The USDA Agricultural Research Service (ARS) recently established SCINet , which consists of a shared high performance computing resource, Ceres, and the dedicated high-speed Internet2 network used to access Ceres. Current and potential SCINet users are using and generating very large datasets so SCINet needs to be provisioned with adequate data storage for their active computing. It is not designed to hold data beyond active research phases. At the same time, the National Agricultural Library has been developing the Ag Data Commons, a research data catalog and repository designed for public data release and professional data curation. Ag Data Commons needs to anticipate the size and nature of data it will be tasked with handling. The ARS Web-enabled Databases Working Group, organized under the SCINet initiative, conducted a study to establish baseline data storage needs and practices, and to make projections that could inform future infrastructure design, purchases, and policies. The SCINet Web-enabled Databases Working Group helped develop the survey which is the basis for an internal report. While the report was for internal use, the survey and resulting data may be generally useful and are being released publicly. From October 24 to November 8, 2016 we administered a 17-question survey (Appendix A) by emailing a Survey Monkey link to all ARS Research Leaders, intending to cover data storage needs of all 1,675 SY (Category 1 and Category 4) scientists. We designed the survey to accommodate either individual researcher responses or group responses. Research Leaders could decide, based on their unit's practices or their management preferences, whether to delegate response to a data management expert in their unit, to all members of their unit, or to themselves collate responses from their unit before reporting in the survey. Larger storage ranges cover vastly different amounts of data so the implications here could be significant depending on whether the true amount is at the lower or higher end of the range. Therefore, we requested more detail from "Big Data users," those 47 respondents who indicated they had more than 10 to 100 TB or over 100 TB total current data (Q5). All other respondents are called "Small Data users." Because not all of these follow-up requests were successful, we used actual follow-up responses to estimate likely responses for those who did not respond. We defined active data as data that would be used within the next six months. All other data would be considered inactive, or archival. To calculate per person storage needs we used the high end of the reported range divided by 1 for an individual response, or by G, the number of individuals in a group response. For Big Data users we used the actual reported values or estimated likely values. Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: Appendix A: ARS data storage survey questions. File Name: Appendix A.pdfResource Description: The full list of questions asked with the possible responses. The survey was not administered using this PDF but the PDF was generated directly from the administered survey using the Print option under Design Survey. Asterisked questions were required. A list of Research Units and their associated codes was provided in a drop down not shown here. Resource Software Recommended: Adobe Acrobat,url: https://get.adobe.com/reader/ Resource Title: CSV of Responses from ARS Researcher Data Storage Survey. File Name: Machine-readable survey response data.csvResource Description: CSV file includes raw responses from the administered survey, as downloaded unfiltered from Survey Monkey, including incomplete responses. Also includes additional classification and calculations to support analysis. Individual email addresses and IP addresses have been removed. This information is that same data as in the Excel spreadsheet (also provided).Resource Title: Responses from ARS Researcher Data Storage Survey. File Name: Data Storage Survey Data for public release.xlsxResource Description: MS Excel worksheet that Includes raw responses from the administered survey, as downloaded unfiltered from Survey Monkey, including incomplete responses. Also includes additional classification and calculations to support analysis. Individual email addresses and IP addresses have been removed.Resource Software Recommended: Microsoft Excel,url: https://products.office.com/en-us/excel

