This statistic depicts the sales of the H&M Group worldwide from 2006 to 2024. In the fiscal year 2024, global net sales of the H&M Group amounted to about 234 billion Swedish kronor. H&MH&M offers a broad and varied range of fashion including collections for women, men, teenagers and children. The range also includes sportswear, underwear, shoes, accessories and cosmetics, as well as home textiles and decorations from H&M Home.Germany is H&M's largest market. In 2024, over 35 billion Swedish kronor were generated from that country alone. The company operates roughly 4,253 stores worldwide and employs approximately 97,710 people. H&M dropped out of the top ten most valuable apparel brands in the world as of 2023.H&M aims to be a more sustainable choice for today’s increasingly aware customers. To this end, H&M’s investments in social improvements and reduced environmental impact extend throughout the product life cycle – from responsible use of natural resources to ensuring good working conditions at suppliers’ factories. Sustainability work is thoroughly integrated into the business, not only because it is an investment in the customer offering,but also because it is vital to the group’s long-term growth and development. However, there have been questions raised as to how effective and trustworthy H&M's sustainability practices really are.

Dataset Card for H&M Clothes captions

_Dataset used to train/finetune [Clothes text to image model] Captions are generated by using the 'detail_desc' and 'colour_group_name' or 'perceived_colour_master_name' from kaggle/competitions/h-and-m-personalized-fashion-recommendations. Original images were also obtained from the url (https://www.kaggle.com/competitions/h-and-m-personalized-fashion-recommendations/data?select=images)

  For each row the dataset contains image and text… See the full description on the dataset page: https://huggingface.co/datasets/wbensvage/clothes_desc.

Dataset Card for "h-and-m-fashion-caption"

More Information needed

This dataset provides valuable insights into the wage gap between Hispanic and White workers in the United States.

The wage gap is expressed as a percentage by which hourly wages of Hispanic workers are less than those of White workers.

It is an essential measure for understanding income disparities and examining trends over time.

Interesting Task Ideas:

1. Analyze the Hispanic-White wage gap trends over the years.
2. Explore the variations in median and average wages between Hispanic and White workers.
3. Investigate the gender-specific wage gap and identify any disparities between Hispanic and White men and women.
4. Conduct regression analysis to analyze the wage gap while controlling for relevant factors such as education, age, and geographic location.
5. Visualize the wage gap data to emphasize the magnitude of disparities and highlight any patterns over time.
6. Discover the potential effects of policy changes or economic transformations on the wage gap.

If you find this dataset insightful, don't forget to upvote it! 😊💝

Checkout my other datasets

Poverty-Level Wages in the USA Dataset

1.4M Amazon Products

Black-White Wage Gap in the USA Dataset

Clash of Clans Clans Dataset 2023 (3.5M Clans)

Productivity and Hourly Compensation

Photo by Clay Banks on Unsplash

This is the public release of the Samsung Open Mean Opinion Scores (SOMOS) dataset for the evaluation of neural text-to-speech (TTS) synthesis, which consists of audio files generated with a public domain voice from trained TTS models based on bibliography, and numbers assigned to each audio as quality (naturalness) evaluations by several crowdsourced listeners.DescriptionThe SOMOS dataset contains 20,000 synthetic utterances (wavs), 100 natural utterances and 374,955 naturalness evaluations (human-assigned scores in the range 1-5). The synthetic utterances are single-speaker, generated by training several Tacotron-like acoustic models and an LPCNet vocoder on the LJ Speech voice public dataset. 2,000 text sentences were synthesized, selected from Blizzard Challenge texts of years 2007-2016, the LJ Speech corpus as well as Wikipedia and general domain data from the Internet.Naturalness evaluations were collected via crowdsourcing a listening test on Amazon Mechanical Turk in the US, GB and CA locales. The records of listening test participants (workers) are fully anonymized. Statistics on the reliability of the scores assigned by the workers are also included, generated through processing the scores and validation controls per submission page.

To listen to audio samples of the dataset, please see our Github page.

The dataset release comes with a carefully designed train-validation-test split (70%-15%-15%) with unseen systems, listeners and texts, which can be used for experimentation on MOS prediction.

This version also contains the necessary resources to obtain the transcripts corresponding to all dataset audios.

Terms of use

The dataset may be used for research purposes only, for non-commercial purposes only, and may be distributed with the same terms.

Every time you produce research that has used this dataset, please cite the dataset appropriately.

Cite as:

@inproceedings{maniati22_interspeech, author={Georgia Maniati and Alexandra Vioni and Nikolaos Ellinas and Karolos Nikitaras and Konstantinos Klapsas and June Sig Sung and Gunu Jho and Aimilios Chalamandaris and Pirros Tsiakoulis}, title={{SOMOS: The Samsung Open MOS Dataset for the Evaluation of Neural Text-to-Speech Synthesis}}, year=2022, booktitle={Proc. Interspeech 2022}, pages={2388--2392}, doi={10.21437/Interspeech.2022-10922} }

References of resources & models used

Voice & synthesized texts:K. Ito and L. Johnson, “The LJ Speech Dataset,” https://keithito.com/LJ-Speech-Dataset/, 2017.

Vocoder:J.-M. Valin and J. Skoglund, “LPCNet: Improving neural speech synthesis through linear prediction,” in Proc. ICASSP, 2019.R. Vipperla, S. Park, K. Choo, S. Ishtiaq, K. Min, S. Bhattacharya, A. Mehrotra, A. G. C. P. Ramos, and N. D. Lane, “Bunched lpcnet: Vocoder for low-cost neural text-to-speech systems,” in Proc. Interspeech, 2020.

