Dataset Card for "mnist-outlier"

📚 This dataset is an enriched version of the MNIST Dataset. The workflow is described in the medium article: Changes of Embeddings during Fine-Tuning of Transformers.

  Explore the Dataset

The open source data curation tool Renumics Spotlight allows you to explorer this dataset. You can find a Hugging Face Space running Spotlight with this dataset here: https://huggingface.co/spaces/renumics/mnist-outlier.

Or you can explorer it locally:… See the full description on the dataset page: https://huggingface.co/datasets/renumics/mnist-outlier.

This dataset builds upon "Financial Statement Data Sets" by incorporating several key improvements to enhance the accuracy and usability of US-GAAP financial data from SEC filings of U.S. exchange-listed companies. Drawing on submissions from January 2009 onward, the enhanced dataset aims to provide analysts with a cleaner, more consistent dataset by addressing common challenges found in the original data.

Key Enhancements:

1. Outlier Detection and Correction: Outliers in the original dataset have been systematically identified and corrected, providing more reliable financial figures.
2. Amendment Adjustments: In cases where SEC rules allow amendment filings to only include delta figures, full figures from the original submissions have been carried over for consistency, facilitating more straightforward analysis.
3. Missing Figure Estimation: Using calculation arcs from the US-GAAP taxonomy, missing financial figures have been computed where possible, ensuring greater completeness.
4. Data Structuring: Financial figures that previously appeared as separate rows have been consolidated into single rows with new columns, offering a cleaner structure.

Scope:

• Data Scope: The dataset is restricted to figures reported under US-GAAP standards, with the exception of EntityCommonStockSharesOutstanding and EntityPublicFloat.
• Currency and Units: The dataset exclusively includes figures reported in USD or shares, ensuring uniformity and comparability. It excludes ratios and non-financial metrics to maintain focus on financial data.
• Company Selection: The dataset is limited to companies with U.S. exchange tickers, providing a concentrated analysis of publicly traded firms within the United States.
• Submission Types: The dataset only incorporates data from 10-Q, 10-K, 10-Q/A, and 10-K/A filings, ensuring consistency in the type of financial reports analyzed.

Dataset Features:

• Refined Financial Data: Accurate and consistent figures by addressing reporting issues, corrections for outliers, and data consolidation.
• Enhanced Usability: By handling amendment submissions and leveraging GAAP taxonomies, the dataset offers a more analysis-friendly structure.
• Improved Completeness: Where original submissions had gaps in reporting, this dataset fills those gaps using calculated figures based on accounting principles.

The source code for data extraction is available here

The dataset is presented in the paper:

Building and analysing a labelled Measure While Drilling dataset from 15 hard rock tunnels in Norway, by T.F. Hansen, Z. Liu, J. Torressen

The paper has a preprint on SSRN: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4729646 and is under review in a peer-reviewed journal.

The dataset is utilised in a machine learning analysis in the paper:

Predicting rock type from MWD tunnel data using a reproducible ML-modelling process, by T.F. Hansen, Z. Liu, J. Torressen

The paper is published in the journal Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology:

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2024.105843

Description of the dataset:

Measure While Drilling (MWD) is a technique in rock drilling, mainly used in drill and blast tunnelling, where data about the rock mass is registered by sensors while drilling. The extensive and geologically diversified dataset contains corresponding MWD-data and rock mass mappings for 5205 blasting rounds from 15 hard rock tunnels in Norway. MWD-data are presented as tabular data. 10 different rocktypes are the corresponding labels.

Four files are given:

A csv-file of the training dataset - with outliers removed

A csv-file of the testing dataset (split train/test 0.75/0.25) - with outliers removed

A csv-file with the full unsplitted dataset, cleaned and with outliers removed

A csv-file with the raw dataset, before cleaning, processing and outlier removal

The author gratefully acknowledge the tunnel software/hardware company Bever Control, which have facilitated data from the clients Bane NOR, Statens Vegvesen, Nye Veier, and the contractor AF-Gruppen.

NOTE: The dataset is only available for research, no commercial use.

Abstract: Building health management is an important part in running an efficient and cost-effective building. Many problems in a building’s system can go undetected for long periods of time, leading to expensive repairs or wasted resources. This project aims to help detect and diagnose the building‘s health with data driven methods throughout the day. Orca and IMS are two state of the art algorithms that observe an array of building health sensors and provide feedback on the overall system’s health as well as localize the problem to one, or possibly two, components. With this level of feedback the hope is to quickly identify problems and provide appropriate maintenance while reducing the number of complaints and service calls. Introduction: To prepare these technologies for the new installation, the proposed methods are being tested on a current system that behaves similarly to the future green building. Building 241 was determined to best resemble the proposed building 232 and therefore was chosen for this study. Building 241 is currently outfitted with 34 sensors that monitor the heating & cooling temperatures for the air and water systems as well as other various subsystem states. The daily sensor recordings were logged and sent to the IDU group for analysis. The period of analysis was focused from July 1st through August 10th 2009. Methodology: The two algorithms used for analysis were Orca and IMS. Both methods look for anomalies using a distanced based scoring approach. Orca has the ability to use a single data set and find outliers within that data set. This tactic was applied to each day. After scoring each time sample throughout a given day the Orca score profiles were compared by computing the correlation against all other days. Days with high overall correlations were considered normal however days with lower overall correlations were more anomalous. IMS, on the other hand, needs a normal set of data to build a model, which can be applied to a set of test data to asses how anomaly the particular data set is. The typical days identified by Orca were used as the reference/training set for IMS, while all the other days were passed through IMS resulting in an anomaly score profile for each day. The mean of the IMS score profile was then calculated for each day to produce a summary IMS score. These summary scores were ranked and the top outliers were identified (see Figure 1). Once the anomalies were identified the contributing parameters were then ranked by the algorithm. Analysis: The contributing parameters identified by IMS were localized to the return air temperature duct system. -7/03/09 (Figure 2 & 3) AHU-1 Return Air Temperature (RAT) Calculated Average Return Air Temperature -7/19/09 (Figure 3 & 4) AHU-2 Return Air Temperature (RAT) Calculated Average Return Air Temperature IMS identified significantly higher temperatures compared to other days during the month of July and August. Conclusion: The proposed algorithms Orca and IMS have shown that they were able to pick up significant anomalies in the building system as well as diagnose the anomaly by identifying the sensor values that were anomalous. In the future these methods can be used on live streaming data and produce a real time anomaly score to help building maintenance with detection and diagnosis of problems.

