I have practically no knowledge of Matlab, and need to translate some parsing routines into Python. They are for large files, that are themselves divided into 'blocks', and I'm having difficulty right from the off with the checksum at the top of the file.
What exactly is going on here in Matlab?
status = fseek(fid, 0, 'cof');
fposition = ftell(fid);
disp(' ');
disp(['** Block ',num2str(iBlock),' File Position = ',int2str(fposition)]);
% ----------------- Block Start ------------------ %
[A, count] = fread(fid, 3, 'uint32');
if(count == 3)
magic_l = A(1);
magic_h = A(2);
block_length = A(3);
else
if(fposition == file_length)
disp(['** End of file OK']);
else
disp(['** Cannot read block start magic ! Note File Length = ',num2str(file_length)]);
end
ok = 0;
break;
end
fid is the file currently being looked at
iBlock is a counter for which 'block' you're in within the file
magic_l and magic_h are to do with checksums later, here is the code for that (follows straight from the code above):
disp(sprintf(' Magic_L = %08X, Magic_H = %08X, Length = %i', magic_l, magic_h, block_length));
correct_magic_l = hex2dec('4D445254');
correct_magic_h = hex2dec('43494741');
if(magic_l ~= correct_magic_l | magic_h ~= correct_magic_h)
disp(['** Bad block start magic !']);
ok = 0;
return;
end
remaining_length = block_length - 3*4 - 3*4; % We read Block Header, and we expect a footer
disp(sprintf(' Remaining Block bytes = %i', remaining_length));
What is going on with the %08X and the hex2dec stuff?
Also, why specify 3*4 instead of 12?
Really though, I want to know how to replicate [A, count] = fread(fid, 3, 'uint32'); in Python, as io.readline() is just pulling the first 3 characters of the file. Apologies if I'm missing the point somewhere here. It's just that using io.readline(3) on the file seems to return something it shouldn't, and I don't understand how the block_length can fit in a single byte when it could potentially be very long.
Thanks for reading this ramble. I hope you can understand kind of what I want to know! (Any insight at all is appreciated.)
Python Code for Reading a 1-Dimensional Array
When replacing Matlab with Python, I wanted to read binary data into a numpy.array, so I used numpy.fromfile to read the data into a 1-dimensional array:
import numpy as np
with open(inputfilename, 'rb') as fid:
data_array = np.fromfile(fid, np.int16)
Some advantages of using numpy.fromfile versus other Python solutions include:
Not having to manually determine the number of items to be read. You can specify them using the count= argument, but it defaults to -1 which indicates reading the entire file.
Being able to specify either an open file object (as I did above with fid) or you can specify a filename. I prefer using an open file object, but if you wanted to use a filename, you could replace the two lines above with:
data_array = numpy.fromfile(inputfilename, numpy.int16)
Matlab Code for a 2-Dimensional Array
Matlab's fread has the ability to read the data into a matrix of form [m, n] instead of just reading it into a column vector. For instance, to read data into a matrix with 2 rows use:
fid = fopen(inputfilename, 'r');
data_array = fread(fid, [2, inf], 'int16');
fclose(fid);
Equivalent Python Code for a 2-Dimensional Array
You can handle this scenario in Python using Numpy's shape and transpose.
import numpy as np
with open(inputfilename, 'rb') as fid:
data_array = np.fromfile(fid, np.int16).reshape((-1, 2)).T
The -1 tells numpy.reshape to infer the length of the array for that dimension based on the other dimension—the equivalent of Matlab's inf infinity representation.
The .T transposes the array so that it is a 2-dimensional array with the first dimension—the axis—having a length of 2.
From the documentation of fread, it is a function to read binary data. The second argument specifies the size of the output vector, the third one the size/type of the items read.
In order to recreate this in Python, you can use the array module:
f = open(...)
import array
a = array.array("L") # L is the typecode for uint32
a.fromfile(f, 3)
This will read read three uint32 values from the file f, which are available in a afterwards. From the documentation of fromfile:
Read n items (as machine values) from the file object f and append them to the end of the array. If less than n items are available, EOFError is raised, but the items that were available are still inserted into the array. f must be a real built-in file object; something else with a read() method won’t do.
