Forum Discussion

Anonymous's avatar
Anonymous
Not applicable
6 years ago
Solved

Relationship issue with Measure

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 ...
Need Help
  • freder1ck's avatar
    freder1ck
    6 years ago

     

    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...

     

freder1ck's avatar
freder1ck
Kudo Kingpin
6 years ago

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's avatar
Anonymous
Not applicable
6 years ago

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.

 

    • Anonymous's avatar
      Anonymous
      Not applicable
      6 years ago

      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's avatar
      Anonymous
      Not applicable
      6 years ago

      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's avatar
        freder1ck
        Kudo Kingpin
        6 years ago
        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.