- Question: Q: How do I make a logarithmic chart using my own Data in Numbers? I need to make a chart using logarithmic data for a flood distribution chart and can not get the Data to plot the way I would like, with a Log scale along the X Axis and my discharge values along the Y axis.
- Download Strong Workout Tracker Gym Log and enjoy it on your iPhone, iPad, and iPod touch. The most intuitive workout and exercise tracker for any fitness routine. Strong is the simplest and most intuitive workout tracker, designed to help you get better results from your workouts.
Numbers Explained. Numbers is an Apple-developed spreadsheet application that is packaged as part of iWork. With Numbers, you can create powerful spreadsheets using a variety of templates which can be wirelessly transferred between iDevices via iCloud or exported to a different format and shared with your colleagues. On the Format tab, in the Current Selection group, click the arrow in the Chart Elements box, and then click the axis that you want to select. On the Format tab, in the Current Selection group, click Format Selection. Under Axis Options, Click Number, and then in the Category box, select the number format. To view the system log file, click 'system.log.' To browse different application-specific logs, look through the other folders here. 'Library/Logs' is your current Mac user account's user-specific application log folder, '/Library/Logs' is the system-wide application log folder, and '/var/log' generally contains logs for low.
In Custom Axis, Y = 1, 2, 4, 8, 16 I showed axes with base 2 logarithmic scales in both Excel 2003 and 2007. In Excel 2003 it is necessary to transform the data to get the intended result. In Excel 2007, the axis can be achieved with the untransformed data.
In the previous post, the data was widely spaced, so it filled a base 10 log scale with two decades with only a reasonable amount of space above and below the data.
If the data isn't spread out so nicely, you lose the opportunity to use a regular logarithmic axis. We'll look at this for Excel 2003 and for Excel 2007, and then we'll look at native logarithmic axis labeling.
Excel 2003
The data in the table below has a narrow range, from 8 to 12, and the range spans a power of ten.
Here is the data charted using a linear axis.
When we apply a logarithmic scale axis, the data spans across 10, so by default the axis ranges from 1 to 100. The data is squeezed into the middle of the chart.
Since Excel 2003 only permits the axis to begin and end at powers of ten, we're stuck with this, and the fanciest labeling doesn't make the data easier to read.
Following the steps in Custom Axis, Y = 1, 2, 4, 8, 16 we can plot the logs of the data on a linear scale, from log(8) = 0.903 to log(12) = 1.079.
We can hide the default labels, add a series with points where we want our custom labels using log(Y) data, and use the Y values as data labels.
Here's the chart. With such a narrow spread in the data, it's not immediately apparent that the Y scale isn't linear, but if you took out your ruler (you still have one of those, right? you're not completely digital?) you can tell that the span between 8 and 9 is larger than that between 11 and 12.
Excel 2007
As described in Custom Axis, Y = 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, Excel 2007 makes working with log scales a bit easier.
Here is the data plotted on a linear scale.
Here is the same chart, with the scale transformed to a logarithmic scale, using the default base 10. Same as Excel 2003.
Here the log scale has been changed to base 2.
In 2007 we can change the min and max of the log axis to values other than 10 (i.e., other than the base). Here the axis ranges from 8 to 80, still a decade on the base 10 log scale. Instead of the minor ticks being located at multiples of ten (20, 30, 40, 50,…), they are located at multiples of 8 (16, 24, 32, 40,…)
We can also change the maximum so that the axis spans a non-integral number of cycles. Here the maximum is 12 to fit the data. This looks the same using base 10 or base 2.
We don't get labels other than at the minimum because the axis spans less than a power of base 10 or of base 2, but we can use the same protocol as above to add points with data labels. The advantage Excel 2007 has over 2003 is that we can use the actual values to locate the points, and we can simply use the Y value data label option. In Excel 2003 we had to use the log of the Y positions, and either manually edit the labels, or use a third-party add-in. (Even though the add-in is great, it still is something extra required.)
Finished. Again, just like Excel 2003, only easier.