Abstract: Building health management is an important part in running an efficient and cost-effective building. Many problems in a building’s system can go undetected for long periods of time, leading to expensive repairs or wasted resources. This project aims to help detect and diagnose the building‘s health with data driven methods throughout the day. Orca and IMS are two state of the art algorithms that observe an array of building health sensors and provide feedback on the overall system’s health as well as localize the problem to one, or possibly two, components. With this level of feedback the hope is to quickly identify problems and provide appropriate maintenance while reducing the number of complaints and service calls. Introduction: To prepare these technologies for the new installation, the proposed methods are being tested on a current system that behaves similarly to the future green building. Building 241 was determined to best resemble the proposed building 232 and therefore was chosen for this study. Building 241 is currently outfitted with 34 sensors that monitor the heating & cooling temperatures for the air and water systems as well as other various subsystem states. The daily sensor recordings were logged and sent to the IDU group for analysis. The period of analysis was focused from July 1st through August 10th 2009. Methodology: The two algorithms used for analysis were Orca and IMS. Both methods look for anomalies using a distanced based scoring approach. Orca has the ability to use a single data set and find outliers within that data set. This tactic was applied to each day. After scoring each time sample throughout a given day the Orca score profiles were compared by computing the correlation against all other days. Days with high overall correlations were considered normal however days with lower overall correlations were more anomalous. IMS, on the other hand, needs a normal set of data to build a model, which can be applied to a set of test data to asses how anomaly the particular data set is. The typical days identified by Orca were used as the reference/training set for IMS, while all the other days were passed through IMS resulting in an anomaly score profile for each day. The mean of the IMS score profile was then calculated for each day to produce a summary IMS score. These summary scores were ranked and the top outliers were identified (see Figure 1). Once the anomalies were identified the contributing parameters were then ranked by the algorithm. Analysis: The contributing parameters identified by IMS were localized to the return air temperature duct system. -7/03/09 (Figure 2 & 3) AHU-1 Return Air Temperature (RAT) Calculated Average Return Air Temperature -7/19/09 (Figure 3 & 4) AHU-2 Return Air Temperature (RAT) Calculated Average Return Air Temperature IMS identified significantly higher temperatures compared to other days during the month of July and August. Conclusion: The proposed algorithms Orca and IMS have shown that they were able to pick up significant anomalies in the building system as well as diagnose the anomaly by identifying the sensor values that were anomalous. In the future these methods can be used on live streaming data and produce a real time anomaly score to help building maintenance with detection and diagnosis of problems.

SUMMARYThis analysis, designed and executed by Ribble Rivers Trust, identifies areas across England with the greatest levels of physical illnesses that are linked with obesity and inactivity. Please read the below information to gain a full understanding of what the data shows and how it should be interpreted.ANALYSIS METHODOLOGYThe analysis was carried out using Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) data, derived from NHS Digital, relating to:- Asthma (in persons of all ages)- Cancer (in persons of all ages)- Chronic kidney disease (in adults aged 18+)- Coronary heart disease (in persons of all ages)- Diabetes mellitus (in persons aged 17+)- Hypertension (in persons of all ages)- Stroke and transient ischaemic attack (in persons of all ages)This information was recorded at the GP practice level. However, GP catchment areas are not mutually exclusive: they overlap, with some areas covered by 30+ GP practices. Therefore, to increase the clarity and usability of the data, the GP-level statistics were converted into statistics based on Middle Layer Super Output Area (MSOA) census boundaries.For each of the above illnesses, the percentage of each MSOA’s population with that illness was estimated. This was achieved by calculating a weighted average based on:- The percentage of the MSOA area that was covered by each GP practice’s catchment area- Of the GPs that covered part of that MSOA: the percentage of patients registered with each GP that have that illnessThe estimated percentage of each MSOA’s population with each illness was then combined with Office for National Statistics Mid-Year Population Estimates (2019) data for MSOAs, to estimate the number of people in each MSOA with each illness, within the relevant age range.For each illness, each MSOA was assigned a relative score between 1 and 0 (1 = worst, 0 = best) based on:A) the PERCENTAGE of the population within that MSOA who are estimated to have that illnessB) the NUMBER of people within that MSOA who are estimated to have that illnessAn average of scores A & B was taken, and converted to a relative score between 1 and 0 (1= worst, 0 = best). The closer to 1 the score, the greater both the number and percentage of the population in the MSOA predicted to have that illness, compared to other MSOAs. In other words, those are areas where a large number of people are predicted to suffer from an illness, and where those people make up a large percentage of the population, indicating there is a real issue with that illness within the population and the investment of resources to address that issue could have the greatest benefits.The scores for each of the 7 illnesses were added together then converted to a relative score between 1 – 0 (1 = worst, 0 = best), to give an overall score for each MSOA: a score close to 1 would indicate that an area has high predicted levels of all obesity/inactivity-related illnesses, and these are areas where the local population could benefit the most from interventions to address those illnesses. A score close to 0 would indicate very low predicted levels of obesity/inactivity-related illnesses and therefore interventions might not be required.LIMITATIONS1. GPs do not have catchments that are mutually exclusive from each other: they overlap, with some geographic areas being covered by 30+ practices. This dataset should be viewed in combination with the ‘Health and wellbeing statistics (GP-level, England): Missing data and potential outliers’ dataset to identify where there are areas that are covered by multiple GP practices but at least one of those GP practices did not provide data. Results of the analysis in these areas should be interpreted with caution, particularly if the levels of obesity/inactivity-related illnesses appear to be significantly lower than the immediate surrounding areas.2. GP data for the financial year 1st April 2018 – 31st March 2019 was used in preference to data for the financial year 1st April 2019 – 31st March 2020, as the onset of the COVID19 pandemic during the latter year could have affected the reporting of medical statistics by GPs. However, for 53 GPs (out of 7670) that did not submit data in 2018/19, data from 2019/20 was used instead. Note also that some GPs (997 out of 7670) did not submit data in either year. This dataset should be viewed in conjunction with the ‘Health and wellbeing statistics (GP-level, England): Missing data and potential outliers’ dataset, to determine areas where data from 2019/20 was used, where one or more GPs did not submit data in either year, or where there were large discrepancies between the 2018/19 and 2019/20 data (differences in statistics that were > mean +/- 1 St.Dev.), which suggests erroneous data in one of those years (it was not feasible for this study to investigate this further), and thus where data should be interpreted with caution. Note also that there are some rural areas (with little or no population) that do not officially fall into any GP catchment area (although this will not affect the results of this analysis if there are no people living in those areas).3. Although all of the obesity/inactivity-related illnesses listed can be caused or exacerbated by inactivity and obesity, it was not possible to distinguish from the data the cause of the illnesses in patients: obesity and inactivity are highly unlikely to be the cause of all cases of each illness. By combining the data with data relating to levels of obesity and inactivity in adults and children (see the ‘Levels of obesity, inactivity and associated illnesses: Summary (England)’ dataset), we can identify where obesity/inactivity could be a contributing factor, and where interventions to reduce obesity and increase activity could be most beneficial for the health of the local population.4. It was not feasible to incorporate ultra-fine-scale geographic distribution of populations that are registered with each GP practice or who live within each MSOA. Populations might be concentrated in certain areas of a GP practice’s catchment area or MSOA and relatively sparse in other areas. Therefore, the dataset should be used to identify general areas where there are high levels of obesity/inactivity-related illnesses, rather than interpreting the boundaries between areas as ‘hard’ boundaries that mark definite divisions between areas with differing levels of these illnesses. TO BE VIEWED IN COMBINATION WITH:This dataset should be viewed alongside the following datasets, which highlight areas of missing data and potential outliers in the data:- Health and wellbeing statistics (GP-level, England): Missing data and potential outliersDOWNLOADING THIS DATATo access this data on your desktop GIS, download the ‘Levels of obesity, inactivity and associated illnesses: Summary (England)’ dataset.DATA SOURCESThis dataset was produced using:Quality and Outcomes Framework data: Copyright © 2020, Health and Social Care Information Centre. The Health and Social Care Information Centre is a non-departmental body created by statute, also known as NHS Digital.GP Catchment Outlines. Copyright © 2020, Health and Social Care Information Centre. The Health and Social Care Information Centre is a non-departmental body created by statute, also known as NHS Digital. Data was cleaned by Ribble Rivers Trust before use.COPYRIGHT NOTICEThe reproduction of this data must be accompanied by the following statement:© Ribble Rivers Trust 2021. Analysis carried out using data that is: Copyright © 2020, Health and Social Care Information Centre. The Health and Social Care Information Centre is a non-departmental body created by statute, also known as NHS Digital.CaBA HEALTH & WELLBEING EVIDENCE BASEThis dataset forms part of the wider CaBA Health and Wellbeing Evidence Base.

