count overlap between two numpy arrays [duplicate] - python

I want to get the intersecting (common) rows across two 2D numpy arrays. E.g., if the following arrays are passed as inputs:
array([[1, 4],
[2, 5],
[3, 6]])
array([[1, 4],
[3, 6],
[7, 8]])
the output should be:
array([[1, 4],
[3, 6])
I know how to do this with loops. I'm looking at a Pythonic/Numpy way to do this.

For short arrays, using sets is probably the clearest and most readable way to do it.
Another way is to use numpy.intersect1d. You'll have to trick it into treating the rows as a single value, though... This makes things a bit less readable...
import numpy as np
A = np.array([[1,4],[2,5],[3,6]])
B = np.array([[1,4],[3,6],[7,8]])
nrows, ncols = A.shape
dtype={'names':['f{}'.format(i) for i in range(ncols)],
'formats':ncols * [A.dtype]}
C = np.intersect1d(A.view(dtype), B.view(dtype))
# This last bit is optional if you're okay with "C" being a structured array...
C = C.view(A.dtype).reshape(-1, ncols)
For large arrays, this should be considerably faster than using sets.

You could use Python's sets:
>>> import numpy as np
>>> A = np.array([[1,4],[2,5],[3,6]])
>>> B = np.array([[1,4],[3,6],[7,8]])
>>> aset = set([tuple(x) for x in A])
>>> bset = set([tuple(x) for x in B])
>>> np.array([x for x in aset & bset])
array([[1, 4],
[3, 6]])
As Rob Cowie points out, this can be done more concisely as
np.array([x for x in set(tuple(x) for x in A) & set(tuple(x) for x in B)])
There's probably a way to do this without all the going back and forth from arrays to tuples, but it's not coming to me right now.

