Add new index to multiindex as a count of first level - python

I would like to add a new multiindex in between the already existing indexes 'Warnings' and 'equip' with the sum of the column 'count per equip' for each 'Warnings' level.
idx = pd.MultiIndex.from_product([['warning1', 'warning2', 'warning3'],
['ff0001', 'ff0002', 'ff0003']],
names=['Warnings', 'equip'])
col = ['count per equip']
df = pd.DataFrame([100,2,1,44,45,20,25,98,0], idx, col)
df
So the resulting dataframe would have the same number of index in level 0, 'Warnings', and for this example it would be [103, 109, 123], respectively.
I've managed to sum and insert the index at the right place, but when trying to do all together, all values are NaN's:
df = df.assign(total=df.groupby(level=[0]).size()).set_index('total', append=True).reorder_levels(['Warnings','total','equip'])

In assign we can't do groupby. So, the following code create similar data.
idx = pd.MultiIndex.from_product([['warning1', 'warning2', 'warning3'],
['ff0001', 'ff0002', 'ff0003']],
names=['Warnings', 'equip'])
col = ['count per equip']
df = pd.DataFrame([100,2,1,44,45,20,25,98,0], idx, col)
Grouping based on level = 0
df['total'] = df.groupby(level=0).transform(lambda x: x.size)
df = df.set_index('total', append=True).reorder_levels(['Warnings','total','equip'])
print(df)
count per equip
Warnings total equip
warning1 3 ff0001 100
ff0002 2
ff0003 1
warning2 3 ff0001 44
ff0002 45
ff0003 20
warning3 3 ff0001 25
ff0002 98
ff0003 0

Related

Iterate over columns and rows to identify what changed for data analysis

I have a historical table that keeps track of the status of a task over time.
The table looks similar to the below, where the 'ID' is unique to the task, 'Date' changes whenever an action is taken on the task, 'Factor1, Factor2, etc' are columns that contain details of the underlying task.
I want to flag on an 'ID' level, what 'Factor' columns are changing over time. Once I identify which 'Factor' columns are changing, I am planning on doing analysis to see which 'Factor' columns are changing the most, the least, etc.
I am looking to:
Sort by 'Date' ascending
Groupby 'ID'
Loop through each column that has 'Factor' in the column name and for each column, identify if the 'Factor' data changed by looping through each row for each ID
Create a new column for each 'Factor' column to flag if the underlying factor row changed overtime for that specific ID
Python code for sample data:
import pandas as pd
data = [[1,'12/12/2021','A',500],[2,'10/20/2021','D',200],[3,'7/2/2022','E',300],
[1,'5/2/2022','B',500],[1,'8/2/2022','B',500],[3,'10/2/2022','C',200],
[2,'1/5/2022','D',200]]
df = pd.DataFrame(data, columns=['ID', 'Date','Factor1','Factor2'])
My desired output is this:
import pandas as pd
data = [[1, '12/12/2021', 'A', 500], [2, '10/20/2021', 'D', 200], [3, '7/2/2022', 'E', 300],
[1, '5/2/2022', 'B', 500], [1, '8/2/2022', 'B', 500], [3, '10/2/2022', 'C', 200],
[2, '1/5/2022', 'D', 200]]
df = pd.DataFrame(data, columns=['ID', 'Date', 'Factor1', 'Factor2'])
# get the 'Factor' columns
factor_columns = [col for col in df.columns if col.startswith('Factor')]
# returns Y if previous val has changed else N
def check_factor(x, col, df1):
# assigning previous value if exist or target factor value if NaN
val = df1[df1.ID == x.ID].shift(1)[col].fillna(x[col]).loc[x.name]
return 'N' if val == x[col] else 'Y'
# creating new columns list to reorder columns
columns = ['ID', 'Date']
for col in factor_columns:
columns += [col, f'{col}_Changed']
# applying check_factor to new column
df[f'{col}_Changed'] = df.apply(check_factor, args=(col, df.copy()), axis=1)
df = df[columns]
print(df)
OUTPUT:
ID Date Factor1 Factor1_Changed Factor2 Factor2_Changed
0 1 12/12/2021 A N 500 N
1 2 10/20/2021 D N 200 N
2 3 7/2/2022 E N 300 N
3 1 5/2/2022 B Y 500 N
4 1 8/2/2022 B N 500 N
5 3 10/2/2022 C Y 200 Y
6 2 1/5/2022 D N 200 N

