I have a potentially long array of one's and zero's that looks like this:
a = [0,0,1,0,1,0,.....]
I want to translate each consecutive pair of values to an integer between 0 & 3 as shown below:
0,0 -> 0
0,1 -> 1
1,0 -> 3
1,1 -> 2
I'm looking for a nice clean efficient way to create the array b (example output below) using the mapping above:
b = [0, 3, 3,...]
Is a dict a good idea? I can't figure out how to do it though.
Try:
x = np.reshape(a, (-1,2))
b = x[:,0]*2 + (x[:,0] ^ x[:,1])
If you want to use a dict with an explicit mapping between corresponding decimal numbers, you could try this:
# Convert to a (-1,2) matrix and decimal numbers first
a = np.reshape(a, (-1,2))
a = np.sum(np.array([2,1])*a, axis=1)
# Define dictionary with mapping
D = {0: 0, 1: 1, 2: 3, 3: 2}
# Apply dictionary
a = [D[x] for x in a]
You could use the successive pairs as indices to perform a look-up, for getting the translated value:
master = np.array([[0, 1],[3, 2]])
b = master[a[::2], a[1::2]]
Test input:
[1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 1, 1, 0, 0, 1]
Output:
[2, 1, 2, 2, 1, 1, 0, 3]
Related
With
input = [0,0,5,9,0,4,10,3,0]
as list
I need an output, which is going to be two highest values in input while setting other list elements to zero.
output = [0,0,0,9,0,0,10,0,0]
The closest I got:
from itertools import compress
import numpy as np
import operator
input= [0,0,5,9,0,4,10,3,0]
top_2_idx = np.argsort(test)[-2:]
test[top_2_idx[0]]
test[top_2_idx[1]]
Can you please help?
You can sort, find the two largest values, and then use a list comprehension:
input = [0,0,5,9,0,4,10,3,0]
*_, c1, c2 = sorted(input)
result = [0 if i not in {c1, c2} else i for i in input]
Output:
[0, 0, 0, 9, 0, 0, 10, 0, 0]
Not as pretty as Ajax's solution but a O(n) solution and a little more dynamic:
from collections import deque
def zero_non_max(lst, keep_top_n):
"""
Returns a list with all numbers zeroed out
except the keep_top_n.
>>> zero_non_max([0, 0, 5, 9, 0, 4, 10, 3, 0], 3)
>>> [0, 0, 5, 9, 0, 0, 10, 0, 0]
"""
lst = lst.copy()
top_n = deque(maxlen=keep_top_n)
for index, x in enumerate(lst):
if len(top_n) < top_n.maxlen or x > top_n[-1][0]:
top_n.append((x, index))
lst[index] = 0
for val, index in top_n:
lst[index] = val
return lst
lst = [0, 0, 5, 9, 0, 4, 10, 3, 0]
print(zero_non_max(lst, 2))
Output:
[0, 0, 0, 9, 0, 0, 10, 0, 0]
Pure numpy approach:
import numpy as np
arr = np.array([0, 0, 5, 9, 0, 4, 10, 3, 0])
top_2_idx = np.argsort(arr)[-2:]
np.put(arr, np.argwhere(~np.isin(arr, arr[top_2_idx])), 0)
print(arr)
The output:
[ 0 0 0 9 0 0 10 0 0]
Numpy.put
It's possible to achieve this with a single list traversal, making the algorithm O(n):
First find the two highest values with a single traversal;
Then create a list of zeros and add in the found maxima.
Code
def two_max(lst):
# Find two highest values in a single traversal
max_i, max_j = 0, 1
for i in range(len(lst)):
_, max_i, max_j = sorted((max_i, max_j, i), key=lst.__getitem__)
# Make a new list with zeros and replace both maxima
new_lst = [0] * len(lst)
new_lst[max_i], new_lst[max_j] = lst[max_i], lst[max_j]
return new_lst
lst = [0, 0, 5, 9, 0, 4, 10, 3, 0]
print(two_max(lst)) # [0, 0, 0, 9, 0, 0, 10, 0, 0]
Note that if the maximum value in the list appears more than twice, only the two left-most values will appear.
As a sidenote, do not use names such as input in your code as this overshadows the built-in function of the same name.
