The USDA Agricultural Research Service (ARS) recently established SCINet , which consists of a shared high performance computing resource, Ceres, and the dedicated high-speed Internet2 network used to access Ceres. Current and potential SCINet users are using and generating very large datasets so SCINet needs to be provisioned with adequate data storage for their active computing. It is not designed to hold data beyond active research phases. At the same time, the National Agricultural Library has been developing the Ag Data Commons, a research data catalog and repository designed for public data release and professional data curation. Ag Data Commons needs to anticipate the size and nature of data it will be tasked with handling. The ARS Web-enabled Databases Working Group, organized under the SCINet initiative, conducted a study to establish baseline data storage needs and practices, and to make projections that could inform future infrastructure design, purchases, and policies. The SCINet Web-enabled Databases Working Group helped develop the survey which is the basis for an internal report. While the report was for internal use, the survey and resulting data may be generally useful and are being released publicly. From October 24 to November 8, 2016 we administered a 17-question survey (Appendix A) by emailing a Survey Monkey link to all ARS Research Leaders, intending to cover data storage needs of all 1,675 SY (Category 1 and Category 4) scientists. We designed the survey to accommodate either individual researcher responses or group responses. Research Leaders could decide, based on their unit's practices or their management preferences, whether to delegate response to a data management expert in their unit, to all members of their unit, or to themselves collate responses from their unit before reporting in the survey. Larger storage ranges cover vastly different amounts of data so the implications here could be significant depending on whether the true amount is at the lower or higher end of the range. Therefore, we requested more detail from "Big Data users," those 47 respondents who indicated they had more than 10 to 100 TB or over 100 TB total current data (Q5). All other respondents are called "Small Data users." Because not all of these follow-up requests were successful, we used actual follow-up responses to estimate likely responses for those who did not respond. We defined active data as data that would be used within the next six months. All other data would be considered inactive, or archival. To calculate per person storage needs we used the high end of the reported range divided by 1 for an individual response, or by G, the number of individuals in a group response. For Big Data users we used the actual reported values or estimated likely values. Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: Appendix A: ARS data storage survey questions. File Name: Appendix A.pdfResource Description: The full list of questions asked with the possible responses. The survey was not administered using this PDF but the PDF was generated directly from the administered survey using the Print option under Design Survey. Asterisked questions were required. A list of Research Units and their associated codes was provided in a drop down not shown here. Resource Software Recommended: Adobe Acrobat,url: https://get.adobe.com/reader/ Resource Title: CSV of Responses from ARS Researcher Data Storage Survey. File Name: Machine-readable survey response data.csvResource Description: CSV file includes raw responses from the administered survey, as downloaded unfiltered from Survey Monkey, including incomplete responses. Also includes additional classification and calculations to support analysis. Individual email addresses and IP addresses have been removed. This information is that same data as in the Excel spreadsheet (also provided).Resource Title: Responses from ARS Researcher Data Storage Survey. File Name: Data Storage Survey Data for public release.xlsxResource Description: MS Excel worksheet that Includes raw responses from the administered survey, as downloaded unfiltered from Survey Monkey, including incomplete responses. Also includes additional classification and calculations to support analysis. Individual email addresses and IP addresses have been removed.Resource Software Recommended: Microsoft Excel,url: https://products.office.com/en-us/excel

Excel spreadsheets by species (4 letter code is abbreviation for genus and species used in study, year 2010 or 2011 is year data collected, SH indicates data for Science Hub, date is date of file preparation). The data in a file are described in a read me file which is the first worksheet in each file. Each row in a species spreadsheet is for one plot (plant). The data themselves are in the data worksheet. One file includes a read me description of the column in the date set for chemical analysis. In this file one row is an herbicide treatment and sample for chemical analysis (if taken). This dataset is associated with the following publication: Olszyk , D., T. Pfleeger, T. Shiroyama, M. Blakely-Smith, E. Lee , and M. Plocher. Plant reproduction is altered by simulated herbicide drift toconstructed plant communities. ENVIRONMENTAL TOXICOLOGY AND CHEMISTRY. Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Pensacola, FL, USA, 36(10): 2799-2813, (2017).

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the Excel population distribution across 18 age groups. It lists the population in each age group along with the percentage population relative of the total population for Excel. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population distribution of Excel by age. For example, using this dataset, we can identify the largest age group in Excel.

