This dataset consists of mathematical question and answer pairs, from a range of question types at roughly school-level difficulty. This is designed to test the mathematical learning and algebraic reasoning skills of learning models.

## Example questions

 Question: Solve -42*r + 27*c = -1167 and 130*r + 4*c = 372 for r.
 Answer: 4
 
 Question: Calculate -841880142.544 + 411127.
 Answer: -841469015.544
 
 Question: Let x(g) = 9*g + 1. Let q(c) = 2*c + 1. Let f(i) = 3*i - 39. Let w(j) = q(x(j)). Calculate f(w(a)).
 Answer: 54*a - 30

It contains 2 million (question, answer) pairs per module, with questions limited to 160 characters in length, and answers to 30 characters in length. Note the training data for each question type is split into "train-easy", "train-medium", and "train-hard". This allows training models via a curriculum. The data can also be mixed together uniformly from these training datasets to obtain the results reported in the paper. Categories:

• algebra (linear equations, polynomial roots, sequences)
• arithmetic (pairwise operations and mixed expressions, surds)
• calculus (differentiation)
• comparison (closest numbers, pairwise comparisons, sorting)
• measurement (conversion, working with time)
• numbers (base conversion, remainders, common divisors and multiples, primality, place value, rounding numbers)
• polynomials (addition, simplification, composition, evaluating, expansion)
• probability (sampling without replacement)

Raw radio tracking data used to determine the precise distance to Venus (and improve knowledge of the Astronomical Unit) from the Galileo flyby on 10 February 1990.

Dataset Description for Filtered Sigma Dolphin Dataset

Overview

This dataset is a cleaned and filtered version of the Sigma Dolphin dataset (https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/saurabhshahane/sigmadolphin), designed to aid in solving maths word problems using AI techniques. This was used as an effort towards taking part in the AI Mathematical Olympiad - Progress Prize 1 (https://www.kaggle.com/competitions/ai-mathematical-olympiad-prize/overview). The dataset was processed using TF-IDF vectorisation and K-means clustering, specifically targeting questions relevant to the AIME (American Invitational Mathematics Examination) and AMC 12 (American Mathematics Competitions).

Context

The Sigma Dolphin dataset is a project initiated by Microsoft Research Asia, aimed at building an intelligent system with natural language understanding and reasoning capacities to automatically solve maths word problems written in natural language. This project began in early 2013, and the dataset includes maths word problems from various sources, including community question-answering sites like Yahoo! Answers.

Source and Original Dataset Details

• Original Dataset: Sigma Dolphin (https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/saurabhshahane/sigmadolphin)
• Original Source: https://msropendata.com/datasets/f0e63bb3-717a-4a53-aa79-da339b0d7992
• Project Page: http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/projects/dolphin/
• References:
  • Shuming Shi, et al. "Automatically Solving Number Word Problems by Semantic Parsing and Reasoning." EMNLP 2015.
  • Danqing Huang, et al. "How Well Do Computers Solve Math Word Problems? Large-Scale Dataset Construction and Evaluation." ACL 2016.
  • JSON: http://json.org/

Content

The filtered dataset includes problems that are relevant for preparing for maths competitions such as AIME and AMC. The data is structured to facilitate the training and evaluation of AI models aimed at solving these types of problems.

Datasets:

There are several filtered versions of the dataset based on different similarity thresholds (0.3 and 0.5). These thresholds were used to determine the relevance of problems from the original Sigma Dolphin dataset to the AIME and AMC problems.

1. Number Word Problems Filtered at 0.3 Threshold:

   • File: number_word_test_filtered_0.3_Threshold.csv
   • Description: Contains problems filtered with a similarity threshold of 0.3, ensuring moderate relevance to AIME and AMC 12 problems.

2. Number Word Problems Filtered at 0.5 Threshold:

   • File: number_word_std.test_filtered_0.5_Threshold.csv
   • Description: Contains problems filtered with a higher similarity threshold of 0.5, ensuring higher relevance to AIME and AMC 12 problems.

