Scooby Doo Episodes

A Dataset for exploration of the best and worst Scooby Doo episodes

About this dataset

Scooby-Doo is one of the most iconic cartoon characters of all time. The lovable Great Dane and his human friends have been solving mysteries and catching bad guys for over 50 years.

This dataset contains information on every Scooby-Doo episode and movie, including the title, air date, run time, and various other variables. It took me over a year to watch every Scooby-Doo iteration and track every variable. Many values are subjective by nature of watching but I tried my hardest to keep the data collection consistent.

If you plan to use this data for anything school/entertainment related you are free to (credit is always welcome)

How to use the dataset

To use this dataset, simply download it and then import it into your preferred software program. Once you have imported the dataset, you can then begin to analyze the data.

There are a number of different ways that you can analyze this data. For example, you could look at the distribution of Scooby Doo episodes by season, or by year. You could also look at the popularity of different Scooby Doo characters by looking at how often they are mentioned in the dataset.

This dataset is a great resource for anyone interested in Scooby Doo, or in analyzing television data more generally. Enjoy!

Research Ideas

-Using the IMDB rating, run time, and engagement score, predict how much I will enjoy an episode/movie. -Determine which network airs the best Scooby-Doo content based on average IMDB rating and engagement score. -Analyze the impact of gender on catch rate for monsters/culprits

Acknowledgements

License

License: Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) - You are free to: - Share - copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for non-commercial purposes only. - Adapt - remix, transform, and build upon the material for non-commercial purposes only. - You must: - Give appropriate credit - Provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. - ShareAlike - You must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original. - You may not: - Use the material for commercial purposes.

Columns

File: scoobydoo.csv | Column name | Description | |:-----------------------------|:----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | level_0 | The level of the episode or movie. (Numeric) | | series_name | The name of the series the episode or movie is from. (String) | | network | The network the episode or movie aired on. (String) | | season | The season of the series the episode or movie is from. (Numeric) | | title | The title of the episode or movie. (String) | | imdb | The IMDB rating of the episode or movie. (Numeric) | | engagement | The engagement rating of the episode or movie. (Numeric) | | date_aired | The date the episode or movie aired. (Date) | | run_time | The run time of the episode or movie. (Time) | | format | The format of the episode or movie. (String) | | monster_name | The name of the monster in the episode or movie. (String) | | monster_gender | The gender of the monster in the episode or movie. (String) | | monster_type | The type of monster in the episode or movie. (String) | | monster_subtype | The subtype of monster in the episode or movie. (String) | | monster_species | The species of monster in the episode or movie. (String) | | monster_real | Whether the monster is real or not. (Boolean) | | monster_amount | The number of monsters in the episode or movie. (Numeric) ...