Dataset with the data of the manuscript "Consistency of pacing profile according to performance level in three different editions of the Chicago, London, and Tokyo marathons" published in Scientific Reports (DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-14868-6). The dataset is after pre-processing data (removing outliers, calculate the variables of analysis, etc.).

This dataset contains a list of outlier sample concentrations identified for 17 water quality constituents from streamwater sample collected at 15 study watersheds in Gwinnett County, Georgia for water years 2003 to 2020. The 17 water quality constituents are: biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), chemical oxygen demand (COD), total suspended solids (TSS), suspended sediment concentration (SSC), total nitrogen (TN), total nitrate plus nitrite (NO3NO2), total ammonia plus organic nitrogen (TKN), dissolved ammonia (NH3), total phosphorus (TP), dissolved phosphorus (DP), total organic carbon (TOC), total calcium (Ca), total magnesium (Mg), total copper (TCu), total lead (TPb), total zinc (TZn), and total dissolved solids (TDS). 885 outlier concentrations were identified. Outliers were excluded from model calibration datasets used to estimate streamwater constituent loads for 12 of these constituents. Outlier concentrations were removed because they had a high influence on the model fits of the concentration relations, which could substantially affect model predictions. Identified outliers were also excluded from loads that were calculated using the Beale ratio estimator. Notes on reason(s) for considering a concentration as an outlier are included.

Dataset and codes for "Observation of Acceleration and Deceleration Periods at Pine Island Ice Shelf from 1997–2023 "

• Description of the data and file structure

The MATLAB codes and related datasets are used for generating the figures for the paper "Observation of Acceleration and Deceleration Periods at Pine Island Ice Shelf from 1997–2023".

Files and variables

File 1: Data_and_Code.zip

Directory: Main_function

**Description:****Include MATLAB scripts and functions. Each script include discriptions that guide the user how to used it and how to find the dataset that used for processing.

MATLAB Main Scripts: Include the whole steps to process the data, output figures, and output videos.

Script_1_Ice_velocity_process_flow.m

Script_2_strain_rate_process_flow.m

Script_3_DROT_grounding_line_extraction.m

Script_4_Read_ICESat2_h5_files.m

Script_5_Extraction_results.m

MATLAB functions: Five Files that includes MATLAB functions that support the main script:

1_Ice_velocity_code: Include MATLAB functions related to ice velocity post-processing, includes remove outliers, filter, correct for atmospheric and tidal effect, inverse weited averaged, and error estimate.

2_strain_rate: Include MATLAB functions related to strain rate calculation.

3_DROT_extract_grounding_line_code: Include MATLAB functions related to convert range offset results output from GAMMA to differential vertical displacement and used the result extract grounding line.

4_Extract_data_from_2D_result: Include MATLAB functions that used for extract profiles from 2D data.

5_NeRD_Damage_detection: Modified code fom Izeboud et al. 2023. When apply this code please also cite Izeboud et al. 2023 (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0034425722004655).

6_Figure_plotting_code:Include MATLAB functions related to Figures in the paper and support information.

