Since collections.Counter is so slow, I am pursuing a faster method of summing mapped values in Python 2.7. It seems like a simple concept and I'm kind of disappointed in the built-in Counter method.
Basically, I need to be able to take arrays like this:
array([[ 0., 2.],
[ 2., 2.],
[ 3., 1.]])
array([[ 0., 3.],
[ 1., 1.],
[ 2., 5.]])
And then "add" them so they look like this:
array([[ 0., 5.],
[ 1., 1.],
[ 2., 7.],
[ 3., 1.]])
If there isn't a good way to do this quickly and efficiently, I'm open to any other ideas that will allow me to do something similar to this, and I'm open to modules other than Numpy.
Thanks!
Edit: Ready for some speedtests?
Intel win 64bit machine. All of the following values are in seconds; 20000 loops.
collections.Counter results:
2.131000, 2.125000, 2.125000
Divakar's union1d + masking results:
1.641000, 1.633000, 1.625000
Divakar's union1d + indexing results:
0.625000, 0.625000, 0.641000
Histogram results:
1.844000, 1.938000, 1.858000
Pandas results:
16.659000, 16.686000, 16.885000
Conclusions: union1d + indexing wins, the array size is too small for Pandas to be effective, and the histogram approach blew my mind with its simplicity but I'm guessing it takes too much overhead to create. All of the responses I received were very good, though. This is what I used to get the numbers. Thanks again!
Edit: And it should be mentioned that using Counter1.update(Counter2.elements()) is terrible despite doing the same exact thing (65.671000 sec).
Later Edit: I've been thinking about this a lot, and I've came to realize that, with Numpy, it might be more effective to fill each array with zeros so that the first column isn't even needed since we can just use the index, and that would also make it much easier to add multiple arrays together as well as do other functions. Additionally, Pandas makes more sense than Numpy since there would be no need to 0-fill, and it would definitely be more effective with large data sets (however, Numpy has the advantage of being compatible on more platforms, like GAE, if that matters at all). Lastly, the answer I checked was definitely the best answer for the exact question I asked--adding the two arrays in the way I showed--but I think what I needed was a change in perspective.
Here's one approach with np.union1d and masking -
def app1(a,b):
c0 = np.union1d(a[:,0],b[:,0])
out = np.zeros((len(c0),2))
out[:,0] = c0
mask1 = np.in1d(c0,a[:,0])
out[mask1,1] = a[:,1]
mask2 = np.in1d(c0,b[:,0])
out[mask2,1] += b[:,1]
return out
Sample run -
In [174]: a
Out[174]:
array([[ 0., 2.],
[ 12., 2.],
[ 23., 1.]])
In [175]: b
Out[175]:
array([[ 0., 3.],
[ 1., 1.],
[ 12., 5.]])
In [176]: app1(a,b)
Out[176]:
array([[ 0., 5.],
[ 1., 1.],
[ 12., 7.],
[ 23., 1.]])
Here's another with np.union1d and indexing -
def app2(a,b):
n = np.maximum(a[:,0].max(), b[:,0].max())+1
c0 = np.union1d(a[:,0],b[:,0])
out0 = np.zeros((int(n), 2))
out0[a[:,0].astype(int),1] = a[:,1]
out0[b[:,0].astype(int),1] += b[:,1]
out = out0[c0.astype(int)]
out[:,0] = c0
return out
For the case where all indices are covered by the first column values in a and b -
def app2_specific(a,b):
c0 = np.union1d(a[:,0],b[:,0])
n = c0[-1]+1
out0 = np.zeros((int(n), 2))
out0[a[:,0].astype(int),1] = a[:,1]
out0[b[:,0].astype(int),1] += b[:,1]
out0[:,0] = c0
return out0
Sample run -
In [234]: a
Out[234]:
array([[ 0., 2.],
[ 2., 2.],
[ 3., 1.]])
In [235]: b
Out[235]:
array([[ 0., 3.],
[ 1., 1.],
[ 2., 5.]])
