Challenge #3: Running Averages

[sprodger]

My Solution:

Spoiler

This post has been edited by Community Moderation to redact sensitive attachments. The original attachment has been replaced by post_placeholder.txt.

[AmNotARobot]

My workflow is in-elegant, but it works and the results match...

Learned a lot as a consequence. Thank  you

This post has been edited by Community Moderation to redact sensitive attachments. The original attachment has been replaced by post_placeholder.txt.

[MarcusDoesBI]

Learnt a lot from this one.  Can deffo see myself using this at work in the near future.

Spoiler

This post has been edited by Community Moderation to redact sensitive attachments. The original attachment has been replaced by post_placeholder.txt.

[RichoBsJ]

Hi! Here my solution 🙂

This post has been edited by Community Moderation to redact sensitive attachments. The original attachment has been replaced by post_placeholder.txt.

[Verenala4]

Hi,

This one was definitely tougher for me (mostly because it took me a few minutes to understand the task).

My solution is similar to many other replies (I did use the data cleansing tool in addition). I am sure there is a quicker way to get the result but this is what I got.

V

Spoiler

This post has been edited by Community Moderation to redact sensitive attachments. The original attachment has been replaced by post_placeholder.txt.

[nilaysameer]

Confounded me - Till I saw the setting on the multi-row formula to make rows values closest to existing for those that do not exist. I would have expected averages to work out no matter what pervious rows were.

This post has been edited by Community Moderation to redact sensitive attachments. The original attachment has been replaced by post_placeholder.txt.

[Thableaus]

Challenge #3 - Done!

Spoiler

This post has been edited by Community Moderation to redact sensitive attachments. The original attachment has been replaced by post_placeholder.txt.

[rfergus]

Didn't impute null values like the official solution so it didn't have the same ramp up, ramp down values which I think gives a better result.

Spoiler

This post has been edited by Community Moderation to redact sensitive attachments. The original attachment has been replaced by post_placeholder.txt.

[Johannesm2]

Hi,

Please see attached for my solution workflow. One comment - I did some testing to compare my output with the suggested output, and it seems like the one provided includes some incorrect values. For example, if you look at RecordID #73 in the r6mo_d_CAGI field, then compare that to the supporting data, something seems off. Please let me know if that makes sense or if I can provide more details.

Lastly, is there a way I can check which challenges I've been given credit for?

Thanks!

Johannes

This post has been edited by Community Moderation to redact sensitive attachments. The original attachment has been replaced by post_placeholder.txt.

[JudyN]

Hello,

Can anyone share how to derive the calculation for the below?

Month: Value: Running 3 mo. Average:

1           218       218

2           200       212

3           272       233

I am confused because shouldn't it be the following?

Month: Value: Running 3 mo. Average:

1           218       218               (218/1=218)

2           200       212               (218+200/2=209)

3           272       233               (218+200+272/3=230)

In the output of the answer, I also see below which is confusing.

Month: Value: Running 3 mo. Average (r3mo_u_CAGI):

1           218       218

2           200       212

3           272       230

Please help to understand the calculation. Thanks.