Sea surface temperature (SST) plays an important role in a number of ecological processes and can vary over a wide range of time scales, from daily to decadal changes. SST influences primary production, species migration patterns, and coral health. If temperatures are anomalously warm for extended periods of time, drastic changes in the surrounding ecosystem can result, including harmful effects such as coral bleaching. This layer represents the standard deviation of SST (degrees Celsius) of the weekly time series from 2000-2013. Three SST datasets were combined to provide continuous coverage from 1985-2013. The concatenation applies bias adjustment derived from linear regression to the overlap periods of datasets, with the final representation matching the 0.05-degree (~5-km) near real-time SST product. First, a weekly composite, gap-filled SST dataset from the NOAA Pathfinder v5.2 SST 1/24-degree (~4-km), daily dataset (a NOAA Climate Data Record) for each location was produced following Heron et al. (2010) for January 1985 to December 2012. Next, weekly composite SST data from the NOAA/NESDIS/STAR Blended SST 0.1-degree (~11-km), daily dataset was produced for February 2009 to October 2013. Finally, a weekly composite SST dataset from the NOAA/NESDIS/STAR Blended SST 0.05-degree (~5-km), daily dataset was produced for March 2012 to December 2013. The standard deviation of the long-term mean SST was calculated by taking the standard deviation over all weekly data from 2000-2013 for each pixel.

What you get:

Upvote! The database contains +40,000 records on US Gross Rent & Geo Locations. The field description of the database is documented in the attached pdf file. To access, all 325,272 records on a scale roughly equivalent to a neighborhood (census tract) see link below and make sure to upvote. Upvote right now, please. Enjoy!

Get the full free database with coupon code: FreeDatabase, See directions at the bottom of the description... And make sure to upvote :) coupon ends at 2:00 pm 8-23-2017

Gross Rent & Geographic Statistics:

• Mean Gross Rent (double)
• Median Gross Rent (double)
• Standard Deviation of Gross Rent (double)
• Number of Samples (double)
• Square area of land at location (double)
• Square area of water at location (double)

Geographic Location:

• Longitude (double)
• Latitude (double)
• State Name (character)
• State abbreviated (character)
• State_Code (character)
• County Name (character)
• City Name (character)
• Name of city, town, village or CPD (character)
• Primary, Defines if the location is a track and block group.
• Zip Code (character)
• Area Code (character)

Abstract

The data set originally developed for real estate and business investment research. Income is a vital element when determining both quality and socioeconomic features of a given geographic location. The following data was derived from over +36,000 files and covers 348,893 location records.

License

Only proper citing is required please see the documentation for details. Have Fun!!!

Golden Oak Research Group, LLC. “U.S. Income Database Kaggle”. Publication: 5, August 2017. Accessed, day, month year.

For any questions, you may reach us at research_development@goldenoakresearch.com. For immediate assistance, you may reach me on at 585-626-2965

please note: it is my personal number and email is preferred

Check our data's accuracy: Census Fact Checker

Access all 325,272 location for Free Database Coupon Code:

Don't settle. Go big and win big. Optimize your potential**. Access all gross rent records and more on a scale roughly equivalent to a neighborhood, see link below:

• Website: Golden Oak Research make sure to upvote

A small startup with big dreams, giving the every day, up and coming data scientist professional grade data at affordable prices It's what we do.

