We'll extract any data from any website on the Internet. You don't have to worry about buying and maintaining complex and expensive software, or hiring developers.

Some common use cases our customers use the data for: • Data Analysis • Market Research • Price Monitoring • Sales Leads • Competitor Analysis • Recruitment

We can get data from websites with pagination or scroll, with captchas, and even from behind logins. Text, images, videos, documents.

Receive data in any format you need: Excel, CSV, JSON, or any other.

Analysis of ‘Popular Website Traffic Over Time ’ provided by Analyst-2 (analyst-2.ai), based on source dataset retrieved from https://www.kaggle.com/yamqwe/popular-website-traffice on 13 February 2022.

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

About this dataset

Background

Have you every been in a conversation and the question comes up, who uses Bing? This question comes up occasionally because people wonder if these sites have any views. For this research study, we are going to be exploring popular website traffic for many popular websites.

Methodology

The data collected originates from SimilarWeb.com.

Source

For the analysis and study, go to The Concept Center

This dataset was created by Chase Willden and contains around 0 samples along with 1/1/2017, Social Media, technical information and other features such as: - 12/1/2016 - 3/1/2017 - and more.

How to use this dataset

• Analyze 11/1/2016 in relation to 2/1/2017
• Study the influence of 4/1/2017 on 1/1/2017
• More datasets

Acknowledgements

If you use this dataset in your research, please credit Chase Willden

Start A New Notebook!

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

This Website Statistics dataset has four resources showing usage of the Lincolnshire Open Data website. Web analytics terms used in each resource are defined in their accompanying Metadata file.

• Website Usage Statistics: This document shows a statistical summary of usage of the Lincolnshire Open Data site for the latest calendar year.

• Website Statistics Summary: This dataset shows a website statistics summary for the Lincolnshire Open Data site for the latest calendar year.

• Webpage Statistics: This dataset shows statistics for individual Webpages on the Lincolnshire Open Data site by calendar year.

• Dataset Statistics: This dataset shows cumulative totals for Datasets on the Lincolnshire Open Data site that have also been published on the national Open Data site Data.Gov.UK - see the Source link.

  Note: Website and Webpage statistics (the first three resources above) show only UK users, and exclude API calls (automated requests for datasets). The Dataset Statistics are confined to users with javascript enabled, which excludes web crawlers and API calls.

These Website Statistics resources are updated annually in January by the Lincolnshire County Council Business Intelligence team. For any enquiries about the information contact opendata@lincolnshire.gov.uk.

Foreword

This users dataset is a preview of a much bigger dataset, with lots of related data (product listings of sellers, comments on listed products, etc...).

My Telegram bot will answer your queries and allow you to contact me.

Context

There are a lot of unknowns when running an E-commerce store, even when you have analytics to guide your decisions.

Users are an important factor in an e-commerce business. This is especially true in a C2C-oriented store, since they are both the suppliers (by uploading their products) AND the customers (by purchasing other user's articles).

This dataset aims to serve as a benchmark for an e-commerce fashion store. Using this dataset, you may want to try and understand what you can expect of your users and determine in advance how your grows may be.

• For instance, if you see that most of your users are not very active, you may look into this dataset to compare your store's performance.

If you think this kind of dataset may be useful or if you liked it, don't forget to show your support or appreciation with an upvote/comment. You may even include how you think this dataset might be of use to you. This way, I will be more aware of specific needs and be able to adapt my datasets to suits more your needs.

This dataset is part of a preview of a much larger dataset. Please contact me for more.

Content

The data was scraped from a successful online C2C fashion store with over 10M registered users. The store was first launched in Europe around 2009 then expanded worldwide.

Visitors vs Users: Visitors do not appear in this dataset. Only registered users are included. "Visitors" cannot purchase an article but can view the catalog.

Acknowledgements

We wouldn't be here without the help of others. If you owe any attributions or thanks, include them here along with any citations of past research.

Inspiration

Questions you might want to answer using this dataset:

• Are e-commerce users interested in social network feature ?
• Are my users active enough (compared to those of this dataset) ?
• How likely are people from other countries to sign up in a C2C website ?
• How many users are likely to drop off after years of using my service ?

Example works:

• Report(s) made using SQL queries can be found on the data.world page of the dataset.
• Notebooks may be found on the Kaggle page of the dataset.

License

CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0

For other licensing options, contact me.

Context

This file contains 5 years of daily time series data for several measures of traffic on a statistical forecasting teaching notes website whose alias is statforecasting.com. The variables have complex seasonality that is keyed to the day of the week and to the academic calendar. The patterns you you see here are similar in principle to what you would see in other daily data with day-of-week and time-of-year effects. Some good exercises are to develop a 1-day-ahead forecasting model, a 7-day ahead forecasting model, and an entire-next-week forecasting model (i.e., next 7 days) for unique visitors.