3. Filtered Number Word Problems 2 at 0.3 Threshold:

   • File: filtered_number_word_problems2_Threshold.csv
   • Description: Another set of problems filtered at a 0.3 similarity threshold.

4. Filtered Number Word Problems 2 at 0.5 Threshold:

   • File: filtered_number_word_problems_Threshold.csv
   • Description: Another set of problems filtered at a 0.5 similarity threshold.

Why Different Similarity Thresholds?

Different similarity thresholds (0.3 and 0.5) are used to provide flexibility in selecting problems based on their relevance to AIME and AMC problems. A lower threshold (0.3) includes a broader range of problems, ensuring a diverse set of questions, while a higher threshold (0.5) focuses on problems with stronger relevance, offering a more targeted and precise dataset. This allows users to choose the level of specificity that best fits their needs.

For a detailed explanation of the preprocessing and filtering process, please refer to the Sigma Dolphin Filtered & Cleaned Notebook.

Acknowledgements

We extend our gratitude to all the original authors of the Sigma Dolphin dataset and the creators of the AIME and AMC problems. This project leverages the work of numerous researchers and datasets to build a comprehensive resource for AI-based problem solving in mathematics.

Usage

This dataset is intended for research and educational purposes. It can be used to train AI models for natural language processing and problem-solving tasks, specifically targeting maths word problems in competitive environments like AIME and AMC.

Licensing

This dataset is shared under the Computational Use of Data Agreement v1.0.

This description provides an extensive overview of the dataset, its sources, contents, and usage. If any specific details or additional sections are needed, please let me know!

This dataset comprises curated mathematical problems and their answers sourced from prestigious competitions such as the American Invitational Mathematics Examination (AIME) and the** International Mathematical Olympiad** (IMO). Designed to challenge both human and machine intelligence, these problems cover a wide range of mathematical disciplines, including algebra, geometry, number theory, and combinatorics.

The dataset is structured for use in validating and benchmarking large language models (LLMs), assessing their problem-solving abilities, reasoning, and logical inference skills.

The project lead for the collection of this data was Carrington Hilson. Elk (9 adult females) were captured and equipped with GPS collars (Lotek Iridium) transmitting data from 2023-2024. The Potter-Redwood Valley herd does not migrate between traditional summer and winter seasonal ranges. Therefore, annual home ranges were modeled using year-round data to demarcate high use areas in lieu of modeling the specific winter ranges commonly seen in other ungulate analyses in California. GPS locations were fixed at 6.5 hour intervals in the dataset. To improve the quality of the data set, all points with DOP values greater than 5 and those points visually assessed as a bad fix by the analyst were removed. The methodology used for this migration analysis allowed for the mapping of the herd's home range. Brownian bridge movement models (BBMMs; Sawyer et al. 2009) were constructed with GPS collar data from 8 elk, including 15 annual home range sequences, location, date, time, and average location error as inputs in Migration Mapper. BBMMs were produced at a spatial resolution of 50 m using a sequential fix interval of less than 27 hours and a fixed motion variance of 1000. Home range is visualized as the 50th percentile contour (high use) and the 99th percentile contour of the year-round utilization distribution. Home range designations for this herd may expand with a larger sample.

Sample sizes vary between subsets; 16 and 10 fixes per hour, n = 9; 12 and 6 fixes per hour, n = 23; 4 fixes per hour, n = 32; 3 days, n = 64; 6 days, n = 32.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the population of South Range by gender, including both male and female populations. This dataset can be utilized to understand the population distribution of South Range across both sexes and to determine which sex constitutes the majority.

Key observations

There is a slight majority of male population, with 52.64% of total population being male. Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates.

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates.

Scope of gender :

Please note that American Community Survey asks a question about the respondents current sex, but not about gender, sexual orientation, or sex at birth. The question is intended to capture data for biological sex, not gender. Respondents are supposed to respond with the answer as either of Male or Female. Our research and this dataset mirrors the data reported as Male and Female for gender distribution analysis. No further analysis is done on the data reported from the Census Bureau.