Data for Figure 3.39 from Chapter 3 of the Working Group I (WGI) Contribution to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Sixth Assessment Report (AR6). Figure 3.39 shows the observed and simulated Pacific Decadal Variability (PDV). --------------------------------------------------- How to cite this dataset --------------------------------------------------- When citing this dataset, please include both the data citation below (under 'Citable as') and the following citation for the report component from which the figure originates: Eyring, V., N.P. Gillett, K.M. Achuta Rao, R. Barimalala, M. Barreiro Parrillo, N. Bellouin, C. Cassou, P.J. Durack, Y. Kosaka, S. McGregor, S. Min, O. Morgenstern, and Y. Sun, 2021: Human Influence on the Climate System. In Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S.L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L. Goldfarb, M.I. Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J.B.R. Matthews, T.K. Maycock, T. Waterfield, O. Yelekçi, R. Yu, and B. Zhou (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 423–552, doi:10.1017/9781009157896.005. --------------------------------------------------- Figure subpanels --------------------------------------------------- The figure has six panels. Files are not separated according to the panels. --------------------------------------------------- List of data provided --------------------------------------------------- pdv.obs.nc contains - Observed SST anomalies associated with the PDV pattern - Observed PDV index time series (unfiltered) - Observed PDV index time series (low-pass filtered) - Taylor statistics of the observed PDV patterns - Statistical significance of the observed SST anomalies associated with the PDV pattern pdv.hist.cmip6.nc contains - Simulated SST anomalies associated with the PDV pattern - Simulated PDV index time series (unfiltered) - Simulated PDV index time series (low-pass filtered) - Taylor statistics of the simulated PDV patterns based on CMIP6 historical simulations. pdv.hist.cmip5.nc contains - Simulated SST anomalies associated with the PDV pattern - Simulated PDV index time series (unfiltered) - Simulated PDV index time series (low-pass filtered) - Taylor statistics of the simulated PDV patterns based on CMIP5 historical simulations. pdv.piControl.cmip6.nc contains - Simulated SST anomalies associated with the PDV pattern - Simulated PDV index time series (unfiltered) - Simulated PDV index time series (low-pass filtered) - Taylor statistics of the simulated PDV patterns based on CMIP6 piControl simulations. pdv.piControl.cmip5.nc contains - Simulated SST anomalies associated with the PDV pattern - Simulated PDV index time series (unfiltered) - Simulated PDV index time series (low-pass filtered) - Taylor statistics of the simulated PDV patterns based on CMIP5 piControl simulations. --------------------------------------------------- Data provided in relation to figure --------------------------------------------------- Panel a: - ipo_pattern_obs_ref in pdv.obs.nc: shading - ipo_pattern_obs_signif (dataset = 1) in pdv.obs.nc: cross markers Panel b: - Multimodel ensemble mean of ipo_model_pattern in pdv.hist.cmip6.nc: shading, with their sign agreement for hatching Panel c: - tay_stats (stat = 0, 1) in pdv.obs.nc: black dots - tay_stats (stat = 0, 1) in pdv.hist.cmip6.nc: red crosses, and their multimodel ensemble mean for the red dot - tay_stats (stat = 0, 1) in pdv.hist.cmip5.nc: blue crosses, and their multimodel ensemble mean for the blue dot Panel d: - Lag-1 autocorrelation of tpi in pdv.obs.nc: black horizontal lines in left . ERSSTv5: dataset = 1 . HadISST: dataset = 2 . COBE-SST2: dataset = 3 - Multimodel ensemble mean and percentiles of lag-1 autocorrelation of tpi in pdv.piControl.cmip5.nc: blue open box-whisker in the left - Multimodel ensemble mean and percentiles of lag-1 autocorrelation of tpi in pdv.piControl.cmip6.nc: red open box-whisker in the left - Multimodel ensemble mean and percentiles of lag-1 autocorrelation of tpi in pdv.hist.cmip5.nc: blue filled box-whisker in the left - Multimodel ensemble mean and percentiles of lag-1 autocorrelation of tpi in pdv.hist.cmip6.nc: red filled box-whisker in the left - Lag-10 autocorrelation of tpi_lp in pdv.obs.nc: black horizontal lines in right . ERSSTv5: dataset = 1 . HadISST: dataset = 2 . COBE-SST2: dataset = 3 - Multimodel ensemble mean and percentiles of lag-10 autocorrelation of tpi_lp in pdv.piControl.cmip5.nc: blue open box-whisker in the right - Multimodel ensemble mean and percentiles of lag-10 autocorrelation of tpi_lp in pdv.piControl.cmip6.nc: red open box-whisker in the right - Multimodel ensemble mean and percentiles of lag-10 autocorrelation of tpi_lp in pdv.hist.cmip5.nc: blue filled box-whisker in the right - Multimodel ensemble mean and percentiles of lag-10 autocorrelation of tpi_lp in pdv.hist.cmip6.nc: red filled box-whisker in the right Panel e: - Standard deviation of tpi in pdv.obs.nc: black horizontal lines in left . ERSSTv5: dataset = 1 . HadISST: dataset = 2 . COBE-SST2: dataset = 3 - Multimodel ensemble mean and percentiles of standard deviation of tpi in pdv.piControl.cmip5.nc: blue open box-whisker in the left - Multimodel ensemble mean and percentiles of standard deviation of tpi in pdv.piControl.cmip6.nc: red open box-whisker in the left - Multimodel ensemble mean and percentiles of standard deviation of tpi in pdv.hist.cmip5.nc: blue filled box-whisker in the left - Multimodel ensemble mean and percentiles of standard deviation of tpi in pdv.hist.cmip6.nc: red filled box-whisker in the left - Standard deviation of tpi_lp in pdv.obs.nc: black horizontal lines in right . ERSSTv5: dataset = 1 . HadISST: dataset = 2 . COBE-SST2: dataset = 3 - Multimodel ensemble mean and percentiles of standard deviation of tpi_lp in pdv.piControl.cmip5.nc: blue open box-whisker in the right - Multimodel ensemble mean and percentiles of standard deviation of tpi_lp in pdv.piControl.cmip6.nc: red open box-whisker in the right - Multimodel ensemble mean and percentiles of standard deviation of tpi_lp in pdv.hist.cmip5.nc: blue filled box-whisker in the right - Multimodel ensemble mean and percentiles of standard deviation of tpi_lp in pdv.hist.cmip6.nc: red filled box-whisker in the right Panel f: - tpi_lp in pdv.obs.nc: black curves . ERSSTv5: dataset = 1 . HadISST: dataset = 2 . COBE-SST2: dataset = 3 - tpi_lp in pdv.hist.cmip6.nc: 5th-95th percentiles in red shading, multimodel ensemble mean and its 5-95% confidence interval for red curves - tpi_lp in pdv.hist.cmip5.nc: 5th-95th percentiles in blue shading, multimodel ensemble mean for blue curve CMIP5 is the fifth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project. CMIP6 is the sixth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project. SST stands for Sea Surface Temperature. --------------------------------------------------- Notes on reproducing the figure from the provided data --------------------------------------------------- Multimodel ensemble means and percentiles of historical simulations of CMIP5 and CMIP6 are calculated after weighting individual members with the inverse of the ensemble size of the same model. ensemble_assign in each file provides the model number to which each ensemble member belongs. This weighting does not apply to the sign agreement calculation. piControl simulations from CMIP5 and CMIP6 consist of a single member from each model, so the weighting is not applied. Multimodel ensemble means of the pattern correlation in Taylor statistics in (c) and the autocorrelation of the index in (d) are calculated via Fisher z-transformation and back transformation. --------------------------------------------------- Sources of additional information --------------------------------------------------- The following weblinks are provided in the Related Documents section of this catalogue record: - Link to the report component containing the figure (Chapter 3) - Link to the Supplementary Material for Chapter 3, which contains details on the input data used in Table 3.SM.1 - Link to the code for the figure, archived on Zenodo - Link to the figure on the IPCC AR6 website