I could not understand why there is no suggested pure numpy way to get this working. So I found one, that uses numpy broadcast. The basic idea is to transform one of the arrays to 3d by axes swapping. Let's construct 2 arrays:
a=np.random.randint(10, size=(5, 3))
b=np.zeros_like(a)
b[:4,:]=a[np.random.randint(a.shape[0], size=4), :]
With my run it gave:
a=array([[5, 6, 3],
[8, 1, 0],
[2, 1, 4],
[8, 0, 6],
[6, 7, 6]])
b=array([[2, 1, 4],
[2, 1, 4],
[6, 7, 6],
[5, 6, 3],
[0, 0, 0]])
The steps are (arrays can be interchanged) :
#a is nxm and b is kxm
c = np.swapaxes(a[:,:,None],1,2)==b #transform a to nx1xm
# c has nxkxm dimensions due to comparison broadcast
# each nxixj slice holds comparison matrix between a[j,:] and b[i,:]
# Decrease dimension to nxk with product:
c = np.prod(c,axis=2)
#To get around duplicates://
# Calculate cumulative sum in k-th dimension
c= c*np.cumsum(c,axis=0)
# compare with 1, so that to get only one 'True' statement by row
c=c==1
#//
# sum in k-th dimension, so that a nx1 vector is produced
c=np.sum(c,axis=1).astype(bool)
# The intersection between a and b is a[c]
result=a[c]
In a function with 2 lines for used memory reduction (correct me if wrong):
def array_row_intersection(a,b):
tmp=np.prod(np.swapaxes(a[:,:,None],1,2)==b,axis=2)
return a[np.sum(np.cumsum(tmp,axis=0)*tmp==1,axis=1).astype(bool)]
which gave result for my example:
result=array([[5, 6, 3],
[2, 1, 4],
[6, 7, 6]])
This is faster than set solutions, as it makes use only of simple numpy operations, while it reduces constantly dimensions, and is ideal for two big matrices. I guess I might have made mistakes in my comments, as I got the answer by experimentation and instinct. The equivalent for column intersection can either be found by transposing the arrays or by changing the steps a little. Also, if duplicates are wanted, then the steps inside "//" have to be skipped. The function can be edited to return only the boolean array of the indices, which came handy to me ,while trying to get different arrays indices with the same vector. Benchmark for the voted answer and mine (number of elements in each dimension plays role on what to choose):
Code:
def voted_answer(A,B):
nrows, ncols = A.shape
dtype={'names':['f{}'.format(i) for i in range(ncols)],
'formats':ncols * [A.dtype]}
C = np.intersect1d(A.view(dtype), B.view(dtype))
return C.view(A.dtype).reshape(-1, ncols)
a_small=np.random.randint(10, size=(10, 10))
b_small=np.zeros_like(a_small)
b_small=a_small[np.random.randint(a_small.shape[0],size=[a_small.shape[0]]),:]
a_big_row=np.random.randint(10, size=(10, 1000))
b_big_row=a_big_row[np.random.randint(a_big_row.shape[0],size=[a_big_row.shape[0]]),:]
a_big_col=np.random.randint(10, size=(1000, 10))
b_big_col=a_big_col[np.random.randint(a_big_col.shape[0],size=[a_big_col.shape[0]]),:]
a_big_all=np.random.randint(10, size=(100,100))
b_big_all=a_big_all[np.random.randint(a_big_all.shape[0],size=[a_big_all.shape[0]]),:]
print 'Small arrays:'
print '\t Voted answer:',timeit.timeit(lambda:voted_answer(a_small,b_small),number=100)/100
print '\t Proposed answer:',timeit.timeit(lambda:array_row_intersection(a_small,b_small),number=100)/100
print 'Big column arrays:'
print '\t Voted answer:',timeit.timeit(lambda:voted_answer(a_big_col,b_big_col),number=100)/100
print '\t Proposed answer:',timeit.timeit(lambda:array_row_intersection(a_big_col,b_big_col),number=100)/100
print 'Big row arrays:'
print '\t Voted answer:',timeit.timeit(lambda:voted_answer(a_big_row,b_big_row),number=100)/100
print '\t Proposed answer:',timeit.timeit(lambda:array_row_intersection(a_big_row,b_big_row),number=100)/100
print 'Big arrays:'
print '\t Voted answer:',timeit.timeit(lambda:voted_answer(a_big_all,b_big_all),number=100)/100
print '\t Proposed answer:',timeit.timeit(lambda:array_row_intersection(a_big_all,b_big_all),number=100)/100
with results:
Small arrays:
Voted answer: 7.47108459473e-05
Proposed answer: 2.47001647949e-05
Big column arrays:
Voted answer: 0.00198730945587
Proposed answer: 0.0560171294212
Big row arrays:
Voted answer: 0.00500325918198
Proposed answer: 0.000308241844177
Big arrays:
Voted answer: 0.000864889621735
Proposed answer: 0.00257176160812
Following verdict is that if you have to compare 2 big 2d arrays of 2d points then use voted answer. If you have big matrices in all dimensions, voted answer is the best one by all means. So, it depends on what you choose each time.

Numpy broadcasting
We can create a boolean mask using broadcasting which can be then used to filter the rows in array A which are also present in array B
A = np.array([[1,4],[2,5],[3,6]])
B = np.array([[1,4],[3,6],[7,8]])
m = (A[:, None] == B).all(-1).any(1)
>>> A[m]
array([[1, 4],
[3, 6]])

Another way to achieve this using structured array:
>>> a = np.array([[3, 1, 2], [5, 8, 9], [7, 4, 3]])
>>> b = np.array([[2, 3, 0], [3, 1, 2], [7, 4, 3]])
>>> av = a.view([('', a.dtype)] * a.shape[1]).ravel()
>>> bv = b.view([('', b.dtype)] * b.shape[1]).ravel()
>>> np.intersect1d(av, bv).view(a.dtype).reshape(-1, a.shape[1])
array([[3, 1, 2],
[7, 4, 3]])
Just for clarity, the structured view looks like this:
>>> a.view([('', a.dtype)] * a.shape[1])
array([[(3, 1, 2)],
[(5, 8, 9)],
[(7, 4, 3)]],
dtype=[('f0', '<i8'), ('f1', '<i8'), ('f2', '<i8')])

