💸💸💸 Cost of Living - 144k Tweets in English | Aug - Sept 2022 💸💸💸

UPDATED Sept 9th

The cost of living is a scorching topic. This dataset is composed of tweets sent from August 20 to Sept 9 2022, with over 144k tweets. All tweets are in English and are from different countries. Below is a breakdown of columns and the data in them.

https://images.unsplash.com/photo-1553729459-efe14ef6055d?ixlib=rb-1.2.1&ixid=MnwxMjA3fDB8MHxwaG90by1wYWdlfHx8fGVufDB8fHx8&auto=format&fit=crop&w=1770&q=80" alt="">

Columns Description

• [x] date_time - Date and Time tweet was sent
• [x] username - Username that sent the tweet
• [x] user_location - Location entered in the account location info on Twitter
• [x] user_description - Text added to "about" in account
• [x] verified - If the user has the "verified by Twitter" blue tick
• [x] followers_count - Number of Followers
• [x] following_count - Number of accounts followed by the person who sent the tweet
• [x] tweet_like_count - How many people liked the tweet
• [x] tweet_retweet_count - How many people retweeted the tweet
• [x] tweet_reply_count - How many people replied to that tweet
• [x] source - Where was the tweet sent from. The link has info if using iPhone, Android and others
• [x] tweet_text - Text sent in the tweet

About this dataset

Context

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

Key observations

The largest age group in United States was for the group of age 30 to 34 years years with a population of 22.71 million (6.86%), according to the ACS 2018-2022 5-Year Estimates. At the same time, the smallest age group in United States was the 80 to 84 years years with a population of 6.25 million (1.89%). Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2018-2022 5-Year Estimates

Content

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

Age groups:

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

Variables / Data Columns

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

Good to know

Margin of Error

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

Custom data

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

Inspiration

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

Recommended for further research

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

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 2021 estimates of housing unit and 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.Additional methodology documentation is provided with the data publication download. Metadata and Downloads.Note: Pixel values in this image service have been altered from the original raster dataset due to data requirements in web services. The service is intended primarily for data visualization. Relative values and spatial patterns have been largely preserved in the service, but users are encouraged to download the source data for quantitative analysis.

This poverty rate data shows what percentage of the measured population* falls below the poverty line. Poverty is closely related to income: different “poverty thresholds” are in place for different sizes and types of household. A family or individual is considered to be below the poverty line if that family or individual’s income falls below their relevant poverty threshold. For more information on how poverty is measured by the U.S. Census Bureau (the source for this indicator’s data), visit the U.S. Census Bureau’s poverty webpage.

The poverty rate is an important piece of information when evaluating an area’s economic health and well-being. The poverty rate can also be illustrative when considered in the contexts of other indicators and categories. As a piece of data, it is too important and too useful to omit from any indicator set.

The poverty rate for all individuals in the measured population in Champaign County has hovered around roughly 20% since 2005. However, it reached its lowest rate in 2021 at 14.9%, and its second lowest rate in 2023 at 16.3%. Although the American Community Survey (ACS) data shows fluctuations between years, given their margins of error, none of the differences between consecutive years’ estimates are statistically significant, making it impossible to identify a trend.

Poverty rate data was sourced from the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, which are released annually.

As with any datasets that are estimates rather than exact counts, it is important to take into account the margins of error (listed in the column beside each figure) when drawing conclusions from the data.

Due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, instead of providing the standard 1-year data products, the Census Bureau released experimental estimates from the 1-year data in 2020. This includes a limited number of data tables for the nation, states, and the District of Columbia. The Census Bureau states that the 2020 ACS 1-year experimental tables use an experimental estimation methodology and should not be compared with other ACS data. For these reasons, and because data is not available for Champaign County, no data for 2020 is included in this Indicator.

For interested data users, the 2020 ACS 1-Year Experimental data release includes a dataset on Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months by Age.

*According to the U.S. Census Bureau document “How Poverty is Calculated in the ACS," poverty status is calculated for everyone but those in the following groups: “people living in institutional group quarters (such as prisons or nursing homes), people in military barracks, people in college dormitories, living situations without conventional housing, and unrelated individuals under 15 years old."

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2023 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (17 October 2024).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2022 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (25 September 2023).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2021 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (16 September 2022).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2019 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (8 June 2021).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2018 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (8 June 2021).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2017 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (13 September 2018).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2016 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (14 September 2017).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2015 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (19 September 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2014 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2013 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2012 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2011 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2010 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2008 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2007 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2006 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2005 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).