In [236]: app2_specific(a,b)
Out[236]:
array([[ 0., 5.],
[ 1., 1.],
[ 2., 7.],
[ 3., 1.]])
If you know the number of fields, use np.bincount.
c = np.vstack([a, b])
counts = np.bincount(c[:, 0], weights = c[:, 1], minlength = numFields)
out = np.vstack([np.arange(numFields), counts]).T
This works if you're getting all your data at once. Make a list of your arrays and vstack them. If you're getting data chunks sequentially, you can use np.add.at to do the same thing.
out = np.zeros(2, numFields)
out[:, 0] = np.arange(numFields)
np.add.at(out[:, 1], a[:, 0], a[:, 1])
np.add.at(out[:, 1], b[:, 0], b[:, 1])
You can use a basic histogram, this will deal with gaps, too. You can filter out zero-count entries if need be.
import numpy as np
x = np.array([[ 0., 2.],
[ 2., 2.],
[ 3., 1.]])
y = np.array([[ 0., 3.],
[ 1., 1.],
[ 2., 5.],
[ 5., 3.]])
c, w = np.vstack((x,y)).T
h, b = np.histogram(c, weights=w,
bins=np.arange(c.min(),c.max()+2))
r = np.vstack((b[:-1], h)).T
print(r)
# [[ 0. 5.]
# [ 1. 1.]
# [ 2. 7.]
# [ 3. 1.]
# [ 4. 0.]
# [ 5. 3.]]
r_nonzero = r[r[:,1]!=0]
Pandas have some functions doing exactly what you intend
import pandas as pd
pda = pd.DataFrame(a).set_index(0)
pdb = pd.DataFrame(b).set_index(0)
result = pd.concat([pda, pdb], axis=1).fillna(0).sum(axis=1)
Edit: If you actually need the data back in numpy format, just do
array_res = result.reset_index(name=1).values
This is a quintessential grouping problem, which numpy_indexed (disclaimer: I am its author) was created to solve elegantly and efficiently:
import numpy_indexed as npi
C = np.concatenate([A, B], axis=0)
labels, sums = npi.group_by(C[:, 0]).sum(C[:, 1])
Note: its cleaner to maintain your label arrays as a seperate int array; floats are finicky when it comes to labeling things, with positive and negative zeros, and printed values not relaying all binary state. Better to use ints for that.
Related
I have a list of numpy arrays. These arrays are related to some data sets and iteration. In my list arrays are sorted firstly based on the iterations and then data sets but I want to sort them firstly based on the iterations. This is my list:
all_data=[np.array([[1., 5.],[1., 5.],[1., 5.]]),\
np.array([[2., 5.],[2., 5.],[2., 5.]]),\
np.array([[3., 5.],[3., 5.],[3., 5.]]),\
np.array([[1., 50.],[1., 50.],[1., 50.]]),\
np.array([[2., 50.],[2., 50.],[2., 50.]]),\
np.array([[3., 50.],[3., 50.2],[3., 50.]]),\
np.array([[1., 500.],[1., 500.],[1., 500.]]),\
np.array([[2., 500.],[2., 500.],[2., 500.]]),\
np.array([[3., 500.],[3., 500.],[3., 500.]])]
As it can be seen in my list, the data stored in first three arrays are presenting three iterations (from 1 to 3) of one data set (which their last column is 5). From array number 4 to 6, I have the results of the same three iterations for another data set (which their last column is 50) and last three arrays are related to another data set. I porpusefuly copied this simplified numbers to make a visualization of what I want. I have the numbers iterations and data sets as:
n_data_sets=3.
n_iteration=3.