Key observations

The largest age group in Excel, AL was for the group of age 45 to 49 years years with a population of 74 (15.64%), according to the ACS 2018-2022 5-Year Estimates. At the same time, the smallest age group in Excel, AL was the 85 years and over years with a population of 2 (0.42%). Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2018-2022 5-Year Estimates

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2018-2022 5-Year Estimates

Age groups:

• Under 5 years
• 5 to 9 years
• 10 to 14 years
• 15 to 19 years
• 20 to 24 years
• 25 to 29 years
• 30 to 34 years
• 35 to 39 years
• 40 to 44 years
• 45 to 49 years
• 50 to 54 years
• 55 to 59 years
• 60 to 64 years
• 65 to 69 years
• 70 to 74 years
• 75 to 79 years
• 80 to 84 years
• 85 years and over

Variables / Data Columns

• Age Group: This column displays the age group in consideration
• Population: The population for the specific age group in the Excel is shown in this column.
• % of Total Population: This column displays the population of each age group as a proportion of Excel total population. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.

Good to know

Margin of Error

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

Custom data

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

Inspiration

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

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Excel Population by Age. You can refer the same here

Abstract

The documentation covers Enterprise Survey panel datasets that were collected in Slovenia in 2009, 2013 and 2019.

The Slovenia ES 2009 was conducted between 2008 and 2009. The Slovenia ES 2013 was conducted between March 2013 and September 2013. Finally, the Slovenia ES 2019 was conducted between December 2018 and November 2019. The objective of the Enterprise Survey is to gain an understanding of what firms experience in the private sector.

As part of its strategic goal of building a climate for investment, job creation, and sustainable growth, the World Bank has promoted improving the business environment as a key strategy for development, which has led to a systematic effort in collecting enterprise data across countries. The Enterprise Surveys (ES) are an ongoing World Bank project in collecting both objective data based on firms' experiences and enterprises' perception of the environment in which they operate.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

The primary sampling unit of the study is the establishment. An establishment is a physical location where business is carried out and where industrial operations take place or services are provided. A firm may be composed of one or more establishments. For example, a brewery may have several bottling plants and several establishments for distribution. For the purposes of this survey an establishment must take its own financial decisions and have its own financial statements separate from those of the firm. An establishment must also have its own management and control over its payroll.

Universe

As it is standard for the ES, the Slovenia ES was based on the following size stratification: small (5 to 19 employees), medium (20 to 99 employees), and large (100 or more employees).

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The sample for Slovenia ES 2009, 2013, 2019 were selected using stratified random sampling, following the methodology explained in the Sampling Manual for Slovenia 2009 ES and for Slovenia 2013 ES, and in the Sampling Note for 2019 Slovenia ES.

Three levels of stratification were used in this country: industry, establishment size, and oblast (region). The original sample designs with specific information of the industries and regions chosen are included in the attached Excel file (Sampling Report.xls.) for Slovenia 2009 ES. For Slovenia 2013 and 2019 ES, specific information of the industries and regions chosen is described in the "The Slovenia 2013 Enterprise Surveys Data Set" and "The Slovenia 2019 Enterprise Surveys Data Set" reports respectively, Appendix E.

For the Slovenia 2009 ES, industry stratification was designed in the way that follows: the universe was stratified into manufacturing industries, services industries, and one residual (core) sector as defined in the sampling manual. Each industry had a target of 90 interviews. For the manufacturing industries sample sizes were inflated by about 17% to account for potential non-response cases when requesting sensitive financial data and also because of likely attrition in future surveys that would affect the construction of a panel. For the other industries (residuals) sample sizes were inflated by about 12% to account for under sampling in firms in service industries.

For Slovenia 2013 ES, industry stratification was designed in the way that follows: the universe was stratified into one manufacturing industry, and two service industries (retail, and other services).

Finally, for Slovenia 2019 ES, three levels of stratification were used in this country: industry, establishment size, and region. The original sample design with specific information of the industries and regions chosen is described in "The Slovenia 2019 Enterprise Surveys Data Set" report, Appendix C. Industry stratification was done as follows: Manufacturing – combining all the relevant activities (ISIC Rev. 4.0 codes 10-33), Retail (ISIC 47), and Other Services (ISIC 41-43, 45, 46, 49-53, 55, 56, 58, 61, 62, 79, 95).

For Slovenia 2009 and 2013 ES, size stratification was defined following the standardized definition for the rollout: small (5 to 19 employees), medium (20 to 99 employees), and large (more than 99 employees). For stratification purposes, the number of employees was defined on the basis of reported permanent full-time workers. This seems to be an appropriate definition of the labor force since seasonal/casual/part-time employment is not a common practice, except in the sectors of construction and agriculture.