Arrays implement the sequence protocol and therefore support the same operations as lists, but you can also use the .tolist() method to create a normal list from the array.
Really though, I want to know how to replicate [A, count] = fread(fid, 3, 'uint32');
In Matlab, one of fread()'s signatures is fread(fileID, sizeA, precision). This reads in the first sizeA elements (not bytes) of a file, each of a size sufficient for precision. In this case, since you're reading in uint32, each element is of size 32 bits, or 4 bytes.
So, instead, try io.readline(12) to get the first 3 4-byte elements from the file.
The first part is covered by Torsten's answer... you're going to need array or numarray to do anything with this data anyway.
As for the %08X and the hex2dec stuff, %08X is just the print format for those unit32 numbers (8 digit hex, exactly the same as Python), and hex2dec('4D445254') is matlab for 0x4D445254.
Finally, ~= in matlab is a bitwise compare; use == in Python.
Related
I want to save a sparse matrix of numbers (integers, but it could be floats) to a file for data exchange. For sparse matrix I mean a matrix where a high percentage of values (typically 90%) are equal to 0. Sparse in this case does not relate to the file format but to the actual content of the matrix.
The matrix is formatted in the following way:
col1 col2 ....
row1 int1_1 int1_2 ....
row2 int2_1 .... ....
.... .... .... ....
By using a text file (tab-delimited) the size of the file is 4.2G. Which file format, preferably ubiquitous such as a .txt file, can I use to easily load and save this sparse data matrix? We usually work with Python/R/Matlab, so formats that are supported by these are preferred.
I found the Feather format (which currently does not support Matlab, afaik).
Some comparison on reading and writing, and memory performance in Pandas is provided in this section.
It provides also support for the Julia language.
Edit:
I found that this format in my case uses more disk space than the .txt one, probably to increase performance in I/O. Compressing with zip alleviates the problem but compression during writing seems to not be supported yet.
You have several solutions, but generally what you need to do it output the indices of the non-zero elements as well as the values. Lets assume that you want to export to a single text file.
Generate array
Lets first generate a 10000 x 5000 sparse array with ~10% filled (it will be a bit less due to replicated indices):
N = 10000;
M = 5000;
rho = .1;
rN = ceil(sqrt(rho)*N);
rM = ceil(sqrt(rho)*M);
S = sparse(N, M);
S(randi(N, [rN 1]), randi(M, [rM 1])) = randi(255, rN, rM);
If your array is not stored as a sparse array, you can create it simply using (where M is the full array):
S = sparse(M);
Save as text file
Now we will save the matrix in the following format
row_indx col_indx value
row_indx col_indx value
row_indx col_indx value
This is done by extracting the row and column indices as well as data values and then saving it to a text file in a loop:
[n, m, s] = find(S);
fid = fopen('Sparse.txt', 'wt');
arrayfun(#(n, m, s) fprintf(fid, '%d\t%d\t%d\n', n, m, s), n, m, s);
fclose(fid);
If the underlying data is not an integer, then you can use the %f flag on the last output, e.g. (saved with 15 decimal places)
arrayfun(#(n, m, s) fprintf(fid, '%d\t%d\t%.15f\n', n, m, s), n, m, s);
Compare this to the full array:
fid = fopen('Full.txt', 'wt');
arrayfun(#(n) fprintf(fid, '%s\n', num2str(S(n, :))), (1:N).');
fclose(fid);
In this case, the sparse file is ~50MB and the full file ~170MB representing a factor of 3 efficiency. This is expected since I need to save 3 numbers for every nonzero element of the array, and ~10% of the array is filled, requiring ~30% as many numbers to be saved compared to the full array.
For floating point format, the saving is larger since the size of the indices compared to the floating point value is much smaller.
