This dataset contains metadata about all Covid-related YouTube videos which circulated on public social media, but which YouTube eventually removed because they contained false information. It describes 8,122 videos that were shared between November 2019 and June 2020. The dataset contains unique identifiers for the videos and social media accounts that shared the videos, statistics on social media engagement and metadata such as video titles and view counts where they were recoverable. We publish the data alongside the code used to produce on Github. The dataset has reuse potential for research studying narratives related to the coronavirus, the impact of social media on knowledge about health and the politics of social media platforms.

A class of discrete-time models of infectious disease spread, referred to as individual-level models (ILMs), are typically fitted in a Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) framework. These models quantify probabilistic outcomes regarding the risk of infection of susceptible individuals due to various susceptibility and transmissibility factors, including their spatial distance from infectious individuals. The infectious pressure from infected individuals exerted on susceptible individuals is intrinsic to these ILMs. Unfortunately, quantifying this infectious pressure for data sets containing many individuals can be computationally burdensome, leading to a time-consuming likelihood calculation and, thus, computationally prohibitive MCMC-based analysis. This problem worsens when using data augmentation to allow for uncertainty in infection times. In this paper, we develop sampling methods that can be used to calculate a fast, approximate likelihood when fitting such disease models. A simple random sampling approach is initially considered followed by various spatially-stratified schemes. We test and compare the performance of our methods with both simulated data and data from the 2001 foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) epidemic in the U.K. Our results indicate that substantial computation savings can be obtained—albeit, of course, with some information loss—suggesting that such techniques may be of use in the analysis of very large epidemic data sets.

Contain informative data related to COVID-19 pandemic. Specially, figure out about the First Case and First Death information for every single country. First Case information consist 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 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.

Concept: Difference between average cost of outstanding loans (ICC) and its average funding cost. Comprises both earmarked and nonearmarked operations. Source: Central Bank of Brazil – Statistics Department 27443-icc-spread 27443-icc-spread

An outbreak of the Zika virus, an infection transmitted mostly by the Aedes species mosquito (Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus), has been sweeping across the Americas and the Pacific since mid-2015. Although first isolated in 1947 in Uganda, a lack of previous research has challenged the scientific community to quickly understand its devastating effects as the epidemic continues to spread.

All Countries & Territories with Active Zika Virus Transmission http://www.cdc.gov/zika/images/zikamain_071416_880.jpg" width="600">

The data

This dataset shares publicly available data related to the ongoing Zika epidemic. It is being provided as a resource to the scientific community engaged in the public health response. The data provided here is not official and should be considered provisional and non-exhaustive. The data in reports may change over time, reflecting delays in reporting or changes in classifications. And while accurate representation of the reported data is the objective in the machine readable files shared here, that accuracy is not guaranteed. Before using any of these data, it is advisable to review the original reports and sources, which are provided whenever possible along with further information on the CDC Zika epidemic GitHub repo.

The dataset includes the following fields:

• report_date - The report date is the date that the report was published. The date should be specified in standard ISO format (YYYY-MM-DD).

• location - A location is specified for each observation following the specific names specified in the country place name database. This may be any place with a 'location_type' as listed below, e.g. city, state, country, etc. It should be specified at up to three hierarchical levels in the following format: [country]-[state/province]-[county/municipality/city], always beginning with the country name. If the data is for a particular city, e.g. Salvador, it should be specified: Brazil-Bahia-Salvador.

• location_type - A location code is included indicating: city, district, municipality, county, state, province, or country. If there is need for an additional 'location_type', open an Issue to create a new 'location_type'.

• data_field - The data field is a short description of what data is represented in the row and is related to a specific definition defined by the report from which it comes.

• data_field_code - This code is defined in the country data guide. It includes a two letter country code (ISO-3166 alpha-2, list), followed by a 4-digit number corresponding to a specific report type and data type.

• time_period - Optional. If the data pertains to a specific period of time, for example an epidemiological week, that number should be indicated here and the type of time period in the 'time_period_type', otherwise it should be NA.

• time_period_type - Required only if 'time_period' is specified. Types will also be specified in the country data guide. Otherwise should be NA.

• value - The observation indicated for the specific 'report_date', 'location', 'data_field' and when appropriate, 'time_period'.

• unit - The unit of measurement for the 'data_field'. This should conform to the 'data_field' unit options as described in the country-specific data guide.