For Slovenia 2009 ES, regional stratification was defined in 2 regions. These regions are Vzhodna Slovenija and Zahodna Slovenija. The Slovenia sample contains panel data. The wave 1 panel “Investment Climate Private Enterprise Survey implemented in Slovenia” consisted of 223 establishments interviewed in 2005. A total of 57 establishments have been re-interviewed in the 2008 Business Environment and Enterprise Performance Survey.

For Slovenia 2013 ES, regional stratification was defined in 2 regions (city and the surrounding business area) throughout Slovenia.

Finally, for Slovenia 2019 ES, regional stratification was done across two regions: Eastern Slovenia (NUTS code SI03) and Western Slovenia (SI04).

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Personal Interview [capi]

Research instrument

Questionnaires have common questions (core module) and respectfully additional manufacturing- and services-specific questions. The eligible manufacturing industries have been surveyed using the Manufacturing questionnaire (includes the core module, plus manufacturing specific questions). Retail firms have been interviewed using the Services questionnaire (includes the core module plus retail specific questions) and the residual eligible services have been covered using the Services questionnaire (includes the core module). Each variation of the questionnaire is identified by the index variable, a0.

Response rate

Survey non-response must be differentiated from item non-response. The former refers to refusals to participate in the survey altogether whereas the latter refers to the refusals to answer some specific questions. Enterprise Surveys suffer from both problems and different strategies were used to address these issues.

Item non-response was addressed by two strategies: a- For sensitive questions that may generate negative reactions from the respondent, such as corruption or tax evasion, enumerators were instructed to collect the refusal to respond as (-8). b- Establishments with incomplete information were re-contacted in order to complete this information, whenever necessary. However, there were clear cases of low response.

For 2009 and 2013 Slovenia ES, the survey non-response was addressed by maximizing efforts to contact establishments that were initially selected for interview. Up to 4 attempts were made to contact the establishment for interview at different times/days of the week before a replacement establishment (with similar strata characteristics) was suggested for interview. Survey non-response did occur but substitutions were made in order to potentially achieve strata-specific goals. Further research is needed on survey non-response in the Enterprise Surveys regarding potential introduction of bias.

For 2009, the number of contacted establishments per realized interview was 6.18. This number is the result of two factors: explicit refusals to participate in the survey, as reflected by the rate of rejection (which includes rejections of the screener and the main survey) and the quality of the sample frame, as represented by the presence of ineligible units. The relatively low ratio of contacted establishments per realized interview (6.18) suggests that the main source of error in estimates in the Slovenia may be selection bias and not frame inaccuracy.

For 2013, the number of realized interviews per contacted establishment was 25%. This number is the result of two factors: explicit refusals to participate in the survey, as reflected by the rate of rejection (which includes rejections of the screener and the main survey) and the quality of the sample frame, as represented by the presence of ineligible units. The number of rejections per contact was 44%.

Finally, for 2019, the number of interviews per contacted establishments was 9.7%. This number is the result of two factors: explicit refusals to participate in the survey, as reflected by the rate of rejection (which includes rejections of the screener and the main survey) and the quality of the sample frame, as represented by the presence of ineligible units. The share of rejections per contact was 75.2%.

The excelforms extension for CKAN provides a mechanism for users to input data into Table Designer tables using Excel-based forms, enhancing data entry efficiency. This extension focuses on streamlining the process of adding data rows to tables within CKAN's Table Designer. A key component of the functionality is the ability to import multiple rows in a single operation, which significant reduces overhead associated with entering multiple data points. Key Features: Excel-Based Forms: Users can enter data using familiar Excel spreadsheets, leveraging their existing skills and software. Table Designer Integration: Designed to work seamlessly with CKAN's Table Designer, extending its functionality to include Excel-based data entry. Multiple Row Import: Supports importing multiple rows of data at once, improving data entry efficiency, especially when dealing with large datasets. Data mapping: Simplifies the process of aligning excel column headers to their corresponding data fields in tables. Improved Data Entry Speed: Provides an alternative to manual data entry, resulting in faster population and easier updates. Technical Integration: The excelforms extension integrates with CKAN by introducing new functionalities and workflows around the Table Designer plugin. The installation instructions specify that this plugin to be added before the tabledesigner plugin. Benefits & Impact: By enabling Excel-based data entry, the excelforms extension improves the user experience for those familiar with spreadsheet software. The ability to import multiple rows simultaneously significantly reduces the time and effort required to populate tables, particularly when dealing with large amounts of data. The impact is better data accessibility through the streamlining of data population workflows.

