The data are qualitative data consisting of notes recorded during meetings, workshops, and other interactions with case study participants. This dataset is not publicly accessible because: EPA cannot release personally identifiable information regarding living individuals, according to the Privacy Act and the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). This dataset contains information about human research subjects. Because there is potential to identify individual participants and disclose personal information, either alone or in combination with other datasets, individual level data are not appropriate to post for public access. Restricted access may be granted to authorized persons by contacting the party listed. It can be accessed through the following means: The data cannot be accessed by anyone outside of the research team because of the potential to identify human participants. Format: The data are qualitative data contained in Microsoft Word documents. This dataset is associated with the following publication: Eisenhauer, E., K. Maxwell, B. Kiessling, S. Henson, M. Matsler, R. Nee, M. Shacklette, M. Fry, and S. Julius. Inclusive engagement for equitable resilience: community case study insights. Environmental Research Communications. IOP Publishing, BRISTOL, UK, 6: 125012, (2024).

Beginning March 1, 2022, the "COVID-19 Case Surveillance Public Use Data" will be updated on a monthly basis. This case surveillance public use dataset has 12 elements for all COVID-19 cases shared with CDC and includes demographics, any exposure history, disease severity indicators and outcomes, presence of any underlying medical conditions and risk behaviors, and no geographic data. CDC has three COVID-19 case surveillance datasets: COVID-19 Case Surveillance Public Use Data with Geography: Public use, patient-level dataset with clinical data (including symptoms), demographics, and county and state of residence. (19 data elements) COVID-19 Case Surveillance Public Use Data: Public use, patient-level dataset with clinical and symptom data and demographics, with no geographic data. (12 data elements) COVID-19 Case Surveillance Restricted Access Detailed Data: Restricted access, patient-level dataset with clinical and symptom data, demographics, and state and county of residence. Access requires a registration process and a data use agreement. (32 data elements) The following apply to all three datasets: Data elements can be found on the COVID-19 case report form located at www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/downloads/pui-form.pdf. Data are considered provisional by CDC and are subject to change until the data are reconciled and verified with the state and territorial data providers. Some data cells are suppressed to protect individual privacy. The datasets will include all cases with the earliest date available in each record (date received by CDC or date related to illness/specimen collection) at least 14 days prior to the creation of the previously updated datasets. This 14-day lag allows case reporting to be stabilized and ensures that time-dependent outcome data are accurately captured. Datasets are updated monthly. Datasets are created using CDC’s operational Policy on Public Health Research and Nonresearch Data Management and Access and include protections designed to protect individual privacy. For more information about data collection and reporting, please see https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nndss/data-collection.html For more information about the COVID-19 case surveillance data, please see https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/faq-surveillance.html Overview The COVID-19 case surveillance database includes individual-level data reported to U.S. states and autonomous reporting entities, including New York City and the District of Columbia (D.C.), as well as U.S. territories and affiliates. On April 5, 2020, COVID-19 was added to the Nationally Notifiable Condition List and classified as “immediately notifiable, urgent (within 24 hours)” by a Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists (CSTE) Interim Position Statement (Interim-20-ID-01). CSTE updated the position statement on August 5, 2020 to clarify the interpretation of antigen detection tests and serologic test results within the case classification. The statement also recommended that all states and territories enact laws to make COVID-19 reportable in their jurisdiction, and that jurisdictions conducting surveillance should submit case notifications to CDC. COVID-19 case surveillance data are collected by jurisdictions and reported volun

District and Taluka (sub district) wise court cases show the number of pending cases over various time periods. Cases such as Criminal, Civil and Stage are pending in court. The data set also provides information on the number of cases filed by senior citizens and women.

7150_source_data.csv: The raw data from the source with original administrative dimensions. This dataset may have already been restructured by scraping PDFs, combining files, or pivoting tables to fit the proper tabular format used by NDAP, but the actual data values remain unchanged. ● NDAP_REPORT_7150.csv: The final standardised data using LGD geographic dimensions as seen on NPAP. ● 7150_metadata.csv: Variable-level metadata, including the following fields: ❖ VariableName: The full variable name as it appears in the data ❖ VariableCode: A unique variable code that is used as a short name for the variable during internal processing and can be used for simplicity if desired ❖ Type_Of_Variable: The classification of the column, whether it is a dimension or a variable (i.e. indicator) ❖ Unit_Of_Measure: ❖ Aggregation_Type: The default aggregation function to be used when aggregating each variable ❖ Weighing_Variable_Name: The weight assigned to each variable that is used by default when aggregating ❖ Weighing_Variable_ID: The weighting variable id corresponding to the weighing variable name ❖ Long_Description: A more descriptive definition of the variable ❖ Scaling_factor: Scaling factor from source ● 7150_KEYS.csv: The key which maps source administrative units to the standardised Local Government Directory (LGD) dimensions. This file also contains pre-calculated weights for every constituent unit mapped from the source dimensions into the LGD. You can interpret each row as describing what fraction of the source unit is mapped to a corresponding LGD unit. This file includes the following fields: ❖ src[Unit]Name: The administrative unit name as it appears in the source data. Depending on the dataset, that may include State, District, Subdistrict, Block, Village/Town, etc. ❖ [Unit]Name: The standardised administrative unit name as it appears in the LGD. Depending on the dataset, that may include State, District, Subdistrict, Block, Village/Town, etc. ❖ [Unit]Name: The standardised administrative unit code corresponding to the unit name in the LDG. ❖ Year: The year in which the data was collected or reported. Depending on the dataset, any other temporal variables may also be present (Quarter, Month, Calendar Day, etc.) ❖ Number_Of_Children: The number of LGD units associated with the mapping described by an individual row. Units from the source that have undergone a split will contain multiple children. ❖ Number_Of_Parents: The number of source units associated with the mapping described by an individual row. Units from the source that have undergone a merge will contain multiple parents. ❖ Weighing_Variables: Households, Population, Male Population, Female Population, Land Area (Total, Rural, and Urban versions of each). For each weighing variable there are the following associated fields: ■ Count: the total count of households, population, or land area mapped from the source unit to the LGD unit for that particular row (NumberOfHouseholds, TotalPopulation, LandArea). ■ Mapping_Error: the percentage error due to missing villages in the base data, meaning what fraction of the weighing variable is dropped because the microdata could not be mapped to the LGD. ■ Weighing_Ratio: the weighing ratio for that constituent match of source unit to LGD unit for each particular row. This is the fraction applied to the source data to achieve the LGD-standardised final data.

