Hi 538! We invited more than 200 people to a dance party that started at 9:30 p.m. September 5 at a house in Davis, California. After collecting arrival data for 81 people who came, we found that 10:30 -11:00p.m. was the most popular time to arrive. We also collected temperature and humidity data from locations around the house. Part I: Basics Number of people who came: 93 at the peak, but we collected the arrival data for 81 persons. When they arrived: Time  of   arrival   21:08:01   21:09:01   21:10:00   21:11:00   21:12:10   21:24:03   21:24:03   21:32:37   21:32:37   21:37:37   21:37:41   21:38:55   21:38:59   21:39:02   21:41:11   21:41:11   21:41:30   21:42:22   21:48:49   21:48:51   21:56:55   22:00:22   22:00:22   22:11:54   22:11:54   22:11:55   22:11:55   22:11:55   22:17:07   22:17:07   22:17:07   22:19:31   22:19:31   22:24:27   22:24:27   22:25:09   22:27:47   22:27:48   22:28:28   22:28:29   22:35:45   22:35:45   22:35:45   22:35:45   22:38:14   22:39:00   22:39:01   22:40:22   22:40:22   22:42:11   22:42:12   22:42:38   22:43:15   22:44:35   22:44:41   22:45:36   22:45:36   22:46:11   22:46:14   22:52:06   22:57:06   22:57:14   22:57:19   22:57:22   22:57:39   22:58:17   22:58:21   22:59:27   22:59:56   22:59:59   23:00:02   23:00:03   23:00:13   23:01:01   23:01:04   23:02:17   23:02:18   23:09:02   23:12:48   23:16:33   23:16:50   In what types of groups they arrived: Units  in  which  people  arrived   1  person   2  people   3  people   4  people   5  people   12%   25%   10%   42%   11%   Units in which people arrived, broken down by time: Units  in  which  people  arrived  by   time   8   7   6   Group  of  8ive   5   Group  of  two   4   Group  of  four   3   2   Group  of  one   1   Group  of  three   0   9:00   9:30   10:00   10:30   11:00   Couples arrived pretty evenly throughout the night, with the most couples coming at the average most popular time to come, 10:30. Single persons arriving showed a strong preference for arriving late, with the first few single people whom were not close personal friends arriving at 10:30. Groups of four were the most infrequently found groups. Counted  Arrivals   78   71   64   57   50   43   36   29   22   15   8   1   19:40   y  =  -­‐1E-­‐05x2  +  0.0019x  +  0.8795   R²  =  0.9876   20:09   20:38   21:07   21:36   22:04   22:33   23:02   23:31   We asked individuals to fill out a chalkboard with their reported arrival times. When graphed against the counted arrival times, we can see that although we did not count arrivals after 11:15, we can estimate that about 12-20 more people arrived (and by our counts taken at 1:30, there were 93 people present, so we were sort of right!) Reported  Arrivals,  at  the  party   y  =  -­‐1.0476x2  +  8.2381x  -­‐  5.2857   R²  =  0.77671   12:00   11:30   11:00   10:30   10:00   9:30   9:00   0   2   4   6   8   10   12   14   Anticipated attendees, based on facebook data: Attendance  data,  Facebook   200   180   160   140   120   100   80   60   40   20   0   Going   Maybe   We exceeded our expectations by 37 attendees! Invited   16   Part II: Environmental Data We also wanted to collect some data on the physical environment of the party in addition to demographic data. We measured the temperature in six locations throughout the party. In the second graph, we graphed the temperatures with the outside backyard thermometer as the standard to see the effect of the party. Recorded  Temperature,  various   locations   85   80   75   OutsideFront   70   OutsideBack   65   Dance8loorEntry   60   Dance8loorDJ   09/05/14  19:02:40.0   09/05/14  19:27:40.0   09/05/14  19:52:40.0   09/05/14  20:17:40.0   09/05/14  20:42:40.0   09/05/14  21:07:40.0   09/05/14  21:32:40.0   09/05/14  21:57:40.0   09/05/14  22:22:40.0   09/05/14  22:47:40.0   09/05/14  23:12:40.0   09/05/14  23:37:40.0   09/06/14  00:02:40.0   09/06/14  00:27:40.0   09/06/14  00:52:40.0   09/06/14  01:17:40.0   09/06/14  01:42:40.0   09/06/14  02:07:40.0   09/06/14  02:32:40.0   09/06/14  02:57:40.0   09/06/14  03:22:40.0   09/06/14  03:37:40.1   55   Kitchen   Dance8loorWall   As we can see, there seems to be a large discrepancy between the temperature at the front of the house and the temperature at the back. The sensor at the front was right next to an open window, and several individuals came outside from the dancefloor to speak near it. The sensor in the back was also near a center of activity but was taped to a metal pole. There may have been a calibration error, or the differences in outside temperature may reflect reality. Temperature  Deviation  from  outside   backyard  temperature   12   10   8   6   OutsideFront   4   Dance8loorEntryway   Dance8loorDJ   2   Dance8loorWall   09/05/14  19:02:40.0   09/05/14  19:27:40.0   09/05/14  19:52:40.0   09/05/14  20:17:40.0   09/05/14  20:42:40.0   09/05/14  21:07:40.0   09/05/14  21:32:40.0   09/05/14  21:57:40.0   09/05/14  22:22:40.0   09/05/14  22:47:40.0   09/05/14  23:12:40.0   09/05/14  23:37:40.0   09/06/14  00:02:40.0   09/06/14  00:27:40.0   09/06/14  00:52:40.0   09/06/14  01:17:40.0   09/06/14  01:42:40.0   09/06/14  02:07:40.0   09/06/14  02:32:40.0   09/06/14  02:57:40.0   09/06/14  03:22:40.0   0   Kitchen   A note: The purple, orange, and green lines were all sensors placed in various spots on the dancefloor. The blue line describes the social confluence between the backyard and the dancefloor that happened in the kitchen. Some observations: 1.) As we can see, the dancefloor was actually cooler than the kitchen where a lot of people were hanging out (the dancefloor had some footloose innovators who added two fans and opened some windows). We estimate that the dancefloor would have been 10-12 degrees warmer had the fans not been there. 2.) The only time at which the dancefloor was warmer than the kitchen was when people came from all over the house to dance to a remixed version of the Imperial March. 3.) Additionally, the temperature was lower right near the DJ,a buffer zone of cool air that was about 2 feet around the DJ table. This was possibly due to the presence of the speakers limiting dancing. Finally, we measured the humidity of the party! We’re not really sure what to make of this, other than that we had a party on our hands. 35   30   25   20   15   10   5   0   09/05/14   09/05/14   09/05/14   09/05/14   09/05/14   09/05/14   09/05/14   09/05/14   09/05/14   09/05/14   09/05/14   09/05/14   09/05/14   09/06/14   09/06/14   09/06/14   09/06/14   09/06/14   09/06/14   09/06/14   09/06/14   09/06/14   Relative  Humidity  of  the   dance@loor   Part III: The measurements continue Other miscellaneous collected data: Beverages  reported   Essence  of  the   vanquished,  12   ALLI,  1   Good  Beer,  16   KAVA,  4   Wine,  7   The  blood  of   my  enemies,  4   Crappy  Beer,  2   Liquor,  9   H2O,  3   Tea,  2   Most visitors were drinking beer (most of those supping on the tears of their foes/vanquished were also drinking beers). Thanks for issuing such a cool call for data! In Excel solidarity, A bunch of Davis Nerds.