To create the dataset, the top 10 countries leading in the incidence of COVID-19 in the world were selected as of October 22, 2020 (on the eve of the second full of pandemics), which are presented in the Global 500 ranking for 2020: USA, India, Brazil, Russia, Spain, France and Mexico. For each of these countries, no more than 10 of the largest transnational corporations included in the Global 500 rating for 2020 and 2019 were selected separately. The arithmetic averages were calculated and the change (increase) in indicators such as profitability and profitability of enterprises, their ranking position (competitiveness), asset value and number of employees. The arithmetic mean values of these indicators for all countries of the sample were found, characterizing the situation in international entrepreneurship as a whole in the context of the COVID-19 crisis in 2020 on the eve of the second wave of the pandemic. The data is collected in a general Microsoft Excel table. Dataset is a unique database that combines COVID-19 statistics and entrepreneurship statistics. The dataset is flexible data that can be supplemented with data from other countries and newer statistics on the COVID-19 pandemic. Due to the fact that the data in the dataset are not ready-made numbers, but formulas, when adding and / or changing the values in the original table at the beginning of the dataset, most of the subsequent tables will be automatically recalculated and the graphs will be updated. This allows the dataset to be used not just as an array of data, but as an analytical tool for automating scientific research on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and crisis on international entrepreneurship. The dataset includes not only tabular data, but also charts that provide data visualization. The dataset contains not only actual, but also forecast data on morbidity and mortality from COVID-19 for the period of the second wave of the pandemic in 2020. The forecasts are presented in the form of a normal distribution of predicted values and the probability of their occurrence in practice. This allows for a broad scenario analysis of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and crisis on international entrepreneurship, substituting various predicted morbidity and mortality rates in risk assessment tables and obtaining automatically calculated consequences (changes) on the characteristics of international entrepreneurship. It is also possible to substitute the actual values identified in the process and following the results of the second wave of the pandemic to check the reliability of pre-made forecasts and conduct a plan-fact analysis. The dataset contains not only the numerical values of the initial and predicted values of the set of studied indicators, but also their qualitative interpretation, reflecting the presence and level of risks of a pandemic and COVID-19 crisis for international entrepreneurship.

Raw data outputs 1-18 Raw data output 1. Differentially expressed genes in AML CSCs compared with GTCs as well as in TCGA AML cancer samples compared with normal ones. This data was generated based on the results of AML microarray and TCGA data analysis. Raw data output 2. Commonly and uniquely differentially expressed genes in AML CSC/GTC microarray and TCGA bulk RNA-seq datasets. This data was generated based on the results of AML microarray and TCGA data analysis. Raw data output 3. Common differentially expressed genes between training and test set samples the microarray dataset. This data was generated based on the results of AML microarray data analysis. Raw data output 4. Detailed information on the samples of the breast cancer microarray dataset (GSE52327) used in this study. Raw data output 5. Differentially expressed genes in breast CSCs compared with GTCs as well as in TCGA BRCA cancer samples compared with normal ones. Raw data output 6. Commonly and uniquely differentially expressed genes in breast cancer CSC/GTC microarray and TCGA BRCA bulk RNA-seq datasets. This data was generated based on the results of breast cancer microarray and TCGA BRCA data analysis. CSC, and GTC are abbreviations of cancer stem cell, and general tumor cell, respectively. Raw data output 7. Differential and common co-expression and protein-protein interaction of genes between CSC and GTC samples. This data was generated based on the results of AML microarray and STRING database-based protein-protein interaction data analysis. CSC, and GTC are abbreviations of cancer stem cell, and general tumor cell, respectively. Raw data output 8. Differentially expressed genes between AML dormant and active CSCs. This data was generated based on the results of AML scRNA-seq data analysis. Raw data output 9. Uniquely expressed genes in dormant or active AML CSCs. This data was generated based on the results of AML scRNA-seq data analysis. Raw data output 10. Intersections between the targeting transcription factors of AML key CSC genes and differentially expressed genes between AML CSCs vs GTCs and between dormant and active AML CSCs or the uniquely expressed genes in either class of CSCs. Raw data output 11. Targeting desirableness score of AML key CSC genes and their targeting transcription factors. These scores were generated based on an in-house scoring function described in the Methods section. Raw data output 12. CSC-specific targeting desirableness score of AML key CSC genes and their targeting transcription factors. These scores were generated based on an in-house scoring function described in the Methods section. Raw data output 13. The protein-protein interactions between AML key CSC genes with themselves and their targeting transcription factors. This data was generated based on the results of AML microarray and STRING database-based protein-protein interaction data analysis. Raw data output 14. The previously confirmed associations of genes having the highest targeting desirableness and CSC-specific targeting desirableness scores with AML or other cancers’ (stem) cells as well as hematopoietic stem cells. These data were generated based on a PubMed database-based literature mining. Raw data output 15. Drug score of available drugs and bioactive small molecules targeting AML key CSC genes and/or their targeting transcription factors. These scores were generated based on an in-house scoring function described in the Methods section. Raw data output 16. CSC-specific drug score of available drugs and bioactive small molecules targeting AML key CSC genes and/or their targeting transcription factors. These scores were generated based on an in-house scoring function described in the Methods section. Raw data output 17. Candidate drugs for experimental validation. These drugs were selected based on their respective (CSC-specific) drug scores. CSC is the abbreviation of cancer stem cell. Raw data output 18. Detailed information on the samples of the AML microarray dataset GSE30375 used in this study.