Then I tried firstly to split my list into the number of data sets using:
data=[all_data[i:i + n_iteration] for i in range(0, len(all_data), n_iteration)]
Then I tried the following code to rearrange my list but it was not successfull:
re_ar=[]
for i in range (len (data)-1):
for j in range (len(data[i])):
re_ar.append([data[i][j], data[i+1][j]])
This is my expected outcome:
[[np.array([[1., 5.],[1., 5.],[1., 5.]]),\
np.array([[1., 50.],[1., 50.],[1., 50.]]),\
np.array([[1., 500.],[1., 500.],[1., 500.]])],\
[np.array([[2., 5.],[2., 5.],[2., 5.]]),\
np.array([[2., 50.],[2., 50.],[2., 50.]]),\
np.array([[2., 500.],[2., 500.],[2., 500.]])],\
[np.array([[3., 5.],[3., 5.],[3., 5.]]),\
np.array([[3., 50.],[3., 50.2],[3., 50.]]),\
np.array([[3., 500.],[3., 500.],[3., 500.]])]]
What I think you are saying is that you want every n-th element from the list:
n_iteration = 3
data=[all_data[i:: n_iteration] for i in range(n_iteration)]
which gives
[[array([[1., 5.], [1., 5.], [1., 5.]]),
array([[ 1., 50.], [ 1., 50.], [ 1., 50.]]),
array([[ 1., 500.], [ 1., 500.], [ 1., 500.]])],
[array([[2., 5.], [2., 5.], [2., 5.]]),
array([[ 2., 50.], [ 2., 50.], [ 2., 50.]]),
array([[ 2., 500.], [ 2., 500.], [ 2., 500.]])],
[array([[3., 5.], [3., 5.], [3., 5.]]),
array([[ 3. , 50. ], [ 3. , 50.2], [ 3. , 50. ]]),
array([[ 3., 500.], [ 3., 500.], [ 3., 500.]])]]
I think I've misunderstood something with indexing in numpy.
I have a 3D-numpy array of shape (dim_x, dim_y, dim_z) and I want to find the maximum along the third axis (dim_z), and set its value to 1 and all the others to zero.
The problem is that I end up with several 1 in the same row, even if values are different.
Here is the code :
>>> test = np.random.rand(2,3,2)
>>> test
array([[[ 0.13110146, 0.07138861],
[ 0.84444158, 0.35296986],
[ 0.97414498, 0.63728852]],
[[ 0.61301975, 0.02313646],
[ 0.14251848, 0.91090492],
[ 0.14217992, 0.41549218]]])
>>> result = np.zeros_like(test)
>>> result[:test.shape[0], np.arange(test.shape[1]), np.argmax(test, axis=2)]=1
>>> result
array([[[ 1., 0.],
[ 1., 1.],
[ 1., 1.]],
[[ 1., 0.],
[ 1., 1.],
[ 1., 1.]]])
I was expecting to end with :
array([[[ 1., 0.],
[ 1., 0.],
[ 1., 0.]],
[[ 1., 0.],
[ 0., 1.],
[ 0., 1.]]])
Probably I'm missing something here. From what I've understood, 0:dim_x, np.arange(dim_y) returns dim_x of dim_y tuples and np.argmax(test, axis=dim_z) has the shape (dim_x, dim_y) so if the indexing is of the form [x, y, z] a couple [x, y] is not supposed to appear twice.
Could someone explain me where I'm wrong ? Thanks in advance.
What we are looking for
We get the argmax indices along the last axis -
idx = np.argmax(test, axis=2)
For the given sample data, we have idx :
array([[0, 0, 0],
[0, 1, 1]])
Now, idx covers the first and second axes, while getting those argmax indices.
To assign the corresponding ones in the output, we need to create range arrays for the first two axes covering the lengths along those and aligned according to the shape of idx. Now, idx is a 2D array of shape (m,n), where m = test.shape[0] and n = test.shape[1].
Thus, the range arrays for assignment into first two axes of output must be -
X = np.arange(test.shape[0])[:,None]
Y = np.arange(test.shape[1])
Notice, the extension of the first range array to 2D is needed to have it aligned against the rows of idx and Y would align against the cols of idx -
In [239]: X
Out[239]:
array([[0],
[1]])
In [240]: Y
Out[240]: array([0, 1, 2])
Schematically put -
idx :
Y array
--------->
x x x | X array
x x x |
v
The fault in original code
Your code was -
result[:test.shape[0], np.arange(test.shape[1]), ..