IntroductionFollowing the identification of Local Area Energy Planning (LAEP) use cases, this dataset lists the data sources and/or information that could help facilitate this research. View our dedicated page to find out how we derived this list: Local Area Energy Plan — UK Power Networks (opendatasoft.com)

Methodological Approach Data upload: a list of datasets and ancillary details are uploaded into a static Excel file before uploaded onto the Open Data Portal.

Quality Control Statement

Quality Control Measures include: Manual review and correct of data inconsistencies Use of additional verification steps to ensure accuracy in the methodology

Assurance Statement The Open Data Team and Local Net Zero Team worked together to ensure data accuracy and consistency.

Other Download dataset information: Metadata (JSON)

Definitions of key terms related to this dataset can be found in the Open Data Portal Glossary: https://ukpowernetworks.opendatasoft.com/pages/glossary/

Please note that "number of records" in the top left corner is higher than the number of datasets available as many datasets are indexed against multiple use cases leading to them being counted as multiple records.

Provide the product inspection bureau with case statistics for item inquiries.

Note: Reporting of new COVID-19 Case Surveillance data will be discontinued July 1, 2024, to align with the process of removing SARS-CoV-2 infections (COVID-19 cases) from the list of nationally notifiable diseases. Although these data will continue to be publicly available, the dataset will no longer be updated.

Authorizations to collect certain public health data expired at the end of the U.S. public health emergency declaration on May 11, 2023. The following jurisdictions discontinued COVID-19 case notifications to CDC: Iowa (11/8/21), Kansas (5/12/23), Kentucky (1/1/24), Louisiana (10/31/23), New Hampshire (5/23/23), and Oklahoma (5/2/23). Please note that these jurisdictions will not routinely send new case data after the dates indicated. As of 7/13/23, case notifications from Oregon will only include pediatric cases resulting in death.

This case surveillance public use dataset has 19 elements for all COVID-19 cases shared with CDC and includes demographics, geography (county and state of residence), any exposure history, disease severity indicators and outcomes, and presence of any underlying medical conditions and risk behaviors.

Currently, CDC provides the public with three versions of COVID-19 case surveillance line-listed data: this 19 data element dataset with geography, a 12 data element public use dataset, and a 33 data element restricted access dataset.

The following apply to the public use datasets and the restricted access dataset:

• Data elements can be found on the COVID-19 case report form located at www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/downloads/pui-form.pdf.
• Data are considered provisional by CDC and are subject to change until the data are reconciled and verified with the state and territorial data providers.
• Some data are suppressed to protect individual privacy.
• Datasets will include all cases with the earliest date available in each record (date received by CDC or date related to illness/specimen collection) at least 14 days prior to the creation of the current datasets. This 14-day lag allows case reporting to be stabilized and ensure that time-dependent outcome data are accurately captured.
• Datasets are updated monthly.
• Datasets are created using CDC’s Policy on Public Health Research and Nonresearch Data Management and Access and include protections designed to protect individual privacy.
• For more information about data collection and reporting, please see https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/about-us-cases-deaths.html.
• For more information about the COVID-19 case surveillance data, please see https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/faq-surveillance.html
  

Overview

The COVID-19 case surveillance database includes individual-level data reported to U.S. states and autonomous reporting entities, including New York City and the District of Columbia (D.C.), as well as U.S. territories and affiliates. On April 5, 2020, COVID-19 was added to the Nationally Notifiable Condition List and classified as “immediately notifiable, urgent (within 24 hours)” by a Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists (CSTE) Interim Position Statement (<a href="https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.cste.org/resource/resmgr/ps/positionstatement2020/Interim-20-ID-01_COVID

As of 09/24/24, this dataset is being retired and will no longer be updated.

This data set includes the cumulative (total) number of COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths for each locality in Virginia by report date. This data set was first published on April 01, 2020. The data set increases in size daily and as a result, the dataset may take longer to update; however, it is expected to be available by 12:00 noon. When you download the data set, the dates will be sorted in ascending order, meaning that the earliest date will be at the top. To see data for the most recent date, please scroll down to the bottom of the data set. The Virginia Department of Health’s Thomas Jefferson Health District (TJHD) will be renamed to Blue Ridge Health District (BRHD), effective January 2021. More information about this change can be found here: https://www.vdh.virginia.gov/blue-ridge/name-change/

Statistical information on deaths of confirmed cases of Severe special infectious pneumonia(COVID-19) from 2020, sub-statistical tables stratified by region, age group, and gender. This data set is updated once a day according to the fixed schedule of the system. At present, there are more cases of severe special contagious pneumonia imported from abroad than those diagnosed at the airport or centralized quarantine center, and they are immediately isolated and treated, so the county and city information is not indicated.

