This data release contains lake and reservoir water surface temperature summary statistics calculated from Landsat 8 Analysis Ready Dataset (ARD) images available within the Conterminous United States (CONUS) from 2013-2023. All zip files within this data release contain nested directories using .parquet files to store the data. The file example_script_for_using_parquet.R contains example code for using the R arrow package (Richardson and others, 2024) to open and query the nested .parquet files. Limitations with this dataset include: - All biases inherent to the Landsat Surface Temperature product are retained in this dataset which can produce unrealistically high or low estimates of water temperature. This is observed to happen, for example, in cases with partial cloud coverage over a waterbody. - Some waterbodies are split between multiple Landsat Analysis Ready Data tiles or orbit footprints. In these cases, multiple waterbody-wide statistics may be reported - one for each data tile. The deepest point values will be extracted and reported for tile covering the deepest point. A total of 947 waterbodies are split between multiple tiles (see the multiple_tiles = “yes” column of site_id_tile_hv_crosswalk.csv). - Temperature data were not extracted from satellite images with more than 90% cloud cover. - Temperature data represents skin temperature at the water surface and may differ from temperature observations from below the water surface. Potential methods for addressing limitations with this dataset: - Identifying and removing unrealistic temperature estimates: - Calculate total percentage of cloud pixels over a given waterbody as: percent_cloud_pixels = wb_dswe9_pixels/(wb_dswe9_pixels + wb_dswe1_pixels), and filter percent_cloud_pixels by a desired percentage of cloud coverage. - Remove lakes with a limited number of water pixel values available (wb_dswe1_pixels < 10) - Filter waterbodies where the deepest point is identified as water (dp_dswe = 1) - Handling waterbodies split between multiple tiles: - These waterbodies can be identified using the "site_id_tile_hv_crosswalk.csv" file (column multiple_tiles = “yes”). A user could combine sections of the same waterbody by spatially weighting the values using the number of water pixels available within each section (wb_dswe1_pixels). This should be done with caution, as some sections of the waterbody may have data available on different dates. All zip files within this data release contain nested directories using .parquet files to store the data. The example_script_for_using_parquet.R contains example code for using the R arrow package to open and query the nested .parquet files. - "year_byscene=XXXX.zip" – includes temperature summary statistics for individual waterbodies and the deepest points (the furthest point from land within a waterbody) within each waterbody by the scene_date (when the satellite passed over). Individual waterbodies are identified by the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) permanent_identifier included within the site_id column. Some of the .parquet files with the byscene datasets may only include one dummy row of data (identified by tile_hv="000-000"). This happens when no tabular data is extracted from the raster images because of clouds obscuring the image, a tile that covers mostly ocean with a very small amount of land, or other possible. An example file path for this dataset follows: year_byscene=2023/tile_hv=002-001/part-0.parquet -"year=XXXX.zip" – includes the summary statistics for individual waterbodies and the deepest points within each waterbody by the year (dataset=annual), month (year=0, dataset=monthly), and year-month (dataset=yrmon). The year_byscene=XXXX is used as input for generating these summary tables that aggregates temperature data by year, month, and year-month. Aggregated data is not available for the following tiles: 001-004, 001-010, 002-012, 028-013, and 029-012, because these tiles primarily cover ocean with limited land, and no output data were generated. An example file path for this dataset follows: year=2023/dataset=lakes_annual/tile_hv=002-001/part-0.parquet - "example_script_for_using_parquet.R" – This script includes code to download zip files directly from ScienceBase, identify HUC04 basins within desired landsat ARD grid tile, download NHDplus High Resolution data for visualizing, using the R arrow package to compile .parquet files in nested directories, and create example static and interactive maps. - "nhd_HUC04s_ingrid.csv" – This cross-walk file identifies the HUC04 watersheds within each Landsat ARD Tile grid. -"site_id_tile_hv_crosswalk.csv" - This cross-walk file identifies the site_id (nhdhr{permanent_identifier}) within each Landsat ARD Tile grid. This file also includes a column (multiple_tiles) to identify site_id's that fall within multiple Landsat ARD Tile grids. - "lst_grid.png" – a map of the Landsat grid tiles labelled by the horizontal – vertical ID.

Ordinary least square (OLS) estimation of a linear regression model is well-known to be highly sensitive to outliers. It is common practice to (1) identify and remove outliers by looking at the data and (2) to fit OLS and form confidence intervals and p-values on the remaining data as if this were the original data collected. This standard “detect-and-forget” approach has been shown to be problematic, and in this article we highlight the fact that it can lead to invalid inference and show how recently developed tools in selective inference can be used to properly account for outlier detection and removal. Our inferential procedures apply to a general class of outlier removal procedures that includes several of the most commonly used approaches. We conduct simulations to corroborate the theoretical results, and we apply our method to three real datasets to illustrate how our inferential results can differ from the traditional detect-and-forget strategy. A companion R package, outference, implements these new procedures with an interface that matches the functions commonly used for inference with lm in R. Supplementary materials for this article are available online.

1. Dataset: House pricing dataset containing 21 columns and 21613 rows.
2. Programming Language : R
3. Objective : To predict house prices by creating a model
4. Steps : A) Import the dataset B) Install and run libraries C) Data Cleaning - Remove Null Values , Change Data Types , Dropping of Columns which are not important D) Data Analysis - (i)Linear Regression Model was used to establish the relationship between the dependent variable (price) and other independent variable (ii) Outliers were identified and removed (iii) Regression model was run once again after removing the outliers (iv) Multiple R- squared was calculated which indicated the independent variables can explain 73% change/ variation in the dependent variable (v) P value was less than that of alpha 0.05 which shows it is statistically significant. (vi) Interpreting the meaning of the results of the coefficients (vii) Checked the assumption of multicollinearity (viii) VIF(Variance inflation factor) was calculated for all the independent variables and their absolute value was found to be less than 5. Hence, there is not threat of multicollinearity and that we can proceed with the independent variables specified.