Log Axis Labeling
Below are a few variations on a log axis that spans six cycles. These were produced in Excel 2003, but they would be the same in 2007. The scales show both major and minor tick marks, which are available for any base except for 2.
The first scale runs from 1 to 1,000,000, and the second from 1/1,000,000 to 1. The third and fourth run from 1 to 1,000,000 like the first, but instead of the default major unit (major tick spacing) of 10, the third has a major unit of 100 and the fourth of 1000. The minor tick spacing is ignored.
Excel Chart Logarithmic Scale
If you use the default major unit, minor ticks are placed at multiples of the number at the start of the cycle. In the Excel 2007 chart above that used a base 10 log scale and ranged from 8 to 80, the minor ticks were at multiples of 8 (16, 24, 32, 40,…). In our first axis below, the bottom of the decade is at 1, so minor ticks are at multiples of 1 (2, 3, 4, 5,…). The the second axis, the bottom of the decade is at 0.1, so minor ticks are at 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, and so forth.
In 2003, when the non-default major unit is used, the space between major tick marks is divided up as if it were a single cycle (not two or three. Instead of the ticks being located at 2, 3, 4, etc, for a major unit of two cycles, the minor ticks are located at the square of the one-cycle values, that is, at 4, 9, 16, etc. For a major unit of three cycles, the minor ticks are located at the cube of the one-cycle values, that is, at 8, 27, 64, etc. Interesting.
Excel 2007 does this a bit differently, and for a two-cycle major unit, it makes sense. The first pair of axes below show a scale of 1 to 100, first with the major unit defined by the default one cycle, then by two cycles. I've added labels to many of the minor ticks to help illustrate this behavior. The two cycle axis has the first minor tick where the first cycle ends and the next cycle starts, then the rest of the ticks are where they were defined for the second cycle. This puts the ticks at the very logical values of 10, 20, 30, etc.
With larger spans between major ticks, Excel 2007 seems to get confused. The second pair of axes shows three cycles with major units of one and three cycles. The three-cycle axis places minor ticks where the two-axis tick did in the first instance, at multiples of 10 between 10 and 90. There is no tick at 100, nor any between 100 and 1000. Not shown is a four-cycle axis. This puts minor ticks at multiples of 10 between 10 and 90, and at multiples of 1000 between 1000 and 9000, but skips the decade between 100 and 1000.
– – –
This is pretty obscure. It doesn't make sense to use multiple cycles as the major unit. In a two-cycle major unit, Excel 2007 uses more logical minor tick spacing, while the minor tick spacing is broken for larger major units. Excel 2003 uses a consistent minor tick spacing which is logical in its own way, but not readily understandable.
Governments' stark daily figures on the spread of coronavirus are difficult to compare across countries, and may be significant undercounts. But the data needed to analyse the more reliable and comparable excess mortality metric are only available in a few jurisdictions, leaving these official case and death counts the best available data for much of the world.
Related
- Coronavirus tracker: an up-to-date visual narrative of the spread of Covid-19
- Lockdown monitor: Tracking efforts to ease national lockdowns and reopen economies
- Video: Explaining the design tradeoffs in epidemic trajectory charts
US states in detail
Since mid-March, lockdowns and social distancing procedures in the United States have been largely managed on a state-by-state basis. President Trump urged governors to use their latitude over reopenings, and several had raced to lift restrictions on business before meeting CDC guidelines on declining case counts as well as the need for widespread testing and contact tracers. But the majority are taking a phased approach to reopening.
Cases or deaths
Comparing the spread of coronavirus in different countries is difficult using the data being released by governments. Confirmed case counts depend heavily on the extent of countries' very different testing regimes, so higher totals may simply reflect more testing.
Deaths are somewhat more reliable, but remain problematic because countries have different rules for what deaths to include in their official numbers. The most notable difference between countries' Covid mortality figures is whether or not they include deaths outside hospitals, particularly in care homes. Some countries like France and the UK have even changed which deaths they include during the course of the epidemic. Between May 25 and July 3, Spain's data was not readily comparable to its earlier figures, and was temporarily removed from the chart until a revised time series was published.
