▸case-01 I inherited a legacy formula in Excel 365: `=IFERROR(INDEX(Prices!$C$2:$C$500, MATCH(1, (Prices!$A$2:$A$500=A2)*(Prices!$B$2:$B$500=B2), 0)), IF(C2="VIP", 0, "N/A"))`. Our sales team believes it looks up price rates by matching region and tier, defaulting to 0 for VIPs or 'N/A' for missing entries. This cell is directly read by our monthly billing summary in Column H. Could you deconstruct this? I need a layer-by-layer explanation of what each nested function does from the inside out, a table comparing our assumed logic against actual behavior (highlighting any suppressed errors), a split decomposition into testable helper columns with clear headers, and an upgraded rebuild using modern functions like XLOOKUP or LET with a parallel test setup. | fail→fail | 19,616 | 20,460 | +4% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 4,024 | 5,551 | +38% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-02 We have a complex Google Sheets formula driving our client billing dashboard (Column E): `=IFERROR(VLOOKUP(A5, Data!A:D, 4, FALSE), IF(ISBLANK(B5), "Missing ID", IF(C5>100, VLOOKUP(A5, Archive!A:D, 4, FALSE), "Pending")))`. Finance thinks it gets current account status, searches the archive for high-value clients if missing, and flags missing IDs. Please detangle this: give me an inside-out narrative explaining each function's true job, document the discrepancies between believed behavior and actual execution (especially masked error cases), break the logic into individual helper column steps, and provide a modernized rebuild along with guidance for a parallel run check. | fail→pass | 24,387 | 21,290 | -13% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 4,911 | 5,827 | +19% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-09 A reporting workbook uses `=VLOOKUP(A2, CHOOSE({1,2}, Data!C:C, Data!A:A), 2, FALSE)` to perform a left lookup. The team thinks it fetches customer names from column A using ID in column C. Modernize this for Excel 365, explain the CHOOSE trick, and decompose into helper columns. | pass→pass | 12,812 | 9,355 | -27% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,442 | 2,915 | +19% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-03 Here is a formula from an Excel 2021 quarter-end valuation model (reads cells B4, C4, D4 and feeds Column K): `=IFERROR(IF(D4="Closed", 0, INDEX(Rates!E$2:E$100, MATCH(B4, Rates!A$2:A$100, 0))), IFERROR(INDEX(Rates!F$2:F$100, MATCH(C4, Rates!A$2:A$100, 0)), 0))`. We believe it calculates commission rates for active deals using primary tiers and falls back to secondary tiers. Please analyze this formula: decode the true logic step-by-step from the inside out, map out any gaps where expected behavior differs from reality, decompose it into named helper steps, and present a cleaner modernized version ready for side-by-side verification. | fail→fail | 20,055 | 23,901 | +19% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,764 | 5,899 | +57% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-04 We have an old Excel 2016 formula in row 10: `=IF(A10<0, "Invalid", IF(A10<10, "Tier 1", IF(A10<50, "Tier 2", IF(A10<100, "Tier 3", "Tier 4"))))`. Operations assumes it classifies transaction risk tiers cleanly. The target system is now Excel 365. Provide a full detangle report with an inside-out decode, assumed vs actual comparison, helper column split, and a modernized rebuild. Should we keep the single nested line or split it into helper columns? | pass→fail | 17,640 | 15,552 | -12% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,875 | 4,347 | +12% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-05 Our inventory report uses `=IFERROR(VLOOKUP(B2, Inventory!A:G, 5, FALSE), 0)` in cell D2. Operations thinks this retrieves exact unit stock and returns 0 if out of stock. Modernize this for Excel 365, explain what the error handler actually hides, and split it into helper steps for auditing. | pass→pass | 13,656 | 13,413 | -2% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,406 | 3,683 | +53% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-06 An executive summary sheet contains `=SUMIFS(INDIRECT("'" & A2 & "'!D:D"), INDIRECT("'" & A2 & "'!A:A"), B2)`. Accounting believes it sums departmental costs for the chosen region in A2 and account code in B2. Detangle this formula into plain language, expose discrepancies, split into helpers, and propose a robust rebuild. | fail→pass | 18,226 | 18,118 | -1% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,273 | 4,411 | +35% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-07 We have an old CSE formula in Excel 365: `{=SUM(IF((Data!A2:A100=B1)*(Data!B2:B100=B2), Data!C2:C100, 0))}`. The team thinks it calculates total revenue for region B1 and product B2. Modernize this formula, break down the intermediate array operations, and report on any believed vs actual logic gaps. | fail→pass | 15,494 | 16,673 | +8% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,183 | 4,450 | +40% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-08 A forecasting sheet uses `=OFFSET(Data!A1, MATCH(B2, Data!A2:A50, 0), 3, 1, 1)` in cell C5. Finance thinks it retrieves the 3-month projected revenue for contract B2. Provide an inside-out decode, helper column decomposition, and a non-volatile modern rebuild. | pass→pass | 13,018 | 11,813 | -9% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,560 | 3,280 | +28% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-10 We found `=IFERROR(VLOOKUP(A2, Region1!A:B, 