The benchmark interest rate in the United States was last recorded at 4.50 percent. This dataset provides the latest reported value for - United States Fed Funds Rate - plus previous releases, historical high and low, short-term forecast and long-term prediction, economic calendar, survey consensus and news.

The benchmark interest rate in Sweden was last recorded at 2 percent. This dataset provides the latest reported value for - Sweden Interest Rate - plus previous releases, historical high and low, short-term forecast and long-term prediction, economic calendar, survey consensus and news.

The benchmark interest rate in Japan was last recorded at 0.50 percent. This dataset provides - Japan Interest Rate - actual values, historical data, forecast, chart, statistics, economic calendar and news.

The benchmark interest rate In the Euro Area was last recorded at 2.15 percent. This dataset provides - Euro Area Interest Rate - actual values, historical data, forecast, chart, statistics, economic calendar and news.

WARNING: This is a pre-release dataset and its fields names and data structures are subject to change. It should be considered pre-release until the end of 2024. Expected changes:Metadata is missing or incomplete for some layers at this time and will be continuously improved.We expect to update this layer roughly in line with CDTFA at some point, but will increase the update cadence over time as we are able to automate the final pieces of the process.This dataset is continuously updated as the source data from CDTFA is updated, as often as many times a month. If you require unchanging point-in-time data, export a copy for your own use rather than using the service directly in your applications.PurposeCounty and incorporated place (city) boundaries along with third party identifiers used to join in external data. Boundaries are from the authoritative source the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA), altered to show the counties as one polygon. This layer displays the city polygons on top of the County polygons so the area isn"t interrupted. The GEOID attribute information is added from the US Census. GEOID is based on merged State and County FIPS codes for the Counties. Abbreviations for Counties and Cities were added from Caltrans Division of Local Assistance (DLA) data. Place Type was populated with information extracted from the Census. Names and IDs from the US Board on Geographic Names (BGN), the authoritative source of place names as published in the Geographic Name Information System (GNIS), are attached as well. Finally, coastal buffers are removed, leaving the land-based portions of jurisdictions. This feature layer is for public use.Related LayersThis dataset is part of a grouping of many datasets:Cities: Only the city boundaries and attributes, without any unincorporated areasWith Coastal BuffersWithout Coastal BuffersCounties: Full county boundaries and attributes, including all cities within as a single polygonWith Coastal BuffersWithout Coastal BuffersCities and Full Counties: A merge of the other two layers, so polygons overlap within city boundaries. Some customers require this behavior, so we provide it as a separate service.With Coastal BuffersWithout Coastal Buffers (this dataset)Place AbbreviationsUnincorporated Areas (Coming Soon)Census Designated Places (Coming Soon)Cartographic CoastlinePolygonLine source (Coming Soon)Working with Coastal BuffersThe dataset you are currently viewing includes the coastal buffers for cities and counties that have them in the authoritative source data from CDTFA. In the versions where they are included, they remain as a second polygon on cities or counties that have them, with all the same identifiers, and a value in the COASTAL field indicating if it"s an ocean or a bay buffer. If you wish to have a single polygon per jurisdiction that includes the coastal buffers, you can run a Dissolve on the version that has the coastal buffers on all the fields except COASTAL, Area_SqMi, Shape_Area, and Shape_Length to get a version with the correct identifiers.Point of ContactCalifornia Department of Technology, Office of Digital Services, odsdataservices@state.ca.govField and Abbreviation DefinitionsCOPRI: county number followed by the 3-digit city primary number used in the Board of Equalization"s 6-digit tax rate area numbering systemPlace Name: CDTFA incorporated (city) or county nameCounty: CDTFA county name. For counties, this will be the name of the polygon itself. For cities, it is the name of the county the city polygon is within.Legal Place Name: Board on Geographic Names authorized nomenclature for area names published in the Geographic Name Information SystemGNIS_ID: The numeric identifier from the Board on Geographic Names that can be used to join these boundaries to other datasets utilizing this identifier.GEOID: numeric geographic identifiers from the US Census Bureau Place Type: Board on Geographic Names authorized nomenclature for boundary type published in the Geographic Name Information SystemPlace Abbr: CalTrans Division of Local Assistance abbreviations of incorporated area namesCNTY Abbr: CalTrans Division of Local Assistance abbreviations of county namesArea_SqMi: The area of the administrative unit (city or county) in square miles, calculated in EPSG 3310 California Teale Albers.COASTAL: Indicates if the polygon is a coastal buffer. Null for land polygons. Additional values include "ocean" and "bay".GlobalID: While all of the layers we provide in this dataset include a GlobalID field with unique values, we do not recommend you make any use of it. The GlobalID field exists to support offline sync, but is not persistent, so data keyed to it will be orphaned at our next update. Use one of the other persistent identifiers, such as GNIS_ID or GEOID instead.AccuracyCDTFA"s source data notes the following about accuracy:City boundary changes and county boundary line adjustments filed with the Board of Equalization per Government Code 54900. This GIS layer contains the boundaries of the unincorporated county and incorporated cities within the state of California. The initial dataset was created in March of 2015 and was based on the State Board of Equalization tax rate area boundaries. As of April 1, 2024, the maintenance of this dataset is provided by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration for the purpose of determining sales and use tax rates. The boundaries are continuously being revised to align with aerial imagery when areas of conflict are discovered between the original boundary provided by the California State Board of Equalization and the boundary made publicly available by local, state, and federal government. Some differences may occur between actual recorded boundaries and the boundaries used for sales and use tax purposes. The boundaries in this map are representations of taxing jurisdictions for the purpose of determining sales and use tax rates and should not be used to determine precise city or county boundary line locations. COUNTY = county name; CITY = city name or unincorporated territory; COPRI = county number followed by the 3-digit city primary number used in the California State Board of Equalization"s 6-digit tax rate area numbering system (for the purpose of this map, unincorporated areas are assigned 000 to indicate that the area is not within a city).Boundary ProcessingThese data make a structural change from the source data. While the full boundaries provided by CDTFA include coastal buffers of varying sizes, many users need boundaries to end at the shoreline of the ocean or a bay. As a result, after examining existing city and county boundary layers, these datasets provide a coastline cut generally along the ocean facing coastline. For county boundaries in northern California, the cut runs near the Golden Gate Bridge, while for cities, we cut along the bay shoreline and into the edge of the Delta at the boundaries of Solano, Contra Costa, and Sacramento counties.In the services linked above, the versions that include the coastal buffers contain them as a second (or third) polygon for the city or county, with the value in the COASTAL field set to whether it"s a bay or ocean polygon. These can be processed back into a single polygon by dissolving on all the fields you wish to keep, since the attributes, other than the COASTAL field and geometry attributes (like areas) remain the same between the polygons for this purpose.SliversIn cases where a city or county"s boundary ends near a coastline, our coastline data may cross back and forth many times while roughly paralleling the jurisdiction"s boundary, resulting in many polygon slivers. We post-process the data to remove these slivers using a city/county boundary priority algorithm. That is, when the data run parallel to each other, we discard the coastline cut and keep the CDTFA-provided boundary, even if it extends into the ocean a small amount. This processing supports consistent boundaries for Fort Bragg, Point Arena, San Francisco, Pacifica, Half Moon Bay, and Capitola, in addition to others. More information on this algorithm will be provided soon.Coastline CaveatsSome cities have buffers extending into water bodies that we do not cut at the shoreline. These include South Lake Tahoe and Folsom, which extend into neighboring lakes, and San Diego and surrounding cities that extend into San Diego Bay, which our shoreline encloses. If you have feedback on the exclusion of these items, or others, from the shoreline cuts, please reach out using the contact information above.Offline UseThis service is fully enabled for sync and export using Esri Field Maps or other similar tools. Importantly, the GlobalID field exists only to support that use case and should not be used for any other purpose (see note in field descriptions).Updates and Date of ProcessingConcurrent with CDTFA updates, approximately every two weeks, Last Processed: 12/17/2024 by Nick Santos using code path at https://github.com/CDT-ODS-DevSecOps/cdt-ods-gis-city-county/ at commit 0bf269d24464c14c9cf4f7dea876aa562984db63. It incorporates updates from CDTFA as of 12/12/2024. Future updates will include improvements to metadata and update frequency.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the Cut Bank population over the last 20 plus years. It lists the population for each year, along with the year on year change in population, as well as the change in percentage terms for each year. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population change of Cut Bank across the last two decades. For example, using this dataset, we can identify if the population is declining or increasing. If there is a change, when the population peaked, or if it is still growing and has not reached its peak. We can also compare the trend with the overall trend of United States population over the same period of time.