Director: data_and_result

Description:**Include directories that store the results output from MATLAB. user only neeed to modify the path in MATLAB script to their own path.

1_origin : Sample data ("PS-20180323-20180329", “PS-20180329-20180404”, “PS-20180404-20180410”) output from GAMMA software in Geotiff format that can be used to calculate DROT and velocity. Includes displacment, theta, phi, and ccp.

2_maskccpN: Remove outliers by ccp < 0.05 and change displacement to velocity (m/day).

3_rockpoint: Extract velocities at non-moving region

4_constant_detrend: removed orbit error

5_Tidal_correction: remove atmospheric and tidal induced error

6_rockpoint: Extract non-aggregated velocities at non-moving region

6_vx_vy_v: trasform velocities from va/vr to vx/vy

7_rockpoint: Extract aggregated velocities at non-moving region

7_vx_vy_v_aggregate_and_error_estimate: inverse weighted average of three ice velocity maps and calculate the error maps

8_strain_rate: calculated strain rate from aggregate ice velocity

9_compare: store the results before and after tidal correction and aggregation.

10_Block_result: times series results that extrac from 2D data.

11_MALAB_output_png_result: Store .png files and time serties result

12_DROT: Differential Range Offset Tracking results

13_ICESat_2: ICESat_2 .h5 files and .mat files can put here (in this file only include the samples from tracks 0965 and 1094)

14_MODIS_images: you can store MODIS images here

shp: grounding line, rock region, ice front, and other shape files.

File 2 : PIG_front_1947_2023.zip

Includes Ice front positions shape files from 1947 to 2023, which used for plotting figure.1 in the paper.

File 3 : PIG_DROT_GL_2016_2021.zip

Includes grounding line positions shape files from 1947 to 2023, which used for plotting figure.1 in the paper.

Data was derived from the following sources:
Those links can be found in MATLAB scripts or in the paper "**Open Research" **section.

SUMMARYThis analysis, designed and executed by Ribble Rivers Trust, identifies areas across England with the greatest levels of cancer (in persons of all ages). Please read the below information to gain a full understanding of what the data shows and how it should be interpreted.ANALYSIS METHODOLOGYThe analysis was carried out using Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) data, derived from NHS Digital, relating to cancer (in persons of all ages).This information was recorded at the GP practice level. However, GP catchment areas are not mutually exclusive: they overlap, with some areas covered by 30+ GP practices. Therefore, to increase the clarity and usability of the data, the GP-level statistics were converted into statistics based on Middle Layer Super Output Area (MSOA) census boundaries.The percentage of each MSOA’s population (all ages) with cancer was estimated. This was achieved by calculating a weighted average based on:The percentage of the MSOA area that was covered by each GP practice’s catchment areaOf the GPs that covered part of that MSOA: the percentage of registered patients that have that illness The estimated percentage of each MSOA’s population with cancer was then combined with Office for National Statistics Mid-Year Population Estimates (2019) data for MSOAs, to estimate the number of people in each MSOA with cancer, within the relevant age range.Each MSOA was assigned a relative score between 1 and 0 (1 = worst, 0 = best) based on:A) the PERCENTAGE of the population within that MSOA who are estimated to have cancerB) the NUMBER of people within that MSOA who are estimated to have cancerAn average of scores A & B was taken, and converted to a relative score between 1 and 0 (1= worst, 0 = best). The closer to 1 the score, the greater both the number and percentage of the population in the MSOA that are estimated to have cancer, compared to other MSOAs. In other words, those are areas where it’s estimated a large number of people suffer from cancer, and where those people make up a large percentage of the population, indicating there is a real issue with cancer within the population and the investment of resources to address that issue could have the greatest benefits.LIMITATIONS1. GP data for the financial year 1st April 2018 – 31st March 2019 was used in preference to data for the financial year 1st April 2019 – 31st March 2020, as the onset of the COVID19 pandemic during the latter year could have affected the reporting of medical statistics by GPs. However, for 53 GPs (out of 7670) that did not submit data in 2018/19, data from 2019/20 was used instead. Note also that some GPs (997 out of 7670) did not submit data in either year. This dataset should be viewed in conjunction with the ‘Health and wellbeing statistics (GP-level, England): Missing data and potential outliers’ dataset, to determine areas where data from 2019/20 was used, where one or more GPs did not submit data in either year, or where there were large discrepancies between the 2018/19 and 2019/20 data (differences in statistics that were > mean +/- 1 St.Dev.), which suggests erroneous data in one of those years (it was not feasible for this study to investigate this further), and thus where data should be interpreted with caution. Note also that there are some rural areas (with little or no population) that do not officially fall into any GP catchment area (although this will not affect the results of this analysis if there are no people living in those areas).2. Although all of the obesity/inactivity-related illnesses listed can be caused or exacerbated by inactivity and obesity, it was not possible to distinguish from the data the cause of the illnesses in patients: obesity and inactivity are highly unlikely to be the cause of all cases of each illness. By combining the data with data relating to levels of obesity and inactivity in adults and children (see the ‘Levels of obesity, inactivity and associated illnesses: Summary (England)’ dataset), we can identify where obesity/inactivity could be a contributing factor, and where interventions to reduce obesity and increase activity could be most beneficial for the health of the local population.3. It was not feasible to incorporate ultra-fine-scale geographic distribution of populations that are registered with each GP practice or who live within each MSOA. Populations might be concentrated in certain areas of a GP practice’s catchment area or MSOA and relatively sparse in other areas. Therefore, the dataset should be used to identify general areas where there are high levels of cancer, rather than interpreting the boundaries between areas as ‘hard’ boundaries that mark definite divisions between areas with differing levels of cancer.TO BE VIEWED IN COMBINATION WITH:This dataset should be viewed alongside the following datasets, which highlight areas of missing data and potential outliers in the data:Health and wellbeing statistics (GP-level, England): Missing data and potential outliersLevels of obesity, inactivity and associated illnesses (England): Missing dataDOWNLOADING THIS DATATo access this data on your desktop GIS, download the ‘Levels of obesity, inactivity and associated illnesses: Summary (England)’ dataset.DATA SOURCESThis dataset was produced using:Quality and Outcomes Framework data: Copyright © 2020, Health and Social Care Information Centre. The Health and Social Care Information Centre is a non-departmental body created by statute, also known as NHS Digital.GP Catchment Outlines. Copyright © 2020, Health and Social Care Information Centre. The Health and Social Care Information Centre is a non-departmental body created by statute, also known as NHS Digital. Data was cleaned by Ribble Rivers Trust before use.MSOA boundaries: © Office for National Statistics licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Contains OS data © Crown copyright and database right 2021.Population data: Mid-2019 (June 30) Population Estimates for Middle Layer Super Output Areas in England and Wales. © Office for National Statistics licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. © Crown Copyright 2020.COPYRIGHT NOTICEThe reproduction of this data must be accompanied by the following statement:© Ribble Rivers Trust 2021. Analysis carried out using data that is: Copyright © 2020, Health and Social Care Information Centre. The Health and Social Care Information Centre is a non-departmental body created by statute, also known as NHS Digital; © Office for National Statistics licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Contains OS data © Crown copyright and database right 2021. © Crown Copyright 2020.CaBA HEALTH & WELLBEING EVIDENCE BASEThis dataset forms part of the wider CaBA Health and Wellbeing Evidence Base.

