Related
I want to merge two dictionaries so that the resulting dict has keys from the first dict and values from the first and second.
>>> A = {'AB': 'a', 'A': 'a'}
>>> B = {'AB': 'b', 'B': 'b'}
>>> merge_left(A, B)
{'AB': 'b', 'A': 'a'}
This is somewhat similar to a left outer join used in merging database tables in that one side is used as the "base" and the other side is compared to it.
Here is a table of what value each key should have in the resulting dict.
Possible Situations
Key in A
Key not in A
Key in B
Use B's value
Don't include
Key not in B
Use A's value
N/A
Is there a function merge_left or something similar that returns the dict above?
I used dict.get's ability to return a default value to make a fairly short merge_left function. This uses a dict-comprehension over key, value pairs of the first dict and checks them against the second.
def merge_left(defaults, override):
return {key, override.get(key, default) for key, default in defaults.items()}
Since this function is just returning a dict-comprehension, you can "inline" it directly into your code.
>>> A = {'AB': 'a', 'A': 'a'}
>>> B = {'AB': 'b', 'B': 'b'}
>>> {k: B.get(k, a) for k, a in A.items()}
{'AB': 'b', 'A': 'a'}
I have 2 lists which correspond to what I would like to be my key:value pairs, for example:
list_1 = [1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2,2,2,2] #(key)
list_2 = [x,x,x,y,g,r,t,w,r,r,r,t,f,c,d] #(value)
I've (kind of) been able to create a dictionary via: dict = dict(zip(list_1, [list_2]))
However the problem with this is that it is only picking up '1' as a key and also results in duplicate entries within the list of values for the key.
Can anyone suggest a way to create a dictionary so that only the unique values from list_2 are mapped to their corresponding key?
Thanks
EDIT:
output I'm looking for would be one dictionary keyed by 1 and 2 with lists as values containing only the unique values for each i.e.:
dict = {1: [x,y,g,r,t,w], 2: [r,t,f,c,d]}
This sort of problem is properly solved with a collections.defaultdict(set); the defaultdict gives you easy auto-vivificaction of sets for each key on demand, and the set uniquifies the values associated with each key:
from collections import defaultdict
mydict = defaultdict(set)
for k, v in zip(list_1, list_2):
mydict[k].add(v)
You can then convert the result to a plain dict with list values with:
mydict = {k: list(v) for k, v in mydict.items()}
If order of the values must be preserved, on modern Python you can use dicts instead of set (on older Python, you'd use collections.OrderedDict):
mydict = defaultdict(dict)
for k, v in zip(list_1, list_2):
mydict[k][v] = True # Dummy value; we're using a dict to get an ordered set of the keys
with the conversion to plain dict with list values being unchanged
If the input is already sorted, itertools.groupby is theoretically slightly more efficient (it's actual O(n), vs. average case O(n) using dicts), but in practice the defaultdict is typically as faster or faster (the implementation of groupby has some unavoidable inefficiencies). Just for illustration, the groupby solution would be:
from itertools import groupby
from operator import itemgetter
mydict = {k: {v for _, v in grp} for k, grp in groupby(zip(list_1, list_2), key=itemgetter(0))]
# Or preserving order of insertion:
getval = itemgetter(1) # Construct once to avoid repeated construction
mydict = {k: list(dict.fromkeys(map(getval, grp)))
for k, grp in groupby(zip(list_1, list_2), key=itemgetter(0))]
Since a dictionary is a set it cant contain twice the same key but it can have the key once then a list of value for that you can use the one-line method
my_dict = {key:[list_2[i] for i in range(len(list_2)) if list_1[i]==key] for key in set(list_1)}
Or a more classic method
my_dict = {}
for key_id in range(len(list_1)):
if list_1[key_id] not in my_dict:
my_dict[list_1[key_id]] = []
my_dict[list_1[key_id]].append(list_2[key_id])
In both case the result is
my_dict = {1: ['x', 'x', 'x', 'y', 'g', 'r', 't', 'w', 'r'], 2: ['r', 'r', 't', 'f', 'c', 'd']}
The problem is your key is too unique. there're only two unique keys 1 and 2. So if you're creating dictionaries you can't have {1:x, 1:y} at same time for example, unless you change the key to something new and unique.