Raw data outputs 1-18 Raw data output 1. Differentially expressed genes in AML CSCs compared with GTCs as well as in TCGA AML cancer samples compared with normal ones. This data was generated based on the results of AML microarray and TCGA data analysis. Raw data output 2. Commonly and uniquely differentially expressed genes in AML CSC/GTC microarray and TCGA bulk RNA-seq datasets. This data was generated based on the results of AML microarray and TCGA data analysis. Raw data output 3. Common differentially expressed genes between training and test set samples the microarray dataset. This data was generated based on the results of AML microarray data analysis. Raw data output 4. Detailed information on the samples of the breast cancer microarray dataset (GSE52327) used in this study. Raw data output 5. Differentially expressed genes in breast CSCs compared with GTCs as well as in TCGA BRCA cancer samples compared with normal ones. Raw data output 6. Commonly and uniquely differentially expressed genes in breast cancer CSC/GTC microarray and TCGA BRCA bulk RNA-seq datasets. This data was generated based on the results of breast cancer microarray and TCGA BRCA data analysis. CSC, and GTC are abbreviations of cancer stem cell, and general tumor cell, respectively. Raw data output 7. Differential and common co-expression and protein-protein interaction of genes between CSC and GTC samples. This data was generated based on the results of AML microarray and STRING database-based protein-protein interaction data analysis. CSC, and GTC are abbreviations of cancer stem cell, and general tumor cell, respectively. Raw data output 8. Differentially expressed genes between AML dormant and active CSCs. This data was generated based on the results of AML scRNA-seq data analysis. Raw data output 9. Uniquely expressed genes in dormant or active AML CSCs. This data was generated based on the results of AML scRNA-seq data analysis. Raw data output 10. Intersections between the targeting transcription factors of AML key CSC genes and differentially expressed genes between AML CSCs vs GTCs and between dormant and active AML CSCs or the uniquely expressed genes in either class of CSCs. Raw data output 11. Targeting desirableness score of AML key CSC genes and their targeting transcription factors. These scores were generated based on an in-house scoring function described in the Methods section. Raw data output 12. CSC-specific targeting desirableness score of AML key CSC genes and their targeting transcription factors. These scores were generated based on an in-house scoring function described in the Methods section. Raw data output 13. The protein-protein interactions between AML key CSC genes with themselves and their targeting transcription factors. This data was generated based on the results of AML microarray and STRING database-based protein-protein interaction data analysis. Raw data output 14. The previously confirmed associations of genes having the highest targeting desirableness and CSC-specific targeting desirableness scores with AML or other cancers’ (stem) cells as well as hematopoietic stem cells. These data were generated based on a PubMed database-based literature mining. Raw data output 15. Drug score of available drugs and bioactive small molecules targeting AML key CSC genes and/or their targeting transcription factors. These scores were generated based on an in-house scoring function described in the Methods section. Raw data output 16. CSC-specific drug score of available drugs and bioactive small molecules targeting AML key CSC genes and/or their targeting transcription factors. These scores were generated based on an in-house scoring function described in the Methods section. Raw data output 17. Candidate drugs for experimental validation. These drugs were selected based on their respective (CSC-specific) drug scores. CSC is the abbreviation of cancer stem cell. Raw data output 18. Detailed information on the samples of the AML microarray dataset GSE30375 used in this study.

To create the dataset, the top 10 countries leading in the incidence of COVID-19 in the world were selected as of October 22, 2020 (on the eve of the second full of pandemics), which are presented in the Global 500 ranking for 2020: USA, India, Brazil, Russia, Spain, France and Mexico. For each of these countries, no more than 10 of the largest transnational corporations included in the Global 500 rating for 2020 and 2019 were selected separately. The arithmetic averages were calculated and the change (increase) in indicators such as profitability and profitability of enterprises, their ranking position (competitiveness), asset value and number of employees. The arithmetic mean values of these indicators for all countries of the sample were found, characterizing the situation in international entrepreneurship as a whole in the context of the COVID-19 crisis in 2020 on the eve of the second wave of the pandemic. The data is collected in a general Microsoft Excel table. Dataset is a unique database that combines COVID-19 statistics and entrepreneurship statistics. The dataset is flexible data that can be supplemented with data from other countries and newer statistics on the COVID-19 pandemic. Due to the fact that the data in the dataset are not ready-made numbers, but formulas, when adding and / or changing the values in the original table at the beginning of the dataset, most of the subsequent tables will be automatically recalculated and the graphs will be updated. This allows the dataset to be used not just as an array of data, but as an analytical tool for automating scientific research on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and crisis on international entrepreneurship. The dataset includes not only tabular data, but also charts that provide data visualization. The dataset contains not only actual, but also forecast data on morbidity and mortality from COVID-19 for the period of the second wave of the pandemic in 2020. The forecasts are presented in the form of a normal distribution of predicted values and the probability of their occurrence in practice. This allows for a broad scenario analysis of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and crisis on international entrepreneurship, substituting various predicted morbidity and mortality rates in risk assessment tables and obtaining automatically calculated consequences (changes) on the characteristics of international entrepreneurship. It is also possible to substitute the actual values identified in the process and following the results of the second wave of the pandemic to check the reliability of pre-made forecasts and conduct a plan-fact analysis. The dataset contains not only the numerical values of the initial and predicted values of the set of studied indicators, but also their qualitative interpretation, reflecting the presence and level of risks of a pandemic and COVID-19 crisis for international entrepreneurship.