Machine Learning pipeline used to provide toxicity prediction in FunTox-Networks

01_DATA # preprocessing and filtering of raw activity data from ChEMBL
- Chembl_v25 # latest activity assay data set from ChEMBL (retrieved Nov 2019)
- filt_stats.R # Filtering and preparation of raw data
- Filtered # output data sets from filt_stats.R
- toxicity_direction.csv # table of toxicity measurements and their proportionality to toxicity

02_MolDesc # Calculation of molecular descriptors for all compounds within the filtered ChEMBL data set
- datastore # files with all compounds and their calculated molecular descriptors based on SMILES
- scripts
- calc_molDesc.py # calculates for all compounds based on their smiles the molecular descriptors
- chemopy-1.1 # used python package for descriptor calculation as decsribed in: https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btt105

03_Averages # Calculation of moving averages for levels and organisms as required for calculation of Z-scores
- datastore # output files with statistics calculated by make_Z.R
- scripts
-make_Z.R # script to calculate statistics to calculate Z-scores as used by the regression models

04_ZScores # Calculation of Z-scores and preparation of table to fit regression models
- datastore # Z-normalized activity data and molecular descriptors in the form as used for fitting regression models
- scripts
-calc_Ztable.py # based on activity data, molecular descriptors and Z-statistics, the learning data is calculated

05_Regression # Performing regression. Preparation of data by removing of outliers based on a linear regression model. Learning of random forest regression models. Validation of learning process by cross validation and tuning of hyperparameters.

- datastore # storage of all random forest regression models and average level of Z output value per level and organism (zexp_*.tsv)
- scripts
- data_preperation.R # set up of regression data set, removal of outliers and optional removal of fields and descriptors
- Rforest_CV.R # analysis of machine learning by cross validation, importance of regression variables and tuning of hyperparameters (number of trees, split of variables)
- Rforest.R # based on analysis of Rforest_CV.R learning of final models

rregrs_output
# early analysis of regression model performance with the package RRegrs as described in: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13321-015-0094-2

OSU_SnowCourse Summary: Manual snow course observations were collected over WY 2012-2014 from four paired forest-open sites chosen to span a broad elevation range. Study sites were located in the upper McKenzie (McK) River watershed, approximately 100 km east of Corvallis, Oregon, on the western slope of the Cascade Range and in the Middle Fork Willamette (MFW) watershed, located to the south of the McKenzie. The sites were designated based on elevation, with a range of 1110-1480 m. Distributed snow depth and snow water equivalent (SWE) observations were collected via monthly manual snow courses from 1 November through 1 April and bi-weekly thereafter. Snow courses spanned 500 m of forested terrain and 500 m of adjacent open terrain. Snow depth observations were collected approximately every 10 m and SWE was measured every 100 m along the snow courses with a federal snow sampler. These data are raw observations and have not been quality controlled in any way. Distance along the transect was estimated in the field. OSU_SnowDepth Summary: 10-minute snow depth observations collected at OSU met stations in the upper McKenzie River Watershed and the Middle Fork Willamette Watershed during Water Years 2012-2014. Each meterological tower was deployed to represent either a forested or an open area at a particular site, and generally the locations were paired, with a meterological station deployed in the forest and in the open area at a single site. These data were collected in conjunction with manual snow course observations, and the meterological stations were located in the approximate center of each forest or open snow course transect. These data have undergone basic quality control. See manufacturer specifications for individual instruments to determine sensor accuracy. This file was compiled from individual raw data files (named "RawData.txt" within each site and year directory) provided by OSU, along with metadata of site attributes. We converted the Excel-based timestamp (seconds since origin) to a date, changed the NaN flags for missing data to NA, and added site attributes such as site name and cover. We replaced positive values with NA, since snow depth values in raw data are negative (i.e., flipped, with some correction to use the height of the sensor as zero). Thus, positive snow depth values in the raw data equal negative snow depth values. Second, the sign of the data was switched to make them positive. Then, the smooth.m (MATLAB) function was used to roughly smooth the data, with a moving window of 50 points. Third, outliers were removed. All values higher than the smoothed values +10, were replaced with NA. In some cases, further single point outliers were removed. OSU_Met Summary: Raw, 10-minute meteorological observations collected at OSU met stations in the upper McKenzie River Watershed and the Middle Fork Willamette Watershed during Water Years 2012-2014. Each meterological tower was deployed to represent either a forested or an open area at a particular site, and generally the locations were paired, with a meterological station deployed in the forest and in the open area at a single site. These data were collected in conjunction with manual snow course observations, and the meteorological stations were located in the approximate center of each forest or open snow course transect. These stations were deployed to collect numerous meteorological variables, of which snow depth and wind speed are included here. These data are raw datalogger output and have not been quality controlled in any way. See manufacturer specifications for individual instruments to determine sensor accuracy. This file was compiled from individual raw data files (named "RawData.txt" within each site and year directory) provided by OSU, along with metadata of site attributes. We converted the Excel-based timestamp (seconds since origin) to a date, changed the NaN and 7999 flags for missing data to NA, and added site attributes such as site name and cover. OSU_Location Summary: Location Metadata for manual snow course observations and meteorological sensors. These data are compiled from GPS data for which the horizontal accuracy is unknown, and from processed hemispherical photographs. They have not been quality controlled in any way.