Content

The variables are daily counts of page loads, unique visitors, first-time visitors, and returning visitors to an academic teaching notes website. There are 2167 rows of data spanning the date range from September 14, 2014, to August 19, 2020. A visit is defined as a stream of hits on one or more pages on the site on a given day by the same user, as identified by IP address. Multiple individuals with a shared IP address (e.g., in a computer lab) are considered as a single user, so real users may be undercounted to some extent. A visit is classified as "unique" if a hit from the same IP address has not come within the last 6 hours. Returning visitors are identified by cookies if those are accepted. All others are classified as first-time visitors, so the count of unique visitors is the sum of the counts of returning and first-time visitors by definition. The data was collected through a traffic monitoring service known as StatCounter.

Inspiration

This file and a number of other sample datasets can also be found on the website of RegressIt, a free Excel add-in for linear and logistic regression which I originally developed for use in the course whose website generated the traffic data given here. If you use Excel to some extent as well as Python or R, you might want to try it out on this dataset.

Point of Interest (POI) is defined as an entity (such as a business) at a ground location (point) which may be (of interest). We provide high-quality POI data that is fresh, consistent, customizable, easy to use and with high-density coverage for all countries of the world.

This is our process flow:

Our machine learning systems continuously crawl for new POI data
Our geoparsing and geocoding calculates their geo locations
Our categorization systems cleanup and standardize the datasets
Our data pipeline API publishes the datasets on our data store

A new POI comes into existence. It could be a bar, a stadium, a museum, a restaurant, a cinema, or store, etc.. In today's interconnected world its information will appear very quickly in social media, pictures, websites, press releases. Soon after that, our systems will pick it up.

POI Data is in constant flux. Every minute worldwide over 200 businesses will move, over 600 new businesses will open their doors and over 400 businesses will cease to exist. And over 94% of all businesses have a public online presence of some kind tracking such changes. When a business changes, their website and social media presence will change too. We'll then extract and merge the new information, thus creating the most accurate and up-to-date business information dataset across the globe.

We offer our customers perpetual data licenses for any dataset representing this ever changing information, downloaded at any given point in time. This makes our company's licensing model unique in the current Data as a Service - DaaS Industry. Our customers don't have to delete our data after the expiration of a certain "Term", regardless of whether the data was purchased as a one time snapshot, or via our data update pipeline.

Customers requiring regularly updated datasets may subscribe to our Annual subscription plans. Our data is continuously being refreshed, therefore subscription plans are recommended for those who need the most up to date data. The main differentiators between us vs the competition are our flexible licensing terms and our data freshness.

Data samples may be downloaded at https://store.poidata.xyz/us

Context

Phishing is a form of identity theft that occurs when a malicious website impersonates a legitimate one in order to acquire sensitive information such as passwords, account details, or credit card numbers. People generally tend to fall pray to this very easily. Kudos to the commendable craftsmanship of the attackers which makes people believe that it is a legitimate website. There is a need to identify the potential phishing websites and differentiate them from the legitimate ones. This dataset identifies the prominent features of the phishing websites, 10 such features have been identified.

Content

Generally, the open source datasets available on the internet do not comes with the code and the logic which arises certain problems i.e.:

1. Limited Data: The ML algorithms can only be tested with the existing phishing URLs and no new phishing URLS can be checked for its validity.
2. Outdated URLs: The datasets available on the internet has been uploaded long time ago, there are new kind of phishing URLs arising in every second.
3. Outdated Features: The datasets available on the internet has been uploaded long time ago, there are new methodologies arising in phishing techniques.
4. No Access to Backend: There is no stepwise guide describing how the feature has been derived.

On the contrary we are trying to overcome all the above-mentioned problems.

1. Real Time Data: Before applying a Machine Learning algorithm, we can run the script and fetch real time URLs from Phishtank (for phishing URLs) and from moz (for legitimate URLs) 2. Scalable Data: We can also specify the number of URLs we want to feed the model and hence the web scrapper will fetch that much amount of data from the websites. Presently we are using 1401 URLs in this project i.e. 901 Phishing URLs and 500 Legitimate URLS. 3. New Features: We have tried to implement the prominent new features that is there in the current phishing URLs and since we own the code, new features can also be added. 4. Source code on Github: The source code is published on GitHub for public use and can be used for further scope of improvements. This way there will be transparency to the logic and more creators can add there meaningful additions to the code.

Link to the source code

https://github.com/akshaya1508/detection_of_phishing_websites.git

Inspiration

The idea to develop the dataset and the code for this dataset has been inspired by various other creators who have worked on the similar lines.

