We Keep Coding

What's the fastest way to select values from columns based on keys in another columns in pandas?

I need a fast way to extract the right values from a pandas dataframe:
Given a dataframe with (a lot of) data in several named columns and an additional columns whose values only contains names of the other columns, how do I select values from the data-columns with the additional columns as keys?
It's simple to do via an explicit loop, but this is extremely slow with something like .iterrows() directly on the DataFrame. If converting to numpy-arrays, it's faster, but still not fast. Can I combine methods from pandas to do it even faster?
Example: This is the kind of DataFrame structure, where columns A and B contain data and column keys contains the keys to select from:
import pandas
df = pandas.DataFrame(
{'A': [1,2,3,4],
'B': [5,6,7,8],
'keys': ['A','B','B','A']},
)
print(df)
output:
Out[1]:
A B keys
0 1 5 A
1 2 6 B
2 3 7 B
3 4 8 A
Now I need some fast code that returns a DataFrame like
Out[2]:
val_keys
0 1
1 6
2 7
3 4
I was thinking something along the lines of this:
tmp = df.melt(id_vars=['keys'], value_vars=['A','B'])
out = tmp.loc[a['keys']==a['variable']]
which produces:
Out[2]:
keys variable value
0 A A 1
3 A A 4
5 B B 6
6 B B 7
but doesn't have the right order or index. So it's not quite a solution.
Any suggestions?

See if either of these work for you
df['val_keys']= np.where(df['keys'] =='A', df['A'],df['B'])
or
df['val_keys']= np.select([df['keys'] =='A', df['keys'] =='B'], [df['A'],df['B']])
No need to specify anything for the code below!
def value(row):
a = row.name
b = row['keys']
c = df.loc[a,b]
return c
df.apply(value, axis=1)

Have you tried filtering then mapping:
df_A = df[df['key'].isin(['A'])]
df_B = df[df['key'].isin(['B'])]
A_dict = dict(zip(df_A['key'], df_A['A']))
B_dict = dict(zip(df_B['key'], df_B['B']))
df['val_keys'] = df['key'].map(A_dict)
df['val_keys'] = df['key'].map(B_dict).fillna(df['val_keys']) # non-exhaustive mapping for the second one
Your df['val_keys'] column will now contain the result as in your val_keys output.
If you want you can just retain that column as in your expected output by:
df = df[['val_keys']]
Hope this helps :))

Forcing pandas .iloc to return a single-row dataframe?

For programming purpose, I want .iloc to consistently return a data frame, even when the resulting data frame has only one row. How to accomplish this?
Currently, .iloc returns a Series when the result only has one row. Example:
In [1]: df = pd.DataFrame({'a':[1,2], 'b':[3,4]})
In [2]: df
Out[2]:
a b
0 1 3
1 2 4
In [3]: type(df.iloc[0, :])
Out[3]: pandas.core.series.Series
This behavior is poor for 2 reasons:
Depending on the number of chosen rows, .iloc can either return a Series or a Data Frame, forcing me to manually check for this in my code
- .loc, on the other hand, always return a Data Frame, making pandas inconsistent within itself (wrong info, as pointed out in the comment)
For the R user, this can be accomplished with drop = FALSE, or by using tidyverse's tibble, which always return a data frame by default.

Use double brackets,
df.iloc[[0]]
Output:
a b
0 1 3
print(type(df.iloc[[0]])
<class 'pandas.core.frame.DataFrame'>
Short for df.iloc[[0],:]

Accessing row(s) by label: loc
# Setup
df = pd.DataFrame({'X': [1, 2, 3], 'Y':[4, 5, 6]}, index=['a', 'b', 'c'])
df
X Y
a 1 4
b 2 5
c 3 6
To get a DataFrame instead of a Series, pass a list of indices of length 1,
df.loc[['a']]
# Same as
df.loc[['a'], :] # selects all columns
X Y
a 1 4
To select multiple specific rows, use
df.loc[['a', 'c']]
X Y
a 1 4
c 3 6
To select a contiguous range of rows, use
df.loc['b':'c']
X Y
b 2 5
c 3 6
Access row(s) by position: iloc
Specify a list of indices of length 1,
i = 1
df.iloc[[i]]
X Y
b 2 5
Or, specify a slice of length 1:
df.iloc[i:i+1]
X Y
b 2 5
To select multiple rows or a contiguous slice you'd use a similar syntax as with loc.