R code used for each data set to perform negative binomial regression, calculate overdispersion statistic, generate summary statistics, remove outliers

Linear Performance Pricing (LPP) Pipe Pricing Dataset

This synthetic dataset simulates supplier quotes for iron pipes of varying lengths. It is designed to demonstrate Linear Performance Pricing (LPP), a procurement analytics technique used to identify cost-saving opportunities by correlating product prices with performance parameters (e.g., pipe length). The dataset includes: - Real-world variations: Noise, outliers, and multiple suppliers. - Target prices: Calculated using market trends (target_price_market) and best-practice benchmarks (target_price_benchmark).

Inspired by the example from "Data-Driven Spend Management" (Chapter 3).

Suggested Analysis Tasks

1. Regression Analysis: Replicate the market line (P^M = 1.465 + 1.076L) using linear regression.
2. Outlier Detection: Identify overpriced quotes using Z-scores or IQR.
3. Savings Calculation: Compute total savings if prices are negotiated down to the benchmark.
4. Supplier Comparison: Analyze pricing strategies of S1 vs S2 vs S3 vs S4.
5. Visualization: Plot price vs. length with market/benchmark lines.

Support This Dataset 🚀

Help this dataset reach more learners and practitioners in procurement analytics! If you find this dataset useful, consider:

**Upvoting** this dataset on Kaggle – it boosts visibility and helps others discover it.

Your support keeps datasets like this free and open-source for the community! 🌟

SUMMARYThis analysis, designed and executed by Ribble Rivers Trust, identifies areas across England with the greatest levels of asthma (in persons of all ages). Please read the below information to gain a full understanding of what the data shows and how it should be interpreted.ANALYSIS METHODOLOGYThe analysis was carried out using Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) data, derived from NHS Digital, relating to asthma (in persons of all ages).This information was recorded at the GP practice level. However, GP catchment areas are not mutually exclusive: they overlap, with some areas covered by 30+ GP practices. Therefore, to increase the clarity and usability of the data, the GP-level statistics were converted into statistics based on Middle Layer Super Output Area (MSOA) census boundaries.The percentage of each MSOA’s population (all ages) with asthma was estimated. This was achieved by calculating a weighted average based on:The percentage of the MSOA area that was covered by each GP practice’s catchment areaOf the GPs that covered part of that MSOA: the percentage of registered patients that have that illness The estimated percentage of each MSOA’s population with asthma was then combined with Office for National Statistics Mid-Year Population Estimates (2019) data for MSOAs, to estimate the number of people in each MSOA with asthma, within the relevant age range.Each MSOA was assigned a relative score between 1 and 0 (1 = worst, 0 = best) based on:A) the PERCENTAGE of the population within that MSOA who are estimated to have asthmaB) the NUMBER of people within that MSOA who are estimated to have asthmaAn average of scores A & B was taken, and converted to a relative score between 1 and 0 (1= worst, 0 = best). The closer to 1 the score, the greater both the number and percentage of the population in the MSOA that are estimated to have asthma, compared to other MSOAs. In other words, those are areas where it’s estimated a large number of people suffer from asthma, and where those people make up a large percentage of the population, indicating there is a real issue with asthma within the population and the investment of resources to address that issue could have the greatest benefits.LIMITATIONS1. GP data for the financial year 1st April 2018 – 31st March 2019 was used in preference to data for the financial year 1st April 2019 – 31st March 2020, as the onset of the COVID19 pandemic during the latter year could have affected the reporting of medical statistics by GPs. However, for 53 GPs (out of 7670) that did not submit data in 2018/19, data from 2019/20 was used instead. Note also that some GPs (997 out of 7670) did not submit data in either year. This dataset should be viewed in conjunction with the ‘Health and wellbeing statistics (GP-level, England): Missing data and potential outliers’ dataset, to determine areas where data from 2019/20 was used, where one or more GPs did not submit data in either year, or where there were large discrepancies between the 2018/19 and 2019/20 data (differences in statistics that were > mean +/- 1 St.Dev.), which suggests erroneous data in one of those years (it was not feasible for this study to investigate this further), and thus where data should be interpreted with caution. Note also that there are some rural areas (with little or no population) that do not officially fall into any GP catchment area (although this will not affect the results of this analysis if there are no people living in those areas).2. Although all of the obesity/inactivity-related illnesses listed can be caused or exacerbated by inactivity and obesity, it was not possible to distinguish from the data the cause of the illnesses in patients: obesity and inactivity are highly unlikely to be the cause of all cases of each illness. By combining the data with data relating to levels of obesity and inactivity in adults and children (see the ‘Levels of obesity, inactivity and associated illnesses: Summary (England)’ dataset), we can identify where obesity/inactivity could be a contributing factor, and where interventions to reduce obesity and increase activity could be most beneficial for the health of the local population.3. It was not feasible to incorporate ultra-fine-scale geographic distribution of populations that are registered with each GP practice or who live within each MSOA. Populations might be concentrated in certain areas of a GP practice’s catchment area or MSOA and relatively sparse in other areas. Therefore, the dataset should be used to identify general areas where there are high levels of asthma, rather than interpreting the boundaries between areas as ‘hard’ boundaries that mark definite divisions between areas with differing levels of asthma.TO BE VIEWED IN COMBINATION WITH:This dataset should be viewed alongside the following datasets, which highlight areas of missing data and potential outliers in the data:Health and wellbeing statistics (GP-level, England): Missing data and potential outliersLevels of obesity, inactivity and associated illnesses (England): Missing dataDOWNLOADING THIS DATATo access this data on your desktop GIS, download the ‘Levels of obesity, inactivity and associated illnesses: Summary (England)’ dataset.DATA SOURCESThis dataset was produced using:Quality and Outcomes Framework data: Copyright © 2020, Health and Social Care Information Centre. The Health and Social Care Information Centre is a non-departmental body created by statute, also known as NHS Digital.GP Catchment Outlines. Copyright © 2020, Health and Social Care Information Centre. The Health and Social Care Information Centre is a non-departmental body created by statute, also known as NHS Digital. Data was cleaned by Ribble Rivers Trust before use.COPYRIGHT NOTICEThe reproduction of this data must be accompanied by the following statement:© Ribble Rivers Trust 2021. Analysis carried out using data that is: Copyright © 2020, Health and Social Care Information Centre. The Health and Social Care Information Centre is a non-departmental body created by statute, also known as NHS Digital.CaBA HEALTH & WELLBEING EVIDENCE BASEThis dataset forms part of the wider CaBA Health and Wellbeing Evidence Base.