All general (non-research, non-ownership related) payments from the 2023 program year [January 1 – December 31, 2023]

NOTE: This is a very large file and, depending on your network characteristics and software, may take a long time to download or fail to download. Additionally, the number of rows in the file may be larger than the maximum rows your version of Microsoft Excel supports. If you can't download the file, we recommend engaging your IT support staff. If you are able to download the file but are unable to open it in MS Excel or get a message that the data has been truncated, we recommend trying alternative programs such as MS Access, Universal Viewer, Editpad or any other software your organization has available for large datasets.

This is a dataset downloaded off excelbianalytics.com created off of random VBA logic. I recently performed an extensive exploratory data analysis on it and I included new columns to it, namely: Unit margin, Order year, Order month, Order weekday and Order_Ship_Days which I think can help with analysis on the data. I shared it because I thought it was a great dataset to practice analytical processes on for newbies like myself.

Spreadsheets targeted at the analysis of GHS safety fingerprints.AbstractOver a 20-year period, the UN developed the Globally Harmonized System (GHS) to address international variation in chemical safety information standards. By 2014, the GHS became widely accepted internationally and has become the cornerstone of OSHA’s Hazard Communication Standard. Despite this progress, today we observe that there are inconsistent results when different sources apply the GHS to specific chemicals, in terms of the GHS pictograms, hazard statements, precautionary statements, and signal words assigned to those chemicals. In order to assess the magnitude of this problem, this research uses an extension of the “chemical fingerprints” used in 2D chemical structure similarity analysis to GHS classifications. By generating a chemical safety fingerprint, the consistency of the GHS information for specific chemicals can be assessed. The problem is the sources for GHS information can differ. For example, the SDS for sodium hydroxide pellets found on Fisher Scientific’s website displays two pictograms, while the GHS information for sodium hydroxide pellets on Sigma Aldrich’s website has only one pictogram. A chemical information tool, which identifies such discrepancies within a specific chemical inventory, can assist in maintaining the quality of the safety information needed to support safe work in the laboratory. The tools for this analysis will be scaled to the size of a moderate large research lab or small chemistry department as a whole (between 1000 and 3000 chemical entities) so that labelling expectations within these universes can be established as consistently as possible.Most chemists are familiar with programs such as excel and google sheets which are spreadsheet programs that are used by many chemists daily. Though a monadal programming approach with these tools, the analysis of GHS information can be made possible for non-programmers. This monadal approach employs single spreadsheet functions to analyze the data collected rather than long programs, which can be difficult to debug and maintain. Another advantage of this approach is that the single monadal functions can be mixed and matched to meet new goals as information needs about the chemical inventory evolve over time. These monadal functions will be used to converts GHS information into binary strings of data called “bitstrings”. This approach is also used when comparing chemical structures. The binary approach make data analysis more manageable, as GHS information comes in a variety of formats such as pictures or alphanumeric strings which are difficult to compare on their face. Bitstrings generated using the GHS information can be compared using an operator such as the tanimoto coefficent to yield values from 0 for strings that have no similarity to 1 for strings that are the same. Once a particular set of information is analyzed the hope is the same techniques could be extended to more information. For example, if GHS hazard statements are analyzed through a spreadsheet approach the same techniques with minor modifications could be used to tackle more GHS information such as pictograms.Intellectual Merit. This research indicates that the use of the cheminformatic technique of structural fingerprints can be used to create safety fingerprints. Structural fingerprints are binary bit strings that are obtained from the non-numeric entity of 2D structure. This structural fingerprint allows comparison of 2D structure through the use of the tanimoto coefficient. The use of this structural fingerprint can be extended to safety fingerprints, which can be created by converting a non-numeric entity such as GHS information into a binary bit string and comparing data through the use of the tanimoto coefficient.Broader Impact. Extension of this research can be applied to many aspects of GHS information. This research focused on comparing GHS hazard statements, but could be further applied to other bits of GHS information such as pictograms and GHS precautionary statements. Another facet of this research is allowing the chemist who uses the data to be able to compare large dataset using spreadsheet programs such as excel and not need a large programming background. Development of this technique will also benefit the Chemical Health and Safety community and Chemical Information communities by better defining the quality of GHS information available and providing a scalable and transferable tool to manipulate this information to meet a variety of other organizational needs.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset presents the the household distribution across 16 income brackets among four distinct age groups in Excel: Under 25 years, 25-44 years, 45-64 years, and over 65 years. The dataset highlights the variation in household income, offering valuable insights into economic trends and disparities within different age categories, aiding in data analysis and decision-making..