Variables / Data Columns

• Gender: This column displays the Gender (Male / Female)
• Population: The population of the gender in the South Range is shown in this column.
• % of Total Population: This column displays the percentage distribution of each gender as a proportion of South Range total population. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for South Range Population by Race & Ethnicity. You can refer the same here

Study information

The sample included in this dataset represents five children who participated in a number line intervention study. Originally six children were included in the study, but one of them fulfilled the criterion for exclusion after missing several consecutive sessions. Thus, their data is not included in the dataset.

All participants were currently attending Year 1 of primary school at an independent school in New South Wales, Australia. For children to be able to eligible to participate they had to present with low mathematics achievement by performing at or below the 25th percentile in the Maths Problem Solving and/or Numerical Operations subtests from the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test III (WIAT III A & NZ, Wechsler, 2016). Participants were excluded from participating if, as reported by their parents, they have any other diagnosed disorders such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, autism spectrum disorder, intellectual disability, developmental language disorder, cerebral palsy or uncorrected sensory disorders.

The study followed a multiple baseline case series design, with a baseline phase, a treatment phase, and a post-treatment phase. The baseline phase varied between two and three measurement points, the treatment phase varied between four and seven measurement points, and all participants had 1 post-treatment measurement point.

The number of measurement points were distributed across participants as follows:

Participant 1 – 3 baseline, 6 treatment, 1 post-treatment

Participant 3 – 2 baseline, 7 treatment, 1 post-treatment

Participant 5 – 2 baseline, 5 treatment, 1 post-treatment

Participant 6 – 3 baseline, 4 treatment, 1 post-treatment

Participant 7 – 2 baseline, 5 treatment, 1 post-treatment

In each session across all three phases children were assessed in their performance on a number line estimation task, a single-digit computation task, a multi-digit computation task, a dot comparison task and a number comparison task. Furthermore, during the treatment phase, all children completed the intervention task after these assessments. The order of the assessment tasks varied randomly between sessions.

Measures

Number Line Estimation. Children completed a computerised bounded number line task (0-100). The number line is presented in the middle of the screen, and the target number is presented above the start point of the number line to avoid signalling the midpoint (Dackermann et al., 2018). Target numbers included two non-overlapping sets (trained and untrained) of 30 items each. Untrained items were assessed on all phases of the study. Trained items were assessed independent of the intervention during baseline and post-treatment phases, and performance on the intervention is used to index performance on the trained set during the treatment phase. Within each set, numbers were equally distributed throughout the number range, with three items within each ten (0-10, 11-20, 21-30, etc.). Target numbers were presented in random order. Participants did not receive performance-based feedback. Accuracy is indexed by percent absolute error (PAE) [(number estimated - target number)/ scale of number line] x100.

Single-Digit Computation. The task included ten additions with single-digit addends (1-9) and single-digit results (2-9). The order was counterbalanced so that half of the additions present the lowest addend first (e.g., 3 + 5) and half of the additions present the highest addend first (e.g., 6 + 3). This task also included ten subtractions with single-digit minuends (3-9), subtrahends (1-6) and differences (1-6). The items were presented horizontally on the screen accompanied by a sound and participants were required to give a verbal response. Participants did not receive performance-based feedback. Performance on this task was indexed by item-based accuracy.

Multi-digit computational estimation. The task included eight additions and eight subtractions presented with double-digit numbers and three response options. None of the response options represent the correct result. Participants were asked to select the option that was closest to the correct result. In half of the items the calculation involved two double-digit numbers, and in the other half one double and one single digit number. The distance between the correct response option and the exact result of the calculation was two for half of the trials and three for the other half. The calculation was presented vertically on the screen with the three options shown below. The calculations remained on the screen until participants responded by clicking on one of the options on the screen. Participants did not receive performance-based feedback. Performance on this task is measured by item-based accuracy.