Key observations

In 2023, the population of Cut Bank was 3,017, a 0.43% decrease year-by-year from 2022. Previously, in 2022, Cut Bank population was 3,030, a decline of 0.69% compared to a population of 3,051 in 2021. Over the last 20 plus years, between 2000 and 2023, population of Cut Bank decreased by 73. In this period, the peak population was 3,161 in the year 2009. The numbers suggest that the population has already reached its peak and is showing a trend of decline. Source: U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).

Data Coverage:

• From 2000 to 2023

Variables / Data Columns

• Year: This column displays the data year (Measured annually and for years 2000 to 2023)
• Population: The population for the specific year for the Cut Bank is shown in this column.
• Year on Year Change: This column displays the change in Cut Bank population for each year compared to the previous year.
• Change in Percent: This column displays the year on year change as a percentage. 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 Cut Bank Population by Year. You can refer the same here

Note: The schema changed in February 2025 - please see below. We will post a roadmap of upcoming changes, but service URLs and schema are now stable. For deployment status of new services beginning in February 2025, see https://gis.data.ca.gov/pages/city-and-county-boundary-data-status. Additional roadmap and status links at the bottom of this metadata.This dataset is regularly updated as the source data from CDTFA is updated, as often as many times a month. If you require unchanging point-in-time data, export a copy for your own use rather than using the service directly in your applications. Purpose County boundaries along with third party identifiers used to join in external data. Boundaries are from the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA). These boundaries are the best available statewide data source in that CDTFA receives changes in incorporation and boundary lines from the Board of Equalization, who receives them from local jurisdictions for tax purposes. Boundary accuracy is not guaranteed, and though CDTFA works to align boundaries based on historical records and local changes, errors will exist. If you require a legal assessment of boundary location, contact a licensed surveyor.This dataset joins in multiple attributes and identifiers from the US Census Bureau and Board on Geographic Names to facilitate adding additional third party data sources. In addition, we attach attributes of our own to ease and reduce common processing needs and questions. Finally, coastal buffers are separated into separate polygons, leaving the land-based portions of jurisdictions and coastal buffers in adjacent polygons. This layer removes the coastal buffer polygons. This feature layer is for public use. Related LayersThis dataset is part of a grouping of many datasets:Cities: Only the city boundaries and attributes, without any unincorporated areasWith Coastal BuffersWithout Coastal BuffersCounties: Full county boundaries and attributes, including all cities within as a single polygonWith Coastal BuffersWithout Coastal Buffers (this dataset)Cities and Full Counties: A merge of the other two layers, so polygons overlap within city boundaries. Some customers require this behavior, so we provide it as a separate service.With Coastal BuffersWithout Coastal BuffersCity and County AbbreviationsUnincorporated Areas (Coming Soon)Census Designated PlacesCartographic CoastlinePolygonLine source (Coming Soon) Working with Coastal Buffers The dataset you are currently viewing excludes the coastal buffers for cities and counties that have them in the source data from CDTFA. In the versions where they are included, they remain as a second polygon on cities or counties that have them, with all the same identifiers, and a value in the COASTAL field indicating if it"s an ocean or a bay buffer. If you wish to have a single polygon per jurisdiction that includes the coastal buffers, you can run a Dissolve on the version that has the coastal buffers on all the fields except OFFSHORE and AREA_SQMI to get a version with the correct identifiers. Point of ContactCalifornia Department of Technology, Office of Digital Services, odsdataservices@state.ca.gov Field and Abbreviation DefinitionsCDTFA_COUNTY: CDTFA county name. For counties, this will be the name of the polygon itself. For cities, it is the name of the county the city polygon is within.CDTFA_COPRI: county number followed by the 3-digit city primary number used in the Board of Equalization"s 6-digit tax rate area numbering system. The boundary data originate with CDTFA's teams managing tax rate information, so this field is preserved and flows into this dataset.CENSUS_GEOID: numeric geographic identifiers from the US Census BureauCENSUS_PLACE_TYPE: City, County, or Town, stripped off the census name for identification purpose.GNIS_PLACE_NAME: Board on Geographic Names authorized nomenclature for area names published in the Geographic Name Information SystemGNIS_ID: The numeric identifier from the Board on Geographic Names that can be used to join these boundaries to other datasets utilizing this identifier.CDT_COUNTY_ABBR: Abbreviations of county names - originally derived from CalTrans Division of Local Assistance and now managed by CDT. Abbreviations are 3 characters.CDT_NAME_SHORT: The name of the jurisdiction (city or county) with the word "City" or "County" stripped off the end. Some changes may come to