Acoustic models:N. Ellinas, G. Vamvoukakis, K. Markopoulos, A. Chalamandaris, G. Maniati, P. Kakoulidis, S. Raptis, J. S. Sung, H. Park, and P. Tsiakoulis, “High quality streaming speech synthesis with low, sentence-length-independent latency,” in Proc. Interspeech, 2020.Y. Wang, R. Skerry-Ryan, D. Stanton, Y. Wu, R. J. Weiss, N. Jaitly, Z. Yang, Y. Xiao, Z. Chen, S. Bengio et al., “Tacotron: Towards End-to-End Speech Synthesis,” in Proc. Interspeech, 2017.J. Shen, R. Pang, R. J. Weiss, M. Schuster, N. Jaitly, Z. Yang, Z. Chen, Y. Zhang, Y. Wang, R. Skerrv-Ryan et al., “Natural TTS Synthesis by Conditioning Wavenet on MEL Spectrogram Predictions,” in Proc. ICASSP, 2018.J. Shen, Y. Jia, M. Chrzanowski, Y. Zhang, I. Elias, H. Zen, and Y. Wu, “Non-Attentive Tacotron: Robust and Controllable Neural TTS Synthesis Including Unsupervised Duration Modeling,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.04301, 2020.M. Honnibal and M. Johnson, “An Improved Non-monotonic Transition System for Dependency Parsing,” in Proc. EMNLP, 2015.M. Dominguez, P. L. Rohrer, and J. Soler-Company, “PyToBI: A Toolkit for ToBI Labeling Under Python,” in Proc. Interspeech, 2019.Y. Zou, S. Liu, X. Yin, H. Lin, C. Wang, H. Zhang, and Z. Ma, “Fine-grained prosody modeling in neural speech synthesis using ToBI representation,” in Proc. Interspeech, 2021.K. Klapsas, N. Ellinas, J. S. Sung, H. Park, and S. Raptis, “WordLevel Style Control for Expressive, Non-attentive Speech Synthesis,” in Proc. SPECOM, 2021.T. Raitio, R. Rasipuram, and D. Castellani, “Controllable neural text-to-speech synthesis using intuitive prosodic features,” in Proc. Interspeech, 2020.

Synthesized texts from the Blizzard Challenges 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2016:M. Fraser and S. King, "The Blizzard Challenge 2007," in Proc. SSW6, 2007.V. Karaiskos, S. King, R. A. Clark, and C. Mayo, "The Blizzard Challenge 2008," in Proc. Blizzard Challenge Workshop, 2008.A. W. Black, S. King, and K. Tokuda, "The Blizzard Challenge 2009," in Proc. Blizzard Challenge, 2009.S. King and V. Karaiskos, "The Blizzard Challenge 2010," 2010.S. King and V. Karaiskos, "The Blizzard Challenge 2011," 2011.S. King and V. Karaiskos, "The Blizzard Challenge 2012," 2012.S. King and V. Karaiskos, "The Blizzard Challenge 2013," 2013.S. King and V. Karaiskos, "The Blizzard Challenge 2016," 2016.

Contact

Alexandra Vioni - a.vioni@samsung.com

If you have any questions or comments about the dataset, please feel free to write to us.

We are interested in knowing if you find our dataset useful! If you use our dataset, please email us and tell us about your research.

tomytjandra/h-and-m-fashion-caption-12k dataset hosted on Hugging Face and contributed by the HF Datasets community

The data included in this publication depict components of wildfire risk specifically for populated areas in the United States. These datasets represent where people live in the United States and the in situ risk from wildfire, i.e., the risk at the location where the adverse effects take place.

National wildfire hazard datasets of annual burn probability and fire intensity, generated by the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station and Pyrologix LLC, form the foundation of the Wildfire Risk to Communities data. Vegetation and wildland fuels data from LANDFIRE 2020 (version 2.2.0) were used as input to two different but related geospatial fire simulation systems. Annual burn probability was produced with the USFS geospatial fire simulator (FSim) at a relatively coarse cell size of 270 meters (m). To bring the burn probability raster data down to a finer resolution more useful for assessing hazard and risk to communities, we upsampled them to the native 30 m resolution of the LANDFIRE fuel and vegetation data. In this upsampling process, we also spread values of modeled burn probability into developed areas represented in LANDFIRE fuels data as non-burnable. Burn probability rasters represent landscape conditions as of the end of 2020. Fire intensity characteristics were modeled at 30 m resolution using a process that performs a comprehensive set of FlamMap runs spanning the full range of weather-related characteristics that occur during a fire season and then integrates those runs into a variety of results based on the likelihood of those weather types occurring. Before the fire intensity modeling, the LANDFIRE 2020 data were updated to reflect fuels disturbances occurring in 2021 and 2022. As such, the fire intensity datasets represent landscape conditions as of the end of 2022. The data products in this publication that represent where people live, reflect 2020 estimates of housing units and 2021 estimates of population counts from the U.S. Census Bureau, combined with building footprint data from Onegeo and USA Structures, both reflecting 2022 conditions.

The specific raster datasets included in this publication include:

Building Count: Building Count is a 30-m raster representing the count of buildings in the building footprint dataset located within each 30-m pixel.

Building Density: Building Density is a 30-m raster representing the density of buildings in the building footprint dataset (buildings per square kilometer [km²]).

Building Coverage: Building Coverage is a 30-m raster depicting the percentage of habitable land area covered by building footprints.

Population Count (PopCount): PopCount is a 30-m raster with pixel values representing residential population count (persons) in each pixel.

Population Density (PopDen): PopDen is a 30-m raster of residential population density (people/km²).

Housing Unit Count (HUCount): HUCount is a 30-m raster representing the number of housing units in each pixel.

Housing Unit Density (HUDen): HUDen is a 30-m raster of housing-unit density (housing units/km²).

Housing Unit Exposure (HUExposure): HUExposure is a 30-m raster that represents the expected number of housing units within a pixel potentially exposed to wildfire in a year. This is a long-term annual average and not intended to represent the actual number of housing units exposed in any specific year.

Housing Unit Impact (HUImpact): HUImpact is a 30-m raster that represents the relative potential impact of fire to housing units at any pixel, if a fire were to occur. It is an index that incorporates the general consequences of fire on a home as a function of fire intensity and uses flame length probabilities from wildfire modeling to capture likely intensity of fire.