This is essentially :
result[:, np.arange(test.shape[1]), ...
So, you are selecting all elements along the first axis, instead of only selecting the corresponding ones that correspond to idx indices. In that process, you were selecting a lot more than required elements for assignment and hence you were seeing many more than required 1s in result array.
The correction
Thus, the only correction needed was indexing into the first axis with the range array and a working solution would be -
result[np.arange(test.shape[0])[:,None], np.arange(test.shape[1]), ...
The alternative(s)
Alternatively, using the range arrays created earlier with X and Y -
result[X,Y,idx] = 1
Another way to get X,Y would be with np.mgrid -
m,n = test.shape[:2]
X,Y = np.ogrid[:m,:n]
I think there's a problem with mixing basic (slice) and advanced indexing. It's easier to see when selecting value from an array than with this assignment; but it can result in transposed axes. For a problem like this it is better use advanced indexing all around, as provided by ix_
In [24]: test = np.random.rand(2,3,2)
In [25]: idx=np.argmax(test,axis=2)
In [26]: idx
Out[26]:
array([[1, 0, 1],
[0, 1, 1]], dtype=int32)
with basic and advanced:
In [31]: res1 = np.zeros_like(test)
In [32]: res1[:, np.arange(test.shape[1]), idx]=1
In [33]: res1
Out[33]:
array([[[ 1., 1.],
[ 1., 1.],
[ 0., 1.]],
[[ 1., 1.],
[ 1., 1.],
[ 0., 1.]]])
with advanced:
In [35]: I,J = np.ix_(range(test.shape[0]), range(test.shape[1]))
In [36]: I
Out[36]:
array([[0],
[1]])
In [37]: J
Out[37]: array([[0, 1, 2]])
In [38]: res2 = np.zeros_like(test)
In [40]: res2[I, J , idx]=1
In [41]: res2
Out[41]:
array([[[ 0., 1.],
[ 1., 0.],
[ 0., 1.]],
[[ 1., 0.],
[ 0., 1.],
[ 0., 1.]]])
On further thought, the use of the slice for the 1st dimension is just wrong , if the goal is to set or find the 6 argmax values
In [54]: test
Out[54]:
array([[[ 0.15288242, 0.36013289],
[ 0.90794601, 0.15265616],
[ 0.34014976, 0.53804266]],
[[ 0.97979479, 0.15898605],
[ 0.04933804, 0.89804999],
[ 0.10199319, 0.76170911]]])
In [55]: test[I, J, idx]
Out[55]:
array([[ 0.36013289, 0.90794601, 0.53804266],
[ 0.97979479, 0.89804999, 0.76170911]])
In [56]: test[:, J, idx]
Out[56]:
array([[[ 0.36013289, 0.90794601, 0.53804266],
[ 0.15288242, 0.15265616, 0.53804266]],
[[ 0.15898605, 0.04933804, 0.76170911],
[ 0.97979479, 0.89804999, 0.76170911]]])
With the slice it selects a (2,3,2) set of values from test (or res), not the intended (2,3). There 2 extra rows.
Here is an easier way to do it:
>>> test == test.max(axis=2, keepdims=1)
array([[[ True, False],
[ True, False],
[ True, False]],
[[ True, False],
[False, True],
[False, True]]], dtype=bool)
...and if you really want that as floating-point 1.0 and 0.0, then convert it:
>>> (test==test.max(axis=2, keepdims=1)).astype(float)
array([[[ 1., 0.],
[ 1., 0.],
[ 1., 0.]],
[[ 1., 0.],
[ 0., 1.],
[ 0., 1.]]])