The total population in the United States was estimated at 341.2 million people in 2024, according to the latest census figures and projections from Trading Economics. This dataset provides - United States Population - actual values, historical data, forecast, chart, statistics, economic calendar and news.

Context

In the time of epidemics, what is the status of HIV AIDS across the world, where does each country stands, is it getting any better. The data set should be helpful to explore much more about above mentioned factors.

Content

The data set contains data on

1. No. of people living with HIV AIDS
2. No. of deaths due to HIV AIDS
3. No. of cases among adults (19-45)
4. Prevention of mother-to-child transmission estimates
5. ART (Anti Retro-viral Therapy) coverage among people living with HIV estimates
6. ART (Anti Retro-viral Therapy) coverage among children estimates

Acknowledgements / Data Source

• WHO : https://www.who.int/hiv/data/en/
• UNESCO : https://data.unicef.org/resources/dataset/hiv-aids-statistical-tables/

Collection methodology

https://github.com/imdevskp/hiv_aids_who_unesco_data_cleaning

Cover Photo

Photo by Anna Shvets from Pexels https://www.pexels.com/photo/red-ribbon-on-white-surface-3900425/

Similar Datasets

• COVID-19 - https://www.kaggle.com/imdevskp/corona-virus-report
• MERS - https://www.kaggle.com/imdevskp/mers-outbreak-dataset-20122019
• Ebola Western Africa 2014 Outbreak - https://www.kaggle.com/imdevskp/ebola-outbreak-20142016-complete-dataset
• H1N1 | Swine Flu 2009 Pandemic Dataset - https://www.kaggle.com/imdevskp/h1n1-swine-flu-2009-pandemic-dataset
• SARS 2003 Pandemic - https://www.kaggle.com/imdevskp/sars-outbreak-2003-complete-dataset
• HIV AIDS - https://www.kaggle.com/imdevskp/hiv-aids-dataset

A collaborative project between SPC, the World Fish Centre and the University of Wollongong has produced the first detailed population estimates of people living close to the coast in the 22 Pacific Island Countries and Territories (PICTs). These estimates are stratified into 1, 5, and 10km zones. More information about this dataset: https://sdd.spc.int/mapping-coastal