how we process this value to make it more consistent.AREA_SQMI: The area of the administrative unit (city or county) in square miles, calculated in EPSG 3310 California Teale Albers.OFFSHORE: Indicates if the polygon is a coastal buffer. Null for land polygons. Additional values include "ocean" and "bay".PRIMARY_DOMAIN: Currently empty/null for all records. Placeholder field for official URL of the city or countyCENSUS_POPULATION: Currently null for all records. In the future, it will include the most recent US Census population estimate for the jurisdiction.GlobalID: While all of the layers we provide in this dataset include a GlobalID field with unique values, we do not recommend you make any use of it. The GlobalID field exists to support offline sync, but is not persistent, so data keyed to it will be orphaned at our next update. Use one of the other persistent identifiers, such as GNIS_ID or GEOID instead. Boundary AccuracyCounty boundaries were originally derived from a 1:24,000 accuracy dataset, with improvements made in some places to boundary alignments based on research into historical records and boundary changes as CDTFA learns of them. City boundary data are derived from pre-GIS tax maps, digitized at BOE and CDTFA, with adjustments made directly in GIS for new annexations, detachments, and corrections.Boundary accuracy within the dataset varies. While CDTFA strives to correctly include or exclude parcels from jurisdictions for accurate tax assessment, this dataset does not guarantee that a parcel is placed in the correct jurisdiction. When a parcel is in the correct jurisdiction, this dataset cannot guarantee accurate placement of boundary lines within or between parcels or rights of way. This dataset also provides no information on parcel boundaries. For exact jurisdictional or parcel boundary locations, please consult the county assessor's office and a licensed surveyor. CDTFA's data is used as the best available source because BOE and CDTFA receive information about changes in jurisdictions which otherwise need to be collected independently by an agency or company to compile into usable map boundaries. CDTFA maintains the best available statewide boundary information. CDTFA's source data notes the following about accuracy: City boundary changes and county boundary line adjustments filed with the Board of Equalization per Government Code 54900. This GIS layer contains the boundaries of the unincorporated county and incorporated cities within the state of California. The initial dataset was created in March of 2015 and was based on the State Board of Equalization tax rate area boundaries. As of April 1, 2024, the maintenance of this dataset is provided by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration for the purpose of determining sales and use tax rates. The boundaries are continuously being revised to align with aerial imagery when areas of conflict are discovered between the original boundary provided by the California State Board of Equalization and the boundary made publicly available by local, state, and federal government. Some differences may occur between actual recorded boundaries and the boundaries used for sales and use tax purposes. The boundaries in this map are representations of taxing jurisdictions for the purpose of determining sales and use tax rates and should not be used to determine precise city or county boundary line locations. Boundary ProcessingThese data make a structural change from the source data. While the full boundaries provided by CDTFA include coastal buffers of varying sizes, many users need boundaries to end at the shoreline of the ocean or a bay. As a result, after examining existing city and county boundary layers, these datasets provide a coastline cut generally along the ocean facing coastline. For county boundaries in northern California, the cut runs near the Golden Gate Bridge, while for cities, we cut along the bay shoreline and into the edge of the Delta at the boundaries of Solano, Contra Costa, and Sacramento counties. In the services linked above, the versions that include the coastal buffers contain them as a second (or third) polygon for the city or county, with the value in the COASTAL field set to whether it"s a bay or ocean polygon. These can be processed back into a single polygon by dissolving on all the fields you wish to keep, since the attributes, other than the COASTAL field and geometry attributes (like areas) remain the same between the polygons for this purpose. SliversIn cases where a city or county"s boundary ends near a coastline, our coastline data may cross back and forth many times while roughly paralleling the jurisdiction"s boundary, resulting in many polygon slivers. We post-process the data to remove these slivers using a city/county boundary priority algorithm. That is, when the data run parallel to each other, we discard the coastline cut and keep the CDTFA-provided boundary, even if it extends into the ocean a small amount. This processing supports consistent boundaries for Fort Bragg, Point Arena, San Francisco, Pacifica, Half Moon Bay, and Capitola, in addition to others. More information on this algorithm will be provided soon. Coastline CaveatsSome cities have buffers extending into water bodies that we do not cut at the shoreline. These include South Lake Tahoe and Folsom, which extend into neighboring lakes, and San Diego and surrounding cities that extend into San Diego Bay, which our shoreline encloses. If you have feedback on the