Excel spreadsheets by species (4 letter code is abbreviation for genus and species used in study, year 2010 or 2011 is year data collected, SH indicates data for Science Hub, date is date of file preparation). The data in a file are described in a read me file which is the first worksheet in each file. Each row in a species spreadsheet is for one plot (plant). The data themselves are in the data worksheet. One file includes a read me description of the column in the date set for chemical analysis. In this file one row is an herbicide treatment and sample for chemical analysis (if taken). This dataset is associated with the following publication: Olszyk , D., T. Pfleeger, T. Shiroyama, M. Blakely-Smith, E. Lee , and M. Plocher. Plant reproduction is altered by simulated herbicide drift toconstructed plant communities. ENVIRONMENTAL TOXICOLOGY AND CHEMISTRY. Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Pensacola, FL, USA, 36(10): 2799-2813, (2017).

This is a dataset downloaded off excelbianalytics.com created off of random VBA logic. I recently performed an extensive exploratory data analysis on it and I included new columns to it, namely: Unit margin, Order year, Order month, Order weekday and Order_Ship_Days which I think can help with analysis on the data. I shared it because I thought it was a great dataset to practice analytical processes on for newbies like myself.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the Excel 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 Excel. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population distribution of Excel by age. For example, using this dataset, we can identify the largest age group in Excel.

Key observations

The largest age group in Excel, AL was for the group of age 45 to 49 years years with a population of 74 (15.64%), according to the ACS 2018-2022 5-Year Estimates. At the same time, the smallest age group in Excel, AL was the 85 years and over years with a population of 2 (0.42%). 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 Excel is shown in this column.
• % of Total Population: This column displays the population of each age group as a proportion of Excel 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 Excel Population by Age. You can refer the same here

Dataset

This dataset was created by Pinky Verma

Contents

Abstract

The documentation covers Enterprise Survey panel datasets that were collected in Slovenia in 2009, 2013 and 2019.

The Slovenia ES 2009 was conducted between 2008 and 2009. The Slovenia ES 2013 was conducted between March 2013 and September 2013. Finally, the Slovenia ES 2019 was conducted between December 2018 and November 2019. The objective of the Enterprise Survey is to gain an understanding of what firms experience in the private sector.

As part of its strategic goal of building a climate for investment, job creation, and sustainable growth, the World Bank has promoted improving the business environment as a key strategy for development, which has led to a systematic effort in collecting enterprise data across countries. The Enterprise Surveys (ES) are an ongoing World Bank project in collecting both objective data based on firms' experiences and enterprises' perception of the environment in which they operate.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

The primary sampling unit of the study is the establishment. An establishment is a physical location where business is carried out and where industrial operations take place or services are provided. A firm may be composed of one or more establishments. For example, a brewery may have several bottling plants and several establishments for distribution. For the purposes of this survey an establishment must take its own financial decisions and have its own financial statements separate from those of the firm. An establishment must also have its own management and control over its payroll.

Universe

As it is standard for the ES, the Slovenia ES was based on the following size stratification: small (5 to 19 employees), medium (20 to 99 employees), and large (100 or more employees).

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The sample for Slovenia ES 2009, 2013, 2019 were selected using stratified random sampling, following the methodology explained in the Sampling Manual for Slovenia 2009 ES and for Slovenia 2013 ES, and in the Sampling Note for 2019 Slovenia ES.

Three levels of stratification were used in this country: industry, establishment size, and oblast (region). The original sample designs with specific information of the industries and regions chosen are included in the attached Excel file (Sampling Report.xls.) for Slovenia 2009 ES. For Slovenia 2013 and 2019 ES, specific information of the industries and regions chosen is described in the "The Slovenia 2013 Enterprise Surveys Data Set" and "The Slovenia 2019 Enterprise Surveys Data Set" reports respectively, Appendix E.

For the Slovenia 2009 ES, industry stratification was designed in the way that follows: the universe was stratified into manufacturing industries, services industries, and one residual (core) sector as defined in the sampling manual. Each industry had a target of 90 interviews. For the manufacturing industries sample sizes were inflated by about 17% to account for potential non-response cases when requesting sensitive financial data and also because of likely attrition in future surveys that would affect the construction of a panel. For the other industries (residuals) sample sizes were inflated by about 12% to account for under sampling in firms in service industries.

For Slovenia 2013 ES, industry stratification was designed in the way that follows: the universe was stratified into one manufacturing industry, and two service industries (retail, and other services).

