This dataset is about companies. It has 202 rows and is filtered where the company is Google. It features 30 columns including city, country, employees, and employee type.

This dataset contains current and historical demographic data on Google's workforce since the company began publishing diversity data in 2014. It includes data collected for government reporting and voluntary employee self-identification globally relating to hiring, retention, and representation categorized by race, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability status, and military status. In some instances, the data is limited due to various government policies around the world and the desire to protect Googler confidentiality. All data in this dataset will be updated yearly upon publication of Google’s Diversity Annual Report . Google uses this data to inform its diversity, equity, and inclusion work. More information on our methodology can be found in the Diversity Annual Report. This public dataset is hosted in Google BigQuery and is included in BigQuery's 1TB/mo of free tier processing. This means that each user receives 1TB of free BigQuery processing every month, which can be used to run queries on this public dataset. Watch this short video to learn how to get started quickly using BigQuery to access public datasets. What is BigQuery .

Context

Data-driven models help mobile app designers understand best practices and trends, and can be used to make predictions about design performance and support the creation of adaptive UIs. This paper presents Rico, the largest repository of mobile app designs to date, created to support five classes of data-driven applications: design search, UI layout generation, UI code generation, user interaction modeling, and user perception prediction. To create Rico, we built a system that combines crowdsourcing and automation to scalably mine design and interaction data from Android apps at runtime. The Rico dataset contains design data from more than 9.3k Android apps spanning 27 categories. It exposes visual, textual, structural, and interactive design properties of more than 66k unique UI screens. To demonstrate the kinds of applications that Rico enables, we present results from training an autoencoder for UI layout similarity, which supports query-by-example search over UIs.

Content

Rico was built by mining Android apps at runtime via human-powered and programmatic exploration. Like its predecessor ERICA, Rico’s app mining infrastructure requires no access to — or modification of — an app’s source code. Apps are downloaded from the Google Play Store and served to crowd workers through a web interface. When crowd workers use an app, the system records a user interaction trace that captures the UIs visited and the interactions performed on them. Then, an automated agent replays the trace to warm up a new copy of the app and continues the exploration programmatically, leveraging a content-agnostic similarity heuristic to efficiently discover new UI states. By combining crowdsourcing and automation, Rico can achieve higher coverage over an app’s UI states than either crawling strategy alone. In total, 13 workers recruited on UpWork spent 2,450 hours using apps on the platform over five months, producing 10,811 user interaction traces. After collecting a user trace for an app, we ran the automated crawler on the app for one hour.

Acknowledgements

UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN https://interactionmining.org/rico

Inspiration

The Rico dataset is large enough to support deep learning applications. We trained an autoencoder to learn an embedding for UI layouts, and used it to annotate each UI with a 64-dimensional vector representation encoding visual layout. This vector representation can be used to compute structurally — and often semantically — similar UIs, supporting example-based search over the dataset. To create training inputs for the autoencoder that embed layout information, we constructed a new image for each UI capturing the bounding box regions of all leaf elements in its view hierarchy, differentiating between text and non-text elements. Rico’s view hierarchies obviate the need for noisy image processing or OCR techniques to create these inputs.

This version of the CivilComments Dataset provides access to the primary seven labels that were annotated by crowd workers, the toxicity and other tags are a value between 0 and 1 indicating the fraction of annotators that assigned these attributes to the comment text.

The other tags are only available for a fraction of the input examples. They are currently ignored for the main dataset; the CivilCommentsIdentities set includes those labels, but only consists of the subset of the data with them. The other attributes that were part of the original CivilComments release are included only in the raw data. See the Kaggle documentation for more details about the available features.

The comments in this dataset come from an archive of the Civil Comments platform, a commenting plugin for independent news sites. These public comments were created from 2015 - 2017 and appeared on approximately 50 English-language news sites across the world. When Civil Comments shut down in 2017, they chose to make the public comments available in a lasting open archive to enable future research. The original data, published on figshare, includes the public comment text, some associated metadata such as article IDs, publication IDs, timestamps and commenter-generated "civility" labels, but does not include user ids. Jigsaw extended this dataset by adding additional labels for toxicity, identity mentions, as well as covert offensiveness. This data set is an exact replica of the data released for the Jigsaw Unintended Bias in Toxicity Classification Kaggle challenge. This dataset is released under CC0, as is the underlying comment text.

For comments that have a parent_id also in the civil comments data, the text of the previous comment is provided as the "parent_text" feature. Note that the splits were made without regard to this information, so using previous comments may leak some information. The annotators did not have access to the parent text when making the labels.

To use this dataset:

import tensorflow_datasets as tfds

ds = tfds.load('civil_comments', split='train')
for ex in ds.take(4):
 print(ex)

See the guide for more informations on tensorflow_datasets.

Company Datasets for valuable business insights!

Discover new business prospects, identify investment opportunities, track competitor performance, and streamline your sales efforts with comprehensive Company Datasets.

These datasets are sourced from top industry providers, ensuring you have access to high-quality information:

• Owler: Gain valuable business insights and competitive intelligence. -AngelList: Receive fresh startup data transformed into actionable insights. -CrunchBase: Access clean, parsed, and ready-to-use business data from private and public companies. -Craft.co: Make data-informed business decisions with Craft.co's company datasets. -Product Hunt: Harness the Product Hunt dataset, a leader in curating the best new products.