Using Loc and Iloc together

Hello I am trying to pull three rows of data. Row 0 Row 1 and the Row that is titled "Inventories".
I Figured the best way would be to find the Row number of Inventories and parse the date using iloc. However I get an error that says to many indexers. Any help would be appreciated
df.columns=df.iloc[1]
cols = df.columns.tolist()
A =df.loc[df[cols[0]].isin(['Inventories'])].index.tolist()
df = df.iloc[[0,1,[A]]]
I have also tried
df = df.iloc[[0,1,A]]
Also please note A returns 56, and if I replace A with 56 in
df = df.iloc[[0,1,56]]
I get the desired outcome.
For position of matched condition use Series.argmax, so possible add A without [] to DataFrame.iloc, it working well if ALWAYS match condition:
A = df[cols[0]].eq('Inventories').argmax()
df = df.iloc[[0,1,A]]
Another idea is add conditio with bitwise OR by | for test first 2 rows:
df = pd.DataFrame({'col' : [100,10,'s','Inventories',1,10,100]})
df.index += 10
print (df)
col
10 100
11 10
12 s
13 Inventories
14 1
15 10
16 100
df = df[np.in1d(np.arange(len(df)), [0,1]) | df.iloc[:, 0].eq('Inventories')]
print (df)
col
10 100
11 10
13 Inventories
Or join filtered rows by positions and by condition:
df = pd.concat([df.iloc[[0, 1]], df[df.iloc[:, 0].eq('Inventories')]])
print (df)
col
10 100
11 10
13 Inventories
IIC you are wanting to pull out 3 specific values in the index (which can be an index number or a string). This will allow you to set the values you want to pull back when referencing an index.
df = pd.DataFrame({
'Column' : [1, 2, 3, 4, 5],
'index' : [0, 1, 'Test', 'Inventories', 4]
})
df = df.set_index('index')
df.loc[[0, 1, 'Inventories']]

Subset / group by pandas Data Frame to calculate mean and apply to missing values

I am trying to subset pandas dataframe by a group / category, calculate a statistic and apply it to the original dataframe for missing values in the group.
df1 = pd.DataFrame({
'City': ['SF','NYC','SF','NYC','SF','CHI','LA','LA','CHI'],
'Val': [2,4,0,0,7,4,3,5,6]
})
for name, group in df.groupby(['City']):
dff = df[df['City'] == name]
# Calculate mean
df1 = dff[dff['Val'] != 0]
mean_val = int(df1['Val'].mean())
Now, I need to apply mean_val to all 0s in the subset.
We could mask out the 0 values then groupby transform to calculate the mean and fillna to put the means back, lastly convert the column to int using astype:
s = df['Val'].mask(df['Val'].eq(0))
df['Val'] = s.fillna(s.groupby(df['City']).transform('mean')).astype(int)
Or we can boolean index where Val is 0, mask out the 0 values and assign the results of groupby transform back using loc:
m = df['Val'].eq(0)
df.loc[m, 'Val'] = (
df['Val'].mask(m)
.groupby(df['City']).transform('mean')
.astype(int)
)
Both produce:
df:
City Val
0 SF 2
1 NYC 4
2 SF 4
3 NYC 4
4 SF 7
5 CHI 4
6 LA 3
7 LA 5
8 CHI 6
We could filter dff to get the index locations relative to df and assign back to modify the original approach:
for name, group in df.groupby(['City']):
dff = df[df['City'] == name]
# Calculate mean
df1 = dff[dff['Val'] != 0]
mean_val = int(df1['Val'].mean())
# Assign mean back to `df` at index locations where Val is 0 in group
df.loc[dff[(dff['Val'] == 0)].index, 'Val'] = mean_val
Although looping is highly discouraged in pandas due to increased runtime.
However, if we are going to use the iterable from groupby we should use the values returned instead of filtering from df:
for name, group in df.groupby(['City']):
# Create Boolean Index
m = group['Val'] != 0
# Calculate mean from grouped dataframe `group`
mean_val = int(group.loc[m, 'Val'].mean())
# Assign mean back to `df` at index locations where Val is 0 in group
df.loc[group[~m].index, 'Val'] = mean_val
DataFrame and imports:
import pandas as pd
df = pd.DataFrame({
'City': ['SF', 'NYC', 'SF', 'NYC', 'SF', 'CHI', 'LA', 'LA', 'CHI'],
'Val': [2, 4, 0, 0, 7, 4, 3, 5, 6],
})

