I'd like to accomplish the following task. There are three columns of data. Column A represents price, where the sum needs to be kept under $100,000. Column B represents a value. Column C represents a name tied to columns A & B.
Out of >100 rows of data, I need to find the highest 8 values in column B while keeping the sum of the prices in column A under $100,000. And then return the 8 names from column C.
Can this be accomplished?
EDIT:
I attempted the Solver solution w/ no luck. 200 rows looks to be the max w/ Solver, and that is what I'm using now. Here are the steps I've taken:
Create a column called rank RANK(B2,$B$2:$B$200) (used column D -- what is the purpose of this?)
Create a column called flag just put in zeroes (used column E)
Create 3 total cells total_price (=SUM(A2:A200)), total_value (=SUM(B2:B200)) and total_flag (=(E2:E200))
Use solver to minimize total_value (shouldn't this be maximize??)
Add constraints -Total_price<=100000 -Total_flag=8 -Flag cells are binary
Using Simplex LP, it simply changes the flags for the first 8 values. However, the total price for the first 8 values is >$100,000 ($140k). I've tried changing some options in the Solver Parameters as well as using different solving methods to no avail. I'd like to post an image of the parameter settings, but don't have enough "reputation".
EDIT #2:
The first 5 rows looks like this, price goes down to ~$6k at the bottom of the table.
Price Value Name Rank Flag
$22,538 42.81905675 Blow, Joe 1 0
$22,427 37.36240932 Doe, Jane 2 0
$17,158 34.12127693 Hall, Cliff 3 0
$16,625 33.97654031 Povich, John 4 0
$15,631 33.58212402 Cow, Holy 5 0
I'll give you the solver solution as a starting point. It involves the creation of some extra columns and total cells. Note solver is limited in the amount of cells it can handle but will work with 100 anyway.
Create a column called rank RANK(B2,$B$2:$B$100)
Create a column called flag just put in zeroes
Create 3 total cells total_price, total_value and total_flag
Use solver to minimize total_value
Add constraints
-Total_price<=100000
-Total_flag=8
-Flag cells are binary
This will flag the rows you want and you can grab the names however you want.
Related
I'm looking for a solution for a problem I'm facing in Excel. This is my table simplified:
Every sale has an unique ID, but more people can have contributed to a sale. the column "name" and "share of sales(%)" show how many people have contributed and what their percentage was.
Sale_ID
Name
Share of sales(%)
1
Person A
100
2
Person B
100
3
Person A
30
3
Person C
70
Now I want to add a column to my table that shows the name of the person that has the highest share of sales percentage per Sales_ID. Like this:
Sale_ID
Name
Share of sales(%)
Highest sales
1
Person A
100
Person A
2
Person B
100
Person B
3
Person A
30
Person C
3
Person C
70
Person C
So when multiple people have contributed the new column shows only the one with the highest value.
I hope someone can help me, thanks in advance!
You can try this on cell D2:
=LET(maxSales, MAXIFS(C2:C5,A2:A5,A2:A5),
INDEX(B2:B5, XMATCH(A2:A5&maxSales,A2:A5&C2:C5)))
or just removing the LET since maxSales is used only one time:
=INDEX(B2:B5, XMATCH(A2:A5&MAXIFS(C2:C5,A2:A5,A2:A5),A2:A5&C2:C5))
On cell E2 I provided another solution via MAP/XLOOKUP:
=LET(maxSales, MAXIFS(C2:C5,A2:A5,A2:A5),
MAP(A2:A5, maxSales, LAMBDA(a,b, XLOOKUP(a&b, A2:A5&C2:C5, B2:B5))))
similarly without LET:
=MAP(A2:A5, MAXIFS(C2:C5,A2:A5,A2:A5),
LAMBDA(a,b, XLOOKUP(a&b, A2:A5&C2:C5, B2:B5)))
and here is the output:
Explanation
The trick here is to identify the max share of sales per each group and this can be done via MAXIFS(max_range, criteria_range1, criteria1, [criteria_range2, criteria2], ...). The size and shape of the max_range and criteria_rangeN arguments must be the same.