We provide fresh and ready-to-use company data, eliminating the need for complex scraping and parsing. Our data includes crucial details such as:

• Company name;
• Size;
• Founding date;
• Location;
• Industry;
• Revenue;
• Employee count;
• Competitors.

You can choose your preferred data delivery method, including various storage options, delivery frequency, and input/output formats.

Receive datasets in CSV, JSON, and other formats, with storage options like AWS S3 and Google Cloud Storage. Opt for one-time, monthly, quarterly, or bi-annual data delivery.

With Oxylabs Datasets, you can count on:

• Fresh and accurate data collected and parsed by our expert web scraping team.
• Time and resource savings, allowing you to focus on data analysis and achieving your business goals.
• A customized approach tailored to your specific business needs.
• Legal compliance in line with GDPR and CCPA standards, thanks to our membership in the Ethical Web Data Collection Initiative.

Pricing Options:

Standard Datasets: choose from various ready-to-use datasets with standardized data schemas, priced from $1,000/month.

Custom Datasets: Tailor datasets from any public web domain to your unique business needs. Contact our sales team for custom pricing.

Experience a seamless journey with Oxylabs:

• Understanding your data needs: We work closely to understand your business nature and daily operations, defining your unique data requirements.
• Developing a customized solution: Our experts create a custom framework to extract public data using our in-house web scraping infrastructure.
• Delivering data sample: We provide a sample for your feedback on data quality and the entire delivery process.
• Continuous data delivery: We continuously collect public data and deliver custom datasets per the agreed frequency.

Unlock the power of data with Oxylabs' Company Datasets and supercharge your business insights today!

As there was no large publicly available cross-domain dataset for comparative argument mining, we create one composed of sentences, potentially annotated with BETTER / WORSE markers (the first object is better / worse than the second object) or NONE (the sentence does not contain a comparison of the target objects). The BETTER sentences stand for a pro-argument in favor of the first compared object and WORSE-sentences represent a con-argument and favor the second object. We aim for minimizing dataset domain-specific biases in order to capture the nature of comparison and not the nature of the particular domains, thus decided to control the specificity of domains by the selection of comparison targets. We hypothesized and could confirm in preliminary experiments that comparison targets usually have a common hypernym (i.e., are instances of the same class), which we utilized for selection of the compared objects pairs. The most specific domain we choose, is computer science with comparison targets like programming languages, database products and technology standards such as Bluetooth or Ethernet. Many computer science concepts can be compared objectively (e.g., on transmission speed or suitability for certain applications). The objects for this domain were manually extracted from List of-articles at Wikipedia. In the annotation process, annotators were asked to only label sentences from this domain if they had some basic knowledge in computer science. The second, broader domain is brands. It contains objects of different types (e.g., cars, electronics, and food). As brands are present in everyday life, anyone should be able to label the majority of sentences containing well-known brands such as Coca-Cola or Mercedes. Again, targets for this domain were manually extracted from `List of''-articles at Wikipedia.The third domain is not restricted to any topic: random. For each of 24~randomly selected seed words 10 similar words were collected based on the distributional similarity API of JoBimText (http://www.jobimtext.org). Seed words created using randomlists.com: book, car, carpenter, cellphone, Christmas, coffee, cork, Florida, hamster, hiking, Hoover, Metallica, NBC, Netflix, ninja, pencil, salad, soccer, Starbucks, sword, Tolkien, wine, wood, XBox, Yale.Especially for brands and computer science, the resulting object lists were large (4493 in brands and 1339 in computer science). In a manual inspection, low-frequency and ambiguous objects were removed from all object lists (e.g., RAID (a hardware concept) and Unity (a game engine) are also regularly used nouns). The remaining objects were combined to pairs. For each object type (seed Wikipedia list page or the seed word), all possible combinations were created. These pairs were then used to find sentences containing both objects. The aforementioned approaches to selecting compared objects pairs tend minimize inclusion of the domain specific data, but do not solve the problem fully though. We keep open a question of extending dataset with diverse object pairs including abstract concepts for future work. As for the sentence mining, we used the publicly available index of dependency-parsed sentences from the Common Crawl corpus containing over 14 billion English sentences filtered for duplicates. This index was queried for sentences containing both objects of each pair. For 90% of the pairs, we also added comparative cue words (better, easier, faster, nicer, wiser, cooler, decent, safer, superior, solid, terrific, worse, harder, slower, poorly, uglier, poorer, lousy, nastier, inferior, mediocre) to the query in order to bias the selection towards comparisons but at the same time admit comparisons that do not contain any of the anticipated cues. This was necessary as a random sampling would have resulted in only a very tiny fraction of comparisons. Note that even sentences containing a cue word do not necessarily express a comparison between the desired targets (dog vs. cat: He's the best pet that you can get, better than a dog or cat.). It is thus especially crucial to enable a classifier to learn not to rely on the existence of clue words only (very likely in a random sample of sentences with very few comparisons). For our corpus, we keep pairs with at least 100 retrieved sentences.From all sentences of those pairs, 2500 for each category were randomly sampled as candidates for a crowdsourced annotation that we conducted on figure-eight.com in several small batches. Each sentence was annotated by at least five trusted workers. We ranked annotations by confidence, which is the figure-eight internal measure of combining annotator trust and voting, and discarded annotations with a confidence below 50%. Of all annotated items, 71% received unanimous votes and for over 85% at least 4 out of 5 workers agreed -- rendering the collection procedure aimed at ease of annotation successful.The final dataset contains 7199 sentences with 271 distinct object pairs. The majority of sentences (over 72%) are non-comparative despite biasing the selection with cue words; in 70% of the comparative sentences, the favored target is named first.You can browse though the data here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1U8i6EU9GUKmHdPnfwXEuBxi0h3aiRCLPRC-3c9ROiOE/edit?usp=sharing Full description of the dataset is available in the workshop paper at ACL 2019 conference. Please cite this paper if you use the data: Franzek, Mirco, Alexander Panchenko, and Chris Biemann. ""Categorization of Comparative Sentences for Argument Mining."" arXiv preprint arXiv:1809.06152 (2018).@inproceedings{franzek2018categorization, title={Categorization of Comparative Sentences for Argument Mining}, author={Panchenko, Alexander and Bondarenko, and Franzek, Mirco and Hagen, Matthias and Biemann, Chris}, booktitle={Proceedings of the 6th Workshop on Argument Mining at ACL'2019}, year={2019}, address={Florence, Italy}}