I would use a tuple in your purpose:
list(set(tuple(zip(list_1, list_2))))
The set gives you unique mappings which is what dropping the duplicates.
keys = [1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2,2,2,2]
values = ['x','x','x','y','g','r','t','w','r','r','r','t','f','c','d']
result = {}
for key,value in zip(keys,values):
if key not in result:
result[key] = []
if value not in result[key]:
result[key].append(value)
else:
if value not in result[key]:
result[key].append(value)
print(result)
{1: ['x', 'y', 'g', 'r', 't', 'w'], 2: ['r', 't', 'f', 'c', 'd']}
Note:
zip(keys,values) this will create a iterable of tuples, each tuple consist of one element from the keys and values.
(1,'x')
(1,'x')
I have a dictionary in python like this example:
small example:
d = {'chr12:112843810-112843817': 'CGTAGAG', 'chr16:48394513-48394520': 'TTTAAAC'}
the value of this dictionary is a sequence of characters and the characters can only be A, C, G or T. but I want to make a new dictionary in which the keys are similar but values are different. in fact in new dictionary the sequence of characters would have 2 changes:
1- it must be reversed (direction). for example "AGT" would be "TGA".
2- I want to convert: A -> T , T -> A , C -> G , G -> C.
considering 2 above items, AGTCC would be converted to GGACT
here is the expected output for the small example:
expected output:
d2 = {'chr12:112843810-112843817': 'CTCTACG', 'chr16:48394513-48394520': 'GTTTAAA'}
I am trying to do that in python using the following code:
def reverse_complement(dict):
for v in dict:
complement = {'A': 'T', 'C': 'G', 'G': 'C', 'T': 'A'}
return [complement[base] for base in v[::-1]]
but it does not return what would like to get. do you know how to fix it?
for v in dict iterates the keys, not the values. You should use items to iterate over key-value pairs.
The return statement causes the function to return after the first iteration.
dict is a bad variable name (d is probably worse, but at least it does not shadow a built-in name)
You can use a dict comphrension:
def reverse_complement(d):
complement = {'A': 'T', 'C': 'G', 'G': 'C', 'T': 'A'}
return {k: ''.join(complement[base] for base in v[::-1]) for k, v in d.items()}
or with str.translate:
def reverse_complement(d):
table = str.maketrans('ACGT', 'TGCA')
return {k: v[::-1].translate(table) for k, v in d.items()}
Here another solution with string replacement methods. This might be faster.
the complement method does the inversion by fist setting the string to lower case and then doing the renaming based on lower to upper case.
The "[::-1]" reverses the order and the rest is a dictionary comprehension, that creates a new dictionary
complement = lambda s: s.lower().replace("g","C").replace("c","G").replace("t","A").replace("a","T")
d2 = { k:complement(v)[::-1] for k,v in d.items() }
Similar to first answer by #DeepSpace, you could map the complements in-place with reversed():
d = {'chr12:112843810-112843817': 'CGTAGAG', 'chr16:48394513-48394520': 'TTTAAAC'}
complements = {'A': 'T', 'T': 'A', 'C': 'G', 'G': 'C'}
for k, v in d.items():
d[k] = ''.join(map(complements.get, reversed(v)))
print(d)
# {'chr12:112843810-112843817': 'CTCTACG', 'chr16:48394513-48394520': 'GTTTAAA'}
You can also rebuild new dictionary:
d2 = {k: ''.join(map(complements.get, reversed(v))) for k, v in d.items()}
print(d2)
# {'chr12:112843810-112843817': 'CTCTACG', 'chr16:48394513-48394520': 'GTTTAAA'}
Note: ''.join(map(complements.get, reversed(v))) is just another way of writing ''.join(complemements.get(x) for x in reversed(v)).