Finally, for Slovenia 2019 ES, three levels of stratification were used in this country: industry, establishment size, and region. The original sample design with specific information of the industries and regions chosen is described in "The Slovenia 2019 Enterprise Surveys Data Set" report, Appendix C. Industry stratification was done as follows: Manufacturing – combining all the relevant activities (ISIC Rev. 4.0 codes 10-33), Retail (ISIC 47), and Other Services (ISIC 41-43, 45, 46, 49-53, 55, 56, 58, 61, 62, 79, 95).

For Slovenia 2009 and 2013 ES, size stratification was defined following the standardized definition for the rollout: small (5 to 19 employees), medium (20 to 99 employees), and large (more than 99 employees). For stratification purposes, the number of employees was defined on the basis of reported permanent full-time workers. This seems to be an appropriate definition of the labor force since seasonal/casual/part-time employment is not a common practice, except in the sectors of construction and agriculture.

For Slovenia 2009 ES, regional stratification was defined in 2 regions. These regions are Vzhodna Slovenija and Zahodna Slovenija. The Slovenia sample contains panel data. The wave 1 panel “Investment Climate Private Enterprise Survey implemented in Slovenia” consisted of 223 establishments interviewed in 2005. A total of 57 establishments have been re-interviewed in the 2008 Business Environment and Enterprise Performance Survey.

For Slovenia 2013 ES, regional stratification was defined in 2 regions (city and the surrounding business area) throughout Slovenia.

Finally, for Slovenia 2019 ES, regional stratification was done across two regions: Eastern Slovenia (NUTS code SI03) and Western Slovenia (SI04).

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Personal Interview [capi]

Research instrument

Questionnaires have common questions (core module) and respectfully additional manufacturing- and services-specific questions. The eligible manufacturing industries have been surveyed using the Manufacturing questionnaire (includes the core module, plus manufacturing specific questions). Retail firms have been interviewed using the Services questionnaire (includes the core module plus retail specific questions) and the residual eligible services have been covered using the Services questionnaire (includes the core module). Each variation of the questionnaire is identified by the index variable, a0.

Response rate

Survey non-response must be differentiated from item non-response. The former refers to refusals to participate in the survey altogether whereas the latter refers to the refusals to answer some specific questions. Enterprise Surveys suffer from both problems and different strategies were used to address these issues.

Item non-response was addressed by two strategies: a- For sensitive questions that may generate negative reactions from the respondent, such as corruption or tax evasion, enumerators were instructed to collect the refusal to respond as (-8). b- Establishments with incomplete information were re-contacted in order to complete this information, whenever necessary. However, there were clear cases of low response.

For 2009 and 2013 Slovenia ES, the survey non-response was addressed by maximizing efforts to contact establishments that were initially selected for interview. Up to 4 attempts were made to contact the establishment for interview at different times/days of the week before a replacement establishment (with similar strata characteristics) was suggested for interview. Survey non-response did occur but substitutions were made in order to potentially achieve strata-specific goals. Further research is needed on survey non-response in the Enterprise Surveys regarding potential introduction of bias.

For 2009, the number of contacted establishments per realized interview was 6.18. This number is the result of two factors: explicit refusals to participate in the survey, as reflected by the rate of rejection (which includes rejections of the screener and the main survey) and the quality of the sample frame, as represented by the presence of ineligible units. The relatively low ratio of contacted establishments per realized interview (6.18) suggests that the main source of error in estimates in the Slovenia may be selection bias and not frame inaccuracy.

For 2013, the number of realized interviews per contacted establishment was 25%. This number is the result of two factors: explicit refusals to participate in the survey, as reflected by the rate of rejection (which includes rejections of the screener and the main survey) and the quality of the sample frame, as represented by the presence of ineligible units. The number of rejections per contact was 44%.

Finally, for 2019, the number of interviews per contacted establishments was 9.7%. This number is the result of two factors: explicit refusals to participate in the survey, as reflected by the rate of rejection (which includes rejections of the screener and the main survey) and the quality of the sample frame, as represented by the presence of ineligible units. The share of rejections per contact was 75.2%.

Greetings , fellow analysts !

(NOTE : This is a random dataset generated using python. It bears no resemblance to any real entity in the corporate world. Any resemblance is a matter of coincidence.)

REC-SSEC Bank is a govt-aided bank operating in the Indian Peninsula. They have regional branches in over 40+ regions of the country. You have been provided with a massive excel sheet containing the transaction details, the total transaction amount and their location and total transaction count.