Sheet 1 (Raw-Data): The raw data of the study is provided, presenting the tagging results for the used measures described in the paper. For each subject, it includes multiple columns: A. a sequential student ID B an ID that defines a random group label and the notation C. the used notation: user Story or use Cases D. the case they were assigned to: IFA, Sim, or Hos E. the subject's exam grade (total points out of 100). Empty cells mean that the subject did not take the first exam F. a categorical representation of the grade L/M/H, where H is greater or equal to 80, M is between 65 included and 80 excluded, L otherwise G. the total number of classes in the student's conceptual model H. the total number of relationships in the student's conceptual model I. the total number of classes in the expert's conceptual model J. the total number of relationships in the expert's conceptual model K-O. the total number of encountered situations of alignment, wrong representation, system-oriented, omitted, missing (see tagging scheme below) P. the researchers' judgement on how well the derivation process explanation was explained by the student: well explained (a systematic mapping that can be easily reproduced), partially explained (vague indication of the mapping ), or not present.

Tagging scheme:
Aligned (AL) - A concept is represented as a class in both models, either

with the same name or using synonyms or clearly linkable names; Wrongly represented (WR) - A class in the domain expert model is incorrectly represented in the student model, either (i) via an attribute, method, or relationship rather than class, or (ii) using a generic term (e.g., user'' instead ofurban planner''); System-oriented (SO) - A class in CM-Stud that denotes a technical implementation aspect, e.g., access control. Classes that represent legacy system or the system under design (portal, simulator) are legitimate; Omitted (OM) - A class in CM-Expert that does not appear in any way in CM-Stud; Missing (MI) - A class in CM-Stud that does not appear in any way in CM-Expert.

All the calculations and information provided in the following sheets

originate from that raw data.

Sheet 2 (Descriptive-Stats): Shows a summary of statistics from the data collection,

including the number of subjects per case, per notation, per process derivation rigor category, and per exam grade category.

Sheet 3 (Size-Ratio):

The number of classes within the student model divided by the number of classes within the expert model is calculated (describing the size ratio). We provide box plots to allow a visual comparison of the shape of the distribution, its central value, and its variability for each group (by case, notation, process, and exam grade) . The primary focus in this study is on the number of classes. However, we also provided the size ratio for the number of relationships between student and expert model.

Sheet 4 (Overall):

Provides an overview of all subjects regarding the encountered situations, completeness, and correctness, respectively. Correctness is defined as the ratio of classes in a student model that is fully aligned with the classes in the corresponding expert model. It is calculated by dividing the number of aligned concepts (AL) by the sum of the number of aligned concepts (AL), omitted concepts (OM), system-oriented concepts (SO), and wrong representations (WR). Completeness on the other hand, is defined as the ratio of classes in a student model that are correctly or incorrectly represented over the number of classes in the expert model. Completeness is calculated by dividing the sum of aligned concepts (AL) and wrong representations (WR) by the sum of the number of aligned concepts (AL), wrong representations (WR) and omitted concepts (OM). The overview is complemented with general diverging stacked bar charts that illustrate correctness and completeness.

For sheet 4 as well as for the following four sheets, diverging stacked bar

charts are provided to visualize the effect of each of the independent and mediated variables. The charts are based on the relative numbers of encountered situations for each student. In addition, a "Buffer" is calculated witch solely serves the purpose of constructing the diverging stacked bar charts in Excel. Finally, at the bottom of each sheet, the significance (T-test) and effect size (Hedges' g) for both completeness and correctness are provided. Hedges' g was calculated with an online tool: https://www.psychometrica.de/effect_size.html. The independent and moderating variables can be found as follows:

Sheet 5 (By-Notation):

Model correctness and model completeness is compared by notation - UC, US.

Sheet 6 (By-Case):

Model correctness and model completeness is compared by case - SIM, HOS, IFA.

Sheet 7 (By-Process):

Model correctness and model completeness is compared by how well the derivation process is explained - well explained, partially explained, not present.

Sheet 8 (By-Grade):

Model correctness and model completeness is compared by the exam grades, converted to categorical values High, Low , and Medium.

The dataset contains a weekly situation update on COVID-19, the epidemiological curve and the global geographical distribution (EU/EEA and the UK, worldwide).

Since the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic, ECDC’s Epidemic Intelligence team has collected the number of COVID-19 cases and deaths, based on reports from health authorities worldwide. This comprehensive and systematic process was carried out on a daily basis until 14/12/2020. See the discontinued daily dataset: COVID-19 Coronavirus data - daily. ECDC’s decision to discontinue daily data collection is based on the fact that the daily number of cases reported or published by countries is frequently subject to retrospective corrections, delays in reporting and/or clustered reporting of data for several days. Therefore, the daily number of cases may not reflect the true number of cases at EU/EEA level at a given day of reporting. Consequently, day to day variations in the number of cases does not constitute a valid basis for policy decisions.

ECDC continues to monitor the situation. Every week between Monday and Wednesday, a team of epidemiologists screen up to 500 relevant sources to collect the latest figures for publication on Thursday. The data screening is followed by ECDC’s standard epidemic intelligence process for which every single data entry is validated and documented in an ECDC database. An extract of this database, complete with up-to-date figures and data visualisations, is then shared on the ECDC website, ensuring a maximum level of transparency.