Here is another numpy-based solution that avoids sorting the entire array, which takes O(nlogn) time.
import numpy as np
arr = np.array([0,0,5,9,0,4,10,3,0])
arr[np.argpartition(arr,-2)[:-2]] = 0
If you want to create a new array as output:
result = np.zeros_like(arr)
idx = np.argpartition(arr,-2)[-2:]
result[idx] = arr[idx]
A corresponding Python-native solution is to use heap.nlargest, which also avoids sorting the entire array.
import heapq
arr = [0,0,5,9,0,4,10,3,0]
l = len(arr)
idx1, idx2 = heapq.nlargest(2, range(l), key=arr.__getitem__)
result = [0] * l
result[idx1] = arr[idx1]
result[idx2] = arr[idx2]
I am looping through a range
Loopnumber = []
for i in range(2):
series1 = [10/01/2017, 30,10,2017, 21/11/2017]
loopnumber = ?
Loopnumber.extend(loopnumber)
I wish to create a series of same length as series 1 which a datetime series, and which is of value i and every time the loop runs the values of i are appended to a vector called loopnumber
expected output is
[0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2]
in this case expected output is
It's not clear why you need this, but you can extend a list within your for loop. Note also you need range(3) to iterate 3 times.
loop_list = []
for i in range(3):
series1 = ['10/01/2017', '30,10,2017', '21/11/2017']
loop_list.extend([i]*len(series1))
print(loop_list)
[0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2]
I have 2 lists ...
The first is something like
a = [imgType_a, imgType_b, imgType_c]
The second is something like
b = [img_foo_a, img_foo_b, img_foo_c, img_bar_a, img_bar_b, img_bar_c]
I'd like to compare the lists and return a list of indices that correspond a where the last letter in a matches the last letter in b
For the example about I'd like to return ...
[0, 1, 2, 0, 1, 2]
if
a = [imgType_c, imgType_b, imgType_a]
and
b = [img_foo_a, img_foo_b, img_foo_c, img_bar_c, img_bar_a, img_bar_b, img_baz_a, img_qux_a]
the result would be
[2, 1, 0, 0, 2, 1, 2, 2]
The length of the list b will always be >=a.
You can use index to find the index of each element in b where it matches a (once you've converted those to be just the last letter). This can be done in a list comprehension:
>>> [[i[-1] for i in a].index(x) for x in [i[-1] for i in b]]
[0, 1, 2, 0, 1, 2]
Or, more efficient and clearer, convert your arrays first:
>>> a_last = [i[-1] for i in a]
>>> b_last = [i[-1] for i in b]
>>> [a_last.index(x) for x in b_last]
[0, 1, 2, 0, 1, 2]
Instead of using a list, use a dictionary:
img_type_map = {img_type[-1]: i for i, img_type in enumerate(a)}
output = [img_type_map[img[-1]] for img in b]
Consider a sequence of coin tosses: 1, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1 where tail = 0 and head = 1.
The desired output is the sequence: 0, 1, 2, 0, 1, 0
Each element of the output sequence counts the number of tails since the last head.
I have tried a naive method:
def timer(seq):
if seq[0] == 1: time = [0]
if seq[0] == 0: time = [1]
for x in seq[1:]:
if x == 0: time.append(time[-1] + 1)
if x == 1: time.append(0)
return time
Question: Is there a better method?
Using NumPy:
import numpy as np
seq = np.array([1,0,0,1,0,1,0,0,0,0,1,0])
arr = np.arange(len(seq))
result = arr - np.maximum.accumulate(arr * seq)
print(result)
yields
[0 1 2 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 0 1]
Why arr - np.maximum.accumulate(arr * seq)? The desired output seemed related to a simple progression of integers:
arr = np.arange(len(seq))
So the natural question is, if seq = np.array([1, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1]) and the expected result is expected = np.array([0, 1, 2, 0, 1, 0]), then what value of x makes
arr + x = expected
Since
In [220]: expected - arr
Out[220]: array([ 0, 0, 0, -3, -3, -5])
it looks like x should be the cumulative max of arr * seq:
In [234]: arr * seq
Out[234]: array([0, 0, 0, 3, 0, 5])
In [235]: np.maximum.accumulate(arr * seq)
Out[235]: array([0, 0, 0, 3, 3, 5])
Step 1: Invert l:
In [311]: l = [1, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1]
In [312]: out = [int(not i) for i in l]; out
Out[312]: [0, 1, 1, 0, 1, 0]
Step 2: List comp; add previous value to current value if current value is 1.
