About this dataset

Context

The dataset presents median household incomes for various household sizes in England, AR, as reported by the U.S. Census Bureau. The dataset highlights the variation in median household income with the size of the family unit, offering valuable insights into economic trends and disparities within different household sizes, aiding in data analysis and decision-making.

Key observations

• Of the 7 household sizes (1 person to 7-or-more person households) reported by the census bureau, England did not include 5, 6, or 7-person households. Across the different household sizes in England the mean income is $64,018, and the standard deviation is $32,785. The coefficient of variation (CV) is 51.21%. This high CV indicates high relative variability, suggesting that the incomes vary significantly across different sizes of households.
• In the most recent year, 2021, The smallest household size for which the bureau reported a median household income was 1-person households, with an income of $20,006. It then further increased to $59,740 for 4-person households, the largest household size for which the bureau reported a median household income.

https://i.neilsberg.com/ch/england-ar-median-household-income-by-household-size.jpeg" alt="England, AR median household income, by household size (in 2022 inflation-adjusted dollars)">

Content

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

Household Sizes:

• 1-person households
• 2-person households
• 3-person households
• 4-person households
• 5-person households
• 6-person households
• 7-or-more-person households

Variables / Data Columns

• Household Size: This column showcases 7 household sizes ranging from 1-person households to 7-or-more-person households (As mentioned above).
• Median Household Income: Median household income, in 2022 inflation-adjusted dollars for the specific household size.

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 England median household income. You can refer the same here

Snapshot img

AI Training Dataset Market Size 2025-2029

The ai training dataset market size is valued to increase by USD 7.33 billion, at a CAGR of 29% from 2024 to 2029. Proliferation and increasing complexity of foundational AI models will drive the ai training dataset market.

Market Insights

North America dominated the market and accounted for a 36% growth during the 2025-2029.
By Service Type - Text segment was valued at USD 742.60 billion in 2023
By Deployment - On-premises segment accounted for the largest market revenue share in 2023

Market Size & Forecast

Market Opportunities: USD 479.81 million 
Market Future Opportunities 2024: USD 7334.90 million
CAGR from 2024 to 2029 : 29%

Market Summary

The market is experiencing significant growth as businesses increasingly rely on artificial intelligence (AI) to optimize operations, enhance customer experiences, and drive innovation. The proliferation and increasing complexity of foundational AI models necessitate large, high-quality datasets for effective training and improvement. This shift from data quantity to data quality and curation is a key trend in the market. Navigating data privacy, security, and copyright complexities, however, poses a significant challenge. Businesses must ensure that their datasets are ethically sourced, anonymized, and securely stored to mitigate risks and maintain compliance. For instance, in the supply chain optimization sector, companies use AI models to predict demand, optimize inventory levels, and improve logistics. Access to accurate and up-to-date training datasets is essential for these applications to function efficiently and effectively. Despite these challenges, the benefits of AI and the need for high-quality training datasets continue to drive market growth. The potential applications of AI are vast and varied, from healthcare and finance to manufacturing and transportation. As businesses continue to explore the possibilities of AI, the demand for curated, reliable, and secure training datasets will only increase.

What will be the size of the AI Training Dataset Market during the forecast period?

Get Key Insights on Market Forecast (PDF) Request Free SampleThe market continues to evolve, with businesses increasingly recognizing the importance of high-quality datasets for developing and refining artificial intelligence models. According to recent studies, the use of AI in various industries is projected to grow by over 40% in the next five years, creating a significant demand for training datasets. This trend is particularly relevant for boardrooms, as companies grapple with compliance requirements, budgeting decisions, and product strategy. Moreover, the importance of data labeling, feature selection, and imbalanced data handling in model performance cannot be overstated. For instance, a mislabeled dataset can lead to biased and inaccurate models, potentially resulting in costly errors. Similarly, effective feature selection algorithms can significantly improve model accuracy and reduce computational resources. Despite these challenges, advances in model compression methods, dataset scalability, and data lineage tracking are helping to address some of the most pressing issues in the market. For example, model compression techniques can reduce the size of models, making them more efficient and easier to deploy. Similarly, data lineage tracking can help ensure data consistency and improve model interpretability. In conclusion, the market is a critical component of the broader AI ecosystem, with significant implications for businesses across industries. By focusing on data quality, effective labeling, and advanced techniques for handling imbalanced data and improving model performance, organizations can stay ahead of the curve and unlock the full potential of AI.