Catholic_CO2_Footprint_Beta_Full_NULL_NAmerica2Burhans, Molly A., Cheney, David M., Gerlt, R.. . “Catholic_CO2_Footprint_Beta_Full_NULL_NAmerica2”. Scale not given. Version 1.0. MO and CT, USA: GoodLands Inc., Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc., 2019.MethodologyThis is the first global Carbon footprint of the Catholic population. We will continue to improve and develop these data with our research partners over the coming years. While it is helpful, it should also be viewed and used as a "beta" prototype that we and our research partners will build from and improve. The years of carbon data are (2010) and (2015 - SHOWN). The year of Catholic data is 2018. The year of population data is 2016. Care should be taken during future developments to harmonize the years used for catholic, population, and CO2 data.1. Zonal Statistics: Esri Population Data and Dioceses --> Population per dioceses, non Vatican based numbers2. Zonal Statistics: FFDAS and Dioceses and Population dataset --> Mean CO2 per Diocese3. Field Calculation: Population per Diocese and Mean CO2 per diocese --> CO2 per Capita4. Field Calculation: CO2 per Capita * Catholic Population --> Catholic Carbon FootprintAssumption: PerCapita CO2Deriving per-capita CO2 from mean CO2 in a geography assumes that people's footprint accounts for their personal lifestyle and involvement in local business and industries that are contribute CO2. Catholic CO2Assumes that Catholics and non-Catholic have similar CO2 footprints from their lifestyles.Derived from:A multiyear, global gridded fossil fuel CO2 emission data product: Evaluation and analysis of resultshttp://ffdas.rc.nau.edu/About.htmlRayner et al., JGR, 2010 - The is the first FFDAS paper describing the version 1.0 methods and results published in the Journal of Geophysical Research.Asefi et al., 2014 - This is the paper describing the methods and results of the FFDAS version 2.0 published in the Journal of Geophysical Research.Readme version 2.2 - A simple readme file to assist in using the 10 km x 10 km, hourly gridded Vulcan version 2.2 results.Liu et al., 2017 - A paper exploring the carbon cycle response to the 2015-2016 El Nino through the use of carbon cycle data assimilation with FFDAS as the boundary condition for FFCO2."S. Asefi‐Najafabady P. J. Rayner K. R. Gurney A. McRobert Y. Song K. Coltin J. Huang C. Elvidge K. BaughFirst published: 10 September 2014 https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD021296 Cited by: 30Link to FFDAS data retrieval and visualization: http://hpcg.purdue.edu/FFDAS/index.phpAbstractHigh‐resolution, global quantification of fossil fuel CO2 emissions is emerging as a critical need in carbon cycle science and climate policy. We build upon a previously developed fossil fuel data assimilation system (FFDAS) for estimating global high‐resolution fossil fuel CO2 emissions. We have improved the underlying observationally based data sources, expanded the approach through treatment of separate emitting sectors including a new pointwise database of global power plants, and extended the results to cover a 1997 to 2010 time series at a spatial resolution of 0.1°. Long‐term trend analysis of the resulting global emissions shows subnational spatial structure in large active economies such as the United States, China, and India. These three countries, in particular, show different long‐term trends and exploration of the trends in nighttime lights, and population reveal a decoupling of population and emissions at the subnational level. Analysis of shorter‐term variations reveals the impact of the 2008–2009 global financial crisis with widespread negative emission anomalies across the U.S. and Europe. We have used a center of mass (CM) calculation as a compact metric to express the time evolution of spatial patterns in fossil fuel CO2 emissions. The global emission CM has moved toward the east and somewhat south between 1997 and 2010, driven by the increase in emissions in China and South Asia over this time period. Analysis at the level of individual countries reveals per capita CO2 emission migration in both Russia and India. The per capita emission CM holds potential as a way to succinctly analyze subnational shifts in carbon intensity over time. Uncertainties are generally lower than the previous version of FFDAS due mainly to an improved nightlight data set."Global Diocesan Boundaries:Burhans, M., Bell, J., Burhans, D., Carmichael, R., Cheney, D., Deaton, M., Emge, T. Gerlt, B., Grayson, J., Herries, J., Keegan, H., Skinner, A., Smith, M., Sousa, C., Trubetskoy, S. “Diocesean Boundaries of the Catholic Church” [Feature Layer]. Scale not given. Version 1.2. Redlands, CA, USA: GoodLands Inc., Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc., 2016.Using: ArcGIS. 10.4. Version 10.0. Redlands, CA: Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc., 2016.Boundary ProvenanceStatistics and Leadership DataCheney, D.M. “Catholic Hierarchy of the World” [Database]. Date Updated: August 2019. Catholic Hierarchy. Using: Paradox. Retrieved from Original Source.Catholic HierarchyAnnuario Pontificio per l’Anno .. Città del Vaticano :Tipografia Poliglotta Vaticana, Multiple Years.The data for these maps was extracted from the gold standard of Church data, the Annuario Pontificio, published yearly by the Vatican. The collection and data development of the Vatican Statistics Office are unknown. GoodLands is not responsible for errors within this data. We encourage people to document and report errant information to us at data@good-lands.org or directly to the Vatican.Additional information about regular changes in bishops and sees comes from a variety of public diocesan and news announcements.GoodLands’ polygon data layers, version 2.0 for global ecclesiastical boundaries of the Roman Catholic Church:Although care has been taken to ensure the accuracy, completeness and reliability of the information provided, due to this being the first developed dataset of global ecclesiastical boundaries curated from many sources it may have a higher margin of error than established geopolitical administrative boundary maps. Boundaries need to be verified with appropriate Ecclesiastical Leadership. The current information is subject to change without notice. No parties involved with the creation of this data are liable for indirect, special or incidental damage resulting from, arising out of or in connection with the use of the information. We referenced 1960 sources to build our global datasets of ecclesiastical jurisdictions. Often, they were isolated images of dioceses, historical documents and information about parishes that were cross checked. These sources can be viewed here:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/11ANlH1S_aYJOyz4TtG0HHgz0OLxnOvXLHMt4FVOS85Q/edit#gid=0To learn more or contact us please visit: https://good-lands.org/Esri Gridded Population Data 2016DescriptionThis layer is a global estimate of human population for 2016. Esri created this estimate by modeling a footprint of where people live as a dasymetric settlement likelihood surface, and then assigned 2016 population estimates stored on polygons of the finest level of geography available onto the settlement surface. Where people live means where their homes are, as in where people sleep most of the time, and this is opposed to where they work. Another way to think of this estimate is a night-time estimate, as opposed to a day-time estimate.Knowledge of population distribution helps us understand how humans affect the natural world and how natural events such as storms and earthquakes, and other phenomena affect humans. This layer represents the footprint of where people live, and how many people live there.Dataset SummaryEach cell in this layer has an integer value with the estimated number of people likely to live in the geographic region represented by that cell. Esri additionally produced several additional layers World Population Estimate Confidence 2016: the confidence level (1-5) per cell for the probability of people being located and estimated correctly. World Population Density Estimate 2016: this layer is represented as population density in units of persons per square kilometer.World Settlement Score 2016: the dasymetric likelihood surface used to create this layer by apportioning population from census polygons to the settlement score raster.To use this layer in analysis, there are several properties or geoprocessing environment settings that should be used:Coordinate system: WGS_1984. This service and its underlying data are WGS_1984. We do this because projecting population count data actually will change the populations due to resampling and either collapsing or splitting cells to fit into another coordinate system. Cell Size: 0.0013474728 degrees (approximately 150-meters) at the equator. No Data: -1Bit Depth: 32-bit signedThis layer has query, identify, pixel, and export image functions enabled, and is restricted to a maximum analysis size of 30,000 x 30,000 pixels - an area about the size of Africa.Frye, C. et al., (2018). Using Classified and Unclassified Land Cover Data to Estimate the Footprint of Human Settlement. Data Science Journal. 17, p.20. DOI: http://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2018-020.What can you do with this layer?This layer is unsuitable for mapping or cartographic use, and thus it does not include a convenient legend. Instead, this layer is useful for analysis, particularly for estimating counts of people living within watersheds, coastal areas, and other areas that do not have standard boundaries. Esri recommends using the Zonal Statistics tool or the Zonal Statistics to Table tool where you provide input zones as either polygons, or raster data, and the tool will summarize the count of population within those zones. https://www.esri.com/arcgis-blog/products/arcgis-living-atlas/data-management/2016-world-population-estimate-services-are-now-available/