This dataset tracks the updates made on the dataset "MeSH 2023 Update - Delete Report" as a repository for previous versions of the data and metadata.

Preliminary investigation (a) Carry out a shortened initial investigation (steps 1, 2 and 3) based on the matrix scatter plot and box plot. Do not remove outliers or transform the data. Indicate if you had to process the data file in anyway. Explain any conclusions drawn from the evidence and backup your conclusions. (b) Explain why using the correlation matrix for the factor analysis is indicated. (c) Display the sample correlation matrix R. Does the matrix R suggest the number of factors to use? (d) Perform a preliminary simplified principal component analysis using R. i. List the eigenvalues and describe the percent contributions to the variance. ii. Determine the number of principal components to retain and justify your an- swer by considering at least three methods. Note and comment if there is any disagreement between the methods. (e) Include your code

• DATASET: Dependent variable is 'Personal.Loan'. 0 indicates loan not approved and 1 indicates loan approved.
• OBJECTIVE : We will do Exploratory Data Analysis and use Logistic Regression, Decision Tree, Random Forest and AUC to find out which is the best model. Steps:
• Set the working directory and read the data
• Check the data types of all the variables https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F10868729%2F020afd07cf0c5ba058d88add9bcd467a%2FPicture1.png?generation=1699357564112927&alt=media" alt="">
• DATA CLEANING
• We need to change the data types of certain variables to factor vector
• Check for missing data, duplicate records and remove insignificant variables https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F10868729%2Fa286a5225207d4419b34bcf800e3cb67%2FPicture2.png?generation=1699357685993423&alt=media" alt="">
• New data frame created called 'bank1' after dropping the 'ID' column.
• EXPLORATORY DATA ANALYSIS
• We will try to get some insights by digging into the data through bar charts and box plots which can help the bank management in decision making
• Run the required libraries https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F10868729%2F7363f4b9ca8245b6e998bf07005fa099%2FPicture3.png?generation=1699357871368520&alt=media" alt=""> https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F10868729%2F8dba10f16fc6c2d7fd51a4c82a692136%2FCount%20of%20Loans%20Approved%20%20Not%20Approved.jpeg?generation=1699357967347355&alt=media" alt="">
• Out of the total 5000 customers, 4520 have not been approved for a loan while 480 have been https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F10868729%2Fe5eec968e7b264d9ec540bd1f24379fd%2FPicture4.png?generation=1699358066228901&alt=media" alt=""> https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F10868729%2Fb64eba6f373d5c043c9f504cfa348a75%2FPicture5.png?generation=1699358103026827&alt=media" alt=""> https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F10868729%2F94608993dc12cdc31cfeca92932e0cb5%2FBoxPlot%20Income%20and%20Family.jpeg?generation=1699358148840198&alt=media" alt="">
• THIS INDICATES THAT INCOME IS HIGHER WHEN THERE ARE LESS FAMILY MEMBERS https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F10868729%2F8e44daf4ed42094f71c3000737f07a32%2FPicture6.png?generation=1699360599956530&alt=media" alt=""> https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F10868729%2F0fd9010b95acf9ad20f7b9d0e171f305%2FBoxplot%20between%20Income%20%20Personal%20Loan.jpeg?generation=1699359231020725&alt=media" alt="">
• THIS INDICATES PERSONAL LOAN HAS BEEN APPROVED FOR CUSTOMERS HAVING HIGHER INCOME https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F10868729%2Ff817481849aba7f176b7c4d0147308de%2FPicture7.png?generation=1699360768102069&alt=media" alt=""> https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F10868729%2F8e0bad8c76aaa11fe3b9909721d587f5%2FBoxPlot%20between%20Income%20%20Credit%20Cards.jpeg?generation=1699360798538907&alt=media" alt="">
• THIS INDICATES THAT THE INCOME IS PRETTY SIMILAR FOR CUSTOMERS OWNING AND NOT OWNING A CREDIT CARD https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F10868729%2Fab4b2fd2fde2a009bceb05a5a1161040%2FPicture8.png?generation=1699360882879480&alt=media" alt=""> https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F10868729%2Fe747dfa315609c4907ea83a9ac7f482c%2FBoxPlot%20between%20Income%20Class%20%20Mortgage.jpeg?generation=1699359265603058&alt=media" alt="">
• CUSTOMERS BELONGING TO THE RICH CLASS (INCOME GROUP : 150-200) HAVE THE HIGHEST MORTGAGE https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F10868729%2F6552d3fb9564b3ab3239ef67ed17a098%2FPicture9.png?generation=1699360938106437&alt=media" alt=""> https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F10868729%2F4c7c7077e26229f455c1d9ef6e83195f%2FBoxPlot%20between%20CC%20Avg%20and%20Online%20Banking.jpeg?generation=1699359306645100&alt=media" alt="">
• CC AVG IS PRETTY SIMILAR FOR THOSE WHO OPTED FOR ONLINE SERVICES AND THOSE WHO DID NOT
  https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F10868729%2Feddee2ca08a8138bb54eed0c25750280%2FPicture10.png?generation=1699360994581181&alt=media" alt=""> https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F10868729%2F6127e25258b25ccfbae66a5463a72773%2FBoxplot%20between%20CC%20Avg%20and%20Education.jpeg?generation=1699359333295827&alt=media" alt="">
• MORE EDUCATED CUSTOMERS HAVE A HIGHER CREDIT AVERAGE ![](https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F...