Housing Unit Risk (HURisk): HURisk is a 30-m raster that integrates all four primary elements of wildfire risk - likelihood, intensity, susceptibility, and exposure - on pixels where housing unit density is greater than zero.The geospatial data products described and distributed here are part of the Wildfire Risk to Communities project. This project was directed by Congress in the 2018 Consolidated Appropriations Act (i.e., 2018 Omnibus Act, H.R. 1625, Section 210: Wildfire Hazard Severity Mapping) to help U.S. communities understand components of their relative wildfire risk profile, the nature and effects of wildfire risk, and actions communities can take to mitigate risk. The first edition of these data represented the first time wildfire risk to communities had been mapped nationally with consistent methodology. They provided foundational information for comparing the relative wildfire risk among populated communities in the United States. In this version, the 2nd edition, we use improved modeling and mapping methodology and updated input data to generate the current suite of products.See the Wildfire Risk to Communities website at https://www.wildfirerisk.org for complete project information and an interactive web application for exploring some of the datasets published here. We deliver the data here as zip files by U.S. state (including AK and HI), and for the full extent of the continental U.S.

This data publication is a second edition and represents an update to any previous versions of Wildfire Risk to Communities risk datasets published by the USDA Forest Service. This second edition was originally published on 06/03/2024. On 09/10/2024, a minor correction was made to the abstract in this overall metadata document as well as the individual metadata documents associated with each raster dataset. The supplemental file containing data product descriptions was also updated. In addition, we separated the large CONUS download into a series of smaller zip files (one for each layer).

There are two companion data publications that are part of the WRC 2.0 data update: one that characterizes landscape-wide wildfire hazard and risk for the nation (Scott et al. 2024, https://doi.org/10.2737/RDS-2020-0016-2), and one that delineates wildfire risk reduction zones and provides tabular summaries of wildfire hazard and risk raster datasets (Dillon et al. 2024, https://doi.org/10.2737/RDS-2024-0030).

Allforce is a leading data intelligence company specializing in comprehensive audience targeting solutions. We maintain one of the most extensive and accurate databases of professional contact information, with a focus on delivering verified, actionable data that drives measurable marketing results for our clients.

Dataset Overview: Our US Human Resources Professional Contact Database provides access to 2.4 million verified HR professionals across 475,000 companies nationwide. This premium dataset is specifically curated for B2B marketers seeking to connect with decision-makers in the HR ecosystem.

Key Features & Benefits: 2.4M+ HR professionals across all specialties 475,000+ companies represented Segmented by HR function: Benefits, Payroll, Recruiting, Training, Compensation, and more Decision-maker level contacts included

Data Quality & Verification: LinkedIn URL verification for each contact Regular database updates and maintenance High deliverability rates (Email Safe certification) Active professional verification process

Multi-Channel Marketing Support: Email addresses (newsletter-safe, verified deliverable) Direct phone numbers for telemarketing Postal addresses for direct mail campaigns LinkedIn profile matching for social outreach Digital advertising - Programmatic audiences

Data Compliance & Safety: All data is collected and maintained in compliance with applicable privacy regulations. Our "Safe to Email" certification ensures subscribers have opted into professional communications, reducing bounce rates and compliance risks.

Industries Served: Healthcare, Technology, Manufacturing, Financial Services, Retail, Education, Government, and all major industry verticals with HR departments.

Transform your HR marketing strategy with verified, actionable contact data that delivers results.

Publicly available weblinks used to develop research project.

This dataset is associated with the following publication: Hall, E., R. Hall, J. Aron, S. Swanson, M. Philbin, R. Schaefer, T. Jones-Lepp, D. Heggem, J. Lin, E. Wilson, and H. Kahan. An Ecological Function Approach to Managing Harmful Cyanobacteria in Three Oregon Lakes: Beyond Water Quality Advisories and Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs). WATER. MDPI AG, Basel, SWITZERLAND, 11(6): 1125, (2019).

The dataset includes information on soil properties collected from two conventionally managed fields under corn-soybean rotation in October 2005 and October 2016, respectively. The fields are located in Story County, Central Iowa. 42 sampling locations per field and year were sampled within a 50 m × 50 m grid, and 1 to 2 samples per location were collected using a hydraulic soil sampler (d= 38.2 mm) from the 0 - 120 cm soil layer. The samples were analyzed to determine carbon and nitrogen concentration, and soil pH in five soil layers (0-15, 15-30, 30-60, 60-90, and 90-120 cm). Presented is the raw data per location (mean of duplicates) with which carbon and nitrogen content can be calculated with either the equivalent soil mass method or by using bulk density. For more information about this dataset contact: Tom Sauer: tom.sauer@usda.gov Christian Dold: c.dold@fz-juelich.de Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: Data Dictionary. File Name: data-dictionary_CD.csvResource Description: Defines variables and their units for the data table, also provided as a separate sheet within xlsx file.Resource Title: Soil Properties. File Name: Soil Chemical Analysis.xlsx

This project area “OTM 33 Mobile Emission Measurements” covers research on remote emissions quantification with the various forms of mobile monitoring approaches. There will be multiple data sets included in this project. The metadata and data dictionaries are included with each data set. The data sets with metadata and data dictionaries are as follows:

Methane Transect data Set: The dataset contains mobile methane concentration measurements acquired at 10 samples per second data acquisition rate, collected while driving along transects downwind of a methane source. The data consists of GPS coordinates, methane concetrion data and transect indicators. The controlled methane release experiment was conducted on May 15, 2010 in Durham, North Carolina, where three passes were made for the one CR experiment and the point-source release rate was controlled at S = 0.6 g/s. Additionally, the dataset contains four field studies conducted in Colorado on four separate days in July 2010, with the number of passes for each study ranging from two to five.

This dataset is associated with the following publication: Albertson, J., T. Foster-Wittig, A. Swingler, G. Foderaro, S. Ferrari, S. Amin, M. Modrak, H. Brantley , and E. Thoma. A Mobile Sensing Approach for Regional Surveillance of Fugitive Methane Emissions in Oil and Gas Production. ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY. American Chemical Society, Washington, DC, USA, 50(5): 2487-2497, (2015).