np.array(set(map(tuple, b)).difference(set(map(tuple, a))))
This could also work

Without Index
Visit https://gist.github.com/RashidLadj/971c7235ce796836853fcf55b4876f3c
def intersect2D(Array_A, Array_B):
"""
Find row intersection between 2D numpy arrays, a and b.
"""
# ''' Using Tuple ''' #
intersectionList = list(set([tuple(x) for x in Array_A for y in Array_B if(tuple(x) == tuple(y))]))
print ("intersectionList = \n",intersectionList)
# ''' Using Numpy function "array_equal" ''' #
""" This method is valid for an ndarray """
intersectionList = list(set([tuple(x) for x in Array_A for y in Array_B if(np.array_equal(x, y))]))
print ("intersectionList = \n",intersectionList)
# ''' Using set and bitwise and '''
intersectionList = [list(y) for y in (set([tuple(x) for x in Array_A]) & set([tuple(x) for x in Array_B]))]
print ("intersectionList = \n",intersectionList)
return intersectionList
With Index
Visit https://gist.github.com/RashidLadj/bac71f3d3380064de2f9abe0ae43c19e
def intersect2D(Array_A, Array_B):
"""
Find row intersection between 2D numpy arrays, a and b.
Returns another numpy array with shared rows and index of items in A & B arrays
"""
# [[IDX], [IDY], [value]] where Equal
# ''' Using Tuple ''' #
IndexEqual = np.asarray([(i, j, x) for i,x in enumerate(Array_A) for j, y in enumerate (Array_B) if(tuple(x) == tuple(y))]).T
# ''' Using Numpy array_equal ''' #
IndexEqual = np.asarray([(i, j, x) for i,x in enumerate(Array_A) for j, y in enumerate (Array_B) if(np.array_equal(x, y))]).T
idx, idy, intersectionList = (IndexEqual[0], IndexEqual[1], IndexEqual[2]) if len(IndexEqual) != 0 else ([], [], [])
return intersectionList, idx, idy

A = np.array([[1,4],[2,5],[3,6]])
B = np.array([[1,4],[3,6],[7,8]])
def matching_rows(A,B):
matches=[i for i in range(B.shape[0]) if np.any(np.all(A==B[i],axis=1))]
if len(matches)==0:
return B[matches]
return np.unique(B[matches],axis=0)
>>> matching_rows(A,B)
array([[1, 4],
[3, 6]])
This of course assumes the rows are all the same length.

import numpy as np
A=np.array([[1, 4],
[2, 5],
[3, 6]])
B=np.array([[1, 4],
[3, 6],
[7, 8]])
intersetingRows=[(B==irow).all(axis=1).any() for irow in A]
print(A[intersetingRows])