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the Cut And Shoot population over the last 20 plus years. It lists the population for each year, along with the year on year change in population, as well as the change in percentage terms for each year. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population change of Cut And Shoot across the last two decades. For example, using this dataset, we can identify if the population is declining or increasing. If there is a change, when the population peaked, or if it is still growing and has not reached its peak. We can also compare the trend with the overall trend of United States population over the same period of time.

Key observations

In 2023, the population of Cut And Shoot was 1,184, a 0.17% decrease year-by-year from 2022. Previously, in 2022, Cut And Shoot population was 1,186, an increase of 4.31% compared to a population of 1,137 in 2021. Over the last 20 plus years, between 2000 and 2023, population of Cut And Shoot increased by 85. In this period, the peak population was 1,449 in the year 2019. The numbers suggest that the population has already reached its peak and is showing a trend of decline. Source: U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).

Data Coverage:

• From 2000 to 2023

Variables / Data Columns

• Year: This column displays the data year (Measured annually and for years 2000 to 2023)
• Population: The population for the specific year for the Cut And Shoot is shown in this column.
• Year on Year Change: This column displays the change in Cut And Shoot population for each year compared to the previous year.
• Change in Percent: This column displays the year on year change as a percentage. 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 Cut And Shoot Population by Year. You can refer the same here

The benchmark interest rate in Mexico was last recorded at 7.75 percent. This dataset provides - Mexico Interest Rate - actual values, historical data, forecast, chart, statistics, economic calendar and news.

This dataset is part of the following publication at the TransAI 2023 conference: R. Wallsberger, R. Knauer, S. Matzka; "Explainable Artificial Intelligence in Mechanical Engineering: A Synthetic Dataset for Comprehensive Failure Mode Analysis" DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TransAI60598.2023.00032

This is the original XAI Drilling dataset optimized for XAI purposes and it can be used to evaluate explanations of such algortihms. The dataset comprises 20,000 data points, i.e., drilling operations, stored as rows, 10 features, one binary main failure label, and 4 binary subgroup failure modes, stored in columns. The main failure rate is about 5.0 % for the whole dataset. The features that constitute this dataset are as follows:

• ID: Every data point in the dataset is uniquely identifiable, thanks to the ID feature. This ensures traceability and easy referencing, especially when analyzing specific drilling scenarios or anomalies.
• Cutting speed vc (m/min): The cutting speed is a pivotal parameter in drilling, influencing the efficiency and quality of the drilling process. It represents the speed at which the drill bit's cutting edge moves through the material.
• Spindle speed n (1/min): This feature captures the rotational speed of the spindle or drill bit, respectively.
• Feed f (mm/rev): Feed denotes the depth the drill bit penetrates into the material with each revolution. There is a balance between speed and precision, with higher feeds leading to faster drilling but potentially compromising hole quality.
• Feed rate vf (mm/min): The feed rate is a measure of how quickly the material is fed to the drill bit. It is a determinant of the overall drilling time and influences the heat generated during the process.
• Power Pc (kW): The power consumption during drilling can be indicative of the efficiency of the process and the wear state of the drill bit.
• Cooling (%): Effective cooling is paramount in drilling, preventing overheating and reducing wear. This ordinal feature captures the cooling level applied, with four distinct states representing no cooling (0%), partial cooling (25% and 50%), and high to full cooling (75% and 100%).
• Material: The type of material being drilled can significantly influence the drilling parameters and outcomes. This dataset encompasses three primary materials: C45K hot-rolled heat-treatable steel (EN 1.0503), cast iron GJL (EN GJL-250), and aluminum-silicon (AlSi) alloy (EN AC-42000), each presenting its unique challenges and considerations. The three materials are represented as “P (Steel)” for C45K, “K (Cast Iron)” for cast iron GJL and “N (Non-ferrous metal)” for AlSi alloy.
• Drill Bit Type: Different materials often require specialized drill bits. This feature categorizes the type of drill bit used, ensuring compatibility with the material and optimizing the drilling process. It consists of three categories, which are based on the DIN 1836: “N” for C45K, “H” for cast iron and “W” for AlSi alloy [5].

• Process time t (s): This feature captures the full duration of each drilling operation, providing insights into efficiency and potential bottlenecks.

• Main failure: This binary feature indicates if any significant failure on the drill bit occurred during the drilling process. A value of 1 flags a drilling process that encountered issues, which in this case is true when any of the subgroup failure modes are 1, while 0 indicates a successful drilling operation without any major failures.

Subgroup failures: - Build-up edge failure (215x): Represented as a binary feature, a build-up edge failure indicates the occurrence of material accumulation on the cutting edge of the drill bit due to a combination of low cutting speeds and insufficient cooling. A value of 1 signifies the presence of this failure mode, while 0 denotes its absence. - Compression chips failure (344x): This binary feature captures the formation of compressed chips during drilling, resulting from the factors high feed rate, inadequate cooling and using an incompatible drill bit. A value of 1 indicates the occurrence of at least two of the three factors above, while 0 suggests a smooth drilling operation without compression chips. - Flank wear failure (278x): A binary feature representing the wear of the drill bit's flank due to a combination of high feed rates and low cutting speeds. A value of 1 indicates significant flank wear, affecting the drilling operation's accuracy and efficiency, while 0 denotes a wear-free operation. - Wrong drill bit failure (300x): As a binary feature, it indicates the use of an inappropriate drill bit for the material being drilled. A value of 1 signifies a mismatch, leading to potential drilling issues, while 0 indicates the correct drill bit usage.

