I have a dataframe df that looks like this:
ID Sequence
0 A->A
1 C->C->A
2 C->B->A
3 B->A
4 A->C->A
5 A->C->C
6 A->C
7 A->C->C
8 B->B
9 C->C and so on ....
I want to create a column called 'Outcome', which is binomial in nature.
Its value essentially depends on three lists that I am generating from below
Whenever 'A' occurs in a sequence, probability of "Outcome" being 1 is 2%
Whenever 'B' occurs in a sequence, probability of "Outcome" being 1 is 6%
Whenever 'C' occurs in a sequence, probability of "Outcome" being 1 is 1%
so here is the code which is generating these 3 (bi_A, bi_B, bi_C) lists -
A=0.02
B=0.06
C=0.01
count_A=0
count_B=0
count_C=0
for i in range(0,len(df)):
if('A' in df.sequence[i]):
count_A+=1
if('B' in df.sequence[i]):
count_B+=1
if('C' in df.sequence[i]):
count_C+=1
bi_A = np.random.binomial(1, A, count_A)
bi_B = np.random.binomial(1, B, count_B)
bi_C = np.random.binomial(1, C, count_C)
What I am trying to do is to combine these 3 lists as an "output" column so that probability of Outcome being 1 when "A" is in sequence is 2% and so on. How to I solve for it as I understand there would be data overlap, where bi_A says one sequence is 0 and bi_B says it's 1, so how would we solve for this ?
End data should look like -
ID Sequence Output
0 A->A 0
1 C->C->A 1
2 C->B->A 0
3 B->A 0
4 A->C->A 0
5 A->C->C 1
6 A->C 0
7 A->C->C 0
8 B->B 0
9 C->C 0
and so on ....
Such that when I find probability of Outcome = 1 when A is in string, it should be 2%
EDIT -
you can generate the sequence data using this code-
import pandas as pd
import itertools
import numpy as np
import random
alphabets=['A','B','C']
combinations=[]
for i in range(1,len(alphabets)+1):
combinations.append(['->'.join(i) for i in itertools.product(alphabets, repeat = i)])
combinations=(sum(combinations, []))
weights=np.random.normal(100,30,len(combinations))
weights/=sum(weights)
weights=weights.tolist()
#weights=np.random.dirichlet(np.ones(len(combinations))*1000.,size=1)
'''n = len(combinations)
weights = [random.random() for _ in range(n)]
sum_weights = sum(weights)
weights = [w/sum_weights for w in weights]'''
df=pd.DataFrame(random.choices(
population=combinations,weights=weights,
k=10000),columns=['sequence'])
I'm relatively new to Pandas dataframes and I have to do simple calculation, but so far I haven't found a good way to go about it.
Basically what I have is:
type group amount
1 A real 55
2 A fake 12
3 B real 610
4 B fake 23
5 B real 45
Now, I have to add a new column that would show the percentage of fakes in type total. So the simple formula for this table would be for A 12 / (55 + 12) * 100 and for B 23 / (610 + 23 + 45) * 100 and the table should look something like this:
type group amount percentage
1 A real 55
2 A fake 12 17.91
3 B real 610
4 B fake 23
5 B real 45 3.39
I know about groupby statements and basically all the components I need for this (I guess...), but can't figure out how to combine to get this result.
df['percentage'] = df.amount \
/ df.groupby(['type']) \
.amount.transform('sum').loc[df.group.eq('fake')]).fillna('')
df
If handling multiple fake in group per type. We can be a bit more careful. I'll set the index to preserve the type and group columns while I transform.
c = ['type', 'group']
d1 = df.set_index(c, append=True)
d1.amount /= d1.groupby(level=['type']).amount.transform('sum')
d1.reset_index(c)
From here, you can choose to leave that alone or consolidate the group column.
d1.groupby(level=c).sum().reset_index()
Try this out:
percentage = {}
for type in df.type.unique():
numerator = df[(df.type == type) & (df.group == 'fake')].amount.sum()
denominator = df[(df.type == type)].amount.sum()
percentage[type] = numerator / denominator * 100
df['percentage'] = list(df.type.map(percentage))
If you wanted to make sure you accounted for multiple fake groups per type you can do the following
type_group_total = df.groupby(['type', 'group']).transform('sum')
type_total = df.groupby('type')[['amount']].transform('sum')
df['percentage'] = type_group_total / type_total
Output
type group amount percentage
0 A real 55 0.820896
1 A fake 12 0.179104
2 B real 610 0.899705
3 B fake 23 0.100295
4 B fake 45 0.100295
This is a continuation of my question. Fastest way to compare rows of two pandas dataframes?
I have two dataframes A and B:
A is 1000 rows x 500 columns, filled with binary values indicating either presence or absence.