These data and computer code (written in R, https://www.r-project.org) were created to statistically evaluate a suite of spatiotemporal covariates that could potentially explain pronghorn (Antilocapra americana) mortality risk in the Northern Sagebrush Steppe (NSS) ecosystem (50.0757o N, −108.7526o W). Known-fate data were collected from 170 adult female pronghorn monitored with GPS collars from 2003-2011, which were used to construct a time-to-event (TTE) dataset with a daily timescale and an annual recurrent origin of 11 November. Seasonal risk periods (winter, spring, summer, autumn) were defined by median migration dates of collared pronghorn. We linked this TTE dataset with spatiotemporal covariates that were extracted and collated from pronghorn seasonal activity areas (estimated using 95% minimum convex polygons) to form a final dataset. Specifically, average fence and road densities (km/km2), average snow water equivalent (SWE; kg/m2), and maximum decadal normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) were considered as predictors. We tested for these main effects of spatiotemporal risk covariates as well as the hypotheses that pronghorn mortality risk from roads or fences could be intensified during severe winter weather (i.e., interactions: SWE*road density and SWE*fence density). We also compare an analogous frequentist implementation to estimate model-averaged risk coefficients. Ultimately, the study aimed to develop the first broad-scale, spatially explicit map of predicted annual pronghorn survivorship based on anthropogenic features and environmental gradients to identify areas for conservation and habitat restoration efforts.

Methods We combined relocations from GPS-collared adult female pronghorn (n = 170) with raster data that described potentially important spatiotemporal risk covariates. We first collated relocation and time-to-event data to remove individual pronghorn from the analysis that had no spatial data available. We then constructed seasonal risk periods based on the median migration dates determined from a previous analysis; thus, we defined 4 seasonal periods as winter (11 November–21 March), spring (22 March–10 April), summer (11 April–30 October), and autumn (31 October–10 November). We used the package 'amt' in Program R to rarify relocation data to a common 4-hr interval using a 30-min tolerance. We used the package 'adehabitatHR' in Program R to estimate seasonal activity areas using 95% minimum convex polygon. We constructed annual- and seasonal-specific risk covariates by averaging values within individual activity areas. We specifically extracted values for linear features (road and fence densities), a proxy for snow depth (SWE), and a measure of forage productivity (NDVI). We resampled all raster data to a common resolution of 1 km2. Given that fence density models characterized regional-scale variation in fence density (i.e., 1.5 km2), this resolution seemed appropriate for our risk analysis. We fit Bayesian proportional hazards (PH) models using a time-to-event approach to model the effects of spatiotemporal covariates on pronghorn mortality risk. We aimed to develop a model to understand the relative effects of risk covariates for pronghorn in the NSS. The effect of fence or road densities may depend on SWE such that the variables interact in affecting mortality risk. Thus, our full candidate model included four main effects and two interaction terms. We used reversible-jump Markov Chain Monte Carlo (RJMCMC) to determine relative support for a nested set of Bayesian PH models. This allowed us to conduct Bayesian model selection and averaging in one step by using two custom samplers provided for the R package 'nimble'. For brevity, we provide the final time-to-event dataset and analysis code rather than include all of the code, GIS, etc. used to estimate seasonal activity areas and extract and collate spatial risk covariates for each individual. Rather we provide the data and all code to reproduce the risk regression results presented in the manuscript.

This resource is for historic purposes only and was provided for the GovHack competition (3-5 July 2015). After the event it was discovered that the latitude and longitude columns had been inadvertently inverted. For any project using this data please use the updated version of the resource (link) located here.\r \r We have elected not to remove this resource at this time so as to ensure that any GovHack entries using this data are not disadvantaged during the judging process. We intend to remove this version of the data after the GovHack judging has been completed.\r ==\r

This data originates from Crossref API. It has metadata on the articles contained in Data Citation Corpus where the citation pair dataset is a DOI.

How to recreate this dataset in Jupyter Notebook:

1) Prepare list of articles to query ```python import pandas as pd

See: https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/keakohv/data-citation-coprus-v4-1-eupmc-and-datacite

CITATIONS_PARQUET = "data_citation_corpus_filtered_v4.1.parquet"

Load the citation pairs from the Parquet file

citation_pairs = pd.read_parquet(CITATIONS_PARQUET)

Remove all rows where https is in the 'publication' column but no "doi.org" is present

citation_pairs = citation_pairs[ ~((citation_pairs['dataset'].str.contains("https")) & (~citation_pairs['dataset'].str.contains("doi.org"))) ]

Remove all rows where figshare is in the dataset name

citation_pairs = citation_pairs[ ~citation_pairs['dataset'].str.contains("figshare") ]

citation_pairs['is_doi'] = citation_pairs['dataset'].str.contains('doi.org', na=False)

citation_pairs_doi = citation_pairs[citation_pairs['is_doi'] == True].copy()

articles = list(set(citation_pairs_doi['publication'].to_list()))

articles = [doi.replace("_", "/") for doi in articles]

Save list articles to a file

with open("articles.txt", "w") as f: for article in articles: f.write(f"{article} ") ```

2) Query articles from CrossRef API

%%writefile enrich.py
#!pip install -q aiolimiter
import sys, pathlib, asyncio, aiohttp, orjson, sqlite3, time
from aiolimiter import AsyncLimiter

# ---------- config ----------
HEADERS  = {"User-Agent": "ForDataCiteEnrichment (mailto:your_email)"} # Put your email here
MAX_RPS  = 45           # polite pool limit (50), leave head-room
BATCH_SIZE = 10_000         # rows per INSERT
DB_PATH  = pathlib.Path("crossref.sqlite").resolve()
ARTICLES  = pathlib.Path("articles.txt")
# -----------------------------