General overview
The following datasets are described by this metadata record, and are available for download from the provided URL.

- Raw log files, physical parameters raw log files
- Raw excel files, respiration/PAM chamber raw excel spreadsheets
- Processed and cleaned excel files, respiration chamber biomass data
- Raw rapid light curve excel files (this is duplicated from Raw log files), combined dataset pH, temperature, oxygen, salinity, velocity for experiment
- Associated R script file for pump cycles of respirations chambers

####

Physical parameters raw log files

Raw log files
1) DATE=
2) Time= UTC+11
3) PROG=Automated program to control sensors and collect data
4) BAT=Amount of battery remaining
5) STEP=check aquation manual
6) SPIES=check aquation manual
7) PAR=Photoactive radiation
8) Levels=check aquation manual
9) Pumps= program for pumps
10) WQM=check aquation manual

####

Respiration/PAM chamber raw excel spreadsheets

Abbreviations in headers of datasets
Note: Two data sets are provided in different formats. Raw and cleaned (adj). These are the same data with the PAR column moved over to PAR.all for analysis. All headers are the same. The cleaned (adj) dataframe will work with the R syntax below, alternative add code to do cleaning in R.

Date: ISO 1986 - Check
Time:UTC+11 unless otherwise stated
DATETIME: UTC+11 unless otherwise stated
ID (of instrument in respiration chambers)
ID43=Pulse amplitude fluoresence measurement of control
ID44=Pulse amplitude fluoresence measurement of acidified chamber
ID=1 Dissolved oxygen
ID=2 Dissolved oxygen
ID3= PAR
ID4= PAR
PAR=Photo active radiation umols
F0=minimal florescence from PAM
Fm=Maximum fluorescence from PAM
Yield=(F0 – Fm)/Fm
rChl=an estimate of chlorophyll (Note this is uncalibrated and is an estimate only)
Temp=Temperature degrees C
PAR=Photo active radiation
PAR2= Photo active radiation2
DO=Dissolved oxygen
%Sat= Saturation of dissolved oxygen
Notes=This is the program of the underwater submersible logger with the following abreviations:
Notes-1) PAM=
Notes-2) PAM=Gain level set (see aquation manual for more detail)
Notes-3) Acclimatisation= Program of slowly introducing treatment water into chamber
Notes-4) Shutter start up 2 sensors+sample…= Shutter PAMs automatic set up procedure (see aquation manual)
Notes-5) Yield step 2=PAM yield measurement and calculation of control
Notes-6) Yield step 5= PAM yield measurement and calculation of acidified
Notes-7) Abatus respiration DO and PAR step 1= Program to measure dissolved oxygen and PAR (see aquation manual). Steps 1-4 are different stages of this program including pump cycles, DO and PAR measurements.

8) Rapid light curve data
Pre LC: A yield measurement prior to the following measurement
After 10.0 sec at 0.5% to 8%: Level of each of the 8 steps of the rapid light curve
Odessey PAR (only in some deployments): An extra measure of PAR (umols) using an Odessey data logger
Dataflow PAR: An extra measure of PAR (umols) using a Dataflow sensor.
PAM PAR: This is copied from the PAR or PAR2 column
PAR all: This is the complete PAR file and should be used
Deployment: Identifying which deployment the data came from

####

Respiration chamber biomass data

The data is chlorophyll a biomass from cores from the respiration chambers. The headers are: Depth (mm) Treat (Acidified or control) Chl a (pigment and indicator of biomass) Core (5 cores were collected from each chamber, three were analysed for chl a), these are psudoreplicates/subsamples from the chambers and should not be treated as replicates.

####

Associated R script file for pump cycles of respirations chambers

Associated respiration chamber data to determine the times when respiration chamber pumps delivered treatment water to chambers. Determined from Aquation log files (see associated files). Use the chamber cut times to determine net production rates. Note: Users need to avoid the times when the respiration chambers are delivering water as this will give incorrect results. The headers that get used in the attached/associated R file are start regression and end regression. The remaining headers are not used unless called for in the associated R script. The last columns of these datasets (intercept, ElapsedTimeMincoef) are determined from the linear regressions described below.

To determine the rate of change of net production, coefficients of the regression of oxygen consumption in discrete 180 minute data blocks were determined. R squared values for fitted regressions of these coefficients were consistently high (greater than 0.9). We make two assumptions with calculation of net production rates: the first is that heterotrophic community members do not change their metabolism under OA; and the second is that the heterotrophic communities are similar between treatments.

####

Combined dataset pH, temperature, oxygen, salinity, velocity for experiment

This data is rapid light curve data generated from a Shutter PAM fluorimeter. There are eight steps in each rapid light curve. Note: The software component of the Shutter PAM fluorimeter for sensor 44 appeared to be damaged and would not cycle through the PAR cycles. Therefore the rapid light curves and recovery curves should only be used for the control chambers (sensor ID43).

The headers are
PAR: Photoactive radiation
relETR: F0/Fm x PAR
Notes: Stage/step of light curve
Treatment: Acidified or control


The associated light treatments in each stage. Each actinic light intensity is held for 10 seconds, then a saturating pulse is taken (see PAM methods).