Unpacking the AI Training Dataset Market Landscape

In the realm of artificial intelligence (AI), the significance of high-quality training datasets is indisputable. Businesses harnessing AI technologies invest substantially in acquiring and managing these datasets to ensure model robustness and accuracy. According to recent studies, up to 80% of machine learning projects fail due to insufficient or poor-quality data. Conversely, organizations that effectively manage their training data experience an average ROI improvement of 15% through cost reduction and enhanced model performance.

Distributed computing systems and high-performance computing facilitate the processing of vast datasets, enabling businesses to train models at scale. Data security protocols and privacy preservation techniques are crucial to protect sensitive information within these datasets. Reinforcement learning models and supervised learning models each have their unique applications, with the former demonstrating a 30% faster convergence rate in certain use cases.

Data annot

National and subnational mid-year population estimates for the UK and its constituent countries by administrative area, age and sex (including components of population change, median age and population density).

The Health Survey for England, 2000-2001: Small Area Estimation Teaching Dataset was prepared as a resource for those interested in learning introductory small area estimation techniques. It was first presented as part of a workshop entitled 'Introducing small area estimation techniques and applying them to the Health Survey for England using Stata'. The data are accompanied by a guide that includes a practical case study enabling users to derive estimates of disability for districts in the absence of survey estimates. This is achieved using various models that combine information from ESDS government surveys with other aggregate data that are reliably available for sub-national areas. Analysis is undertaken using Stata statistical software; all relevant syntax is provided in the accompanying '.do' files.

The data files included in this teaching resource contain HSE variables and data from the Census and Mid-year population estimates and projections that were developed originally by the National Statistical agencies, as follows:

• The main data file, 'hse_data.dta', is a reduced version of the HSE for 2000 and 2001. In order to combine data from two years of the HSE in a consistent way some changes have been made to the weights in each year. Additionally, some recoding of the limiting long term illness (LLTI), disability and the age variable has also been undertaken.
• File 'practical_1_task_5_data.dta' contains population counts and model mobility disability rates (estimated during practical 1) distinguishing single year of age and sex for the six case study districts.
• File 'practical_2_data.dta' contains the aggregate data required for Practical 2, including age- and sex-specific rates of LLTI (Census) for six UK case study districts, age- and sex-specific rates of mobility disability for England (HSE), and population counts for the six districts.
• File 'pop_data_practical_3.dta' contains population counts for the six districts (by age, sex and LLTI status) required for practical 3

The original HSEs for 2000 and 2001 are held at the UK Data Archive under SNs 4628 and 4912 respectively. Full details of the recoding of HSE variables and how the aggregate data was produced can be found in the data documentation.

This unrestricted access data collection is freely available to download under an Open Government Licence from the UK Data Service. Note that the files should be unzipped/saved to the C: drive of the computer to be used; all syntax assumes files are saved at this location.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset presents median household incomes for various household sizes in Kentucky, as reported by the U.S. Census Bureau. The dataset highlights the variation in median household income with the size of the family unit, offering valuable insights into economic trends and disparities within different household sizes, aiding in data analysis and decision-making.

Key observations

• Of the 7 household sizes (1 person to 7-or-more person households) reported by the census bureau, all of the household sizes were found in Kentucky. Across the different household sizes in Kentucky the mean income is $76,460, and the standard deviation is $22,344. The coefficient of variation (CV) is 29.22%. This high CV indicates high relative variability, suggesting that the incomes vary significantly across different sizes of households.
• In the most recent year, 2021, The smallest household size for which the bureau reported a median household income was 1-person households, with an income of $29,738. It then further increased to $90,899 for 7-person households, the largest household size for which the bureau reported a median household income.

https://i.neilsberg.com/ch/kentucky-median-household-income-by-household-size.jpeg" alt="Kentucky median household income, by household size (in 2022 inflation-adjusted dollars)">

Content

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

Household Sizes:

• 1-person households
• 2-person households
• 3-person households
• 4-person households
• 5-person households
• 6-person households
• 7-or-more-person households

Variables / Data Columns

• Household Size: This column showcases 7 household sizes ranging from 1-person households to 7-or-more-person households (As mentioned above).
• Median Household Income: Median household income, in 2022 inflation-adjusted dollars for the specific household size.