Related

Numpy double-slice assignment with integer indexing followed by boolean indexing

I already know that Numpy "double-slice" with fancy indexing creates copies instead of views, and the solution seems to be to convert them to one single slice (e.g. This question). However, I am facing this particular problem where i need to deal with an integer indexing followed by boolean indexing and I am at a loss what to do. The problem (simplified) is as follows:
a = np.random.randn(2, 3, 4, 4)
idx_x = np.array([[1, 2], [1, 2], [1, 2]])
idx_y = np.array([[0, 0], [1, 1], [2, 2]])
print(a[..., idx_y, idx_x].shape) # (2, 3, 3, 2)
mask = (np.random.randn(2, 3, 3, 2) > 0)
a[..., idx_y, idx_x][mask] = 1 # assignment doesn't work
How can I make the assignment work?
Not sure, but an idea is to do the broadcasting manually and adding the mask respectively just like Tim suggests. idx_x and idx_y both have the same shape (3,2) which will be broadcasted to the shape (6,6) from the cartesian product (3*2)^2.
x = np.broadcast_to(idx_x.ravel(), (6,6))
y = np.broadcast_to(idx_y.ravel(), (6,6))
# this should be the same as
x,y = np.meshgrid(idx_x, idx_y)
Now reshape the mask to the broadcasted indices and use it to select
mask = mask.reshape(6,6)
a[..., x[mask], y[mask]] = 1
The assignment now works, but I am not sure if this is the exact assignment you wanted.
Ok apparently I am making things complicated. No need to combine the indexing. The following code solves the problem elegantly:
b = a[..., idx_y, idx_x]
b[mask] = 1
a[..., idx_y, idx_x] = b
print(a[..., idx_y, idx_x][mask]) # all 1s
EDIT: Use #Kevin's solution which actually gets the dimensions correct!
I haven't tried it specifically on your sample code but I had a similar issue before. I think I solved it by applying the mask to the indices instead, something like:
a[..., idx_y[mask], idx_x[mask]] = 1
-that way, numpy can assign the values to the a array correctly.
EDIT2: Post some test code as comments remove formatting.
a = np.arange(27).reshape([3, 3, 3])
ind_x = np.array([[0, 0], [1, 2]])
ind_y = np.array([[1, 2], [1, 1]])
x = np.broadcast_to(ind_x.ravel(), (4, 4))
y = np.broadcast_to(ind_y.ravel(), (4, 4)).T
# x1, y2 = np.meshgrid(ind_x, ind_y) # above should be the same as this
mask = a[:, ind_y, ind_x] % 2 == 0 # what should this reshape to?
# a[..., x[mask], y[mask]] = 1 # Then you can mask away (may also need to reshape a or the masked x or y)

Use information of two arrays to create a third one

I have two numpy-arrays and want to create a third one with the information in these twos.
Here is a simple example:
have = np.array([[1, 2, 3, 4], [5, 6, 7, 8]])
use = np.array([[2], [3]])
solution = np.array([[1, 1, 3, 4], [5, 5, 5, 8]])
What I want is to use the "use"-array, which gives me the number of how often I want to use the first element in each row from my "have"-array.
So the 2 in "use" means, that I want to have two times a "1" in my new array "solution". Similary for the "3" in use, I want that my new array has 3 times a "5". The rest from have should be the same.
It is important to use the "use"-array for doing this (or a numpy-array in general).
Do you have some ideas?
If there are only small such data structures and performance is not an issue then you can do this so simple:
np.array([ [a[0]]*b[0]+list(a[b[0]:]) for a,b in zip(have,use)])
Simply iterate through the have and replace the values based on the use.
Use:
for i in range(use.shape[0]):
have[i, :use[i, 0]] = np.repeat(have[i, 0], use[i, 0])
Using only numpy operations:
First create a boolean mask of same size as have. mask(i, j) is True if j < use[i, j] otherwise it's False. So mask is True for indices which are to be replaced by first column value. Now use np.where to replace.
n, m = have.shape
mask = np.repeat(np.arange(m)[None, :], n, axis = 0) < use
have = np.where(mask, have[:, 0:1], have)
Output:
>>> have
array([[1, 1, 3, 4],
[5, 5, 5, 8]])
If performance matters, you can use np.apply_along_axis().
import numpy as np
have = np.array([[1, 2, 3, 4], [5, 6, 7, 8]])
use = np.array([[2], [3]])
def rep1st(arr):
rep = arr[0]
res = np.repeat(arr[1], rep)
res = np.concatenate([res, arr[rep+1:]])
return res
solution = np.apply_along_axis(rep1st, 1, np.concatenate([use, have], axis=1))
update:
As #hpaulj said, actually the method using apply_along_axis above is not as efficient as I expected. I misunderstood it. Reference: numpy np.apply_along_axis function speed up?.
However, I made some test on current methods:
import numpy as np
from timeit import timeit
def rep1st(arr):
rep = arr[0]
res = np.repeat(arr[1], rep)
res = np.concatenate([res, arr[rep + 1:]])
return res
def test(row, col, run):
have = np.random.randint(0, 100, size=(row, col))
use = np.random.randint(0, col, size=(row, 1))
d = locals()
d.update(globals())
# method by me
t1 = timeit("np.apply_along_axis(rep1st, 1, np.concatenate([use, have], axis=1))", number=run, globals=d)
# method by #quantummind
t2 = timeit("np.array([[a[0]] * b[0] + list(a[b[0]:]) for a, b in zip(have, use)])", number=run, globals=d)
# method by #Amit Vikram Singh
t3 = timeit(
"np.where(np.repeat(np.arange(have.shape[1])[None, :], have.shape[0], axis=0) < use, have[:, 0:1], have)",
number=run, globals=d
)
print(f"{t1:8.6f}, {t2:8.6f}, {t3:8.6f}")
test(1000, 10, 10)
test(100, 100, 10)
test(10, 1000, 10)
test(1000000, 10, 1)
test(100000, 100, 1)
test(10000, 1000, 1)
test(1000, 10000, 1)
test(100, 100000, 1)
test(10, 1000000, 1)
results:
0.062488, 0.028484, 0.000408
0.010787, 0.013811, 0.000270
0.001057, 0.009146, 0.000216
6.146863, 3.210017, 0.044232
0.585289, 1.186013, 0.034110
0.091086, 0.961570, 0.026294
0.039448, 0.917052, 0.022553
0.028719, 0.919377, 0.022751
0.035121, 1.027036, 0.025216
It shows that the second method proposed by #Amit Vikram Singh always works well even when the arrays are huge.