The 4 resource surveys (coastal, rivers and streams, lakes and reservoirs, and wetlands) each have datasets covering the biological, chemical, physical habitat, hydrologic and watershed data. This dataset is associated with the following publications: Stoddard , J., J. Van Sickle, A. Herlihy, J. Brahney, S. Paulsen , D. Peck , R. Mitchell , and A. Pollard. Continental-scale increase in stream and lake phosphorus: Are oligotrophic systems disappearing in the U.S.?. ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY. American Chemical Society, Washington, DC, USA, 50(7): 3409-3415, (2016). Herlihy, A., M. Kentula, T. Magee, G. Lomnicky, A. Nahlik, and G. Serenbetz. Striving for consistency in the National Wetland Condition Assessment: developing a reference condition approach for assessing wetlands at a continental scale. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT. Springer, New York, NY, USA, 191: 327, (2019). Magee, T., K. Blocksom, and S. Fennessy. A national-scale vegetation multimetric index (VMMI) as an indicator of wetland condition across the conterminous United States.. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT. Springer, New York, NY, USA, 191: 322, (2019). Herlihy, A., J. Sifneos, G. Lomnicky, A. Nahlik, M. Kentula, T. Magee, M. Weber, and A. Trebitz. The response of wetland quality indicators to human disturbance indicators across the United States. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT. Springer, New York, NY, USA, 191: 296, (2019). Herlihy, A., S. Paulsen, M. Kentula, T. Magee, A. Nahlik, and G. Lomnicky. Assessing the relative and attributable risk of stressors to wetland condition across the conterminous United States. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT. Springer, New York, NY, USA, 191: 320, (2019). Lomnicky, G., A.T. Herlihy, and P. Kaufmann. Quantifying the extent of human disturbance activities and anthropogenic stressors in wetlands across the conterminous United States: results from the National Wetland Condition Assessment. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT. Springer, New York, NY, USA, 191: 324, (2019). Bowen, G., A. Putman, J.R. Brooks, D. Bowling, E. Oerter, and S. Good. Inferring the source of evaporated waters using stable H and O isotopes.. OECOLOGIA. Springer, New York, NY, USA, 187(4): 1025-1039, (2018). Fox, E., J. Ver Hoef, and T. Olsen. Comparing Spatial Regression to Random Forests for Large Environmental Data Sets.. PLoS ONE. Public Library of Science, San Francisco, CA, USA, 15(3): e0229509, (2020). Nahlik, A., K. Blocksom, A. Herlihy, M. Kentula, T. Magee, and S. Paulsen. Use of national-scale data to examine human-mediated additions of heavy metals to wetland soils of the US. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT. Springer, New York, NY, USA, 191: 336, (2019). Kentula, M., and S. Paulsen. The 2011 National Wetland Condition Assessment: Overview and an Invitation. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT. Springer, New York, NY, USA, 325, (2019). Magee, T., K. Blocksom, A. Herlihy, and A. Nahlik. Characterizing nonnative plants in wetlands across the conterminous United States. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT. Springer, New York, NY, USA, 191: 344, (2019). Feio, M., R. Hughes, M. Callisto, S.J. Nichols, O.N. Odume, B.R. Quintella, M. Kuemmerlen, F.C. Aguiar, S.F.P. Almeida, P. Alonso-EguíaLis , F.O. Arimoro, F.J. Dyer , J.S. Harding , S. Jang , P. Kaufmann, S. Lee, J. Li, D.R. Macedo, A. Mendes, N. Mercado-Silva , W. Monk, K. Nakamura, G.G. Ndiritu , R. Ogden , M. Peat , T.B. Reynoldson , B. Rios-Touma , P. Segurado , and A.G. Yates. The biological assessment and rehabilitation of the world’s rivers: an overview. WATER. MDPI AG, Basel, SWITZERLAND, 13(3): 371, (2021).

The dataset contains large ensembles of bias adjusted daily climate model outputs of minimum temperature, maximum temperature, precipitation, relative humidity, surface pressure, wind speed, incoming shortwave radiation, and incoming longwave radiation on a 0.5-degree grid over North America. Intended uses include hydrological/land surface impact modelling and related event attribution studies. The CanLEADv1 dataset is based on archived climate model simulations in the Canadian Regional Climate Model Large Ensemble (CanRCM4 LE) https://open.canada.ca/data/en/dataset/83aa1b18-6616-405e-9bce-af7ef8c2031c and Canadian Earth System Model Large Ensembles (CanESM2 LE) https://open.canada.ca/data/en/dataset/aa7b6823-fd1e-49ff-a6fb-68076a4a477c datasets. Specifically, CanLEADv1 provides bias adjusted daily climate variables over North America derived from 50 member initial condition ensembles of CanESM2 (ALL and NAT radiative forcings) and CanESM2-driven CanRCM4 (ALL radiative forcings) simulations (Scinocca et al., 2016; Fyfe et al., 2017). Raw CanESM2 LE and CanRCM4 LE outputs are bias adjusted (Cannon, 2018; Cannon et al., 2015) so that they are statistically consistent with two observationally-constrained historical meteorological forcing datasets (S14FD, Iizumi et al., 2017; EWEMBI, Lange, 2018). File names, formats, and metadata headers follow the recommended Data Reference Syntax for bias-adjusted Coordinated Regional Downscaling Experiment (CORDEX) simulations (Nikulin and Legutke, 2016). Multiple initial condition simulations can be used to investigate the externally forced response, internal variability, and the relative role of external forcing and internal variability on the climate system (e.g., Fyfe et al., 2017). Large ensembles of ALL and NAT simulations can be compared in event attribution studies (e.g., Kirchmeier-Young et al., 2017). Availability of bias adjusted outputs from the CanESM2-CanRCM4 modelling system can be used to investigate the added value of dynamical downscaling (Scinocca et al., 2016). Multiple observational datasets are used for bias adjustment to partly account for observational uncertainty (Iizumi et al., 2017). For CanESM2 LE, there are two sets of radiative forcing scenarios (ALL, which consists of historical and RCP8.5 forcings for the periods 1950-2005 and 2006-2100, respectively, and NAT, which consists of historicalNat forcings for the period 1950-2020), two observationally-constrained target datasets for bias adjustment (S14FD and EWEMBI), and 50 ensemble members, which gives a total of 2 × 2 × 50 = 200 sets of outputs. For CanRCM4 LE, historicalNat simulations were not run; hence, there are 2 × 50 = 100 sets of outputs. In both cases, CanLEADv1 provides variables on the CORDEX NAM-44i 0.5-degree grid. CanESM2 outputs (~2.8-degree grid) and CanRCM4 outputs (0.44-degree grid), are bilinearly interpolated onto the NAM-44i grid before bias adjustment. A multivariate version of quantile mapping (Cannon, 2018) is used to adjust the distribution of each simulated variable, as well as the statistical dependence between variables, so that these properties match those of the target observational dataset. Bias adjustment is performed on a grid cell by grid cell basis. Outside of the historical calibration period, the climate change signal simulated by the climate model is preserved (Cannon et al., 2015). References: Cannon, A. J. (2018). Multivariate quantile mapping bias correction: an N-dimensional probability density function transform for climate model simulations of multiple variables. Climate Dynamics, 50(1-2), 31-49. Cannon, A. J., Sobie, S. R., & Murdock, T. Q. (2015). Bias correction of GCM precipitation by quantile mapping: How well do methods preserve changes in quantiles and extremes? Journal of Climate, 28(17), 6938-6959. Fyfe, J. C., Derksen, C., Mudryk, L., Flato, G. M., Santer, B. D., Swart, N. C., Molotch, N. P., Zhang, X., Wan, H., Arora, V. K., Scinocca, J., & Jiao, Y. (2017). Large near-term projected snowpack loss over the western United States. Nature Communications, 8, 14996. Iizumi, T., Takikawa, H., Hirabayashi, Y., Hanasaki, N., & Nishimori, M. (2017). Contributions of different bias-correction methods and reference meteorological forcing data sets to uncertainty in projected temperature and precipitation extremes. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 122(15), 7800-7819. Kirchmeier-Young, M. C., Zwiers, F. W., Gillett, N. P., & Cannon, A. J. (2017). Attributing extreme fire risk in Western Canada to human emissions. Climatic Change, 144(2), 365-379. Lange, S. (2018). Bias correction of surface downwelling longwave and shortwave radiation for the EWEMBI dataset. Earth System Dynamics, 9(2), 627-645. Nikulin, G., & Legutke, S. (2016). Data Reference Syntax (DRS) for bias-adjusted CORDEX simulations. https://is-enes-data.github.io/CORDEX_adjust_drs.pdf Scinocca, J. F., Kharin, V. V., Jiao, Y., Qian, M. W., Lazare, M., Solheim, L., Flato, G. M., Biner, S., Desgagne, & Dugas, B. (2016). Coordinated global and regional climate modeling. Journal of Climate, 29(1), 17-35.

