I came across a code snippet where I could not understand two of the statements, though I could see the end result of each.
I will create a variable before giving the statements:
train = np.random.random((10,100))
One of them read as :
train = train[:-1, 1:-1]
What does this slicing mean? How to read this? I know that that -1 in slicing denotes from the back. But I cannot understand this.
Another statement read as follows:
la = [0.2**(7-j) for j in range(1,t+1)]
np.array(la)[:,None]
What does slicing with None as in [:,None] mean?
For the above two statements, along with how each statement is read, it will be helpful to have an alternative method along, so that I understand it better.
One of Python's strengths is its uniform application of straightforward principles. Numpy indexing, like all indexing in Python, passes a single argument to the indexed object's (i.e., the array's) __getitem__ method, and numpy arrays were one of the primary justifications for the slicing mechanism (or at least one of its very early uses).
When I'm trying to understand new behaviours I like to start with a concrete and comprehensible example, so rather than 10x100 random values I'll start with a one-dimensional 4-element vector and work up to 3x4, which should be big enough to understand what's going on.
simple = np.array([1, 2, 3, 4])
train = np.array([[1, 2, 3, 4],
[5, 6, 7, 8],
[9, 10, 11, 12]])
The interpreter shows these as
array([1, 2, 3, 4])
array([[ 1, 2, 3, 4],
[ 5, 6, 7, 8],
[ 9, 10, 11, 12]])
The expression simple[x] is equivalent to (which is to say the interpreter ends up executing) simple.__getitem__(x) under the hood - note this call takes a single argument.
The numpy array's __getitem__ method implements indexing with an integer very simply: it selects a single element from the first dimension. So simple[1] is 2, and train[1] is array([5, 6, 7, 8]).
When __getitem__ receives a tuple as an argument (which is how Python's syntax interprets expressions like array[x, y, z]) it applies each element of the tuple as an index to successive dimensions of the indexed object. So result = train[1, 2] is equivalent (conceptually - the code is more complex in implementation) to
temp = train[1] # i.e. train.__getitem__(1)
result = temp[2] # i.e. temp.__getitem__(2)
and sure enough we find that result comes out at 7. You could think of array[x, y, z] as equivalent to array[x][y][z].
Now we can add slicing to the mix. Expressions containing a colon can be regarded as slice literals (I haven't seen a better name for them), and the interpreter creates slice objects for them. As the documentation notes, a slice object is mostly a container for three values, start, stop and slice, and it's up to each object's __getitem__ method how it interprets them. You might find this question helpful to understand slicing further.
With what you now know, you should be able to understand the answer to your first question.
result = train[:-1, 1:-1]
will call train.__getitem__ with a two-element tuple of slices. This is equivalent to
temp = train[:-1]
result = temp[..., 1:-1]
The first statement can be read as "set temp to all but the last row of train", and the second as "set result to all but the first and last columns of temp". train[:-1] is
array([[1, 2, 3, 4],
[5, 6, 7, 8]])
and applying the [1:-1] subscripting to the second dimension of that array gives
array([[2, 3],
[6, 7]])
The ellipsis on the first dimension of the temp subscript says "pass everything," so the subscript expression[...]can be considered equivalent to[:]. As far as theNonevalues are concerned, a slice has a maximum of three data points: _start_, _stop_ and _step_. ANonevalue for any of these gives the default value, which is0for _start_, the length of the indexed object for _stop_, and1for _step. Sox[None:None:None]is equivalent tox[0:len(x):1]which is equivalent tox[::]`.
With this knowledge under your belt you should stand a bit more chance of understanding what's going on.
Related
Fancy Indexing vs Views in Numpy
In an answer to this equation: is is explained that different idioms will produce different results.
Using the idiom where fancy indexing is to chose the values and said values are set to a new value in the same line means that the values in the original object will be changed in place.