Gene expression data have been presented as non-normalized (2-Ct*109) in all but the last six rows; this allows for the back-calculation of the raw threshold cycle (Ct) values so that interested individuals can readily estimate the typical range of expression of each gene. Values representing aberrant levels for a particular parameter (z-score>2.5) have been highlighted in bold. When there was a statistically significant difference (student’s t-test, p0.05). SA = surface area. GCP = genome copy proportion. Ma Dis = Mahalanobis distance. “.” = missing data.

SUMMARYThis analysis, designed and executed by Ribble Rivers Trust, identifies areas across England with the greatest levels of depression in adults (aged 18+). Please read the below information to gain a full understanding of what the data shows and how it should be interpreted.ANALYSIS METHODOLOGYThe analysis was carried out using Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) data, derived from NHS Digital, relating to depression in adults (aged 18+).This information was recorded at the GP practice level. However, GP catchment areas are not mutually exclusive: they overlap, with some areas covered by 30+ GP practices. Therefore, to increase the clarity and usability of the data, the GP-level statistics were converted into statistics based on Middle Layer Super Output Area (MSOA) census boundaries.The percentage of each MSOA’s population (aged 18+) with depression was estimated. This was achieved by calculating a weighted average based on:The percentage of the MSOA area that was covered by each GP practice’s catchment areaOf the GPs that covered part of that MSOA: the percentage of registered patients that have that illness The estimated percentage of each MSOA’s population with depression was then combined with Office for National Statistics Mid-Year Population Estimates (2019) data for MSOAs, to estimate the number of people in each MSOA with depression, within the relevant age range.Each MSOA was assigned a relative score between 1 and 0 (1 = worst, 0 = best) based on:A) the PERCENTAGE of the population within that MSOA who are estimated to have depressionB) the NUMBER of people within that MSOA who are estimated to have depressionAn average of scores A & B was taken, and converted to a relative score between 1 and 0 (1= worst, 0 = best). The closer to 1 the score, the greater both the number and percentage of the population in the MSOA that are estimated to have depression, compared to other MSOAs. In other words, those are areas where it’s estimated a large number of people suffer from depression, and where those people make up a large percentage of the population, indicating there is a real issue with depression within the population and the investment of resources to address that issue could have the greatest benefits.LIMITATIONS1. GP data for the financial year 1st April 2018 – 31st March 2019 was used in preference to data for the financial year 1st April 2019 – 31st March 2020, as the onset of the COVID19 pandemic during the latter year could have affected the reporting of medical statistics by GPs. However, for 53 GPs (out of 7670) that did not submit data in 2018/19, data from 2019/20 was used instead. Note also that some GPs (997 out of 7670) did not submit data in either year. This dataset should be viewed in conjunction with the ‘Health and wellbeing statistics (GP-level, England): Missing data and potential outliers’ dataset, to determine areas where data from 2019/20 was used, where one or more GPs did not submit data in either year, or where there were large discrepancies between the 2018/19 and 2019/20 data (differences in statistics that were > mean +/- 1 St.Dev.), which suggests erroneous data in one of those years (it was not feasible for this study to investigate this further), and thus where data should be interpreted with caution. Note also that there are some rural areas (with little or no population) that do not officially fall into any GP catchment area (although this will not affect the results of this analysis if there are no people living in those areas).2. Although all of the obesity/inactivity-related illnesses listed can be caused or exacerbated by inactivity and obesity, it was not possible to distinguish from the data the cause of the illnesses in patients: obesity and inactivity are highly unlikely to be the cause of all cases of each illness. By combining the data with data relating to levels of obesity and inactivity in adults and children (see the ‘Levels of obesity, inactivity and associated illnesses: Summary (England)’ dataset), we can identify where obesity/inactivity could be a contributing factor, and where interventions to reduce obesity and increase activity could be most beneficial for the health of the local population.3. It was not feasible to incorporate ultra-fine-scale geographic distribution of populations that are registered with each GP practice or who live within each MSOA. Populations might be concentrated in certain areas of a GP practice’s catchment area or MSOA and relatively sparse in other areas. Therefore, the dataset should be used to identify general areas where there are high levels of depression, rather than interpreting the boundaries between areas as ‘hard’ boundaries that mark definite divisions between areas with differing levels of depression.TO BE VIEWED IN COMBINATION WITH:This dataset should be viewed alongside the following datasets, which highlight areas of missing data and potential outliers in the data:Health and wellbeing statistics (GP-level, England): Missing data and potential outliersLevels of obesity, inactivity and associated illnesses (England): Missing dataDOWNLOADING THIS DATATo access this data on your desktop GIS, download the ‘Levels of obesity, inactivity and associated illnesses: Summary (England)’ dataset.DATA SOURCESThis dataset was produced using:Quality and Outcomes Framework data: Copyright © 2020, Health and Social Care Information Centre. The Health and Social Care Information Centre is a non-departmental body created by statute, also known as NHS Digital.GP Catchment Outlines. Copyright © 2020, Health and Social Care Information Centre. The Health and Social Care Information Centre is a non-departmental body created by statute, also known as NHS Digital. Data was cleaned by Ribble Rivers Trust before use.COPYRIGHT NOTICEThe reproduction of this data must be accompanied by the following statement:© Ribble Rivers Trust 2021. Analysis carried out using data that is: Copyright © 2020, Health and Social Care Information Centre. The Health and Social Care Information Centre is a non-departmental body created by statute, also known as NHS Digital.CaBA HEALTH & WELLBEING EVIDENCE BASEThis dataset forms part of the wider CaBA Health and Wellbeing Evidence Base.