If you find the data useful, please support data sharing by referencing this dataset and the original data source. If you're interested in contributing to the Zika project from GitHub, you can read more here. The source for the Zika virus structure is available here.

This dataset contains ERA5 surface level analysis parameter data ensemble means (see linked dataset for spreads). ERA5 is the 5th generation reanalysis project from the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECWMF) - see linked documentation for further details. The ensemble means and spreads are calculated from the ERA5 10 member ensemble, run at a reduced resolution compared with the single high resolution (hourly output at 31 km grid spacing) 'HRES' realisation, for which these data have been produced to provide an uncertainty estimate. This dataset contains a limited selection of all available variables and have been converted to netCDF from the original GRIB files held on the ECMWF system. They have also been translated onto a regular latitude-longitude grid during the extraction process from the ECMWF holdings. For a fuller set of variables please see the linked Copernicus Data Store (CDS) data tool, linked to from this record.

Note, ensemble standard deviation is often referred to as ensemble spread and is calculated as the standard deviation of the 10-members in the ensemble (i.e., including the control). It is not the sample standard deviation, and thus were calculated by dividing by 10 rather than 9 (N-1). See linked datasets for ensemble member and ensemble mean data.

The ERA5 global atmospheric reanalysis of the covers 1979 to 2 months behind the present month. This follows on from the ERA-15, ERA-40 rand ERA-interim re-analysis projects.

An initial release of ERA5 data (ERA5t) is made roughly 5 days behind the present date. These will be subsequently reviewed ahead of being released by ECMWF as quality assured data within 3 months. CEDA holds a 6 month rolling copy of the latest ERA5t data. See related datasets linked to from this record. However, for the period 2000-2006 the initial ERA5 release was found to suffer from stratospheric temperature biases and so new runs to address this issue were performed resulting in the ERA5.1 release (see linked datasets). Note, though, that Simmons et al. 2020 (technical memo 859) report that "ERA5.1 is very close to ERA5 in the lower and middle troposphere." but users of data from this period should read the technical memo 859 for further details.

This dataset contains ERA5 initial release (ERA5t) surface level analysis parameter data ensemble means (see linked dataset for spreads). ERA5t is the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECWMF) ERA5 reanalysis project initial release available upto 5 days behind the present data. CEDA will maintain a 6 month rolling archive of these data with overlap to the verified ERA5 data - see linked datasets on this record. The ensemble means and spreads are calculated from the ERA5t 10 member ensemble, run at a reduced resolution compared with the single high resolution (hourly output at 31 km grid spacing) 'HRES' realisation, for which these data have been produced to provide an uncertainty estimate. This dataset contains a limited selection of all available variables and have been converted to netCDF from the original GRIB files held on the ECMWF system. They have also been translated onto a regular latitude-longitude grid during the extraction process from the ECMWF holdings. For a fuller set of variables please see the linked Copernicus Data Store (CDS) data tool, linked to from this record. See linked datasets for ensemble member and spread data.

Note, ensemble standard deviation is often referred to as ensemble spread and is calculated as the standard deviation of the 10-members in the ensemble (i.e., including the control). It is not the sample standard deviation, and thus were calculated by dividing by 10 rather than 9 (N-1).

The ERA5 global atmospheric reanalysis of the covers 1979 to 2 months behind the present month. This follows on from the ERA-15, ERA-40 rand ERA-interim re-analysis projects. An initial release of ERA5 data (ERA5t) is made roughly 5 days behind the present date. These will be subsequently reviewed and, if required, amended before the full ERA5 release. CEDA holds a 6 month rolling copy of the latest ERA5t data. See related datasets linked to from this record.

Abstract:

Analyzing the spread of information related to a specific event in the news has many potential applications. Consequently, various systems have been developed to facilitate the analysis of information spreadings such as detection of disease propagation and identification of the spreading of fake news through social media. There are several open challenges in the process of discerning information propagation, among them the lack of resources for training and evaluation. This paper describes the process of compiling a corpus from the EventRegistry global media monitoring system. We focus on information spreading in three domains: sports (i.e. the FIFA WorldCup), natural disasters (i.e. earthquakes), and climate change (i.e.global warming). This corpus is a valuable addition to the currently available datasets to examine the spreading of information about various kinds of events.Introduction:Domain-specific gaps in information spreading are ubiquitous and may exist due to economic conditions, political factors, or linguistic, geographical, time-zone, cultural, and other barriers. These factors potentially contribute to obstructing the flow of local as well as international news. We believe that there is a lack of research studies that examine, identify, and uncover the reasons for barriers in information spreading. Additionally, there is limited availability of datasets containing news text and metadata including time, place, source, and other relevant information. When a piece of information starts spreading, it implicitly raises questions such as asHow far does the information in the form of news reach out to the public?Does the content of news remain the same or changes to a certain extent?Do the cultural values impact the information especially when the same news will get translated in other languages?Statistics about datasets:

Statistics about datasets:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

# Domain Event Type Articles Per Language Total Articles

1 Sports FIFA World Cup 983-en, 762-sp, 711-de, 10-sl, 216-pt 2679

2 Natural Disaster Earthquake 941-en, 999-sp, 937-de, 19-sl, 251-pt 3194

3 Climate Changes Global Warming 996-en, 298-sp, 545-de, 8-sl, 97-pt 1945

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ERA5 is the fifth generation ECMWF reanalysis for the global climate and weather for the past 8 decades. Data is available from 1940 onwards. ERA5 replaces the ERA-Interim reanalysis. Reanalysis combines model data with observations from across the world into a globally complete and consistent dataset using the laws of physics. This principle, called data assimilation, is based on the method used by numerical weather prediction centres, where every so many hours (12 hours at ECMWF) a previous forecast is combined with newly available observations in an optimal way to produce a new best estimate of the state of the atmosphere, called analysis, from which an updated, improved forecast is issued. Reanalysis works in the same way, but at reduced resolution to allow for the provision of a dataset spanning back several decades. Reanalysis does not have the constraint of issuing timely forecasts, so there is more time to collect observations, and when going further back in time, to allow for the ingestion of improved versions of the original observations, which all benefit the quality of the reanalysis product. ERA5 provides hourly estimates for a large number of atmospheric, ocean-wave and land-surface quantities. An uncertainty estimate is sampled by an underlying 10-member ensemble at three-hourly intervals. Ensemble mean and spread have been pre-computed for convenience. Such uncertainty estimates are closely related to the information content of the available observing system which has evolved considerably over time. They also indicate flow-dependent sensitive areas. To facilitate many climate applications, monthly-mean averages have been pre-calculated too, though monthly means are not available for the ensemble mean and spread. ERA5 is updated daily with a latency of about 5 days. In case that serious flaws are detected in this early release (called ERA5T), this data could be different from the final release 2 to 3 months later. In case that this occurs users are notified. The data set presented here is a regridded subset of the full ERA5 data set on native resolution. It is online on spinning disk, which should ensure fast and easy access. It should satisfy the requirements for most common applications. An overview of all ERA5 datasets can be found in this article. Information on access to ERA5 data on native resolution is provided in these guidelines. Data has been regridded to a regular lat-lon grid of 0.25 degrees for the reanalysis and 0.5 degrees for the uncertainty estimate (0.5 and 1 degree respectively for ocean waves). There are four main sub sets: hourly and monthly products, both on pressure levels (upper air fields) and single levels (atmospheric, ocean-wave and land surface quantities). The present entry is "ERA5 hourly data on pressure levels from 1940 to present".

Due to the relevance of the COVID-19 global pandemic, we are releasing our dataset of tweets acquired from the Twitter Stream related to COVID-19 chatter. The first 9 weeks of data (from January 1st, 2020 to March 11th, 2020) contain very low tweet counts as we filtered other data we were collecting for other research purposes, however, one can see the dramatic increase as the awareness for the virus spread. Dedicated data gathering started from March 11th to March 29th which yielded over 4 million tweets a day.

The data collected from the stream captures all languages, but the higher prevalence are: English, Spanish, and French. We release all tweets and retweets on the full_dataset.tsv file (70,569,368 unique tweets), and a cleaned version with no retweets on the full_dataset-clean.tsv file (13,535,912 unique tweets). There are several practical reasons for us to leave the retweets, tracing important tweets and their dissemination is one of them. For NLP tasks we provide the top 1000 frequent terms in frequent_terms.csv, the top 1000 bigrams in frequent_bigrams.csv, and the top 1000 trigrams in frequent_trigrams.csv. Some general statistics per day are included for both datasets in the statistics-full_dataset.tsv and statistics-full_dataset-clean.tsv files.