In survival analyses, inverse-probability-of-treatment (IPT) and inverse-probability-of-censoring (IPC) weighted estimators of parameters in marginal structural Cox models (Cox MSMs) are often used to estimate treatment effects in the presence of time-dependent confounding and censoring. In most applications, a robust variance estimator of the IPT and IPC weighted estimator is calculated leading to conservative confidence intervals. This estimator assumes that the weights are known rather than estimated from the data. Although a consistent estimator of the asymptotic variance of the IPT and IPC weighted estimator is generally available, applications and thus information on the performance of the consistent estimator are lacking. Reasons might be a cumbersome implementation in statistical software, which is further complicated by missing details on the variance formula. In this paper, we therefore provide a detailed derivation of the variance of the asymptotic distribution of the IPT and IPC weighted estimator and explicitly state the necessary terms to calculate a consistent estimator of this variance. We compare the performance of the robust and the consistent variance estimator in an application based on routine health care data and in a simulation study. The simulation reveals no substantial differences between the two estimators in medium and large data sets with no unmeasured confounding, but the consistent variance estimator performs poorly in small samples or under unmeasured confounding, if the number of confounders is large. We thus conclude that the robust estimator is more appropriate for all practical purposes.

Overview: 142: Areas used for sports, leisure and recreation purposes. Traceability (lineage): This dataset was produced with a machine learning framework with several input datasets, specified in detail in Witjes et al., 2022 (in review, preprint available at https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-561383/v3 ) Scientific methodology: The single-class probability layers were generated with a spatiotemporal ensemble machine learning framework detailed in Witjes et al., 2022 (in review, preprint available at https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-561383/v3 ). The single-class uncertainty layers were calculated by taking the standard deviation of the three single-class probabilities predicted by the three components of the ensemble. The HCL (hard class) layers represents the class with the highest probability as predicted by the ensemble. Usability: The HCL layers have a decreasing average accuracy (weighted F1-score) at each subsequent level in the CLC hierarchy. These metrics are 0.83 at level 1 (5 classes):, 0.63 at level 2 (14 classes), and 0.49 at level 3 (43 classes). This means that the hard-class maps are more reliable when aggregating classes to a higher level in the hierarchy (e.g. 'Discontinuous Urban Fabric' and 'Continuous Urban Fabric' to 'Urban Fabric'). Some single-class probabilities may more closely represent actual patterns for some classes that were overshadowed by unequal sample point distributions. Users are encouraged to set their own thresholds when postprocessing these datasets to optimize the accuracy for their specific use case. Uncertainty quantification: Uncertainty is quantified by taking the standard deviation of the probabilities predicted by the three components of the spatiotemporal ensemble model. Data validation approaches: The LULC classification was validated through spatial 5-fold cross-validation as detailed in the accompanying publication. Completeness: The dataset has chunks of empty predictions in regions with complex coast lines (e.g. the Zeeland province in the Netherlands and the Mar da Palha bay area in Portugal). These are artifacts that will be avoided in subsequent versions of the LULC product. Consistency: The accuracy of the predictions was compared per year and per 30km*30km tile across europe to derive temporal and spatial consistency by calculating the standard deviation. The standard deviation of annual weighted F1-score was 0.135, while the standard deviation of weighted F1-score per tile was 0.150. This means the dataset is more consistent through time than through space: Predictions are notably less accurate along the Mediterrranean coast. The accompanying publication contains additional information and visualisations. Positional accuracy: The raster layers have a resolution of 30m, identical to that of the Landsat data cube used as input features for the machine learning framework that predicted it. Temporal accuracy: The dataset contains predictions and uncertainty layers for each year between 2000 and 2019. Thematic accuracy: The maps reproduce the Corine Land Cover classification system, a hierarchical legend that consists of 5 classes at the highest level, 14 classes at the second level, and 44 classes at the third level. Class 523: Oceans was omitted due to computational constraints.

ABSTRACT In order to search for an ideal test for multiple comparison procedures, this study aimed to develop two tests, similar to the Tukey and SNK tests, based on the distribution of the externally studentized amplitude. The test names are Tukey Midrange (TM) and SNK Midrange (SNKM). The tests were evaluated based on the experimentwise error rate and power, using Monte Carlo simulation. The results showed that the TM test could be an alternative to the Tukey test, since it presented superior performances in some simulated scenarios. On the other hand, the SNKM test performed less than the SNK test.