This dataset is composed of the URLs of the top 1 million websites. The domains are ranked using the Alexa traffic ranking which is determined using a combination of the browsing behavior of users on the website, the number of unique visitors, and the number of pageviews. In more detail, unique visitors are the number of unique users who visit a website on a given day, and pageviews are the total number of user URL requests for the website. However, multiple requests for the same website on the same day are counted as a single pageview. The website with the highest combination of unique visitors and pageviews is ranked the highest

Author: Víctor Yeste. Universitat Politècnica de Valencia.The object of this study is the design of a cybermetric methodology whose objectives are to measure the success of the content published in online media and the possible prediction of the selected success variables.In this case, due to the need to integrate data from two separate areas, such as web publishing and the analysis of their shares and related topics on Twitter, has opted for programming as you access both the Google Analytics v4 reporting API and Twitter Standard API, always respecting the limits of these.The website analyzed is hellofriki.com. It is an online media whose primary intention is to solve the need for information on some topics that provide daily a vast number of news in the form of news, as well as the possibility of analysis, reports, interviews, and many other information formats. All these contents are under the scope of the sections of cinema, series, video games, literature, and comics.This dataset has contributed to the elaboration of the PhD Thesis:Yeste Moreno, VM. (2021). Diseño de una metodología cibermétrica de cálculo del éxito para la optimización de contenidos web [Tesis doctoral]. Universitat Politècnica de València. https://doi.org/10.4995/Thesis/10251/176009Data have been obtained from each last-minute news article published online according to the indicators described in the doctoral thesis. All related data are stored in a database, divided into the following tables:tesis_followers: User ID list of media account followers.tesis_hometimeline: data from tweets posted by the media account sharing breaking news from the web.status_id: Tweet IDcreated_at: date of publicationtext: content of the tweetpath: URL extracted after processing the shortened URL in textpost_shared: Article ID in WordPress that is being sharedretweet_count: number of retweetsfavorite_count: number of favoritestesis_hometimeline_other: data from tweets posted by the media account that do not share breaking news from the web. Other typologies, automatic Facebook shares, custom tweets without link to an article, etc. With the same fields as tesis_hometimeline.tesis_posts: data of articles published by the web and processed for some analysis.stats_id: Analysis IDpost_id: Article ID in WordPresspost_date: article publication date in WordPresspost_title: title of the articlepath: URL of the article in the middle webtags: Tags ID or WordPress tags related to the articleuniquepageviews: unique page viewsentrancerate: input ratioavgtimeonpage: average visit timeexitrate: output ratiopageviewspersession: page views per sessionadsense_adunitsviewed: number of ads viewed by usersadsense_viewableimpressionpercent: ad display ratioadsense_ctr: ad click ratioadsense_ecpm: estimated ad revenue per 1000 page viewstesis_stats: data from a particular analysis, performed at each published breaking news item. Fields with statistical values can be computed from the data in the other tables, but total and average calculations are saved for faster and easier further processing.id: ID of the analysisphase: phase of the thesis in which analysis has been carried out (right now all are 1)time: "0" if at the time of publication, "1" if 14 days laterstart_date: date and time of measurement on the day of publicationend_date: date and time when the measurement is made 14 days latermain_post_id: ID of the published article to be analysedmain_post_theme: Main section of the published article to analyzesuperheroes_theme: "1" if about superheroes, "0" if nottrailer_theme: "1" if trailer, "0" if notname: empty field, possibility to add a custom name manuallynotes: empty field, possibility to add personalized notes manually, as if some tag has been removed manually for being considered too generic, despite the fact that the editor put itnum_articles: number of articles analysednum_articles_with_traffic: number of articles analysed with traffic (which will be taken into account for traffic analysis)num_articles_with_tw_data: number of articles with data from when they were shared on the media’s Twitter accountnum_terms: number of terms analyzeduniquepageviews_total: total page viewsuniquepageviews_mean: average page viewsentrancerate_mean: average input ratioavgtimeonpage_mean: average duration of visitsexitrate_mean: average output ratiopageviewspersession_mean: average page views per sessiontotal: total of ads viewedadsense_adunitsviewed_mean: average of ads viewedadsense_viewableimpressionpercent_mean: average ad display ratioadsense_ctr_mean: average ad click ratioadsense_ecpm_mean: estimated ad revenue per 1000 page viewsTotal: total incomeretweet_count_mean: average incomefavorite_count_total: total of favoritesfavorite_count_mean: average of favoritesterms_ini_num_tweets: total tweets on the terms on the day of publicationterms_ini_retweet_count_total: total retweets on the terms on the day of publicationterms_ini_retweet_count_mean: average retweets on the terms on the day of publicationterms_ini_favorite_count_total: total of favorites on the terms on the day of publicationterms_ini_favorite_count_mean: average of favorites on the terms on the day of publicationterms_ini_followers_talking_rate: ratio of followers of the media Twitter account who have recently published a tweet talking about the terms on the day of publicationterms_ini_user_num_followers_mean: average followers of users who have spoken of the terms on the day of publicationterms_ini_user_num_tweets_mean: average number of tweets published by users who spoke about the terms on the day of publicationterms_ini_user_age_mean: average age in days of users who have spoken of the terms on the day of publicationterms_ini_ur_inclusion_rate: URL inclusion ratio of tweets talking about terms on the day of publicationterms_end_num_tweets: total tweets on terms 14 days after publicationterms_ini_retweet_count_total: total retweets on terms 14 days after publicationterms_ini_retweet_count_mean: average retweets on terms 14 days after publicationterms_ini_favorite_count_total: total bookmarks on terms 14 days after publicationterms_ini_favorite_count_mean: average of favorites on terms 14 days after publicationterms_ini_followers_talking_rate: ratio of media Twitter account followers who have recently posted a tweet talking about the terms 14 days after publicationterms_ini_user_num_followers_mean: average followers of users who have spoken of the terms 14 days after publicationterms_ini_user_num_tweets_mean: average number of tweets published by users who have spoken about the terms 14 days after publicationterms_ini_user_age_mean: the average age in days of users who have spoken of the terms 14 days after publicationterms_ini_ur_inclusion_rate: URL inclusion ratio of tweets talking about terms 14 days after publication.tesis_terms: data of the terms (tags) related to the processed articles.stats_id: Analysis IDtime: "0" if at the time of publication, "1" if 14 days laterterm_id: Term ID (tag) in WordPressname: Name of the termslug: URL of the termnum_tweets: number of tweetsretweet_count_total: total retweetsretweet_count_mean: average retweetsfavorite_count_total: total of favoritesfavorite_count_mean: average of favoritesfollowers_talking_rate: ratio of followers of the media Twitter account who have recently published a tweet talking about the termuser_num_followers_mean: average followers of users who were talking about the termuser_num_tweets_mean: average number of tweets published by users who were talking about the termuser_age_mean: average age in days of users who were talking about the termurl_inclusion_rate: URL inclusion ratio