Key observations

• Upon closer examination of the distribution of households among age brackets, it reveals that there are 2(1.24%) households where the householder is under 25 years old, 57(35.40%) households with a householder aged between 25 and 44 years, 42(26.09%) households with a householder aged between 45 and 64 years, and 60(37.27%) households where the householder is over 65 years old.
• The age group of 45 to 64 years exhibits the highest median household income, while the largest number of households falls within the 65 years and over bracket. This distribution hints at economic disparities within the town of Excel, showcasing varying income levels among different age demographics.

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2018-2022 5-Year Estimates.

Income brackets:

• Less than $10,000
• $10,000 to $14,999
• $15,000 to $19,999
• $20,000 to $24,999
• $25,000 to $29,999
• $30,000 to $34,999
• $35,000 to $39,999
• $40,000 to $44,999
• $45,000 to $49,999
• $50,000 to $59,999
• $60,000 to $74,999
• $75,000 to $99,999
• $100,000 to $124,999
• $125,000 to $149,999
• $150,000 to $199,999
• $200,000 or more

Variables / Data Columns

• Household Income: This column showcases 16 income brackets ranging from Under $10,000 to $200,000+ ( As mentioned above).
• Under 25 years: The count of households led by a head of household under 25 years old with income within a specified income bracket.
• 25 to 44 years: The count of households led by a head of household 25 to 44 years old with income within a specified income bracket.
• 45 to 64 years: The count of households led by a head of household 45 to 64 years old with income within a specified income bracket.
• 65 years and over: The count of households led by a head of household 65 years and over old with income within a specified income bracket.

Good to know

Margin of Error

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

Custom data

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

Inspiration

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

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Excel median household income by age. You can refer the same here

The Large Truck* Crash Causation Study (LTCCS) is based on a three-year data collection project conducted by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). LTCCS is the first-ever national study to attempt to determine the critical events and associated factors that contribute to serious large truck crashes allowing DOT and others to implement effective countermeasures to reduce the occurrence and severity of these crashes.

Greetings , fellow analysts !

(NOTE : This is a random dataset generated using python. It bears no resemblance to any real entity in the corporate world. Any resemblance is a matter of coincidence.)

REC-SSEC Bank is a govt-aided bank operating in the Indian Peninsula. They have regional branches in over 40+ regions of the country. You have been provided with a massive excel sheet containing the transaction details, the total transaction amount and their location and total transaction count.

The dataset is described as follows :

1. Date - The date on which the transaction took place. 2.Domain - Where or which type of Business entity made the transaction. 3.Location - Where the data is collected from 4.Value - Total value of transaction
2. Count of transaction .

For example , in the very first row , the data can be read as : " On the first of January, 2022 , 1932 transactions of summing upto INR 365554 from Bhuj were reported " NOTE : There are about 2750 transactions every single day. All of this has been given to you.

The bank wants you to answer the following questions :

1. What is the average transaction value everyday for each domain over the year.
2. What is the average transaction value for every city/location over the year
3. The bank CEO , Mr: Hariharan , wants to promote the ease of transaction for the highest active domain. If the domains could be sorted into a priority, what would be the priority list ?
4. What's the average transaction count for each city ?

Pakistan’s largest ecommerce data – Power BI Report

Dataset Link: pakistan’s_largest_ecommerce_dataset Cleaned Data: Cleaned_Pakistan’s_largest_ecommerce_dataset

Raw Data:

Rows: 584525 **Columns: **21

Process:

All the raw data transformed and saved in new Excel file Working – Pakistan Largest Ecommerce Dataset

Processed Data:

Rows: 582250 Columns: 22 Visualization: Here is the link of Visualization report link: Pakistan-s-largest-ecommerce-data-Power-BI-Data-Visualization-Report

Conclusion:

In categories Mobiles & Tables make more money by selling highest no of products and also providing highest amount of discount on products. On the other side Men’s Fashion Category has sell second highest no of products but it can’t generate money with that ratio, may be the prices of individual products is a good reason behind that. And in orders details we experience Mobiles & Tablets have highest no of canceled orders but completed orders are almost same as Men’s Fashion. We have mostly completed orders but have huge no of canceled orders. In payment methods cod has most no of completed order and mostly canceled orders have payment method Easyaxis.