IMP-8 Weimer propagated solar wind data and linearly interpolated time delay, cosine angle, and goodness information of propagated data at 1 min Resolution. This data set consists of propagated solar wind data that has first been propagated to a position just outside of the nominal bow shock (about 17, 0, 0 Re) and then linearly interpolated to 1 min resolution using the interp1.m function in MATLAB. The input data for this data set is a 1 min resolution processed solar wind data constructed by Dr. J.M. Weygand. The method of propagation is similar to the minimum variance technique and is outlined in Dan Weimer et al. [2003; 2004]. The basic method is to find the minimum variance direction of the magnetic field in the plane orthogonal to the mean magnetic field direction. This minimum variance direction is then dotted with the difference between final position vector minus the original position vector and the quantity is divided by the minimum variance dotted with the solar wind velocity vector, which gives the propagation time. This method does not work well for shocks and minimum variance directions with tilts greater than 70 degrees of the sun-earth line. This data set was originally constructed by Dr. J.M. Weygand for Prof. R.L. McPherron, who was the principle investigator of two National Science Foundation studies: GEM Grant ATM 02-1798 and a Space Weather Grant ATM 02-08501. These data were primarily used in superposed epoch studies References: Weimer, D. R. (2004), Correction to ‘‘Predicting interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) propagation delay times using the minimum variance technique,’’ J. Geophys. Res., 109, A12104, doi:10.1029/2004JA010691. Weimer, D.R., D.M. Ober, N.C. Maynard, M.R. Collier, D.J. McComas, N.F. Ness, C. W. Smith, and J. Watermann (2003), Predicting interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) propagation delay times using the minimum variance technique, J. Geophys. Res., 108, 1026, doi:10.1029/2002JA009405.

In power analysis for multivariable Cox regression models, variance of the estimated log-hazard ratio for the treatment effect is usually approximated by inverting the expected null information matrix. Because in many typical power analysis settings assumed true values of the hazard ratios are not necessarily close to unity, the accuracy of this approximation is not theoretically guaranteed. To address this problem, the null variance expression in power calculations can be replaced with one of alternative expressions derived under the assumed true value of the hazard ratio for the treatment effect. This approach is explored analytically and by simulations in the present paper. We consider several alternative variance expressions, and compare their performance to that of the traditional null variance expression. Theoretical analysis and simulations demonstrate that while the null variance expression performs well in many non-null settings, it can also be very inaccurate, substantially underestimating or overestimating the true variance in a wide range of realistic scenarios, particularly those where the numbers of treated and control subjects are very different and the true hazard ratio is not close to one. The alternative variance expressions have much better theoretical properties, confirmed in simulations. The most accurate of these expressions has a relatively simple form - it is the sum of inverse expected event counts under treatment and under control scaled up by a variance inflation factor.

ISEE-1 Weimer propagated solar wind data and linearly interpolated time delay, cosine angle, and goodness information of propagated data at 1 min Resolution. This data set consists of propagated solar wind data that has first been propagated to a position just outside of the nominal bow shock (about 17, 0, 0 Re) and then linearly interpolated to 1 min resolution using the interp1.m function in MATLAB. The input data for this data set is a 1 min resolution processed solar wind data constructed by Dr. J.M. Weygand. The method of propagation is similar to the minimum variance technique and is outlined in Dan Weimer et al. [2003; 2004]. The basic method is to find the minimum variance direction of the magnetic field in the plane orthogonal to the mean magnetic field direction. This minimum variance direction is then dotted with the difference between final position vector minus the original position vector and the quantity is divided by the minimum variance dotted with the solar wind velocity vector, which gives the propagation time. This method does not work well for shocks and minimum variance directions with tilts greater than 70 degrees of the sun-earth line. This data set was originally constructed by Dr. J.M. Weygand for Prof. R.L. McPherron, who was the principle investigator of two National Science Foundation studies: GEM Grant ATM 02-1798 and a Space Weather Grant ATM 02-08501. These data were primarily used in superposed epoch studies References: Weimer, D. R. (2004), Correction to ‘‘Predicting interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) propagation delay times using the minimum variance technique,’’ J. Geophys. Res., 109, A12104, doi:10.1029/2004JA010691. Weimer, D.R., D.M. Ober, N.C. Maynard, M.R. Collier, D.J. McComas, N.F. Ness, C. W. Smith, and J. Watermann (2003), Predicting interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) propagation delay times using the minimum variance technique, J. Geophys. Res., 108, 1026, doi:10.1029/2002JA009405.