Here is a way to do it with only one winner per row-column combo (i.e. no ties, as discussed in comments):
rowmesh, colmesh = np.meshgrid(range(test.shape[0]), range(test.shape[1]), indexing='ij')
maxloc = np.argmax(test, axis=2)
flatind = np.ravel_multi_index( [rowmesh, colmesh, maxloc ], test.shape )
result = np.zeros_like(test)
result.flat[flatind] = 1
UPDATE after reading hpaulj's answer:
rowmesh, colmesh = np.ix_(range(test.shape[0]), range(test.shape[1]))
is a more-efficient, more numpythonic, alternative to my meshgrid call (the rest of the code stays the same)
The issue of why your approach fails is hard to explain, but here's one place where intuition could start: your slicing approach says "all rows, times all columns, times a certain sequence of layers". How many elements is that slice in total? By contrast, how many elements do you actually want to set to 1? It can be instructive to look at the values you get when you view the corresponding test values of the slice you're trying to assign to:
>>> test[:, :, maxloc].shape
(2, 3, 2, 3) # oops! it's because maxloc itself is 2x3
>>> test[:, :, maxloc]
array([[[[ 0.13110146, 0.13110146, 0.13110146],
[ 0.13110146, 0.07138861, 0.07138861]],
[[ 0.84444158, 0.84444158, 0.84444158],
[ 0.84444158, 0.35296986, 0.35296986]],
[[ 0.97414498, 0.97414498, 0.97414498],
[ 0.97414498, 0.63728852, 0.63728852]]],
[[[ 0.61301975, 0.61301975, 0.61301975],
[ 0.61301975, 0.02313646, 0.02313646]],
[[ 0.14251848, 0.14251848, 0.14251848],
[ 0.14251848, 0.91090492, 0.91090492]],
[[ 0.14217992, 0.14217992, 0.14217992],
[ 0.14217992, 0.41549218, 0.41549218]]]]) # note the repetition, because in maxloc you're repeatedly asking for layer 0 sometimes, and sometimes repeatedly for layer 1
Say I had the following:
x = np.array([[1.,2.,3.,4.],[2.,3.,4.,5,],[1.,3.,5.,6.]])
What would the syntax be in order to select say, the first two columns of every row? (So [[1.,2.],[2.,3.],[1.,3.]]).
Ultimately I want to run a loop of the form:
for j in range(len(x)):
a = x[1,2:j] * #something
Where x[1,2:j] refers to what I am trying to achieve in my question. Thanks in advance!
You can use np.hsplit() (Split an array into multiple sub-arrays horizontally (column-wise).) then chose the fist part :
>>> np.hsplit(x,2)[0]
array([[ 1., 2.],
[ 2., 3.],
[ 1., 3.]])
Or you can just use slicing :
>>> x[:, :2]
array([[ 1., 2.],
[ 2., 3.],
[ 1., 3.]])
You can slice axis 1 of the array x:
>>> x[:, :2]
array([[ 1., 2.],
[ 2., 3.],
[ 1., 3.]])
The : for axis 0 effectively means "every row". The :2 in axis 1 means "get the first two columns (0 and 1)".
Slicing in multiple dimensions works similarly to Python lists and other iterables,
start:stop:step
You can specify a slice for each dimension of the array, or use : to get everything along the axis.
I want to center multi-dimensional data in a n x m matrix (<class 'numpy.matrixlib.defmatrix.matrix'>), let's say X . I defined a new array ones(645), lets say centVector to produce the mean for every row in matrix X. And now I want to iterate every row in X, compute the mean and assign this value to the corresponding index in centVector. Isn't this possible in a single row in scipy/numpy? I am not used to this language and think about something like:
centVector = ones(645)
for key, val in X:
centVector[key] = centVector[key] * (val.sum/val.size)
Afterwards I just need to subtract the mean in every Row:
X = X - centVector
How can I simplify this?
EDIT: And besides, the above code is not actually working - for a key-value loop I need something like enumerate(X). And I am not sure if X - centVector is returning the proper solution.
First, some example data:
>>> import numpy as np
>>> X = np.matrix(np.arange(25).reshape((5,5)))
>>> print X
[[ 0 1 2 3 4]
[ 5 6 7 8 9]
[10 11 12 13 14]
[15 16 17 18 19]
[20 21 22 23 24]]
numpy conveniently has a mean function. By default however, it'll give you the mean over all the values in the array. Since you want the mean of each row, you need to specify the axis of the operation:
>>> np.mean(X, axis=1)
matrix([[ 2.],
[ 7.],
[ 12.],
[ 17.],
[ 22.]])