Dot Comparison and Number Comparison. Both tasks included the same 20 items, which were presented twice, counterbalancing left and right presentation. Magnitudes to be compared were between 5 and 99, with four items for each of the following ratios: .91, .83, .77, .71, .67. Both quantities were presented horizontally side by side, and participants were instructed to press one of two keys (F or J), as quickly as possible, to indicate the largest one. Items were presented in random order and participants did not receive performance-based feedback. In the non-symbolic comparison task (dot comparison) the two sets of dots remained on the screen for a maximum of two seconds (to prevent counting). Overall area and convex hull for both sets of dots is kept constant following Guillaume et al. (2020). In the symbolic comparison task (Arabic numbers), the numbers remained on the screen until a response was given. Performance on both tasks was indexed by accuracy.

The Number Line Intervention

During the intervention sessions, participants estimated the position of 30 Arabic numbers in a 0-100 bounded number line. As a form of feedback, within each item, the participants’ estimate remained visible, and the correct position of the target number appeared on the number line. When the estimate’s PAE was lower than 2.5, a message appeared on the screen that read “Excellent job”, when PAE was between 2.5 and 5 the message read “Well done, so close! and when PAE was higher than 5 the message read “Good try!” Numbers were presented in random order.

Variables in the dataset

Age = age in ‘years, months’ at the start of the study

Sex = female/male/non-binary or third gender/prefer not to say (as reported by parents)

Math_Problem_Solving_raw = Raw score on the Math Problem Solving subtest from the WIAT III (WIAT III A & NZ, Wechsler, 2016).

Math_Problem_Solving_Percentile = Percentile equivalent on the Math Problem Solving subtest from the WIAT III (WIAT III A & NZ, Wechsler, 2016).

Num_Ops_Raw = Raw score on the Numerical Operations subtest from the WIAT III (WIAT III A & NZ, Wechsler, 2016).

Math_Problem_Solving_Percentile = Percentile equivalent on the Numerical Operations subtest from the WIAT III (WIAT III A & NZ, Wechsler, 2016).

The remaining variables refer to participants’ performance on the study tasks. Each variable name is composed by three sections. The first one refers to the phase and session. For example, Base1 refers to the first measurement point of the baseline phase, Treat1 to the first measurement point on the treatment phase, and post1 to the first measurement point on the post-treatment phase.

The second part of the variable name refers to the task, as follows:

DC = dot comparison

SDC = single-digit computation

NLE_UT = number line estimation (untrained set)

NLE_T= number line estimation (trained set)

CE = multidigit computational estimation

NC = number comparison

The final part of the variable name refers to the type of measure being used (i.e., acc = total correct responses and pae = percent absolute error).

Thus, variable Base2_NC_acc corresponds to accuracy on the number comparison task during the second measurement point of the baseline phase and Treat3_NLE_UT_pae refers to the percent absolute error on the untrained set of the number line task during the third session of the Treatment phase.

This dataset contains three archives. The first archive, full_dataset.zip, contains geometries and free energies for nearly 44,000 solute molecules with almost 9 million conformers, in 42 different solvents. The geometries and gas phase free energies are computed using density functional theory (DFT). The solvation free energy for each conformer is computed using COSMO-RS and the solution free energies are computed using the sum of the gas phase free energies and the solvation free energies. The geometries for each solute conformer are provided as ASE_atoms_objects within a pandas DataFrame, found in the compressed file dft coords.pkl.gz within full_dataset.zip. The gas-phase energies, solvation free energies, and solution free energies are also provided as a pandas DataFrame in the compressed file free_energy.pkl.gz within full_dataset.zip. Ten example data splits for both random and scaffold split types are also provided in the ZIP archive for training models. Scaffold split index 0 is used to generate results in the corresponding publication. The second archive, refined_conf_search.zip, contains geometries and free energies for a representative sample of 28 solute molecules from the full dataset that were subject to a refined conformer search and thus had more conformers located. The format of the data is identical to full_dataset.zip. The third archive contains one folder for each solvent for which we have provided free energies in full_dataset.zip. Each folder contains the .cosmo file for every solvent conformer used in the COSMOtherm calculations, a dummy input file for the COSMOtherm calculations, and a CSV file that contains the electronic energy of each solvent conformer that needs to be substituted for "EH_Line" in the dummy input file.