ECDC receives regular updates from EU/EEA countries through the Early Warning and Response System (EWRS), The European Surveillance System (TESSy), the World Health Organization (WHO) and email exchanges with other international stakeholders. This information is complemented by screening up to 500 sources every day to collect COVID-19 figures from 196 countries. This includes websites of ministries of health (43% of the total number of sources), websites of public health institutes (9%), websites from other national authorities (ministries of social services and welfare, governments, prime minister cabinets, cabinets of ministries, websites on health statistics and official response teams) (6%), WHO websites and WHO situation reports (2%), and official dashboards and interactive maps from national and international institutions (10%). In addition, ECDC screens social media accounts maintained by national authorities on for example Twitter, Facebook, YouTube or Telegram accounts run by ministries of health (28%) and other official sources (e.g. official media outlets) (2%). Several media and social media sources are screened to gather additional information which can be validated with the official sources previously mentioned. Only cases and deaths reported by the national and regional competent authorities from the countries and territories listed are aggregated in our database.

Disclaimer: National updates are published at different times and in different time zones. This, and the time ECDC needs to process these data, might lead to discrepancies between the national numbers and the numbers published by ECDC. Users are advised to use all data with caution and awareness of their limitations. Data are subject to retrospective corrections; corrected datasets are released as soon as processing of updated national data has been completed.

If you reuse or enrich this dataset, please share it with us.

As high-throughput methods become more common, training undergraduates to analyze data must include having them generate informative summaries of large datasets. This flexible case study provides an opportunity for undergraduate students to become familiar with the capabilities of R programming in the context of high-throughput evolutionary data collected using macroarrays. The story line introduces a recent graduate hired at a biotech firm and tasked with analysis and visualization of changes in gene expression from 20,000 generations of the Lenski Lab’s Long-Term Evolution Experiment (LTEE). Our main character is not familiar with R and is guided by a coworker to learn about this platform. Initially this involves a step-by-step analysis of the small Iris dataset built into R which includes sepal and petal length of three species of irises. Practice calculating summary statistics and correlations, and making histograms and scatter plots, prepares the protagonist to perform similar analyses with the LTEE dataset. In the LTEE module, students analyze gene expression data from the long-term evolutionary experiments, developing their skills in manipulating and interpreting large scientific datasets through visualizations and statistical analysis. Prerequisite knowledge is basic statistics, the Central Dogma, and basic evolutionary principles. The Iris module provides hands-on experience using R programming to explore and visualize a simple dataset; it can be used independently as an introduction to R for biological data or skipped if students already have some experience with R. Both modules emphasize understanding the utility of R, rather than creation of original code. Pilot testing showed the case study was well-received by students and faculty, who described it as a clear introduction to R and appreciated the value of R for visualizing and analyzing large datasets.

Contain informative data related to COVID-19 pandemic. Specially, figure out about the First Case and First Death information for every single country. The datasets mainly focus on two major fields first one is First Case which consists of information of Date of First Case(s), Number of confirm Case(s) at First Day, Age of the patient(s) of First Case, Last Visited Country and the other one First Death information consist of Date of First Death and Age of the Patient who died first for every Country mentioning corresponding Continent. The datasets also contain the Binary Matrix of spread chain among different country and region.

*This is not a country. This is a ship. The name of the Cruise Ship was not given from the government.
"N+": the age is not specified but greater than N
“No Trace”: some data was not found
“Unspecified”: not available from the authority
“N/A”: for “Last Visited Country(s) of Confirmed Case(s)” column, “N/A” indicates that the confirmed case(s) of those countries do not have any travel history in recent past; in “Age of First Death(s)” column “N/A” indicates that those countries do not have may death case till May 16, 2020.

Four datasets are presented here. The original dataset is a collection of the COVID-19 data maintained by Our World in Data. It includes data on confirmed cases, and deaths, as well as other variables of potential interest for ten countries such as Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Denmark, France, Israel, Italy, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The original dataset includes the data from the date of 31st December in 2019 to 31st May in 2020 with a total of 1.530 instances and 19 features. This dataset is collected from a variety of sources (the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, United Nations, World Bank, Global Burden of Disease, Blavatnik School of Government, etc.). After the original dataset is pre-processed by cleaning and removing some data including unnecessary and blank. Then, all strings are converted numeric values, and some new features such as continent, hemisphere, year, month, and day are added by extracting the original features. After that, the processed original dataset is organized for prediction of the number of new cases of COVID-19 for 1 day, 3 days, and 10 days ago and three datasets (Dataset-1, 2, 3) are created for that.

Note: This dataset is no longer being updated due to the end of the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency.

Note: On 2/16/22, 17,467 cases based on at-home positive test results were excluded from the probable case counts. Per national case classification guidelines, cases based on at-home positive results are now classified as “suspect” cases. The majority of these cases were identified between November 2021 and February 2022.

CDPH tracks both probable and confirmed cases of COVID-19 to better understand how the virus is impacting our communities. Probable cases are defined as individuals with a positive antigen test that detects the presence of viral antigens. Antigen testing is useful when rapid results are needed, or in settings where laboratory resources may be limited. Confirmed cases are defined as individuals with a positive molecular test, which tests for viral genetic material, such as a PCR or polymerase chain reaction test. Results from both types of tests are reported to CDPH.

Due to the expanded use of antigen testing, surveillance of probable cases is increasingly important. The proportion of probable cases among the total cases in California has increased. To provide a more complete picture of trends in case volume, it is now more important to provide probable case data in addition to confirmed case data. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has begun publishing probable case data for states.