The American Community Survey (ACS) is an ongoing survey that provides vital information on a yearly basis about our nation and its people by contacting over 3.5 million households across the country. The resulting data provides incredibly detailed demographic information across the US aggregated at various geographic levels which helps determine how more than $675 billion in federal and state funding are distributed each year. Businesses use ACS data to inform strategic decision-making. ACS data can be used as a component of market research, provide information about concentrations of potential employees with a specific education or occupation, and which communities could be good places to build offices or facilities. For example, someone scouting a new location for an assisted-living center might look for an area with a large proportion of seniors and a large proportion of people employed in nursing occupations. Through the ACS, we know more about jobs and occupations, educational attainment, veterans, whether people own or rent their homes, and other topics. Public officials, planners, and entrepreneurs use this information to assess the past and plan the future. For more information, see the Census Bureau's ACS Information Guide . This public dataset is hosted in Google BigQuery as part of the Google Cloud Public Datasets Program , with Carto providing cleaning and onboarding support. It is included in BigQuery's 1TB/mo of free tier processing. This means that each user receives 1TB of free BigQuery processing every month, which can be used to run queries on this public dataset. Watch this short video to learn how to get started quickly using BigQuery to access public datasets. What is BigQuery .

Due to changes in the collection and availability of data on COVID-19, this website will no longer be updated. The webpage will no longer be available as of 11 May 2023. On-going, reliable sources of data for COVID-19 are available via the COVID-19 dashboard and the UKHSA GLA Covid-19 Mobility Report Since March 2020, London has seen many different levels of restrictions - including three separate lockdowns and many other tiers/levels of restrictions, as well as easing of restrictions and even measures to actively encourage people to go to work, their high streets and local restaurants. This reports gathers data from a number of sources, including google, apple, citymapper, purple wifi and opentable to assess the extent to which these levels of restrictions have translated to a reductions in Londoners' movements. The data behind the charts below come from different sources. None of these data represent a direct measure of how well people are adhering to the lockdown rules - nor do they provide an exhaustive data set. Rather, they are measures of different aspects of mobility, which together, offer an overall impression of how people Londoners are moving around the capital. The information is broken down by use of public transport, pedestrian activity, retail and leisure, and homeworking. Public Transport For the transport measures, we have included data from google, Apple, CityMapper and Transport for London. They measure different aspects of public transport usage - depending on the data source. Each of the lines in the chart below represents a percentage of a pre-pandemic baseline. activity Source Latest Baseline Min value in Lockdown 1 Min value in Lockdown 2 Min value in Lockdown 3 Citymapper Citymapper mobility index 2021-09-05 Compares trips planned and trips taken within its app to a baseline of the four weeks from 6 Jan 2020 7.9% 28% 19% Google Google Mobility Report 2022-10-15 Location data shared by users of Android smartphones, compared time and duration of visits to locations to the median values on the same day of the week in the five weeks from 3 Jan 2020 20.4% 40% 27% TfL Bus Transport for London 2022-10-30 Bus journey ‘taps' on the TfL network compared to same day of the week in four weeks starting 13 Jan 2020 - 34% 24% TfL Tube Transport for London 2022-10-30 Tube journey ‘taps' on the TfL network compared to same day of the week in four weeks starting 13 Jan 2020 - 30% 21% Pedestrian activity With the data we currently have it's harder to estimate pedestrian activity and high street busyness. A few indicators can give us information on how people are making trips out of the house: activity Source Latest Baseline Min value in Lockdown 1 Min value in Lockdown 2 Min value in Lockdown 3 Walking Apple Mobility Index 2021-11-09 estimates the frequency of trips made on foot compared to baselie of 13 Jan '20 22% 47% 36% Parks Google Mobility Report 2022-10-15 Frequency of trips to parks. Changes in the weather mean this varies a lot. Compared to baseline of 5 weeks from 3 Jan '20 30% 55% 41% Retail & Rec Google Mobility Report 2022-10-15 Estimates frequency of trips to shops/leisure locations. Compared to baseline of 5 weeks from 3 Jan '20 30% 55% 41% Retail and recreation In this section, we focus on estimated footfall to shops, restaurants, cafes, shopping centres and so on. activity Source Latest Baseline Min value in Lockdown 1 Min value in Lockdown 2 Min value in Lockdown 3 Grocery/pharmacy Google Mobility Report 2022-10-15 Estimates frequency of trips to grovery shops and pharmacies. Compared to baseline of 5 weeks from 3 Jan '20 32% 55.00% 45.000% Retail/rec Google Mobility Report 2022-10-15 Estimates frequency of trips to shops/leisure locations. Compared to baseline of 5 weeks from 3 Jan '20 32% 55.00% 45.000% Restaurants OpenTable State of the Industry 2022-02-19 London restaurant bookings made through OpenTable 0% 0.17% 0.024% Home Working The Google Mobility Report estimates changes in how many people are staying at home and going to places of work compared to normal. It's difficult to translate this into exact percentages of the population, but changes back towards ‘normal' can be seen to start before any lockdown restrictions were lifted. This value gives a seven day rolling (mean) average to avoid it being distorted by weekends and bank holidays. name Source Latest Baseline Min/max value in Lockdown 1 Min/max value in Lockdown 2 Min/max value in Lockdown 3 Residential Google Mobility Report 2022-10-15 Estimates changes in how many people are staying at home for work. Compared to baseline of 5 weeks from 3 Jan '20 131% 119% 125% Workplaces Google Mobility Report 2022-10-15 Estimates changes in how many people are going to places of work. Compared to baseline of 5 weeks from 3 Jan '20 24% 54% 40% Restriction Date end_date Average Citymapper Average homeworking Work from home advised 17 Mar '20 21 Mar '20 57% 118% Schools, pubs closed 21 Mar '20 24 Mar '20 34% 119% UK enters first lockdown 24 Mar '20 10 May '20 10% 130% Some workers encouraged to return to work 10 May '20 01 Jun '20 15% 125% Schools open, small groups outside 01 Jun '20 15 Jun '20 19% 122% Non-essential businesses re-open 15 Jun '20 04 Jul '20 24% 120% Hospitality reopens 04 Jul '20 03 Aug '20 34% 115% Eat out to help out scheme begins 03 Aug '20 08 Sep '20 44% 113% Rule of 6 08 Sep '20 24 Sep '20 53% 111% 10pm Curfew 24 Sep '20 15 Oct '20 51% 112% Tier 2 (High alert) 15 Oct '20 05 Nov '20 49% 113% Second Lockdown 05 Nov '20 02 Dec '20 31% 118% Tier 2 (High alert) 02 Dec '20 19 Dec '20 45% 115% Tier 4 (Stay at home advised) 19 Dec '20 05 Jan '21 22% 124% Third Lockdown 05 Jan '21 08 Mar '21 22% 122% Roadmap 1 08 Mar '21 29 Mar '21 29% 118% Roadmap 2 29 Mar '21 12 Apr '21 36% 117% Roadmap 3 12 Apr '21 17 May '21 51% 113% Roadmap out of lockdown: Step 3 17 May '21 19 Jul '21 65% 109% Roadmap out of lockdown: Step 4 19 Jul '21 07 Nov '22 68% 107%