# ---- platform tweak: prefer selector loop on Windows ----
if sys.platform == "win32":
  asyncio.set_event_loop_policy(asyncio.WindowsSelectorEventLoopPolicy())

# ---- read the DOI list ----
with ARTICLES.open(encoding="utf-8") as f:
  DOIS = [line.strip() for line in f if line.strip()]

# ---- make sure DB & table exist BEFORE the async part ----
DB_PATH.parent.mkdir(parents=True, exist_ok=True)
with sqlite3.connect(DB_PATH) as db:
  db.execute("""
    CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS works (
      doi  TEXT PRIMARY KEY,
      json TEXT
    )
  """)
  db.execute("PRAGMA journal_mode=WAL;")   # better concurrency

# ---------- async section ----------
limiter = AsyncLimiter(MAX_RPS, 1)       # 45 req / second
sem   = asyncio.Semaphore(100)        # cap overall concurrency

async def fetch_one(session, doi: str):
  url = f"https://api.crossref.org/works/{doi}"
  async with limiter, sem:
    try:
      async with session.get(url, headers=HEADERS, timeout=10) as r:
        if r.status == 404:         # common “not found”
          return doi, None
        r.raise_for_status()        # propagate other 4xx/5xx
        return doi, await r.json()
    except Exception as e:
      return doi, None            # log later, don’t crash

async def main():
  start = time.perf_counter()
  db  = sqlite3.connect(DB_PATH)        # KEEP ONE connection
  db.execute("PRAGMA synchronous = NORMAL;")   # speed tweak

  async with aiohttp.ClientSession(json_serialize=orjson.dumps) as s:
    for chunk_start in range(0, len(DOIS), BATCH_SIZE):
      slice_ = DOIS[chunk_start:chunk_start + BATCH_SIZE]
      tasks = [asyncio.create_task(fetch_one(s, d)) for d in slice_]
      results = await asyncio.gather(*tasks)    # all tuples, no exc

      good_rows, bad_dois = [], []
      for doi, payload in results:
        if payload is None:
          bad_dois.append(doi)
        else:
          good_rows.append((doi, orjson.dumps(payload).decode()))

      if good_rows:
        db.executemany(
          "INSERT OR IGNORE INTO works (doi, json) VALUES (?, ?)",
          good_rows,
        )
        db.commit()

      if bad_dois:                # append for later retry
        with open("failures.log", "a", encoding="utf-8") as fh:
          fh.writelines(f"{d}
" for d in bad_dois)

      done = chunk_start + len(slice_)
      rate = done / (time.perf_counter() - start)
      print(f"{done:,}/{len(DOIS):,} ({rate:,.1f} DOI/s)")

  db.close()

if _name_ == "_main_":
  asyncio.run(main())

Then run: python !python enrich.py

3) Finally extract the necessary fields

import sqlite3
import orjson
i...

Invasive marine species are well documented but options to manage them are limited. At Palmyra Atoll National Wildlife Refuge (Central North Pacific), native invasive corallimorpharians, Rhodactis howesii, have smothered live native corals since 2007. Laboratory and field trials were conducted evaluating two control methods to remove R. howesii overgrowing the benthos at Palmyra Atoll (Palmyra): 1) toothpaste mixed with chlorine, citric acid, or sodium hydroxide (NaOH), and 2) hot water. Paste mixed with NaOH had the most efficacious kill in mesocosm trials and resulted in >90% kill over a 98 m2 area three days after treatment. Hot water at 82C was most effective in mesocosms; in the field hot water was less effective than paste but still resulted in a kill of ca. 75% over 100 m2 three days after treatment. Costs of paste and heat (excluding capital equipment and costs of regulatory approval should this method be deployed large scale) were $70/m2 and $59/m2 respectively. Invasive R. howesii currently occupy ca 5,800,000 m2 of reef at Palmyra with ca. 276,000 m2 comprising heavily infested areas. Several potential management strategies are discussed based on costs of treatment, area covered, and the biology of the invasion. The methods described here expand the set of tools available to manage invasive species in complex marine habitats.

The data contain bathymetric data from the Namibia continental slope. The data were acquired on R/V Meteor research expeditions M76/1 in 2008, and R/V Maria S. Merian expedition MSM19/1c in 2011. The purpose of the data was the exploration of the Namibian continental slope and espressially the investigation of large seafloor depressions. The bathymetric data were acquired with the 191-beam 12 kHz Kongsberg EM120 system. The data were processed using the public software package MBSystems. The loaded data were cleaned semi-automatically and manually, removing outliers and other erroneous data. Initial velocity fields were adjusted to remove artifacts from the data. Gridding was done in 10x10 m grid cells for the MSM19-1c dataset and 50x50 m for the M76 dataset using the Gaussian Weighted Mean algorithm.

R K.v2i.coco Remove_hashmarkerli

## Overview

R K.v2i.coco Remove_hashmarkerli is a dataset for computer vision tasks - it contains YARD12 annotations for 263 images.

## Getting Started

You can download this dataset for use within your own projects, or fork it into a workspace on Roboflow to create your own model.

  ## License

  This dataset is available under the [BY-NC-SA 4.0 license](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/BY-NC-SA 4.0).

