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).

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.

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

This dataset is a practical SQL case study designed for learners who are looking to enhance their SQL skills in analyzing sales, products, and marketing data. It contains several SQL queries related to a simulated business database for product sales, marketing expenses, and location data. The database consists of three main tables: Fact, Product, and Location.

Objective of the Case Study: The purpose of this case study is to provide learners with a variety of practical SQL exercises that involve real-world business problems. The queries explore topics such as:

• Aggregating data (e.g., sum, count, average)
• Filtering and sorting data
• Grouping and joining multiple tables
• Using SQL functions like AVG(), COUNT(), SUM(), and MIN/MAX()
• Handling advanced SQL features such as row numbering, transactions, and stored procedures

Vitamin D insufficiency appears to be prevalent in SLE patients. Multiple factors potentially contribute to lower vitamin D levels, including limited sun exposure, the use of sunscreen, darker skin complexion, aging, obesity, specific medical conditions, and certain medications. The study aims to assess the risk factors associated with low vitamin D levels in SLE patients in the southern part of Bangladesh, a region noted for a high prevalence of SLE. The research additionally investigates the possible correlation between vitamin D and the SLEDAI score, seeking to understand the potential benefits of vitamin D in enhancing disease outcomes for SLE patients. The study incorporates a dataset consisting of 50 patients from the southern part of Bangladesh and evaluates their clinical and demographic data. An initial exploratory data analysis is conducted to gain insights into the data, which includes calculating means and standard deviations, performing correlation analysis, and generating heat maps. Relevant inferential statistical tests, such as the Student’s t-test, are also employed. In the machine learning part of the analysis, this study utilizes supervised learning algorithms, specifically Linear Regression (LR) and Random Forest (RF). To optimize the hyperparameters of the RF model and mitigate the risk of overfitting given the small dataset, a 3-Fold cross-validation strategy is implemented. The study also calculates bootstrapped confidence intervals to provide robust uncertainty estimates and further validate the approach. A comprehensive feature importance analysis is carried out using RF feature importance, permutation-based feature importance, and SHAP values. The LR model yields an RMSE of 4.83 (CI: 2.70, 6.76) and MAE of 3.86 (CI: 2.06, 5.86), whereas the RF model achieves better results, with an RMSE of 2.98 (CI: 2.16, 3.76) and MAE of 2.68 (CI: 1.83,3.52). Both models identify Hb, CRP, ESR, and age as significant contributors to vitamin D level predictions. Despite the lack of a significant association between SLEDAI and vitamin D in the statistical analysis, the machine learning models suggest a potential nonlinear dependency of vitamin D on SLEDAI. These findings highlight the importance of these factors in managing vitamin D levels in SLE patients. The study concludes that there is a high prevalence of vitamin D insufficiency in SLE patients. Although a direct linear correlation between the SLEDAI score and vitamin D levels is not observed, machine learning models suggest the possibility of a nonlinear relationship. Furthermore, factors such as Hb, CRP, ESR, and age are identified as more significant in predicting vitamin D levels. Thus, the study suggests that monitoring these factors may be advantageous in managing vitamin D levels in SLE patients. Given the immunological nature of SLE, the potential role of vitamin D in SLE disease activity could be substantial. Therefore, it underscores the need for further large-scale studies to corroborate this hypothesis.

This open data set contains the raw CSV files that were generated in the first GREAT case study, carried out in collaboration with UNDP and using the infrastructure developed by PlanetPlay. A merged file is also provided that may be more convenient for some users who wish to carry out their own analysis.

This dataset contains statistics on appeal cases accepted by the Department of Digital Development, recording the year, number of cases received, number of cases concluded and unresolved, and is updated annually.

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.

In the way of my journey to earn the google data analytics certificate I will practice real world example by following the steps of the data analysis process: ask, prepare, process, analyze, share, and act. Picking the Bellabeat example.

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.

Hello! Welcome to the Capstone project I have completed to earn my Data Analytics certificate through Google. I chose to complete this case study through RStudio desktop. The reason I did this is that R is the primary new concept I learned throughout this course. I wanted to embrace my curiosity and learn more about R through this project. In the beginning of this report I will provide the scenario of the case study I was given. After this I will walk you through my Data Analysis process based on the steps I learned in this course:

1. Ask
2. Prepare
3. Process
4. Analyze
5. Share
6. Act

The data I used for this analysis comes from this FitBit data set: https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/arashnic/fitbit

" This dataset generated by respondents to a distributed survey via Amazon Mechanical Turk between 03.12.2016-05.12.2016. Thirty eligible Fitbit users consented to the submission of personal tracker data, including minute-level output for physical activity, heart rate, and sleep monitoring. "

This dataset belongs to a Hackathon organized by "Univ.AI"!!