The double-bracket approach doesn't always work for me (e.g. when I use a conditional to select a timestamped row with loc).
You can, however, just add to_frame() to your operation.
>>> df = pd.DataFrame({'a':[1,2], 'b':[3,4]})
>>> df2 = df.iloc[0, :].to_frame().transpose()
>>> type(df2)
<class 'pandas.core.frame.DataFrame'>

please use the below options:
df1 = df.iloc[[0],:]
#type(df1)
df1
or
df1 = df.iloc[0:1,:]
#type(df1)
df1

For getting single row extraction from Dataframe use:
df_name.iloc[index,:].to_frame().transpose()

single_Sample1=df.iloc[7:10]
single_Sample1
[1]: https://i.stack.imgur.com/RHHDZ.png**strong text**

How to replace all non-NaN entries of a dataframe with 1 and all NaN with 0

I have a dataframe with 71 columns and 30597 rows. I want to replace all non-nan entries with 1 and the nan values with 0.
Initially I tried for-loop on each value of the dataframe which was taking too much time.
Then I used data_new=data.subtract(data) which was meant to subtract all the values of the dataframe to itself so that I can make all the non-null values 0.
But an error occurred as the dataframe had multiple string entries.

You can take the return value of df.notnull(), which is False where the DataFrame contains NaN and True otherwise and cast it to integer, giving you 0 where the DataFrame is NaN and 1 otherwise:
newdf = df.notnull().astype('int')
If you really want to write into your original DataFrame, this will work:
df.loc[~df.isnull()] = 1 # not nan
df.loc[df.isnull()] = 0 # nan

Use notnull with casting boolean to int by astype:
print ((df.notnull()).astype('int'))
Sample:
import pandas as pd
import numpy as np
df = pd.DataFrame({'a': [np.nan, 4, np.nan], 'b': [1,np.nan,3]})
print (df)
a b
0 NaN 1.0
1 4.0 NaN
2 NaN 3.0
print (df.notnull())
a b
0 False True
1 True False
2 False True
print ((df.notnull()).astype('int'))
a b
0 0 1
1 1 0
2 0 1

I'd advise making a new column rather than just replacing. You can always delete the previous column if necessary but its always helpful to have a source for a column populated via an operation on another.
e.g. if df['col1'] is the existing column
df['col2'] = df['col1'].apply(lambda x: 1 if not pd.isnull(x) else np.nan)
where col2 is the new column. Should also work if col2 has string entries.

I do a lot of data analysis and am interested in finding new/faster methods of carrying out operations. I had never come across jezrael's method, so I was curious to compare it with my usual method (i.e. replace by indexing). NOTE: This is not an answer to the OP's question, rather it is an illustration of the efficiency of jezrael's method. Since this is NOT an answer I will remove this post if people do not find it useful (and after being downvoted into oblivion!). Just leave a comment if you think I should remove it.
I created a moderately sized dataframe and did multiple replacements using both the df.notnull().astype(int) method and simple indexing (how I would normally do this). It turns out that the latter is slower by approximately five times. Just an fyi for anyone doing larger-scale replacements.
from __future__ import division, print_function
import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import datetime as dt
# create dataframe with randomly place NaN's
data = np.ones( (1e2,1e2) )
data.ravel()[np.random.choice(data.size,data.size/10,replace=False)] = np.nan
df = pd.DataFrame(data=data)
trials = np.arange(100)
d1 = dt.datetime.now()
for r in trials:
new_df = df.notnull().astype(int)
print( (dt.datetime.now()-d1).total_seconds()/trials.size )
# create a dummy copy of df. I use a dummy copy here to prevent biasing the
# time trial with dataframe copies/creations within the upcoming loop
df_dummy = df.copy()
d1 = dt.datetime.now()
for r in trials:
df_dummy[df.isnull()] = 0
df_dummy[df.isnull()==False] = 1
print( (dt.datetime.now()-d1).total_seconds()/trials.size )
This yields times of 0.142 s and 0.685 s respectively. It is clear who the winner is.