In Matlab, a quick way to extract the data would be to save the string given by:
mat2str(S)
This is essentially the same but wraps it in the sparse command for easy loading in Matlab - one would need to parse this in other languages to be able to read it in. The command tells you how to recreate the array, implying you may need to store the size of the matrix in the file as well (I recommend doing it in the first line since you can read this in and create the sparse matrix before parsing the rest of the file.
Save as binary file
A much more efficient method is to save as a binary file. Assuming the data and indices can be stored as unsigned 16 bit integers you can do the following:
[n, m, s] = find(S);
fid = fopen('Sparse.dat', 'w');
fwrite(fid, size(S), 'uint16');
fwrite(fid, [n m s], 'uint16');
fclose(fid);
Then to read the data:
fid = fopen('Sparse.dat', 'r');
sz = fread(fid, 2, 'uint16');
s = reshape(fread(fid, 'uint16'), [], 3);
s = sparse(s(:, 1), s(:, 2), s(:, 3), sz(1), sz(2));
fclose(fid);
Now we can check they are equal:
isequal(S, s)
Saving the full array:
fid = fopen('Full.dat', 'w');
fwrite(fid, full(S), 'uint16');
fclose(fid);
Comparing the sparse and full file sizes I get 21MB and 95MB.
A couple of notes:
Using a single write/read command is much (much much) quicker than looping, so the last method is by far the fastest, and also most space efficient.
The maximum index/data value size that can be saved as a binary integer is 2^n - 1, where n is the bitdepth. In my example of 16 bits (uint16), that corresponds to a range of 0..65,535. By the sounds of it, you may need to use 32 bits or even 64 bits just to store the indices.
Higher efficiency can be obtained by saving the indices as one data type (e.g. uint32) and the actual values as another (e.g. uint8). However, this adds additional complexity in the saving and reading.
You will still want to store the matrix size first, as I showed in the binary example.
You can store the values as doubles if required, but indices should always be integers. Again, extra complexity, but doable.
I'm reading a binary file with signal samples both in Octave and Python.
The thing is, I want to obtain the same values for both codes, which is not the case.
The binary file is basically a signal in complex format I,Q recorded as a 16bits Int.
So, based on the Octave code:
[data, cnt_data] = fread(fid, 2 * secondOfData * fs, 'int16');
and then:
data = data(1:2:end) + 1i * data(2:2:end);
It seems simple, just reading the binary data as 16 bits ints. And then creating the final array of complex numbers.
Threfore I assume that in Python I need to do as follows:
rel=int(f.read(2).encode("hex"),16)
img=int(f.read(2).encode("hex"),16)
in_clean.append(complex(rel,img))
Ok, the main problem I have is that both real and imaginary parts values are not the same.
For instance, in Octave, the first value is: -20390 - 10053i
While in Python (applying the code above), the value is: (23216+48088j)
As signs are different, the first thing I thought was that maybe the endianness of the computer that recorded the file and the one I'm using for reading the file are different. So I turned to unpack function, as it allows you to force the endian type.
I was not able to find an "int16" in the unpack documentation:
https://docs.python.org/2/library/struct.html
Therefore I went for the "i" option adding "x" (padding bytes) in order to meet the requirement of 32 bits from the table in the "struct" documentation.
So with:
struct.unpack("i","xx"+f.read(2))[0]
the result is (-1336248200-658802568j) Using
struct.unpack("<i","xx"+f.read(2))[0] provides the same result.
With:
struct.unpack(">i","xx"+f.read(2))[0]
The value is: (2021153456+2021178328j)
With:
struct.unpack(">i",f.read(2)+"xx")[0]
The value is: (1521514616-1143441288j)
With:
struct.unpack("<i",f.read(2)+"xx")[0]
The value is: (2021175386+2021185723j)
I also tried with numpy and "frombuffer":
np.frombuffer(f.read(1).encode("hex"),dtype=np.int16)
With provides: (24885+12386j)
So, any idea about what I'm doing wrong? I'd like to obtain the same value as in Octave.