For either measure, we use a seven-day rolling average to adjust for the impact of administrative delays to reporting new data over weekends.
Logarithmic Chart Vs Linear Chart
The FT is tracking excess mortality — the difference between deaths from all causes during the pandemic and the historic seasonal average — in the handful of countries and municipalities that publish suitably recent data, and has reported on the specific circumstances in Mexico, Russia, South Africa, Turkey and the UK.'
Logarithmic or linear scales
The vertical axis of our charts are shown using a logarithmic scale, where the same distance on the scale represents multiplying or dividing by the same amount, instead of adding or subtracting the same amount as is the case with a linear scale. Log scales are particularly suited to displaying trends in relative rates of change, like a virus spreading. By comparing the slopes of two lines, a log scale allows us to compare epidemics at a very early stage with those that are much more advanced, even though they have very different absolute numbers of cases or deaths.
On a log scale, an epidemic looks like a steep diagonal line that flattens towards a horizontal line as its rate of growth slows. On the more familiar linear scale, the same data looks like a hockey stick shooting upwards, which gives a better sense of the overall size of each country's epidemic.
Adjusting for population
Logarithmic Charts In Numbers For Mac Os
Unusually for cross-national data, adjusting for population isn't strictly necessary when analysing the speed at which a virus spreads. Viruses don't respect borders, and the rate at which they spread is not affected by the overall population of the affected country.
Population matters least in the early stages of an epidemic because cases are likely to be highly concentrated in particular regions like Hubei or Lombardy. Later, though, viewing the values per 100,000 people gives a sense of the pandemic's relative strain on countries' resources. Switching to the 'per 100k' view won't alter the shape of each country's curve, but will reorder them relative to one another.
Adjusted for population, small countries with broad definitions for what cases or deaths to include in their data will look particularly badly affected, while epidemics concentrated in parts of a very populous country look surprisingly small. Try changing this setting while comparing Belgium to the US or China.'
We hide countries with populations under 80,000 to avoid distorting the scale of population-adjusted charts. You can still search from them, though: Try looking at San Marino and Andorra; both European microstates have large proportions of their population affected.
Sources
Unless otherwise stated below, national data comes from the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control.
Data for the United States, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the US Virgin Islands and Northern Mariana Islands come from The Covid Tracking Project. Data for New York state has been adjusted to redistribute nursing home deaths that were added to the official death toll on May 7 in proportion to its original data. Data for New Jersey has been adjusted to redistribute 1,854 probable Covid-19 deaths that were added to the official death toll on June 25 in proportion to its original data. To improve comparability with other countries on the daily death toll chart, the US data on the cross-national chart has been adjusted to begin displaying seven days after first averaging three daily deaths. During this period, there was a localised outbreak of Covid-19 in Washington state.
UK deaths and new cases data, and all data from that nations of the UK, comes from the UK Government coronavirus dashboard. Deaths data uses the new defintion of Covid deaths as those which occurred within 28 days a positive test. On July 2, the UK's methodology for reporting positive cases changed to remove 30,302 duplicates identified when combining testing data from hospitals ('pillar 1') and private sector labs ('pillar 2'). Prior to July 2, UK cumulative cases data are the sum of the revised totals published by Public Health England, Public Health Scotland, Public Health Wales, and the Northern Ireland Department of Health. On October 3 and 4, Englandadded 15,841 positive cases that it had failed to include in its daily reporting of statistics between September 25 and October 2. The England and UK time series for this period have been adjusted to redistribute these deaths in proportion to the previously known distribution of the data.
Data for Sweden after April 5 is calculated from the daily difference of cumulative figures published Tuesday through Fridays by the Swedish Public Health Agency. Unlike most other countries, Sweden uses 'date of incidence' figures for its official death toll, so these 'date of reporting' figures will not match official data for the most recent days.
Cases data for Turkey reflects the 'new patients' metric that excludes asymptomatic cases.