generating matrix of pairs from two object vectors using numpy

I have two object arrays not necessarily of the same length:
import numpy as np
class Obj_A:
def __init__(self,n):
self.type = 'a'+str(n)
def __eq__(self,other):
return self.type==other.type
class Obj_B:
def __init__(self,n):
self.type = 'b'+str(n)
def __eq__(self,other):
return self.type==other.type
a = np.array([Obj_A(n) for n in range(2)])
b = np.array([Obj_B(n) for n in range(3)])
I would like to generate the matrix
mat = np.array([[[a[0],b[0]],[a[0],b[1]],[a[0],b[2]]],
[[a[1],b[0]],[a[1],b[1]],[a[1],b[2]]]])
this matrix has shape (len(a),len(b),2). Its elements are
mat[i,j] = [a[i],b[j]]
A solution is
mat = np.empty((len(a),len(b),2),dtype='object')
for i,aa in enumerate(a):
for j,bb in enumerate(b):
mat[i,j] = np.array([aa,bb],dtype='object')
but this is too expensive for my problem, which has O(len(a)) = O(len(b)) = 1e5.
I suspect there is a clean numpy solution involving np.repeat, np.tile and np.transpose, similar to the accepted answer here, but the output in this case does not simply reshape to the desired result.
I would suggest using np.meshgrid(), which takes two input arrays and repeats both along different axes so that looking at corresponding positions of the outputs gets you all possible combinations. For example:
>>> x, y = np.meshgrid([1, 2, 3], [4, 5])
>>> x
array([[1, 2, 3],
[1, 2, 3]])
>>> y
array([[4, 4, 4],
[5, 5, 5]])
In your case, you can put the two arrays together and transpose them into the proper configuration. Based on some experimentation I think this should work for you:
>>> np.transpose(np.meshgrid(a, b), (2, 1, 0))

NumPy: A General Vectorized Method to Apply a Function Returning a Matrix to Each Row of a Matrix

