Relationship issue with Measure

[Anonymous]

Hi Experts

I have been looking at this problem for 3 days and cannot see why my table to the right does not show the same p-value for each of the month periods. 

Scenario

If you select product id 72201092  which has a p-value of 0.013345 when you look at the table to the right for each period (date) the p-vlaue os 1.0000 when it should be the same for each data point. 

Sample file. https://www.dropbox.com/s/jj62h2vxtepm5yd/Sample__Test%281%29.pbix?dl=0

it seems that there is no relationship between meausre and month field.

[freder1ck]

Hi @Anonymous,

Nice dashboard and some advanced (to me) stats! I've tagged this with #statistics to get the attention of the stats geniuses. 

When I click each month bar below, I notice that the p-value is 1. Wouldn't this be correct? That is, the correlation between month 10 and the dataset of month 10 only would be one. 

Your data model and relationships look pretty good. I have a couple of suggestions. 

1. Your calendar table is monthly not daily so it can't be marked as a date table. Be sure to turn off auto date time for this report in settings (Options and Settings: options: Current File: Time Intelligence: Auto date/time). Doing this will reduce your file size.
2. You have multiple transaction tables/fact tables connected to a shared lookup or dimension table with bi-directional filtering, which can create ambiguity. For complaint description, it's 1-1 but you can actually set it as 1-many or many-1 (put the many on the complaint table side). Not sure why you set Parts to bi-directional. If it's to cross-filter slicers, then there's a better way. 

organized data model

[Anonymous]

here is a more up to date file, replacing the older file from yesterday.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/w4p1z5ueibwrwxd/Sample__Test.%281%29.pbix?dl=0

[Anonymous]

I cannot see the file - would you please create a new link to the file?

[Anonymous]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/il7oyejsdzze3n6/Sample__Test..pbix?dl=0

here you go...sorry

[Anonymous]

based on your excellent feedback, if you take from PMS_TM1_Sales_vol Table column (month_date) and add that to the table it give you the right p-value but errors on the inidivdual data points shows 846 as a constant number for 12 periods.

As opposed to the actual value (see image  below) - fixed one problem another one comes along.

[freder1ck]

Haven't been able to look at this a whole lot the past couple of days. The problem of a wrong value in a total is generally the result of evaluating a measure with no filters. The fix is either to do a SUMX of the measure over the distinct months, or to have an IF statement that evaluates the measure differently if there are no filters.

[Anonymous]

Another expert also tried

I've just tried to see what values EARLIER formula returns, and it seems like it returns the same value as if there were no EARLIER function.

I created the measure below to check the output:

__testS = 
VAR Mytable1 = ADDCOLUMNS(VALUES(PMS_FINANCIAL_PDS[Month Start]);"CountComplaints";CALCULATE(COUNTROWS(PMS_COMPLAINT));"Index";RANKX(PMS_FINANCIAL_PDS;PMS_FINANCIAL_PDS[Month Start];;;Dense))
VAR cc = 
SUMX(Mytable1; 
    SUMX(Mytable1;
        EARLIER([CountComplaints])
    )
)
VAR i = 
SUMX(Mytable1; 
    SUMX(Mytable1;
        EARLIER([Index])
    )
)
RETURN
    i & ", " & cc

[freder1ck]

Instead of EARLIER, you could set variables to fix values outside the SUMX. You could also preview the results of your MyTable by doing a new table from the modeling tab. You could also use ADDCOLUMNS to preview the amounts at the row level.

[Anonymous]

hi freder1ck

could you kindly demo this table - i follow what you are saying but slighly confused at the start. i'll happily add a demo file if you need one. thanks once again.

[freder1ck · Accepted solution]

New Table

My Table = 
VAR OuterComplaints = COUNTROWS ( PMS_COMPLAINT )
RETURN
ADDCOLUMNS (
    VALUES ( PMS_FINANCIAL_PDS[Month Start] ),
    "CountComplaints", CALCULATE ( COUNTROWS ( PMS_COMPLAINT ) ),
    "Index", RANKX ( PMS_FINANCIAL_PDS, PMS_FINANCIAL_PDS[Month Start],,, DENSE ),
    "Outer Complaints", OuterComplaints
)

Something along these lines...

[Anonymous]

hi Freder1ck

firstly many thanks, i believe the answer lies with the following measure.

__s = VAR Mytable1 = ADDCOLUMNS(VALUES(PMS_FINANCIAL_PDS[Month Start]),"CountComplaints",CALCULATE(COUNTROWS(PMS_COMPLAINT)),"Index",RANKX(PMS_FINANCIAL_PDS,PMS_FINANCIAL_PDS[Month Start],,,Dense))
RETURN
SUMX(Mytable1, 
    SUMX(Mytable1,
        IF([Index]>EARLIER([Index])&&[CountComplaints]<EARLIER([CountComplaints]), 1,
        IF([Index]>EARLIER([Index])&&[CountComplaints]>EARLIER([CountComplaints]), -1))
    )
)

[Anonymous]

Hi Expert

When I click each month bar below, I notice that the p-value is 1. Wouldn't this be correct? That is, the correlation between month 10 and the dataset of month 10 only would be one. - How could we make this change this correlation from 1 to 1 to 1 to 12 oranother number...

[Anonymous]

Hi Freder!ck

When I click each month bar below, I notice that the p-value is 1. Wouldn't this be correct? - NO should be the value in the table for each data point

That is, the correlation between month 10 and the dataset of month 10 only would be one.  - As above

Your data model and relationships look pretty good. I have a couple of suggestions. 

1. Your calendar table is monthly not daily so it can't be marked as a date table. Be sure to turn off auto date time for this report in settings (Options and Settings: options: Current File: Time Intelligence: Auto date/time). Doing this will reduce your file size. - Done may thanks
2. You have multiple transaction tables/fact tables connected to a shared lookup or dimension table with bi-directional filtering, which can create ambiguity. For complaint description, it's 1-1 but you can actually set it as 1-many or many-1 (put the many on the complaint table side). Not sure why you set Parts to bi-directional. If it's to cross-filter slicers, then there's a better way.  - You are correct on the bi-direction realtion ship

one quick question how do you tag a question to #statistics for future reference