On October 5, Mexico's health ministry said a record increase in cumulative cases and deaths was due to the inclusion of data dating back to June. The time series between June 1 and October 8 has been adjusted to redistribute an estimated 23,845 cases and 2,450 deaths in proportion to the previously known distribution of the data.
On October 1, Argentina added 3,050 deaths to its official cumulative death toll, reflecting previous deaths recorded in the province of Buenos Aires that had not been attributed to a date. The time series up until that date has been adjusted to redistribute these deaths in proportion to the previously known distribution of the data.
On September 6, Bolivia added 1,610 deaths to its official cumulative death toll without explaination. The time series up until that date has been adjusted to redistribute these deaths in proportion to the previously known distribution of the data.
On September 6, Ecuadoradjusted its methodology to cease distinguishing betwween confirmed and suspected Covid-19. This resulted in 3,752 additional deaths previously classified as suspected being added to its official cumulative death toll. The time series up until that date has been adjusted to redistributed these deaths in proportion to the previously known distribution of the data.
Data for Italy before August 17 has been adjusted to redistribute 154 deaths from March, April and May that the Parma Local Health Authority had not previously reported. These have been distributed in proportion to the previously-known data for the Emilia-Romagna region in those three months.
Data for Peru before July 23 has been adjusted to redistribute 3,688 deaths added in a revision on July 22 and 3,658 deaths added in a revision announced on August 13. Both adjustments distributed the additional deaths in proportion to the previously available data.
How to enter your passcode on a cracked iPhone screen: Hold down the Home button to activate Siri. Say 'Turn on VoiceOver'. Press the Home button twice to bring up the passcode screen. On an iPhone X/XS/XR/11, if this brings up Apple Pay, instead swipe up as you normally would and leave your finger there until Siri says 'Lift for home. Mar 15, 2016 AssistiveTouch works by placing a small button on your Home screen. When you tap it, a handy menu will appear allowing you to access actions that are normally triggered using gestures or buttons. If you've broken your home button, you can enable AssistiveTouch by opening the iPhone's Settings app. Head to 'General'. Dec 18, 2018 Method 2 – How to Unlock iPhone with Unresponsive Screen (using iTunes) If your data is already backup, then you can restore your iPhone and start using it again. Here's the process. Download & Open iTunes. Go to recovery mode, by press & hold the home button and power button simultaneously. Nov 18, 2019 Breaking your iPhone's screen is one thing, but breaking the Home button can be even worse, especially if it means you just can't use your phone. Thankfully, there are ways to work around the problem.
Here is the data plotted on a linear scale.
Here is the same chart, with the scale transformed to a logarithmic scale, using the default base 10. Same as Excel 2003.
Here the log scale has been changed to base 2.
In 2007 we can change the min and max of the log axis to values other than 10 (i.e., other than the base). Here the axis ranges from 8 to 80, still a decade on the base 10 log scale. Instead of the minor ticks being located at multiples of ten (20, 30, 40, 50,…), they are located at multiples of 8 (16, 24, 32, 40,…)
We can also change the maximum so that the axis spans a non-integral number of cycles. Here the maximum is 12 to fit the data. This looks the same using base 10 or base 2.
We don't get labels other than at the minimum because the axis spans less than a power of base 10 or of base 2, but we can use the same protocol as above to add points with data labels. The advantage Excel 2007 has over 2003 is that we can use the actual values to locate the points, and we can simply use the Y value data label option. In Excel 2003 we had to use the log of the Y positions, and either manually edit the labels, or use a third-party add-in. (Even though the add-in is great, it still is something extra required.)
Finished. Again, just like Excel 2003, only easier.
Log Axis Labeling
Below are a few variations on a log axis that spans six cycles. These were produced in Excel 2003, but they would be the same in 2007. The scales show both major and minor tick marks, which are available for any base except for 2.