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 Kentucky median household income. You can refer the same here

The mid-year estimates refer to the population on 30 June of the reference year and are produced in line with the standard United Nations (UN) definition for population estimates. They are the official set of population estimates for the UK and its constituent countries, the regions and counties of England, and local authorities and their equivalents.

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner. To provide quantitative estimates of the principal demographic and social characteristics of emigrants to the USA from the UK, and to test the usefulness of the passenger lists of American ports for this purpose. Main Topics: Variables Age, sex, occupation, nationality, type and size of migrating household; type of vessel, class of accomodation, data and port of arrival and departure, destination and place of last residence (where available). Please note: this study does not include information on named individuals and would therefore not be useful for personal family history research. Simple random sample one-in-five of ships entering five US ports Compilation or synthesis of existing material

This zip file contains the Standard Area Measurements (SAM) for the administrative areas in the United Kingdom as at 31 December 2023. This includes the wards, local authority districts, counties and regions in England and the countries. All measurements provided are ‘flat’ as they do not take into account variations in relief e.g. mountains and valleys. Measurements are given in hectares (10,000 square metres) to 2 decimal places. Four types of measurements are included: total extent (AREAEHECT), area to mean high water (coastline) (AREACHECT), area of inland water (AREAIHECT) and area to mean high water excluding area of inland water (land area) (AREALHECT). The Eurostat-recommended approach is to use the ‘land area’ measurement to compile population density figures.Click the Download button to download the files

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner. This study estimates the size of the union wage premium in Britain and the United States over the last two decades. The project compared trends in the wage premium between the US and Britain to provide insights into the way unions operate in a period of union decline. For Britain, the analysis was based on data from the British Social Attitudes Surveys (BSA) 1983-2002, the Labour Force Surveys for 1989-2000 (LFS) and the Workplace Employee Relations Survey 1998 (WERS98), which are all held at the UK Data Archive (see web page links below). For the US, the Current Population Surveys 1973-2002 (not held at UKDA) were used. Users should note that this deposit includes data from BSA and WERS98 only, not LFS, and covers Britain only, for the years 1983-2001. No separate documentation has been deposited for this study, but users may find the original documentation for BSA and WERS useful. Links to the documentation for these studies may be found via the UKDA's major studies web pages: British Social Attitudes Workplace Employee Relations For further information on the project, including data sources, compilation and variables, the depositor suggests that users consult the ESRC Society Today web site, using the grant number R000223958. Main Topics: The files include the following information: membwag3: linked employer-employee data from WERS98 where the unit is the employee; tsearn: repeat cross-section data from BSA 1983-2002; wag8998: 1989 and 1998 analysis of the impact of the closed shop and perceptions of union power on the wage premium. Please see documentation for BSA and WERS studies for details of original sampling Compilation or synthesis of existing material

Numbers of enterprises and local units produced from a snapshot of the Inter-Departmental Business Register (IDBR) taken on 14 March 2025.

United Kingdom UK: Urban Land Area data was reported at 58,698.750 sq km in 2010. This stayed constant from the previous number of 58,698.750 sq km for 2000. United Kingdom UK: Urban Land Area data is updated yearly, averaging 58,698.750 sq km from Dec 1990 (Median) to 2010, with 3 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 58,698.750 sq km in 2010 and a record low of 58,698.750 sq km in 2010. United Kingdom UK: Urban Land Area data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United Kingdom – Table UK.World Bank.WDI: Land Use, Protected Areas and National Wealth. Urban land area in square kilometers, based on a combination of population counts (persons), settlement points, and the presence of Nighttime Lights. Areas are defined as urban where contiguous lighted cells from the Nighttime Lights or approximated urban extents based on buffered settlement points for which the total population is greater than 5,000 persons.; ; Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN)/Columbia University. 2013. Urban-Rural Population and Land Area Estimates Version 2. Palisades, NY: NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC). http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/data/set/lecz-urban-rural-population-land-area-estimates-v2.; Sum;