This dataset uses U.S. Census table B17020 - Poverty Status by Age The data shows the number of people per locality, the overall number of people living below the poverty level per locality, and then the number of people under age 18 living below the poverty level per locality. This last data element is broken down into three segments - aged <6 years, 6-11 years, and 12-17 years, which when added together equal the total number of children under age 18 living below the poverty level per locality.

This map features a global estimate of human population for 2016 with a focus on the Caribbean region . Esri created this estimate by modeling a footprint of where people live as a dasymetric settlement likelihood surface, and then assigned 2016 population estimates stored on polygons of the finest level of geography available onto the settlement surface. Where people live means where their homes are, as in where people sleep most of the time, and this is opposed to where they work. Another way to think of this estimate is a night-time estimate, as opposed to a day-time estimate.Knowledge of population distribution helps us understand how humans affect the natural world and how natural events such as storms and earthquakes, and other phenomena affect humans. This layer represents the footprint of where people live, and how many people live there.Dataset SummaryEach cell in this layer has an integer value with the estimated number of people likely to live in the geographic region represented by that cell. Esri additionally produced several additional layers World Population Estimate Confidence 2016: the confidence level (1-5) per cell for the probability of people being located and estimated correctly. World Population Density Estimate 2016: this layer is represented as population density in units of persons per square kilometer.World Settlement Score 2016: the dasymetric likelihood surface used to create this layer by apportioning population from census polygons to the settlement score raster.To use this layer in analysis, there are several properties or geoprocessing environment settings that should be used:Coordinate system: WGS_1984. This service and its underlying data are WGS_1984. We do this because projecting population count data actually will change the populations due to resampling and either collapsing or splitting cells to fit into another coordinate system. Cell Size: 0.0013474728 degrees (approximately 150-meters) at the equator. No Data: -1Bit Depth: 32-bit signedThis layer has query, identify, pixel, and export image functions enabled, and is restricted to a maximum analysis size of 30,000 x 30,000 pixels - an area about the size of Africa.Frye, C. et al., (2018). Using Classified and Unclassified Land Cover Data to Estimate the Footprint of Human Settlement. Data Science Journal. 17, p.20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2018-020.What can you do with this layer?This layer is unsuitable for mapping or cartographic use, and thus it does not include a convenient legend. Instead, this layer is useful for analysis, particularly for estimating counts of people living within watersheds, coastal areas, and other areas that do not have standard boundaries. Esri recommends using the Zonal Statistics tool or the Zonal Statistics to Table tool where you provide input zones as either polygons, or raster data, and the tool will summarize the count of population within those zones.