Testing data is updated weekly. Due to small numbers, the percentage of probable cases in the first two weeks of the month may change. Probable case data from San Diego County is not included in the statewide table at this time.

For more information, please see https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/Pages/COVID-19/Probable-Cases.aspx

Introduction

This repository hosts the Testing Roads for Autonomous VEhicLes (TRAVEL) dataset. TRAVEL is an extensive collection of virtual roads that have been used for testing lane assist/keeping systems (i.e., driving agents) and data from their execution in state of the art, physically accurate driving simulator, called BeamNG.tech. Virtual roads consist of sequences of road points interpolated using Cubic splines.

Along with the data, this repository contains instructions on how to install the tooling necessary to generate new data (i.e., test cases) and analyze them in the context of test regression. We focus on test selection and test prioritization, given their importance for developing high-quality software following the DevOps paradigms.

This dataset builds on top of our previous work in this area, including work on

• test generation (e.g., AsFault, DeepJanus, and DeepHyperion) and the SBST CPS tool competition (SBST2021),
• test selection: SDC-Scissor and related tool
• test prioritization: automated test cases prioritization work for SDCs.

Dataset Overview

The TRAVEL dataset is available under the data folder and is organized as a set of experiments folders. Each of these folders is generated by running the test-generator (see below) and contains the configuration used for generating the data (experiment_description.csv), various statistics on generated tests (generation_stats.csv) and found faults (oob_stats.csv). Additionally, the folders contain the raw test cases generated and executed during each experiment (test.).

The following sections describe what each of those files contains.

Experiment Description

The experiment_description.csv contains the settings used to generate the data, including:

• Time budget. The overall generation budget in hours. This budget includes both the time to generate and execute the tests as driving simulations.
• The size of the map. The size of the squared map defines the boundaries inside which the virtual roads develop in meters.
• The test subject. The driving agent that implements the lane-keeping system under test. The TRAVEL dataset contains data generated testing the BeamNG.AI and the end-to-end Dave2 systems.
• The test generator. The algorithm that generated the test cases. The TRAVEL dataset contains data obtained using various algorithms, ranging from naive and advanced random generators to complex evolutionary algorithms, for generating tests.
• The speed limit. The maximum speed at which the driving agent under test can travel.
• Out of Bound (OOB) tolerance. The test cases' oracle that defines the tolerable amount of the ego-car that can lie outside the lane boundaries. This parameter ranges between 0.0 and 1.0. In the former case, a test failure triggers as soon as any part of the ego-vehicle goes out of the lane boundary; in the latter case, a test failure triggers only if the entire body of the ego-car falls outside the lane.

Experiment Statistics

The generation_stats.csv contains statistics about the test generation, including:

• Total number of generated tests. The number of tests generated during an experiment. This number is broken down into the number of valid tests and invalid tests. Valid tests contain virtual roads that do not self-intersect and contain turns that are not too sharp.
• Test outcome. The test outcome contains the number of passed tests, failed tests, and test in error. Passed and failed tests are defined by the OOB Tolerance and an additional (implicit) oracle that checks whether the ego-car is moving or standing. Tests that did not pass because of other errors (e.g., the simulator crashed) are reported in a separated category.

The TRAVEL dataset also contains statistics about the failed tests, including the overall number of failed tests (total oob) and its breakdown into OOB that happened while driving left or right. Further statistics about the diversity (i.e., sparseness) of the failures are also reported.

Test Cases and Executions

Each test. contains information about a test case and, if the test case is valid, the data observed during its execution as driving simulation.

The data about the test case definition include:

• The road points. The list of points in a 2D space that identifies the center of the virtual road, and their interpolation using cubic splines (interpolated_points)
• The test ID. The unique identifier of the test in the experiment.
• Validity flag and explanation. A flag that indicates whether the test is valid or not, and a brief message describing why the test is not considered valid (e.g., the road contains sharp turns or the road self intersects)

The test data are organized according to the following JSON Schema and can be interpreted as RoadTest objects provided by the tests_generation.py module.

{
 "type": "object",
 "properties": {
  "id": { "type": "integer" },
  "is_valid": { "type": "boolean" },
  "validation_message": { "type": "string" },
  "road_points": { §\label{line:road-points}§
   "type": "array",
   "items": { "$ref": "schemas/pair" },
  },
  "interpolated_points": { §\label{line:interpolated-points}§
   "type": "array",
   "items": { "$ref": "schemas/pair" },
  },
  "test_outcome": { "type": "string" }, §\label{line:test-outcome}§
  "description": { "type": "string" },
  "execution_data": { 
   "type": "array",
   "items": { "$ref" : "schemas/simulationdata" }
  }
 },
 "required": [
  "id", "is_valid", "validation_message",
  "road_points", "interpolated_points"
 ]
}

Finally, the execution data contain a list of timestamped state information recorded by the driving simulation. State information is collected at constant frequency and includes absolute position, rotation, and velocity of the ego-car, its speed in Km/h, and control inputs from the driving agent (steering, throttle, and braking). Additionally, execution data contain OOB-related data, such as the lateral distance between the car and the lane center and the OOB percentage (i.e., how much the car is outside the lane).

The simulation data adhere to the following (simplified) JSON Schema and can be interpreted as Python objects using the simulation_data.py module.