Merge columns of a specific row [duplicate]

How do I create an empty DataFrame, then add rows, one by one?
I created an empty DataFrame:
df = pd.DataFrame(columns=('lib', 'qty1', 'qty2'))
Then I can add a new row at the end and fill a single field with:
df = df._set_value(index=len(df), col='qty1', value=10.0)
It works for only one field at a time. What is a better way to add new row to df?
You can use df.loc[i], where the row with index i will be what you specify it to be in the dataframe.
>>> import pandas as pd
>>> from numpy.random import randint
>>> df = pd.DataFrame(columns=['lib', 'qty1', 'qty2'])
>>> for i in range(5):
>>> df.loc[i] = ['name' + str(i)] + list(randint(10, size=2))
>>> df
lib qty1 qty2
0 name0 3 3
1 name1 2 4
2 name2 2 8
3 name3 2 1
4 name4 9 6
In case you can get all data for the data frame upfront, there is a much faster approach than appending to a data frame:
Create a list of dictionaries in which each dictionary corresponds to an input data row.
Create a data frame from this list.
I had a similar task for which appending to a data frame row by row took 30 min, and creating a data frame from a list of dictionaries completed within seconds.
rows_list = []
for row in input_rows:
dict1 = {}
# get input row in dictionary format
# key = col_name
dict1.update(blah..)
rows_list.append(dict1)
df = pd.DataFrame(rows_list)
In the case of adding a lot of rows to dataframe, I am interested in performance. So I tried the four most popular methods and checked their speed.
Performance
Using .append (NPE's answer)
Using .loc (fred's answer)
Using .loc with preallocating (FooBar's answer)
Using dict and create DataFrame in the end (ShikharDua's answer)
Runtime results (in seconds):
Approach
1000 rows
5000 rows
10 000 rows
.append
0.69
3.39
6.78
.loc without prealloc
0.74
3.90
8.35
.loc with prealloc
0.24
2.58
8.70
dict
0.012
0.046
0.084
So I use addition through the dictionary for myself.
Code:
import pandas as pd
import numpy as np
import time
del df1, df2, df3, df4
numOfRows = 1000
# append
startTime = time.perf_counter()
df1 = pd.DataFrame(np.random.randint(100, size=(5,5)), columns=['A', 'B', 'C', 'D', 'E'])
for i in range( 1,numOfRows-4):
df1 = df1.append( dict( (a,np.random.randint(100)) for a in ['A','B','C','D','E']), ignore_index=True)
print('Elapsed time: {:6.3f} seconds for {:d} rows'.format(time.perf_counter() - startTime, numOfRows))
print(df1.shape)
# .loc w/o prealloc
startTime = time.perf_counter()
df2 = pd.DataFrame(np.random.randint(100, size=(5,5)), columns=['A', 'B', 'C', 'D', 'E'])
for i in range( 1,numOfRows):
df2.loc[i] = np.random.randint(100, size=(1,5))[0]
print('Elapsed time: {:6.3f} seconds for {:d} rows'.format(time.perf_counter() - startTime, numOfRows))
print(df2.shape)
# .loc with prealloc
df3 = pd.DataFrame(index=np.arange(0, numOfRows), columns=['A', 'B', 'C', 'D', 'E'] )
startTime = time.perf_counter()
for i in range( 1,numOfRows):
df3.loc[i] = np.random.randint(100, size=(1,5))[0]
print('Elapsed time: {:6.3f} seconds for {:d} rows'.format(time.perf_counter() - startTime, numOfRows))
print(df3.shape)
# dict
startTime = time.perf_counter()
row_list = []
for i in range (0,5):
row_list.append(dict( (a,np.random.randint(100)) for a in ['A','B','C','D','E']))
for i in range( 1,numOfRows-4):
dict1 = dict( (a,np.random.randint(100)) for a in ['A','B','C','D','E'])
row_list.append(dict1)
df4 = pd.DataFrame(row_list, columns=['A','B','C','D','E'])
print('Elapsed time: {:6.3f} seconds for {:d} rows'.format(time.perf_counter() - startTime, numOfRows))
print(df4.shape)
P.S.: I believe my realization isn't perfect, and maybe there is some optimization that could be done.
You could use pandas.concat(). For details and examples, see Merge, join, and concatenate.
For example:
def append_row(df, row):
return pd.concat([
df,
pd.DataFrame([row], columns=row.index)]
).reset_index(drop=True)
df = pd.DataFrame(columns=('lib', 'qty1', 'qty2'))
new_row = pd.Series({'lib':'A', 'qty1':1, 'qty2': 2})
df = append_row(df, new_row)
NEVER grow a DataFrame!
Yes, people have already explained that you should NEVER grow a DataFrame, and that you should append your data to a list and convert it to a DataFrame once at the end. But do you understand why?
Here are the most important reasons, taken from my post here.
It is always cheaper/faster to append to a list and create a DataFrame in one go.
Lists take up less memory and are a much lighter data structure to work with, append, and remove.
dtypes are automatically inferred for your data. On the flip side, creating an empty frame of NaNs will automatically make them object, which is bad.