However the final example below:
https://scipy-cookbook.readthedocs.io/items/ViewsVsCopies.html
"A final exercise"
The example appears to use the same idiom:
a[x, :][:, y] = 100
but it still produces a different result depending on whether x is a slice or a fancy index (see below):
a = np.arange(12).reshape(3,4)
ifancy = [0,2]
islice = slice(0,3,2)
a[islice, :][:, ifancy] = 100
a
#array([[100, 1, 100, 3],
# [ 4, 5, 6, 7],
# [100, 9, 100, 11]])
a = np.arange(12).reshape(3,4)
ifancy = [0,2]
islice = slice(0,3,2)
a[ifancy, :][:, islice] = 100 # note that ifancy and islice are interchanged here
>>> a
array([[ 0, 1, 2, 3],
[ 4, 5, 6, 7],
[ 8, 9, 10, 11]])
My intuition is that if the first set of fancy indexes is a slice it treats the object like a view and therefore the values in the orignal object are changed.
Whereas in the second case the first set of fancy indexes is itself a fancy index so it treats the object as a fancy index creating a copy of the original object. This then means that the original object is not changed when the values of the copy object are changed.
Is my intuition correct?
The example hints that one should think of the sqeuence of getitem and setitem can someone explain it to my properly in theis way?
Python evaluates each set of [] separately. a[x, :][:, y] = 100 is 2 operations.
temp = a[x,:] # getitem step
temp[:,y] = 100 # setitem step
Whether the 2nd line ends up modifying a depends on whether temp is a view or copy.
Remember, numpy is an addon to Python. It does not modify basic Python syntax or interpretation.
I was surprised that numpy.split yields a list and not an array. I would have thought it would be better to return an array, since numpy has put a lot of work into making arrays more useful than lists. Can anyone justify numpy returning a list instead of an array? Why would that be a better programming decision for the numpy developers to have made?
A comment pointed out that if the slit is uneven, the result can't be a array, at least not one that has the same dtype. At best it would be an object dtype.
But lets consider the case of equal length subarrays:
In [124]: x = np.arange(10)
In [125]: np.split(x,2)
Out[125]: [array([0, 1, 2, 3, 4]), array([5, 6, 7, 8, 9])]
In [126]: np.array(_) # make an array from that
Out[126]:
array([[0, 1, 2, 3, 4],
[5, 6, 7, 8, 9]])
But we can get the same array without split - just reshape:
In [127]: x.reshape(2,-1)
Out[127]:
array([[0, 1, 2, 3, 4],
[5, 6, 7, 8, 9]])
Now look at the code for split. It just passes the task to array_split. Ignoring the details about alternative axes, it just does
sub_arys = []
for i in range(Nsections):
# st and end from `div_points
sub_arys.append(sary[st:end])
return sub_arys
In other words, it just steps through array and returns successive slices. Those (often) are views of the original.
So split is not that sophisticate a function. You could generate such a list of subarrays yourself without a lot of numpy expertise.
Another point. Documentation notes that split can be reversed with an appropriate stack. concatenate (and family) takes a list of arrays. If give an array of arrays, or a higher dim array, it effectively iterates on the first dimension, e.g. concatenate(arr) => concatenate(list(arr)).
Actually you are right it returns a list
import numpy as np
a=np.random.randint(1,30,(2,2))
b=np.hsplit(a,2)
type(b)
it will return type(b) as list so, there is nothing wrong in the documentation, i also first thought that the documentation is wrong it doesn't return a array, but when i checked
type(b[0])
type(b[1])
it returned type as ndarray.
it means it returns a list of ndarrary's.
I ran across something that seemed to me like inconsistent behavior in Numpy slices. Specifically, please consider the following example:
import numpy as np
a = np.arange(9).reshape(3,3) # a 2d numpy array
y = np.array([1,2,2]) # vector that will be used to index the array
b = a[np.arange(len(a)),y] # a vector (what I want)
c = a[:,y] # a matrix ??
I wanted to obtain a vector such that the i-th element is a[i,y[i]]. I tried two things (b and c above) and was surprised that b and c are not the same... in fact one is a vector and the other is a matrix! I was under the impression that : was shorthand for "all elements" but apparently the meaning is somewhat more subtle.
After trial and error I somewhat understand the difference now (b == np.diag(c)), but would appreciate clarification on why they are different, what exactly using : implies, and how to understand when to use either case.
Thanks!
It's hard to understand advanced indexing (with lists or arrays) without understanding broadcasting.