The dataset is described as follows :

1. Date - The date on which the transaction took place. 2.Domain - Where or which type of Business entity made the transaction. 3.Location - Where the data is collected from 4.Value - Total value of transaction
2. Count of transaction .

For example , in the very first row , the data can be read as : " On the first of January, 2022 , 1932 transactions of summing upto INR 365554 from Bhuj were reported " NOTE : There are about 2750 transactions every single day. All of this has been given to you.

The bank wants you to answer the following questions :

1. What is the average transaction value everyday for each domain over the year.
2. What is the average transaction value for every city/location over the year
3. The bank CEO , Mr: Hariharan , wants to promote the ease of transaction for the highest active domain. If the domains could be sorted into a priority, what would be the priority list ?
4. What's the average transaction count for each city ?

In this project, I conducted a comprehensive analysis of retail and warehouse sales data to derive actionable insights. The primary objective was to understand sales trends, evaluate performance across channels, and identify key contributors to overall business success.

To achieve this, I transformed raw data into interactive Excel dashboards that highlight sales performance and channel contributions, providing a clear and concise representation of business metrics.

Key Highlights of the Project:

Created two dashboards: Sales Dashboard and Contribution Dashboard. Answered critical business questions, such as monthly trends, channel performance, and top contributors. Presented actionable insights with professional visuals, making it easy for stakeholders to make data-driven decisions.

Sample data for exercises in Further Adventures in Data Cleaning.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the median household income in Excel. It can be utilized to understand the trend in median household income and to analyze the income distribution in Excel by household type, size, and across various income brackets.

Content

The dataset will have the following datasets when applicable

Please note: The 2020 1-Year ACS estimates data was not reported by the Census Bureau due to the impact on survey collection and analysis caused by COVID-19. Consequently, median household income data for 2020 is unavailable for large cities (population 65,000 and above).

• Excel, AL Median Household Income Trends (2010-2021, in 2022 inflation-adjusted dollars)
• Median Household Income Variation by Family Size in Excel, AL: Comparative analysis across 7 household sizes
• Income Distribution by Quintile: Mean Household Income in Excel, AL
• Excel, AL households by income brackets: family, non-family, and total, in 2022 inflation-adjusted dollars

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/.

Interested in deeper insights and visual analysis?

Explore our comprehensive data analysis and visual representations for a deeper understanding of Excel median household income. You can refer the same here

This repository contains the data supporting the manuscript "A Generic Scenario Analysis of End-of-Life Plastic Management: Chemical Additives" (to be) submitted to the Energy and Environmental Science Journal https://pubs.rsc.org/en/journals/journalissues/ee#!recentarticles&adv This repository contains Excel spreadsheets used to calculate material flow throughout the plastics life cycle, with a strong emphasis on chemical additives in the end-of-life stages. Three major scenarios were presented in the manuscript: 1) mechanical recycling (existing recycling infrastructure), 2) implementing chemical recycling to the existing plastics recycling, and 3) extracting chemical additives before the manufacturing stage. Users would primarily modify values on the yellow tab "US 2018 Facts - Sensitivity". Values highlighted in yellow may be changed for sensitivity analysis purposes. Please note that the values shown for MSW generated, recycled, incinerated, landfilled, composted, imported, exported, re-exported, and other categories in this tab were based on 2018 data. Analysis for other years can be made possible with a replicate version of this spreadsheet and the necessary data to replace those of 2018. Most of the tabs, especially those that contain "Stream # - Description", do not require user interaction. They are intermediate calculations that change according to the user inputs. It is available for the user to see so that the calculation/method is transparent. The major results of these individual stream tabs are ultimately compiled into one summary tab. All streams throughout the plastics life cycle, for each respective scenario (1, 2, and 3), are shown in the "US Mat Flow Analysis 2018" tab. For each stream, we accounted the approximate mass of plastics found in MSW, additives that may be present, and non-plastics. Each spreadsheet contains a representative diagram that matches the stream label. This illustration is placed to aid the user with understanding the connection between each stage in the plastics' life cycle. For example, the Scenario 1 spreadsheet uniquely contains Material Flow Analysis Summary, in addition to the LCI. In the "Material Flow Analysis Summary" tab, we represented the input, output, releases, exposures, and greenhouse gas emissions based on the amount of materials inputted into a specific stage in the plastics life cycle. The "Life Cycle Inventory" tab contributes additional calculations to estimate land, air, and water releases. Figures and Data - A gs analysis on eol plastic management This word document contains the raw data used to create all the figures in the main manuscript. The major references used to obtain the data are also included where appropriate.