There is a method .fillna() on DataFrames which does what you need. For example:
df = df.fillna(0) # Replace all NaN values with zero, returning the modified DataFrame
or
df.fillna(0, inplace=True) # Replace all NaN values with zero, updating the DataFrame directly

for fmarc 's answer:
df.loc[~df.isnull()] = 1 # not nan
df.loc[df.isnull()] = 0 # nan
The code above does not work for me, and the below works.
df[~df.isnull()] = 1 # not nan
df[df.isnull()] = 0 # nan
With the pandas 0.25.3
And if you want to just change values in specific columns, you may need to create a temp dataframe and assign it to the columns of the original dataframe:
change_col = ['a', 'b']
tmp = df[change_col]
tmp[tmp.isnull()]='xxx'
df[change_col]=tmp

Try this one:
df.notnull().mul(1)

Here i will give a suggestion to take a particular column and if the rows in that column is NaN replace it by 0 or values are there in that column replace it as 1
this below line will change your column to 0
df.YourColumnName.fillna(0,inplace=True)
Now Rest of the Not Nan Part will be Replace by 1 by below code
df["YourColumnName"]=df["YourColumnName"].apply(lambda x: 1 if x!=0 else 0)
Same Can Be applied to the total dataframe by not defining the column Name

Use: df.fillna(0)
to fill NaN with 0.

Generally there are two steps - substitute all not NAN values and then substitute all NAN values.
dataframe.where(~dataframe.notna(), 1) - this line will replace all not nan values to 1.
dataframe.fillna(0) - this line will replace all NANs to 0
Side note: if you take a look at pandas documentation, .where replaces all values, that are False - this is important thing. That is why we use inversion to create a mask ~dataframe.notna(), by which .where() will replace values

How do I filter a pandas DataFrame based on value counts?

I'm working in Python with a pandas DataFrame of video games, each with a genre. I'm trying to remove any video game with a genre that appears less than some number of times in the DataFrame, but I have no clue how to go about this. I did find a StackOverflow question that seems to be related, but I can't decipher the solution at all (possibly because I've never heard of R and my memory of functional programming is rusty at best).
Help?

Use groupby filter:
In [11]: df = pd.DataFrame([[1, 2], [1, 4], [5, 6]], columns=['A', 'B'])
In [12]: df
Out[12]:
A B
0 1 2
1 1 4
2 5 6
In [13]: df.groupby("A").filter(lambda x: len(x) > 1)
Out[13]:
A B
0 1 2
1 1 4
I recommend reading the split-combine-section of the docs.

Solutions with better performance should be GroupBy.transform with size for count per groups to Series with same size like original df, so possible filter by boolean indexing:
df1 = df[df.groupby("A")['A'].transform('size') > 1]
Or use Series.map with Series.value_counts:
df1 = df[df['A'].map(df['A'].value_counts()) > 1]

#jezael solution works very well, Here is a different approach to filter based on values count :
For example, if the dataset is :
df = pd.DataFrame({'a': [1,2,3,3,1,6], 'b': [11,2,33,4,55,6]})
Convert and save the count as a dictionary
ount_freq = dict(df['a'].value_counts())
Create a new column and copy the target column, map the dictionary with newly created column
df['count_freq'] = df['a']
df['count_freq'] = df['count_freq'].map(count_freq)
Now we have a new column with count freq, you can now define a threshold and filter easily with this column.
df[df.count_freq>1]

Additionlly, in case one wants to filter and have 'count' column:
attr = 'A'
limit = 10
df2 = df.groupby(attr)[attr].agg(count='count')
df2 = df2.loc[df2['count'] > limit].reset_index()
print(df2)
#outputs rows with grouped 'A' count > 10 and columns ==> index, count, A

I might be a little late to this party but:
df = pd.DataFrame(df_you_have.groupby(['IdA', 'SomeOtherA'])['theA_you_want_to_count'].count())
df.reset_index(inplace=True)
This is how you create a new dataframe and then just filter it...
df[df['A']>100]

add columns different length pandas

I have a problem with adding columns in pandas.
I have DataFrame, dimensional is nxk. And in process I wiil need add columns with dimensional mx1, where m = [1,n], but I don't know m.
When I try do it:
df['Name column'] = data
# type(data) = list
result:
AssertionError: Length of values does not match length of index
Can I add columns with different length?