This CD-ROM product is an authoritative reference source of 15 key financial ratios by industry groupings compiled from the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS 2007). It is based on up-to-date, reliable and comprehensive data on Canadian businesses, derived from Statistics Canada databases of financial statements for three reference years. The CD-ROM enables users to compare their enterprise's performance to that of their industry and to address issues such as profitability, efficiency and business risk. Financial Performance Indicators can also be used for inter-industry comparisons. Volume 1 covers large enterprises in both the financial and non-financial sectors, at the national level, with annual operating revenue of $25 million or more. Volume 2 covers medium-sized enterprises in the non-financial sector, at the national level, with annual operating revenue of $5 million to less than $25 million. Volume 3 covers small enterprises in the non-financial sector, at the national, provincial, territorial, Atlantic region and Prairie region levels, with annual operating revenue of $30,000 to less than $5 million. Note: FPICB has been discontinued as of 2/23/2015. Statistics Canada continues to provide information on Canadian businesses through alternative data sources. Information on specific financial ratios will continue to be available through the annual Financial and Taxation Statistics for Enterprises program: CANSIM table 180-0003 ; the Quarterly Survey of Financial Statements: CANSIM tables 187-0001 and 187-0002 ; and the Small Business Profiles, which present financial data for small businesses in Canada, available on Industry Canada's website: Financial Performance Data.

All general (non-research, non-ownership related) payments from the 2022 program year [January 1 – December 31, 2022]

NOTE: This is a very large file and, depending on your network characteristics and software, may take a long time to download or fail to download. Additionally, the number of rows in the file may be larger than the maximum rows your version of Microsoft Excel supports. If you can't download the file, we recommend engaging your IT support staff. If you are able to download the file but are unable to open it in MS Excel or get a message that the data has been truncated, we recommend trying alternative programs such as MS Access, Universal Viewer, Editpad or any other software your organization has available for large datasets.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset presents the the household distribution across 16 income brackets among four distinct age groups in Excel: Under 25 years, 25-44 years, 45-64 years, and over 65 years. The dataset highlights the variation in household income, offering valuable insights into economic trends and disparities within different age categories, aiding in data analysis and decision-making..

Key observations

• Upon closer examination of the distribution of households among age brackets, it reveals that there are 2(1.12%) households where the householder is under 25 years old, 72(40.45%) households with a householder aged between 25 and 44 years, 38(21.35%) households with a householder aged between 45 and 64 years, and 66(37.08%) households where the householder is over 65 years old.
• In Excel, the age group of 25 to 44 years stands out with both the highest median income and the maximum share of households. This alignment suggests a financially stable demographic, indicating an established community with stable careers and higher incomes.

Content

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

Income brackets:

• Less than $10,000
• $10,000 to $14,999
• $15,000 to $19,999
• $20,000 to $24,999
• $25,000 to $29,999
• $30,000 to $34,999
• $35,000 to $39,999
• $40,000 to $44,999
• $45,000 to $49,999
• $50,000 to $59,999
• $60,000 to $74,999
• $75,000 to $99,999
• $100,000 to $124,999
• $125,000 to $149,999
• $150,000 to $199,999
• $200,000 or more

Variables / Data Columns

• Household Income: This column showcases 16 income brackets ranging from Under $10,000 to $200,000+ ( As mentioned above).
• Under 25 years: The count of households led by a head of household under 25 years old with income within a specified income bracket.
• 25 to 44 years: The count of households led by a head of household 25 to 44 years old with income within a specified income bracket.
• 45 to 64 years: The count of households led by a head of household 45 to 64 years old with income within a specified income bracket.
• 65 years and over: The count of households led by a head of household 65 years and over old with income within a specified income bracket.

Good to know

Margin of Error

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

Custom data

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

Inspiration

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

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Excel median household income by age. You can refer the same here

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the median household income in Excel. It can be utilized to understand the trend in median household income and to analyze the income distribution in Excel by household type, size, and across various income brackets.