The vertical land change activity focuses on the detection, analysis, and explanation of topographic change. These detection techniques include both quantitative methods, for example, using difference metrics derived from multi-temporal topographic digital elevation models (DEMs), such as, light detection and ranging (lidar), National Elevation Dataset (NED), Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM), and Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (IFSAR), and qualitative methods, for example, using multi-temporal aerial photography to visualize topographic change. The geographic study area of this activity is Perry County, Kentucky. Available multi-temporal lidar, NED, SRTM, IFSAR, and other topographic elevation datasets, as well as aerial photography and multi-spectral image data were identified and downloaded for this study area county. Available mine maps and mine portal locations were obtained from the Kentucky Mine Mapping Information System, Division of Mine Safety, 300 Sower Boulevard, Frankfort, KY 40601 at http://minemaps.ky.gov/Default.aspx?Src=Downloads. These features were used to spatially locate the study areas within Perry County. Previously developed differencing methods (Gesch, 2006) were used to develop difference raster datasets of NED/SRTM (1950-2000 date range) and SRTM/IFSAR (2000-2008 date range). The difference rasters were evaluated to exclude difference values that were below a specified vertical change threshold, which was applied spatially by National Land Cover Dataset (NLCD) 1992 and 2006 land cover type, respectively. This spatial application of the vertical change threshold values improved the overall ability to detect vertical change because threshold values in bare earth areas were distinguished from threshold values in heavily vegetated areas. Lidar high-resolution (1.5 m) DEMs were acquired for Perry County, Kentucky from U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service Geospatial Data Gateway at https://gdg.sc.egov.usda.gov/GDGOrder.aspx#. ESRI Mosaic Datasets were generated from lidar point-cloud data and available topographic DEMs for the specified study area. These data were analyzed to estimate volumetric changes on the land surface at three different periods with lidar acquisitions collected for Perry County, KY on 3/29/12 to 4/6/12. A recent difference raster dataset time span (2008-2012 date range) was analyzed by differencing the Perry County lidar-derived DEM and an IFSAR-derived dataset. The IFSAR-derived data were resampled to the resolution of the lidar DEM (approximately 1-m resolution) and compared with the lidar-derived DEM. Land cover based threshold values were applied spatially to detect vertical change using the lidar/IFSAR difference dataset. Perry County lidar metadata reported that the acquisition required lidar to be collected with an average of 0.68 m point spacing or better and vertical accuracy of 15 cm root mean square error (RMSE) or better. References: Gesch, Dean B., 2006, An inventory and assessment of significant topographic changes in the United States Brookings, S. Dak., South Dakota State University, Ph.D. dissertation, 234 p, at https://topotools.cr.usgs.gov/pdfs/DGesch_dissertation_Nov2006.pdf.

The UKFood dataset provides a statistical match of the Living Costs and Food Survey (LCFS) and the National Diet and Nutrition Survey (NDNS), combining food purchases and expenditure at the household level with nutrient intake at the individual level. It was produced as part of the Imperial College Business School Fiscal INCentives for Health improvement: repurposing consumption taxes on food (FINCH) project (funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)).

The LCFS is a nationally representative survey conducted by the Office for National Statistics (ONS), designed to collect information on household spending patterns across the entirety of the UK. It is widely used to produce official UK family spending and food consumption statistics. In particular, the Food Family module (conducted by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) records participants' food and drink purchases in a two-week diary, documenting quantities, expenditures, and nutrients for over 500 types of food. The NDNS, funded by the Food Standards Agency (FSA) and conducted by NatCen and the University of Cambridge MRC Epidemiology Unit), gathers detailed information on food and nutrient intake from a representative sample of the UK population. This project employed statistical matching techniques to merge individuals from LCFS and NDNS, utilising a set of common variables in both datasets to create a new dataset containing household food expenditure and individual nutrient intake data. A predictive mean matching imputation technique facilitates the fusion of the two datasets that include samples from the same representative population and share a suitable subset of common variables for the 2018/19 fiscal year. The UKFood dataset encompasses a rich array of sociodemographic characteristics, including household size, ethnicity, tenure, marital status, sex, age, socioeconomic classification (SEC), UK regions, and the number of children in the household. Importantly, it also includes a range of nutrients at both individual and household levels (such as energy (kcal), protein, fat, carbohydrate, and sugar), enabling comparisons of nutrient purchases and intakes for a representative sample of the UK. This new dataset supports analyses of the impacts of fiscal policies, which necessitates an assessment of both household expenditure and finances, as well as individual nutrient intakes.

Documentation

The UKFood User Guide, Raw Variables Guide and ReadMe file are available via the Documentation tab. The Stata do-file information and codebook file are available for download alongside the data files, by registered UKDS users.