This part of the data release contains a grid of standard deviations of bathymetric soundings within each 0.5 m x 0.5 m grid cell. The bathymetry was collected on February 1, 2011, in the Sacramento River from the confluence of the Feather River to Knights Landing. The standard deviations represent one component of bathymetric uncertainty in the final digital elevation model (DEM), which is also available in this data release. The bathymetry data were collected by the USGS Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center (PCMSC) team with collaboration and funding from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. This project used interferometric sidescan sonar to characterize the riverbed and channel banks along a 12 mile reach of the Sacramento River near the town of Knights Landing, California (River Mile 79 through River Mile 91) to aid in the understanding of fish response to the creation of safe habitat associated with levee restoration efforts in two 1.5 mile reaches of the Sacramento River between River Mile 80 and 86.

We provide the generated dataset used for supervised machine learning in the related article. The data are in tabular format and contain all principal components and ground truth labels per tissue type. Tissue type codes used are; C1 for kidney, C2 for skin, and C3 for colon. 'PC' stands for the principal component. For feature extraction specifications, please see the original design in the related article. Features have been extracted independently for each tissue type.

A noniterative sample size procedure is proposed for a general hypothesis test based on the t distribution by modifying and extending Guenther’s (1981) approach for the one sample and two sample t tests. The generalized procedure is employed to determine the sample size for treatment comparisons using the analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) and the mixed effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) in randomized clinical trials. The sample size is calculated by adding a few simple correction terms to the sample size from the normal approximation to account for the nonnormality of the t statistic and lower order variance terms, which are functions of the covariates in the model. But it does not require specifying the covariate distribution. The noniterative procedure is suitable for superiority tests, noninferiority tests and a special case of the tests for equivalence or bioequivalence, and generally yields the exact or nearly exact sample size estimate after rounding to an integer. The method for calculating the exact power of the two sample t test with unequal variance in superiority trials is extended to equivalence trials. We also derive accurate power formulae for ANCOVA and MMRM, and the formula for ANCOVA is exact for normally distributed covariates. Numerical examples demonstrate the accuracy of the proposed methods particularly in small samples.

View on Map View ArcGIS Service BTM Standard deviation – this mosaic dataset is part of a series of seafloor terrain datasets aimed at providing a consistent baseline to assist users in consistently characterizing Aotearoa New Zealand seafloor habitats. This series has been developed using the tools provided within the Benthic Terrain Model (BTM [v3.0]) across different multibeam echo-sounder datasets. The series includes derived outputs from 50 MBES survey sets conducted between 1999 and 2020 from throughout the New Zealand marine environment (where available) covering an area of approximately 52,000 km2. Consistency and compatibility of the benthic terrain datasets have been achieved by utilising a common projected coordinate system (WGS84 Web Mercator), resolution (10 m), and by using a standard classification dictionary (also utilised by previous BTM studies in NZ). However, we advise caution when comparing the classification between different survey areas.Derived BTM outputs include the Bathymetric Position Index (BPI); Surface Derivative; Rugosity; Depth Statistics; Terrain Classification. A standardised digital surface model, and derived hillshade and aspect datasets have also been made available. The index of the original MBES survey surface models used in this analysis can be accessed from https://data.linz.govt.nz/layer/95574-nz-bathymetric-surface-model-index/The full report and description of available output datasets are available at: https://www.doc.govt.nz/globalassets/documents/science-and-technical/drds367entire.pdf

Additional file 1. QTL detected using the whole dataset to determine the genetic architecture of egg production and egg quality traits. This file gives the position of all the QTL detected using the whole dataset, with the top SNP corresponding to the SNP with the highest effect in the QTL region. The QTL is defined by the first (left) and last (right) SNPs that are 1 % significant at the chromosome level, respectively. Var (%) is the percentage of variance explained by the top SNP in the analysis with the whole dataset. Var LE(%) is the percentage of variance explained by the top SNP in the analysis with data for the low-energy diet only. Var HE(%) is the percentage of variance explained by the top SNP in the analysis with data for the high-energy diet only. Var 50(%) is the percentage of variance explained by the top SNP in the analysis with data for egg collection at 50 weeks only. Var 70(%) is the percentage of variance explained by the top SNP in the analysis with data for egg collection at 70 weeks only. Z Diet is the Z test statistics used to compare the two estimates calculated from the data for LE and HE diets. Z Age is the Z test statistics used to compare the two estimates calculated from the data for egg collection at 50 and 70 weeks of age. The difference was significant when P