Given a dictionary like so:
my_map = {'a': 1, 'b': 2}
How can one invert this map to get:
inv_map = {1: 'a', 2: 'b'}
Python 3+:
inv_map = {v: k for k, v in my_map.items()}
Python 2:
inv_map = {v: k for k, v in my_map.iteritems()}
Assuming that the values in the dict are unique:
Python 3:
dict((v, k) for k, v in my_map.items())
Python 2:
dict((v, k) for k, v in my_map.iteritems())
If the values in my_map aren't unique:
Python 3:
inv_map = {}
for k, v in my_map.items():
inv_map[v] = inv_map.get(v, []) + [k]
Python 2:
inv_map = {}
for k, v in my_map.iteritems():
inv_map[v] = inv_map.get(v, []) + [k]
To do this while preserving the type of your mapping (assuming that it is a dict or a dict subclass):
def inverse_mapping(f):
return f.__class__(map(reversed, f.items()))
Try this:
inv_map = dict(zip(my_map.values(), my_map.keys()))
(Note that the Python docs on dictionary views explicitly guarantee that .keys() and .values() have their elements in the same order, which allows the approach above to work.)
Alternatively:
inv_map = dict((my_map[k], k) for k in my_map)
or using python 3.0's dict comprehensions
inv_map = {my_map[k] : k for k in my_map}
Another, more functional, way:
my_map = { 'a': 1, 'b':2 }
dict(map(reversed, my_map.items()))
We can also reverse a dictionary with duplicate keys using defaultdict:
from collections import Counter, defaultdict
def invert_dict(d):
d_inv = defaultdict(list)
for k, v in d.items():
d_inv[v].append(k)
return d_inv
text = 'aaa bbb ccc ddd aaa bbb ccc aaa'
c = Counter(text.split()) # Counter({'aaa': 3, 'bbb': 2, 'ccc': 2, 'ddd': 1})
dict(invert_dict(c)) # {1: ['ddd'], 2: ['bbb', 'ccc'], 3: ['aaa']}
See here:
This technique is simpler and faster than an equivalent technique using dict.setdefault().
This expands upon the answer by Robert, applying to when the values in the dict aren't unique.
class ReversibleDict(dict):
# Ref: https://stackoverflow.com/a/13057382/
def reversed(self):
"""
Return a reversed dict, with common values in the original dict
grouped into a list in the returned dict.
Example:
>>> d = ReversibleDict({'a': 3, 'c': 2, 'b': 2, 'e': 3, 'd': 1, 'f': 2})
>>> d.reversed()
{1: ['d'], 2: ['c', 'b', 'f'], 3: ['a', 'e']}
"""
revdict = {}
for k, v in self.items():
revdict.setdefault(v, []).append(k)
return revdict
The implementation is limited in that you cannot use reversed twice and get the original back. It is not symmetric as such. It is tested with Python 2.6. Here is a use case of how I am using to print the resultant dict.
If you'd rather use a set than a list, and there could exist unordered applications for which this makes sense, instead of setdefault(v, []).append(k), use setdefault(v, set()).add(k).
Combination of list and dictionary comprehension. Can handle duplicate keys
{v:[i for i in d.keys() if d[i] == v ] for k,v in d.items()}
A case where the dictionary values is a set. Like:
some_dict = {"1":{"a","b","c"},
"2":{"d","e","f"},
"3":{"g","h","i"}}
The inverse would like:
some_dict = {vi: k for k, v in some_dict.items() for vi in v}
The output is like this:
{'c': '1',
'b': '1',
'a': '1',
'f': '2',
'd': '2',
'e': '2',
'g': '3',
'h': '3',
'i': '3'}
For instance, you have the following dictionary:
my_dict = {'a': 'fire', 'b': 'ice', 'c': 'fire', 'd': 'water'}
And you wanna get it in such an inverted form:
inverted_dict = {'fire': ['a', 'c'], 'ice': ['b'], 'water': ['d']}
First Solution. For inverting key-value pairs in your dictionary use a for-loop approach:
# Use this code to invert dictionaries that have non-unique values
inverted_dict = dict()
for key, value in my_dict.items():
inverted_dict.setdefault(value, list()).append(key)
Second Solution. Use a dictionary comprehension approach for inversion:
# Use this code to invert dictionaries that have unique values
inverted_dict = {value: key for key, value in my_dict.items()}
Third Solution. Use reverting the inversion approach (relies on the second solution):
# Use this code to invert dictionaries that have lists of values
my_dict = {value: key for key in inverted_dict for value in my_map[key]}
Lot of answers but didn't find anything clean in case we are talking about a dictionary with non-unique values.