LScD (Leicester Scientific Dictionary)April 2020 by Neslihan Suzen, PhD student at the University of Leicester (ns433@leicester.ac.uk/suzenneslihan@hotmail.com)Supervised by Prof Alexander Gorban and Dr Evgeny Mirkes[Version 3] The third version of LScD (Leicester Scientific Dictionary) is created from the updated LSC (Leicester Scientific Corpus) - Version 2*. All pre-processing steps applied to build the new version of the dictionary are the same as in Version 2** and can be found in description of Version 2 below. We did not repeat the explanation. After pre-processing steps, the total number of unique words in the new version of the dictionary is 972,060. The files provided with this description are also same as described as for LScD Version 2 below.* Suzen, Neslihan (2019): LSC (Leicester Scientific Corpus). figshare. Dataset. https://doi.org/10.25392/leicester.data.9449639.v2** Suzen, Neslihan (2019): LScD (Leicester Scientific Dictionary). figshare. Dataset. https://doi.org/10.25392/leicester.data.9746900.v2[Version 2] Getting StartedThis document provides the pre-processing steps for creating an ordered list of words from the LSC (Leicester Scientific Corpus) [1] and the description of LScD (Leicester Scientific Dictionary). This dictionary is created to be used in future work on the quantification of the meaning of research texts. R code for producing the dictionary from LSC and instructions for usage of the code are available in [2]. The code can be also used for list of texts from other sources, amendments to the code may be required.LSC is a collection of abstracts of articles and proceeding papers published in 2014 and indexed by the Web of Science (WoS) database [3]. Each document contains title, list of authors, list of categories, list of research areas, and times cited. The corpus contains only documents in English. The corpus was collected in July 2018 and contains the number of citations from publication date to July 2018. The total number of documents in LSC is 1,673,824.LScD is an ordered list of words from texts of abstracts in LSC.The dictionary stores 974,238 unique words, is sorted by the number of documents containing the word in descending order. All words in the LScD are in stemmed form of words. The LScD contains the following information:1.Unique words in abstracts2.Number of documents containing each word3.Number of appearance of a word in the entire corpusProcessing the LSCStep 1.Downloading the LSC Online: Use of the LSC is subject to acceptance of request of the link by email. To access the LSC for research purposes, please email to ns433@le.ac.uk. The data are extracted from Web of Science [3]. You may not copy or distribute these data in whole or in part without the written consent of Clarivate Analytics.Step 2.Importing the Corpus to R: The full R code for processing the corpus can be found in the GitHub [2].All following steps can be applied for arbitrary list of texts from any source with changes of parameter. The structure of the corpus such as file format and names (also the position) of fields should be taken into account to apply our code. The organisation of CSV files of LSC is described in README file for LSC [1].Step 3.Extracting Abstracts and Saving Metadata: Metadata that include all fields in a document excluding abstracts and the field of abstracts are separated. Metadata are then saved as MetaData.R. Fields of metadata are: List_of_Authors, Title, Categories, Research_Areas, Total_Times_Cited and Times_cited_in_Core_Collection.Step 4.Text Pre-processing Steps on the Collection of Abstracts: In this section, we presented our approaches to pre-process abstracts of the LSC.1.Removing punctuations and special characters: This is the process of substitution of all non-alphanumeric characters by space. We did not substitute the character “-” in this step, because we need to keep words like “z-score”, “non-payment” and “pre-processing” in order not to lose the actual meaning of such words. A processing of uniting prefixes with words are performed in later steps of pre-processing.2.Lowercasing the text data: Lowercasing is performed to avoid considering same words like “Corpus”, “corpus” and “CORPUS” differently. Entire collection of texts are converted to lowercase.3.Uniting prefixes of words: Words containing prefixes joined with character “-” are united as a word. The list of prefixes united for this research are listed in the file “list_of_prefixes.csv”. The most of prefixes are extracted from [4]. We also added commonly used prefixes: ‘e’, ‘extra’, ‘per’, ‘self’ and ‘ultra’.4.Substitution of words: Some of words joined with “-” in the abstracts of the LSC require an additional process of substitution to avoid losing the meaning of the word before removing the character “-”. Some examples of such words are “z-test”, “well-known” and “chi-square”. These words have been substituted to “ztest”, “wellknown” and “chisquare”. Identification of such words is done by sampling of abstracts form LSC. The full list of such words and decision taken for substitution are presented in the file “list_of_substitution.csv”.5.Removing the character “-”: All remaining character “-” are replaced by space.6.Removing numbers: All digits which are not included in a word are replaced by space. All words that contain digits and letters are kept because alphanumeric characters such as chemical formula might be important for our analysis. Some examples are “co2”, “h2o” and “21st”.7.Stemming: Stemming is the process of converting inflected words into their word stem. This step results in uniting several forms of words with similar meaning into one form and also saving memory space and time [5]. All words in the LScD are stemmed to their word stem.8.Stop words removal: Stop words are words that are extreme common but provide little value in a language. Some common stop words in English are ‘I’, ‘the’, ‘a’ etc. We used ‘tm’ package in R to remove stop words [6]. There are 174 English stop words listed in the package.Step 5.Writing the LScD into CSV Format: There are 1,673,824 plain processed texts for further analysis. All unique words in the corpus are extracted and written in the file “LScD.csv”.The Organisation of the LScDThe total number of words in the file “LScD.csv” is 974,238. Each field is described below:Word: It contains unique words from the corpus. All words are in lowercase and their stem forms. The field is sorted by the number of documents that contain words in descending order.Number of Documents Containing the Word: In this content, binary calculation is used: if a word exists in an abstract then there is a count of 1. If the word exits more than once in a document, the count is still 1. Total number of document containing the word is counted as the sum of 1s in the entire corpus.Number of Appearance in Corpus: It contains how many times a word occurs in the corpus when the corpus is considered as one large document.Instructions for R CodeLScD_Creation.R is an R script for processing the LSC to create an ordered list of words from the corpus [2]. Outputs of the code are saved as RData file and in CSV format. Outputs of the code are:Metadata File: It includes all fields in a document excluding abstracts. Fields are List_of_Authors, Title, Categories, Research_Areas, Total_Times_Cited and Times_cited_in_Core_Collection.File of Abstracts: It contains all abstracts after pre-processing steps defined in the step 4.DTM: It is the Document Term Matrix constructed from the LSC[6]. Each entry of the matrix is the number of times the word occurs in the corresponding document.LScD: An ordered list of words from LSC as defined in the previous section.The code can be used by:1.Download the folder ‘LSC’, ‘list_of_prefixes.csv’ and ‘list_of_substitution.csv’2.Open LScD_Creation.R script3.Change parameters in the script: replace with the full path of the directory with source files and the full path of the directory to write output files4.Run the full code.References[1]N. Suzen. (2019). LSC (Leicester Scientific Corpus) [Dataset]. Available: https://doi.org/10.25392/leicester.data.9449639.v1[2]N. Suzen. (2019). LScD-LEICESTER SCIENTIFIC DICTIONARY CREATION. Available: https://github.com/neslihansuzen/LScD-LEICESTER-SCIENTIFIC-DICTIONARY-CREATION[3]Web of Science. (15 July). Available: https://apps.webofknowledge.com/[4]A. Thomas, "Common Prefixes, Suffixes and Roots," Center for Development and Learning, 2013.[5]C. Ramasubramanian and R. Ramya, "Effective pre-processing activities in text mining using improved porter’s stemming algorithm," International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer and Communication Engineering, vol. 2, no. 12, pp. 4536-4538, 2013.[6]I. Feinerer, "Introduction to the tm Package Text Mining in R," Accessible en ligne: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/tm/vignettes/tm.pdf, 2013.