After 10.0 sec at 0.5% = 1 umols PAR
After 10.0 sec at 0.7% = 1 umols PAR
After 10.0 sec at 1.1% = 0.96 umols PAR
After 10.0 sec at 1.6% = 4.32 umols PAR
After 10.0 sec at 2.4% = 4.32 umols PAR
After 10.0 sec at 3.6% = 8.31 umols PAR
After 10.0 sec at 5.3% =15.78 umols PAR
After 10.0 sec at 8.0% = 25.75 umols PAR

This dataset appears to be missing data, note D5 rows potentially not useable information

See the word document in the download file for more information.

Will all children be able to read by 2030? The ability to read with comprehension is a foundational skill that every education system around the world strives to impart by late in primary school—generally by age 10. Moreover, attaining the ambitious Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in education requires first achieving this basic building block, and so does improving countries’ Human Capital Index scores. Yet past evidence from many low- and middle-income countries has shown that many children are not learning to read with comprehension in primary school. To understand the global picture better, we have worked with the UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) to assemble a new dataset with the most comprehensive measures of this foundational skill yet developed, by linking together data from credible cross-national and national assessments of reading. This dataset covers 115 countries, accounting for 81% of children worldwide and 79% of children in low- and middle-income countries. The new data allow us to estimate the reading proficiency of late-primary-age children, and we also provide what are among the first estimates (and the most comprehensive, for low- and middle-income countries) of the historical rate of progress in improving reading proficiency globally (for the 2000-17 period). The results show that 53% of all children in low- and middle-income countries cannot read age-appropriate material by age 10, and that at current rates of improvement, this “learning poverty” rate will have fallen only to 43% by 2030. Indeed, we find that the goal of all children reading by 2030 will be attainable only with historically unprecedented progress. The high rate of “learning poverty” and slow progress in low- and middle-income countries is an early warning that all the ambitious SDG targets in education (and likely of social progress) are at risk. Based on this evidence, we suggest a new medium-term target to guide the World Bank’s work in low- and middle- income countries: cut learning poverty by at least half by 2030. This target, together with improved measurement of learning, can be as an evidence-based tool to accelerate progress to get all children reading by age 10.

For further details, please refer to https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/e52f55322528903b27f1b7e61238e416-0200022022/original/Learning-poverty-report-2022-06-21-final-V7-0-conferenceEdition.pdf

Data set for the paper entitled "Learning and forgetting in the jet fighter aircraft industry". Data set includes flayaway cost and number of procurement units for three types of aircraft: F-22A Raptor, F-35A Lighnight II, and A/F-18-E/F Super Hornet. Data set also includes military procurements deflator. Annual data. Samples periods: 2000-2009 for the Raptor, 2007-2015 for the Lighnight II, and 1997-2013 for the Super Hornet. Data set includes all information for estimating learning curves and forgotting as presented in the corresponding paper. Data set also includes procument units and flyaway cost for the EA-18G Glowler, which it is a posterior modification of the Super Hornet for electronic warfare. These data are not included in the research paper, but they can be used to check that flyaway cost is constant as production accumulated, and no learning-by-doing process is observed for this particular aircraft (as all learning was acquired during the previous production of the Super Hornet).Abstract:A recent strategy carried out by the aircraft industry to reduce the total cost of new generation fighter has consisted in the development of a single airframe with different technical and operational specifications. This strategy has been designed to reduce costs in the Research, Design, and Development phase with the aim of reducing the final unitary price of aircraft. This is the case of the F-35 Lightning II, where three versions, with significant differences among them, are produced simultaneously based on a single airframe. Whereas this strategy seems to be useful to cut down pre-production sunk costs, remains key to study their effects on production costs. This paper shows that this strategy can imply larger costs in the production phase by reducing learning acquisition and hence, the total effect on the final unitary price of the aircraft is indeterminate. Learning curves are estimated based on the flyaway cost for the latest three fighter aircraft models: The A/F-18E/F Super Hornet, F-22A Raptor, and the F-35A Lightning II. We find that learning rates for the F-35A are significantly lower (an estimated learning rate around 9%) than for the other two models (around 14%).

The benchmark interest rate in Canada was last recorded at 2.75 percent. This dataset provides - Canada Interest Rate - actual values, historical data, forecast, chart, statistics, economic calendar and news.

Success.ai offers a cutting-edge solution for businesses and organizations seeking Company Financial Data on private and public companies. Our comprehensive database is meticulously crafted to provide verified profiles, including contact details for financial decision-makers such as CFOs, financial analysts, corporate treasurers, and other key stakeholders. This robust dataset is continuously updated and validated using AI technology to ensure accuracy and relevance, empowering businesses to make informed decisions and optimize their financial strategies.

Key Features of Success.ai's Company Financial Data:

Global Coverage: Access data from over 70 million businesses worldwide, including public and private companies across all major industries and regions. Our datasets span 250+ countries, offering extensive reach for your financial analysis and market research.

Detailed Financial Profiles: Gain insights into company financials, including revenue, profit margins, funding rounds, and operational costs. Profiles are enriched with key contact details, including work emails, phone numbers, and physical addresses, ensuring direct access to decision-makers.

Industry-Specific Data: Tailored datasets for sectors such as financial services, manufacturing, technology, healthcare, and energy, among others. Each dataset is customized to meet the unique needs of industry professionals and analysts.

Real-Time Accuracy: With continuous updates powered by AI-driven validation, our financial data maintains a 99% accuracy rate, ensuring you have access to the most reliable and up-to-date information available.

Compliance and Security: All data is collected and processed in strict adherence to global compliance standards, including GDPR, ensuring ethical and lawful usage.

Why Choose Success.ai for Company Financial Data?

