ey guys I need your help. I want to predict rice production in India using a simple regression. For this I have a dataset with the yield and production data for the last 40 years. As explanatory variables I have the daily data on rainfall, temperature etc. Now to my problem. Obviously the number of observations of the y-variable (40) does not match the number of observations of the x-variable (about 15,000). Thus a regression is not feasible. What is the best way to proceed?
Average the weather data over the year and thus estimate the y-variable, i.e. a kind of undersampling of the x-variable. Of course, this means that important data such as outliers are lost.
Add the annual production values for each weather entry in the associated year. This would give us the same y value 365 times. Doesn't sound reasonable to me either.
What other ideas do you guys have? If interested, I'll be happy to attach the datasets as well.
I've been looking at how BLEU score works. What I understood from the online videos + the original research paper is that BLEU score value should be within the range 0-1.
Then, when I started to look at some research papers, I found that BLEU value (almost) always higher than 1!
For instance, have a look here:
https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/W19-8624.pdf
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2005.01107v1.pdf
Am I missing something?
Another small point: what does the headers in the table below mean? The BLEU score was calculated using unigrams, then unigrams & bigrams (averaged), etc.? or each ngrams size was calculated independently?
In my dataset I have a set of categories, where for every category I have a set of 150 examples. Each example has been annotated as true/false by 5 human raters. I am computing the inter-annotator agreement using the Fleiss-kappa score:
1) for the entire dataset
2) for each category in particular
However, the results I obtained show that the Fleiss-kappa score for the entire dataset does not equal the average of the Fleiss-kappa score for each category. In my computation I am using a standard built-in package to compute the scores. Could this be due to a bug in my matrix computation, or are the scores not supposed to be equal? Thanks!
I have a large excel file that has monthly sales per customer for January - December 2016. I want to predict what their sales will be in January 2017.
You could average each client's data and ignore the zeros with a formula like
=AVERAGEIF(D2:D12,"<>0)
D2:D12 would be the range of a single client's sales variable and it would give you a monthly average for that client that you could use for January Predicted Sales.
You have several problems to solve:
Determining (a) candidate forecasting model(s) to use.
Organising your existing data to test whether such model(s) are actually suitable, performing such tests and selecting (a) suitable model(s) [There may be more than one model to be used dependent on whether your data are homogeneous or not.]
Organising your existing data to apply your chosen model(s) for the
purposes of making your prediction. (A different organisation to 2. may be required.)
Your description talks about "sales" but the data sample you provided mentions "claims". These are very different entities - sales (dependent on what type of sales) may well be as frequent as monthly, but claims are likely to be a lot less frequent. If this is the case and claims are highly infrequent, then there is little sense in trying to predict an individual customer's claim. In such a case it would make more sense to predict the aggregate level of claims across a group of customers.
With all modelling, and particularly with forecasting models, context is highly important in steering towards which particular types of model are likely to be suitable. As it is, you have provided no context about what your data really represents, so are unlikely (beyond random chance) to find that any solution offered to you is actually going to be suitable. A solution might compute but, in the context in which you are operating, will it provide anything like a sensible or justifiable set of forecasts?
The "AverageIf" solution may be sufficient; however, you may be able to do better if there is in fact any trends/seasonality in the data that could be used to modeling advantage. For each customer, I would check for autocorrelation in the data. "Autocorrelation, also known as serial correlation, is the correlation of a signal with a delayed copy of itself as a function of delay. Informally, it is the similarity between observations as a function of the time lag between them."(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autocorrelation) For instance, if there is significant autocorrelation at lag = 12, this would suggest yearly seasonality in the data (maybe every January is similar). There is a nice tutorial to analyze autocorrelation in Excel at:
http://www.real-statistics.com/time-series-analysis/stochastic-processes/autocorrelation-function/
If autocorrelation does exist, it would likely then be useful to perform regression with that time component(s). If there is a trend with time in additional to a cyclical component, that should also be factored into the regression (i.e., such as a "Year" variable); or a more sophisticated time series method could be applied that would accomodate trend and autocorrelation such as an Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA) model:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoregressive_integrated_moving_average
Excel has a forecasting function that might help:
FORECAST.ETS function
Calculates or predicts a future value based on existing (historical) values by using the AAA version of the Exponential Smoothing (ETS) algorithm. The predicted value is a continuation of the historical values in the specified target date, which should be a continuation of the timeline. You can use this function to predict future sales, inventory requirements, or consumer trends.
This function requires the timeline to be organized with a constant step between the different points. For example, that could be a monthly timeline with values on the 1st of every month, a yearly timeline, or a timeline of numerical indices. For this type of timeline, it’s very useful to aggregate raw detailed data before you apply the forecast, which produces more accurate forecast results as well.
Syntax
FORECAST.ETS(target_date, values, timeline, [seasonality], [data_completion], [aggregation])
And you can see it in action in a workbook from the FORECAST.ETS.SEASONALITY page:
Download a sample workbook
I have 2 columns and multiple rows of data in excel. Each column represents an algorithm and the values in rows are the results of these algorithms with different parameters. I want to make statistical significance test of these two algorithms with excel. Can anyone suggest a function?
As a result, it will be nice to state something like "Algorithm A performs 8% better than Algorithm B with .9 probability (or 95% confidence interval)"
The wikipedia article explains accurately what I need:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_significance
It seems like a very easy task but I failed to find a scientific measurement function.
Any advice over a built-in function of excel or function snippets are appreciated.
Thanks..
Edit:
After tharkun's comments, I realized I should clarify some points:
The results are merely real numbers between 1-100 (they are percentage values). As each row represents a different parameter, values in a row represents an algorithm's result for this parameter. The results do not depend on each other.
When I take average of all values for Algorithm A and Algorithm B, I see that the mean of all results that Algorithm A produced are 10% higher than Algorithm B's. But I don't know if this is statistically significant or not. In other words, maybe for one parameter Algorithm A scored 100 percent higher than Algorithm B and for the rest Algorithm B has higher scores but just because of this one result, the difference in average is 10%.
And I want to do this calculation using just excel.
Thanks for the clarification. In that case you want to do an independent sample T-Test. Meaning you want to compare the means of two independent data sets.
Excel has a function TTEST, that's what you need.
For your example you should probably use two tails and type 2.
The formula will output a probability value known as probability of alpha error. This is the error which you would make if you assumed the two datasets are different but they aren't. The lower the alpha error probability the higher the chance your sets are different.
You should only accept the difference of the two datasets if the value is lower than 0.01 (1%) or for critical outcomes even 0.001 or lower. You should also know that in the t-test needs at least around 30 values per dataset to be reliable enough and that the type 2 test assumes equal variances of the two datasets. If equal variances are not given, you should use the type 3 test.
http://depts.alverno.edu/nsmt/stats.htm