This dataset was created and deposited onto the University of Sheffield Online Research Data repository (ORDA) on 23-Jun-2023 by Dr. Matthew S. Hanchard, Research Associate at the University of Sheffield iHuman Institute. The dataset forms part of three outputs from a project titled ‘Fostering cultures of open qualitative research’ which ran from January 2023 to June 2023:

· Fostering cultures of open qualitative research: Dataset 1 – Survey Responses · Fostering cultures of open qualitative research: Dataset 2 – Interview Transcripts · Fostering cultures of open qualitative research: Dataset 3 – Coding Book

The project was funded with £13,913.85 of Research England monies held internally by the University of Sheffield - as part of their ‘Enhancing Research Cultures’ scheme 2022-2023.

The dataset aligns with ethical approval granted by the University of Sheffield School of Sociological Studies Research Ethics Committee (ref: 051118) on 23-Jan-2021. This includes due concern for participant anonymity and data management.

ORDA has full permission to store this dataset and to make it open access for public re-use on the basis that no commercial gain will be made form reuse. It has been deposited under a CC-BY-NC license. Overall, this dataset comprises:

· 15 x Interview transcripts - in .docx file format which can be opened with Microsoft Word, Google Doc, or an open-source equivalent.

All participants have read and approved their transcripts and have had an opportunity to retract details should they wish to do so.

Participants chose whether to be pseudonymised or named directly. The pseudonym can be used to identify individual participant responses in the qualitative coding held within the ‘Fostering cultures of open qualitative research: Dataset 3 – Coding Book’ files.

For recruitment, 14 x participants we selected based on their responses to the project survey., whilst one participant was recruited based on specific expertise.

· 1 x Participant sheet – in .csv format which may by opened with Microsoft Excel, Google Sheet, or an open-source equivalent.

The provides socio-demographic detail on each participant alongside their main field of research and career stage. It includes a RespondentID field/column which can be used to connect interview participants with their responses to the survey questions in the accompanying ‘Fostering cultures of open qualitative research: Dataset 1 – Survey Responses’ files.

The project was undertaken by two staff:

Co-investigator: Dr. Itzel San Roman Pineda ORCiD ID: 0000-0002-3785-8057 i.sanromanpineda@sheffield.ac.uk Postdoctoral Research Assistant Labelled as ‘Researcher 1’ throughout the dataset

Principal Investigator (corresponding dataset author): Dr. Matthew Hanchard ORCiD ID: 0000-0003-2460-8638 m.s.hanchard@sheffield.ac.uk Research Associate iHuman Institute, Social Research Institutes, Faculty of Social Science Labelled as ‘Researcher 2’ throughout the dataset

LinkedIn Job Postings Data - Comprehensive Professional Intelligence for HR Strategy & Market Research

LinkedIn Job Postings Data represents the most comprehensive professional intelligence dataset available, delivering structured insights across millions of LinkedIn job postings, LinkedIn job listings, and LinkedIn career opportunities. Canaria's enriched LinkedIn Job Postings Data transforms raw LinkedIn job market information into actionable business intelligence—normalized, deduplicated, and enhanced with AI-powered enrichment for deep workforce analytics, talent acquisition, and market research.