In [487]: a=np.arange(9).reshape(3,3)
In [488]: idx = np.array([1,2,2])
Index with a (3,) and (3,) producing shape (3,) result:
In [489]: a[np.arange(3),idx]
Out[489]: array([1, 5, 8])
Index with (3,1) and (3,), result is (3,3)
In [490]: a[np.arange(3)[:,None],idx]
Out[490]:
array([[1, 2, 2],
[4, 5, 5],
[7, 8, 8]])
The slice : does basically the same thing. There are subtle differences, but here it's the same.
In [491]: a[:,idx]
Out[491]:
array([[1, 2, 2],
[4, 5, 5],
[7, 8, 8]])
ix_ does the same thing, converting the (3,) & (3,) to (3,1) and (1,3):
In [492]: np.ix_(np.arange(3),idx)
Out[492]:
(array([[0],
[1],
[2]]), array([[1, 2, 2]]))
A broadcasted sum might help visualize the two cases:
In [495]: np.arange(3)*10+idx
Out[495]: array([ 1, 12, 22])
In [496]: np.sum(np.ix_(np.arange(3)*10,idx),axis=0)
Out[496]:
array([[ 1, 2, 2],
[11, 12, 12],
[21, 22, 22]])
When you pass
np.arange(len(a)), y
You can view the result as being all the indexed pairs for the zipped elements you passed. In this case, indexing by np.arange(len(a)) and y
np.arange(len(a))
# [0, 1, 2]
y
# [1, 2, 2]
effectively takes elements: (0, 1), (1, 2), and (2, 2).
print(a[0, 1], a[1, 2], a[2, 2]) # 0th, 1st, 2nd elements from each indexer
# 1 5 8
In the second case, you take the entire slice along the first dimension. (Nothing before the colon.) So this is all elements along the 0th axis. You then specify with y that you want the 1st, 2nd, and 2nd element along each row. (0-indexed.)
As you pointed out, it may seem a bit unintuitive that the results are different given that the individual elements of the slice are equivalent:
a[:] == a[np.arange(len(a))]
and
a[:y] == a[:y]
However, NumPy advanced indexing cares what type of data structure you pass when indexing (tuples, integers, etc). Things can become hairy very quickly.
The detail behind that is this: first consider all NumPy indexing to be of the general form x[obj], where obj is the evaluation of whatever you passed. How NumPy "behaves" depends on what type of object obj is:
Advanced indexing is triggered when the selection object, obj, is a
non-tuple sequence object, an ndarray (of data type integer or bool),
or a tuple with at least one sequence object or ndarray (of data type
integer or bool).
...
The definition of advanced indexing means that x[(1,2,3),] is
fundamentally different than x[(1,2,3)]. The latter is equivalent to
x[1,2,3] which will trigger basic selection while the former will
trigger advanced indexing. Be sure to understand why this occurs.
In your first case, obj = np.arange(len(a)),y, a tuple that fits the bill in bold above. This triggers advanced indexing and forces the behavior described above.
As for the second case, [:,y]
When there is at least one slice (:), ellipsis (...) or np.newaxis in
the index (or the array has more dimensions than there are advanced
indexes), then the behaviour can be more complicated. It is like
concatenating the indexing result for each advanced index element.
Demonstrated:
# Concatenate the indexing result for each advanced index element.
np.vstack((a[0, y], a[1, y], a[2, y]))
I'm trying to implement quicksort in Python using 2 main functions - partition and quicksort.
The partition function is designed so that it returns 2 arrays - bigger and smaller than p.
after that quicksort is called on both of them separately.
so the quicksort works like this:
def quicksort(array)
pivot = 0 # pivot choice is irrelevant
left,right = partition(array,pivot)
quicksort(left)
quicksoft(right)
return left+right
But from my understanding it should be possible to design partition to return just one single index - delimiting bigger and smaller arrays and redesign quicksort as follows:
def quicksort(array)
pivot = 0 # pivot choice is irrelevant
i = partition(array,pivot)
quicksort(array[:i-1])
quicksoft(array[i:])
return array
but this implementation returns partially sorted array
original array [5, 4, 2, 1, 6, 7, 3, 8, 9]
sorted array [3, 4, 2, 1, 5, 7, 6, 8, 9]
what am i missing here?