A solution would be:
from collections import defaultdict
inv_map = defaultdict(list)
for k, v in my_map.items():
inv_map[v].append(k)
Example:
If initial dict my_map = {'c': 1, 'd': 5, 'a': 5, 'b': 10}
then, running the code above will give:
{5: ['a', 'd'], 1: ['c'], 10: ['b']}
I found that this version is more than 10% faster than the accepted version of a dictionary with 10000 keys.
d = {i: str(i) for i in range(10000)}
new_d = dict(zip(d.values(), d.keys()))
In addition to the other functions suggested above, if you like lambdas:
invert = lambda mydict: {v:k for k, v in mydict.items()}
Or, you could do it this way too:
invert = lambda mydict: dict( zip(mydict.values(), mydict.keys()) )
I think the best way to do this is to define a class. Here is an implementation of a "symmetric dictionary":
class SymDict:
def __init__(self):
self.aToB = {}
self.bToA = {}
def assocAB(self, a, b):
# Stores and returns a tuple (a,b) of overwritten bindings
currB = None
if a in self.aToB: currB = self.bToA[a]
currA = None
if b in self.bToA: currA = self.aToB[b]
self.aToB[a] = b
self.bToA[b] = a
return (currA, currB)
def lookupA(self, a):
if a in self.aToB:
return self.aToB[a]
return None
def lookupB(self, b):
if b in self.bToA:
return self.bToA[b]
return None
Deletion and iteration methods are easy enough to implement if they're needed.
This implementation is way more efficient than inverting an entire dictionary (which seems to be the most popular solution on this page). Not to mention, you can add or remove values from your SymDict as much as you want, and your inverse-dictionary will always stay valid -- this isn't true if you simply reverse the entire dictionary once.
If the values aren't unique, and you're a little hardcore:
inv_map = dict(
(v, [k for (k, xx) in filter(lambda (key, value): value == v, my_map.items())])
for v in set(my_map.values())
)
Especially for a large dict, note that this solution is far less efficient than the answer Python reverse / invert a mapping because it loops over items() multiple times.
This handles non-unique values and retains much of the look of the unique case.
inv_map = {v:[k for k in my_map if my_map[k] == v] for v in my_map.itervalues()}
For Python 3.x, replace itervalues with values.
I am aware that this question already has many good answers, but I wanted to share this very neat solution that also takes care of duplicate values:
def dict_reverser(d):
seen = set()
return {v: k for k, v in d.items() if v not in seen or seen.add(v)}
This relies on the fact that set.add always returns None in Python.
Here is another way to do it.
my_map = {'a': 1, 'b': 2}
inv_map= {}
for key in my_map.keys() :
val = my_map[key]
inv_map[val] = key
dict([(value, key) for key, value in d.items()])
Function is symmetric for values of type list; Tuples are coverted to lists when performing reverse_dict(reverse_dict(dictionary))
def reverse_dict(dictionary):
reverse_dict = {}
for key, value in dictionary.iteritems():
if not isinstance(value, (list, tuple)):
value = [value]
for val in value:
reverse_dict[val] = reverse_dict.get(val, [])
reverse_dict[val].append(key)
for key, value in reverse_dict.iteritems():
if len(value) == 1:
reverse_dict[key] = value[0]
return reverse_dict
Since dictionaries require one unique key within the dictionary unlike values, we have to append the reversed values into a list of sort to be included within the new specific keys.