This dataset contains counts of live births for California as a whole based on information entered on birth certificates. Final counts are derived from static data and include out of state births to California residents, whereas provisional counts are derived from incomplete and dynamic data. Provisional counts are based on the records available when the data was retrieved and may not represent all births that occurred during the time period.

The final data tables include both births that occurred in California regardless of the place of residence (by occurrence) and births to California residents (by residence), whereas the provisional data table only includes births that occurred in California regardless of the place of residence (by occurrence). The data are reported as totals, as well as stratified by parent giving birth's age, parent giving birth's race-ethnicity, and birth place type. See temporal coverage for more information on which strata are available for which years.

predict

DPH note about change from 7-day to 14-day metrics: As of 10/15/2020, this dataset is no longer being updated. Starting on 10/15/2020, these metrics will be calculated using a 14-day average rather than a 7-day average. The new dataset using 14-day averages can be accessed here: https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/COVID-19-case-rate-per-100-000-population-and-perc/hree-nys2

As you know, we are learning more about COVID-19 all the time, including the best ways to measure COVID-19 activity in our communities. CT DPH has decided to shift to 14-day rates because these are more stable, particularly at the town level, as compared to 7-day rates. In addition, since the school indicators were initially published by DPH last summer, CDC has recommended 14-day rates and other states (e.g., Massachusetts) have started to implement 14-day metrics for monitoring COVID transmission as well.

With respect to geography, we also have learned that many people are looking at the town-level data to inform decision making, despite emphasis on the county-level metrics in the published addenda. This is understandable as there has been variation within counties in COVID-19 activity (for example, rates that are higher in one town than in most other towns in the county).

This dataset includes a weekly count and weekly rate per 100,000 population for COVID-19 cases, a weekly count of COVID-19 PCR diagnostic tests, and a weekly percent positivity rate for tests among people living in community settings. Dates are based on date of specimen collection (cases and positivity).

A person is considered a new case only upon their first COVID-19 testing result because a case is defined as an instance or bout of illness. If they are tested again subsequently and are still positive, it still counts toward the test positivity metric but they are not considered another case.

These case and test counts do not include cases or tests among people residing in congregate settings, such as nursing homes, assisted living facilities, or correctional facilities.

These data are updated weekly; the previous week period for each dataset is the previous Sunday-Saturday, known as an MMWR week (https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nndss/document/MMWR_week_overview.pdf). The date listed is the date the dataset was last updated and corresponds to a reporting period of the previous MMWR week. For instance, the data for 8/20/2020 corresponds to a reporting period of 8/9/2020-8/15/2020.

Notes: 9/25/2020: Data for Mansfield and Middletown for the week of Sept 13-19 were unavailable at the time of reporting due to delays in lab reporting.

West Virginia and Kansas had the lowest cost of living across all U.S. states, with composite costs being half of those found in Hawaii. This was according to a composite index that compares prices for various goods and services on a state-by-state basis. In West Virginia, the cost of living index amounted to **** — well below the national benchmark of 100. Virginia— which had an index value of ***** — was only slightly above that benchmark. Expensive places to live included Hawaii, Massachusetts, and California. Housing costs in the U.S. Housing is usually the highest expense in a household’s budget. In 2023, the average house sold for approximately ******* U.S. dollars, but house prices in the Northeast and West regions were significantly higher. Conversely, the South had some of the least expensive housing. In West Virginia, Mississippi, and Louisiana, the median price of the typical single-family home was less than ******* U.S. dollars. That makes living expenses in these states significantly lower than in states such as Hawaii and California, where housing is much pricier. What other expenses affect the cost of living? Utility costs such as electricity, natural gas, water, and internet also influence the cost of living. In Alaska, Hawaii, and Connecticut, the average monthly utility cost exceeded *** U.S. dollars. That was because of the significantly higher prices for electricity and natural gas in these states.

This dataset is about books, has 1 rows and is filtered where the book is The blue zone : lessons for living longer from the people who've lived the longest. It features 7 columns including book, author, publication date, language, and book publisher. The preview is ordered by publication date (descending).

This dataset contains counts of live births for California counties based on information entered on birth certificates. Final counts are derived from static data and include out of state births to California residents, whereas provisional counts are derived from incomplete and dynamic data. Provisional counts are based on the records available when the data was retrieved and may not represent all births that occurred during the time period.