Title of each data set starts with the section number of report, which the data were used in analysis.

This dataset is associated with the following publication: Yang, J., H. Wei, X. Wang, S. Buchberger, M. Liang, N. Chang, B. Bierwagen, S. Julius, Z. Li, D. Boccelli, R. Clark, H. Liu, and J. Neal. National Water Infrastructure Adaptation Assessment: Part II, Smart Urban Designer (SUD) and Application Case Studies. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, USA, 2020.

The data included in this publication depict the 2024 version of components of wildfire risk for all lands in the United States that: 1) are landscape-wide (i.e., measurable at every pixel across the landscape); and 2) represent in situ risk - risk at the location where the adverse effects take place on the landscape.

National wildfire hazard datasets of annual burn probability and fire intensity, generated by the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station and Pyrologix LLC, form the foundation of the Wildfire Risk to Communities data. Vegetation and wildland fuels data from LANDFIRE 2020 (version 2.2.0) were used as input to two different but related geospatial fire simulation systems. Annual burn probability was produced with the USFS geospatial fire simulator (FSim) at a relatively coarse cell size of 270 meters (m). To bring the burn probability raster data down to a finer resolution more useful for assessing hazard and risk to communities, we upsampled them to the native 30 m resolution of the LANDFIRE fuel and vegetation data. In this upsampling process, we also spread values of modeled burn probability into developed areas represented in LANDFIRE fuels data as non-burnable. Burn probability rasters represent landscape conditions as of the end of 2020. Fire intensity characteristics were modeled at 30 m resolution using a process that performs a comprehensive set of FlamMap runs spanning the full range of weather-related characteristics that occur during a fire season and then integrates those runs into a variety of results based on the likelihood of those weather types occurring. Before the fire intensity modeling, the LANDFIRE 2020 data were updated to reflect fuels disturbances occurring in 2021 and 2022. As such, the fire intensity datasets represent landscape conditions as of the end of 2022. Additional methodology documentation is provided in a methods document (\Supplements\WRC_V2_Methods_Landscape-wideRisk.pdf) packaged in the data download.

The specific raster datasets in this publication include:

Risk to Potential Structures (RPS): A measure that integrates wildfire likelihood and intensity with generalized consequences to a home on every pixel. For every place on the landscape, it poses the hypothetical question, "What would be the relative risk to a house if one existed here?" This allows comparison of wildfire risk in places where homes already exist to places where new construction may be proposed. This dataset is referred to as Risk to Homes in the Wildfire Risk to Communities web application.

Conditional Risk to Potential Structures (cRPS): The potential consequences of fire to a home at a given location, if a fire occurs there and if a home were located there. Referred to as Wildfire Consequence in the Wildfire Risk to Communities web application.

Exposure Type: Exposure is the spatial coincidence of wildfire likelihood and intensity with communities. This layer delineates where homes are directly exposed to wildfire from adjacent wildland vegetation, indirectly exposed to wildfire from indirect sources such as embers and home-to-home ignition, or not exposed to wildfire due to distance from direct and indirect ignition sources.

Burn Probability (BP): The annual probability of wildfire burning in a specific location. Referred to as Wildfire Likelihood in the Wildfire Risk to Communities web application.

Conditional Flame Length (CFL): The mean flame length for a fire burning in the direction of maximum spread (headfire) at a given location if a fire were to occur; an average measure of wildfire intensity.

Flame Length Exceedance Probability - 4 ft (FLEP4): The conditional probability that flame length at a pixel will exceed 4 feet if a fire occurs; indicates the potential for moderate to high wildfire intensity.

Flame Length Exceedance Probability - 8 ft (FLEP8): the conditional probability that flame length at a pixel will exceed 8 feet if a fire occurs; indicates the potential for high wildfire intensity.