More details can be found (and will be updated faster at: https://github.com/thepanacealab/covid19_twitter)

As always, the tweets distributed here are only tweet identifiers (with date and time added) due to the terms and conditions of Twitter to re-distribute Twitter data. The need to be hydrated to be used.

Raw numerical results, phylogeny, and related data for the conference proceeding article "Summarizing Global SARS-CoV-2 Geographical Spread by Phylogenetic Multitype Branching Models".

To merge these files in Unix shell, simply use the "cat" command to concatenate the four parts into a single big "tar.gz" file, then decompress as usual. For example: "cat DATASET01.tar.gz DATASET02.tar.gz DATASET03.tar.gz DATASET04.tar.gz > FULL.tar.gz". Then decompress the newly generated FULL.tar.gz.

On Windows, rename "DATASET0X.tar.gz" to "DATASET.tar.gz.00X" for each X={1,2,3,4}. Then use the "7-Zip" app to open the part 1 (i.e., "DATASET.tar.gz.001"); then 7-Zip should automatically detect the presence of part 2~4 and decompress everything.

The dataset was originally published in DiVA and moved to SND in 2024.

The data included in this publication depict the 2024 version of components of wildfire risk for all lands in the United States that: 1) are landscape-wide (i.e., measurable at every pixel across the landscape); and 2) represent in situ risk - risk at the location where the adverse effects take place on the landscape.National wildfire hazard datasets of annual burn probability and fire intensity, generated by the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station and Pyrologix LLC, form the foundation of the Wildfire Risk to Communities data. Vegetation and wildland fuels data from LANDFIRE 2020 (version 2.2.0) were used as input to two different but related geospatial fire simulation systems. Annual burn probability was produced with the USFS geospatial fire simulator (FSim) at a relatively coarse cell size of 270 meters (m). To bring the burn probability raster data down to a finer resolution more useful for assessing hazard and risk to communities, we upsampled them to the native 30 m resolution of the LANDFIRE fuel and vegetation data. In this upsampling process, we also spread values of modeled burn probability into developed areas represented in LANDFIRE fuels data as non-burnable. Burn probability rasters represent landscape conditions as of the end of 2020. Fire intensity characteristics were modeled at 30 m resolution using a process that performs a comprehensive set of FlamMap runs spanning the full range of weather-related characteristics that occur during a fire season and then integrates those runs into a variety of results based on the likelihood of those weather types occurring. Before the fire intensity modeling, the LANDFIRE 2020 data were updated to reflect fuels disturbances occurring in 2021 and 2022. As such, the fire intensity datasets represent landscape conditions as of the end of 2022. Additional methodology documentation is provided in a methods document (\Supplements\WRC_V2_Methods_Landscape-wideRisk.pdf) packaged in the data download.The specific raster datasets in this publication include:Risk to Potential Structures (RPS): A measure that integrates wildfire likelihood and intensity with generalized consequences to a home on every pixel. For every place on the landscape, it poses the hypothetical question, "What would be the relative risk to a house if one existed here?" This allows comparison of wildfire risk in places where homes already exist to places where new construction may be proposed. This dataset is referred to as Risk to Homes in the Wildfire Risk to Communities web application.Conditional Risk to Potential Structures (cRPS): The potential consequences of fire to a home at a given location, if a fire occurs there and if a home were located there. Referred to as Wildfire Consequence in the Wildfire Risk to Communities web application.Exposure Type: Exposure is the spatial coincidence of wildfire likelihood and intensity with communities. This layer delineates where homes are directly exposed to wildfire from adjacent wildland vegetation, indirectly exposed to wildfire from indirect sources such as embers and home-to-home ignition, or not exposed to wildfire due to distance from direct and indirect ignition sources.Burn Probability (BP): The annual probability of wildfire burning in a specific location. Referred to as Wildfire Likelihood in the Wildfire Risk to Communities web application.Conditional Flame Length (CFL): The mean flame length for a fire burning in the direction of maximum spread (headfire) at a given location if a fire were to occur; an average measure of wildfire intensity. Flame Length Exceedance Probability - 4 ft (FLEP4): The conditional probability that flame length at a pixel will exceed 4 feet if a fire occurs; indicates the potential for moderate to high wildfire intensity.Flame Length Exceedance Probability - 8 ft (FLEP8): the conditional probability that flame length at a pixel will exceed 8 feet if a fire occurs; indicates the potential for high wildfire intensity. Wildfire Hazard Potential (WHP): An index that quantifies the relative potential for wildfire that may be difficult to manage, used as a measure to help prioritize where fuel treatments may be needed.Additional methodology documentation is provided with the data publication download. https://www.fs.usda.gov/rds/archive/Catalog/RDS-2020-0016-2Note: Pixel values in this image service have been altered from the original raster dataset due to data requirements in web services. The service is intended primarily for data visualization. Relative values and spatial patterns have been largely preserved in the service, but users are encouraged to download the source data for quantitative analysis.

