Forum Discussion
Relationship issue with Measure
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...
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.
- 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.
- 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
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.
- 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
- 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
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.
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.
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)) ) )
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
I cannot see the file - would you please create a new link to the file?
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...