def r_maping(dictionary):
List_z=[]
Map= {}
for z, x in dictionary.iteritems(): #iterate through the keys and values
Map.setdefault(x,List_z).append(z) #Setdefault is the same as dict[key]=default."The method returns the key value available in the dictionary and if given key is not available then it will return provided default value. Afterward, we will append into the default list our new values for the specific key.
return Map
Fast functional solution for non-bijective maps (values not unique):
from itertools import imap, groupby
def fst(s):
return s[0]
def snd(s):
return s[1]
def inverseDict(d):
"""
input d: a -> b
output : b -> set(a)
"""
return {
v : set(imap(fst, kv_iter))
for (v, kv_iter) in groupby(
sorted(d.iteritems(),
key=snd),
key=snd
)
}
In theory this should be faster than adding to the set (or appending to the list) one by one like in the imperative solution.
Unfortunately the values have to be sortable, the sorting is required by groupby.
Try this for python 2.7/3.x
inv_map={};
for i in my_map:
inv_map[my_map[i]]=i
print inv_map
def invertDictionary(d):
myDict = {}
for i in d:
value = d.get(i)
myDict.setdefault(value,[]).append(i)
return myDict
print invertDictionary({'a':1, 'b':2, 'c':3 , 'd' : 1})
This will provide output as : {1: ['a', 'd'], 2: ['b'], 3: ['c']}
A lambda solution for current python 3.x versions:
d1 = dict(alice='apples', bob='bananas')
d2 = dict(map(lambda key: (d1[key], key), d1.keys()))
print(d2)
Result:
{'apples': 'alice', 'bananas': 'bob'}
This solution does not check for duplicates.
Some remarks:
The lambda construct can access d1 from the outer scope, so we only
pass in the current key. It returns a tuple.
The dict() constructor accepts a list of tuples. It
also accepts the result of a map, so we can skip the conversion to a
list.
This solution has no explicit for loop. It also avoids using a list comprehension for those who are bad at math ;-)
Taking up the highly voted answer starting If the values in my_map aren't unique:, I had a problem where not only the values were not unique, but in addition, they were a list, with each item in the list consisting again of a list of three elements: a string value, a number, and another number.
Example:
mymap['key1'] gives you:
[('xyz', 1, 2),
('abc', 5, 4)]
I wanted to switch only the string value with the key, keeping the two number elements at the same place. You simply need another nested for loop then:
inv_map = {}
for k, v in my_map.items():
for x in v:
# with x[1:3] same as x[1], x[2]:
inv_map[x[0]] = inv_map.get(x[0], []) + [k, x[1:3]]
Example:
inv_map['abc'] now gives you:
[('key1', 1, 2),
('key1', 5, 4)]
This works even if you have non-unique values in the original dictionary.
def dict_invert(d):
'''
d: dict
Returns an inverted dictionary
'''
# Your code here
inv_d = {}
for k, v in d.items():
if v not in inv_d.keys():
inv_d[v] = [k]
else:
inv_d[v].append(k)
inv_d[v].sort()
print(f"{inv_d[v]} are the values")
return inv_d
I would do it that way in python 2.
inv_map = {my_map[x] : x for x in my_map}
Not something completely different, just a bit rewritten recipe from Cookbook. It's futhermore optimized by retaining setdefault method, instead of each time getting it through the instance:
def inverse(mapping):
'''
A function to inverse mapping, collecting keys with simillar values
in list. Careful to retain original type and to be fast.