{
  "$id": "schemas/simulationdata",
  "type": "object",
  "properties": {
    "timer" : { "type": "number" },
    "pos" : { 
         "type": "array",
         "items":{ "$ref" : "schemas/triple" }
        }
    "vel" : { 
         "type": "array",
         "items":{ "$ref" : "schemas/triple" }
        }
    "vel_kmh" : { "type": "number" },
    "steering" : { "type": "number" },
    "brake" : { "type": "number" },
    "throttle" : { "type": "number" },
    "is_oob" : { "type": "number" },
    "oob_percentage" : { "type": "number" } §\label{line:oob-percentage}§
  },
 "required": [
  "timer", "pos", "vel", "vel_kmh", 
  "steering", "brake", "throttle",
  "is_oob", "oob_percentage"
 ]
}

Dataset Content

The TRAVEL dataset is a lively initiative so the content of the dataset is subject to change. Currently, the dataset contains the data collected during the SBST CPS tool competition, and data collected in the context of our recent work on test selection (SDC-Scissor work and tool) and test prioritization (automated test cases prioritization work for SDCs).

SBST CPS Tool Competition Data

The data collected during the SBST CPS tool competition are stored inside data/competition.tar.gz. The file contains the test cases generated by Deeper, Frenetic, AdaFrenetic, and Swat, the open-source test generators submitted to the competition and executed against BeamNG.AI with an aggression factor of 0.7 (i.e., conservative driver).

A collection of 22 data set of 50+ requirements each, expressed as user stories.

The dataset has been created by gathering data from web sources and we are not aware of license agreements or intellectual property rights on the requirements / user stories. The curator took utmost diligence in minimizing the risks of copyright infringement by using non-recent data that is less likely to be critical, by sampling a subset of the original requirements collection, and by qualitatively analyzing the requirements. In case of copyright infringement, please contact the dataset curator (Fabiano Dalpiaz, f.dalpiaz@uu.nl) to discuss the possibility of removal of that dataset [see Zenodo's policies]

The data sets have been originally used to conduct experiments about ambiguity detection with the REVV-Light tool: https://github.com/RELabUU/revv-light

This collection has been originally published in Mendeley data: https://data.mendeley.com/datasets/7zbk8zsd8y/1

Overview of the datasets [data and links added in December 2024]

The following text provides a description of the datasets, including links to the systems and websites, when available. The datasets are organized by macro-category and then by identifier.

Public administration and transparency

g02-federalspending.txt (2018) originates from early data in the Federal Spending Transparency project, which pertain to the website that is used to share publicly the spending data for the U.S. government. The website was created because of the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 (DATA Act). The specific dataset pertains a system called DAIMS or Data Broker, which stands for DATA Act Information Model Schema. The sample that was gathered refers to a sub-project related to allowing the government to act as a data broker, thereby providing data to third parties. The data for the Data Broker project is currently not available online, although the backend seems to be hosted in GitHub under a CC0 1.0 Universal license. Current and recent snapshots of federal spending related websites, including many more projects than the one described in the shared collection, can be found here.

g03-loudoun.txt (2018) is a set of extracted requirements from a document, by the Loudoun County Virginia, that describes the to-be user stories and use cases about a system for land management readiness assessment called Loudoun County LandMARC. The source document can be found here and it is part of the Electronic Land Management System and EPlan Review Project - RFP RFQ issued in March 2018. More information about the overall LandMARC system and services can be found here.

g04-recycling.txt(2017) concerns a web application where recycling and waste disposal facilities can be searched and located. The application operates through the visualization of a map that the user can interact with. The dataset has obtained from a GitHub website and it is at the basis of a students' project on web site design; the code is available (no license).

g05-openspending.txt (2018) is about the OpenSpending project (www), a project of the Open Knowledge foundation which aims at transparency about how local governments spend money. At the time of the collection, the data was retrieved from a Trello board that is currently unavailable. The sample focuses on publishing, importing and editing datasets, and how the data should be presented. Currently, OpenSpending is managed via a GitHub repository which contains multiple sub-projects with unknown license.

g11-nsf.txt (2018) refers to a collection of user stories referring to the NSF Site Redesign & Content Discovery project, which originates from a publicly accessible GitHub repository (GPL 2.0 license). In particular, the user stories refer to an early version of the NSF's website. The user stories can be found as closed Issues.

(Research) data and meta-data management

g08-frictionless.txt (2016) regards the Frictionless Data project, which offers an open source dataset for building data infrastructures, to be used by researchers, data scientists, and data engineers. Links to the many projects within the Frictionless Data project are on GitHub (with a mix of Unlicense and MIT license) and web. The specific set of user stories has been collected in 2016 by GitHub user @danfowler and are stored in a Trello board.

g14-datahub.txt (2013) concerns the open source project DataHub, which is currently developed via a GitHub repository (the code has Apache License 2.0). DataHub is a data discovery platform which has been developed over multiple years. The specific data set is an initial set of user stories, which we can date back to 2013 thanks to a comment therein.

g16-mis.txt (2015) is a collection of user stories that pertains a repository for researchers and archivists. The source of the dataset is a public Trello repository. Although the user stories do not have explicit links to projects, it can be inferred that the stories originate from some project related to the library of Duke University.

g17-cask.txt (2016) refers to the Cask Data Application Platform (CDAP). CDAP is an open source application platform (GitHub, under Apache License 2.0) that can be used to develop applications within the Apache Hadoop ecosystem, an open-source framework which can be used for distributed processing of large datasets. The user stories are extracted from a document that includes requirements regarding dataset management for Cask 4.0, which includes the scenarios, user stories and a design for the implementation of these user stories. The raw data is available in the following environment.