The first scale runs from 1 to 1,000,000, and the second from 1/1,000,000 to 1. The third and fourth run from 1 to 1,000,000 like the first, but instead of the default major unit (major tick spacing) of 10, the third has a major unit of 100 and the fourth of 1000. The minor tick spacing is ignored.
Excel Chart Logarithmic Scale
If you use the default major unit, minor ticks are placed at multiples of the number at the start of the cycle. In the Excel 2007 chart above that used a base 10 log scale and ranged from 8 to 80, the minor ticks were at multiples of 8 (16, 24, 32, 40,…). In our first axis below, the bottom of the decade is at 1, so minor ticks are at multiples of 1 (2, 3, 4, 5,…). The the second axis, the bottom of the decade is at 0.1, so minor ticks are at 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, and so forth.
In 2003, when the non-default major unit is used, the space between major tick marks is divided up as if it were a single cycle (not two or three. Instead of the ticks being located at 2, 3, 4, etc, for a major unit of two cycles, the minor ticks are located at the square of the one-cycle values, that is, at 4, 9, 16, etc. For a major unit of three cycles, the minor ticks are located at the cube of the one-cycle values, that is, at 8, 27, 64, etc. Interesting.
Excel 2007 does this a bit differently, and for a two-cycle major unit, it makes sense. The first pair of axes below show a scale of 1 to 100, first with the major unit defined by the default one cycle, then by two cycles. I've added labels to many of the minor ticks to help illustrate this behavior. The two cycle axis has the first minor tick where the first cycle ends and the next cycle starts, then the rest of the ticks are where they were defined for the second cycle. This puts the ticks at the very logical values of 10, 20, 30, etc.
With larger spans between major ticks, Excel 2007 seems to get confused. The second pair of axes shows three cycles with major units of one and three cycles. The three-cycle axis places minor ticks where the two-axis tick did in the first instance, at multiples of 10 between 10 and 90. There is no tick at 100, nor any between 100 and 1000. Not shown is a four-cycle axis. This puts minor ticks at multiples of 10 between 10 and 90, and at multiples of 1000 between 1000 and 9000, but skips the decade between 100 and 1000.
– – –
This is pretty obscure. It doesn't make sense to use multiple cycles as the major unit. In a two-cycle major unit, Excel 2007 uses more logical minor tick spacing, while the minor tick spacing is broken for larger major units. Excel 2003 uses a consistent minor tick spacing which is logical in its own way, but not readily understandable.
Governments' stark daily figures on the spread of coronavirus are difficult to compare across countries, and may be significant undercounts. But the data needed to analyse the more reliable and comparable excess mortality metric are only available in a few jurisdictions, leaving these official case and death counts the best available data for much of the world.
Related
- Coronavirus tracker: an up-to-date visual narrative of the spread of Covid-19
- Lockdown monitor: Tracking efforts to ease national lockdowns and reopen economies
- Video: Explaining the design tradeoffs in epidemic trajectory charts
US states in detail
Since mid-March, lockdowns and social distancing procedures in the United States have been largely managed on a state-by-state basis. President Trump urged governors to use their latitude over reopenings, and several had raced to lift restrictions on business before meeting CDC guidelines on declining case counts as well as the need for widespread testing and contact tracers. But the majority are taking a phased approach to reopening.
Cases or deaths
Comparing the spread of coronavirus in different countries is difficult using the data being released by governments. Confirmed case counts depend heavily on the extent of countries' very different testing regimes, so higher totals may simply reflect more testing.
Deaths are somewhat more reliable, but remain problematic because countries have different rules for what deaths to include in their official numbers. The most notable difference between countries' Covid mortality figures is whether or not they include deaths outside hospitals, particularly in care homes. Some countries like France and the UK have even changed which deaths they include during the course of the epidemic. Between May 25 and July 3, Spain's data was not readily comparable to its earlier figures, and was temporarily removed from the chart until a revised time series was published.
For either measure, we use a seven-day rolling average to adjust for the impact of administrative delays to reporting new data over weekends.