Author: Víctor Yeste. Universitat Politècnica de Valencia.This work is an exploratory, quantitative, and not experimental study with an inductive inference type and a longitudinal follow-up. It analyzes movie data and tweets published by users using the official Twitter hashtags of movie premieres the week before, the same week, and the week after each release date.The scope of the study is the collection of movies released in February 2022 in the USA, and the object of the study includes them and the tweets that refer to the film in the 3 closest weeks to their premiere dates. The tweets recollected were classified by the week they were published, so they are classified by a time dimension called timepoint. The week before the release date has been designated as timepoint 1, the week of the release date is timepoint 2, and the week immediately afterward is timepoint 3. Another dimension that has been considered is if the movie has domestic production or not, which means that if one of the countries of origin is the United States, the movie is designated as domestic.The chosen variables are organized in two data tables, one for the movies and one for the collected tweets.Variables related to the movies:id: Internal id of the moviename: Title of the moviehashtag: Official hashtag of the moviecountries: List of countries of the movie, separated by a semicolonmpaa: Film ratings system by the Motion Picture Association of America. It is a completely voluntary rating system and ratings have no legal standing. The currently rating systems include G (general audiences), PG (parental guidance suggested), PG-13 (parents strongly cautioned), R (restricted, under 17 requires accompanying parent or adult guardian) and NC-17 (no one 17 and under admitted)(Film Ratings - Motion Picture Association, n.d.)genres: List of genres of the movie, e.g., Action or Thriller, separated by a semicolonrelease_date: Release date of the movie in a format YYYY-MM-DDopening_grosses: Amount of USA dollars that the movie obtained on the opening date (the first week after the release date)opening_theaters: Amount of USA theaters that released the movie on the opening date (the first week after the release date)rating_avg: Average rating of the movieVariables related to the tweets:id: Internal id of the tweetstatus_id: Twitter id of the tweetmovie_id: Internal id of the movietimepoint: Week number related to the movie premiere that the tweet was published on. “1” is the week before the movie release, “2” is the week after the movie release” and “3” is the second week after the movie release.author_id: Twitter id of the author of the tweetcreated_at: Date and time of the tweet, with format “YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS”quote_count: Number of the tweet’s quotesreply_count: Number of the tweet’s repliesretweet_count: Number of the tweet’s retweetslike_count: Number of the tweet’s likessentiment: Sentiment analysis of the tweet’s content with a range from -1 (negative) to 1 (positive)This dataset has contributed to the elaboration of the book chapters:Yeste, Víctor; Calduch-Losa, Ángeles (2022). Genre classification of movie releases in the USA: Exploring data with Twitter hashtags. In Narrativas emergentes para la comunicación digital (pp. 1012-1044). Dykinson, S. L.Yeste, Víctor; Calduch-Losa, Ángeles (2022). Exploratory Twitter hashtag analysis of movie premieres in the USA. In Desafíos audiovisuales de la tecnología y los contenidos en la cultura digital (pp. 169-187). McGraw-Hill Interamericana de España S.L.Yeste, Víctor; Calduch-Losa, Ángeles (2022). ANOVA to study movie premieres in the USA and online conversation on Twitter. The case of rating average using data from official Twitter hashtags. In El mapa y la brújula. Navegando por las metodologías de investigación en comunicación (pp. 151-168). Editorial Fragua.

This repository was created for my Master's thesis in Computational Intelligence and Internet of Things at the University of Córdoba, Spain. The purpose of this repository is to store the datasets found that were used in some of the studies that served as research material for this Master's thesis. Also, the datasets used in the experimental part of this work are included.

Below are the datasets specified, along with the details of their references, authors, and download sources.

----------- STS-Gold Dataset ----------------

The dataset consists of 2026 tweets. The file consists of 3 columns: id, polarity, and tweet. The three columns denote the unique id, polarity index of the text and the tweet text respectively.

Reference: Saif, H., Fernandez, M., He, Y., & Alani, H. (2013). Evaluation datasets for Twitter sentiment analysis: a survey and a new dataset, the STS-Gold.

File name: sts_gold_tweet.csv

----------- Amazon Sales Dataset ----------------

This dataset is having the data of 1K+ Amazon Product's Ratings and Reviews as per their details listed on the official website of Amazon. The data was scraped in the month of January 2023 from the Official Website of Amazon.

Owner: Karkavelraja J., Postgraduate student at Puducherry Technological University (Puducherry, Puducherry, India)

Features:

• product_id - Product ID
• product_name - Name of the Product
• category - Category of the Product
• discounted_price - Discounted Price of the Product
• actual_price - Actual Price of the Product
• discount_percentage - Percentage of Discount for the Product
• rating - Rating of the Product
• rating_count - Number of people who voted for the Amazon rating
• about_product - Description about the Product
• user_id - ID of the user who wrote review for the Product
• user_name - Name of the user who wrote review for the Product
• review_id - ID of the user review
• review_title - Short review
• review_content - Long review
• img_link - Image Link of the Product
• product_link - Official Website Link of the Product

License: CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

File name: amazon.csv

----------- Rotten Tomatoes Reviews Dataset ----------------

This rating inference dataset is a sentiment classification dataset, containing 5,331 positive and 5,331 negative processed sentences from Rotten Tomatoes movie reviews. On average, these reviews consist of 21 words. The first 5331 rows contains only negative samples and the last 5331 rows contain only positive samples, thus the data should be shuffled before usage.

This data is collected from https://www.cs.cornell.edu/people/pabo/movie-review-data/ as a txt file and converted into a csv file. The file consists of 2 columns: reviews and labels (1 for fresh (good) and 0 for rotten (bad)).