The raw data file is available online for public access (https://data.ontario.ca/dataset/lake-simcoe-monitoring). Download the 1980-2019 csv files and open up the file named "Simcoe_Zooplankton&Bythotrephes.csv". Copy and paste the zooplankton sheet into a new excel file called "Simcoe_Zooplankton.csv". The column ZDATE in the excel file needs to be switched from GENERAL to SHORT DATE so that the dates in the ZDATE column read "YYYY/MM/DD". Save as .csv in appropriate R folder. The data file "simcoe_manual_subset_weeks_5" is the raw data that has been subset for the main analysis of the article using the .R file "Simcoe MS - 5 Station Subset Data". The .csv file produced from this must then be manually edited to remove data points that do not have 5 stations per sampling period as well as by combining data points that should fall into a single week. The "simcoe_manual_subset_weeks_5.csv" is then used for the calculation of variability, stabilization, asynchrony, and Shannon Diversity for each year in the .R file "Simcoe MS - 5 Station Calculations". The final .R file "Simcoe MS - 5 Station Analysis contains the final statistical analyses as well as code to reproduce the original figures. Data and code for main and supplementary analyses are also available on GitHub (https://github.com/reillyoc/ZPseasonalPEs).

Significant shifts in latitudinal optima of North American birds (PNAS)Paulo Mateus Martins, Marti J. Anderson, Winston L. Sweatman, and Andrew J. PunnettOverviewThis file contains the raw 2022 release of the North American breeding bird survey dataset (Ziolkowski Jr et al. 2022), as well as the filtered version used in our paper and the code that generated it. We also included code for using BirdLife's species distribution shapefiles to classify species as eastern or western based on their occurrence in the BBS dataset and to calculated the percentage of their range covered by the BBS sampling extent. Note that this code requires species distribution shapefiles, which are not provided but can be obtained directly from https://datazone.birdlife.org/species/requestdis.ReferenceD. J. Ziolkowski Jr., M. Lutmerding, V. I. Aponte, M. A. R. Hudson, North American breeding bird survey dataset 1966–2021: U.S. Geological Survey data release (2022), https://doi.org/10.5066/P97WAZE5Detailed file descriptioninfo_birds_names_shp: A data frame that links BBS species names (column Species) to shapefiles (column Species_BL). See the code2_sampling coverage.dat_raw_BBS_data_v2022: This R environment contains the raw BBS data from the 2022 release (https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/625f151ed34e85fa62b7f926). This object contains data frames created with the files "Routes.zip" (route information), "SpeciesList.txt" (bird taxonomy), and "50-StopData.zip" (actual counts per route and year). This object is the starting point for creating the dataset used in the paper, which was filtered to remove taxonomic uncertainties, as demonstrated in the "code1_build_long_wide_datasets" R script.code1_build_long_wide_datasets: This code filters the original dataset (dat_raw_BBS_data_v2022) to remove taxonomic uncertainties, assigns routes as either eastern or western based on regionalization using the dynamically constrained agglomerative clustering and partitioning method (see the Methods section of the paper), and generates the full long and wide versions of the dataset used in the analyses (dat2_filtered_data_long, dat3_filtered_data_wide).dat2_filtered_data_long: The filtered raw dataset in long form. This dataset was further filtered to remove nocturnal and aquatic species, as well as species with fewer than 30 occurrences, but the complete version is available here. To obtain the exact subset used in the analysis, filter this dataset using the column Species from datasets S1 or S3.dat3_filtered_data_wide: The filtered raw dataset in its widest form. This dataset was further filtered to remove nocturnal and aquatic species, as well as species with fewer than 30 occurrences, but the complete version is available here. To obtain the exact subset used in the analysis, filter this dataset using the column Species from datasets S1 or S3.code2_sampling coverage: This code determines how much of a bird distribution is covered by the BBS sampling extent (refer to Dataset S1). It is important to note that this script requires bird species distribution shapefiles from BirdLife International, which we are not permitted to share. The shapefiles can be requested directly at https://datazone.birdlife.org/species/requestdis