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

Complete dataset of “Film Circulation on the International Film Festival Network and the Impact on Global Film Culture”

A peer-reviewed data paper for this dataset is in review to be published in NECSUS_European Journal of Media Studies - an open access journal aiming at enhancing data transparency and reusability, and will be available from https://necsus-ejms.org/ and https://mediarep.org

Please cite this when using the dataset.

Detailed description of the dataset:

1 Film Dataset: Festival Programs

The Film Dataset consists a data scheme image file, a codebook and two dataset tables in csv format.

The codebook (csv file “1_codebook_film-dataset_festival-program”) offers a detailed description of all variables within the Film Dataset. Along with the definition of variables it lists explanations for the units of measurement, data sources, coding and information on missing data.

The csv file “1_film-dataset_festival-program_long” comprises a dataset of all films and the festivals, festival sections, and the year of the festival edition that they were sampled from. The dataset is structured in the long format, i.e. the same film can appear in several rows when it appeared in more than one sample festival. However, films are identifiable via their unique ID.

The csv file “1_film-dataset_festival-program_wide” consists of the dataset listing only unique films (n=9,348). The dataset is in the wide format, i.e. each row corresponds to a unique film, identifiable via its unique ID. For easy analysis, and since the overlap is only six percent, in this dataset the variable sample festival (fest) corresponds to the first sample festival where the film appeared. For instance, if a film was first shown at Berlinale (in February) and then at Frameline (in June of the same year), the sample festival will list “Berlinale”. This file includes information on unique and IMDb IDs, the film title, production year, length, categorization in length, production countries, regional attribution, director names, genre attribution, the festival, festival section and festival edition the film was sampled from, and information whether there is festival run information available through the IMDb data.

2 Survey Dataset

The Survey Dataset consists of a data scheme image file, a codebook and two dataset tables in csv format.

The codebook “2_codebook_survey-dataset” includes coding information for both survey datasets. It lists the definition of the variables or survey questions (corresponding to Samoilova/Loist 2019), units of measurement, data source, variable type, range and coding, and information on missing data.

The csv file “2_survey-dataset_long-festivals_shared-consent” consists of a subset (n=161) of the original survey dataset (n=454), where respondents provided festival run data for films (n=206) and gave consent to share their data for research purposes. This dataset consists of the festival data in a long format, so that each row corresponds to the festival appearance of a film.

The csv file “2_survey-dataset_wide-no-festivals_shared-consent” consists of a subset (n=372) of the original dataset (n=454) of survey responses corresponding to sample films. It includes data only for those films for which respondents provided consent to share their data for research purposes. This dataset is shown in wide format of the survey data, i.e. information for each response corresponding to a film is listed in one row. This includes data on film IDs, film title, survey questions regarding completeness and availability of provided information, information on number of festival screenings, screening fees, budgets, marketing costs, market screenings, and distribution. As the file name suggests, no data on festival screenings is included in the wide format dataset.