An index is automatically created for you, instead of you having to take care to assign the correct index to the row you are appending.
This is The Right Way™ to accumulate your data
data = []
for a, b, c in some_function_that_yields_data():
data.append([a, b, c])
df = pd.DataFrame(data, columns=['A', 'B', 'C'])
These options are horrible
append or concat inside a loop
append and concat aren't inherently bad in isolation. The
problem starts when you iteratively call them inside a loop - this
results in quadratic memory usage.
# Creates empty DataFrame and appends
df = pd.DataFrame(columns=['A', 'B', 'C'])
for a, b, c in some_function_that_yields_data():
df = df.append({'A': i, 'B': b, 'C': c}, ignore_index=True)
# This is equally bad:
# df = pd.concat(
# [df, pd.Series({'A': i, 'B': b, 'C': c})],
# ignore_index=True)
Empty DataFrame of NaNs
Never create a DataFrame of NaNs as the columns are initialized with
object (slow, un-vectorizable dtype).
# Creates DataFrame of NaNs and overwrites values.
df = pd.DataFrame(columns=['A', 'B', 'C'], index=range(5))
for a, b, c in some_function_that_yields_data():
df.loc[len(df)] = [a, b, c]
The Proof is in the Pudding
Timing these methods is the fastest way to see just how much they differ in terms of their memory and utility.
Benchmarking code for reference.
It's posts like this that remind me why I'm a part of this community. People understand the importance of teaching folks getting the right answer with the right code, not the right answer with wrong code. Now you might argue that it is not an issue to use loc or append if you're only adding a single row to your DataFrame. However, people often look to this question to add more than just one row - often the requirement is to iteratively add a row inside a loop using data that comes from a function (see related question). In that case it is important to understand that iteratively growing a DataFrame is not a good idea.
If you know the number of entries ex ante, you should preallocate the space by also providing the index (taking the data example from a different answer):
import pandas as pd
import numpy as np
# we know we're gonna have 5 rows of data
numberOfRows = 5
# create dataframe
df = pd.DataFrame(index=np.arange(0, numberOfRows), columns=('lib', 'qty1', 'qty2') )
# now fill it up row by row
for x in np.arange(0, numberOfRows):
#loc or iloc both work here since the index is natural numbers
df.loc[x] = [np.random.randint(-1,1) for n in range(3)]
In[23]: df
Out[23]:
lib qty1 qty2
0 -1 -1 -1
1 0 0 0
2 -1 0 -1
3 0 -1 0
4 -1 0 0
Speed comparison
In[30]: %timeit tryThis() # function wrapper for this answer
In[31]: %timeit tryOther() # function wrapper without index (see, for example, #fred)
1000 loops, best of 3: 1.23 ms per loop
100 loops, best of 3: 2.31 ms per loop
And - as from the comments - with a size of 6000, the speed difference becomes even larger:
Increasing the size of the array (12) and the number of rows (500) makes
the speed difference more striking: 313ms vs 2.29s
mycolumns = ['A', 'B']
df = pd.DataFrame(columns=mycolumns)
rows = [[1,2],[3,4],[5,6]]
for row in rows:
df.loc[len(df)] = row
You can append a single row as a dictionary using the ignore_index option.
>>> f = pandas.DataFrame(data = {'Animal':['cow','horse'], 'Color':['blue', 'red']})
>>> f
Animal Color
0 cow blue
1 horse red
>>> f.append({'Animal':'mouse', 'Color':'black'}, ignore_index=True)
Animal Color
0 cow blue
1 horse red
2 mouse black
For efficient appending, see How to add an extra row to a pandas dataframe and Setting With Enlargement.
Add rows through loc/ix on non existing key index data. For example:
In [1]: se = pd.Series([1,2,3])
In [2]: se
Out[2]:
0 1
1 2
2 3
dtype: int64
In [3]: se[5] = 5.
In [4]: se
Out[4]:
0 1.0
1 2.0
2 3.0
5 5.0
dtype: float64
Or:
In [1]: dfi = pd.DataFrame(np.arange(6).reshape(3,2),
.....: columns=['A','B'])
.....:
In [2]: dfi
Out[2]:
A B
0 0 1
1 2 3
2 4 5
In [3]: dfi.loc[:,'C'] = dfi.loc[:,'A']
In [4]: dfi
Out[4]:
A B C
0 0 1 0
1 2 3 2
2 4 5 4
In [5]: dfi.loc[3] = 5
In [6]: dfi
Out[6]:
A B C
0 0 1 0
1 2 3 2
2 4 5 4
3 5 5 5
For the sake of a Pythonic way:
res = pd.DataFrame(columns=('lib', 'qty1', 'qty2'))
res = res.append([{'qty1':10.0}], ignore_index=True)
print(res.head())
lib qty1 qty2
0 NaN 10.0 NaN
You can also build up a list of lists and convert it to a dataframe -
import pandas as pd
columns = ['i','double','square']
rows = []
for i in range(6):
row = [i, i*2, i*i]
rows.append(row)