This premium LinkedIn job postings dataset is engineered to help HR professionals, recruiters, analysts, and business strategists answer mission-critical questions: • What LinkedIn job opportunities are available in target companies? • Which skills are trending in LinkedIn job postings across specific industries? • How are companies advertising their LinkedIn career opportunities? • What are the salary expectations across different LinkedIn job listings and regions?

With real-time updates and comprehensive LinkedIn job posting enrichment, our data provides unparalleled visibility into LinkedIn job market trends, hiring patterns, and workforce dynamics.

Use Cases: What This LinkedIn Job Postings Data Solves

Our dataset transforms LinkedIn job advertisements, market information, and career listings into structured, analyzable insights—powering everything from talent acquisition to competitive intelligence and job market research.

Talent Acquisition & LinkedIn Recruiting Intelligence • LinkedIn job market mapping • LinkedIn career opportunity intelligence • LinkedIn job posting competitive analysis • LinkedIn job skills gap identification

HR Strategy & Workforce Analytics • Organizational network analysis • Employee mobility tracking • Compensation benchmarking • Diversity & inclusion analytics • Workforce planning intelligence • Skills evolution monitoring

Market Research & Competitive Intelligence • Company growth analysis • Industry trend identification • Competitive talent mapping • Market entry intelligence • Partnership & business development • Investment due diligence

LinkedIn Job Market Research & Economic Analysis • Regional LinkedIn job analysis • LinkedIn job skills demand forecasting • LinkedIn job economic impact assessment • LinkedIn job education-industry alignment • LinkedIn remote job trend analysis • LinkedIn career development ROI

What Makes This LinkedIn Job Postings Data Unique

AI-Enhanced LinkedIn Job Intelligence • LinkedIn job posting enrichment with advanced NLP • LinkedIn job seniority classification • LinkedIn job industry expertise mapping • LinkedIn job career progression modeling

Comprehensive LinkedIn Job Market Intelligence • Real-time LinkedIn job postings with salary, requirements, and company insights • LinkedIn recruiting activity tracking • LinkedIn job application analytics • LinkedIn job skills demand analysis • LinkedIn compensation intelligence

Company & Organizational Intelligence • Company growth indicators • Cultural & values intelligence • Competitive positioning

LinkedIn Job Data Quality & Normalization • Advanced LinkedIn job deduplication • LinkedIn job skills taxonomy standardization • LinkedIn job geographic normalization • LinkedIn job company matching • LinkedIn job education standardization

Who Uses Canaria's LinkedIn Data

HR & Talent Acquisition Teams • Optimize recruiting pipelines • Benchmark compensation • Identify talent pools • Develop data-driven hiring strategies

Market Research & Intelligence Analysts • Track industry trends • Build competitive intelligence models • Analyze workforce dynamics

HR Technology & Analytics Platforms • Power recruiting tools and analytics solutions • Fuel compensation engines and dashboards

Academic & Economic Researchers • Study labor market dynamics • Analyze career mobility trends • Research professional development

Government & Policy Organizations • Evaluate workforce development programs • Monitor skills gaps • Inform economic initiatives

Summary

Canaria's LinkedIn Job Postings Data delivers the most comprehensive LinkedIn job market intelligence available. It combines job posting insights, recruiting intelligence, and organizational data in one unified dataset. With AI-enhanced enrichment, real-time updates, and enterprise-grade data quality, it supports advanced HR analytics, talent acquisition, job market research, and competitive intelligence.

About Canaria Inc. Canaria Inc. is a leader in alternative data, specializing in job market intelligence, LinkedIn company data, Glassdoor salary analytics, and Google Maps location insights. We deliver clean, structured, and enriched datasets at scale using proprietary data scraping pipelines and advanced AI/LLM-based modeling, all backed by human validation. Our platform also includes Google Maps data, providing verified business location intelligen...