>> d = dict(a=1, b=2, c=1, d=3, e=2, f=1, g=5, h=2)
>> inverse(d)
{1: ['f', 'c', 'a'], 2: ['h', 'b', 'e'], 3: ['d'], 5: ['g']}
'''
res = {}
setdef = res.setdefault
for key, value in mapping.items():
setdef(value, []).append(key)
return res if mapping.__class__==dict else mapping.__class__(res)
Designed to be run under CPython 3.x, for 2.x replace mapping.items() with mapping.iteritems()
On my machine runs a bit faster, than other examples here
Given a dictionary like so:
my_map = {'a': 1, 'b': 2}
How can one invert this map to get:
inv_map = {1: 'a', 2: 'b'}
Python 3+:
inv_map = {v: k for k, v in my_map.items()}
Python 2:
inv_map = {v: k for k, v in my_map.iteritems()}
Assuming that the values in the dict are unique:
Python 3:
dict((v, k) for k, v in my_map.items())
Python 2:
dict((v, k) for k, v in my_map.iteritems())
If the values in my_map aren't unique:
Python 3:
inv_map = {}
for k, v in my_map.items():
inv_map[v] = inv_map.get(v, []) + [k]
Python 2:
inv_map = {}
for k, v in my_map.iteritems():
inv_map[v] = inv_map.get(v, []) + [k]
To do this while preserving the type of your mapping (assuming that it is a dict or a dict subclass):
def inverse_mapping(f):
return f.__class__(map(reversed, f.items()))
Try this:
inv_map = dict(zip(my_map.values(), my_map.keys()))
(Note that the Python docs on dictionary views explicitly guarantee that .keys() and .values() have their elements in the same order, which allows the approach above to work.)
Alternatively:
inv_map = dict((my_map[k], k) for k in my_map)
or using python 3.0's dict comprehensions
inv_map = {my_map[k] : k for k in my_map}
Another, more functional, way:
my_map = { 'a': 1, 'b':2 }
dict(map(reversed, my_map.items()))
We can also reverse a dictionary with duplicate keys using defaultdict:
from collections import Counter, defaultdict
def invert_dict(d):
d_inv = defaultdict(list)
for k, v in d.items():
d_inv[v].append(k)
return d_inv
text = 'aaa bbb ccc ddd aaa bbb ccc aaa'
c = Counter(text.split()) # Counter({'aaa': 3, 'bbb': 2, 'ccc': 2, 'ddd': 1})
dict(invert_dict(c)) # {1: ['ddd'], 2: ['bbb', 'ccc'], 3: ['aaa']}
See here:
This technique is simpler and faster than an equivalent technique using dict.setdefault().
This expands upon the answer by Robert, applying to when the values in the dict aren't unique.
class ReversibleDict(dict):
# Ref: https://stackoverflow.com/a/13057382/
def reversed(self):
"""
Return a reversed dict, with common values in the original dict
grouped into a list in the returned dict.
Example:
>>> d = ReversibleDict({'a': 3, 'c': 2, 'b': 2, 'e': 3, 'd': 1, 'f': 2})
>>> d.reversed()
{1: ['d'], 2: ['c', 'b', 'f'], 3: ['a', 'e']}
"""
revdict = {}
for k, v in self.items():
revdict.setdefault(v, []).append(k)
return revdict
The implementation is limited in that you cannot use reversed twice and get the original back. It is not symmetric as such. It is tested with Python 2.6. Here is a use case of how I am using to print the resultant dict.
If you'd rather use a set than a list, and there could exist unordered applications for which this makes sense, instead of setdefault(v, []).append(k), use setdefault(v, set()).add(k).
Combination of list and dictionary comprehension. Can handle duplicate keys
{v:[i for i in d.keys() if d[i] == v ] for k,v in d.items()}
A case where the dictionary values is a set. Like:
some_dict = {"1":{"a","b","c"},
"2":{"d","e","f"},
"3":{"g","h","i"}}
The inverse would like:
some_dict = {vi: k for k, v in some_dict.items() for vi in v}
The output is like this:
{'c': '1',
'b': '1',
'a': '1',
'f': '2',
'd': '2',
'e': '2',
'g': '3',
'h': '3',
'i': '3'}
For instance, you have the following dictionary:
my_dict = {'a': 'fire', 'b': 'ice', 'c': 'fire', 'd': 'water'}
And you wanna get it in such an inverted form:
inverted_dict = {'fire': ['a', 'c'], 'ice': ['b'], 'water': ['d']}
First Solution. For inverting key-value pairs in your dictionary use a for-loop approach:
# Use this code to invert dictionaries that have non-unique values
inverted_dict = dict()
for key, value in my_dict.items():
inverted_dict.setdefault(value, list()).append(key)
Second Solution. Use a dictionary comprehension approach for inversion:
# Use this code to invert dictionaries that have unique values
inverted_dict = {value: key for key, value in my_dict.items()}
Third Solution. Use reverting the inversion approach (relies on the second solution):
# Use this code to invert dictionaries that have lists of values
my_dict = {value: key for key in inverted_dict for value in my_map[key]}
Lot of answers but didn't find anything clean in case we are talking about a dictionary with non-unique values.