Content

The dataset will have the following datasets when applicable

Please note: The 2020 1-Year ACS estimates data was not reported by the Census Bureau due to the impact on survey collection and analysis caused by COVID-19. Consequently, median household income data for 2020 is unavailable for large cities (population 65,000 and above).

• Excel, AL Median Household Income Trends (2010-2021, in 2022 inflation-adjusted dollars)
• Median Household Income Variation by Family Size in Excel, AL: Comparative analysis across 7 household sizes
• Income Distribution by Quintile: Mean Household Income in Excel, AL
• Excel, AL households by income brackets: family, non-family, and total, in 2022 inflation-adjusted dollars

Good to know

Margin of Error

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

Custom data

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

Inspiration

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

Interested in deeper insights and visual analysis?

Explore our comprehensive data analysis and visual representations for a deeper understanding of Excel median household income. You can refer the same here

Warning: Large file size (over 1GB). Each monthly data set is large (over 4 million rows), but can be viewed in standard software such as Microsoft WordPad (save by right-clicking on the file name and selecting 'Save Target As', or equivalent on Mac OSX). It is then possible to select the required rows of data and copy and paste the information into another software application, such as a spreadsheet. Alternatively, add-ons to existing software, such as the Microsoft PowerPivot add-on for Excel, to handle larger data sets, can be used. The Microsoft PowerPivot add-on for Excel is available from Microsoft http://office.microsoft.com/en-gb/excel/download-power-pivot-HA101959985.aspx Once PowerPivot has been installed, to load the large files, please follow the instructions below. Note that it may take at least 20 to 30 minutes to load one monthly file. 1. Start Excel as normal 2. Click on the PowerPivot tab 3. Click on the PowerPivot Window icon (top left) 4. In the PowerPivot Window, click on the "From Other Sources" icon 5. In the Table Import Wizard e.g. scroll to the bottom and select Text File 6. Browse to the file you want to open and choose the file extension you require e.g. CSV Once the data has been imported you can view it in a spreadsheet. What does the data cover? General practice prescribing data is a list of all medicines, dressings and appliances that are prescribed and dispensed each month. A record will only be produced when this has occurred and there is no record for a zero total. For each practice in England, the following information is presented at presentation level for each medicine, dressing and appliance, (by presentation name): - the total number of items prescribed and dispensed - the total net ingredient cost - the total actual cost - the total quantity The data covers NHS prescriptions written in England and dispensed in the community in the UK. Prescriptions written in England but dispensed outside England are included. The data includes prescriptions written by GPs and other non-medical prescribers (such as nurses and pharmacists) who are attached to GP practices. GP practices are identified only by their national code, so an additional data file - linked to the first by the practice code - provides further detail in relation to the practice. Presentations are identified only by their BNF code, so an additional data file - linked to the first by the BNF code - provides the chemical name for that presentation.

SQL In-Memory Database Market size was valued at USD 9.26 Billion in 2024 and is projected to reach USD 35.7 Billion by 2032, growing at a CAGR of 20.27% from 2026 to 2032.

SQL In-Memory Database Market Drivers

Demand for Real-Time Analytics and Processing: Businesses increasingly require real-time insights from their data to make faster and more informed decisions. SQL In-Memory databases excel at processing data much faster than traditional disk-based databases, enabling real-time analytics and operational dashboards.

Growth of Big Data and IoT Applications: The rise of Big Data and the Internet of Things (IoT) generates massive amounts of data that needs to be processed quickly. SQL In-Memory databases can handle these high-velocity data streams efficiently due to their in-memory architecture.

Improved Performance for Transaction Processing Systems (TPS): In-memory databases offer significantly faster query processing times compared to traditional databases. This translates to improved performance for transaction-intensive applications like online banking, e-commerce platforms, and stock trading systems.

Reduced Hardware Costs (in some cases): While implementing an in-memory database might require an initial investment in additional RAM, it can potentially reduce reliance on expensive high-performance storage solutions in specific scenarios.

Focus on User Experience and Application Responsiveness: In today's digital landscape, fast and responsive applications are crucial. SQL In-Memory databases contribute to a smoother user experience by enabling quicker data retrieval and transaction processing.

However, it's important to consider some factors that might influence market dynamics:

Limited Data Capacity: In-memory databases are typically limited by the amount of available RAM, making them less suitable for storing massive datasets compared to traditional disk-based solutions.

Higher Implementation Costs: Setting up and maintaining an in-memory database can be more expensive due to the additional RAM requirements compared to traditional databases.

Hybrid Solutions: Many organizations opt for hybrid database solutions that combine in-memory and disk-based storage, leveraging the strengths of both for different data sets and applications.