United States agricultural researchers have many options for making their data available online. This dataset aggregates the primary sources of ag-related data and determines where researchers are likely to deposit their agricultural data. These data serve as both a current landscape analysis and also as a baseline for future studies of ag research data. Purpose As sources of agricultural data become more numerous and disparate, and collaboration and open data become more expected if not required, this research provides a landscape inventory of online sources of open agricultural data. An inventory of current agricultural data sharing options will help assess how the Ag Data Commons, a platform for USDA-funded data cataloging and publication, can best support data-intensive and multi-disciplinary research. It will also help agricultural librarians assist their researchers in data management and publication. The goals of this study were to establish where agricultural researchers in the United States-- land grant and USDA researchers, primarily ARS, NRCS, USFS and other agencies -- currently publish their data, including general research data repositories, domain-specific databases, and the top journals compare how much data is in institutional vs. domain-specific vs. federal platforms determine which repositories are recommended by top journals that require or recommend the publication of supporting data ascertain where researchers not affiliated with funding or initiatives possessing a designated open data repository can publish data Approach The National Agricultural Library team focused on Agricultural Research Service (ARS), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), and United States Forest Service (USFS) style research data, rather than ag economics, statistics, and social sciences data. To find domain-specific, general, institutional, and federal agency repositories and databases that are open to US research submissions and have some amount of ag data, resources including re3data, libguides, and ARS lists were analysed. Primarily environmental or public health databases were not included, but places where ag grantees would publish data were considered. Search methods We first compiled a list of known domain specific USDA / ARS datasets / databases that are represented in the Ag Data Commons, including ARS Image Gallery, ARS Nutrition Databases (sub-components), SoyBase, PeanutBase, National Fungus Collection, i5K Workspace @ NAL, and GRIN. We then searched using search engines such as Bing and Google for non-USDA / federal ag databases, using Boolean variations of “agricultural data” /“ag data” / “scientific data” + NOT + USDA (to filter out the federal / USDA results). Most of these results were domain specific, though some contained a mix of data subjects. We then used search engines such as Bing and Google to find top agricultural university repositories using variations of “agriculture”, “ag data” and “university” to find schools with agriculture programs. Using that list of universities, we searched each university web site to see if their institution had a repository for their unique, independent research data if not apparent in the initial web browser search. We found both ag specific university repositories and general university repositories that housed a portion of agricultural data. Ag specific university repositories are included in the list of domain-specific repositories. Results included Columbia University – International Research Institute for Climate and Society, UC Davis – Cover Crops Database, etc. If a general university repository existed, we determined whether that repository could filter to include only data results after our chosen ag search terms were applied. General university databases that contain ag data included Colorado State University Digital Collections, University of Michigan ICPSR (Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research), and University of Minnesota DRUM (Digital Repository of the University of Minnesota). We then split out NCBI (National Center for Biotechnology Information) repositories. Next we searched the internet for open general data repositories using a variety of search engines, and repositories containing a mix of data, journals, books, and other types of records were tested to determine whether that repository could filter for data results after search terms were applied. General subject data repositories include Figshare, Open Science Framework, PANGEA, Protein Data Bank, and Zenodo. Finally, we compared scholarly journal suggestions for data repositories against our list to fill in any missing repositories that might contain agricultural data. Extensive lists of journals were compiled, in which USDA published in 2012 and 2016, combining search results in ARIS, Scopus, and the Forest Service's TreeSearch, plus the USDA web sites Economic Research Service (ERS), National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), Natural Resources and Conservation Service (NRCS), Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), Rural Development (RD), and Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS). The top 50 journals' author instructions were consulted to see if they (a) ask or require submitters to provide supplemental data, or (b) require submitters to submit data to open repositories. Data are provided for Journals based on a 2012 and 2016 study of where USDA employees publish their research studies, ranked by number of articles, including 2015/2016 Impact Factor, Author guidelines, Supplemental Data?, Supplemental Data reviewed?, Open Data (Supplemental or in Repository) Required? and Recommended data repositories, as provided in the online author guidelines for each the top 50 journals. Evaluation We ran a series of searches on all resulting general subject databases with the designated search terms. From the results, we noted the total number of datasets in the repository, type of resource searched (datasets, data, images, components, etc.), percentage of the total database that each term comprised, any dataset with a search term that comprised at least 1% and 5% of the total collection, and any search term that returned greater than 100 and greater than 500 results. We compared domain-specific databases and repositories based on parent organization, type of institution, and whether data submissions were dependent on conditions such as funding or affiliation of some kind. Results A summary of the major findings from our data review: Over half of the top 50 ag-related journals from our profile require or encourage open data for their published authors. There are few general repositories that are both large AND contain a significant portion of ag data in their collection. GBIF (Global Biodiversity Information Facility), ICPSR, and ORNL DAAC were among those that had over 500 datasets returned with at least one ag search term and had that result comprise at least 5% of the total collection. Not even one quarter of the domain-specific repositories and datasets reviewed allow open submission by any researcher regardless of funding or affiliation. See included README file for descriptions of each individual data file in this dataset. Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: Journals. File Name: Journals.csvResource Title: Journals - Recommended repositories. File Name: Repos_from_journals.csvResource Title: TDWG presentation. File Name: TDWG_Presentation.pptxResource Title: Domain Specific ag data sources. File Name: domain_specific_ag_databases.csvResource Title: Data Dictionary for Ag Data Repository Inventory. File Name: Ag_Data_Repo_DD.csvResource Title: General repositories containing ag data. File Name: general_repos_1.csvResource Title: README and file inventory. File Name: README_InventoryPublicDBandREepAgData.txt

OnPoint Weather is a global weather dataset for business available for any lat/lon point and geographic area such as ZIP codes. OnPoint Weather provides a continuum of hourly and daily weather from the year 2000 to current time and a forward forecast of 45 days. OnPoint Climatology provides hourly and daily weather statistics which can be used to determine ‘departures from normal’ and to provide climatological guidance of expected weather for any location at any point in time. The OnPoint Climatology provides weather statistics such as means, standard deviations and frequency of occurrence. Weather has a significant impact on businesses and accounts for hundreds of billions in lost revenue annually. OnPoint Weather allows businesses to quantify weather impacts and develop strategies to optimize for weather to improve business performance. Examples of Usage Quantify the impact of weather on sales across diverse locations and times of the year Understand how supply chains are impacted by weather Understand how employee’s attendance and performance are impacted by weather Understand how weather influences foot traffic at malls, stores and restaurants OnPoint Weather is available through Google Cloud Platform’s Commercial Dataset Program and can be easily integrated with other Google Cloud Platform Services to quickly reveal and quantify weather impacts on business. Weather Source provides a full range of support services from answering quick questions to consulting and building custom solutions. This public dataset is hosted in Google BigQuery and is included in BigQuery's 1TB/mo of free tier processing. This means that each user receives 1TB of free BigQuery processing every month, which can be used to run queries on this public dataset. Watch this short video to learn how to get started quickly using BigQuery to access public datasets. What is BigQuery 瞭解詳情

Context

An education company named X Education sells online courses to industry professionals. On any given day, many professionals who are interested in the courses land on their website and browse for courses.