Logarithmic Chart Vs Linear Chart
The FT is tracking excess mortality — the difference between deaths from all causes during the pandemic and the historic seasonal average — in the handful of countries and municipalities that publish suitably recent data, and has reported on the specific circumstances in Mexico, Russia, South Africa, Turkey and the UK.'
Logarithmic or linear scales
The vertical axis of our charts are shown using a logarithmic scale, where the same distance on the scale represents multiplying or dividing by the same amount, instead of adding or subtracting the same amount as is the case with a linear scale. Log scales are particularly suited to displaying trends in relative rates of change, like a virus spreading. By comparing the slopes of two lines, a log scale allows us to compare epidemics at a very early stage with those that are much more advanced, even though they have very different absolute numbers of cases or deaths.
On a log scale, an epidemic looks like a steep diagonal line that flattens towards a horizontal line as its rate of growth slows. On the more familiar linear scale, the same data looks like a hockey stick shooting upwards, which gives a better sense of the overall size of each country's epidemic.
Adjusting for population
Logarithmic Charts In Numbers For Mac Os
Unusually for cross-national data, adjusting for population isn't strictly necessary when analysing the speed at which a virus spreads. Viruses don't respect borders, and the rate at which they spread is not affected by the overall population of the affected country.
Population matters least in the early stages of an epidemic because cases are likely to be highly concentrated in particular regions like Hubei or Lombardy. Later, though, viewing the values per 100,000 people gives a sense of the pandemic's relative strain on countries' resources. Switching to the 'per 100k' view won't alter the shape of each country's curve, but will reorder them relative to one another.
Adjusted for population, small countries with broad definitions for what cases or deaths to include in their data will look particularly badly affected, while epidemics concentrated in parts of a very populous country look surprisingly small. Try changing this setting while comparing Belgium to the US or China.'
We hide countries with populations under 80,000 to avoid distorting the scale of population-adjusted charts. You can still search from them, though: Try looking at San Marino and Andorra; both European microstates have large proportions of their population affected.
Sources
Unless otherwise stated below, national data comes from the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control.
Data for the United States, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the US Virgin Islands and Northern Mariana Islands come from The Covid Tracking Project. Data for New York state has been adjusted to redistribute nursing home deaths that were added to the official death toll on May 7 in proportion to its original data. Data for New Jersey has been adjusted to redistribute 1,854 probable Covid-19 deaths that were added to the official death toll on June 25 in proportion to its original data. To improve comparability with other countries on the daily death toll chart, the US data on the cross-national chart has been adjusted to begin displaying seven days after first averaging three daily deaths. During this period, there was a localised outbreak of Covid-19 in Washington state.
UK deaths and new cases data, and all data from that nations of the UK, comes from the UK Government coronavirus dashboard. Deaths data uses the new defintion of Covid deaths as those which occurred within 28 days a positive test. On July 2, the UK's methodology for reporting positive cases changed to remove 30,302 duplicates identified when combining testing data from hospitals ('pillar 1') and private sector labs ('pillar 2'). Prior to July 2, UK cumulative cases data are the sum of the revised totals published by Public Health England, Public Health Scotland, Public Health Wales, and the Northern Ireland Department of Health. On October 3 and 4, Englandadded 15,841 positive cases that it had failed to include in its daily reporting of statistics between September 25 and October 2. The England and UK time series for this period have been adjusted to redistribute these deaths in proportion to the previously known distribution of the data.
Data for Sweden after April 5 is calculated from the daily difference of cumulative figures published Tuesday through Fridays by the Swedish Public Health Agency. Unlike most other countries, Sweden uses 'date of incidence' figures for its official death toll, so these 'date of reporting' figures will not match official data for the most recent days.
Cases data for Turkey reflects the 'new patients' metric that excludes asymptomatic cases.
On October 5, Mexico's health ministry said a record increase in cumulative cases and deaths was due to the inclusion of data dating back to June. The time series between June 1 and October 8 has been adjusted to redistribute an estimated 23,845 cases and 2,450 deaths in proportion to the previously known distribution of the data.