This dataset has been meticulously curated to assist investment analysts, like you, in performing mean-variance optimization for constructing efficient portfolios. The dataset contains historical financial data for a selection of assets, enabling the calculation of risk and return characteristics necessary for portfolio optimization. The goal is to help you determine the most effective allocation of assets to achieve optimal risk-return trade-offs.

Chlorophyll-a, is a widely used proxy for phytoplankton biomass and an indicator for changes in phytoplankton production. As an essential source of energy in the marine environment, the extent and availability of phytoplankton biomass can be highly influential for fisheries production and dictate trophic structure in marine ecosystems. Changes in phytoplankton biomass are predominantly effected by changes in nutrient availability, through either natural (e.g., turbulent ocean mixing) or anthropogenic (e.g., agricultural runoff) processes. This layer represents the standard deviation of the 8-day time series of chlorophyll-a (mg/m3) from 1998-2018. Data products generated by the Ocean Colour component of the European Space Agency (ESA) Climate Change Initiative (CCI) project. These files are 8-day 4-km composites of merged sensor products: Global Area Coverage (GAC), Local Area Coverage (LAC), MEdium Resolution Imaging Spectrometer (MERIS), Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) Aqua, Ocean and Land Colour Instrument (OLCI), Sea-viewing Wide Field-of-view Sensor (SeaWiFS), and Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite (VIIRS). The standard deviation was calculated over all 8-day chlorophyll-a data from 1998-2018 for each pixel. A quality control mask was applied to remove spurious data associated with shallow water, following Gove et al., 2013. Nearshore map pixels with no data were filled with values from the nearest neighboring valid offshore pixel by using a grid of points and the Near Analysis tool in ArcGIS then converting points to raster. Data source: https://oceanwatch.pifsc.noaa.gov/erddap/griddap/esa-cci-chla-8d-v5-0.graph

Version 1 is the current version of the dataset.This collection MODFDS_SDV_GLB_L3 provides level 3 standard deviation of climatological monthly frequency of dust storms (FDS) over land from 175°W to 175°E and 80°S to 80°N at a spatial resolution of 0.1˚ x 0.1˚. It is derived from Level 2, the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) Deep Blue aerosol products Collection 6.1 from Terra (MOD04_L2). The dataset is the standard deviation of climatological monthly mean for each month over 2000 to 2022.The FDS is calculated as the number of days per month when the daily dust optical depth is greater than a threshold optical depth (e.g., 0.025) with two quality flags: the lowest (1) and highest (3). It is advised to use flag 1, which is of lower quality, over dust source regions, and flag 3 over remote areas or polluted regions. Eight thresholds (0.025, 0.05, 0.1, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 2) are saved separately in eight files.If you have any questions, please read the README document first and post your question to the NASA Earthdata Forum (forum.earthdata.nasa.gov) or email the GES DISC Help Desk (gsfc-dl-help-disc@mail.nasa.gov).

Conventional analyses suggest the metabolism of heterotrophs is thermally more sensitive than that of autotrophs, implying that warming leads to pronounced trophodynamic imbalances. However, these analyses inappropriately combine within- and across-taxa trends. We present a novel mathematic framework to separate these, revealing that the higher temperature sensitivity of heterotrophs is mainly caused by within-taxa responses which account for 92% of the difference between autotrophic and heterotrophic protists. This dataset contains both the datasets and R codes of per capita growth rates of autotrophic and heterotrophic protists as well as heterotrophic bacteria and insects., The datasets of per capita growth rates against temperature were compiled from the literature. Experimental data were included if they met the following criteria: at least 3 data points with positive growth rate (µ) and at least 2 unique temperatures at which positive µ were measured. To calculate apparent activation energy, we also removed data points with nonpositive µ and those with temperatures above the optimal growth temperature (defined as the temperature corresponding to the maximal µ)., We use the free software R (version 4.2.0) with R packages (foreach, nlme, plyr, dplyr) to analyse these datasets. R codes are also provided.