Wildfire Hazard Potential (WHP): An index that quantifies the relative potential for wildfire that may be difficult to manage, used as a measure to help prioritize where fuel treatments may be needed.The geospatial data products described and distributed here are part of the Wildfire Risk to Communities project. This project was directed by Congress in the 2018 Consolidated Appropriations Act (i.e., 2018 Omnibus Act, H.R. 1625, Section 210: Wildfire Hazard Severity Mapping) to help U.S. communities understand components of their relative wildfire risk profile, the nature and effects of wildfire risk, and actions communities can take to mitigate risk. The first edition of these data represented the first time wildfire risk to communities had been mapped nationally with consistent methodology. They provided foundational information for comparing the relative wildfire risk among populated communities in the United States. In this version, the 2nd edition, we use improved modeling and mapping methodology and updated input data to generate the current suite of products.See the Wildfire Risk to Communities website at https://www.wildfirerisk.org for complete project information and an interactive web application for exploring some of the datasets published here. We deliver the data here as zip files by U.S. state (including AK and HI), and for the full extent of the continental U.S.

This data publication is a second edition and represents an update to any previous versions of Wildfire Risk to Communities risk datasets published by the USDA Forest Service. There are two companion data publications that are part of the WRC 2.0 data update: one that includes datasets of wildfire hazard and risk for populated areas of the nation, where housing units are currently present (Jaffe et al. 2024, https://doi.org/10.2737/RDS-2020-0060-2), and one that delineates wildfire risk reduction zones and provides tabular summaries of wildfire hazard and risk raster datasets (Dillon et al. 2024, https://doi.org/10.2737/RDS-2024-0030).

Dataset Rekomendasi Fashion H&M

Dataset ini berisi data transaksi, atribut pelanggan, dan metadata produk yang telah dianonimkan dari H&M Group. Kumpulan data komprehensif ini memungkinkan pemodelan perilaku pembelian pelanggan secara mendalam. Wawasan yang dihasilkan dapat dimanfaatkan untuk berbagai tujuan bisnis yang strategis, mulai dari meningkatkan personalisasi pengalaman berbelanja, mengoptimalkan manajemen inventaris untuk efisiensi produksi, hingga mendukung inisiatif… See the full description on the dataset page: https://huggingface.co/datasets/einrafh/hnm-fashion-recommendations-data.

Large go-around, also referred to as missed approach, data set. The data set is in support of the paper presented at the OpenSky Symposium on November the 10th.

If you use this data for a scientific publication, please consider citing our paper.

The data set contains landings from 176 (mostly) large airports from 44 different countries. The landings are labelled as performing a go-around (GA) or not. In total, the data set contains almost 9 million landings with more than 33000 GAs. The data was collected from OpenSky Network's historical data base for the year 2019. The published data set contains multiple files:

go_arounds_minimal.csv.gz

Compressed CSV containing the minimal data set. It contains a row for each landing and a minimal amount of information about the landing, and if it was a GA. The data is structured in the following way:

    Column name
    Type
    Description




    time
    date time
    UTC time of landing or first GA attempt


    icao24
    string
    Unique 24-bit (hexadecimal number) ICAO identifier of the aircraft concerned


    callsign
    string
    Aircraft identifier in air-ground communications


    airport
    string
    ICAO airport code where the aircraft is landing


    runway
    string
    Runway designator on which the aircraft landed


    has_ga
    string
    "True" if at least one GA was performed, otherwise "False"


    n_approaches
    integer
    Number of approaches identified for this flight


    n_rwy_approached
    integer
    Number of unique runways approached by this flight

The last two columns, n_approaches and n_rwy_approached, are useful to filter out training and calibration flight. These have usually a large number of n_approaches, so an easy way to exclude them is to filter by n_approaches > 2.

go_arounds_augmented.csv.gz

Compressed CSV containing the augmented data set. It contains a row for each landing and additional information about the landing, and if it was a GA. The data is structured in the following way:

    Column name
    Type
    Description




    time
    date time
    UTC time of landing or first GA attempt


    icao24
    string
    Unique 24-bit (hexadecimal number) ICAO identifier of the aircraft concerned


    callsign
    string
    Aircraft identifier in air-ground communications


    airport
    string
    ICAO airport code where the aircraft is landing


    runway
    string
    Runway designator on which the aircraft landed


    has_ga
    string
    "True" if at least one GA was performed, otherwise "False"


    n_approaches
    integer
    Number of approaches identified for this flight


    n_rwy_approached
    integer
    Number of unique runways approached by this flight


    registration
    string
    Aircraft registration


    typecode
    string
    Aircraft ICAO typecode


    icaoaircrafttype
    string
    ICAO aircraft type


    wtc
    string
    ICAO wake turbulence category


    glide_slope_angle
    float
    Angle of the ILS glide slope in degrees


    has_intersection

string

    Boolean that is true if the runway has an other runway intersecting it, otherwise false


    rwy_length
    float
    Length of the runway in kilometre


    airport_country
    string
    ISO Alpha-3 country code of the airport


    airport_region
    string
    Geographical region of the airport (either Europe, North America, South America, Asia, Africa, or Oceania)


    operator_country
    string
    ISO Alpha-3 country code of the operator


    operator_region
    string
    Geographical region of the operator of the aircraft (either Europe, North America, South America, Asia, Africa, or Oceania)


    wind_speed_knts
    integer
    METAR, surface wind speed in knots


    wind_dir_deg
    integer
    METAR, surface wind direction in degrees


    wind_gust_knts
    integer
    METAR, surface wind gust speed in knots


    visibility_m
    float
    METAR, visibility in m


    temperature_deg
    integer
    METAR, temperature in degrees Celsius


    press_sea_level_p
    float
    METAR, sea level pressure in hPa


    press_p
    float
    METAR, QNH in hPA


    weather_intensity
    list
    METAR, list of present weather codes: qualifier - intensity


    weather_precipitation
    list
    METAR, list of present weather codes: weather phenomena - precipitation


    weather_desc
    list
    METAR, list of present weather codes: qualifier - descriptor


    weather_obscuration
    list
    METAR, list of present weather codes: weather phenomena - obscuration


    weather_other
    list
    METAR, list of present weather codes: weather phenomena - other