If you use accepted answer, you'll lose your column names, as shown in the accepted answer example, and described in the documentation (emphasis added):
The resulting axis will be labeled 0, ..., n - 1. This is useful if you are concatenating objects where the concatenation axis does not have meaningful indexing information.
It looks like column names ('Name column') are meaningful to the Original Poster / Original Question.
To save column names, use pandas.concat, but don't ignore_index (default value of ignore_index is false; so you can omit that argument altogether). Continue to use axis=1:
import pandas
# Note these columns have 3 rows of values:
original = pandas.DataFrame({
'Age':[10, 12, 13],
'Gender':['M','F','F']
})
# Note this column has 4 rows of values:
additional = pandas.DataFrame({
'Name': ['Nate A', 'Jessie A', 'Daniel H', 'John D']
})
new = pandas.concat([original, additional], axis=1)
# Identical:
# new = pandas.concat([original, additional], ignore_index=False, axis=1)
print(new.head())
# Age Gender Name
#0 10 M Nate A
#1 12 F Jessie A
#2 13 F Daniel H
#3 NaN NaN John D
Notice how John D does not have an Age or a Gender.

Use concat and pass axis=1 and ignore_index=True:
In [38]:
import numpy as np
df = pd.DataFrame({'a':np.arange(5)})
df1 = pd.DataFrame({'b':np.arange(4)})
print(df1)
df
b
0 0
1 1
2 2
3 3
Out[38]:
a
0 0
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
In [39]:
pd.concat([df,df1], ignore_index=True, axis=1)
Out[39]:
0 1
0 0 0
1 1 1
2 2 2
3 3 3
4 4 NaN

We can add the different size of list values to DataFrame.
Example
a = [0,1,2,3]
b = [0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9]
c = [0,1]
Find the Length of all list
la,lb,lc = len(a),len(b),len(c)
# now find the max
max_len = max(la,lb,lc)
Resize all according to the determined max length (not in this example
if not max_len == la:
a.extend(['']*(max_len-la))
if not max_len == lb:
b.extend(['']*(max_len-lb))
if not max_len == lc:
c.extend(['']*(max_len-lc))
Now the all list is same length and create dataframe
pd.DataFrame({'A':a,'B':b,'C':c})
Final Output is
A B C
0 1 0 1
1 2 1
2 3 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9

I had the same issue, two different dataframes and without a common column. I just needed to put them beside each other in a csv file.
Merge:
In this case, "merge" does not work; even adding a temporary column to both dfs and then dropping it. Because this method makes both dfs with the same length. Hence, it repeats the rows of the shorter dataframe to match the longer dataframe's length.
Concat:
The idea of The Red Pea didn't work for me. It just appended the shorter df to the longer one (row-wise) while leaving an empty column (NaNs) above the shorter df's column.
Solution: You need to do the following:
df1 = df1.reset_index()
df2 = df2.reset_index()
df = [df1, df2]
df_final = pd.concat(df, axis=1)
df_final.to_csv(filename, index=False)
This way, you'll see your dfs besides each other (column-wise), each of which with its own length.

If somebody like to replace a specific column of a different size instead of adding it.
Based on this answer, I use a dict as an intermediate type.
Create Pandas Dataframe with different sized columns
If the column to be inserted is not a list but already a dict, the respective line can be omitted.
def fill_column(dataframe: pd.DataFrame, list: list, column: str):
dict_from_list = dict(enumerate(list)) # create enumertable object from list and create dict
dataFrame_asDict = dataframe.to_dict() # Get DataFrame as Dict
dataFrame_asDict[column] = dict_from_list # Assign specific column
return pd.DataFrame.from_dict(dataFrame_asDict, orient='index').T # Create new DataSheet from Dict and return it