MHB Compound bar chart - to round or not to round? (percentages)

  • Thread starter Thread starter 3vo
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
When creating a compound bar chart, sub data percentages can be non-integer values, leading to the question of whether to round them. It's generally acceptable to leave the percentages as they are or round them to a specific number of decimal places, depending on what looks best visually. If rounding is chosen, it should be done normally, where 0.5 rounds up and values below that round down. It's important to note that rounding may result in totals not equaling 100%, which is a common occurrence and should not be a concern. Ultimately, the decision on rounding should prioritize clarity and informativeness in the chart presentation.
3vo
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Hi guys,

I'm currently drawing a compound bar chart.
As I understand, this is type of bar chart which involves sub data within each grouping. The sub data is incorporated into each of their grouping bar as a percentage out of 100% of that bar. So basically the bar is 100% in total and the sub data is drawn into the bar, as their respective percentage of the bar. (I could of prob explained that a lot better).

Anyway... I've drawn up my chart and worked the percentages of each sub data within each grouping out of a 100%. However for some of the groups, the sub data are NOT integers.

Do I round these figures up to a whole number? or a specific number of dp or sf? What do I do if after rounding the total doesn't add up to 100%?

Or is it better to leave them as they are and try to best incorporate them into the graph?

An example of my data: Imagine a table below (dont know how to do one here)
First number is freq, 2nd is %
Monday | Tuesday |
Red 7 30.'43% 3 18.75%
Blue 10 43.'47% 7 43.75%
Black 6 26.08% 6 36.5%
Totals 23 100% 16 100%
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
3vo said:
Do I round these figures up to a whole number? or a specific number of dp or sf? What do I do if after rounding the total doesn't add up to 100%?

Or is it better to leave them as they are and try to best incorporate them into the graph?

Hi 3vo! :)

Yep. Leave them as they are, or round them to some significant number of digits.
Up to you basically. What you think looks best and is most informative.

But if you do round them, don't round up, but round normally.
0.5 goes up, 0.4999 goes down.

And if they don't add up to 100%, don't worry about it.
That's normal - the result of rounding errors.
This is known and accepted.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top