This data is part of the Monthly aggregated Water Vapor MODIS MCD19A2 (1 km) dataset. Check the related identifiers section on the Zenodo side panel to access other parts of the dataset.

General Description

The monthly aggregated water vapor dataset is derived from MCD19A2 v061. The Water Vapor data measures the column above ground retrieved from MODIS near-IR bands at 0.94μm. The dataset time spans from 2000 to 2022 and provides data that covers the entire globe. The dataset can be used in many applications like water cycle modeling, vegetation mapping, and soil mapping. This dataset includes:

• Monthly time-series:
  Derived from MCD19A2 v061, this data provides a monthly aggregated mean and standard deviation of daily water vapor time-series data from 2000 to 2022. Only positive non-cloudy pixels were considered valid observations to derive the mean and the standard deviation. The remaining no-data values were filled using the TMWM algorithm. This dataset also includes smoothed mean and standard deviation values using the Whittaker method. The quality assessment layers and the number of valid observations for each month can provide an indication of the reliability of the monthly mean and standard deviation values.
• Yearly time-series:
  Derived from monthly time-series, this data provides a yearly time-series aggregated statistics of the monthly time-series data.
• Long-term data (2000-2022):
  Derived from monthly time-series, this data provides long-term aggregated statistics for the whole series of monthly observations.

Data Details

• Time period: 2021–2022
• Type of data: Water vapor column above the ground (0.001cm)
• How the data was collected or derived: Derived from MCD19A2 v061 using Google Earth Engine. Cloudy pixels were removed and only positive values of water vapor were considered to compute the statistics. The time-series gap-filling and time-series smoothing were computed using the Scikit-map Python package.
• Statistical methods used: Four statistics were derived: mean, standard deviation, smoothed mean, smoothed standard deviation.
• Limitations or exclusions in the data: The dataset does not include data for Antarctica.
• Coordinate reference system: EPSG:4326
• Bounding box (Xmin, Ymin, Xmax, Ymax): (-180.00000, -62.00081, 179.99994, 87.37000)
• Spatial resolution: 1/120 d.d. = 0.008333333 (1km)
• Image size: 43,200 x 17,924
• File format: Cloud Optimized Geotiff (COG) format.

Support

If you discover a bug, artifact, or inconsistency, or if you have a question please use some of the following channels:

• Technical issues and questions about the code: GitLab Issues
• General questions and comments: LandGIS Forum

Name convention

To ensure consistency and ease of use across and within the projects, we follow the standard Open-Earth-Monitor file-naming convention. The convention works with 10 fields that describes important properties of the data. In this way users can search files, prepare data analysis etc, without needing to open files. The fields are:

1. generic variable name: wv = Water vapor
2. variable procedure combination: mcd19a2v061.seasconv = MCD19A2 v061 with gap-filling algorithm
3. Position in the probability distribution / variable type: m = mean | sd = standard deviation | n = number of observations | qa = quality assessment
4. Spatial support: 1km
5. Depth reference: s = surface
6. Time reference begin time: 20210101 = 2021-01-01
7. Time reference end time: 20221231 = 2022-12-31
8. Bounding box: go = global (without Antarctica)
9. EPSG code: epsg.4326 = EPSG:4326
10. Version code: v20230619 = 2023-06-19 (creation date)

The dataset contains global monthly soil moisture statistics (standard deviation ) for 1 by 1 degree grid cells. The source for the data is AMSR-E daily estimates of soil moisture (AE_Land3.002: AMSR-E/Aqua Daily L3 Surface Soil Moisture, Interpretive Parameters, QC EASE-Grids. Version 2 ). The dataset covers the time period from 2002-10-01 to 2011-09-30.