The data included in this publication depict components of wildfire risk specifically for populated areas in the United States. These datasets represent where people live in the United States and the in situ risk from wildfire, i.e., the risk at the location where the adverse effects take place.National wildfire hazard datasets of annual burn probability and fire intensity, generated by the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station and Pyrologix LLC, form the foundation of the Wildfire Risk to Communities data. Vegetation and wildland fuels data from LANDFIRE 2020 (version 2.2.0) were used as input to two different but related geospatial fire simulation systems. Annual burn probability was produced with the USFS geospatial fire simulator (FSim) at a relatively coarse cell size of 270 meters (m). To bring the burn probability raster data down to a finer resolution more useful for assessing hazard and risk to communities, we upsampled them to the native 30 m resolution of the LANDFIRE fuel and vegetation data. In this upsampling process, we also spread values of modeled burn probability into developed areas represented in LANDFIRE fuels data as non-burnable. Burn probability rasters represent landscape conditions as of the end of 2020. Fire intensity characteristics were modeled at 30 m resolution using a process that performs a comprehensive set of FlamMap runs spanning the full range of weather-related characteristics that occur during a fire season and then integrates those runs into a variety of results based on the likelihood of those weather types occurring. Before the fire intensity modeling, the LANDFIRE 2020 data were updated to reflect fuels disturbances occurring in 2021 and 2022. As such, the fire intensity datasets represent landscape conditions as of the end of 2022. The data products in this publication that represent where people live, reflect 2021 estimates of housing unit and population counts from the U.S. Census Bureau, combined with building footprint data from Onegeo and USA Structures, both reflecting 2022 conditions.The specific raster datasets included in this publication include:Building Count: Building Count is a 30-m raster representing the count of buildings in the building footprint dataset located within each 30-m pixel.Building Density: Building Density is a 30-m raster representing the density of buildings in the building footprint dataset (buildings per square kilometer [km²]).Building Coverage: Building Coverage is a 30-m raster depicting the percentage of habitable land area covered by building footprints.Population Count (PopCount): PopCount is a 30-m raster with pixel values representing residential population count (persons) in each pixel.Population Density (PopDen): PopDen is a 30-m raster of residential population density (people/km²).Housing Unit Count (HUCount): HUCount is a 30-m raster representing the number of housing units in each pixel.Housing Unit Density (HUDen): HUDen is a 30-m raster of housing-unit density (housing units/km²).Housing Unit Exposure (HUExposure): HUExposure is a 30-m raster that represents the expected number of housing units within a pixel potentially exposed to wildfire in a year. This is a long-term annual average and not intended to represent the actual number of housing units exposed in any specific year.Housing Unit Impact (HUImpact): HUImpact is a 30-m raster that represents the relative potential impact of fire to housing units at any pixel, if a fire were to occur. It is an index that incorporates the general consequences of fire on a home as a function of fire intensity and uses flame length probabilities from wildfire modeling to capture likely intensity of fire.Housing Unit Risk (HURisk): HURisk is a 30-m raster that integrates all four primary elements of wildfire risk - likelihood, intensity, susceptibility, and exposure - on pixels where housing unit density is greater than zero.Additional methodology documentation is provided with the data publication download. Metadata and Downloads: (https://www.fs.usda.gov/rds/archive/catalog/RDS-2020-0060-2).Note: Pixel values in this image service have been altered from the original raster dataset due to data requirements in web services. The service is intended primarily for data visualization. Relative values and spatial patterns have been largely preserved in the service, but users are encouraged to download the source data for quantitative analysis.