g18-neurohub.txt (2012) is concerned with the NeuroHub platform, a neuroscience data management, analysis and collaboration platform for researchers in neuroscience to collect, store, and share data with colleagues or with the research community. The user stories were collected at a time NeuroHub was still a research project sponsored by the UK Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC). For information about the research project from which the requirements were collected, see the following record.

g22-rdadmp.txt (2018) is a collection of user stories from the Research Data Alliance's working group on DMP Common Standards. Their GitHub repository contains a collection of user stories that were created by asking the community to suggest functionality that should part of a website that manages data management plans. Each user story is stored as an issue on the GitHub's page.

g23-archivesspace.txt (2012-2013) refers to ArchivesSpace: an open source, web application for managing archives information. The application is designed to support core functions in archives administration such as accessioning; description and arrangement of processed materials including analog, hybrid, and
born digital content; management of authorities and rights; and reference service. The application supports collection management through collection management records, tracking of events, and a growing number of administrative reports. ArchivesSpace is open source and its

This data set includes all channels of engagement in which a service request is created.

Refer to this link to learn more about BOS:311: https://www.cityofboston.gov/311/

9/22/25 UPDATE: In October 2025, 311 service requests will begin transitioning to a new backend system; cases from the new system will populate a new and differently structured dataset. During the transition, some cases will populate in the current dataset ("311 Service Requests - 2025") and some cases will populate in the new dataset (not yet posted) depending on the type of service the case requires. The data dictionary labeled NEW SYSTEM corresponds to the dataset for the new system. The Data Transition Guide provides current information on which case types to find in which dataset as well as how to use old and new datasets together. We anticipate all cases will be transitioned to the new system by mid-2026. If you have any questions on the upcoming changes, you can contact doitbcstech@boston.gov.

NNDSS - TABLE 1HH. Syphilis, Congenital to Syphilis, Primary and Secondary – 2021. In this Table, provisional cases* of notifiable diseases are displayed for United States, U.S. territories, and Non-U.S. residents.

Notice: Due to data processing issues at CDC, data for the following jurisdictions may be incomplete for week 7: Alaska, Arizona, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, North Dakota, New Hampshire, New York City, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island.

Note: This table contains provisional cases of national notifiable diseases from the National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System (NNDSS). NNDSS data from the 50 states, New York City, the District of Columbia and the U.S. territories are collated and published weekly on the NNDSS Data and Statistics web page (https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nndss/data-and-statistics.html). Cases reported by state health departments to CDC for weekly publication are provisional because of the time needed to complete case follow-up. Therefore, numbers presented in later weeks may reflect changes made to these counts as additional information becomes available. The national surveillance case definitions used to define a case are available on the NNDSS web site at https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nndss/. Information about the weekly provisional data and guides to interpreting data are available at: https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nndss/infectious-tables.html.

Footnotes: U: Unavailable — The reporting jurisdiction was unable to send the data to CDC or CDC was unable to process the data. -: No reported cases — The reporting jurisdiction did not submit any cases to CDC. N: Not reportable — The disease or condition was not reportable by law, statute, or regulation in the reporting jurisdiction. NN: Not nationally notifiable — This condition was not designated as being nationally notifiable. NP: Nationally notifiable but not published. NC: Not calculated — There is insufficient data available to support the calculation of this statistic. Cum: Cumulative year-to-date counts. Max: Maximum — Maximum case count during the previous 52 weeks. * Case counts for reporting years 2020 and 2021 are provisional and subject to change. Cases are assigned to the reporting jurisdiction submitting the case to NNDSS, if the case's country of usual residence is the U.S., a U.S. territory, unknown, or null (i.e. country not reported); otherwise, the case is assigned to the 'Non-U.S. Residents' category. Country of usual residence is currently not reported by all jurisdictions or for all conditions. For further information on interpretation of these data, see https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nndss/document/Users_guide_WONDER_tables_cleared_final.pdf. †Previous 52 week maximum and cumulative YTD are determined from periods of time when the condition was reportable in the jurisdiction (i.e., may be less than 52 weeks of data or incomplete YTD data).

