I have a huge spreadsheet with a bunch of columns. For one of the columns, labelled "Clicks," it displays the number of clicks a person has made on a particular email. One person can click 0 or more times. I only care if there has been a click, but not how many. So, I'd like the values to be either 0 or 1.
I tried the following formula, without success (it gives me an error: Clicks must be whole number from -21...... through 21.......).
=IF(AND(H2>0), 1)
Use MIN, to return 0 or 1:
=MIN(H2,1)
Can be achieved with a Custom format:
[>0]1;0
This should work for you:
=IF(H2>0, 1, 0)
Basically, the first parameter is the condition, the second parameter is what will be displayed if that condition is TRUE, the third parameter is what will be displayed if the condition is FALSE.
Related
All of the methods that I've used have 2 answer values (True or False).
How can I get the following with a formula?
If A1=1 then it's 11, if A1=2 the answer is 22, if A1=3 then it's 33, if A1=4 it's 44.
If the value your are evaluating is in cell A1, then the nested function would be as follows:
IF(A1=1,11,IF(A1=2,22,IF(A1=3,33,IF(A1=4,44,""))))
I put the 2 double commas at the end so the formula returns a blank instead of false.
I don't know if that's what you are asking about, but you can make multiple (nested) IF statements in one. For example:
IF(1=2;TRUE;IF(2=2;TRUE;FALSE))
You just put another IF in the FALSE part of IF statement. If that's not it, can you give a piece of the statement you tried and precise more what do you want?
=IF(AND(INT(A1)=A1,A1<=4,A1>=1),A1*11,"")
Now the above works for the condition you placed in your example, however if one were to go by your title alone you have a couple of options you could go with.
You first Option would be nested IF statements. Like you said each IF function has TRUE or FALSE. The trick is to put another IF function in for the TRUE result and another in for the FALSE results
IF(CHECK1, IF(CHECK2, TRUE2, FALSE2),IF(CHECK3, TRUE3, FALSE3))
The above give 4 potential results based on only 3 checks. Another option would be to do a check and supply a value for a TRUE result and another IF for a false result. Keep repeating the process. Conversely you could go the same route flipping TRUE FALSE option. It might look something like this:
IF(CHECK1, TRUE1, IF(CHECK2, TRUE2, IF(CHECK3, TRUE3, FALSE3)))
FALSE3 would be the result of all previous checks failing.
So for your case, your nested IF could look like (assuming the only valid entries are 1, 2, 3 and 4):
IF(A1=1,11,IF(A1,2,22,IF(A1=3,33,44)))
OR
IF(ISODD(A1),IF(A1=1,11,33),IF(A1=2,22,44))
and there are other options to work through the logic. there are also other checks you could be doing and results being displayed if your entries in A1 were not limited to the integers 1,2,3 and 4.
Now because you example is using the sequential integers 1,2,3 and 4 you could also use the CHOOSE function. Alternatively if you can make your criteria evaluate to sequential integers stating at 1 the CHOOSE function would work as well. Supply choose with an integer as the first argument and it will return the corresponding argument in the list that follows
CHOOSE(ARGUMENT,RESULT1, RESULT2,...,RESULTn-1, RESULTn)
In your case it would look something like:
CHOOSE(A1,11,22,33,44)
If you can not get sequential numbers for whatever reason and the gap is numbers is small and you are in the low integer count, you could leave a gap in results by providing "", or 0). lets say you has 1,3 and 4 as potential arguments, then your choose might look like:
CHOOSE(A1,11,"",33,44)
=IF(A1<>"",INDEX({11;22;33;44},A1),"")
=IF(AND(ISNUMBER(A1),A1<=4),A1*11,"")
Currently writing a program in excel that will return a value based on user input. The current formula has 5 different return options which are returned based on the selection of a number by the user. I use the IF() statement embedded into more IF() statements to account for multiple input options. However, when I go to enter in a number beyond the range of the first IF() statement, I am getting 0 even though it should be a different number.
For the code below, C30 is the input cell and it should return .15 if I was to enter 25.
=IF(C30<20, 0.35, IF(20<C30<40, 0.15, IF(40<C30<60, 0, IF(60<C30<80, -0.1, IF(80<C30, -0.2, 0)))))
From the logic statements, it should be returning .15, but all I am getting is 0.
Excel does not use 20<C30<40 it would be:
AND(20<C30,C30<40)
But you can shorten this with a simple MATCH and CHOOSE:
=CHOOSE(MATCH(C30,{0,20,40,60,80}),0.35,0.15,0,-0.1,-0.2)
If you really want a nested if there is no need for the extra tests:
=IF(C30<20,0.35,IF(C30<40,0.15,IF(C30<60,0,IF(C30<80,-0.1,-0.2))))
IF will resolve sequentially and short circuit as soon as it finds the first TRUE, so it does not need the other logic.
The problem here is the logic that you have used to evaluate whether C30 falls within a range of numbers.
IF(20<C30<40,...) will not check whether C30 is in the range of 20 through 40.
Instead, use AND(cond1, cond2, ...) to check whether the values are within the range:
IF(AND(C30 > 20, C30 < 40), ...)
Replace terms like:
20<C30<40
with:
AND(20<C30,C30<40)
etc.
I have 2 worksheets:
Worksheet 1: Member ID, Engagement Date and other data.
Worksheet 2: Member ID, Policy Begin Date, Policy End Date and other data.
On Worksheet 1, I want to return a policy type name (from Worksheet 2), if Worksheet 1's Member ID matches Worksheet 2's Member ID AND if Worksheet 1 Engagement Date falls between Worksheet 2's Policy Begin and End Date...