16,000 Zara UK Fashion Products in CSV Format

Unlock fashion retail intelligence with our comprehensive Zara UK products dataset. This premium collection contains 16,000 products from Zara's UK online store, providing detailed insights into one of the world's leading fast-fashion retailers. Perfect for fashion trend analysis, pricing strategies, competitive research, and machine learning applications.

Dataset Overview

• Language: English
• Coverage: Men's, women's, and children's fashion
• File Size: ~30MB
• Data Freshness: Recently collected (2025)

Complete Data Fields Included

Product Information

• name: Complete product titles and descriptions
• brand: Brand identification (Zara)
• category: Product categories (tops, bottoms, dresses, accessories)
• description: Detailed item descriptions and features
• composition: Fabric composition and material details
• breadcrumbs: Navigation path and product hierarchy

Pricing and Promotions

• price: Current prices in GBP
• old_price: Original prices before discounts
• discount: Discount percentages and savings
• promotions: Active promotional campaigns
• currency: GBP for UK market analysis

Product Attributes

• color: Available color variations
• sizes: Size ranges and availability
• images: High-resolution product image URLs
• url: Direct product page links

Technical Fields

• uniq_id: Unique product identifiers
• scraped_at: Data collection timestamps

Key Use Cases

Fashion Trend Analysis

• Track seasonal trends and popular styles
• Analyze color preferences and combinations
• Monitor fashion trend evolution
• Predict upcoming fashion movements

Competitive Intelligence

• Study Zara's pricing strategies
• Analyze product mix and category focus
• Monitor inventory and availability patterns
• Compare market positioning

E-commerce Analytics

• Category performance analysis
• Price optimization strategies
• Inventory planning insights
• Customer preference mapping

Machine Learning Applications

• Fashion recommendation systems
• Price prediction models
• Trend forecasting algorithms
• Image recognition training data

Data Quality Features

• Clean, Validated Data: Pre-processed and error-checked
• Consistent Formatting: Standardized structure across records
• No Duplicates: Unique products only
• Complete Coverage: Entire Zara UK catalog included
• Fresh Collection: Recently scraped for current relevance

Target Industries

Fashion Retailers

• Competitive benchmarking
• Trend adoption strategies
• Pricing optimization
• Product development insights

Technology Companies

• AI training datasets
• Fashion analytics platforms
• E-commerce enhancement
• Style recommendation engines

Market Research

• Industry analysis reports
• Brand performance tracking
• Consumer behavior studies
• Trend forecasting services

Academic Research

• Fashion industry studies
• Business case studies
• Data science applications
• Sustainability research

Licensing Options

Commercial License

• Full business usage rights
• Team sharing permissions
• Resale of processed insights
• API integration allowed

Academic License

• Non-commercial research use
• Educational institution sharing
• Publication rights included
• Discounted pricing available