3 IMDb & Scripts

The IMDb dataset consists of a data scheme image file, one codebook and eight datasets, all in csv format. It also includes the R scripts that we used for scraping and matching.

The codebook “3_codebook_imdb-dataset” includes information for all IMDb datasets. This includes ID information and their data source, coding and value ranges, and information on missing data.

The csv file “3_imdb-dataset_aka-titles_long” contains film title data in different languages scraped from IMDb in a long format, i.e. each row corresponds to a title in a given language.

The csv file “3_imdb-dataset_awards_long” contains film award data in a long format, i.e. each row corresponds to an award of a given film.

The csv file “3_imdb-dataset_companies_long” contains data on production and distribution companies of films. The dataset is in a long format, so that each row corresponds to a particular company of a particular film.

The csv file “3_imdb-dataset_crew_long” contains data on names and roles of crew members in a long format, i.e. each row corresponds to each crew member. The file also contains binary gender assigned to directors based on their first names using the GenderizeR application.

The csv file “3_imdb-dataset_festival-runs_long” contains festival run data scraped from IMDb in a long format, i.e. each row corresponds to the festival appearance of a given film. The dataset does not include each film screening, but the first screening of a film at a festival within a given year. The data includes festival runs up to 2019.

The csv file “3_imdb-dataset_general-info_wide” contains general information about films such as genre as defined by IMDb, languages in which a film was shown, ratings, and budget. The dataset is in wide format, so that each row corresponds to a unique film.

The csv file “3_imdb-dataset_release-info_long” contains data about non-festival release (e.g., theatrical, digital, tv, dvd/blueray). The dataset is in a long format, so that each row corresponds to a particular release of a particular film.

The csv file “3_imdb-dataset_websites_long” contains data on available websites (official websites, miscellaneous, photos, video clips). The dataset is in a long format, so that each row corresponds to a website of a particular film.

The dataset includes 8 text files containing the script for webscraping. They were written using the R-3.6.3 version for Windows.

The R script “r_1_unite_data” demonstrates the structure of the dataset, that we use in the following steps to identify, scrape, and match the film data.

The R script “r_2_scrape_matches” reads in the dataset with the film characteristics described in the “r_1_unite_data” and uses various R packages to create a search URL for each film from the core dataset on the IMDb website. The script attempts to match each film from the core dataset to IMDb records by first conducting an advanced search based on the movie title and year, and then potentially using an alternative title and a basic search if no matches are found in the advanced search. The script scrapes the title, release year, directors, running time, genre, and IMDb film URL from the first page of the suggested records from the IMDb website. The script then defines a loop that matches (including matching scores) each film in the core dataset with suggested films on the IMDb search page. Matching was done using data on directors, production year (+/- one year), and title, a fuzzy matching approach with two methods: “cosine” and “osa.” where the cosine similarity is used to match titles with a high degree of similarity, and the OSA algorithm is used to match titles that may have typos or minor variations.

The script “r_3_matching” creates a dataset with the matches for a manual check. Each pair of films (original film from the core dataset and the suggested match from the IMDb website was categorized in the following five categories: a) 100% match: perfect match on title, year, and director; b) likely good match; c) maybe match; d) unlikely match; and e) no match). The script also checks for possible doubles in the dataset and identifies them for a manual check.

The script “r_4_scraping_functions” creates a function for scraping the data from the identified matches (based on the scripts described above and manually checked). These functions are used for scraping the data in the next script.

The script “r_5a_extracting_info_sample” uses the function defined in the “r_4_scraping_functions”, in order to scrape the IMDb data for the identified matches. This script does that for the first 100 films, to check, if everything works. Scraping for the entire dataset took a few hours. Therefore, a test with a subsample of 100 films is advisable.

The script “r_5b_extracting_info_all” extracts the data for the entire dataset of the identified matches.

The script “r_5c_extracting_info_skipped” checks the films with missing data (where data was not scraped) and tried to extract data one more time to make sure that the errors were not caused by disruptions in the internet connection or other technical issues.

The script “r_check_logs” is used for troubleshooting and tracking the progress of all of the R scripts used. It gives information on the amount of missing values and errors.

4 Festival Library Dataset

The Festival Library Dataset consists of a data scheme image file, one codebook and one dataset, all in csv format.