The following is the formula I tried and also have attempted extensive research, to no avail:
=INDEX('Program Data'!M2:M25671,MATCH(A2:A489&F2>='Program Data'K2&F2<='Program Data'L2,'Program Data'!E2:E25671,0))
Replace your MATCH with an AGGREGATE that Calculates the SMALLest row where the Policy ID and Dates all match up.
So, we want AGGREGATE(15, 6, <SOME CODE>, 1) to get the Smallest non-error value in a list created by <SOME CODE>
The first thing that <SOME CODE> will want is the ROW we are looking at (minus one, because I see that you are skipping the header row...) which is ROW(Sheet2!$A$2:$A$25671)-1
If the Row does not match, we want to either make it massive or make it error (even better, because then it gets completely skipped). How to do this? Well, I have the POWER function for that. If you try POWER(10,999) you get a #NUM! error, because 10^999 is too large a number for Excel. If you try POWER(0,999) you get 0, because 0^anything is 0. So, we'll just add some POWER to our ROWs to make it error-out when we don't want them.
But, now we need to decide between 10 and 0. Fortunately, Logical statements can be treated as Bitwise Multiplication (True = 1 and False = 0`)
So, --(Sheet2!$A$2:$A$25671=$A2) will give us 1 when the First Columns (Member ID) match, --(Sheet2!$B$2:$B$25671<=$B2) will make sure that the Policy Start Date is before-or-on the record date, and --(Sheet2!$C$2:$C$25671>=$B2) will check the End Date. Multiply it all together, and we get 1 when the row matches, and 0 when it doesn't.
Now, if we take that away from 1, we get the opposite: 0 when we want 0, and 1 when we want 10. So multiply that by 10, and shove it in the POWER function, and add that to the ROW to get <SOME CODE>. Dump it all in the AGGREGATE from the start, and voila
=AGGREGATE(15,6,ROW(Sheet2!$A$2:$A$25671)-1+(POWER(10*(1-(Sheet2!$A$2:$A$25671=$A2)*--(Sheet2!$B$2:$B$25671<=$B2)*--(Sheet2!$C$2:$C$25671>=$B2)),999)),1)
Then, just use that in place of your MATCH (it will generate a #NUM! error when no policy is found)
=INDEX(Sheet2!M2:M25671,AGGREGATE(15,6,ROW(Sheet2!$A$2:$A$25671)-1+(POWER(10*(1-(Sheet2!$A$2:$A$25671=$A2)*--(Sheet2!$B$2:$B$25671<=$B2)*--(Sheet2!$C$2:$C$25671>=$B2)),999)),1),1)
I've seen several forum posts with the answer to this question, but I can't really understand how it's supposed to work, so I figured I'd come here for an explanation.
I have three columns:
CITY........|.Attribute 1.|.Attribute 2.|
Chicago..|........1........|........1........|
Chicago..|........1........|..................|
Boston....|........1........|........1........|
Chicago..|..................|..................|
Boston....|..................|..................|
Boston....|..................|........1........|
Chicago..|........1........|........1........|
Chicago..|........1........|........1........|
I want to get a count of the number of times a city has a "1" in Attribute 1 and Attribute 2. Normally, you would use COUNTIFS (=COUNTIFS(B2:B9,"1",C2:C9,"1"))which would give you the value of 4 - Rows 2, 4, 8, and 9.
But I want to be able to filter this list on the fly, and only be able to see data for Chicago rows, for instance. And thus, want to see the value of 3 - Rows 2, 8, and 9. But when the data is filtered, I still get the value of 4.
What code do I need to insert into my cell to get the value of 3 after filtering my list to only show Chicago, if I want to see when a city has a "1" in both Attribute 1 and Attribute 2?
Thanks!
Would this not work for Chicago?:
=COUNTIFS(A2:A9, "Chicago", B2:B9,"1", C2:C9, "1")
This would not require you to filter the data.
A variant of this could be used:
SUMPRODUCT((Attribute 1.=Satisfactory)*(SUBTOTAL(103,OFFSET(AW3,ROW(tblStudentProgress[D3 Activity])-MIN(ROW(tblStudentProgress[D3 Activity])),0))))
You could also create a helper column and sum attributes 1 and 2. If your helper column row equals 2 then you know both attributes exist. You could take this one step further and use concatenate to combine "Chicago" and your sum. And then filter by Chicago2.
Could you help to advise some script to validate a table cells for empty values? I need to validate that there are no empty cells in table.
tableFG = page.table(:id => 'FinancialsGrid')
tableFG.rows.each do |row|
row.cells.each do |cell|
expect(cell.tableFG_element.text).should_not be_nil
end
end
May be there is another way to check for empty values.
The one thing I do not like about manually writing a loop to iterate through and validate each cell is that you only see the result of the first failure. If there are say two cells that are blank, the test failure will only show one.
As a result, I try to make use of the built-in expectation matchers that check each element (ex all). For example, the following gets the length of text of each cell and makes sure that it is at least 1 character long. Note that Watir strips leading/trailing whitespaces, so a length of 1 should be an actual character.
financials_grid = browser.table(:id => 'FinancialsGrid')
expect(financials_grid.tds.map(&:text).map(&:length)).to all( be > 0 )
A failed expectation would look like the following and include each cell that fails:
expected [1, 0, 0, 1] to all be > 0
object at index 1 failed to match:
expected: > 0
got: 0
object at index 2 failed to match:
expected: > 0
got: 0
Using the page-object gem would be similar (with slightly different methods). Assuming the table is defined in the page as the financials_grid:
page = MyPage.new(browser)
expect(
page.financials_grid_element.cell_elements.map(&:text).map(&:length)
).to all( be > 0 )