df = pd.DataFrame(rows, columns=columns)
giving
i double square
0 0 0 0
1 1 2 1
2 2 4 4
3 3 6 9
4 4 8 16
5 5 10 25
If you always want to add a new row at the end, use this:
df.loc[len(df)] = ['name5', 9, 0]
I figured out a simple and nice way:
>>> df
A B C
one 1 2 3
>>> df.loc["two"] = [4,5,6]
>>> df
A B C
one 1 2 3
two 4 5 6
Note the caveat with performance as noted in the comments.
This is not an answer to the OP question, but a toy example to illustrate ShikharDua's answer which I found very useful.
While this fragment is trivial, in the actual data I had 1,000s of rows, and many columns, and I wished to be able to group by different columns and then perform the statistics below for more than one target column. So having a reliable method for building the data frame one row at a time was a great convenience. Thank you ShikharDua!
import pandas as pd
BaseData = pd.DataFrame({ 'Customer' : ['Acme','Mega','Acme','Acme','Mega','Acme'],
'Territory' : ['West','East','South','West','East','South'],
'Product' : ['Econ','Luxe','Econ','Std','Std','Econ']})
BaseData
columns = ['Customer','Num Unique Products', 'List Unique Products']
rows_list=[]
for name, group in BaseData.groupby('Customer'):
RecordtoAdd={} #initialise an empty dict
RecordtoAdd.update({'Customer' : name}) #
RecordtoAdd.update({'Num Unique Products' : len(pd.unique(group['Product']))})
RecordtoAdd.update({'List Unique Products' : pd.unique(group['Product'])})
rows_list.append(RecordtoAdd)
AnalysedData = pd.DataFrame(rows_list)
print('Base Data : \n',BaseData,'\n\n Analysed Data : \n',AnalysedData)
You can use a generator object to create a Dataframe, which will be more memory efficient over the list.
num = 10
# Generator function to generate generator object
def numgen_func(num):
for i in range(num):
yield ('name_{}'.format(i), (i*i), (i*i*i))
# Generator expression to generate generator object (Only once data get populated, can not be re used)
numgen_expression = (('name_{}'.format(i), (i*i), (i*i*i)) for i in range(num) )
df = pd.DataFrame(data=numgen_func(num), columns=('lib', 'qty1', 'qty2'))
To add raw to existing DataFrame you can use append method.
df = df.append([{ 'lib': "name_20", 'qty1': 20, 'qty2': 400 }])
Instead of a list of dictionaries as in ShikharDua's answer (row-based), we can also represent our table as a dictionary of lists (column-based), where each list stores one column in row-order, given we know our columns beforehand. At the end we construct our DataFrame once.
In both cases, the dictionary keys are always the column names. Row order is stored implicitly as order in a list. For c columns and n rows, this uses one dictionary of c lists, versus one list of n dictionaries. The list-of-dictionaries method has each dictionary storing all keys redundantly and requires creating a new dictionary for every row. Here we only append to lists, which overall is the same time complexity (adding entries to list and dictionary are both amortized constant time) but may have less overhead due to being a simple operation.
# Current data
data = {"Animal":["cow", "horse"], "Color":["blue", "red"]}
# Adding a new row (be careful to ensure every column gets another value)
data["Animal"].append("mouse")
data["Color"].append("black")
# At the end, construct our DataFrame
df = pd.DataFrame(data)
# Animal Color
# 0 cow blue
# 1 horse red
# 2 mouse black
Create a new record (data frame) and add to old_data_frame.
Pass a list of values and the corresponding column names to create a new_record (data_frame):
new_record = pd.DataFrame([[0, 'abcd', 0, 1, 123]], columns=['a', 'b', 'c', 'd', 'e'])
old_data_frame = pd.concat([old_data_frame, new_record])
Here is the way to add/append a row in a Pandas DataFrame:
def add_row(df, row):
df.loc[-1] = row
df.index = df.index + 1
return df.sort_index()
add_row(df, [1,2,3])
It can be used to insert/append a row in an empty or populated Pandas DataFrame.
If you want to add a row at the end, append it as a list:
valuestoappend = [va1, val2, val3]
res = res.append(pd.Series(valuestoappend, index = ['lib', 'qty1', 'qty2']), ignore_index = True)
Another way to do it (probably not very performant):
# add a row
def add_row(df, row):
colnames = list(df.columns)
ncol = len(colnames)
assert ncol == len(row), "Length of row must be the same as width of DataFrame: %s" % row
return df.append(pd.DataFrame([row], columns=colnames))
You can also enhance the DataFrame class like this:
import pandas as pd
def add_row(self, row):
self.loc[len(self.index)] = row
pd.DataFrame.add_row = add_row