This dataset is about book subjects. It has 3 rows and is filtered where the books is Beginning big data with Power BI and Excel 2013 : big data processing and analysis using Power BI in Excel 2013. It features 10 columns including number of authors, number of books, earliest publication date, and latest publication date.

Linear trend analysis of time series is standard procedure in many scientific disciplines. If the number of data is large, a trend may be statistically significant even if data are scattered far from the trend line. This study introduces and tests a quality criterion for time trends referred to as statistical meaningfulness, which is a stricter quality criterion for trends than high statistical significance. The time series is divided into intervals and interval mean values are calculated. Thereafter, r2 and p values are calculated from regressions concerning time and interval mean values. If r2≥0.65 at p≤0.05 in any of these regressions, then the trend is regarded as statistically meaningful. Out of ten investigated time series from different scientific disciplines, five displayed statistically meaningful trends. A Microsoft Excel application (add-in) was developed which can perform statistical meaningfulness tests and which may increase the operationality of the test. The presented method for distinguishing statistically meaningful trends should be reasonably uncomplicated for researchers with basic statistics skills and may thus be useful for determining which trends are worth analysing further, for instance with respect to causal factors. The method can also be used for determining which segments of a time trend may be particularly worthwhile to focus on.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset presents the the household distribution across 16 income brackets among four distinct age groups in Excel: Under 25 years, 25-44 years, 45-64 years, and over 65 years. The dataset highlights the variation in household income, offering valuable insights into economic trends and disparities within different age categories, aiding in data analysis and decision-making..

Key observations

• Upon closer examination of the distribution of households among age brackets, it reveals that there are 2(1.24%) households where the householder is under 25 years old, 57(35.40%) households with a householder aged between 25 and 44 years, 42(26.09%) households with a householder aged between 45 and 64 years, and 60(37.27%) households where the householder is over 65 years old.
• The age group of 45 to 64 years exhibits the highest median household income, while the largest number of households falls within the 65 years and over bracket. This distribution hints at economic disparities within the town of Excel, showcasing varying income levels among different age demographics.

Content

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

Income brackets:

• Less than $10,000
• $10,000 to $14,999
• $15,000 to $19,999
• $20,000 to $24,999
• $25,000 to $29,999
• $30,000 to $34,999
• $35,000 to $39,999
• $40,000 to $44,999
• $45,000 to $49,999
• $50,000 to $59,999
• $60,000 to $74,999
• $75,000 to $99,999
• $100,000 to $124,999
• $125,000 to $149,999
• $150,000 to $199,999
• $200,000 or more

Variables / Data Columns

• Household Income: This column showcases 16 income brackets ranging from Under $10,000 to $200,000+ ( As mentioned above).
• Under 25 years: The count of households led by a head of household under 25 years old with income within a specified income bracket.
• 25 to 44 years: The count of households led by a head of household 25 to 44 years old with income within a specified income bracket.
• 45 to 64 years: The count of households led by a head of household 45 to 64 years old with income within a specified income bracket.
• 65 years and over: The count of households led by a head of household 65 years and over old with income within a specified income bracket.

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 Excel median household income by age. You can refer the same here

This data set is perfect for practicing your analytical skills for Power BI, Tableau, Excel, or transform it into a CSV to practice SQL.

This use case mimics transactions for a fictional eCommerce website named EverMart Online. The 3 tables in this data set are all logically connected together with IDs.

My Power BI Use Case Explanation - Using Microsoft Power BI, I made dynamic data visualizations for revenue reporting and customer behavior reporting.

Revenue Reporting Visuals - Data Card Visual that dynamically shows Total Products Listed, Total Unique Customers, Total Transactions, and Total Revenue by Total Sales, Product Sales, or Categorical Sales. - Line Graph Visual that shows Total Revenue by Month of the entire year. This graph also changes to calculate Total Revenue by Month for the Total Sales by Product and Total Sales by Category if selected. - Bar Graph Visual showcasing Total Sales by Product. - Donut Chart Visual showcasing Total Sales by Category of Product.