GLAH05 Level-1B waveform parameterization data include output parameters from the waveform characterization procedure and other parameters required to calculate surface slope and relief characteristics. GLAH05 contains parameterizations of both the transmitted and received pulses and other characteristics from which elevation and footprint-scale roughness and slope are calculated. The received pulse characterization uses two implementations of the retracking algorithms: one tuned for ice sheets, called the standard parameterization, used to calculate surface elevation for ice sheets, oceans, and sea ice; and another for land (the alternative parameterization). Each data granule has an associated browse product.

Chemistry Problem-Solution

Chemistry Problem-Solution Dataset: 20K pairs across 25 topics and subtopics

By camel-ai (From Huggingface) [source]

About this dataset

To ensure diversity and coverage across various aspects of chemistry, this dataset spans across 25 main topics, encompassing a wide range of subtopics within each main topic. Each main topic and subtopic combination contains an extensive set of 32 distinct problems for analysis and study.

In order to facilitate efficient data exploration and analysis, the dataset is structured with essential columns including 'role_1' which signifies the role or identity responsible for presenting either the problem statement or solution. Additionally, 'sub_topic' denotes the specific subarea within each main topic to which both problem and solution belong.

By utilizing this expansive dataset containing accurate problem statements and their corresponding solutions from diverse topics in chemistry along with their categorization into distinct domains (both main topics and subtopics), users can seamlessly navigate through specific areas of interest while making informed decisions about which subsets they'd like to explore further based on their project requirements or learning objectives.

Please note that since generating this dataset was performed using GPT-4 model powered by artificial intelligence algorithms it's critical to conduct careful validation checks when implementing these data points in real-life scenarios or academic research work where precision plays a vital role

How to use the dataset

About the Dataset

The dataset contains 20,000 pairs of problem statements and their corresponding solutions, covering a wide range of topics within the field of chemistry. These pairs have been generated using the GPT-4 model, ensuring that they are diverse and representative of various concepts in chemistry.

Main Topics and Subtopics

The dataset is organized into 25 main topics, with each topic having 25 subtopics. The main topics represent broader areas within chemistry, while the subtopics narrow down to specific subjects within each main topic. This hierarchical structure allows for better categorization and navigation through different aspects of chemistry problems.

Problem Statement

The problem statement (message_1) column provides a concise description or statement of a specific chemistry problem. It sets up the context for understanding what needs to be solved or analyzed.

Solution

The solution (message_2) column contains the respective answer or solution to each problem statement. It offers insights into how to approach and solve specific types of chemistry problems.

How to Utilize this Dataset

Here are some ways you can leverage this dataset:

• Study Specific Topics: Since there are 25 main topics with multiple subtopics in this dataset, you can focus on exploring certain areas that interest you or align with your learning goals in chemistry.

• Develop Learning Resources: As an educator or content creator, you can use this dataset as inspiration for creating educational materials such as textbooks, online courses, or lesson plans focused on different topics within chemistry.

• Build Intelligent Systems: If you're working on developing AI-powered systems related to solving chemistry problems or providing chemical insights, this dataset can serve as training data for your models.

• Evaluate Existing Models: If you have a chemistry problem-solving model or algorithm, you can use this dataset to evaluate its performance and fine-tune it further.

• Generate New Problem-Solution Pairs: You can use the existing problem-solution pairs as a starting point and leverage them to generate new problem-solution pairs by applying techniques like data augmentation or natural language processing.

Limitations

It's important to consider the following limitations of the dataset:

• The dataset is AI-generated using the GPT-4 model, which means some solutions may

Research Ideas

• Educational Resource: This dataset can be used to create an educational resource for chemistry students. The problem-solution pairs can be used as practice questions, allowing students to test their understanding and problem-solving skills.
• AI Model Training: The dataset can be utilized to train AI models in the field of chemistry education. By feeding the problem-solution pairs into the model, it can learn to generate accurate solutions for various chemistry problems.
• Research Analysis: Researchers in the field of chemistry education or n...