The codebook (csv file “4_codebook_festival-library_dataset”) offers a detailed description of all variables within the Library Dataset. It lists the definition of variables, such as location and festival name, and festival categories,

The CalFish Abundance Database contains a comprehensive collection of anadromous fisheries abundance information. Beginning in 1998, the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission, the California Department of Fish and Game, and the National Marine Fisheries Service, began a cooperative project aimed at collecting, archiving, and entering into standardized electronic formats, the wealth of information generated by fisheries resource management agencies and tribes throughout California.Extensive data are currently available for chinook, coho, and steelhead. Major data categories include adult abundance population estimates, actual fish and/or carcass counts, counts of fish collected at dams, weirs, or traps, and redd counts. Harvest data has been compiled for many streams, and hatchery return data has been compiled for the states mitigation facilities. A draft format has been developed for juvenile abundance and awaits final approval. This CalFish Abundance Database shapefile was generated from fully routed 1:100,000 hydrography. In a few cases streams had to be added to the hydrography dataset in order to provide a means to create shapefiles to represent abundance data associated with them. Streams added were digitized at no more than 1:24,000 scale based on stream line images portrayed in 1:24,000 Digital Raster Graphics (DRG).These features generally represent abundance counts resulting from stream surveys. The linear features in this layer typically represent the location for which abundance data records apply. This would be the reach or length of stream surveyed, or the stream sections for which a given population estimate applies. In some cases the actual stream section surveyed was not specified and linear features represent the entire stream. In many cases there are multiple datasets associated with the same length of stream, and so, linear features overlap. Please view the associated datasets for detail regarding specific features. In CalFish these are accessed through the "link" that is visible when performing an identify or query operation. A URL string is provided with each feature in the downloadable data which can also be used to access the underlying datasets.The coho data that is available via the CalFish website is actually linked directly to the StreamNet website where the databases tabular data is currently stored. Additional information about StreamNet may be downloaded at http://www.streamnet.org. Complete documentation for the StreamNet database may be accessed at http://http://www.streamnet.org/def.html

The LIVE Public-Domain Subjective Image Quality Database is a resource developed by the Laboratory for Image and Video Engineering at the University of Texas at Austin. It contains a set of images and videos whose quality has been ranked by human subjects. This database is used in Quality Assessment (QA) research, which aims to make quality predictions that align with the subjective opinions of human observers.

The database was created through an extensive experiment conducted in collaboration with the Department of Psychology at the University of Texas at Austin. The experiment involved obtaining scores from human subjects for many images distorted with different distortion types. The QA algorithm may be trained on part of this data set, and tested on the rest.

The database is available to the research community free of charge. If you use these images in your research, the creators kindly ask that you reference their website and their papers. There are two releases of the database. Release 2 includes more distortion types and more subjects than Release 1. The distortions include JPEG-compressed images, JPEG2000-compressed images, Gaussian blur, and white noise.

Non-anonymized subset of the databases used in the paper "Traveling the Silk Road: A measurement analysis of a large anonymous online marketplace" (Christin, 2013). In this dataset, textual information (item name, description, or feedback text) and handles have not been anonymized and are thus available. We don't expect any private identifiers or other PII to be present in the data, which was collected from a publicly available website -- the Silk Road anonymous marketplace -- for a few months in 2012.

For less restricted usage terms, please consider the anonymized version, which is also available without any restrictions. This non-anonymized dataset should only be requested if your project MUST rely on full textual descriptions of items and/or feedback.

Christin (2013) Traveling the Silk Road: A measurement analysis of a large anonymous online marketplace. To appear in Proceedings of the 22nd International World Wide Web Conference (WWW'13). Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. May 2013.

Patterns of educational attainment vary greatly across countries, and across population groups within countries. In some countries, virtually all children complete basic education whereas in others large groups fall short. The primary purpose of this database, and the associated research program, is to document and analyze these differences using a compilation of a variety of household-based data sets: Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS); Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS); Living Standards Measurement Study Surveys (LSMS); as well as country-specific Integrated Household Surveys (IHS) such as Socio-Economic Surveys.As shown at the website associated with this database, there are dramatic differences in attainment by wealth. When households are ranked according to their wealth status (or more precisely, a proxy based on the assets owned by members of the household) there are striking differences in the attainment patterns of children from the richest 20 percent compared to the poorest 20 percent.In Mali in 2012 only 34 percent of 15 to 19 year olds in the poorest quintile have completed grade 1 whereas 80 percent of the richest quintile have done so. In many countries, for example Pakistan, Peru and Indonesia, almost all the children from the wealthiest households have completed at least one year of schooling. In some countries, like Mali and Pakistan, wealth gaps are evident from grade 1 on, in other countries, like Peru and Indonesia, wealth gaps emerge later in the school system.The EdAttain website allows a visual exploration of gaps in attainment and enrollment within and across countries, based on the international database which spans multiple years from over 120 countries and includes indicators disaggregated by wealth, gender and urban/rural location. The database underlying that site can be downloaded from here.