The final data tables include both births that occurred in California regardless of the place of residence (by occurrence) and births to California residents (by residence), whereas the provisional data table only includes births that occurred in California regardless of the place of residence (by occurrence). The data are reported as totals, as well as stratified by parent giving birth's age, parent giving birth's race-ethnicity, and birth place type. See temporal coverage for more information on which strata are available for which years.

This data has been taken from LG Inform at http://lginform.local.gov.uk/ data reference ID 31. It shows the percentage of vulnerable people achieving independent living in Plymouth from financial year 2006/2007 to 2010/2011 Percentage of vulnerable people achieving independent living. This is the number of service users (i.e. people who are receiving a Supporting People Service) who have moved on from supported accommodation in a planned way, as a percentage of total service users who have left the service. This was previously reported as NI 141. Source name: Communities and Local Government Collection name: Supporting People Local System (SPLS) Polarity: High is good Polarity is how sentiment is measured "Sentiment is usually considered to have "poles" positive and negative these are often translated into "good" and "bad" sentiment analysis is considered useful to tell us what is good and bad in our information stream

SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS PERCENTAGE OF FAMILIES AND PEOPLE WHOSE INCOME IN THE PAST 12 MONTHS IS BELOW THE POVERTY LEVEL - DP03 Universe - All families and All People Survey-Program - American Community Survey 5-year estimates Years - 2020, 2021, 2022 Poverty statistics in American Community Survey (ACS) products adhere to the standards specified by the Office of Management and Budget in Statistical Policy Directive 14. The Census Bureau uses a set of dollar value thresholds that vary by family size and composition to determine who is in poverty. Further, poverty thresholds for people living alone or with nonrelatives (unrelated individuals) vary by age (under 65 Year or 65 Year and older). The poverty thresholds for two-person families also vary by the age of the householder. If a family’s total income is less than the dollar value of the appropriate threshold, then that family and every individual in it are considered to be in poverty. Similarly, if an unrelated individual’s total income is less than the appropriate threshold, then that individual is considered to be in poverty.

Analysis of ‘Young People Survey’ provided by Analyst-2 (analyst-2.ai), based on source dataset retrieved from https://www.kaggle.com/miroslavsabo/young-people-survey on 13 February 2022.

--- Dataset description provided by original source is as follows ---

Introduction

In 2013, students of the Statistics class at "https://fses.uniba.sk/en/">FSEV UK were asked to invite their friends to participate in this survey.

• The data file (responses.csv) consists of 1010 rows and 150 columns (139 integer and 11 categorical).
• For convenience, the original variable names were shortened in the data file. See the columns.csv file if you want to match the data with the original names.
• The data contain missing values.
• The survey was presented to participants in both electronic and written form.
• The original questionnaire was in Slovak language and was later translated into English.
• All participants were of Slovakian nationality, aged between 15-30.

The variables can be split into the following groups:

• Music preferences (19 items)
• Movie preferences (12 items)
• Hobbies & interests (32 items)
• Phobias (10 items)
• Health habits (3 items)
• Personality traits, views on life, & opinions (57 items)
• Spending habits (7 items)
• Demographics (10 items)

Research questions

Many different techniques can be used to answer many questions, e.g.

• Clustering: Given the music preferences, do people make up any clusters of similar behavior?
• Hypothesis testing: Do women fear certain phenomena significantly more than men? Do the left handed people have different interests than right handed?
• Predictive modeling: Can we predict spending habits of a person from his/her interests and movie or music preferences?
• Dimension reduction: Can we describe a large number of human interests by a smaller number of latent concepts?
• Correlation analysis: Are there any connections between music and movie preferences?
• Visualization: How to effectively visualize a lot of variables in order to gain some meaningful insights from the data?
• (Multivariate) Outlier detection: Small number of participants often cheats and randomly answers the questions. Can you identify them? Hint: [Local outlier factor][1] may help.
• Missing values analysis: Are there any patterns in missing responses? What is the optimal way of imputing the values in surveys?
• Recommendations: If some of user's interests are known, can we predict the other? Or, if we know what a person listen, can we predict which kind of movies he/she might like?

Past research

• (in slovak) Sleziak, P. - Sabo, M.: Gender differences in the prevalence of specific phobias. Forum Statisticum Slovacum. 2014, Vol. 10, No. 6. [Differences (gender + whether people lived in village/town) in the prevalence of phobias.]

• Sabo, Miroslav. Multivariate Statistical Methods with Applications. Diss. Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava, 2014. [Clustering of variables (music preferences, movie preferences, phobias) + Clustering of people w.r.t. their interests.]