Reference: Bo Pang and Lillian Lee. Seeing stars: Exploiting class relationships for sentiment categorization with respect to rating scales. In Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL'05), pages 115–124, Ann Arbor, Michigan, June 2005. Association for Computational Linguistics

File name: data_rt.csv

----------- Preprocessed Dataset Sentiment Analysis ----------------

Preprocessed amazon product review data of Gen3EcoDot (Alexa) scrapped entirely from amazon.in
Stemmed and lemmatized using nltk.
Sentiment labels are generated using TextBlob polarity scores.

The file consists of 4 columns: index, review (stemmed and lemmatized review using nltk), polarity (score) and division (categorical label generated using polarity score).

DOI: 10.34740/kaggle/dsv/3877817

Citation: @misc{pradeesh arumadi_2022, title={Preprocessed Dataset Sentiment Analysis}, url={https://www.kaggle.com/dsv/3877817}, DOI={10.34740/KAGGLE/DSV/3877817}, publisher={Kaggle}, author={Pradeesh Arumadi}, year={2022} }

This dataset was used in the experimental phase of my research.

File name: EcoPreprocessed.csv

----------- Amazon Earphones Reviews ----------------

This dataset consists of a 9930 Amazon reviews, star ratings, for 10 latest (as of mid-2019) bluetooth earphone devices for learning how to train Machine for sentiment analysis.

This dataset was employed in the experimental phase of my research. To align it with the objectives of my study, certain reviews were excluded from the original dataset, and an additional column was incorporated into this dataset.

The file consists of 5 columns: ReviewTitle, ReviewBody, ReviewStar, Product and division (manually added - categorical label generated using ReviewStar score)

License: U.S. Government Works

Source: www.amazon.in

File name (original): AllProductReviews.csv (contains 14337 reviews)

File name (edited - used for my research) : AllProductReviews2.csv (contains 9930 reviews)

----------- Amazon Musical Instruments Reviews ----------------

This dataset contains 7137 comments/reviews of different musical instruments coming from Amazon.

This dataset was employed in the experimental phase of my research. To align it with the objectives of my study, certain reviews were excluded from the original dataset, and an additional column was incorporated into this dataset.

The file consists of 10 columns: reviewerID, asin (ID of the product), reviewerName, helpful (helpfulness rating of the review), reviewText, overall (rating of the product), summary (summary of the review), unixReviewTime (time of the review - unix time), reviewTime (time of the review (raw) and division (manually added - categorical label generated using overall score).

Source: http://jmcauley.ucsd.edu/data/amazon/

File name (original): Musical_instruments_reviews.csv (contains 10261 reviews)

File name (edited - used for my research) : Musical_instruments_reviews2.csv (contains 7137 reviews)

Overview

• The Naturalistic Neuroimaging Database (NNDb v2.0) contains datasets from 86 human participants doing the NIH Toolbox and then watching one of 10 full-length movies during functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI).The participants were all right-handed, native English speakers, with no history of neurological/psychiatric illnesses, with no hearing impairments, unimpaired or corrected vision and taking no medication. Each movie was stopped in 40-50 minute intervals or when participants asked for a break, resulting in 2-6 runs of BOLD-fMRI. A 10 minute high-resolution defaced T1-weighted anatomical MRI scan (MPRAGE) is also provided.
• The NNDb V2.0 is now on Neuroscout, a platform for fast and flexible re-analysis of (naturalistic) fMRI studies. See: https://neuroscout.org/

v2.0 Changes

• Overview
  • We have replaced our own preprocessing pipeline with that implemented in AFNI’s afni_proc.py, thus changing only the derivative files. This introduces a fix for an issue with our normalization (i.e., scaling) step and modernizes and standardizes the preprocessing applied to the NNDb derivative files. We have done a bit of testing and have found that results in both pipelines are quite similar in terms of the resulting spatial patterns of activity but with the benefit that the afni_proc.py results are 'cleaner' and statistically more robust.