The company markets its courses on several websites and search engines like Google. Once these people land on the website, they might browse the courses or fill up a form for the course or watch some videos. When these people fill up a form providing their email address or phone number, they are classified to be a lead. Moreover, the company also gets leads through past referrals. Once these leads are acquired, employees from the sales team start making calls, writing emails, etc. Through this process, some of the leads get converted while most do not. The typical lead conversion rate at X education is around 30%.

Now, although X Education gets a lot of leads, its lead conversion rate is very poor. For example, if, say, they acquire 100 leads in a day, only about 30 of them are converted. To make this process more efficient, the company wishes to identify the most potential leads, also known as ‘Hot Leads’. If they successfully identify this set of leads, the lead conversion rate should go up as the sales team will now be focusing more on communicating with the potential leads rather than making calls to everyone.

There are a lot of leads generated in the initial stage (top) but only a few of them come out as paying customers from the bottom. In the middle stage, you need to nurture the potential leads well (i.e. educating the leads about the product, constantly communicating, etc. ) in order to get a higher lead conversion.

X Education wants to select the most promising leads, i.e. the leads that are most likely to convert into paying customers. The company requires you to build a model wherein you need to assign a lead score to each of the leads such that the customers with higher lead score h have a higher conversion chance and the customers with lower lead score have a lower conversion chance. The CEO, in particular, has given a ballpark of the target lead conversion rate to be around 80%.

Content

Variables Description * Prospect ID - A unique ID with which the customer is identified. * Lead Number - A lead number assigned to each lead procured. * Lead Origin - The origin identifier with which the customer was identified to be a lead. Includes API, Landing Page Submission, etc. * Lead Source - The source of the lead. Includes Google, Organic Search, Olark Chat, etc. * Do Not Email -An indicator variable selected by the customer wherein they select whether of not they want to be emailed about the course or not. * Do Not Call - An indicator variable selected by the customer wherein they select whether of not they want to be called about the course or not. * Converted - The target variable. Indicates whether a lead has been successfully converted or not. * TotalVisits - The total number of visits made by the customer on the website. * Total Time Spent on Website - The total time spent by the customer on the website. * Page Views Per Visit - Average number of pages on the website viewed during the visits. * Last Activity - Last activity performed by the customer. Includes Email Opened, Olark Chat Conversation, etc. * Country - The country of the customer. * Specialization - The industry domain in which the customer worked before. Includes the level 'Select Specialization' which means the customer had not selected this option while filling the form. * How did you hear about X Education - The source from which the customer heard about X Education. * What is your current occupation - Indicates whether the customer is a student, umemployed or employed. * What matters most to you in choosing this course An option selected by the customer - indicating what is their main motto behind doing this course. * Search - Indicating whether the customer had seen the ad in any of the listed items. * Magazine
* Newspaper Article * X Education Forums
* Newspaper * Digital Advertisement * Through Recommendations - Indicates whether the customer came in through recommendations. * Receive More Updates About Our Courses - Indicates whether the customer chose to receive more updates about the courses. * Tags - Tags assigned to customers indicating the current status of the lead. * Lead Quality - Indicates the quality of lead based on the data and intuition the employee who has been assigned to the lead. * Update me on Supply Chain Content - Indicates whether the customer wants updates on the Supply Chain Content. * Get updates on DM Content - Indicates whether the customer wants updates on the DM Content. * Lead Profile - A lead level assigned to each customer based on their profile. * City - The city of the customer. * Asymmetric Activity Index - An index and score assigned to each customer based on their activity and their profile * Asymmetric Profile Index * Asymmetric Activity Score * Asymmetric Profile Score
* I agree to pay the amount through cheque - Indicates whether the customer has agreed to pay the amount through cheque or not. * a free copy of Mastering The Interview - Indicates whether the customer wants a free copy of 'Mastering the Interview' or not. * Last Notable Activity - The last notable activity performed by the student.

Acknowledgements

UpGrad Case Study

Inspiration

Your data will be in front of the world's largest data science community. What questions do you want to see answered?

Nighttime satellite imagery were accessed via Google Earth Engine). Version 4 of the DMSP-OLS Nighttime Lights Time Series consists of cloud-free composites made using all the available archived DMSP-OLS smooth resolution data for calendar years. In cases where two satellites were collecting data - two composites were produced. The products are 30 arc second grids, spanning -180 to 180 degrees longitude and -65 to 75 degrees latitude. Several attributes are included - we used stable_lights which represents lights from cities, towns, and other sites with persistent lighting, including gas flares. Ephemeral events, such as fires have been discarded. The background noise was identified and replaced with values of zero.These data were provided to Google Earth Engine by teh National Centers for Environmental Information - National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration of the United States (see Supporting Documentation).CANUE staff exported the annual data and extracted values of annual mean nighttime brightness for all postal codes in Canada for each year from 1992 to 2013 (DMTI Spatial, 2015).