Delivery Methods

• Instant

On the continental scale, climate is an important determinant of the distributions of plant taxa and ecoregions. To quantify and depict the relations between specific climate variables and these distributions, we placed modern climate and plant taxa distribution data on an approximately 25-kilometer (km) equal-area grid with 27,984 points that cover Canada and the continental United States (Thompson and others, 2015). The gridded climatic data include annual and monthly temperature and precipitation, as well as bioclimatic variables (growing degree days, mean temperatures of the coldest and warmest months, and a moisture index) based on 1961-1990 30-year mean values from the University of East Anglia (UK) Climatic Research Unit (CRU) CL 2.0 dataset (New and others, 2002), and absolute minimum and maximum temperatures for 1951-1980 interpolated from climate-station data (WeatherDisc Associates, 1989). As described below, these data were used to produce portions of the "Atlas of relations between climatic parameters and distributions of important trees and shrubs in North America" (hereafter referred to as "the Atlas"; Thompson and others, 1999a, 1999b, 2000, 2006, 2007, 2012a, 2015). Evolution of the Atlas Over the 16 Years Between Volumes A & B and G: The Atlas evolved through time as technology improved and our knowledge expanded. The climate data employed in the first five Atlas volumes were replaced by more standard and better documented data in the last two volumes (Volumes F and G; Thompson and others, 2012a, 2015). Similarly, the plant distribution data used in Volumes A through D (Thompson and others, 1999a, 1999b, 2000, 2006) were improved for the latter volumes. However, the digitized ecoregion boundaries used in Volume E (Thompson and others, 2007) remain unchanged. Also, as we and others used the data in Atlas Volumes A through E, we came to realize that the plant distribution and climate data for areas south of the US-Mexico border were not of sufficient quality or resolution for our needs and these data are not included in this data release. The data in this data release are provided in comma-separated values (.csv) files. We also provide netCDF (.nc) files containing the climate and bioclimatic data, grouped taxa and species presence-absence data, and ecoregion assignment data for each grid point (but not the country, state, province, and county assignment data for each grid point, which are available in the .csv files). The netCDF files contain updated Albers conical equal-area projection details and more precise grid-point locations. When the original approximately 25-km equal-area grid was created (ca. 1990), it was designed to be registered with existing data sets, and only 3 decimal places were recorded for the grid-point latitude and longitude values (these original 3-decimal place latitude and longitude values are in the .csv files). In addition, the Albers conical equal-area projection used for the grid was modified to match projection irregularities of the U.S. Forest Service atlases (e.g., Little, 1971, 1976, 1977) from which plant taxa distribution data were digitized. For the netCDF files, we have updated the Albers conical equal-area projection parameters and recalculated the grid-point latitudes and longitudes to 6 decimal places. The additional precision in the location data produces maximum differences between the 6-decimal place and the original 3-decimal place values of up to 0.00266 degrees longitude (approximately 143.8 m along the projection x-axis of the grid) and up to 0.00123 degrees latitude (approximately 84.2 m along the projection y-axis of the grid). The maximum straight-line distance between a three-decimal-point and six-decimal-point grid-point location is 144.2 m. Note that we have not regridded the elevation, climate, grouped taxa and species presence-absence data, or ecoregion data to the locations defined by the new 6-decimal place latitude and longitude data. For example, the climate data described in the Atlas publications were interpolated to the grid-point locations defined by the original 3-decimal place latitude and longitude values. Interpolating the data to the 6-decimal place latitude and longitude values would in many cases not result in changes to the reported values and for other grid points the changes would be small and insignificant. Similarly, if the digitized Little (1971, 1976, 1977) taxa distribution maps were regridded using the 6-decimal place latitude and longitude values, the changes to the gridded distributions would be minor, with a small number of grid points along the edge of a taxa's digitized distribution potentially changing value from taxa "present" to taxa "absent" (or vice versa). These changes should be considered within the spatial margin of error for the taxa distributions, which are based on hand-drawn maps with the distributions evidently generalized, or represented by a small, filled circle, and these distributions were subsequently hand digitized. Users wanting to use data that exactly match the data in the Atlas volumes should use the 3-decimal place latitude and longitude data provided in the .csv files in this data release to represent the center point of each grid cell. Users for whom an offset of up to 144.2 m from the original grid-point location is acceptable (e.g., users investigating continental-scale questions) or who want to easily visualize the data may want to use the data associated with the 6-decimal place latitude and longitude values in the netCDF files. The variable names in the netCDF files generally match those in the data release .csv files, except where the .csv file variable name contains a forward slash, colon, period, or comma (i.e., "/", ":", ".", or ","). In the netCDF file variable short names, the forward slashes are replaced with an underscore symbol (i.e., "_") and the colons, periods, and commas are deleted. In the netCDF file variable long names, the punctuation in the name matches that in the .csv file variable names. The "country", "state, province, or territory", and "county" data in the .csv files are not included in the netCDF files. Data included in this release: - Geographic scope. The gridded data cover an area that we labelled as "CANUSA", which includes Canada and the USA (excluding Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and other oceanic islands). Note that the maps displayed in the Atlas volumes are cropped at their northern edge and do not display the full northern extent of the data included in this data release. - Elevation. The elevation data were regridded from the ETOPO5 data set (National Geophysical Data Center, 1993). There were 35 coastal grid points in our CANUSA study area grid for which the regridded elevations were below sea level and these grid points were assigned missing elevation values (i.e., elevation = 9999). The grid points with missing elevation values occur in five coastal areas: (1) near San Diego (California, USA; 1 grid point), (2) Vancouver Island (British Columbia, Canada) and the Olympic Peninsula (Washington, USA; 2 grid points), (3) the Haida Gwaii (formerly Queen Charlotte Islands, British Columbia, Canada) and southeast Alaska (USA, 9 grid points), (4) the Canadian Arctic Archipelago (22 grid points), and (5) Newfoundland (Canada; 1 grid point). - Climate. The gridded climatic data provided here are based on the 1961-1990 30-year mean values from the University of East Anglia (UK) Climatic Research Unit (CRU) CL 2.0 dataset (New and others, 2002), and include annual and monthly temperature and precipitation. The CRU CL 2.0 data were interpolated onto the approximately 25-km grid using geographically-weighted regression, incorporating local lapse-rate estimation and correction. Additional bioclimatic variables (growing degree days on a 5 degrees Celsius base, mean temperatures of the coldest and warmest months, and a moisture index calculated as actual evapotranspiration divided by potential evapotranspiration) were calculated using the interpolated CRU CL 2.0 data. Also included are absolute minimum and maximum temperatures for 1951-1980 interpolated in a similar fashion from climate-station data (WeatherDisc Associates, 1989). These climate and bioclimate data were used in Atlas volumes F and G (see Thompson and others, 2015, for a description of the methods used to create the gridded climate data). Note that for grid points with missing elevation values (i.e., elevation values equal to 9999), climate data were created using an elevation value of -120 meters. Users may want to exclude these climate data from their analyses (see the Usage Notes section in the data release readme file). - Plant distributions. The gridded plant distribution data align with Atlas volume G (Thompson and others, 2015). Plant distribution data on the grid include 690 species, as well as 67 groups of related species and genera, and are based on U.S. Forest Service atlases (e.g., Little, 1971, 1976, 1977), regional atlases (e.g., Benson and Darrow, 1981), and new maps based on information available from herbaria and other online and published sources (for a list of sources, see Tables 3 and 4 in Thompson and others, 2015). See the "Notes" column in Table 1 (https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/p1650-g/table1.html) and Table 2 (https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/p1650-g/table2.html) in Thompson and others (2015) for important details regarding the species and grouped taxa distributions. - Ecoregions. The ecoregion gridded data are the same as in Atlas volumes D and E (Thompson and others, 2006, 2007), and include three different systems, Bailey's ecoregions (Bailey, 1997, 1998), WWF's ecoregions (Ricketts and others, 1999), and Kuchler's potential natural vegetation regions (Kuchler, 1985), that are each based on distinctive approaches to categorizing ecoregions. For the Bailey and WWF ecoregions for North America and the Kuchler potential natural vegetation regions for the contiguous United States (i.e.,

