft Excel,url: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/excel Resource Title: README file list. File Name: file_list_MVOCwheat.txt

Each sheet in the file contains the data for one figure and is labelled accordingly. (XLSX)