[openspending-dev] Sanity checking numbers on Minas Gerais' satellite site

Fri Feb 15 09:31:54 UTC 2013

Hi Vitor,

thanks for tracking that down.
I also noticed the issue a while ago when sanity checking some treemaps but couldn't get to the bottom of it.
There should definitely be (regression) tests for this kind of stuff.

Cheers
Stefan

On 14.02.2013, at 23:15 , Vitor Baptista <vitor at vitorbaptista.com> wrote:

> Hey Friedrich,
> 
> Not sure what you mean. But I guess I'm a bit closer founding the culprit.
> 
> I've added a counter into Aggregator.addBreakdown call, and it's called once per breakdown or drilldown. In Minas Gerais' case, 4 times. There, we end up double (or triple) counting amounts that end up being added to the root node. If I comment this line, https://github.com/openspending/openspendingjs/blob/master/lib/aggregator.js#L224, the problem disappears, but I'm still wondering what's the use of that, and what are the complications.
> 
> Cheers,
> Vítor.
> 
> 2013/2/14 Friedrich Lindenberg <friedrich.lindenberg at okfn.org>
> Did you consider the geographic breakdown? Maybe the aggregator only includes sums which are allocated to a region or otherwise discards some of that dimension?
> 
> - Friedrich
> 
> 
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 8:34 PM, Vitor Baptista <vitor at vitorbaptista.com> wrote:
> If you open http://minasgerais.playground.openspending.org/bubblemap.html, and set a breakpoint into aggregator.js, line 183, you can see:
> 
> 
> > nodes.root.amount
> 61554809596.11001
> > total = 0; for (i in nodes.root.breakdowns) { total += nodes.root.breakdowns[i].amount; }
> 73659290793.70004
> > total = 0; for (i in nodes.root.children) { total += nodes.root.children[i].amount; }
> 61554809596.11003
> 
> The difference between nodes.root.amount and the sum of nodes.root.children amounts seems to be just a precision error. But the breakdowns have a huge difference. I'm trying to understand what's happening, but haven't had much luck.
> 
> My first hypothesis was that we're counting a few values twice. I thought about it because, if you check:
> 
> 
> > data.drilldown[0].region.id
> 
> "1"
> 
> I thought that Aggregator.toNode could change that to "root__1", which would conflict with a cofog1 ID. But doesn't seems to be the case.
> 
> Any ideas?
> 
> Cheers,
> Vítor.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Friedrich Lindenberg | OpenSpending & OKFN Labs | @pudo
> http://openspending.org | http://okfnlabs.org | http://pudo.org
> 
> _______________________________________________
> openspending-dev mailing list
> openspending-dev at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/openspending-dev
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/openspending-dev