Best Price Guarantee: We pride ourselves on offering the most competitive pricing in the industry, ensuring you receive unparalleled value for comprehensive financial data.

AI-Validated Accuracy: Our advanced AI algorithms meticulously verify every data point to ensure precision and reliability, helping you avoid costly errors in your financial decision-making.

Customized Data Solutions: Whether you need data for a specific region, industry, or type of business, we tailor our datasets to align perfectly with your requirements.

Scalable Data Access: From small startups to global enterprises, our platform caters to businesses of all sizes, delivering scalable solutions to suit your operational needs.

Comprehensive Use Cases for Financial Data:

1. Strategic Financial Planning:

Leverage our detailed financial profiles to create accurate budgets, forecasts, and strategic plans. Gain insights into competitors’ financial health and market positions to make data-driven decisions.

1. Mergers and Acquisitions (M&A):

Access key financial details and contact information to streamline your M&A processes. Identify potential acquisition targets or partners with verified profiles and financial data.

1. Investment Analysis:

Evaluate the financial performance of public and private companies for informed investment decisions. Use our data to identify growth opportunities and assess risk factors.

1. Lead Generation and Sales:

Enhance your sales outreach by targeting CFOs, financial analysts, and other decision-makers with verified contact details. Utilize accurate email and phone data to increase conversion rates.

1. Market Research:

Understand market trends and financial benchmarks with our industry-specific datasets. Use the data for competitive analysis, benchmarking, and identifying market gaps.

APIs to Power Your Financial Strategies:

Enrichment API: Integrate real-time updates into your systems with our Enrichment API. Keep your financial data accurate and current to drive dynamic decision-making and maintain a competitive edge.

Lead Generation API: Supercharge your lead generation efforts with access to verified contact details for key financial decision-makers. Perfect for personalized outreach and targeted campaigns.

Tailored Solutions for Industry Professionals:

Financial Services Firms: Gain detailed insights into revenue streams, funding rounds, and operational costs for competitor analysis and client acquisition.

Corporate Finance Teams: Enhance decision-making with precise data on industry trends and benchmarks.

Consulting Firms: Deliver informed recommendations to clients with access to detailed financial datasets and key stakeholder profiles.

Investment Firms: Identify potential investment opportunities with verified data on financial performance and market positioning.

What Sets Success.ai Apart?

Extensive Database: Access detailed financial data for 70M+ companies worldwide, including small businesses, startups, and large corporations.

Ethical Practices: Our data collection and processing methods are fully comp...

Monetary policy is generally regarded as a central element in the attempts of policy makers to attenuate business-cycle fluctuations. According to the New Keynesian paradigm, central banks are able to stimulate or depress aggregate demand in the short run by adjusting their nominal interest rate targets. The effects of interest rate changes on aggregate consumption, the largest component of aggregate demand, are well understood in the context of this paradigm, on which the canonical "workhorse'' model used in monetary policy analysis is grounded. A key feature of the model is that aggregate consumption is fully described by the amount of goods consumed by a representative household. A decline in the policy rate for instance implies that the real interest rate declines, the representative household saves less and hence increase its demand for consumption. At the same time, general equilibrium effects let labour income grow causing consumption to increase further. However, the mechanism outlined above ignores a considerable amount of empirically-observed heterogeneity among households. For example, households with a higher earnings elasticity to interest rate changes benefit more from a rate cut than those with a lower elasticity; households with large debt positions are at a relative advantage over households with large bond holdings; and households with low exposure to inflation are relatively better off than those holding a sizeable amount of nominal assets. As a result, the contribution to the aggregate consumption response differs substantially across households, implying that monetary expansions and tightenings produce relative "winners'' and relative "losers''. The aim of the project laid out in this proposal is to give a disaggregated account of the heterogeneous effects of monetary-policy induced interest rate changes on household consumption and a detailed analysis of the channels underlying them. Additionally, it seeks to draw conclusions about the determinants of the strength of the transmission mechanism of monetary policy. To do so, it relies on a large panel comprising detailed data from the universe of all households residing in Norway between 1993 and 2015 supplemented with additional micro-data provided by the European Commission. I will be assisted by two project partners, Pascal Paul who is a member of the Research Department of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco and Martin Holm who is affiliated with the Research Unit of Statistics Norway and the University of Oslo. In addition, I would like to collaborate with and help train a doctoral student based at the University of Lausanne on this project. Existing empirical studies of the consumption response to monetary policy at the micro level rely on survey data. Therefore, they are subject to a number of severe data limitations. The surveys employed typically have either no or only a short panel dimension, suffer from attrition, include only limited information on income and wealth, are top-coded, and contain a significant amount of measurement error. The administrative data set provided to us by Statistics Norway suffers from none of these issues, implying that we are in a unique position to evaluate the household-level effects of policy rate changes. In a first step, we use forecasts published by the Norwegian central bank to derive monetary policy shocks that are robust to the simultaneity problem inherent in the identification of the effects of monetary policy following Romer and Romer (2004). We then confront the micro-data with the estimated shocks to study the consumption response along different segments of the income and wealth distribution and to test the importance of heterogeneity in labour earnings, financial income, liquid assets, inflation exposure and interest rate exposure among others. The findings will be of high relevance as they will not only allow us to evaluate channels hypothesised in the analytical literature, improve our understanding of the monetary policy transmission mechanism and its distributional consequences but also serve as a benchmark for structural models built both by theorists and practitioners.

Analysis of ‘College Basketball Dataset’ provided by Analyst-2 (analyst-2.ai), based on source dataset retrieved from https://www.kaggle.com/andrewsundberg/college-basketball-dataset on 28 January 2022.