Standardized data on large-scale and long-term patterns of species richness are critical for understanding the consequences of natural and anthropogenic changes in the environment. The North American Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) is one of the largest and most widely used sources of such data, but so far, little is known about the degree to which BBS data provide accurate estimates of regional richness. Here we test this question by comparing estimates of regional richness based on BBS data with spatially and temporally matched estimates based on state Breeding Bird Atlases (BBA). We expected that estimates based on BBA data would provide a more complete (and therefore, more accurate) representation of regional richness due to their larger number of observation units and higher sampling effort within the observation units. Our results were only partially consistent with these predictions: while estimates of regional richness based on BBA data were higher than those based on BBS data, estimates of local richness (number of species per observation unit) were higher in BBS data. The latter result is attributed to higher land-cover heterogeneity in BBS units and higher effectiveness of bird detection (more species are detected per unit time). Interestingly, estimates of regional richness based on BBA blocks were higher than those based on BBS data even when differences in the number of observation units were controlled for. Our analysis indicates that this difference was due to higher compositional turnover between BBA units, probably due to larger differences in habitat conditions between BBA units and a larger number of geographically restricted species. Our overall results indicate that estimates of regional richness based on BBS data suffer from incomplete detection of a large number of rare species, and that corrections of these estimates based on standard extrapolation techniques are not sufficient to remove this bias. Future applications of BBS data in ecology and conservation, and in particular, applications in which the representation of rare species is important (e.g., those focusing on biodiversity conservation), should be aware of this bias, and should integrate BBA data whenever possible.

Methods Overview

This is a compilation of second-generation breeding bird atlas data and corresponding breeding bird survey data. This contains presence-absence breeding bird observations in 5 U.S. states: MA, MI, NY, PA, VT, sampling effort per sampling unit, geographic location of sampling units, and environmental variables per sampling unit: elevation and elevation range from (from SRTM), mean annual precipitation & mean summer temperature (from PRISM), and NLCD 2006 land-use data.

Each row contains all observations per sampling unit, with additional tables containing information on sampling effort impact on richness, a rareness table of species per dataset, and two summary tables for both bird diversity and environmental variables.

The methods for compilation are contained in the supplementary information of the manuscript but also here:

Bird data

For BBA data, shapefiles for blocks and the data on species presences and sampling effort in blocks were received from the atlas coordinators. For BBS data, shapefiles for routes and raw species data were obtained from the Patuxent Wildlife Research Center (https://databasin.org/datasets/02fe0ebbb1b04111b0ba1579b89b7420 and https://www.pwrc.usgs.gov/BBS/RawData).

Using ArcGIS Pro© 10.0, species observations were joined to respective BBS and BBA observation units shapefiles using the Join Table tool. For both BBA and BBS, a species was coded as either present (1) or absent (0). Presence in a sampling unit was based on codes 2, 3, or 4 in the original volunteer birding checklist codes (possible breeder, probable breeder, and confirmed breeder, respectively), and absence was based on codes 0 or 1 (not observed and observed but not likely breeding). Spelling inconsistencies of species names between BBA and BBS datasets were fixed. Species that needed spelling fixes included Brewer’s Blackbird, Cooper’s Hawk, Henslow’s Sparrow, Kirtland’s Warbler, LeConte’s Sparrow, Lincoln’s Sparrow, Swainson’s Thrush, Wilson’s Snipe, and Wilson’s Warbler. In addition, naming conventions were matched between BBS and BBA data. The Alder and Willow Flycatchers were lumped into Traill’s Flycatcher and regional races were lumped into a single species column: Dark-eyed Junco regional types were lumped together into one Dark-eyed Junco, Yellow-shafted Flicker was lumped into Northern Flicker, Saltmarsh Sparrow and the Saltmarsh Sharp-tailed Sparrow were lumped into Saltmarsh Sparrow, and the Yellow-rumped Myrtle Warbler was lumped into Myrtle Warbler (currently named Yellow-rumped Warbler). Three hybrid species were removed: Brewster's and Lawrence's Warblers and the Mallard x Black Duck hybrid. Established “exotic” species were included in the analysis since we were concerned only with detection of richness and not of specific species.

The resultant species tables with sampling effort were pivoted horizontally so that every row was a sampling unit and each species observation was a column. This was done for each state using R version 3.6.2 (R© 2019, The R Foundation for Statistical Computing Platform) and all state tables were merged to yield one BBA and one BBS dataset. Following the joining of environmental variables to these datasets (see below), BBS and BBA data were joined using rbind.data.frame in R© to yield a final dataset with all species observations and environmental variables for each observation unit.

Environmental data

Using ArcGIS Pro© 10.0, all environmental raster layers, BBA and BBS shapefiles, and the species observations were integrated in a common coordinate system (North_America Equidistant_Conic) using the Project tool. For BBS routes, 400m buffers were drawn around each route using the Buffer tool. The observation unit shapefiles for all states were merged (separately for BBA blocks and BBS routes and 400m buffers) using the Merge tool to create a study-wide shapefile for each data source. Whether or not a BBA block was adjacent to a BBS route was determined using the Intersect tool based on a radius of 30m around the route buffer (to fit the NLCD map resolution). Area and length of the BBS route inside the proximate BBA block were also calculated. Mean values for annual precipitation and summer temperature, and mean and range for elevation, were extracted for every BBA block and 400m buffer BBS route using Zonal Statistics as Table tool. The area of each land-cover type in each observation unit (BBA block and BBS buffer) was calculated from the NLCD layer using the Zonal Histogram tool.

