IF [Business Unit] = 'Air Export' then '1'
ELSE [Business Unit]
END
A Business Unit comprises of
- Air Export
- Air Import
- Sea Export
- Sea Import
My objective is to portray the transit target days for Air Export only which is always 1 day.
Currently, I'm doing for a data item called "Transit Target 1".
There will be a data item called "Total Transit Target" which comprises of "Transit Target 1","Transit Target 2" and "Transit Target 3".
I would like to cast '1' as a float for me to do a calculation for "Total Transit Target" later on.
How do I go about doing this? Please help.
You are going to run into to problems casting your result. The problem is the result as coded will result in five possible values:
Air Export
Air Import
Sea Export
Sea Import
1
Only the last value can be successfully cast to a numeric (or float) type.
What I would do is modify your IF...THEN to output either 1 or 0, both integers and thus already in the proper form for cacluation:
IF ([Business Unit] = 'Air Export')
THEN (1)
ELSE (0)
Note that there are no quotes around either result values. They will be of type integer and ready for use in caclulations
Some tips with IF..THEN in Cognos. All conditions and results have to be wrapped in parentheses. Also, there has to be an ELSE clause. Lastly, there is no END. That's used in CASE statements.
I don't want to sound like I'm being passively-aggressively unhelpfully helpful but I'd think that I might want to start by exploring the CAST function.
Where are you going to get the other values for "Total Transit Target"? i.e. where's "Transit Target 2" and "Transit Target 3" coming from? Other calculations based on business unit? Would a case function be more useful than IF?
Who is determining the target? Could target values change for an object? Could it be possible that air export in future could be another value, at least for some instances? Wouldn't it be better if this information was captured in your db, at least because it would be visible, usable in other report contexts, and maintainable? Plus save a wee bit on processing.
Related
Firstly apologies if this has been answered elsewhere.
I am using QuantLib (via Excel) to build a "standard" bond pricing sheet: prices, yields, spline AND matched-maturity ASW.
I can price the bonds, and have successfully built a forecast (Euribor) and discount (EONIA) curve. I can use qlMakeVanillaSwap() to define a spot-start swap by tenor (eg "1y","2Y" etc) and it works fine. However I am struggling to define a "broken date" swap, ie one which starts T+2 and ends on a given date (and so usually has a short stub on the first payment), to match the bond maturity. All the examples I can find have integer year tenors.
I would be grateful if someone could point me to the right method (can be in python, C++ or Excel). Or do I have to go down the route of creating explicit fixed and floating rate schedules for the swaps?
The answer seems to be: Yes, I do have to create explicit fixed and floating rate schedules, using qlSchedule(), but it turns out to be not too onerous. NB. I am pricing a vanilla EUR ABB vs 6m Euribor swap.
As for pricing, it seems the qlMakeVanillaSwap() is doing a few helpful things in one call, but only IF your swap has a whole-period tenor (eg "1y"). I found the answer for what I wanted to do in the example sheet that came with the QuantLibXL download package.
The other thing that qlMakeVanillaSwap() is doing (in addition to creating the schedules) is setting the Pricing Engine (which is used to discount the cashflows). In the longer version you have to (a) set it yourself using qlInstrumentSetPricingEngine() and (b) pass the result of that call to the Trigger parameter of qlVanillaSwapFairRate(), to establish the calculation order.
Can I have a one-line regex code that matches the values between a pipe line "|" independent of the number if items between the pipe lines. E.g. I have the following regex:
^(.*?)\|(.*?)\|(.*?)\|(.*)\|(.*)\|(.*)\|(.*)\|(.*)\|(.*)\|(.*)\|(.*)\|(.*)$
which works only if I have 12 items. How can I make the same work for e.g. 6 items as well?
([^|]+)+
This is the pattern I've used in the past for that purpose. It matches 1 or more group that does not contain the pipe delimeter.
For Adobe Classification Rule Builder (CRB), there is no way to write a regex that will match an arbitrary number of your pattern and push them to $n capture group. Most regex engines do not allow for this, though some languages offer certain ways to more or less effectively do this as returned arrays or whatever. But CRB doesn't offer that sort of thing.