In [319]: [out[0]] + [x + y if y else y for x, y in zip(out[:-1], out[1:])]
Out[319]: [0, 1, 2, 0, 1, 0]
This gets rid of windy ifs by zipping adjacent elements.
Using itertools.accumulate:
>>> a = [1, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1]
>>> b = [1 - x for x in a]
>>> list(accumulate(b, lambda total,e: total+1 if e==1 else 0))
[0, 1, 2, 0, 1, 0]
accumulate is only defined in Python 3. There's the equivalent Python code in the above documentation, though, if you want to use it in Python 2.
It's required to invert a because the first element returned by accumulate is the first list element, independently from the accumulator function:
>>> list(accumulate(a, lambda total,e: 0))
[1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0]
The required output is an array with the same length as the input and none of the values are equal to the input. Therefore, the algorithm must be at least O(n) to form the new output array. Furthermore for this specific problem, you would also need to scan all the values for the input array. All these operations are O(n) and it will not get any more efficient. Constants may differ but your method is already in O(n) and will not go any lower.
Using reduce:
time = reduce(lambda l, r: l + [(l[-1]+1)*(not r)], seq, [0])[1:]
I try to be clear in the following code and differ from the original in using an explicit accumulator.
>>> s = [1,0,0,1,0,1,0,0,0,0,1,0]
>>> def zero_run_length_or_zero(seq):
"Return the run length of zeroes so far in the sequnece or zero"
accumulator, answer = 0, []
for item in seq:
accumulator = 0 if item == 1 else accumulator + 1
answer.append(accumulator)
return answer
>>> zero_run_length_or_zero(s)
[0, 1, 2, 0, 1, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 0, 1]
>>>
This question might be too noob, but I was still not able to figure out how to do it properly.
I have a given array [0,0,0,0,0,0,1,1,2,1,0,0,0,0,1,0,1,2,1,0,2,3] (arbitrary elements from 0-5) and I want to have a counter for the occurence of zeros in a row.
1 times 6 zeros in a row
1 times 4 zeros in a row
2 times 1 zero in a row
=> (2,0,0,1,0,1)
So the dictionary consists out of n*0 values as the index and the counter as the value.
The final array consists of 500+ million values that are unsorted like the one above.
This should get you what you want:
import numpy as np
a = [0,0,0,0,0,0,1,1,2,1,0,0,0,0,1,0,1,2,1,0,2,3]
# Find indexes of all zeroes
index_zeroes = np.where(np.array(a) == 0)[0]
# Find discontinuities in indexes, denoting separated groups of zeroes
# Note: Adding True at the end because otherwise the last zero is ignored
index_zeroes_disc = np.where(np.hstack((np.diff(index_zeroes) != 1, True)))[0]
# Count the number of zeroes in each group
# Note: Adding 0 at the start so first group of zeroes is counted
count_zeroes = np.diff(np.hstack((0, index_zeroes_disc + 1)))
# Count the number of groups with the same number of zeroes
groups_of_n_zeroes = {}
for count in count_zeroes:
if groups_of_n_zeroes.has_key(count):
groups_of_n_zeroes[count] += 1
else:
groups_of_n_zeroes[count] = 1
groups_of_n_zeroes holds:
{1: 2, 4: 1, 6: 1}
Similar to #fgb's, but with a more numpythonic handling of the counting of the occurrences:
items = np.array([0,0,0,0,0,0,1,1,2,1,0,0,0,0,1,0,1,2,1,0,2,3])
group_end_idx = np.concatenate(([-1],
np.nonzero(np.diff(items == 0))[0],
[len(items)-1]))
group_len = np.diff(group_end_idx)
zero_lens = group_len[::2] if items[0] == 0 else group_len[1::2]
counts = np.bincount(zero_lens)
>>> counts[1:]
array([2, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1], dtype=int64)
This seems awfully complicated, but I can't seem to find anything better:
>>> l = [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 2, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 2, 1, 0, 2, 3]
>>> import itertools
>>> seq = [len(list(j)) for i, j in itertools.groupby(l) if i == 0]
>>> seq
[6, 4, 1, 1]
>>> import collections
>>> counter = collections.Counter(seq)
>>> [counter.get(i, 0) for i in xrange(1, max(counter) + 1)]
[2, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1]