The zip file contains the data files and R analysis script used in the manuscript titled 'Attentional bias modification in virtual reality - a VR-based dot-probe task with 2D and 3D stimuli' Analysis_script.R is a script file that can be opened by the statistical software R (https://www.r-project.org/) and Rstudio (https://www.rstudio.com/). All analysis steps and codes are found within this file. All files under the Data_files folder are directly called by Analysis_script from R, therefore please ensure that the folder structure and file names remain the same. Folder dot_probe_raw_data_files and its subfolders contain *.xml files with attentional bias (reaction time) data from the participants, generated by the VR program. outcome_measures_and_demographic_data.xlsx contains participant demographic data and questionnaire measures, generated by the iTerapi platform. This data file has been cleaned to remove information irrelevant to the analysis (e.g. number of reminder emails sent etc.). lsas_pre_individual_items.xlsx contains participant responses to individual items of the LSAS-SR questionnaire, generated by the iTerapi platform.

Along track temperature, Salinity, backscatter, Chlorophyll Fluoresence, and normalized water leaving radiance (nLw).

On the bow of the vessel was a Satlantic SeaWiFS Aircraft Simulator (MicroSAS) system, used to estimate water-leaving radiance from the ship, analogous to to the nLw derived by the SeaWiFS and MODIS satellite sensors, but free from atmospheric error (hence, it can provide data below clouds).

The system consisted of a down-looking radiance sensor and a sky-viewing radiance sensor, both mounted on a steerable holder on the bow. A downwelling irradiance sensor was mounted at the top of the ship's meterological mast, on the bow, far from any potentially shading structures. These data were used to estimate normalized water-leaving radiance as a function of wavelength. The radiance detector was set to view the water at 40deg from nadir as recommended by Mueller et al. [2003b]. The water radiance sensor was able to view over an azimuth range of ~180deg across the ship's heading with no viewing of the ship's wake. The direction of the sensor was adjusted to view the water 90-120deg from the sun's azimuth, to minimize sun glint. This was continually adjusted as the time and ship's gyro heading were used to calculate the sun's position using an astronomical solar position subroutine interfaced with a stepping motor which was attached to the radiometer mount (designed and fabricated at Bigelow Laboratory for Ocean Sciences). Protocols for operation and calibration were performed according to Mueller [Mueller et al., 2003a; Mueller et al., 2003b; Mueller et al., 2003c]. Before 1000h and after 1400h, data quality was poorer as the solar zenith angle was too low. Post-cruise, the 10Hz data were filtered to remove as much residual white cap and glint as possible (we accept the lowest 5% of the data). Reflectance plaque measurements were made several times at local apparent noon on sunny days to verify the radiometer calibrations.

Within an hour of local apparent noon each day, a Satlantic OCP sensor was deployed off the stern of the vessel after the ship oriented so that the sun was off the stern. The ship would secure the starboard Z-drive, and use port Z-drive and bow thruster to move the ship ahead at about 25cm s-1. The OCP was then trailed aft and brought to the surface ~100m aft of the ship, then allowed to sink to 100m as downwelling spectral irradiance and upwelling spectral radiance were recorded continuously along with temperature and salinity. This procedure ensured there were no ship shadow effects in the radiometry.

Instruments include a WETLabs wetstar fluorometer, a WETLabs ECOTriplet and a SeaBird microTSG.
Radiometry was done using a Satlantic 7 channel microSAS system with Es, Lt and Li sensors.

Chl data is based on inter calibrating surface discrete Chlorophyll measure with the temporally closest fluorescence measurement and applying the regression results to all fluorescence data.

Data have been corrected for instrument biofouling and drift based on weekly purewater calibrations of the system. Radiometric data has been processed using standard Satlantic processing software and has been checked with periodic plaque measurements using a 2% spectralon standard.

Lw is calculated from Lt and Lsky and is \"what Lt would be if the
sensor were looking straight down\". Since our sensors are mounted at
40o, based on various NASA protocols, we need to do that conversion.

Lwn adds Es to the mix. Es is used to normalize Lw. Nlw is related to Rrs, Remote Sensing Reflectance

Techniques used are as described in:
Balch WM, Drapeau DT, Bowler BC, Booth ES, Windecker LA, Ashe A (2008) Space–time variability of carbon standing stocks and fixation rates in the Gulf of Maine, along the GNATS transect between Portland, ME, USA, and Yarmouth, Nova Scotia, Canada.
J Plankton Res 30:119–139

This dataset contains polylines depicting non-woodland linear tree and shrub features in Cornwall and much of Devon, derived from lidar data collected by the Tellus South West project. Data from a lidar (light detection and ranging) survey of South West England was used with existing open source GIS datasets to map non-woodland linear features consisting of woody vegetation. The output dataset is the product of several steps of filtering and masking the lidar data using GIS landscape feature datasets available from the Tellus South West project (digital terrain model (DTM) and digital surface model (DSM)), the Ordnance Survey (OS VectorMap District and OpenMap Local, to remove buildings) and the Forestry Commission (Forestry Commission National Forest Inventory Great Britain 2015, to remove woodland parcels). The dataset was tiled as 20 x 20 km shapefiles, coded by the bottom-left 10 km hectad name. Ground-truthing suggests an accuracy of 73.2% for hedgerow height classes.

A 150-kHz narrowband RD Instruments Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler (ADCP) internally recorded 34,805 current ensembles in 362 days from an Ice-Ocean Buoy (IOEB) deployed during the SHEBA project. The IOEB was initially deployed about 50 km from the main camp and drifted from 75.1 N, 141 W to 80.6 N, 160 W between October 1, 1997 and September 30, 1998. The ADCP was located at a depth of 14m below the ice surface and was configured to record data at 15 minute intervals from 40 8m wide bins extending downward 320m below the instrument. The retrieved 24 Mb raw data are processed to remove noise, correct for platform drift and geomagnetic declination, remove bottom hits, and output 2-hr average Earth-referenced current profiles along with ancillary data.