nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Quantiles in areas within a layer?

HectorBorro1

I have a layer with polygons that have smaller areas within. Think counties/municipalities within a state.

The 3 fields in my table are STATE, MUNICIPALITY and a NUMERIC VALUE within the municipality (from 0 to 1) that needs to be mapped.

The problem is that the Quantiles are calculated from all the values in the table (22k) and I need them to be calculated and displayed by STATE, so every state need to have the 5 quantile classes within them.

How can I achieve this without having to create a separate layer by STATE (120)?

I tried some sort of normalization, but my STATE value is text and therefore not usable...

Find more posts tagged with

Cartographic

Accepted answers

DanPatterson_Retired

there are many classification schemes, for example std deviations.

I prefer to produce a classification scheme that is derived from the histogram of the actual data, since any false presumptions of normalcy in the data can be dealt with. If you are interested in between region variations then I would use one scheme. If you are interest at within region variations, then I see the point of a separate one for each region, but I would also advise you to provide the measure of centrality and dispersion the label or within the legend so that people are forewarned that the visual pattern for the with region data is based upon these measures and their absolute values should not be directly compared to other regions. Should wish to normalize the scheme based on their measures, I would still report them. People sometimes get complacent when making visual comparison without knowing what the underlying statistical measures are (ie two regions showing a non-clustered normal looking pattern, can differ markedly in their fundamental values) In short... lie with statistics and lie with maps should be avoided at all costs

All comments

HectorBorro1

Hi Dan Patterson, I've been thinking about your valued reply and now I'm in the heat as having to produce a map layout for each of the 150 areas...

Any Ideas on how I can automate this? Otherwise it will consume more than a week of my time just to clip and separate each polygon with its internal areas...

DanPatterson_Retired

there are many classification schemes, for example std deviations.

HectorBorro1

Indeed, I'm referring to the quantiles symbology. This is quite useful to understanding relationships between areas and their values.

Well, the comparison will be more within the state than across states, that's why I need the "quantilization" to be done by municipalities...

As all the values go from 0 to 1, I don't see another classiication scheme to use. Any ideas?

Here's an example I did by CLIP the municipalities to the state:

Nationwide:

Only one state: Much clearer classification and what I'm looking for, but impractical for 150 states as this will leave me with 150 layers!

DanPatterson_Retired

I assume you are referring to the quantiles symbology, since there is no way of calculating the quantile values for attributes in a table. In the case of symbology, you have to produce the layers. I would suggest that if you are going to be doing state by state comparisons, that you come up with a standard classification scheme so one can see how they stack up against one another. If you are referring to something different, an image would help

Join the Conversation

Signed in members can post, follow updates, and more. New here? Register a free account.

Quick Links

Community Help
Find useful guides, FAQs, and documents to help you navigate and make the most of Esri Community.