Entries in charts (138)
I won't claim to understand or attempt to explain the math behind the investolution.com charts that predict the overall stock market for the next 40 days.
This page contains the prediction for S&P 500 Index minimum and maximum daily closing prices over the next 40 trading days.
It is predicted that S&P 500 Index will not close under 1,178 and over 1,295 between the dates September 19, 2008 and November 14, 2008. This prediction method was accurate for 71.0% and 95.0% of the cases (for minimum and maximum predictions, respectively) within an error margin of +-5% in the past.
Thanks Andrew for sending in the link.
To complete the week of Olympic Infographics from the NYTimes.com, they have created a page to summarize all of the infographics they created. They've been adding to it every day, so it won't actually be complete until the Olympics are over.
The History of World Records from NYTimes.com shows how the world record in a number of Summer Olympic events has progressively been beaten over the last 100 years. In this chart, the Men's 100m Freestyle record was beaten three times this year improving the world record by 0.45 seconds. Similar events are all charted together, so you can see other freestyle events on the same chart.
First, I'm not pushing any particular political agenda. There's considerable debate around this chart, so I don't want to start any arguments. The debate isn't around the validity of the data, but about how it's being presented. The information is freely available from the U.S. Department of the Treasury and the Bureau of the Public Debt.
Second, I like that this chart takes a simple bar chart and adds a few more layers of information. At its root, this is a timeline of the increase in the national debt based on the federal budget by year. Then layered on top of that are the presidents in office that year, some color coding, the political party controlling the White House and highlights for record years.
Third, just to share the reasons for the debate. This is a great example of data being visualized with a specific agenda in mind. Obviously, this is a chart framed to make Republicans look bad, and Democrats look good. The debate centers around a few issues like programs started by one President will carry into the term of another President and more importantly that the political party controlling Congress actually has more impact on the federal budget than the President does.
The BBC online has a site dedicated to charting food prices around the world called : The cost of food: Facts and figures. Mostly simple charts, but they've found a handful of really good information. They could make these prettier, but they get the message across. Each chart tells a simple story.
NameTrends.net is a fantastic interactive site that charts and maps the popularity of baby names over the last century in the U.S. You can look at the most popular names, or search for specific names to see their results. The chart above shows the top 20 baby names from the 2000's decade (10 boys and 10 girls). You can see that those names also had some popularity at the end of the 19th century.
The site also allows you to map the name popularity by state. The slider across the top allows you to see the geographic distribution by year.
Found on Information Aesthetics.
From the Mozilla website, and obviously a part of their sales pitch. I picked up that the calendar arrangement of the squares is in fact correct for 2006. Its getting the small things right that help make good infographics.
An independent study shows that, in 2006, IE users were vulnerable to online threats 78% of the time. Firefox users? Only 2%.
“At risk” defined as publicly available exploits with no patch. Source: “Internet Explorer users Unsafe for 284 Days in 2006” Brian Krebs, Washington Post, 1/4/2007
One of the projects from Information Esthetics, the Map of Scientific Paradigms by Kevin Boyack, Dick Klavans and W. Bradford Paley shows how scientific papers in different fields are connected through their citations.
As to what the image depicts, it was constructed by sorting roughly 800,000 scientific papers into 776 different scientific paradigms (shown as red and blue circular nodes) based on how often the papers were cited together by authors of other papers. Links (curved lines) were made between the paradigms that shared common members, then treated as rubber bands, holding similar paradigms closer to one another when a physical simulation forced them all apart: thus the layout derives directly from the data. Larger paradigms have more papers. Labels list common words unique to each paradigm.
Thanks for sending in the link Alwyn!