All you need is loc[df.shape[0]] or loc[len(df)]
# Assuming your df has 4 columns (str, int, str, bool)
df.loc[df.shape[0]] = ['col1Value', 100, 'col3Value', False]
or
df.loc[len(df)] = ['col1Value', 100, 'col3Value', False]
You can concatenate two DataFrames for this. I basically came across this problem to add a new row to an existing DataFrame with a character index (not numeric).
So, I input the data for a new row in a duct() and index in a list.
new_dict = {put input for new row here}
new_list = [put your index here]
new_df = pd.DataFrame(data=new_dict, index=new_list)
df = pd.concat([existing_df, new_df])
initial_data = {'lib': np.array([1,2,3,4]), 'qty1': [1,2,3,4], 'qty2': [1,2,3,4]}
df = pd.DataFrame(initial_data)
df
lib qty1 qty2
0 1 1 1
1 2 2 2
2 3 3 3
3 4 4 4
val_1 = [10]
val_2 = [14]
val_3 = [20]
df.append(pd.DataFrame({'lib': val_1, 'qty1': val_2, 'qty2': val_3}))
lib qty1 qty2
0 1 1 1
1 2 2 2
2 3 3 3
3 4 4 4
0 10 14 20
You can use a for loop to iterate through values or can add arrays of values.
val_1 = [10, 11, 12, 13]
val_2 = [14, 15, 16, 17]
val_3 = [20, 21, 22, 43]
df.append(pd.DataFrame({'lib': val_1, 'qty1': val_2, 'qty2': val_3}))
lib qty1 qty2
0 1 1 1
1 2 2 2
2 3 3 3
3 4 4 4
0 10 14 20
1 11 15 21
2 12 16 22
3 13 17 43
Make it simple. By taking a list as input which will be appended as a row in the data-frame:
import pandas as pd
res = pd.DataFrame(columns=('lib', 'qty1', 'qty2'))
for i in range(5):
res_list = list(map(int, input().split()))
res = res.append(pd.Series(res_list, index=['lib', 'qty1', 'qty2']), ignore_index=True)
pandas.DataFrame.append
DataFrame.append(self, other, ignore_index=False, verify_integrity=False, sort=False) → 'DataFrame'
Code
df = pd.DataFrame([[1, 2], [3, 4]], columns=list('AB'))
df2 = pd.DataFrame([[5, 6], [7, 8]], columns=list('AB'))
df.append(df2)
With ignore_index set to True:
df.append(df2, ignore_index=True)
If you have a data frame df and want to add a list new_list as a new row to df, you can simply do:
df.loc[len(df)] = new_list
If you want to add a new data frame new_df under data frame df, then you can use:
df.append(new_df)
We often see the construct df.loc[subscript] = … to assign to one DataFrame row. Mikhail_Sam posted benchmarks containing, among others, this construct as well as the method using dict and create DataFrame in the end. He found the latter to be the fastest by far.
But if we replace the df3.loc[i] = … (with preallocated DataFrame) in his code with df3.values[i] = …, the outcome changes significantly, in that that method performs similar to the one using dict. So we should more often take the use of df.values[subscript] = … into consideration. However note that .values takes a zero-based subscript, which may be different from the DataFrame.index.
Before going to add a row, we have to convert the dataframe to a dictionary. There you can see the keys as columns in the dataframe and the values of the columns are again stored in the dictionary, but there the key for every column is the index number in the dataframe.
That idea makes me to write the below code.
df2 = df.to_dict()
values = ["s_101", "hyderabad", 10, 20, 16, 13, 15, 12, 12, 13, 25, 26, 25, 27, "good", "bad"] # This is the total row that we are going to add
i = 0
for x in df.columns: # Here df.columns gives us the main dictionary key
df2[x][101] = values[i] # Here the 101 is our index number. It is also the key of the sub dictionary
i += 1
If all data in your Dataframe has the same dtype you might use a NumPy array. You can write rows directly into the predefined array and convert it to a dataframe at the end.
It seems to be even faster than converting a list of dicts.
import pandas as pd
import numpy as np
from string import ascii_uppercase
startTime = time.perf_counter()
numcols, numrows = 5, 10000
npdf = np.ones((numrows, numcols))
for row in range(numrows):
npdf[row, 0:] = np.random.randint(0, 100, (1, numcols))
df5 = pd.DataFrame(npdf, columns=list(ascii_uppercase[:numcols]))
print('Elapsed time: {:6.3f} seconds for {:d} rows'.format(time.perf_counter() - startTime, numOfRows))
print(df5.shape)
This code snippet uses a list of dictionaries to update the data frame. It adds on to ShikharDua's and Mikhail_Sam's answers.
import pandas as pd
colour = ["red", "big", "tasty"]
fruits = ["apple", "banana", "cherry"]
dict1={}
feat_list=[]
for x in colour:
for y in fruits:
# print(x, y)
dict1 = dict([('x',x),('y',y)])
# print(f'dict 1 {dict1}')
feat_list.append(dict1)
# print(f'feat_list {feat_list}')
feat_df=pd.DataFrame(feat_list)
feat_df.to_csv('feat1.csv')