• Normalization

  • Emily Finn and Clare Grall at Dartmouth and Rick Reynolds and Paul Taylor at AFNI, discovered and showed us that the normalization procedure we used for the derivative files was less than ideal for timeseries runs of varying lengths. Specifically, the 3dDetrend flag -normalize makes 'the sum-of-squares equal to 1'. We had not thought through that an implication of this is that the resulting normalized timeseries amplitudes will be affected by run length, increasing as run length decreases (and maybe this should go in 3dDetrend’s help text). To demonstrate this, I wrote a version of 3dDetrend’s -normalize for R so you can see for yourselves by running the following code:

  # Generate a resting state (rs) timeseries (ts)
  # Install / load package to make fake fMRI ts
  # install.packages("neuRosim")
  library(neuRosim)
  # Generate a ts
  ts.rs <- simTSrestingstate(nscan=2000, TR=1, SNR=1)
  # 3dDetrend -normalize
  # R command version for 3dDetrend -normalize -polort 0 which normalizes by making "the sum-of-squares equal to 1"
  # Do for the full timeseries
  ts.normalised.long <- (ts.rs-mean(ts.rs))/sqrt(sum((ts.rs-mean(ts.rs))^2));
  # Do this again for a shorter version of the same timeseries
  ts.shorter.length <- length(ts.normalised.long)/4
  ts.normalised.short <- (ts.rs[1:ts.shorter.length]- mean(ts.rs[1:ts.shorter.length]))/sqrt(sum((ts.rs[1:ts.shorter.length]- mean(ts.rs[1:ts.shorter.length]))^2));
  # By looking at the summaries, it can be seen that the median values become  larger
  summary(ts.normalised.long)
  summary(ts.normalised.short)
  # Plot results for the long and short ts
  # Truncate the longer ts for plotting only
  ts.normalised.long.made.shorter <- ts.normalised.long[1:ts.shorter.length]
  # Give the plot a title
  title <- "3dDetrend -normalize for long (blue) and short (red) timeseries";
  plot(x=0, y=0, main=title, xlab="", ylab="", xaxs='i', xlim=c(1,length(ts.normalised.short)), ylim=c(min(ts.normalised.short),max(ts.normalised.short)));
  # Add zero line
  lines(x=c(-1,ts.shorter.length), y=rep(0,2), col='grey');
  # 3dDetrend -normalize -polort 0 for long timeseries
  lines(ts.normalised.long.made.shorter, col='blue');
  # 3dDetrend -normalize -polort 0 for short timeseries
  lines(ts.normalised.short, col='red');
  

• Standardization/modernization

  • The above individuals also encouraged us to implement the afni_proc.py script over our own pipeline. It introduces at least three additional improvements: First, we now use Bob’s @SSwarper to align our anatomical files with an MNI template (now MNI152_2009_template_SSW.nii.gz) and this, in turn, integrates nicely into the afni_proc.py pipeline. This seems to result in a generally better or more consistent alignment, though this is only a qualitative observation. Second, all the transformations / interpolations and detrending are now done in fewers steps compared to our pipeline. This is preferable because, e.g., there is less chance of inadvertently reintroducing noise back into the timeseries (see Lindquist, Geuter, Wager, & Caffo 2019). Finally, many groups are advocating using tools like fMRIPrep or afni_proc.py to increase standardization of analyses practices in our neuroimaging community. This presumably results in less error, less heterogeneity and more interpretability of results across studies. Along these lines, the quality control (‘QC’) html pages generated by afni_proc.py are a real help in assessing data quality and almost a joy to use.