Note that axis=1 says: find the mean along the columns (for each row), where 0 = rows and 1 = columns (and so on). Now, you can subtract this mean from your X, as you did originally.
Unsolicited advice
Usually, it's best to avoid the matrix class (see docs). If you remove the np.matrix call from the example data, then you get a normal numpy array.
Unfortunately, in this particular case, using an array slightly complicates things because np.mean will return a 1D array:
>>> X = np.arange(25).reshape((5,5))
>>> r_means = np.mean(X, axis=1)
>>> print r_means
[ 2. 7. 12. 17. 22.]
If you try to subtract this from X, r_means gets broadcast to a row vector, instead of a column vector:
>>> X - r_means
array([[ -2., -6., -10., -14., -18.],
[ 3., -1., -5., -9., -13.],
[ 8., 4., 0., -4., -8.],
[ 13., 9., 5., 1., -3.],
[ 18., 14., 10., 6., 2.]])
So, you'll have to reshape the 1D array into an N x 1 column vector:
>>> X - r_means.reshape((-1, 1))
array([[-2., -1., 0., 1., 2.],
[-2., -1., 0., 1., 2.],
[-2., -1., 0., 1., 2.],
[-2., -1., 0., 1., 2.],
[-2., -1., 0., 1., 2.]])
The -1 passed to reshape tells numpy to figure out this dimension based on the original array shape and the rest of the dimensions of the new array. Alternatively, you could have reshaped the array using r_means[:, np.newaxis].
In NumPy, how can you efficiently make a 1-D object into a 2-D object where the singleton dimension is inferred from the current object (i.e. a list should go to either a 1xlength or lengthx1 vector)?
# This comes from some other, unchangeable code that reads data files.
my_list = [1,2,3,4]
# What I want to do:
my_numpy_array[some_index,:] = numpy.asarray(my_list)
# The above doesn't work because of a broadcast error, so:
my_numpy_array[some_index,:] = numpy.reshape(numpy.asarray(my_list),(1,len(my_list)))
# How to do the above without the call to reshape?
# Is there a way to directly convert a list, or vector, that doesn't have a
# second dimension, into a 1 by length "array" (but really it's still a vector)?
In the most general case, the easiest way to add extra dimensions to an array is by using the keyword None when indexing at the position to add the extra dimension. For example
my_array = numpy.array([1,2,3,4])
my_array[None, :] # shape 1x4
my_array[:, None] # shape 4x1
Why not simply add square brackets?
>> my_list
[1, 2, 3, 4]
>>> numpy.asarray([my_list])
array([[1, 2, 3, 4]])
>>> numpy.asarray([my_list]).shape
(1, 4)
.. wait, on second thought, why is your slice assignment failing? It shouldn't:
>>> my_list = [1,2,3,4]
>>> d = numpy.ones((3,4))
>>> d
array([[ 1., 1., 1., 1.],
[ 1., 1., 1., 1.],
[ 1., 1., 1., 1.]])
>>> d[0,:] = my_list
>>> d[1,:] = numpy.asarray(my_list)
>>> d[2,:] = numpy.asarray([my_list])
>>> d
array([[ 1., 2., 3., 4.],
[ 1., 2., 3., 4.],
[ 1., 2., 3., 4.]])
even:
>>> d[1,:] = (3*numpy.asarray(my_list)).T
>>> d
array([[ 1., 2., 3., 4.],
[ 3., 6., 9., 12.],
[ 1., 2., 3., 4.]])
import numpy as np
a = np.random.random(10)
sel = np.at_least2d(a)[idx]
What about expand_dims?
np.expand_dims(np.array([1,2,3,4]), 0)
has shape (1,4) while
np.expand_dims(np.array([1,2,3,4]), 1)
has shape (4,1).
You can always use dstack() to replicate your array:
import numpy
my_list = array([1,2,3,4])
my_list_2D = numpy.dstack((my_list,my_list));