MAXIFS(C2:C5,A2:A5,A2:A5)
it produces the following output:
maxSales
100
100
70
70
MAXIFS will provide an output of the same size as criteria1, so it returns for each row the corresponding maximum sales for each Sale_ID column value.
It is the array version equivalent to the following formula expanding it down:
MAXIFS($C$2:$C$5,$A$2:$A$5,A2)
INDEX/XMATCH Solution
Having the array with the maximum Shares of sales, we just need to identify the row position via XMATCH to return the corresponding B2:B5 cell via INDEX. We use concatenation (&) to consider more than one criteria to find as part of the XMATCH input arguments.
MAP/XLOOKUP Solution
We use MAP to find for each pair of values (a,b) per row, of the first two MAP input arguments where is the maximum value found for that group and returns the corresponding Name column value. In order to make a lookup based on an additional criteria we use concatenation (&) in XLOOKUP first two input arguments.
I need a count of how many date items fall within Data 1 & Data 2
ie:
x-1 will have a count of 2
x-2 will have a count of 1
-x-3 will have a count of 2
-y-1 will have a count of 2
What would be the best way to go abouts when approaching this?
Data 1
Data 2
Date
x
1
Date 1
x
1
Date 1
x
1
Date 2
x
2
Date 3
x
2
Date 3
y
1
Date 1
y
1
Date 1
I see only one way to interpret with the available information:
To count the number of times Date_to_test falls within Date_1 and Date_2 (screenshot below, sheet here), you could use either the sum or something like a countifs (with interim calc):
sum approach
=SUM(1*($C$2:$C$11<=$B$2:$B$11)*($A$2:$A$11<=$C$2:$C$11))
countifs + interim calc
helper
=1*(C2<=B2)*(A2<=C2)
(additional column, drag down)
countifs
=COUNTIFS($D$2:$D$11,1)
Screenshot
Alternative
as for the 'sum' approach, sumproduct variants (e.g. =SUMPRODUCT(1*($C$2:$C$11<=$B$2:$B$11),1*($B$2:$B$11>=$A$2:$A$11))) are calculation/memory intensive
despite the countifs + helper approach containing more 'visible' data - these values need only be calculated once, the countifs can then be determined independently (assuming no updates to the helper column) - thus making it more memory/calculation efficient depending upon your calculation mode, screen-updating preferences
Caveat
if, by some misfortune re: interpreting your question, you are referring to some other means of establishing whether "date items fall within Data 1 & Data 2", then without knowing what this is, there very low likelihood of being able to guess this correctly
I have two Google sheets tabs:
I.)
--A-- --B--
--1-- type lessThan10Apart
--2-- Car 1
--3-- Plane 0
II.)
--A-- --B-- --C--
--1-- type sourceA sourceB
--2-- Car 1 100
--3-- Plane 10 100
--4-- Car 2 4
My question is how to create the lessThan10Apart formula above. lessThan10Apart should match up the type from sheet I to sheet II and only count the rows that: Are less than 10 units between A and B. But you can also imagine wanting to do any kind of arithmetic between columns B and C and running a COUNT.
My first attempt is something along the lines of:
=COUNTIFS('sheetII'!A:A),$A2, //Match column A
ABS('sheetII'!C:C-'sheetII'!B:B)<10 //Doesn't work!
)
The problem is that you can't seem to be able to do range calculations like this in COUNTIFS.
For the count (per F4 in supplied image),
=SUMPRODUCT(--(ABS(B2:B4-C2:C4)<10))
For the validSum (sum of absolute difference between B & C; per G4 in supplied image),
=SUMPRODUCT(--(ABS(B2:B4-C2:C4)<10), ABS(B2:B4-C2:C4))
Do not use full column references. Minimize your referenced ranges.