What is the proper way of reading and interpreting the values in Python so I can obtain the same value as in Octave by applying fread with an'int16'?
I've been searching on the Internet for an answer for this but I was not able to find a method that provides the same value
Thanks a lot
Best regards
It looks like the binary data in your question is 5ab0bbd8. To unpack signed 16 bit integers with struct.unpack, you use the 'h' format character. From that (23216+48088j) output, it appears that the data is encoded as little-endian, so we need to use < as the first item in the format string.
from struct import unpack
data = b'\x5a\xb0\xbb\xd8'
# The wrong way
rel=int(data[:2].encode("hex"),16)
img=int(data[2:].encode("hex"),16)
c = complex(rel, img)
print c
# The right way
rel, img = unpack('<hh', data)
c = complex(rel, img)
print c
output
(23216+48088j)
(-20390-10053j)
Note that rel, img = unpack('<hh', data) will also work correctly on Python 3.
FWIW, in Python 3, you could also decode 2 bytes to a signed integer like this:
def int16_bytes_to_int(b):
n = int.from_bytes(b, 'little')
if n > 0x7fff:
n -= 0x10000
return n
The rough equivalent in Python 2 is:
def int16_bytes_to_int(b):
lo, hi = b
n = (ord(hi) << 8) + ord(lo)
if n > 0x7fff:
n -= 0x10000
return n
But having to do that subtraction to handle signed numbers is annoying, and using struct.unpack is bound to be much more efficient.
I am aware that there are a lot of almost identical questions, but non seems to really target the general case.
So assume I want to open a file, read it in memory, possibly do some operations on the respective bitstring and write the result back to file.
The following is what seems straightforward to me, but it results in completely different output. Note that for simplicity I only copy the file here:
file = open('INPUT','rb')
data = file.read()
data_16 = data.encode('hex')
data_2 = bin(int(data_16,16))
OUT = open('OUTPUT','wb')
i = 0
while i < len(data_2) / 8:
byte = int(data_2[i*8 : (i+1)*8], 2)
OUT.write('%c' % byte)
i += 1
OUT.close()
I looked at data, data_16 and data_2. The transformations make sense as far as I can see.
As expected, the output file has exactly the same size in bits as the input file.
EDIT: I considered the possibility that the leading '0b' has to be cut. See the following:
>>> data[:100]
'BMFU"\x00\x00\x00\x00\x006\x00\x00\x00(\x00\x00\x00\xe8\x03\x00\x00\xee\x02\x00\x00\x01\x00\x18\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x12\x0b\x00\x00\x12\x0b\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x05=o\xce\xf4^\x16\xe0\x80\x92\x00\x00\x00\x01I\x02\x1d\xb5\x81\xcaN\xcb\xb8\x91\xc3\xc6T\xef\xcb\xe1j\x06\xc3;\x0c*\xb9Q\xbc\xff\xf6\xff\xff\xf7\xed\xdf'
>>> data_16[:100]
'424d46552200000000003600000028000000e8030000ee020000010018000000000000000000120b0000120b000000000000'
>>> data_2[:100]
'0b10000100100110101000110010101010010001000000000000000000000000000000000000000000011011000000000000'
>>> data_2[1]
'b'
Maybe the BMFU" part should be cut from data?
>>> bin(25)
'0b11001'
Note two things:
The "0b" at the beginning. This means that your slicing will be off by 2 bits.
The lack of padding to 8 bits. This will corrupt your data every time unless it happens to mesh up with point 1.
Process the file byte by byte instead of attempting to process it in one big gulp like this. If you find your code too slow then you need to find a faster way of working byte by byte, not switch to an irreparably flawed method such as this one.
You could simply write the data variable back out and you'd have a successful round trip.