But, it's mostly pointless to want this anyways, since there's nothing upstream or downstream that really dynamically/automatically accommodates this sort of thing anyways.
For example, there's no way in the CRB interface to dynamically populate the output value with an arbitary $1$2$3[$n..] value, nor is there a way to dynamically generate an arbitrary number of rules in the rule set.
In addition, Adobe Analytics (AA) does not offer arbitrary on-the-fly classification column generation anyways (unless you want to write a script using the Classification API, but you can't say the same for CRBs anyways).
For example if you have
s.eVar1='foo1|foo2';
And you want to classify this into 2 classification columns/reports, you have to go and create them in the classification interface. And then let's say your next value sent in is:
s.eVar1='foo1|foo2|foo3';
Well AA does not automatically create a new classification level for you; you have to go in and add a 3rd, and so on.
So overall, even though it is not possible to return an arbitrary number of captured groups $n in a CRB, there isn't really a reason you need to.
Perhaps it would help if you explain what you are actually trying to do overall? For example, what report(s) do you expect to see?
One common reason I see this sort of "wish" come up for is when someone wants to track stuff like header or breadcrumb navigation links that have an arbitrary depth to them. So they push e.g. a breadcrumb
Home > Electronics > Computers > Monitors > LED Monitors
...or whatever to an eVar (but pipe delimited, based on your question), and then they want to break this up into classified columns.
And the problem is, it could be an arbitrary length. But as mentioned, setting up classifications and rules for them doesn't really accommodate this sort of thing.
Usually the best practice for a scenario like this is to to look at the raw data and see how many levels represents the bulk of your data, on average. For example if you look at your raw eVar report and see even though upwards of like 5 or 6 levels in the values can be found, but you can also see that most of values on average are between 1-3 levels, then you should create 4 classification columns. The first 3 classifications represent the first 3 levels, and the 4th one will have everything else.
So going back to the example value:
Home|Electronics|Computers|Monitors|LED Monitors
You can have:
Level1 => Home
Level2 => Electronics
Level3 => Computers
Level4+ => Monitors|LED Monitors
Then you setup a CRB with 4 rules, one for each of the levels. And you'd use the same regex in all 4 rule rows:
^([^|]+)(?:\|([^|]+))?(?:\|([^|]+))?(?:\|(.+))?
Which will return the following captured groups to use in the CRB outputs:
$1 => Home
$2 => Electronics
$3 => Computers
$4 => Monitors|LED Monitors
Yeah, this isn't the same as having a classification column for every possible length, but it is more practical, because when it comes to analytics, you shouldn't really try to be too granular about things in the first place.
But if you absolutely need to have something for every possible amount of delimited values, you will need to find out what the max possible is and make that many, hard coded.
Or as an alternative to classifications, consider one of the following alternatives:
Use a list prop
Use a list variable (e.g. list1)
Use a Merchandising eVar (product variable syntax)
This isn't exactly the same thing, and they each have their caveats, but you didn't provide details for what you are ultimately trying to get out of the reports, so this may or may not be something you can work with.
Well anyways, hopefully some of this is food for thought for you.
I'm unsure how to model an Alexa skill that involves adjusting numeric parameters and should allow both relative and absolute adjustments.
Utterances could be similar to:
Set temperature to 20 degrees
Raise temperature by 2 degrees
Increase the temperature to 25 degrees
etc.
Idea 1: Create separate intents for increase, decrease, and set
The utterances of these three are going to be nearly identical which is against recommended best practices.
Idea 2: One intent containing a {AdjustmentType} Slot
That {AdjustmentType} slot would contain the values increase|decrease|set and according aliases. This way I'd no longer have multiple intents with very similar utterances but I would additionally need to deal with to and by who change the meaning and basically overrule {AdjustmentType}. I could simply create another slot type for this and deal with it using Lambda. I'm wondering though whether this is really the way to go as I would end up having utterances that contain little more than slots.
What are your thoughts on this?