Snapshot img

Graph Database Market Size 2025-2029

The graph database market size is valued to increase by USD 11.24 billion, at a CAGR of 29% from 2024 to 2029. Open knowledge network gaining popularity will drive the graph database market.

Market Insights

North America dominated the market and accounted for a 46% growth during the 2025-2029.
By End-user - Large enterprises segment was valued at USD 1.51 billion in 2023
By Type - RDF segment accounted for the largest market revenue share in 2023

Market Size & Forecast

Market Opportunities: USD 670.01 million 
Market Future Opportunities 2024: USD 11235.10 million
CAGR from 2024 to 2029 : 29%

Market Summary

The market is experiencing significant growth due to the increasing demand for low-latency query capabilities and the ability to handle complex, interconnected data. Graph databases are deployed in both on-premises data centers and cloud regions, providing flexibility for businesses with varying IT infrastructures. One real-world business scenario where graph databases excel is in supply chain optimization. In this context, graph databases can help identify the shortest path between suppliers and consumers, taking into account various factors such as inventory levels, transportation routes, and demand patterns. This can lead to increased operational efficiency and reduced costs.
However, the market faces challenges such as the lack of standardization and programming flexibility. Graph databases, while powerful, require specialized skills to implement and manage effectively. Additionally, the market is still evolving, with new players and technologies emerging regularly. Despite these challenges, the potential benefits of graph databases make them an attractive option for businesses seeking to gain a competitive edge through improved data management and analysis.

What will be the size of the Graph Database Market during the forecast period?