LinkedIn companies use datasets to access public company data for machine learning, ecosystem mapping, and strategic decisions. Popular use cases include competitive analysis, CRM enrichment, and lead generation.

Use our LinkedIn Companies Information dataset to access comprehensive data on companies worldwide, including business size, industry, employee profiles, and corporate activity. This dataset provides key company insights, organizational structure, and competitive landscape, tailored for market researchers, HR professionals, business analysts, and recruiters.

Leverage the LinkedIn Companies dataset to track company growth, analyze industry trends, and refine your recruitment strategies. By understanding company dynamics and employee movements, you can optimize sourcing efforts, enhance business development opportunities, and gain a strategic edge in your market. Stay informed and make data-backed decisions with this essential resource for understanding global company ecosystems.

Dataset Features

• timestamp: Represents the date and time when the company data was collected.
• id: Unique identifier for each company in the dataset.
• company_id: Identifier linking the company to an external database or internal system.
• url: Website or URL for more information about the company.
• name: The name of the company.
• about: Brief description of the company.
• description: More detailed information about the company's operations and offerings.
• organization_type: Type of the organization (e.g., private, public).
• industries: List of industries the company operates in.
• followers: Number of followers on the company's platform.
• headquarters: Location of the company's headquarters.
• country_code: Code for the country where the company is located.
• country_codes_array: List of country codes associated with the company (may represent various locations or markets).
• locations: Locations where the company operates.
• get_directions_url: URL to get directions to the company's location(s).
• formatted_locations: Human-readable format of the company's locations.
• website: The official website of the company.
• website_simplified: A simplified version of the company's website URL.
• company_size: Number of employees or company size.
• employees_in_linkedin: Number of employees listed on LinkedIn.
• employees: URL of employees.
• specialties: List of the company’s specializations or services.
• updates: Recent updates or news related to the company.
• crunchbase_url: Link to the company’s profile on Crunchbase.
• founded: Year when the company was founded.
• funding: Information on funding rounds or financial data.
• investors: Investors who have funded the company.
• alumni: Notable alumni from the company.
• alumni_information: Details about the alumni, their roles, or achievements.
• stock_info: Stock market information for publicly traded companies.
• affiliated: Companies or organizations affiliated with the company.
• image: Image representing the company.
• logo: URL of the official logo of the company.
• slogan: Company’s slogan or tagline.
• similar: URL of companies similar to this one.

Distribution

• Data Volume: 56.51M rows and 35 columns.
• Structure: Tabular format (CSV, Excel).

Usage

This dataset is ideal for:
- Market Research: Identifying key trends and patterns across different industries and geographies.
- Business Development: Analyzing potential partners, competitors, or customers.
- Investment Analysis: Assessing investment potential based on company size, funding, and industries.
- Recruitment & Talent Analytics: Understanding the workforce size and specialties of various companies.

Coverage

• Geographic Coverage: Global, with company locations and headquarters spanning multiple countries.
• Time Range: Data likely covers both current and historical information about companies.
• Demographics: Focuses on company attributes rather than demographics, but may contain information about the company's workforce.

License

CUSTOM

Please review the respective licenses below:

1. Data Provider's License
   • Bright Data Master Service Agreement

Who Can Use It

• Data Scientists: For building models, conducting research, or enhancing machine learning algorithms with business data.
• Researchers: For academic analysis in fields like economics, business, or technology.
• Businesses: For analysis, competitive benchmarking, and strategic development.
• Investors: For identifying and evaluating potential investment opportunities.

Dataset Name Ideas

• Global Company Profile Database
• **Business Intellige

The Office dataset contains 31 object categories in three domains: Amazon, DSLR and Webcam. The 31 categories in the dataset consist of objects commonly encountered in office settings, such as keyboards, file cabinets, and laptops. The Amazon domain contains on average 90 images per class and 2817 images in total. As these images were captured from a website of online merchants, they are captured against clean background and at a unified scale. The DSLR domain contains 498 low-noise high resolution images (4288×2848). There are 5 objects per category. Each object was captured from different viewpoints on average 3 times. For Webcam, the 795 images of low resolution (640×480) exhibit significant noise and color as well as white balance artifacts.

Dataset Card for Dataset Name

  Dataset Summary

Mind2Web is a dataset for developing and evaluating generalist agents for the web that can follow language instructions to complete complex tasks on any website. Existing datasets for web agents either use simulated websites or only cover a limited set of websites and tasks, thus not suitable for generalist web agents. With over 2,000 open-ended tasks collected from 137 websites spanning 31 domains and crowdsourced action… See the full description on the dataset page: https://huggingface.co/datasets/osunlp/Mind2Web.