Coups d'Ètat are important events in the life of a country. They constitute an important subset of irregular transfers of political power that can have significant and enduring consequences for national well-being. There are only a limited number of datasets available to study these events (Powell and Thyne 2011, Marshall and Marshall 2019). Seeking to facilitate research on post-WWII coups by compiling a more comprehensive list and categorization of these events, the Cline Center for Advanced Social Research (previously the Cline Center for Democracy) initiated the Coup d’État Project as part of its Societal Infrastructures and Development (SID) project. More specifically, this dataset identifies the outcomes of coup events (i.e., realized, unrealized, or conspiracy) the type of actor(s) who initiated the coup (i.e., military, rebels, etc.), as well as the fate of the deposed leader. Version 2.1.3 adds 19 additional coup events to the data set, corrects the date of a coup in Tunisia, and reclassifies an attempted coup in Brazil in December 2022 to a conspiracy. Version 2.1.2 added 6 additional coup events that occurred in 2022 and updated the coding of an attempted coup event in Kazakhstan in January 2022. Version 2.1.1 corrected a mistake in version 2.1.0, where the designation of “dissident coup” had been dropped in error for coup_id: 00201062021. Version 2.1.1 fixed this omission by marking the case as both a dissident coup and an auto-coup. Version 2.1.0 added 36 cases to the data set and removed two cases from the v2.0.0 data. This update also added actor coding for 46 coup events and added executive outcomes to 18 events from version 2.0.0. A few other changes were made to correct inconsistencies in the coup ID variable and the date of the event. Version 2.0.0 improved several aspects of the previous version (v1.0.0) and incorporated additional source material to include: • Reconciling missing event data • Removing events with irreconcilable event dates • Removing events with insufficient sourcing (each event needs at least two sources) • Removing events that were inaccurately coded as coup events • Removing variables that fell below the threshold of inter-coder reliability required by the project • Removing the spreadsheet ‘CoupInventory.xls’ because of inadequate attribution and citations in the event summaries • Extending the period covered from 1945-2005 to 1945-2019 • Adding events from Powell and Thyne’s Coup Data (Powell and Thyne, 2011)
Items in this Dataset 1. Cline Center Coup d'État Codebook v.2.1.3 Codebook.pdf - This 15-page document describes the Cline Center Coup d’État Project dataset. The first section of this codebook provides a summary of the different versions of the data. The second section provides a succinct definition of a coup d’état used by the Coup d'État Project and an overview of the categories used to differentiate the wide array of events that meet the project's definition. It also defines coup outcomes. The third section describes the methodology used to produce the data. Revised February 2024 2. Coup Data v2.1.3.csv - This CSV (Comma Separated Values) file contains all of the coup event data from the Cline Center Coup d’État Project. It contains 29 variables and 1000 observations. Revised February 2024 3. Source Document v2.1.3.pdf - This 325-page document provides the sources used for each of the coup events identified in this dataset. Please use the value in the coup_id variable to identify the sources used to identify that particular event. Revised February 2024 4. README.md - This file contains useful information for the user about the dataset. It is a text file written in markdown language. Revised February 2024
Citation Guidelines 1. To cite the codebook (or any other documentation associated with the Cline Center Coup d’État Project Dataset) please use the following citation: Peyton, Buddy, Joseph Bajjalieh, Dan Shalmon, Michael Martin, Jonathan Bonaguro, and Scott Althaus. 2024. “Cline Center Coup d’État Project Dataset Codebook”. Cline Center Coup d’État Project Dataset. Cline Center for Advanced Social Research. V.2.1.3. February 27. University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. doi: 10.13012/B2IDB-9651987_V7 2. To cite data from the Cline Center Coup d’État Project Dataset please use the following citation (filling in the correct date of access): Peyton, Buddy, Joseph Bajjalieh, Dan Shalmon, Michael Martin, Jonathan Bonaguro, and Emilio Soto. 2024. Cline Center Coup d’État Project Dataset. Cline Center for Advanced Social Research. V.2.1.3. February 27. University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. doi: 10.13012/B2IDB-9651987_V7

Note: This dataset is no longer being updated as of June 2, 2025.

This dataset contains numbers of COVID-19 outbreaks and associated cases, categorized by setting, reported to CDPH since January 1, 2021.

AB 685 (Chapter 84, Statutes of 2020) and the Cal/OSHA COVID-19 Emergency Temporary Standards (Title 8, Subchapter 7, Sections 3205-3205.4) required non-healthcare employers in California to report workplace COVID-19 outbreaks to their local health department (LHD) between January 1, 2021 – December 31, 2022. Beginning January 1, 2023, non-healthcare employer reporting of COVID-19 outbreaks to local health departments is voluntary, unless a local order is in place. More recent data collected without mandated reporting may therefore be less representative of all outbreaks that have occurred, compared to earlier data collected during mandated reporting. Licensed health facilities continue to be mandated to report outbreaks to LHDs.

LHDs report confirmed outbreaks to the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) via the California Reportable Disease Information Exchange (CalREDIE), the California Connected (CalCONNECT) system, or other established processes. Data are compiled and categorized by setting by CDPH. Settings are categorized by U.S. Census industry codes. Total outbreaks and cases are included for individual industries as well as for broader industrial sectors.

The first dataset includes numbers of outbreaks in each setting by month of onset, for outbreaks reported to CDPH since January 1, 2021. This dataset includes some outbreaks with onset prior to January 1 that were reported to CDPH after January 1; these outbreaks are denoted with month of onset “Before Jan 2021.” The second dataset includes cumulative numbers of COVID-19 outbreaks with onset after January 1, 2021, categorized by setting. Due to reporting delays, the reported numbers may not reflect all outbreaks that have occurred as of the reporting date; additional outbreaks may have occurred that have not yet been reported to CDPH.

While many of these settings are workplaces, cases may have occurred among workers, other community members who visited the setting, or both. Accordingly, these data do not distinguish between outbreaks involving only workers, outbreaks involving only residents or patrons, or outbreaks involving both.

Several additional data limitations should be kept in mind:

• Outbreaks are classified as “Insufficient information” for outbreaks where not enough information was available for CDPH to assign an industry code.

• Some sectors, particularly congregate residential settings, may have increased testing and therefore increased likelihood of outbreak recognition and reporting. As a result, in congregate residential settings, the number of outbreak-associated cases may be more accurate.

• However, in most settings, outbreak and case counts are likely underestimates. For most cases, it is not possible to identify the source of exposure, as many cases have multiple possible exposures.

• Because some settings have been at times been closed or open with capacity restrictions, numbers of outbreak reports in those settings do not reflect COVID-19 transmission risk.

• The number of outbreaks in different settings will depend on the number of different workplaces in each setting. More outbreaks would be expected in settings with many workplaces compared to settings with few workplaces.