On October 1, Argentina added 3,050 deaths to its official cumulative death toll, reflecting previous deaths recorded in the province of Buenos Aires that had not been attributed to a date. The time series up until that date has been adjusted to redistribute these deaths in proportion to the previously known distribution of the data.
On September 6, Bolivia added 1,610 deaths to its official cumulative death toll without explaination. The time series up until that date has been adjusted to redistribute these deaths in proportion to the previously known distribution of the data.
On September 6, Ecuadoradjusted its methodology to cease distinguishing betwween confirmed and suspected Covid-19. This resulted in 3,752 additional deaths previously classified as suspected being added to its official cumulative death toll. The time series up until that date has been adjusted to redistributed these deaths in proportion to the previously known distribution of the data.
Data for Italy before August 17 has been adjusted to redistribute 154 deaths from March, April and May that the Parma Local Health Authority had not previously reported. These have been distributed in proportion to the previously-known data for the Emilia-Romagna region in those three months.
Data for Peru before July 23 has been adjusted to redistribute 3,688 deaths added in a revision on July 22 and 3,658 deaths added in a revision announced on August 13. Both adjustments distributed the additional deaths in proportion to the previously available data.
How to enter your passcode on a cracked iPhone screen: Hold down the Home button to activate Siri. Say 'Turn on VoiceOver'. Press the Home button twice to bring up the passcode screen. On an iPhone X/XS/XR/11, if this brings up Apple Pay, instead swipe up as you normally would and leave your finger there until Siri says 'Lift for home. Mar 15, 2016 AssistiveTouch works by placing a small button on your Home screen. When you tap it, a handy menu will appear allowing you to access actions that are normally triggered using gestures or buttons. If you've broken your home button, you can enable AssistiveTouch by opening the iPhone's Settings app. Head to 'General'. Dec 18, 2018 Method 2 – How to Unlock iPhone with Unresponsive Screen (using iTunes) If your data is already backup, then you can restore your iPhone and start using it again. Here's the process. Download & Open iTunes. Go to recovery mode, by press & hold the home button and power button simultaneously. Nov 18, 2019 Breaking your iPhone's screen is one thing, but breaking the Home button can be even worse, especially if it means you just can't use your phone. Thankfully, there are ways to work around the problem. Unlock iPhone without Home Button. This method involves changing the iPhone lock screen behavior so that you can unlock the iPhone without the home button. The following steps should help you unlock iPhone without using the home button: Step 1: Open settings and then tap General. Step 2: Locate Accessibility in the General menu and click it.
Data for Chile before July 18 has been adjusted to redistribute revised death totals published on June 6 and July 16, and the addition of previously unreported cases added on June 17, all in proportion to the original data.
All cumulative deaths data and new deaths data before July 9 for Spain comes from daily revisions published by the Spanish Ministry of Health. Deaths that could not be attributed to a specific date have been distributed uniformly across the remaining distribution.
Data for India before June 16 has been adjusted to redistribute older deaths added on that date by Maharashtra and Delhi, in proportion to its original data.
Data for China from before April 17 has been adjusted to redistribute a data revision published on that day in proportion to its original data.
Data for France has been adjusted to redistribute nursing home deaths that were added to the official death toll on April 2 as well as revised confirmed case counts on May 5 and May 28, in proportion to its original data.
Unless otherwise stated, population figures come from the World Bank. Population data for Anguilla; Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba; the Falkland Islands, and Western Sahara come from the United Nations Population Division. Data for Eritrea comes from the World Health Organisation. Local sources are used for: Cyprus, Guernsey, Jersey, Moldova, Taiwan, the United Kingdom, the United States and Vatican City.
Reading A Logarithmic Chart
Help us improve these charts: We are looking for further sources of national or municipal mortality data showing total deaths from all causes, preferably broken down by day or week and including figures for recent weeks. If you know of a source of this data for your area, please email coronavirus-data@ft.com.
Development: Cale Tilford, Ændrew Rininsland and Joanna S Kao
US reporting: Brooke Fox