To expand the analysis horizon, state feature was expanded and state demographics and census data was added to the initial dataset.

The dataset has been cleaned and made EDA ready.

Data columns (total 19 columns): # Column Non-Null Count Dtype

0 Id 252000 non-null int64
1 Income 252000 non-null int64
2 Age 252000 non-null int64
3 Experience 252000 non-null int64
4 Marital_Status 252000 non-null object 5 House_Ownership 252000 non-null object 6 Car_Ownership 252000 non-null object 7 Profession 252000 non-null object 8 CITY 252000 non-null object 9 CURRENT_JOB_YRS 252000 non-null int64
10 CURRENT_HOUSE_YRS 252000 non-null int64
11 Risk_Flag 252000 non-null int64
12 Rev_State 252000 non-null object 13 State_GDP 252000 non-null int64
14 Literacy_Rate 252000 non-null float64 15 Population 252000 non-null int64
16 Unemployment 252000 non-null int64
17 Poverty_Rate 252000 non-null float64 18 Region 252000 non-null object dtypes: float64(2), int64(10), object(7) memory usage: 36.5+ MB

This database supports Earnings Corrections.

This data set was generated in accordance with the semiconductor industry and contains values of summary statistics from sensor recordings of the high-precision and high-tech production equipment. Basically, the semiconductor production consists of hundreds of process steps performing physical and chemical operations on so-called wafers, i.e. slices based on semiconductor material. In the production chain, each process equipment is equipped with several sensors recording physical parameters like gas flow, temperature, voltage, etc., resulting in so-called sensor data. Out of the sensor data, values of summary statistics are extracted. These are values like mean, standard deviation and gradients. To keep the entire production as stable as possible, these values are used to monitor the whole production in order to intervene in case of deviations. After the production, each device on the wafer is tested in the most careful way resulting in so-called wafer test data. In some cases, suspicious patterns occur in the wafer test data potentially leading to failure. In this case the root cause must be found in the production chain. For this purpose, the given data is provided. The aim is to find correlations between the wafer test data and the values of summary statistics in order to identify the root cause. The given data is divided into four data sets: "XTrain.csv", "YTrain.csv", "XTest.csv" and "YTest.csv". "XTrain.csv" and "XTest.csv" represent the values of summary statistics originating in the production chain separated for the purpose of training and validating a statistical model. Included are 114 observations of 77 parameters (values of summary statistics). The "YTrain.csv" and "YTest.csv" contain the corresponding wafer test data (144 observations of one parameter).

Dataset

This dataset was created by Matthew Johnson

Contents

Dataset Overview

This dataset contains global COVID-19 case and death data by country, collected directly from the official World Health Organization (WHO) COVID-19 Dashboard. It provides a comprehensive view of the pandemic’s impact worldwide, covering the period up to 2025. The dataset is intended for researchers, analysts, and anyone interested in understanding the progression and global effects of COVID-19 through reliable, up-to-date information.

Source Information

• Website: WHO COVID-19 Dashboard
• Organization: World Health Organization (WHO)
• Data Coverage: Global (by country/territory)
• Time Period: Up to 2025

The World Health Organization is the United Nations agency responsible for international public health. The WHO COVID-19 Dashboard is a trusted source that aggregates official reports from countries and territories around the world, providing daily updates on cases, deaths, and other key metrics related to COVID-19.

Dataset Contents

• Country/Region: The name of the country or territory.
• Date: Reporting date.
• New Cases: Number of new confirmed COVID-19 cases.
• Cumulative Cases: Total confirmed COVID-19 cases to date.
• New Deaths: Number of new confirmed deaths due to COVID-19.
• Cumulative Deaths: Total deaths reported to date.
• Additional fields may include population, rates per 100,000, and more (see data files for details).

How to Use

This dataset can be used for: - Tracking the spread and trends of COVID-19 globally and by country - Modeling and forecasting pandemic progression - Comparative analysis of the pandemic’s impact across countries and regions - Visualization and reporting

Data Reliability

The data is sourced from the WHO, widely regarded as the most authoritative source for global health statistics. However, reporting practices and data completeness may vary by country and may be subject to revision as new information becomes available.

Acknowledgements

Special thanks to the WHO for making this data publicly available and to all those working to collect, verify, and report COVID-19 statistics.

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

used to evaluate the inventory space management

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.

Context

This table is a summary table of insights of my first data analyst project, a Google Data Analytics Professional Certificate Programme Case Study.

Content

It has nearly 5M rows and a 20 columns.