But it looks like you intend to work on the file as a string of 0 and 1 characters. Nothing wrong with that (though it's rarely necessary), but your code takes a very roundabout way of converting the data to that form. Instead of building a monster integer and converting it to a bit string, just do so for one byte at a time:
data = file.read()
data_2 = "".join( bin(ord(c))[2:] for c in data )
data_2 is now a sequence of zeros and ones. (In a single string, same as you have it; but if you'll be making changes, I'd keep the bitstrings in a list). The reverse conversion is also best done byte by byte:
newdata = "".join(chr(int(byte, 8)) for byte in grouper(long_bitstring, 8, "0"))
This uses the grouper recipe from the itertools documentation.
from itertools import izip_longest
def grouper(iterable, n, fillvalue=None):
"Collect data into fixed-length chunks or blocks"
# grouper('ABCDEFG', 3, 'x') --> ABC DEF Gxx
args = [iter(iterable)] * n
return izip_longest(fillvalue=fillvalue, *args)
You can use the struct module to read and write binary data. (Link to the doc here.)
EDIT
Sorry, I was mislead by your title. I’ve just understand that you write binary data in a text file instead of writing binary data directly.
Ok, thanks to alexis and being aware of Ignacio's warning about the padding, I found a way to do what I wanted to do, that is read data into a binary representation and write a binary representation to file:
def padd(bitstring):
padding = ''
for i in range(8-len(bitstring)):
padding += '0'
bitstring = padding + bitstring
return bitstring
file = open('INPUT','rb')
data = file.read()
data_2 = "".join( padd(bin(ord(c))[2:]) for c in data )
OUT = open('OUTPUT','wb')
i = 0
while i < len(data_2) / 8:
byte = int(data_2[i*8 : (i+1)*8], 2)
OUT.write('%c' % byte)
i += 1
OUT.close()
If I did not do it exactly the way proposed by alexis then that is because it did not work. Of course this is terribly slow but now that I can do the simplest thing, I can optimize it further.
I have a binary output file from a FORTRAN code. Want to read it in python. (Reading with FORTRAN and outputting text to read for python is not an option. Long story.) I can read the first record in a simplistic manner:
>>> binfile=open('myfile','rb')
>>> pad1=struct.unpack('i',binfile.read(4))[0]
>>> ver=struct.unpack('d',binfile.read(8))[0]
>>> pad2=struct.unpack('i',binfile.read(4))[0]
>>> pad1,ver,pad2
(8,3.13,8)
Just fine. But this is a big file and I need to do this more efficiently. So I try:
>>> (pad1,ver,pad2)=struct.unpack('idi',binfile.read(16))
This won't run. Gives me an error and tells me that unpack needs an argument with a length of 20. This makes no sense to me since the last time I checked, 4+8+4=16. When I give in and replace the 16 with 20, it runs, but the three numbers are populated with numerical junk. Does anyone see what I am doing wrong? Thanks!
The size you get is due to alignment, try struct.calcsize('idi') to verify the size is actually 20 after alignment. To use the native byte-order without alignment, specify struct.calcsize('=idi') and adapt it to your example.
For more info on the struct module, check http://docs.python.org/2/library/struct.html
The struct module is mainly intended to interoperate with C structures and because of this it aligns the data members. idi corresponds to the following C structure:
struct
{
int int1;
double double1;
int int2;
}
double entries require 8 byte alignment in order to function efficiently (or even correctly) with most CPU load operations. That's why 4 bytes of padding are being added between int1 and double1, which increases the size of the structure to 20 bytes. The same padding is performed by the struct module, unless you suppress the padding by adding < (on little endian machines) or > (on big endian machines), or simply = at the beginning of the format string:
>>> struct.unpack('idi', d)
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
struct.error: unpack requires a string argument of length 20
>>> struct.unpack('<idi', d)
(-1345385859, 2038.0682530887993, 428226400)
>>> struct.unpack('=idi', d)
(-1345385859, 2038.0682530887993, 428226400)
(d is a string of 16 random chars.)
I recommend using arrays to read a file that was written by FORTRAN with UNFORMATTED, SEQUENTIAL.