Note: All supplementary files are provided as a single compressed archive named dataset.zip. Users should extract this file to access the individual Excel and Python files listed below.

This supplementary dataset supports the manuscript titled “Mahalanobis-Based Multivariate Financial Statement Analysis: Outlier Detection and Typological Clustering in U.S. Tech Firms.” It contains both data files and Python scripts used in the financial ratio analysis, Mahalanobis distance computation, and hierarchical clustering stages of the study. The files are organized as follows:

• ESM_1.xlsx – Raw financial ratios of 18 U.S. technology firms (2020–2024)

• ESM_2.py – Python script to calculate Z-scores from raw financial ratios

• ESM_3.xlsx – Dataset containing Z-scores for the selected financial ratios

• ESM_4.py – Python script for generating the correlation heatmap of the Z-scores

• ESM_5.xlsx – Mahalanobis distance values for each firm

• ESM_6.py – Python script to compute Mahalanobis distances

• ESM_7.py – Python script to visualize Mahalanobis distances

• ESM_8.xlsx – Mean Z-scores per firm (used for cluster analysis)

• ESM_9.py – Python script to compute mean Z-scores

• ESM_10.xlsx – Re-standardized Z-scores based on firm-level means

• ESM_11.py – Python script to re-standardize mean Z-scores

• ESM_12.py – Python script to generate the hierarchical clustering dendrogram

All files are provided to ensure transparency and reproducibility of the computational procedures in the manuscript. Each script is commented and formatted for clarity. The dataset is intended for educational and academic reuse under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).

This dataset provides monthly summaries of evapotranspiration (ET) data from OpenET v2.0 image collections for the period 2008-2023 for all National Watershed Boundary Dataset subwatersheds (12-digit hydrologic unit codes [HUC12s]) in the US that overlap the spatial extent of OpenET datasets. For each HUC12, this dataset contains spatial aggregation statistics (minimum, mean, median, and maximum) for each of the ET variables from each of the publicly available image collections from OpenET for the six available models (DisALEXI, eeMETRIC, geeSEBAL, PT-JPL, SIMS, SSEBop) and the Ensemble image collection, which is a pixel-wise ensemble of all 6 individual models after filtering and removal of outliers according to the median absolute deviation approach (Melton and others, 2022). Data are available in this data release in two different formats: comma-separated values (CSV) and parquet, a high-performance format that is optimized for storage and processing of columnar data. CSV files containing data for each 4-digit HUC are grouped by 2-digit HUCs for easier access of regional data, and the single parquet file provides convenient access to the entire dataset. For each of the ET models (DisALEXI, eeMETRIC, geeSEBAL, PT-JPL, SIMS, SSEBop), variables in the model-specific CSV data files include: -huc12: The 12-digit hydrologic unit code -ET: Actual evapotranspiration (in millimeters) over the HUC12 area in the month calculated as the sum of daily ET interpolated between Landsat overpasses -statistic: Max, mean, median, or min. Statistic used in the spatial aggregation within each HUC12. For example, maximum ET is the maximum monthly pixel ET value occurring within the HUC12 boundary after summing daily ET in the month -year: 4-digit year -month: 2-digit month -count: Number of Landsat overpasses included in the ET calculation in the month -et_coverage_pct: Integer percentage of the HUC12 with ET data, which can be used to determine how representative the ET statistic is of the entire HUC12 -count_coverage_pct: Integer percentage of the HUC12 with count data, which can be different than the et_coverage_pct value because the “count” band in the source image collection extends beyond the “et” band in the eastern portion of the image collection extent For the Ensemble data, these additional variables are included in the CSV files: -et_mad: Ensemble ET value, computed as the mean of the ensemble after filtering outliers using the median absolute deviation (MAD) -et_mad_count: The number of models used to compute the ensemble ET value after filtering for outliers using the MAD -et_mad_max: The maximum value in the ensemble range, after filtering for outliers using the MAD -et_mad_min: The minimum value in the ensemble range, after filtering for outliers using the MAD -et_sam: A simple arithmetic mean (across the 6 models) of actual ET average without outlier removal Below are the locations of each OpenET image collection used in this summary: DisALEXI: https://developers.google.com/earth-engine/datasets/catalog/OpenET_DISALEXI_CONUS_GRIDMET_MONTHLY_v2_0 eeMETRIC: https://developers.google.com/earth-engine/datasets/catalog/OpenET_EEMETRIC_CONUS_GRIDMET_MONTHLY_v2_0 geeSEBAL: https://developers.google.com/earth-engine/datasets/catalog/OpenET_GEESEBAL_CONUS_GRIDMET_MONTHLY_v2_0 PT-JPL: https://developers.google.com/earth-engine/datasets/catalog/OpenET_PTJPL_CONUS_GRIDMET_MONTHLY_v2_0 SIMS: https://developers.google.com/earth-engine/datasets/catalog/OpenET_SIMS_CONUS_GRIDMET_MONTHLY_v2_0 SSEBop: https://developers.google.com/earth-engine/datasets/catalog/OpenET_SSEBOP_CONUS_GRIDMET_MONTHLY_v2_0 Ensemble: https://developers.google.com/earth-engine/datasets/catalog/OpenET_ENSEMBLE_CONUS_GRIDMET_MONTHLY_v2_0

Meteorologic data were collected more or less continuously (excepting sensor failures) between 1987 and 1993 using two remotely operated Sierra Misco Alert weather stations. One weather station was located at Dillon Beach towards the northern end of Tomales Bay, while the other station was placed on Tomasini Point near the southern end of the bay. Data were collected every fifteen minutes for WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION (m/s), RELATIVE HUMIDITY (%), AIR TEMPERATURE (degrees C), and SOLAR RADIATION (Watts / m2). The raw data were then averaged over each day. The fraction of the day from which data were recovered as well as the number of records used to calculate the daily average were also included in the online data sets to aid in determining outliers.