As {AdjustmentType} is your on slot type the better solution would be to create custom slots for AdjustmentType. You can have multiple utterences for a given intent. It means even if you have only one intent you can configure multiple sample utterences and it will invoke those utterences based on your voice input.
I have a group of treated firms in a country, and for each firm I would like to find the closest match in terms of industry, size and profitability in the rest of the country. I am working on Stata. All I need is to form a control group- could anybody guide me with the code? That'd be greatly appreciated! I currently have the following, which doesn't get me what I need:
psmatch2 (logpension) (treated sector logassets logebitda), logit ate
Here's how you might match on x1 and x2 using Mahalanobis distance as a metric, to get the effect on y from treatment t:
use http://ssc.wisc.edu/sscc/pubs/files/psm, clear
psmatch2 t, mahalanobis(x1 x2) outcome(y) ate
The variable _n1 stores the observation number of the matched control observation for every treatment observation.
The following is a full set of code you can run to find your average treatment effect on the treated (your most important indicator result) and to check if the data is balanced (whether your result is valid). Before you run it, you need to make sure your treated is labeled in the following manner: 0 should be labeled as the control group and 1 should be labeled as the experimental/treatment. "neighbor(1)" means I chose the option nearest-neighbor matching. It basically pairs each treated observation with a control observation whose propensity score is closest in absolute value.
psmatch2 treated sector logassets logebitda, outcome (logpension) neighbor(1) common
After running psmatch, you need to make sure your data is balanced. So you need to run this:
pstest sector logassets logebitda, treated(treated)
if your t-test shows any significance below 0.05, it means your data is not balanced. to check the balance of your data visually, you can also run
psgraph
right after your psmatch2 command.
Good luck!
I need to define a calculated member in MDX (this is SAS OLAP, but I'd appreciate answers from people who work with different OLAP implementations anyway).
The new measure's value should be calculated from an existing measure by applying an additional filter condition. I suppose it will be clearer with an example:
Existing measure: "Total traffic"
Existing dimension: "Direction" ("In" or "Out")
I need to create a calculated member "Incoming traffic", which equals "Total traffic" with an additional filter (Direction = "In")
The problem is that I don't know MDX and I'm on a very tight schedule (so sorry for a newbie question). The best I could come up with is:
([Measures].[Total traffic], [Direction].[(All)].[In])
Which almost works, except for cells with specific direction:
So it looks like the "intrinsic" filter on Direction is overridden with my own filter). I need an intersection of the "intrinsic" filter and my own. My gut feeling was that it has to do with Intersecting [Direction].[(All)].[In] with the intrinsic coords of the cell being evaluated, but it's hard to know what I need without first reading up on the subject :)
[update] I ended up with
IIF([Direction].currentMember = [Direction].[(All)].[Out],
0,
([Measures].[Total traffic], [Direction].[(All)].[In])
)
..but at least in SAS OLAP this causes extra queries to be performed (to calculate the value for [in]) to the underlying data set, so I didn't use it in the end.
To begin with, you can define a new calculated measure in your MDX, and tell it to use the value of another measure, but with a filter applied:
WITH MEMBER [Measures].[Incoming Traffic] AS
'([Measures].[Total traffic], [Direction].[(All)].[In])'
Whenever you show the new measure on a report, it will behave as if it has a filter of 'Direction > In' on it, regardless of whether the Direction dimension is used at all.
But in your case, you WANT the Direction dimension to take precendence when used....so things get a little messy. You will have to detect if this dimension is in use, and act accordingly:
WITH MEMBER [Measures].[Incoming Traffic] AS
'IIF([Direction].currentMember = [Direction].[(All)].[Out],
([Measures].[Total traffic]),
([Measures].[Total traffic], [Directon].[(All)].[In])
)'
To see if the Dimension is in use, we check if the current cell is using OUT. If so we can return Total Traffic as it is. If not, we can tell it to use IN in our tuple.
I think you should put a column in your Total Traffic fact table for IN/OUT indication & create a Dim table for the IN & Out values. You can then analyse your data based on IN & Out.