Questionnaire

MUSIC PREFERENCES

1. I enjoy listening to music.: Strongly disagree 1-2-3-4-5 Strongly agree (integer)
2. I prefer.: Slow paced music 1-2-3-4-5 Fast paced music (integer)
3. Dance, Disco, Funk: Don't enjoy at all 1-2-3-4-5 Enjoy very much (integer)
4. Folk music: Don't enjoy at all 1-2-3-4-5 Enjoy very much (integer)
5. Country: Don't enjoy at all 1-2-3-4-5 Enjoy very much (integer)
6. Classical: Don't enjoy at all 1-2-3-4-5 Enjoy very much (integer)
7. Musicals: Don't enjoy at all 1-2-3-4-5 Enjoy very much (integer)
8. Pop: Don't enjoy at all 1-2-3-4-5 Enjoy very much (integer)
9. Rock: Don't enjoy at all 1-2-3-4-5 Enjoy very much (integer)
10. Metal, Hard rock: Don't enjoy at all 1-2-3-4-5 Enjoy very much (integer)
11. Punk: Don't enjoy at all 1-2-3-4-5 Enjoy very much (integer)
12. Hip hop, Rap: Don't enjoy at all 1-2-3-4-5 Enjoy very much (integer)
13. Reggae, Ska: Don't enjoy at all 1-2-3-4-5 Enjoy very much (integer)
14. Swing, Jazz: Don't enjoy at all 1-2-3-4-5 Enjoy very much (integer)
15. Rock n Roll: Don't enjoy at all 1-2-3-4-5 Enjoy very much (integer)
16. Alternative music: Don't enjoy at all 1-2-3-4-5 Enjoy very much (integer)
17. Latin: Don't enjoy at all 1-2-3-4-5 Enjoy very much (integer)
18. Techno, Trance: Don't enjoy at all 1-2-3-4-5 Enjoy very much (integer)
19. Opera: Don't enjoy at all 1-2-3-4-5 Enjoy very much (integer)

MOVIE PREFERENCES

1. I really enjoy watching movies.: Strongly disagree 1-2-3-4-5 Strongly agree (integer)
2. Horror movies: Don't enjoy at all 1-2-3-4-5 Enjoy very much (integer)
3. Thriller movies: Don't enjoy at all 1-2-3-4-5 Enjoy very much (integer)
4. Comedies: Don't enjoy at all 1-2-3-4-5 Enjoy very much (integer)
5. Romantic movies: Don't enjoy at all 1-2-3-4-5 Enjoy very much (integer)
6. Sci-fi movies: Don't enjoy at all 1-2-3-4-5 Enjoy very much (integer)
7. War movies: Don't enjoy at all 1-2-3-4-5 Enjoy very much (integer)
8. Tales: Don't enjoy at all 1-2-3-4-5 Enjoy very much (integer)
9. Cartoons: Don't enjoy at all 1-2-3-4-5 Enjoy very much (integer)
10. Documentaries: Don't enjoy at all 1-2-3-4-5 Enjoy very much (integer)
11. Western movies: Don't enjoy at all 1-2-3-4-5 Enjoy very much (integer)
12. Action movies: Don't enjoy at all 1-2-3-4-5 Enjoy very much (integer)

HOBBIES & INTERESTS

1. History: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
2. Psychology: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
3. Politics: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
4. Mathematics: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
5. Physics: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
6. Internet: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
7. PC Software, Hardware: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
8. Economy, Management: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
9. Biology: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
10. Chemistry: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
11. Poetry reading: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
12. Geography: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
13. Foreign languages: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
14. Medicine: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
15. Law: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
16. Cars: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
17. Art: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
18. Religion: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
19. Outdoor activities: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
20. Dancing: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
21. Playing musical instruments: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
22. Poetry writing: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
23. Sport and leisure activities: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
24. Sport at competitive level: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
25. Gardening: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
26. Celebrity lifestyle: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
27. Shopping: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
28. Science and technology: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
29. Theatre: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
30. Socializing: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
31. Adrenaline sports: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)
32. Pets: Not interested 1-2-3-4-5 Very interested (integer)