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the population of Grass Range by gender, including both male and female populations. This dataset can be utilized to understand the population distribution of Grass Range across both sexes and to determine which sex constitutes the majority.

Key observations

There is a slight majority of female population, with 52.63% of total population being female. Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2017-2021 5-Year Estimates.

Content

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

Scope of gender :

Please note that American Community Survey asks a question about the respondents current sex, but not about gender, sexual orientation, or sex at birth. The question is intended to capture data for biological sex, not gender. Respondents are supposed to respond with the answer as either of Male or Female. Our research and this dataset mirrors the data reported as Male and Female for gender distribution analysis. No further analysis is done on the data reported from the Census Bureau.

Variables / Data Columns

• Gender: This column displays the Gender (Male / Female)
• Population: The population of the gender in the Grass Range is shown in this column.
• % of Total Population: This column displays the percentage distribution of each gender as a proportion of Grass Range total population. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Grass Range Population by Gender. You can refer the same here

The U.S. Geological Survey has been characterizing the regional variation in shear stress on the sea floor and sediment mobility through statistical descriptors. The purpose of this project is to identify patterns in stress in order to inform habitat delineation or decisions for anthropogenic use of the continental shelf. The statistical characterization spans the continental shelf from the coast to approximately 120 m water depth, at approximately 5 km resolution. Time-series of wave and circulation are created using numerical models, and near-bottom output of steady and oscillatory velocities and an estimate of bottom roughness are used to calculate a time-series of bottom shear stress at 1-hour intervals. Statistical descriptions such as the median and 95th percentile, which are the output included with this database, are then calculated to create a two-dimensional picture of the regional patterns in shear stress. In addition, time-series of stress are compared to critical stress values at select points calculated from observed surface sediment texture data to determine estimates of sea floor mobility.

The project lead for the collection of this data was Erin Zulliger. Elk (5 adult females) were captured and equipped with GPS collars (Litetrack/Pinpoint Iridium collars, Lotek Wireless Inc., Newmarket, Ontario, Canada or Vectronic Aerospace) transmitting data from 2019-2023. The Dixie Valley herd does not migrate between traditional summer and winter seasonal ranges. Therefore, annual home ranges were modeled using year-round data to demarcate high use areas in lieu of modeling the specific winter ranges commonly seen in other ungulate analyses in California. GPS locations were fixed at 1-6 hour intervals in the dataset. To improve the quality of the data set, the GPS data locations fixed in 2D space and visually assessed as a bad fix by the analyst were removed.The methodology used for this migration analysis allowed for the mapping of the herd’s annual range. Brownian bridge movement models (BBMMs; Sawyer et al. 2009) were constructed with GPS collar data from 5 elk, including 15 annual home range sequences, location, date, time, and average location error as inputs in Migration Mapper. BBMMs were produced at a spatial resolution of 50 m using a sequential fix interval of less than 27 hours. Home range is visualized as the 50th percentile contour (high use) and the 99th percentile contour of the year-round utilization distribution. Annual home range designations for this herd may expand with a larger sample.

The project lead for the collection of this data was Carrington Hilson. Elk (3 adult females) were captured and equipped with GPS collars (Lotek Iridium) transmitting data from 2017-2021. The Reservation Ranch herd does not migrate between traditional summer and winter seasonal ranges. Therefore, annual home ranges were modeled using year-round data to demarcate high use areas in lieu of modeling the specific winter ranges commonly seen in other ungulate analyses in California. GPS locations were fixed between 1-6 hour intervals in the dataset. To improve the quality of the data set as per Bjørneraas et al. (2010), the GPS data were filtered prior to analysis to remove locations which were: i) further from either the previous point or subsequent point than an individual pronghorn is able to travel in the elapsed time, ii) forming spikes in the movement trajectory based on outgoing and incoming speeds and turning angles sharper than a predefined threshold , or iii) fixed in 2D space and visually assessed as a bad fix by the analyst. The methodology used for this migration analysis allowed for the mapping of the herd’s home range. Brownian bridge movement models (BBMMs; Sawyer et al. 2009) were constructed with GPS collar data from 3 elk, including 5 annual home range sequences, location, date, time, and average location error as inputs in Migration Mapper. BBMMs were produced at a spatial resolution of 50 m using a sequential fix interval of less than 27 hours. Large water bodies were clipped from the final output. Home range is visualized as the 50th percentile contour (high use) and the 99th percentile contour of the year-round utilization distribution. Home range designations for this herd may expand with a larger sample.