Your specific example using arrays, would be as follows:
import array
binfile=open('myfile','rb')
pad = array.array('i')
ver = array.array('d')
pad.fromfile(binfile,1) # read the length of the record
ver.fromfile(binfile,1) # read the actual data written by FORTRAN
pad.fromfile(binfile,1) # read the length of the record
If you have FORTRAN records that write arrays of integers and doubles, which is very common, your python would look something like this:
import array
binfile=open('myfile','rb')
pad = array.array('i')
my_integers = array.array('i')
my_floats = array.array('d')
number_of_integers = 1000 # replace with how many you need to read
number_of_floats = 10000 # replace with how many you need to read
pad.fromfile(binfile,1) # read the length of the record
my_integers.fromfile(binfile,number_of_integers) # read the integer data
my_floats.fromfile(binfile,number_of_floats) # read the double data
pad.fromfile(binfile,1) # read the length of the record
Final comment is that if you have characters on the file, you can read those into an array as well, and then decode it into a string. Something like this:
import array
binfile=open('myfile','rb')
pad = array.array('i')
my_characters = array.array('B')
number_of_characters = 63 # replace with number of characters to read
pad.fromfile(binfile,1) # read the length of the record
my_characters.fromfile(binfile,number_of_characters ) # read the data
my_string = my_characters.tobytes().decode(encoding='utf_8')
pad.fromfile(binfile,1) # read the length of the record
I need to store a binary file with a 12 byte header composed of 4 fields. They are namely: sSamples (4-bytes integer), sSampPeriod (4-bytes integer), sSampSize (2-bytes integer), and finally sParmKind (2-bytes integer).
I'm using 'struct' to my variables to the desired fields. Now that I have them defined separately, how could I merge them all to store the '12 bytes header'?
sSamples = struct.pack('i', nSamples) # 4-bytes integer
sSampPeriod = struct.pack('i', nSampPeriod) # 4-bytes integer
sSampSize = struct.pack('H', nSampSize) # 2-bytes integer / unsigned short
sParmKind = struct.pack('H', 9) # 2-bytes integer / unsigned short
In addition, I've a npVect float array of dimensionality D (numpy.ndarray - float32). How could I store this vector in the same binary file, but after the header?
As Cody Brocious wrote, you can pack your entire header at once:
header = struct.pack('<iiHH', nSamples, nSampPeriod, nSampSize, nParmKind)
He also mentioned endianness, which is important if you want to pack your data so as to reliably unpack it on machines with different architectures. The < at the beginning of my format string specifies "pack this data using a little-endian convention".
As for the array, you'll have to pack its length in order to determine how many values to unpack when you read it again. Doing it all in one call:
flattened = npVect.ravel() # get a 1-D array of numbers
arrSize = len(flattened)
# pack header, count of numbers, and numbers, all in one call
packed = struct.pack('<iiHHi%df' % arrSize,
nSamples, nSampPeriod, nSampSize, nParmKind, arrSize, *flattened)
Depending on how big your array is likely to be, you could end up with a huge string representing the entire contents of your binary file, and you might want to look into alternatives to struct which don't require you to have the entire file in memory.
Unpacking:
fmt = '<iiHHi'
nSamples, nSampPeriod, nSampSize, nParmKind, arrSize = struct.unpack(fmt, packed)
# Use unpack_from to start reading after the packed header and count
flattened = struct.unpack_from('<%df' % arrSize, packed, struct.calcsize(fmt))
npVect = np.ndarray(flattened, dtype='float32').reshape(# your dimensions go here
)
EDIT: Oops, the array format isn't quite as simple as that :) The general idea holds, though: flatten your array into a list of numbers using any method you like, pack the number of values, then pack each value. On the other side, read the array as a flat list, then impose whatever structure you need on it.
EDIT: Changed format strings to use repeat specifiers, rather than string multiplication. Thanks to John Machin for pointing it out.
EDIT: Added numpy code to flatten the array before packing and reconstruct it after unpacking.
struct.pack returns a string, so you can combine the fields simply by string concatenation:
header = sSamples + sSampPeriod + sSampSize + sParmKind
assert len( header ) == 12