Difference between revisions of "ISSS608 T3 ASSGN1 PRIYANKA Insights"
(Created page with "<div style=background:#000000 border:#A3BFB1> 250px <font size = 5; color="#FFFFFF"> "Like a Duck to Water" (Mini Challenge 2)</font> </div> <!--...") |
|||
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
| | | | ||
|} | |} | ||
| + | |||
| + | <!--Insights & Conclusion--> | ||
| + | <br/> | ||
| + | <div style="text-align:center;vertical-align:bottom;"> | ||
| + | <font size = 5><span style="font-family:Century Gothic;">Insights</span></font> | ||
| + | </div> | ||
| + | An Exploratory Data Analysis on the given hydrology data indicates clear spikes in the chemical readings across different locations and time.<br><br> | ||
| + | below are some of the insights covered in the=is analysis:<br> | ||
| + | 1. Suspicious Spike in Iron level<br> | ||
| + | 2. Frequent Spikes in Total Coliforms<br> | ||
| + | 3. Consistent high levels of Bicarbonates & Total Dissolved Salts<br> | ||
| + | 4. Drastic increase in Methylosmolene<br> | ||
| + | 5. Suspicious spikes overall chemical levels in 2003<br><br> | ||
| + | In addition to the above insights, the below tableau workbook can be used to explore the trend each individual chemical reading as per the desired location of interest:<br> | ||
| + | [https://public.tableau.com/views/WildlifePreserveAnalysis_PriyankaSharma/AvgReadingsbyChemicalName?:embed=y&:display_count=yes&publish=yes&:toolbar=no WildlifePreserveAnalysis] | ||
| + | <br><br> | ||
| + | <br/> | ||
| + | <div style="text-align:center;vertical-align:bottom;"> | ||
| + | <font size = 5><span style="font-family:Century Gothic;">Conclusion</span></font> | ||
| + | </div> | ||
| + | Although the initial EDA of the data does raise suspicion on the role of the furniture company in the chemical contamination of the waterways, there are significant anomalies in the given dataset which cannot be ignored. For instance:<br> | ||
| + | 1. The data samples have been collected randomly.<br> | ||
| + | 2. There are missing values of readings for some of the chemicals.<br> | ||
| + | 3. There is inconsistency between samples of same chemical collected during the same period across different locations<br><br> | ||
| + | Hence, to come up with a robust analysis, following steps must be taken by the Hydrology department for accurate sample collection:<br> | ||
| + | 1. Ensure that there is a fixed schedule of collecting samples across all locations. | ||
| + | 2. There should be consistency with regard to the amount of sample collected for the same chemical during same period across different locations.<br> | ||
| + | 3. It is possible that the number of sensors from which the readings are collected is not sufficient for analysis, hence more sensors can be installed.<br> | ||
| + | 4. As per the case backgorund, the collected samples were never analyzed due to lack of funding, hence steps must be taken to grant proper budget for the analysis.<br> | ||
| + | 5. Since the samples were never analyzed before, it is suggested that a fresh set of readings be collected to ensure accuracy of the results - some chemicals might be time sensitive and hence the readings might not be correct.<br> | ||
| + | 6. Maintaining a checklist of all the samples to be collected would be helpful so that the department does not miss out on important steps.<br> | ||
| + | <!--Insights & Conclusion--> | ||
Revision as of 22:04, 8 July 2018
"Like a Duck to Water" (Mini Challenge 2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insights
An Exploratory Data Analysis on the given hydrology data indicates clear spikes in the chemical readings across different locations and time.
below are some of the insights covered in the=is analysis:
1. Suspicious Spike in Iron level
2. Frequent Spikes in Total Coliforms
3. Consistent high levels of Bicarbonates & Total Dissolved Salts
4. Drastic increase in Methylosmolene
5. Suspicious spikes overall chemical levels in 2003
In addition to the above insights, the below tableau workbook can be used to explore the trend each individual chemical reading as per the desired location of interest:
WildlifePreserveAnalysis
Conclusion
Although the initial EDA of the data does raise suspicion on the role of the furniture company in the chemical contamination of the waterways, there are significant anomalies in the given dataset which cannot be ignored. For instance:
1. The data samples have been collected randomly.
2. There are missing values of readings for some of the chemicals.
3. There is inconsistency between samples of same chemical collected during the same period across different locations
Hence, to come up with a robust analysis, following steps must be taken by the Hydrology department for accurate sample collection:
1. Ensure that there is a fixed schedule of collecting samples across all locations.
2. There should be consistency with regard to the amount of sample collected for the same chemical during same period across different locations.
3. It is possible that the number of sensors from which the readings are collected is not sufficient for analysis, hence more sensors can be installed.
4. As per the case backgorund, the collected samples were never analyzed due to lack of funding, hence steps must be taken to grant proper budget for the analysis.
5. Since the samples were never analyzed before, it is suggested that a fresh set of readings be collected to ensure accuracy of the results - some chemicals might be time sensitive and hence the readings might not be correct.
6. Maintaining a checklist of all the samples to be collected would be helpful so that the department does not miss out on important steps.