A comprehensive dataset schema detailing the structure for collecting anonymous employee feedback, including field types, validation constraints, and privacy-preserving relationships for workplace survey data.

Citi Bike is the nation's largest bike share program, with 10,000 bikes and 600 stations across Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, and Jersey City. This dataset includes Citi Bike trips since Citi Bike launched in September 2013 and is updated daily. The data has been processed by Citi Bike to remove trips that are taken by staff to service and inspect the system, as well as any trips below 60 seconds in length, which are considered false starts. This public dataset is hosted in Google BigQuery and is included in BigQuery's 1TB/mo of free tier processing. This means that each user receives 1TB of free BigQuery processing every month, which can be used to run queries on this public dataset. Watch this short video to learn how to get started quickly using BigQuery to access public datasets. What is BigQuery .

Top of Atmosphere (TOA) reflectance data in bands from the USGS Landsat 5 and Landsat 8 satellites were accessed via Google Earth Engine. CANUE staff used Google Earth Engine functions to create cloud free annual composites, and mask water features, then export the resulting band data. NDVI indices were calculated as (band 4 - Band 3)/(Band 4 Band 3) for Landsat 5 data, and as (band 5 - band 4)/(band 5 Band 4) for Landsat 8 data. These composites are created from all the scenes in each annual period beginning from the first day of the year and continuing to the last day of the year. No data were available for 2012, due to decommissioning of Landsat 5 in 2011 prior to the start of Landsat 8 in 2013. No cross-calibration between the sensors was performed, please be aware there may be small bias differences between NDVI values calculated using Landsat 5 and Landsat 8. Final NDVI metrics were linked to all 6-digit DMTI Spatial single link postal code locations in Canada, and for surrounding areas within 100m, 250m, 500m, and 1km.

Street tree data from the TreesCount! 2015 Street Tree Census, conducted by volunteers and staff organized by NYC Parks & Recreation and partner organizations. Tree data collected includes tree species, diameter and perception of health. Accompanying blockface data is available indicating status of data collection and data release citywide. The 2015 tree census was the third decadal street tree census and largest citizen science initiative in NYC Parks’ history. Data collection ran from May 2015 to October 2016 and the results of the census show that there are 666,134 trees planted along NYC's streets. The data collected as part of the census represents a snapshot in time of trees under NYC Parks' jurisdiction. The census data formed the basis of our operational database, the Forestry Management System (ForMS) which is used daily by our foresters and other staff for inventory and asset management: https://data.cityofnewyork.us/browse?sortBy=most_accessed&utf8=%E2%9C%93&Data-Collection_Data-Collection=Forestry+Management+System+%28ForMS%29 To learn more about the data collected and managed in ForMS, please refer to this user guide: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PVPWFi-WExkG3rvnagQDoBbqfsGzxCKNmR6n678nUeU/edit. For information on the city's current tree population, use the ForMS datasets.

Geospatial Services Land management within the US Forest Service and on the 900,000+ acre Monongahela National Forest (NF) is driven by a wide mix of resource and societal demands that prove a challenge in fulfilling the Forest Service’s mission of “Caring for the Land and Serving the People.” Programmatically, the 2006 Land and Resource Management Plan guide natural resource management activities on lands administered by the Monongahela National Forest. The Forest Plan describes management direction and practices, resource protection methods and monitoring, desired resource conditions, and the availability and suitability of lands for resource management. Technology enables staff to address these land management issues and Forest Plan direction by using a science-based approach to facilitate effective decisions. Monongahela NF geospatial services, using enabling-technologies, incorporate key tools such as Environmental Systems Research Institute’s ArcGIS desktop suite and Trimble’s global positioning system (GPS) units to meet program and Forest needs. Geospatial Datasets The Forest has a broad set of geospatial datasets that capture geographic features across the eastern West Virginia landscape. Many of these datasets are available to the public through our download site. Selected geospatial data that encompass the Monongahela National Forest are available for download from this page. A link to the FGDC-compliant metadata is provided for each dataset. All data are in zipped format (or available from the specified source), in one of two spatial data formats, and in the following coordinate system: Coordinate System: Universal Transverse Mercator Zone: 17 Units: Meters Datum: NAD 1983 Spheroid: GRS 1980 Map files – All map files are in pdf format. These maps illustrate the correlated geospatial data. All maps are under 1 MB unless otherwise noted. Metadata file – This FGDC-compliant metadata file contains information pertaining to the specific geospatial dataset. Shapefile – This downloadable zipped file is in ESRI’s shapefile format. KML file – This downloadable zipped file is in Google Earth’s KML format. Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: Monongahela National Forest Geospatial Data. File Name: Web Page, url: https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/mnf/landmanagement/gis/?cid=stelprdb5108081 Selected geospatial data that encompass the Monongahela National Forest are available for download from this page.

Note: this database has been uploaded by Hugging Face staff. Please see the original paper, repo, and hosted database below for any questions.

  Google DeepMind AlphaMissense Database

Paper: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adg7492 Github Repo: https://github.com/google-deepmind/alphamissense Original Database: https://console.cloud.google.com/storage/browser/dm_alphamissense

  File descriptions

AlphaMissense_hg19.tsv.gz, AlphaMissense_hg38.tsv.gz:… See the full description on the dataset page: https://huggingface.co/datasets/katielink/dm_alphamissense.