The project lead for the collection of this data was Carrington Hilson. Elk (2 adult females) were captured and equipped with GPS collars (Lotek Iridium) transmitting data from 2022-2023. The Wilson herd does not migrate between traditional summer and winter seasonal ranges. Therefore, annual home ranges were modeled using year-round data to demarcate high use areas in lieu of modeling the specific winter ranges commonly seen in other ungulate analyses in California. GPS locations were fixed between 1-7 hour intervals in the dataset. To improve the quality of the data set as per Bjørneraas et al. (2010), the GPS data were filtered prior to analysis to remove locations which were: i) further from either the previous point or subsequent point than an individual pronghorn is able to travel in the elapsed time, ii) forming spikes in the movement trajectory based on outgoing and incoming speeds and turning angles sharper than a predefined threshold , or iii) fixed in 2D space and visually assessed as a bad fix by the analyst. The methodology used for this migration analysis allowed for the mapping of the herd’s home range. Brownian bridge movement models (BBMMs; Sawyer et al. 2009) were constructed with GPS collar data from 2 elk, including 2 annual home range sequence, location, date, time, and average location error as inputs in Migration Mapper. BBMMs were produced at a spatial resolution of 50 m using a sequential fix interval of less then 27 hours. Home range is visualized as the 50th percentile contour (high use) and the 99th percentile contour of the year-round utilization distribution. Home range designations for this herd may expand with a larger sample.

Welcome to the Spanish Chain of Thought prompt-response dataset, a meticulously curated collection containing 3000 comprehensive prompt and response pairs. This dataset is an invaluable resource for training Language Models (LMs) to generate well-reasoned answers and minimize inaccuracies. Its primary utility lies in enhancing LLMs' reasoning skills for solving arithmetic, common sense, symbolic reasoning, and complex problems.

Dataset Content

This COT dataset comprises a diverse set of instructions and questions paired with corresponding answers and rationales in the Spanish language. These prompts and completions cover a broad range of topics and questions, including mathematical concepts, common sense reasoning, complex problem-solving, scientific inquiries, puzzles, and more.

Each prompt is meticulously accompanied by a response and rationale, providing essential information and insights to enhance the language model training process. These prompts, completions, and rationales were manually curated by native Spanish people, drawing references from various sources, including open-source datasets, news articles, websites, and other reliable references.

Our chain-of-thought prompt-completion dataset includes various prompt types, such as instructional prompts, continuations, and in-context learning (zero-shot, few-shot) prompts. Additionally, the dataset contains prompts and completions enriched with various forms of rich text, such as lists, tables, code snippets, JSON, and more, with proper markdown format.

Prompt Diversity

To ensure a wide-ranging dataset, we have included prompts from a plethora of topics related to mathematics, common sense reasoning, and symbolic reasoning. These topics encompass arithmetic, percentages, ratios, geometry, analogies, spatial reasoning, temporal reasoning, logic puzzles, patterns, and sequences, among others.

These prompts vary in complexity, spanning easy, medium, and hard levels. Various question types are included, such as multiple-choice, direct queries, and true/false assessments.

Response Formats

To accommodate diverse learning experiences, our dataset incorporates different types of answers depending on the prompt and provides step-by-step rationales. The detailed rationale aids the language model in building reasoning process for complex questions.

These responses encompass text strings, numerical values, and date and time formats, enhancing the language model's ability to generate reliable, coherent, and contextually appropriate answers.