This data set is augmented with data from various public data sources. Aircraft related data is mostly from the OpenSky Network's aircraft data base, the METAR information is from the Iowa State University, and the rest is mostly scraped from different web sites. If you need help with the METAR information, you can consult the WMO's Aerodrom Reports and Forecasts handbook.

go_arounds_agg.csv.gz

Compressed CSV containing the aggregated data set. It contains a row for each airport-runway, i.e. every runway at every airport for which data is available. The data is structured in the following way:

    Column name
    Type
    Description




    airport
    string
    ICAO airport code where the aircraft is landing


    runway
    string
    Runway designator on which the aircraft landed


    n_landings
    integer
    Total number of landings observed on this runway in 2019


    ga_rate
    float
    Go-around rate, per 1000 landings


    glide_slope_angle
    float
    Angle of the ILS glide slope in degrees


    has_intersection
    string
    Boolean that is true if the runway has an other runway intersecting it, otherwise false


    rwy_length
    float
    Length of the runway in kilometres


    airport_country
    string
    ISO Alpha-3 country code of the airport


    airport_region
    string
    Geographical region of the airport (either Europe, North America, South America, Asia, Africa, or Oceania)

This aggregated data set is used in the paper for the generalized linear regression model.

Downloading the trajectories

Users of this data set with access to OpenSky Network's Impala shell can download the historical trajectories from the historical data base with a few lines of Python code. For example, you want to get all the go-arounds of the 4th of January 2019 at London City Airport (EGLC). You can use the Traffic library for easy access to the database:

import datetime from tqdm.auto import tqdm import pandas as pd from traffic.data import opensky from traffic.core import Traffic

load minimum data set

df = pd.read_csv("go_arounds_minimal.csv.gz", low_memory=False) df["time"] = pd.to_datetime(df["time"])

select London City Airport, go-arounds, and 2019-01-04

airport = "EGLC" start = datetime.datetime(year=2019, month=1, day=4).replace( tzinfo=datetime.timezone.utc ) stop = datetime.datetime(year=2019, month=1, day=5).replace( tzinfo=datetime.timezone.utc )

df_selection = df.query("airport==@airport & has_ga & (@start <= time <= @stop)")

iterate over flights and pull the data from OpenSky Network

flights = [] delta_time = pd.Timedelta(minutes=10) for _, row in tqdm(df_selection.iterrows(), total=df_selection.shape[0]): # take at most 10 minutes before and 10 minutes after the landing or go-around start_time = row["time"] - delta_time stop_time = row["time"] + delta_time

# fetch the data from OpenSky Network
flights.append(
  opensky.history(
    start=start_time.strftime("%Y-%m-%d %H:%M:%S"),
    stop=stop_time.strftime("%Y-%m-%d %H:%M:%S"),
    callsign=row["callsign"],
    return_flight=True,
  )
)

The flights can be converted into a Traffic object

Traffic.from_flights(flights)

Additional files

Additional files are available to check the quality of the classification into GA/not GA and the selection of the landing runway. These are:

validation_table.xlsx: This Excel sheet was manually completed during the review of the samples for each runway in the data set. It provides an estimate of the false positive and false negative rate of the go-around classification. It also provides an estimate of the runway misclassification rate when the airport has two or more parallel runways. The columns with the headers highlighted in red were filled in manually, the rest is generated automatically.

validation_sample.zip: For each runway, 8 batches of 500 randomly selected trajectories (or as many as available, if fewer than 4000) classified as not having a GA and up to 8 batches of 10 random landings, classified as GA, are plotted. This allows the interested user to visually inspect a random sample of the landings and go-arounds easily.

Walker, D.A., Breen, A.L., Druckenmiller, L.A., Wirth, L.w., Fisher, W, Raynolds, M.K, Sibik, J., Walker, M.D., Hennekens, S., Boggs, K., Boucher, T., Buchhorn, M., Bültmann, H., Cooper, D.J., Daniëls, F.J.A., Davidson, S.J., Ebersole, J.J. et al. 2016. The Alaska Arctic Vegetation Archive (AVA-AK). Phytocoenologia 46:221-229. doi:10.1127/phyto/2016/0128 The Alaska Arctic Vegetation Archive (AVA-AK, GIVD-ID: NA-US-014) is a free, publically available database archive of vegetation-plot data from the Arctic tundra region of northern Alaska. The archive currently contains 24 datasets with 3,026 non-overlapping plots. Of these, 74% have geolocation data with 25-m or better precision. Species cover data and header data are stored in a Turboveg database. A standardized Pan Arctic Species List provides a consistent nomenclature for vascular plants, bryophytes, and lichens in the archive. A web-based online Alaska Arctic Geoecological Atlas (AGA-AK) allows viewing and downloading the species data in a variety of formats, and provides access to a wide variety of ancillary data. We conducted a preliminary cluster analysis of the first 16 datasets (1,613 plots) to examine how the spectrum of derived clusters is related to the suite of datasets, habitat types, and environmental gradients. We present the contents of the archive, assess its strengths and weaknesses, and provide three supplementary files that include the data dictionary, a list of habitat types, an overview of the datasets, and details of the cluster analysis.

See the official website: https://autovi.utc.fr

Modern industrial production lines must be set up with robust defect inspection modules that are able to withstand high product variability. This means that in a context of industrial production, new defects that are not yet known may appear, and must therefore be identified.

On industrial production lines, the typology of potential defects is vast (texture, part failure, logical defects, etc.). Inspection systems must therefore be able to detect non-listed defects, i.e. not-yet-observed defects upon the development of the inspection system. To solve this problem, research and development of unsupervised AI algorithms on real-world data is required.

Renault Group and the Université de technologie de Compiègne (Roberval and Heudiasyc Laboratories) have jointly developed the Automotive Visual Inspection Dataset (AutoVI), the purpose of which is to be used as a scientific benchmark to compare and develop advanced unsupervised anomaly detection algorithms under real production conditions. The images were acquired on Renault Group's automotive production lines, in a genuine industrial production line environment, with variations in brightness and lighting on constantly moving components. This dataset is representative of actual data acquisition conditions on automotive production lines.

The dataset contains 3950 images, split into 1530 training images and 2420 testing images.