PHOBIAS

1. Flying: Not afraid at all 1-2-3-4-5 Very afraid of (integer)
2. Thunder, lightning: Not afraid at all 1-2-3-4-5 Very afraid of (integer)
3. Darkness: Not afraid at all 1-2-3-4-5 Very afraid of (integer)
4. Heights: Not afraid at all 1-2-3-4-5 Very afraid of (integer)
5. Spiders: Not afraid at all 1-2-3-4-5 Very afraid of (integer)
6. Snakes: Not afraid at all 1-2-3-4-5 Very afraid of (integer)
7. Rats, mice: Not afraid at all 1-2-3-4-5 Very afraid of (integer)
8. Ageing: Not afraid at all 1-2-3-4-5 Very afraid of (integer)
9. Dangerous dogs: Not afraid at all 1-2-3-4-5 Very afraid of (integer)
10. Public speaking: Not afraid at all 1-2-3-4-5 Very afraid of (integer)

HEALTH HABITS

1. Smoking habits: Never smoked - Tried smoking - Former smoker - Current smoker (categorical)
2. Drinking: Never - Social drinker - Drink a lot (categorical)
3. I live a very healthy lifestyle.: Strongly disagree 1-2-3-4-5 Strongly agree (integer)

PERSONALITY TRAITS, VIEWS ON LIFE & OPINIONS

1. I take notice of what goes on around me.: Strongly disagree 1-2-3-4-5 Strongly agree (integer)
2. I try to do tasks as soon as possible and not leave them until last minute.: Strongly disagree 1-2-3-4-5 Strongly agree (integer)
3. I always make a list so I don't forget anything.: Strongly disagree 1-2-3-4-5 Strongly agree (integer)
4. I often study or work even in my spare time.: Strongly disagree 1-2-3-4-5 Strongly agree (integer)
5. I look at things from all different angles before I go ahead.: Strongly disagree 1-2-3-4-5 Strongly agree (integer)
6. I believe that bad people will suffer one day and good people will be rewarded.: Strongly disagree 1-2-3-4-5 Strongly agree (integer)
7. I am reliable at work and always complete all tasks given to me.: Strongly disagree 1-2-3-4-5 Strongly agree (integer)
8. I always keep my promises.: Strongly disagree 1-2-3-4-5 Strongly agree (integer)
9. **I can fall for someone very quickly and then

Analysis of ‘COVID-19 case rate per 100,000 population and percent test positivity in the last 7 days by town - ARCHIVE’ provided by Analyst-2 (analyst-2.ai), based on source dataset retrieved from https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/ceb31b99-df28-4d47-bfc9-dd3ab1896172 on 26 January 2022.

--- Dataset description provided by original source is as follows ---

DPH note about change from 7-day to 14-day metrics: As of 10/15/2020, this dataset is no longer being updated. Starting on 10/15/2020, these metrics will be calculated using a 14-day average rather than a 7-day average. The new dataset using 14-day averages can be accessed here: https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/COVID-19-case-rate-per-100-000-population-and-perc/hree-nys2

As you know, we are learning more about COVID-19 all the time, including the best ways to measure COVID-19 activity in our communities. CT DPH has decided to shift to 14-day rates because these are more stable, particularly at the town level, as compared to 7-day rates. In addition, since the school indicators were initially published by DPH last summer, CDC has recommended 14-day rates and other states (e.g., Massachusetts) have started to implement 14-day metrics for monitoring COVID transmission as well.

With respect to geography, we also have learned that many people are looking at the town-level data to inform decision making, despite emphasis on the county-level metrics in the published addenda. This is understandable as there has been variation within counties in COVID-19 activity (for example, rates that are higher in one town than in most other towns in the county).

This dataset includes a weekly count and weekly rate per 100,000 population for COVID-19 cases, a weekly count of COVID-19 PCR diagnostic tests, and a weekly percent positivity rate for tests among people living in community settings. Dates are based on date of specimen collection (cases and positivity).

A person is considered a new case only upon their first COVID-19 testing result because a case is defined as an instance or bout of illness. If they are tested again subsequently and are still positive, it still counts toward the test positivity metric but they are not considered another case.

These case and test counts do not include cases or tests among people residing in congregate settings, such as nursing homes, assisted living facilities, or correctional facilities.

These data are updated weekly; the previous week period for each dataset is the previous Sunday-Saturday, known as an MMWR week (https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nndss/document/MMWR_week_overview.pdf). The date listed is the date the dataset was last updated and corresponds to a reporting period of the previous MMWR week. For instance, the data for 8/20/2020 corresponds to a reporting period of 8/9/2020-8/15/2020.

Notes: 9/25/2020: Data for Mansfield and Middletown for the week of Sept 13-19 were unavailable at the time of reporting due to delays in lab reporting.

--- Original source retains full ownership of the source dataset ---