I am looking for a vectorized method to apply a function returning a 2-dimensional array to each row of a 2-dimensional array and produce a 3-dimensional array.
More specifically, I have a function that takes a vector of length p and returns a 2-dimensional array (m by n). The following is a stylized version of my function:
import numpy as np
def test_func(x, m, n):
# this function is just an example and does not do anything useful.
# but, the dimensions of input and output is what I want to convey.
np.random.seed(x.sum())
return np.random.randint(5, size=(m, n))
I have a t by p 2-dimensional input data:
t = 5
p = 6
input_data = np.arange(t*p).reshape(t, p)
input_data
Out[403]:
array([[ 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, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29]])
I want to apply test_func to each row of the input_data. Since test_func returns a matrix, I expect to create a 3-dimensional (t by m by n) array. I can produce my desired result with the following code:
output_data = np.array([test_func(x, m=3, n=2) for x in input_data])
output_data
Out[405]:
array([[[0, 4],
[0, 4],
[3, 3],
[1, 0]],
[[1, 0],
[1, 0],
[4, 1],
[2, 4]],
[[3, 3],
[3, 0],
[1, 4],
[0, 2]],
[[2, 4],
[2, 1],
[3, 2],
[3, 1]],
[[3, 4],
[4, 3],
[0, 3],
[3, 0]]])
However, this code does not seem to be the most optimal code. It has an explicit for which reduces the speed and it uses an intermediary list which unnecessarily allocates extra memory. So, I like to find a vectorized solution. My best guess was the following code, but it does not work.
output = np.apply_along_axis(test_func, m=3, n=2, axis=1, arr=input_data)
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<ipython-input-406-5bef44da348f>", line 1, in <module>
output = np.apply_along_axis(test_func, m=3, n=2, axis=1, arr=input_data)
File "C:\Anaconda\lib\site-packages\numpy\lib\shape_base.py", line 117, in apply_along_axis
outarr[tuple(i.tolist())] = res
ValueError: could not broadcast input array from shape (3,2) into shape (3)
Would you please suggest an efficient way to this problem.
UPDATE
Below is the actual function that I want to apply. It performs Multidimensional Classical Scaling. The objective of the question was not to optimize the internal workings of the function, but to find a generalize method for vectorizing the function apply. But, in the spirit of full disclosure I put the actual function here. Note that this function only works if p == m*(m-1)/2
def mds_classical_scaling(v, m, n):
# create a symmetric distance matrix from the elements in vector v
D = np.zeros((m, m))
D[np.triu_indices(4, k=1)] = v
D = (D + D.T)
# Transform the symmetric matrix
A = -0.5 * (D**2)
# Create centering matrix
H = np.eye(m) - np.ones((m, m))/m
# Doubly center A and store in B
B = H*A*H
# B should be positive definite otherwise the function
# would not work.
mu, V = eig(B)
#index of largest eigen values
ndx = (-mu).argsort()
# calculate the point configuration from largest eigen values
# and corresponding eigen vectors
Mu1 = diag(mu[ndx][:n])
V1 = V[:, ndx[:n]]
X = V1*sqrt(Mu1)
return X
Any performance boost I get from vectorization is negligible comparing to the actual function. The main reason was learning:)
ali_m's comment is spot-on: for serious speed gains, you should be more specific about what the function does.
That being said, if you still want to use np.apply_along_axis to get a (possibly) small speed-boost, then consider (after rereading that function's docstring) that you can easily
wrap your function to produce 1D arrays,
use np.apply_along_axis with that wrapper and
reshape the resulting array:
def test_func_wrapper(*args, **kwargs):
return test_func(*args, **kwargs).ravel()
output = np.apply_along_axis(test_func_wrapper, m=3, n=2, axis=1, arr=input_data)
np.allclose(output.reshape(5,3, -1), output_data)
# output: True
Note that this is a generic way to speed up such loops. You'll probably get better performance if you use functionality more specific to the actual problem.

Python NumPy: How to fill a matrix using an equation

I wish to initialise a matrix A, using the equation A_i,j = f(i,j) for some f (It's not important what this is).
How can I do so concisely avoiding a situation where I have two for loops?
numpy.fromfunction fits the bill here.
Example from doc:
>>> import numpy as np
>>> np.fromfunction(lambda i, j: i + j, (3, 3), dtype=int)
array([[0, 1, 2],
[1, 2, 3],
[2, 3, 4]])
One could also get the indexes of your array with numpy.indices and then apply the function f in a vectorized fashion,
import numpy as np
shape = 1000, 1000
Xi, Yj = np.indices(shape)
A = (2*Xi + 3*Yj).astype(np.int) # or any other function f(Xi, Yj)

Categories