pandas convert grouped rows into columns

I have a dataframe such as:
label column1
a 1
a 2
b 6
b 4
I would like to make a dataframe with a new column, with the opposite value from column1 where the labels match. Such as:
label column1 column2
a 1 2
a 2 1
b 6 4
b 4 6
I know this is probably very simple to do with a groupby command but I've been searching and can't find anything.
The following uses groupby and apply and seems to work okay:
x = pd.DataFrame({ 'label': ['a','a','b','b'],
'column1': [1,2,6,4] })
y = x.groupby('label').apply(
lambda g: g.assign(column2 = np.asarray(g.column1[::-1])))
y = y.reset_index(drop=True) # optional: drop weird index
print(y)
you can try the code block below:
#create the Dataframe
df = pd.DataFrame({'label':['a','a','b','b'],
'column1':[1,2,6,4]})
#Group by label
a = df.groupby('label').first().reset_index()
b = df.groupby('label').last().reset_index()
#Concat those groups to create columns2
df2 = (pd.concat([b,a])
.sort_values(by='label')
.rename(columns={'column1':'column2'})
.reset_index()
.drop('index',axis=1))
#Merge with the original Dataframe
df = df.merge(df2,left_index=True,right_index=True,on='label')[['label','column1','column2']]
Hope this helps
Assuming their are only pairs of labels, you could use the following as well:
# Create dataframe
df = pd.DataFrame(data = {'label' :['a', 'a', 'b', 'b'],
'column1' :[1,2, 6,4]})
# iterate over dataframe, identify matching label and opposite value
for index, row in df.iterrows():
newvalue = int(df[(df.label == row.label) & (df.column1 != row.column1)].column1.values[0])
# set value to new column
df.set_value(index, 'column2', newvalue)
df.head()
You can use groupby with apply where create new Series with back order:
df['column2'] = df.groupby('label')["column1"] \
.apply(lambda x: pd.Series(x[::-1].values)).reset_index(drop=True)
print (df)
column1 label column2
0 1 a 2
1 2 a 1
2 6 b 4
3 4 b 6

Categories

Resources