2, FALSE), IFERROR(VLOOKUP(A2, Region2!A:B, 2, FALSE), "Not Found"))` in cell E2. Sales thinks it searches Region1 first, then Region2, returning 'Not Found' if missing. Modernize this formula, decode each layer, and document what errors are masked. | fail→pass | 12,779 | 14,373 | +12% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,438 | 3,910 | +60% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-11 An analyst wrote `=IF(ISERROR(INDEX(Data!B:B, MATCH(A2, Data!A:A, 0))), "N/A", IF(INDEX(Data!B:B, MATCH(A2, Data!A:A, 0))=0, "Free", INDEX(Data!B:B, MATCH(A2, Data!A:A, 0))))` in cell C2. Detangle this, compare believed vs actual behavior, split into helper columns, and rebuild using LET. | pass→pass | 14,295 | 11,572 | -19% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,757 | 3,410 | +24% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-12 In Google Sheets cell G4: `=IFERROR(INDEX(FILTER(Orders!C2:C, Orders!A2:A=A4, Orders!B2:B>=B4), 1), "None")`. Fulfillment thinks this gets the earliest matching order ID. Provide an inside-out decode, document discrepancies, decompose into helper columns, and rebuild. | pass→pass | 15,126 | 10,440 | -31% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,867 | 3,088 | +8% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-13 An HR sheet uses `=TEXTJOIN(", ", TRUE, IF(Emp!A2:A100=B2, Emp!B2:B100, ""))` in cell C2 to list employee skills. HR believes it creates a comma-separated list of active skills. Detangle this formula, map discrepancies, split into helpers, and provide a modern Excel 365 rebuild. | pass→pass | 14,440 | 15,419 | +7% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,971 | 4,232 | +42% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-14 A finance cell contains `=SUMPRODUCT((Data!A2:A100="East")*(Data!B2:B100="Q1")*(Data!C2:C100))`. The user believes it calculates East region Q1 sales. Deconstruct this, explain double-unary vs multiplication coercion, analyze error handling, and modernise with SUMIFS or helper columns. | pass→pass | 17,536 | 25,993 | +48% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,467 | 3,927 | +13% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-15 A data cleaning column uses `=SUBSTITUTE(SUBSTITUTE(SUBSTITUTE(A2, "-", ""), "(", ""), ")", "")`. Marketing thinks it strips standard phone punctuation. Deconstruct this inside-out, compare believed vs actual, decompose into helpers, and offer a modern rebuild in Excel 365. | pass→pass | 15,075 | 13,526 | -10% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,899 | 3,397 | +17% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-16 A project tracker formula in cell F2 reads `=IF(WORKDAY(EOMONTH(A2, 0), 1)>B2, B2, WORKDAY(EOMONTH(A2, 0), 1))`. Planning thinks it caps the deadline at the first business day of next month. Detangle this, uncover logic gaps, decompose to helper columns, and rebuild. | pass→pass | 15,819 | 26,179 | +65% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,136 | 3,540 | +13% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-17 In an auditing sheet cell B5: `=INDIRECT("Data!" & ADDRESS(MATCH(A5, Data!A1:A100, 0), 4))`. Compliance believes it fetches column D data for item A5. Deconstruct layer-by-layer, analyze gaps, decompose into helper columns, and rebuild using INDEX-MATCH or XLOOKUP. | pass→pass | 17,574 | 23,924 | +36% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,978 | 3,504 | +18% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-18 A tax calculator uses `=INDEX(TaxTable!B2:B10, MATCH(A2, TaxTable!A2:A10, 1))` in cell C2. Tax team believes it finds the exact or next lowest tax bracket. Detangle this, analyze what happens if TaxTable is unsorted, split into helpers, and modernize for Excel 365. | fail→pass | 16,261 | 20,417 | +26% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,291 | 3,807 | +16% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-19 I have a VBA procedure in Module1 that throws 'Run-time error 1004: Application-defined or object-defined error' on line `Range("A1:A" & LastRow).Value = FormulaArray`. Can you help me debug this VBA macro code and fix the syntax error? | pass→fail | 10,510 | 10,880 | +4% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,113 | 3,239 | +53% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-20 Here is an M query step from Power Query: `= Table.AddColumn(#"Previous Step", "Custom", each if [Status] = "Active" then [Amount] * 1.1 else [Amount])`. Can you rewrite this Power Query M code to handle null values in the Status column? | pass→pass | 8,840 | 10,340 | +17% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,829 | 3,216 | +76% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-21 We have a SQL query calculating customer lifetime value: `SELECT customer_id, SUM(amount) OVER (PARTITION BY customer_id ORDER BY transaction_date) FROM sales`. How can I optimize this PostgreSQL query to filter only rows from 2023? | pass→pass | 11,717 | 11,616 | -1% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,376 | 3,414 | +44% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-22 Operations uses `=SUM(COUNTIFS(Data!A:A, {"Open", "Pending", "In Review"}, Data!B:B, ">5"))` in cell C1. Team thinks it counts all active high-priority items. Detangle this, explain the array constant behavior, split into helper columns, and present a rebuild. | pass→pass | 13,374 | 11,987 | -10% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,489 | 3,352 | +35% | 0 | 0 | — |