The Sea Around Us is a research initiative at The University of British Columbia (located at the Institute for the Oceans and Fisheries, formerly Fisheries Centre) that assesses the impact of fisheries on the marine ecosystems of the world, and offers mitigating solutions to a range of stakeholders.

The Sea Around Us was initiated in collaboration with The Pew Charitable Trusts in 1999, and in 2014, the Sea Around Us also began a collaboration with The Paul G. Allen Family Foundation to provide African and Asian countries with more accurate and comprehensive fisheries data.

The Sea Around Us provides data and analyses through View Data, articles in peer-reviewed journals, and other media (News). The Sea Around Us regularly update products at the scale of countries’ Exclusive Economic Zones, Large Marine Ecosystems, the High Seas and other spatial scales, and as global maps and summaries.

The Sea Around Us emphasizes catch time series starting in 1950, and related series (e.g., landed value and catch by flag state, fishing sector and catch type), and fisheries-related information on every maritime country (e.g., government subsidies, marine biodiversity). Information is also offered on sub-projects, e.g., the historic expansion of fisheries, the performance of Regional Fisheries Management Organizations, or the likely impact of climate change on fisheries.

The information and data presented on their website is freely available to any user, granted that its source is acknowledged. The Sea Around Us is aware that this information may be incomplete. Please let them know about this via the feedback options available on this website.

If you cite or display any content from the Site, or reference the Sea Around Us, the Sea Around Us – Indian Ocean, the University of British Columbia or the University of Western Australia, in any format, written or otherwise, including print or web publications, presentations, grant applications, websites, other online applications such as blogs, or other works, you must provide appropriate acknowledgement using a citation consistent with the following standard:

When referring to various datasets downloaded from the website, and/or its concept or design, or to several datasets extracted from its underlying databases, cite its architects. Example: Pauly D., Zeller D., Palomares M.L.D. (Editors), 2020. Sea Around Us Concepts, Design and Data (seaaroundus.org).

When referring to a set of values extracted for a given country, EEZ or territory, cite the most recent catch reconstruction report or paper (available on the website) for that country, EEZ or territory. Example: For the Mexican Pacific EEZ, the citation should be “Cisneros-Montemayor AM, Cisneros-Mata MA, Harper S and Pauly D (2015) Unreported marine fisheries catch in Mexico, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-22, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 9 p.”, which is accessible on the EEZ page for Mexico (Pacific) on seaaroundus.org.

To help us track the use of Sea Around Us data, we would appreciate you also citing Pauly, Zeller, and Palomares (2020) as the source of the information in an appropriate part of your text;

When using data from our website that are not part of a typical catch reconstruction (e.g., catches by LME or other spatial entity, subsidies given to fisheries, the estuaries in a given country, or the surface area of a given EEZ), cite both the website and the study that generated the underlying database. Many of these can be derived from the ’methods’ texts associated with data pages on seaaroundus.org. Example: Sumaila et al. (2010) for subsides, Alder (2003) for estuaries and Claus et al. (2014) for EEZ delineations, respectively.

The Sea Around Us data are (where not otherwise regulated) under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/). Notices regarding copyrights (© The University of British Columbia), license and disclaimer can be found under http://www.seaaroundus.org/terms-and-conditions/. References:

Alder J (2003) Putting the coast in the Sea Around Us Project. The Sea Around Us Newsletter (15): 1-2.

Cisneros-Montemayor AM, Cisneros-Mata MA, Harper S and Pauly D (2015) Unreported marine fisheries catch in Mexico, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-22, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 9 p.

Pauly D, Zeller D, and Palomares M.L.D. (Editors) (2020) Sea Around Us Concepts, Design and Data (www.seaaroundus.org)

Claus S, De Hauwere N, Vanhoorne B, Deckers P, Souza Dias F, Hernandez F and Mees J (2014) Marine Regions: Towards a global standard for georeferenced marine names and boundaries. Marine Geodesy 37(2): 99-125.

Sumaila UR, Khan A, Dyck A, Watson R, Munro R, Tydemers P and Pauly D (2010) A bottom-up re-estimation of global fisheries subsidies. Journal of Bioeconomics 12: 201-225.

This dataset provides statistics on EUR-Lex website from two views: type of content and number of legal acts available. It is updated on a daily basis.

1) The statistics on the content of EUR-Lex (from 1990 to 2018) show

a) how many legal texts in a given language and document format were made available in EUR-Lex in a particular month and year. They include:

• corrigenda and amending acts
• legal acts, both those that are in force and those that are no longer in force
• proposals, whether awaiting adoption or already adopted.

Since the eight parliamentary term, parliamentary questions are no longer included.

b) bibliographical notices by sector (e.g. case-law, treaties).

2) The statistics on legal acts (from 1990 to 2018) provide yearly and monthly figures on the number of adopted acts (also by author and by type) as well as those repealed and expired in a given month.