--- Dataset description provided by original source is as follows ---

Content

Data from the 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021 Division I college basketball seasons.

cbb.csv has seasons 2013-2019 combined

The 2020 season's data set is kept separate from the other seasons, because there was no postseason due to the Coronavirus.

The 2021 data is from 3/15/2021 and will be updated and added to cbb.csv after the tournament

Variables

RK (Only in cbb20): The ranking of the team at the end of the regular season according to barttorvik

TEAM: The Division I college basketball school

CONF: The Athletic Conference in which the school participates in (A10 = Atlantic 10, ACC = Atlantic Coast Conference, AE = America East, Amer = American, ASun = ASUN, B10 = Big Ten, B12 = Big 12, BE = Big East, BSky = Big Sky, BSth = Big South, BW = Big West, CAA = Colonial Athletic Association, CUSA = Conference USA, Horz = Horizon League, Ivy = Ivy League, MAAC = Metro Atlantic Athletic Conference, MAC = Mid-American Conference, MEAC = Mid-Eastern Athletic Conference, MVC = Missouri Valley Conference, MWC = Mountain West, NEC = Northeast Conference, OVC = Ohio Valley Conference, P12 = Pac-12, Pat = Patriot League, SB = Sun Belt, SC = Southern Conference, SEC = South Eastern Conference, Slnd = Southland Conference, Sum = Summit League, SWAC = Southwestern Athletic Conference, WAC = Western Athletic Conference, WCC = West Coast Conference)

G: Number of games played

W: Number of games won

ADJOE: Adjusted Offensive Efficiency (An estimate of the offensive efficiency (points scored per 100 possessions) a team would have against the average Division I defense)

ADJDE: Adjusted Defensive Efficiency (An estimate of the defensive efficiency (points allowed per 100 possessions) a team would have against the average Division I offense)

BARTHAG: Power Rating (Chance of beating an average Division I team)

EFG_O: Effective Field Goal Percentage Shot

EFG_D: Effective Field Goal Percentage Allowed

TOR: Turnover Percentage Allowed (Turnover Rate)

TORD: Turnover Percentage Committed (Steal Rate)

ORB: Offensive Rebound Rate

DRB: Offensive Rebound Rate Allowed

FTR : Free Throw Rate (How often the given team shoots Free Throws)

FTRD: Free Throw Rate Allowed

2P_O: Two-Point Shooting Percentage

2P_D: Two-Point Shooting Percentage Allowed

3P_O: Three-Point Shooting Percentage

3P_D: Three-Point Shooting Percentage Allowed

ADJ_T: Adjusted Tempo (An estimate of the tempo (possessions per 40 minutes) a team would have against the team that wants to play at an average Division I tempo)

WAB: Wins Above Bubble (The bubble refers to the cut off between making the NCAA March Madness Tournament and not making it)

POSTSEASON: Round where the given team was eliminated or where their season ended (R68 = First Four, R64 = Round of 64, R32 = Round of 32, S16 = Sweet Sixteen, E8 = Elite Eight, F4 = Final Four, 2ND = Runner-up, Champion = Winner of the NCAA March Madness Tournament for that given year)

SEED: Seed in the NCAA March Madness Tournament

YEAR: Season

Acknowledgements

This data was scraped from from http://barttorvik.com/trank.php#. I cleaned the data set and added the POSTSEASON, SEED, and YEAR columns

--- Original source retains full ownership of the source dataset ---

Site selection for cervical stabilization surgery in horses with spinal ataxia frequently relies on measurements derived from radiographic myelography. A variety of measurement criteria exist and can provide conflicting results. The main objectives of this study were to assess the correlation between two commonly used myelographic measures, dorsal contrast column reduction (DCCR) and dural diameter reduction (DDR), and their association with previously selected operative sites in a population of horses operated at a tertiary clinic. Secondary objectives were to determine if articular process joint (APJ) atrophy occurred in a subset of operated horses with radiographic follow-up, and to describe complications of cervical stabilization surgery and long term outcomes. The study was primarily cross-sectional using previously recorded medical information and images from horses operated between 2008 and 2022: three masked raters assessed previously acquired pre-operative myelograms obtained in neutral, flexed and extended neck positions from horses that had subsequently undergone stabilization surgery consisting of cervical interbody fusion via a Kerf-cut cylinder technique at one or two sites. A veterinary radiologist evaluated changes in APJ in radiographs obtained in a subset of horses re-evaluated >18 months after surgery. DCCR was unremarkable at nearly all articulations in all horses, while DDR met reduction criteria at over 50% of articulations in flexed position. Neither DCCR nor DDR distinguished operated from non-operated sites at most intervertebral junctions, except at the C6-7 articulation in neutral and extended position. The two measures were also poorly correlated at most sites and in most positions. Surgical complications included a high incidence of laryngeal hemiplegia. Comparison of operated to non-operated sites within individuals radiographed years later showed consistent, mildly reduced APJ opacity at most operated sites without a consistent decrease in APJ height or area ratios. Our results suggest that DCCR and DDR measures did not reliably predict surgical site selection in this surgical cohort except at C6-7, and that the two measures yielded conflicting diagnostic classification at many sites and positions. Complication rates from stabilization surgery were high; and predictable reduction in APJ height or area after surgery was not demonstrated by radiography in this study.

The benchmark interest rate in Brazil was last recorded at 15 percent. This dataset provides - Brazil Interest Rate - actual values, historical data, forecast, chart, statistics, economic calendar and news.

The benchmark interest rate in China was last recorded at 3 percent. This dataset provides the latest reported value for - China Interest Rate - plus previous releases, historical high and low, short-term forecast and long-term prediction, economic calendar, survey consensus and news.