Data Format and Annotation Details

This fully labeled Spanish Chain of Thought Prompt Completion Dataset is available in JSON and CSV formats. It includes annotation details such as a unique ID, prompt, prompt type, prompt complexity, prompt category, domain, response, rationale, response type, and rich text presence.

Quality and Accuracy

Our dataset upholds the highest standards of quality and accuracy. Each prompt undergoes meticulous validation, and the corresponding responses and rationales are thoroughly verified. We prioritize inclusivity, ensuring that the dataset incorporates prompts and completions representing diverse perspectives and writing styles, maintaining an unbiased and discrimination-free stance.

The Spanish version is grammatically accurate without any spelling or grammatical errors. No copyrighted, toxic, or harmful content is used during the construction of this dataset.

Continuous Updates and Customization

The entire dataset was prepared with the assistance of human curators from the FutureBeeAI crowd community. Ongoing efforts are made to add more assets to this dataset, ensuring its growth and relevance. Additionally, FutureBeeAI offers the ability to gather custom chain of thought prompt completion data tailored to specific needs, providing flexibility and customization options.

License

The dataset, created by FutureBeeAI, is now available for commercial use. Researchers, data scientists, and developers can leverage this fully labeled and ready-to-deploy Spanish Chain of Thought Prompt Completion Dataset to enhance the rationale and accurate response generation capabilities of their generative AI models and explore new approaches to NLP tasks.

Transient killers whales inhabit the West Coast of the United States. Their range and movement patterns are difficult to ascertain, but are vital to understanding killer whale population dynamics and abundance trends. Satellite tagging of West Coast transient killer whales to determine range and movement patterns will provide data to assist in understanding transient killer whale populations. L...

The project lead for the collection of this data was Erin Zulliger. Elk (11 adult females) were captured and equipped with GPS collars (Litetrack/Pinpoint Iridium collars, Lotek Wireless Inc., Newmarket, Ontario, Canada or Vectronic Aerospace) transmitting data from 2016-2023. The Long Prairie herd does not migrate between traditional summer and winter seasonal ranges. Therefore, annual home ranges were modeled using year-round data to demarcate high use areas in lieu of modeling the specific winter ranges commonly seen in other ungulate analyses in California. GPS locations were fixed at 1-13 hour intervals in the dataset. To improve the quality of the data set, the GPS data locations fixed in 2D space and visually assessed as a bad fix by the analyst were removed.The methodology used for this migration analysis allowed for the mapping of the herd's annual range. Brownian bridge movement models (BBMMs; Sawyer et al. 2009) were constructed with GPS collar data from 11 elk, including 34 annual home range sequences, location, date, time, and average location error as inputs in Migration Mapper. BBMMs were produced at a spatial resolution of 50 m using a sequential fix interval of less than 27 hours. Home range is visualized as the 50th percentile contour (high use) and the 99th percentile contour of the year-round utilization distribution. Annual home range designations for this herd may expand with a larger sample.

The project lead for the collection of this data was Carrington Hilson. Elk (2 adult females) were captured and equipped with GPS collars (Lotek Iridium) transmitting data from 2023-2024. The Lone Pine herd does not migrate between traditional summer and winter seasonal ranges. Therefore, annual home ranges were modeled using year-round data to demarcate high use areas in lieu of modeling the specific winter ranges commonly seen in other ungulate analyses in California. GPS locations were fixed at 6.5 hour intervals in the dataset. To improve the quality of the data set, all points with DOP values greater than 5 and those points visually assessed as a bad fix by the analyst were removed. The methodology used for this migration analysis allowed for the mapping of the herd's home range. Brownian bridge movement models (BBMMs; Sawyer et al. 2009) were constructed with GPS collar data from 2 elk, including 2 annual home range sequences, location, date, time, and average location error as inputs in Migration Mapper. BBMMs were produced at a spatial resolution of 50 m using a sequential fix interval of less than 27 hours and a fixed motion variance of 1000. Home range is visualized as the 50th percentile contour (high use) and the 99th percentile contour of the year-round utilization distribution. Home range designations for this herd may expand with a larger sample.