A solution would be:
from collections import defaultdict
inv_map = defaultdict(list)
for k, v in my_map.items():
inv_map[v].append(k)
Example:
If initial dict my_map = {'c': 1, 'd': 5, 'a': 5, 'b': 10}
then, running the code above will give:
{5: ['a', 'd'], 1: ['c'], 10: ['b']}
I found that this version is more than 10% faster than the accepted version of a dictionary with 10000 keys.
d = {i: str(i) for i in range(10000)}
new_d = dict(zip(d.values(), d.keys()))
In addition to the other functions suggested above, if you like lambdas:
invert = lambda mydict: {v:k for k, v in mydict.items()}
Or, you could do it this way too:
invert = lambda mydict: dict( zip(mydict.values(), mydict.keys()) )
I think the best way to do this is to define a class. Here is an implementation of a "symmetric dictionary":
class SymDict:
def __init__(self):
self.aToB = {}
self.bToA = {}
def assocAB(self, a, b):
# Stores and returns a tuple (a,b) of overwritten bindings
currB = None
if a in self.aToB: currB = self.bToA[a]
currA = None
if b in self.bToA: currA = self.aToB[b]
self.aToB[a] = b
self.bToA[b] = a
return (currA, currB)
def lookupA(self, a):
if a in self.aToB:
return self.aToB[a]
return None
def lookupB(self, b):
if b in self.bToA:
return self.bToA[b]
return None
Deletion and iteration methods are easy enough to implement if they're needed.
This implementation is way more efficient than inverting an entire dictionary (which seems to be the most popular solution on this page). Not to mention, you can add or remove values from your SymDict as much as you want, and your inverse-dictionary will always stay valid -- this isn't true if you simply reverse the entire dictionary once.
If the values aren't unique, and you're a little hardcore:
inv_map = dict(
(v, [k for (k, xx) in filter(lambda (key, value): value == v, my_map.items())])
for v in set(my_map.values())
)
Especially for a large dict, note that this solution is far less efficient than the answer Python reverse / invert a mapping because it loops over items() multiple times.
This handles non-unique values and retains much of the look of the unique case.
inv_map = {v:[k for k in my_map if my_map[k] == v] for v in my_map.itervalues()}
For Python 3.x, replace itervalues with values.
I am aware that this question already has many good answers, but I wanted to share this very neat solution that also takes care of duplicate values:
def dict_reverser(d):
seen = set()
return {v: k for k, v in d.items() if v not in seen or seen.add(v)}
This relies on the fact that set.add always returns None in Python.
Here is another way to do it.
my_map = {'a': 1, 'b': 2}
inv_map= {}
for key in my_map.keys() :
val = my_map[key]
inv_map[val] = key
dict([(value, key) for key, value in d.items()])
Function is symmetric for values of type list; Tuples are coverted to lists when performing reverse_dict(reverse_dict(dictionary))
def reverse_dict(dictionary):
reverse_dict = {}
for key, value in dictionary.iteritems():
if not isinstance(value, (list, tuple)):
value = [value]
for val in value:
reverse_dict[val] = reverse_dict.get(val, [])
reverse_dict[val].append(key)
for key, value in reverse_dict.iteritems():
if len(value) == 1:
reverse_dict[key] = value[0]
return reverse_dict
Since dictionaries require one unique key within the dictionary unlike values, we have to append the reversed values into a list of sort to be included within the new specific keys.