We present a multi-temporal, multi-modal remote-sensing dataset for predicting how active wildfires will spread at a resolution of 24 hours. The dataset consists of 13.607 images across 607 fire events in the United States from January 2018 to October 2021. For each fire event, the dataset contains a full time series of daily observations, containing detected active fires and variables related to fuel, topography and weather conditions. Documentation WildfireSpreadTS_Documentation.pdf includes further details about the dataset, following Gebru et al.'s "Datasheets for Datasets" framework. This documentation is similar to the supplementary material of the associated NeurIPS paper, excluding only information about experimental setup and results. For full details, please refer to the associated paper. Code: Getting started Get started working with the dataset at https://github.com/SebastianGer/WildfireSpreadTS. The code includes a PyTorch Dataset and Lightning DataModule to allow for easy access. We recommend converting the GeoTIFF files provided here to HDF5 files (bigger files, but much faster). The necessary code is also available in the repository.

This work is funded by Digital Futures in the project EO-AI4GlobalChange. The computations were enabled by resources provided by the National Academic Infrastructure for Supercomputing in Sweden (NAISS) at C3SE partially funded by the Swedish Research Council through grant agreement no. 2022-06725.

A "spread" can have multiple meanings, but it generally implies a difference between two comparable measures. These can be differences across space, across time, or across anything with a similar attribute. For example, in the stock market, there is a spread between the highest price a buyer is willing to pay and the lowest price a seller is willing to accept.

In this dataset, spread refers to differences in prices between two locations, an origin (e.g., Illinois, Iowa, etc.) and a destination (e.g., Louisiana Gulf, Pacific Northwest, etc.). Mathematically, it is the destination price minus the origin price.

Price spreads are closely linked to transportation. They tend to reflect the costs of moving goods from one point to another, all else constant. Fluctuations in spreads can change the flow of goods (where it may be more profitable to ship to a different location), as well as indicate changes in transportation availability (e.g., disruptions). For more information on how price spreads are linked to transportation, see the story, "Grain Prices, Basis, and Transportation" (https://agtransport.usda.gov/stories/s/sjmk-tkh6).

This is one of three companion datasets. The other two are grain prices (https://agtransport.usda.gov/d/g92w-8cn7) and grain basis (https://agtransport.usda.gov/d/v85y-3hep). These datasets are separate, because the coverage lengths differ and missing values are removed (e.g., there needs to be a cash price and a futures price to have a basis price, and there needs to be both an origin and a destination to have a price spread).

The origin and destination prices come from the grain prices dataset.

Due to the relevance of the COVID-19 global pandemic, we are releasing our dataset of tweets acquired from the Twitter Stream related to COVID-19 chatter. The first 9 weeks of data (from January 1st, 2020 to March 11th, 2020) contain very low tweet counts as we filtered other data we were collecting for other research purposes, however, one can see the dramatic increase as the awareness for the virus spread. Dedicated data gathering started from March 11th to March 22nd which yielded over 4 million tweets a day.

The data collected from the stream captures all languages, but the higher prevalence are: English, Spanish, and French. We release all tweets and retweets on the full_dataset.tsv file (40,823,816 unique tweets), and a cleaned version with no retweets on the full_dataset-clean.tsv file (7,479,940 unique tweets). There are several practical reasons for us to leave the retweets, tracing important tweets and their dissemination is one of them. For NLP tasks we provide the top 1000 frequent terms in frequent_terms.csv, the top 1000 bigrams in frequent_bigrams.csv, and the top 1000 trigrams in frequent_trigrams.csv. Some general statistics per day are included for both datasets in the statistics-full_dataset.tsv and statistics-full_dataset-clean.tsv files.

More details can be found (and will be updated faster at: https://github.com/thepanacealab/covid19_twitter)

As always, the tweets distributed here are only tweet identifiers (with date and time added) due to the terms and conditions of Twitter to re-distribute Twitter data. The need to be hydrated to be used.

USDA Economic Research Service (ERS) compares prices paid by consumers for food with prices received by farmers for corresponding commodities. This data set reports these comparisons for a variety of foods sold through retail food stores such as supermarkets and super centers. Comparisons are made for individual foods and groupings of individual foods-market baskets-that represent what a typical U.S. household buys at retail in a year. The retail costs of these baskets are compared with the money received by farmers for a corresponding basket of agricultural commodities.This record was taken from the USDA Enterprise Data Inventory that feeds into the https://data.gov catalog. Data for this record includes the following resources: Web page with links to Excel files For complete information, please visit https://data.gov.