The evaluation code can be found at https://github.com/phcarval/autovi_evaluation_code.

Disclaimer
All defects shown were intentionally created on Renault Group's production lines for the purpose of producing this dataset. The images were examined and labeled by Renault Group experts, and all defects were corrected after shooting.

License
Copyright © 2023-2024 Renault Group

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. To view a copy of the license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/.

For using the data in a way that falls under the commercial use clause of the license, please contact us.

Attribution
Please use the following for citing the dataset in scientific work:

Carvalho, P., Lafou, M., Durupt, A., Leblanc, A., & Grandvalet, Y. (2024). The Automotive Visual Inspection Dataset (AutoVI): A Genuine Industrial Production Dataset for Unsupervised Anomaly Detection [Dataset]. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10459003

Contact
If you have any questions or remarks about this dataset, please contact us at philippe.carvalho@utc.fr, meriem.lafou@renault.com, alexandre.durupt@utc.fr, antoine.leblanc@renault.com, yves.grandvalet@utc.fr.

Changelog

• v1.0.0
  • Cropped engine_wiring, pipe_clip and pipe_staple images
  • Reduced tank_screw, underbody_pipes and underbody_screw image sizes
• v0.1.1
  • Added ground truth segmentation maps
  • Fixed categorization of some images
  • Added new defect categories
  • Removed tube_fastening and kitting_cart
  • Removed duplicates in pipe_clip

This database contains tobacco consumption data from 1970-2015 collected through a systematic search coupled with consultation with country and subject-matter experts. Data quality appraisal was conducted by at least two research team members in duplicate, with greater weight given to official government sources. All data was standardized into units of cigarettes consumed and a detailed accounting of data quality and sourcing was prepared. Data was found for 82 of 214 countries for which searches for national cigarette consumption data were conducted, representing over 95% of global cigarette consumption and 85% of the world’s population. Cigarette consumption fell in most countries over the past three decades but trends in country specific consumption were highly variable. For example, China consumed 2.5 million metric tonnes (MMT) of cigarettes in 2013, more than Russia (0.36 MMT), the United States (0.28 MMT), Indonesia (0.28 MMT), Japan (0.20 MMT), and the next 35 highest consuming countries combined. The US and Japan achieved reductions of more than 0.1 MMT from a decade earlier, whereas Russian consumption plateaued, and Chinese and Indonesian consumption increased by 0.75 MMT and 0.1 MMT, respectively. These data generally concord with modelled country level data from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation and have the additional advantage of not smoothing year-over-year discontinuities that are necessary for robust quasi-experimental impact evaluations. Before this study, publicly available data on cigarette consumption have been limited—either inappropriate for quasi-experimental impact evaluations (modelled data), held privately by companies (proprietary data), or widely dispersed across many national statistical agencies and research organisations (disaggregated data). This new dataset confirms that cigarette consumption has decreased in most countries over the past three decades, but that secular country specific consumption trends are highly variable. The findings underscore the need for more robust processes in data reporting, ideally built into international legal instruments or other mandated processes. To monitor the impact of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control and other tobacco control interventions, data on national tobacco production, trade, and sales should be routinely collected and openly reported. The first use of this database for a quasi-experimental impact evaluation of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control is: Hoffman SJ, Poirier MJP, Katwyk SRV, Baral P, Sritharan L. Impact of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control on global cigarette consumption: quasi-experimental evaluations using interrupted time series analysis and in-sample forecast event modelling. BMJ. 2019 Jun 19;365:l2287. doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l2287 Another use of this database was to systematically code and classify longitudinal cigarette consumption trajectories in European countries since 1970 in: Poirier MJ, Lin G, Watson LK, Hoffman SJ. Classifying European cigarette consumption trajectories from 1970 to 2015. Tobacco Control. 2022 Jan. DOI: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2021-056627. Statement of Contributions: Conceived the study: GEG, SJH Identified multi-country datasets: GEG, MP Extracted data from multi-country datasets: MP Quality assessment of data: MP, GEG Selection of data for final analysis: MP, GEG Data cleaning and management: MP, GL Internet searches: MP (English, French, Spanish, Portuguese), GEG (English, French), MYS (Chinese), SKA (Persian), SFK (Arabic); AG, EG, BL, MM, YM, NN, EN, HR, KV, CW, and JW (English), GL (English) Identification of key informants: GEG, GP Project Management: LS, JM, MP, SJH, GEG Contacts with Statistical Agencies: MP, GEG, MYS, SKA, SFK, GP, BL, MM, YM, NN, HR, KV, JW, GL Contacts with key informants: GEG, MP, GP, MYS, GP Funding: GEG, SJH SJH: Hoffman, SJ; JM: Mammone J; SRVK: Rogers Van Katwyk, S; LS: Sritharan, L; MT: Tran, M; SAK: Al-Khateeb, S; AG: Grjibovski, A.; EG: Gunn, E; SKA: Kamali-Anaraki, S; BL: Li, B; MM: Mahendren, M; YM: Mansoor, Y; NN: Natt, N; EN: Nwokoro, E; HR: Randhawa, H; MYS: Yunju Song, M; KV: Vercammen, K; CW: Wang, C; JW: Woo, J; MJPP: Poirier, MJP; GEG: Guindon, EG; GP: Paraje, G; GL Gigi Lin Key informants who provided data: Corne van Walbeek (South Africa, Jamaica) Frank Chaloupka (US) Ayda Yurekli (Turkey) Dardo Curti (Uruguay) Bungon Ritthiphakdee (Thailand) Jakub Lobaszewski (Poland) Guillermo Paraje (Chile, Argentina) Key informants who provided useful insights: Carlos Manuel Guerrero López (Mexico) Muhammad Jami Husain (Bangladesh) Nigar Nargis (Bangladesh) Rijo M John (India) Evan Blecher (Nigeria, Indonesia, Philippines, South Africa) Yagya Karki (Nepal) Anne CK Quah (Malaysia) Nery Suarez Lugo (Cuba) Agencies providing assistance: Irani... Visit https://dataone.org/datasets/sha256%3Aaa1b4aae69c3399c96bfbf946da54abd8f7642332d12ccd150c42ad400e9699b for complete metadata about this dataset.