def r_maping(dictionary):
List_z=[]
Map= {}
for z, x in dictionary.iteritems(): #iterate through the keys and values
Map.setdefault(x,List_z).append(z) #Setdefault is the same as dict[key]=default."The method returns the key value available in the dictionary and if given key is not available then it will return provided default value. Afterward, we will append into the default list our new values for the specific key.
return Map
Fast functional solution for non-bijective maps (values not unique):
from itertools import imap, groupby
def fst(s):
return s[0]
def snd(s):
return s[1]
def inverseDict(d):
"""
input d: a -> b
output : b -> set(a)
"""
return {
v : set(imap(fst, kv_iter))
for (v, kv_iter) in groupby(
sorted(d.iteritems(),
key=snd),
key=snd
)
}
In theory this should be faster than adding to the set (or appending to the list) one by one like in the imperative solution.
Unfortunately the values have to be sortable, the sorting is required by groupby.
Try this for python 2.7/3.x
inv_map={};
for i in my_map:
inv_map[my_map[i]]=i
print inv_map
def invertDictionary(d):
myDict = {}
for i in d:
value = d.get(i)
myDict.setdefault(value,[]).append(i)
return myDict
print invertDictionary({'a':1, 'b':2, 'c':3 , 'd' : 1})
This will provide output as : {1: ['a', 'd'], 2: ['b'], 3: ['c']}
A lambda solution for current python 3.x versions:
d1 = dict(alice='apples', bob='bananas')
d2 = dict(map(lambda key: (d1[key], key), d1.keys()))
print(d2)
Result:
{'apples': 'alice', 'bananas': 'bob'}
This solution does not check for duplicates.
Some remarks:
The lambda construct can access d1 from the outer scope, so we only
pass in the current key. It returns a tuple.
The dict() constructor accepts a list of tuples. It
also accepts the result of a map, so we can skip the conversion to a
list.
This solution has no explicit for loop. It also avoids using a list comprehension for those who are bad at math ;-)
Taking up the highly voted answer starting If the values in my_map aren't unique:, I had a problem where not only the values were not unique, but in addition, they were a list, with each item in the list consisting again of a list of three elements: a string value, a number, and another number.
Example:
mymap['key1'] gives you:
[('xyz', 1, 2),
('abc', 5, 4)]
I wanted to switch only the string value with the key, keeping the two number elements at the same place. You simply need another nested for loop then:
inv_map = {}
for k, v in my_map.items():
for x in v:
# with x[1:3] same as x[1], x[2]:
inv_map[x[0]] = inv_map.get(x[0], []) + [k, x[1:3]]
Example:
inv_map['abc'] now gives you:
[('key1', 1, 2),
('key1', 5, 4)]
This works even if you have non-unique values in the original dictionary.
def dict_invert(d):
'''
d: dict
Returns an inverted dictionary
'''
# Your code here
inv_d = {}
for k, v in d.items():
if v not in inv_d.keys():
inv_d[v] = [k]
else:
inv_d[v].append(k)
inv_d[v].sort()
print(f"{inv_d[v]} are the values")
return inv_d
I would do it that way in python 2.
inv_map = {my_map[x] : x for x in my_map}
Not something completely different, just a bit rewritten recipe from Cookbook. It's futhermore optimized by retaining setdefault method, instead of each time getting it through the instance:
def inverse(mapping):
'''
A function to inverse mapping, collecting keys with simillar values
in list. Careful to retain original type and to be fast.
>> d = dict(a=1, b=2, c=1, d=3, e=2, f=1, g=5, h=2)
>> inverse(d)
{1: ['f', 'c', 'a'], 2: ['h', 'b', 'e'], 3: ['d'], 5: ['g']}
'''
res = {}
setdef = res.setdefault
for key, value in mapping.items():
setdef(value, []).append(key)
return res if mapping.__class__==dict else mapping.__class__(res)
Designed to be run under CPython 3.x, for 2.x replace mapping.items() with mapping.iteritems()
On my machine runs a bit faster, than other examples here