Get Key Insights on Market Forecast (PDF) Request Free Sample

The market is an evolving landscape, with businesses increasingly recognizing the value of graph technology for managing complex and interconnected data. According to recent research, the adoption of graph databases is projected to grow by over 20% annually, surpassing traditional relational databases in certain use cases. This trend is particularly significant for industries requiring advanced data analysis, such as finance, healthcare, and telecommunications. Compliance is a key decision area where graph databases offer a competitive edge. By modeling data as nodes and relationships, organizations can easily trace and analyze interconnected data, ensuring regulatory requirements are met. Moreover, graph databases enable real-time insights, which is crucial for budgeting and product strategy in today's fast-paced business environment.
Graph databases also provide superior performance compared to traditional databases, especially in handling complex queries involving relationships and connections. This translates to significant time and cost savings, making it an attractive option for businesses seeking to optimize their data management infrastructure. In conclusion, the market is experiencing robust growth, driven by its ability to handle complex data relationships and offer real-time insights. This trend is particularly relevant for industries dealing with regulatory compliance and seeking to optimize their data management infrastructure.

Unpacking the Graph Database Market Landscape

In today's data-driven business landscape, the adoption of graph databases has surged due to their unique capabilities in handling complex network data modeling. Compared to traditional relational databases, graph databases offer a significant improvement in query performance for intricate relationship queries, with some reports suggesting up to a 500% increase in query response time. Furthermore, graph databases enable efficient data lineage tracking, ensuring regulatory compliance and enhancing data version control. Graph databases, such as property graph models and RDF databases, facilitate node relationship management and real-time graph processing, making them indispensable for industries like finance, healthcare, and social media. With the rise of distributed and knowledge graph databases, organizations can achieve scalability and performance improvements, handling massive datasets with ease. Security, indexing, and deployment are essential aspects of graph databases, ensuring data integrity and availability. Query performance tuning and graph analytics libraries further enhance the value of graph databases in data integration and business intelligence applications. Ultimately, graph databases offer a powerful alternative to NoSQL databases, providing a more flexible and efficient approach to managing complex data relationships.

Key Market Drivers Fueling Growth

The growing popularity o

Dataset Card for legislation-gov-uk-en-cy

  Dataset Summary

This dataset consists of English-Welsh sentence pairs obtained via scraping the www.legislation.gov.uk website. The total dataset is approximately 170 Mb in size.

  Supported Tasks and Leaderboards

translation text-classification summarization sentence-similarity

  Languages

English Welsh

  Dataset Structure





  Data Fields

source target

  Data Splits

train… See the full description on the dataset page: https://huggingface.co/datasets/techiaith/legislation-gov-uk_en-cy.

These data consist of measures of Internet use estimated using small area estimation. The small area estimation is based on census Output Areas (OAs) using the 2013 Oxford Internet Survey (OxIS) and the 2011 British census. There is an estimate for each OA in Great Britain. By combining the 2013 OxIS survey data with the comprehensive small area coverage of the 2011 British census we can use the strengths of one to offset the gaps in the other. Specifically, we follow a two-step process. First, we use the information that is reliably available in OxIS to create model that estimates the proportion of Internet users in OAs. Second, we use the parameters from this model combined with census data to estimate the proportion of Internet users each OA in Britain. Once these estimates are available, we aggregate the estimates up to higher levels of geography. In this way we can estimate Internet use in Glasgow, Manchester and Cardiff as well as other small areas in Britain. This procedure is referred to as indirect, model-based or synthetic estimation. In recent years such SAE techniques have been widely used throughout Europe and North America. See the project website for more details.The objective of the Geography of Digital Inequality project was to explore the geographical contours of Internet use and penetration in Britain. Specifically, the project assembled from existing datasets a new dataset which contains Internet information at fine-grained geographic levels, census output areas (OAs). From OAs we were able to aggregate to higher geographic levels such as counties, Welsh and Scottish Councils, metropolitan areas, or others. Through this unique dataset we explored digital divides and the geography of the Internet, a capability possessed by no other dataset. Specifically, we explored the extent of use versus non-use of the Internet. There were 2 datasets used to assemble this dataset. First, the 2013 Oxford Internet Survey (OxIS) is a random sample of the 2657 people age 14+ from the British population (England, Scotland & Wales). Interviews were conducted face-to-face by an independent survey research company. The response rate for 2013 was 51%. The data collection was a two-stage sample. A random sample of census output areas (OAs) was selected and respondents were randomly sampled within each selected OA. For details, see "Data collection technical report.pdf" which has been uploaded. We use six variables from OxIS: Internet use, region, age, lifestage, gender and education. The questionnaire for OxIS contains about 300 variables and it is available from the OxIS website, see the URL in the "related resources" section. Second, the 2011 British Census. For information on how the census was conducted,see the census website. The URL for the 2011 census is given below in "related resources".