without seeing your code it's hard to be sure, but one possible error is the i-1:
>>> [1,2,3,4][:2]
[1, 2]
>>> [1,2,3,4][2:]
[3, 4]
(although you may be simply skipping the pivot?)
also, slices are new lists, not views:
>>> l = [1,2,3,4]
>>> l[2:][0] = 'three'
>>> l
[1, 2, 3, 4]
which is unfortunate (the typical functional program doing quicksort which is not a quicksort at all, dammit, because it's creating a pile of new arrays annoys me too...)
you can work round the second problem by passing the entire list plus lo/hi indices:
def quicksort(data, lo=0, hi=None):
if hi is None: hi = len(data)
....
quicksort(array[:i-1]) doesn't actually call quicksort on the first partition of the array, it calls quicksort on a copy of the first partition of the array. Thus, your code is partitioning the array in place, then creating copies of the halves and trying to sort them (but never doing anything with the resulting arrays), so your recursive calls have no effect.
If you want to do it like this, you'll have to avoid making copies of the list with slicing, and instead pass around the whole list as well as the ranges you want your functions to apply to.
I had the same problem, my quicksort was returning partially sorted lists. I found the problem was that I wasn't returning the pivot in it's own array. When I create an array for the pivot, it allows the recursion to work properly.
ie. my partition function returns instead of:
return left, right
it returns
return left, pivotval, right
I'm really confused by the index logic of numpy arrays with several dimensions. Here is an example:
import numpy as np
A = np.arange(18).reshape(3,2,3)
[[[ 0, 1, 2],
[ 3, 4, 5]],
[[ 6, 7, 8],
[ 9, 10, 11]],
[[12, 13, 14],
[15, 16, 17]]])
this gives me an array of shape (3,2,3), call them (x,y,z) for sake of argument. Now I want an array B with the elements from A corresponding to x = 0,2 y =0,1 and z = 1,2. Like
array([[[ 1, 2],
[4, 5]],
[[13, 14],
[16, 17]]])
Naively I thought that
B=A[[0,2],[0,1],[1,2]]
would do the job. But it gives
array([ 2, 104])
and does not work.
A[[0,2],:,:][:,:,[1,2]]
does the job. But I still wonder whats wrong with my first try. And what is the best way to do what I want to do?
There are two types of indexing in NumPy basic and advanced. Basic indexing uses tuples of slices for indexing, and does not copy the array, but rather creates a view with adjusted strides. Advanced indexing in contrast also uses lists or arrays of indices and copies the array.
Your first attempt
B = A[[0, 2], [0, 1], [1, 2]]
uses advanced indexing. In advanced indexing, all index lists are first broadcasted to the same shape, and this shape is used for the output array. In this case, they already have the same shape, so the broadcasting does not do anything. The output array will also have this shape of two entries. The first entry of the output array is obtained by using all first indices of the three lists, and the second by using all second indices:
B = numpy.array([A[0, 0, 1], A[2, 1, 2]])
Your second approach
B = A[[0,2],:,:][:,:,[1,2]]
does work, but it is inefficient. It uses advanced indexing twice, so your data will be copied twice.
To get what you actually want with advanced indexing, you can use
A[np.ix_([0,2],[0,1],[1,2])]
as pointed out by nikow. This will copy the data only once.
In your example, you can get away without copying the data at all, using only basic indexing:
B = A[::2, :, 1:2]
I recommend the following advanced tutorial, which explains the various indexing methods: NumPy MedKit
Once you understand the powerful ways to index arrays (and how they can be combined) it will make sense. If your first try was valid then this would collide with some of the other indexing techniques (reducing your options in other use cases).
In your example you can exploit that the third index covers a continuous range:
A[[0,2],:,1:]
You could also use
A[np.ix_([0,2],[0,1],[1,2])]
which is handy in more general cases, when the latter indices are not continuous. np.ix_ simply constructs three index arrays.
As Sven pointed out in his answer, there is a more efficient way in this specific case (using a view instead of a copied version).
Edit: As pointed out by Sven my answer contained some errors, which I have removed. I still think that his answer is better, but unfortunately I can't delete mine now.
A[(0,2),:,1:]
If you wanted
array([[[ 1, 2],
[ 4, 5]],
[[13, 14],
[16, 17]]])
A[indices you want,rows you want, col you want]