Customer Behavior Reporting Visuals - Data Card Visual that dynamically shows Total Products Listed, Total Unique Customers, Total Transactions, and Total Revenue by Total or by continent selected on the map. - Interactive Map Visual showing key statistics for the continent selected. - The key statistics are presented on the tool tip when you select a continent, and the following statistics show for that continent: - Continent Name - Customer Total - Percentage of Products Sold - Percentage of Total Customers - Percentage of Total Transactions - Percentage of Total Revenue

The dataset contains the results of developing alternative text for images using chatbots based on large language models. The study was carried out in April-June 2024. Microsoft Copilot, Google Gemini, and YandexGPT chatbots were used to generate 108 text descriptions for 12 images. Descriptions were generated by chatbots using keywords specified by a person. The experts then rated the resulting descriptions on a Likert scale (from 1 to 5). The data set is presented in a Microsoft Excel table on the “Data” sheet with the following fields: record number; image number; chatbot; image type (photo, logo); request date; list of keywords; number of keywords; length of keywords; time of compilation of keywords; generated descriptions; required length of descriptions; actual length of descriptions; description generation time; usefulness; reliability; completeness; accuracy; literacy. The “Images” sheet contains links to the original images. Alternative descriptions are presented in English.

The field of cancer research is overall ambiguous to the general population and apart from medical news, not a lot is known of the proceedings. This study aims to provide some clarity towards cancer research, especially towards the correlations between research of different types of cancer. The amount of research papers pertaining to different types of cancers is compared against mortality and diagnosis rates to determine the amount of research attention towards a type of cancer in relation to its overall importance or danger level to the general population. This is achieved through the use of many computational tools such as Python, R, and Microsoft Excel. Python is used to parse through the JSON files and extract the abstract and Altmetric score onto a single CSV file. R is used to iterate through the rows of the CSV files and count the appearance of each type of cancer in the abstract. As well as this, R creates the histograms describing Altmetric scores and file frequency. Microsoft Excel is used to provide further data analysis and find correlations between Altmetrics data and Canadian Cancer Society data. The analysis from these tools revealed that breast cancer was the most researched cancer by a large margin with nearly 1,700 papers. Although there were a large number of cancer research papers, the Altmetric scores revealed that most of these papers did not gain significant attention. By comparing these results to Canadian Cancer Society data, it was uncovered that Breast Cancer was receiving research attention that was not merited. There were four times more breast cancer research papers than the second most researched cancer, prostate cancer. This was despite the fact that breast cancer was fourth in mortality and third in new cases among all cancers. Inversely, lung cancer was underrepresented with only 401 research papers in spite of being the deadliest cancer in Canada.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset presents the the household distribution across 16 income brackets among four distinct age groups in Excel: Under 25 years, 25-44 years, 45-64 years, and over 65 years. The dataset highlights the variation in household income, offering valuable insights into economic trends and disparities within different age categories, aiding in data analysis and decision-making..

Key observations

• Upon closer examination of the distribution of households among age brackets, it reveals that there are 2(1.12%) households where the householder is under 25 years old, 72(40.45%) households with a householder aged between 25 and 44 years, 38(21.35%) households with a householder aged between 45 and 64 years, and 66(37.08%) households where the householder is over 65 years old.
• In Excel, the age group of 25 to 44 years stands out with both the highest median income and the maximum share of households. This alignment suggests a financially stable demographic, indicating an established community with stable careers and higher incomes.

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2017-2021 5-Year Estimates.

Income brackets:

• Less than $10,000
• $10,000 to $14,999
• $15,000 to $19,999
• $20,000 to $24,999
• $25,000 to $29,999
• $30,000 to $34,999
• $35,000 to $39,999
• $40,000 to $44,999
• $45,000 to $49,999
• $50,000 to $59,999
• $60,000 to $74,999
• $75,000 to $99,999
• $100,000 to $124,999
• $125,000 to $149,999
• $150,000 to $199,999
• $200,000 or more

Variables / Data Columns

• Household Income: This column showcases 16 income brackets ranging from Under $10,000 to $200,000+ ( As mentioned above).
• Under 25 years: The count of households led by a head of household under 25 years old with income within a specified income bracket.
• 25 to 44 years: The count of households led by a head of household 25 to 44 years old with income within a specified income bracket.
• 45 to 64 years: The count of households led by a head of household 45 to 64 years old with income within a specified income bracket.
• 65 years and over: The count of households led by a head of household 65 years and over old with income within a specified income bracket.

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 Excel median household income by age. You can refer the same here