Discard the Car text in E4 in the above image.
I have thought long and hard about this, but I can't find a solution to what I believe is quite a simple problem.
I have a table of results, where sometimes someone will be given a penalty of a varying amount. This is entered into the penalty column (Col C).
I need a formula which checks if there is an entry into the penalty column and applies it, not only to that row, but to the number of subsequent rows which are affected, depending on the severity of the penalty.
I have tried to see if this is possible by referencing the penalty against the 'ROW()' function but have not been able to achieve the desired effect.
Col D shows the desired output of the formula.
Col E is included for reference only, to show the desired effect on each row.
Col A Col B Col C Col D Col E
Pos Name Penalty New Pos Change
1 Jack 1 0
2 Matt 2 0
3 Daniel 2 5 +2
4 Gordon 3 -1
5 Phillip 4 -1
6 Günther 6 0
7 Johann 3 10 +3
8 Alain 7 -1
9 John 8 -1
10 Gianmaria 9 -1
The big issue is, if someone is handed a big penalty, for example '10' then it affects the following ten rows. I can't work out how to include this variable logic...
I would be interested to hear the approach of others...
You need to use the RANK() function:
Excel RANK Function Examples
In a new column, add the penalty value to the original position, plus a small coeffieient depending on the original position (0.01 per increment perhaps) to move the penalised player below the original person at that position, then in the next column you can RANK() the new column of values (F in my case).
New value is therefore =A2+(IF(C2>0,C2+(0.01*A2)))
Rank is then =RANK(F2,F2:F11,1)
You can combine all the functions into one, but it's clearer to do it in separate columns at first.
I am having trouble determining the correct way to calculate a final rank order for four categories. Each of the four metrics make up a higher group. A Top 10 of each category is applied to the respective product to risk analysis.
CURRENT LOGIC - Assignment of 25% max per category.
Columns - Y4
Parts
0.25
25
=IF(L9=1,$Y$4,IF(L9=2,$Y$4*0.9, IF(L9=3,$Y$4*0.8, IF(L9=4,$Y$4*0.7, IF(L9=5,$Y$4*0.6, IF(L9=6,$Y$4*0.5, IF(L9=7,$Y$4*0.4, IF(L9=8,$Y$4*0.3, IF(L9=9,$Y$4*0.2, IF(L9=10,$Y$4*0.1,0))))))))))
DESIRED...
I would like to use a statement to determine three criteria in order to apply a score (1=100, 2=90, 3=80, etc..).
SUM the rank positions of each of the four categories-apply product rank ascending (not including NULL since it's not in the Top 10)
IF a product is identified in more than one metric-apply a significant contribution weight of (*.75),
IF a product has the number 1 rank in any of the four metrics-apply a score of (100).
Data - UPDATED EXAMPLE
(Product) Parts Labor Overhead External Final Score
"XYZ" 3 1 7 7 100
"ABC" NULL 6 NULL 2 100
"LMN" 4 NULL NULL NULL 70
This is way beyond my capability. ANY assistance is appreciated greatly!!!
Jim
I figured this is a good start and I can alter the weight as needed to reflect the reality of the situation.
=AVERAGE(G28:I28)+SUM(G28:I28)*0.25
However, I couldn't figure out how to put a cap on the score of no more than 100 points.
I am still unclear of what exactly you are attempting and if this will work, but how about this simple matrix using an array formula and some conditional formatting.
Array Formula in F2 (make sure to press Ctrl+Shift+Enter when exiting formula edit mode)
=MIN(100,SUM(IF(B2:E2<>"NULL",CHOOSE(B2:E2,100,90,80,70,60,50,40,30,20,10))))
Conditional Formatting defined as shown below.
Red = 100 value where it comes from a 1
Yellow = 100 value where it comes from more than 1 factor, but without a 1.