• New afni_proc.py command line

  • The following is the afni_proc.py command line that we used to generate blurred and censored timeseries files. The afni_proc.py tool comes with extensive help and examples. As such, you can quickly understand our preprocessing decisions by scrutinising the below. Specifically, the following command is most similar to Example 11 for ‘Resting state analysis’ in the help file (see https://afni.nimh.nih.gov/pub/dist/doc/program_help/afni_proc.py.html): afni_proc.py \ -subj_id "$sub_id_name_1" \ -blocks despike tshift align tlrc volreg mask blur scale regress \ -radial_correlate_blocks tcat volreg \ -copy_anat anatomical_warped/anatSS.1.nii.gz \ -anat_has_skull no \ -anat_follower anat_w_skull anat anatomical_warped/anatU.1.nii.gz \ -anat_follower_ROI aaseg anat freesurfer/SUMA/aparc.a2009s+aseg.nii.gz \ -anat_follower_ROI aeseg epi freesurfer/SUMA/aparc.a2009s+aseg.nii.gz \ -anat_follower_ROI fsvent epi freesurfer/SUMA/fs_ap_latvent.nii.gz \ -anat_follower_ROI fswm epi freesurfer/SUMA/fs_ap_wm.nii.gz \ -anat_follower_ROI fsgm epi freesurfer/SUMA/fs_ap_gm.nii.gz \ -anat_follower_erode fsvent fswm \ -dsets media_?.nii.gz \ -tcat_remove_first_trs 8 \ -tshift_opts_ts -tpattern alt+z2 \ -align_opts_aea -cost lpc+ZZ -giant_move -check_flip \ -tlrc_base "$basedset" \ -tlrc_NL_warp \ -tlrc_NL_warped_dsets \ anatomical_warped/anatQQ.1.nii.gz \ anatomical_warped/anatQQ.1.aff12.1D \ anatomical_warped/anatQQ.1_WARP.nii.gz \ -volreg_align_to MIN_OUTLIER \ -volreg_post_vr_allin yes \ -volreg_pvra_base_index MIN_OUTLIER \ -volreg_align_e2a \ -volreg_tlrc_warp \ -mask_opts_automask -clfrac 0.10 \ -mask_epi_anat yes \ -blur_to_fwhm -blur_size $blur \ -regress_motion_per_run \ -regress_ROI_PC fsvent 3 \ -regress_ROI_PC_per_run fsvent \ -regress_make_corr_vols aeseg fsvent \ -regress_anaticor_fast \ -regress_anaticor_label fswm \ -regress_censor_motion 0.3 \ -regress_censor_outliers 0.1 \ -regress_apply_mot_types demean deriv \ -regress_est_blur_epits \ -regress_est_blur_errts \ -regress_run_clustsim no \ -regress_polort 2 \ -regress_bandpass 0.01 1 \ -html_review_style pythonic We used similar command lines to generate ‘blurred and not censored’ and the ‘not blurred and not censored’ timeseries files (described more fully below). We will provide the code used to make all derivative files available on our github site (https://github.com/lab-lab/nndb).

  We made one choice above that is different enough from our original pipeline that it is worth mentioning here. Specifically, we have quite long runs, with the average being ~40 minutes but this number can be variable (thus leading to the above issue with 3dDetrend’s -normalise). A discussion on the AFNI message board with one of our team (starting here, https://afni.nimh.nih.gov/afni/community/board/read.php?1,165243,165256#msg-165256), led to the suggestion that '-regress_polort 2' with '-regress_bandpass 0.01 1' be used for long runs. We had previously used only a variable polort with the suggested 1 + int(D/150) approach. Our new polort 2 + bandpass approach has the added benefit of working well with afni_proc.py.

  Which timeseries file you use is up to you but I have been encouraged by Rick and Paul to include a sort of PSA about this. In Paul’s own words: * Blurred data should not be used for ROI-based analyses (and potentially not for ICA? I am not certain about standard practice). * Unblurred data for ISC might be pretty noisy for voxelwise analyses, since blurring should effectively boost the SNR of active regions (and even good alignment won't be perfect everywhere). * For uncensored data, one should be concerned about motion effects being left in the data (e.g., spikes in the data). * For censored data: * Performing ISC requires the users to unionize the censoring patterns during the correlation calculation. * If wanting to calculate power spectra or spectral parameters like ALFF/fALFF/RSFA etc. (which some people might do for naturalistic tasks still), then standard FT-based methods can't be used because sampling is no longer uniform. Instead, people could use something like 3dLombScargle+3dAmpToRSFC, which calculates power spectra (and RSFC params) based on a generalization of the FT that can handle non-uniform sampling, as long as the censoring pattern is mostly random and, say, only up to about 10-15% of the data. In sum, think very carefully about which files you use. If you find you need a file we have not provided, we can happily generate different versions of the timeseries upon request and can generally do so in a week or less.

• Effect on results

  • From numerous tests on our own analyses, we have qualitatively found that results using our old vs the new afni_proc.py preprocessing pipeline do not change all that much in terms of general spatial patterns. There is, however, an