For a condensed example:
A B C D E
0 0 0 0 1 0
1 1 1 1 1 0
2 1 0 0 1 1
3 0 1 1 1 0
B is 1024 rows x 10 columns, and is a full iteration from 0 to 1023 in binary form.
Example:
0 1 2
0 0 0 0
1 0 0 1
2 0 1 0
3 0 1 1
4 1 0 0
5 1 0 1
6 1 1 0
7 1 1 1
I am trying to find which rows in A, at a particular 10 columns of A, correspond with each row of B.
Each row of A[My_Columns_List] is guaranteed to be somewhere in B, but not every row of B will match up with a row in A[My_Columns_List]
For example, I want to show that for columns [B,D,E] of A,
rows [1,3] of A match up with row [6] of B,
row [0] of A matches up with row [2] of B,
row [2] of A matches up with row [3] of B.
I have tried using:
pd.merge(B.reset_index(), A.reset_index(),
left_on = B.columns.tolist(),
right_on =A.columns[My_Columns_List].tolist(),
suffixes = ('_B','_A')))
This works, but I was hoping that this method would be faster:
S = 2**np.arange(10)
A_ID = np.dot(A[My_Columns_List],S)
B_ID = np.dot(B,S)
out_row_idx = np.where(np.in1d(A_ID,B_ID))[0]
But when I do this, out_row_idx returns an array containing all the indices of A, which doesn't tell me anything.
I think this method will be faster, but I don't know why it returns an array from 0 to 999.
Any input would be appreciated!
Also, credit goes to #jezrael and #Divakar for these methods.
I'll stick by my initial answer but maybe explain better.
You are asking to compare 2 pandas dataframes. Because of that, I'm going to build dataframes. I may use numpy, but my inputs and outputs will be dataframes.
Setup
You said we have a a 1000 x 500 array of ones and zeros. Let's build that.
A_init = pd.DataFrame(np.random.binomial(1, .5, (1000, 500)))
A_init.columns = pd.MultiIndex.from_product([range(A_init.shape[1]/10), range(10)])
A = A_init
In addition, I gave A a MultiIndex to easily group by columns of 10.
Solution
This is very similar to #Divakar's answer with one minor difference that I'll point out.
For one group of 10 ones and zeros, we can treat it as a bit array of length 8. We can then calculate what it's integer value is by taking the dot product with an array of powers of 2.
twos = 2 ** np.arange(10)
I can execute this for every group of 10 ones and zeros in one go like this
AtB = A.stack(0).dot(twos).unstack()
I stack to get a row of 50 groups of 10 into columns in order to do the dot product more elegantly. I then brought it back with the unstack.
I now have a 1000 x 50 dataframe of numbers that range from 0-1023.
Assume B is a dataframe with each row one of 1024 unique combinations of ones and zeros. B should be sorted like B = B.sort_values().reset_index(drop=True).
This is the part I think I failed at explaining last time. Look at
AtB.loc[:2, :2]
That value in the (0, 0) position, 951 means that the first group of 10 ones and zeros in the first row of A matches the row in B with the index 951. That's what you want!!! Funny thing is, I never looked at B. You know why, B is irrelevant!!! It's just a goofy way of representing the numbers from 0 to 1023. This is the difference with my answer, I'm ignoring B. Ignoring this useless step should save time.
These are all functions that take two dataframes A and B and returns a dataframe of indices where A matches B. Spoiler alert, I'll ignore B completely.
def FindAinB(A, B):
assert A.shape[1] % 10 == 0, 'Number of columns in A is not a multiple of 10'
rng = np.arange(A.shape[1])
A.columns = pd.MultiIndex.from_product([range(A.shape[1]/10), range(10)])
twos = 2 ** np.arange(10)
return A.stack(0).dot(twos).unstack()
def FindAinB2(A, B):
assert A.shape[1] % 10 == 0, 'Number of columns in A is not a multiple of 10'
rng = np.arange(A.shape[1])
A.columns = pd.MultiIndex.from_product([range(A.shape[1]/10), range(10)])
# use clever bit shifting instead of dot product with powers
# questionable improvement
return (A.stack(0) << np.arange(10)).sum(1).unstack()
I'm channelling my inner #Divakar (read, this is stuff I've learned from Divakar)
def FindAinB3(A, B):
assert A.shape[1] % 10 == 0, 'Number of columns in A is not a multiple of 10'
a = A.values.reshape(-1, 10)
a = np.einsum('ij->i', a << np.arange(10))
return pd.DataFrame(a.reshape(A.shape[0], -1), A.index)
Minimalist One Liner
f = lambda A: pd.DataFrame(np.einsum('ij->i', A.values.reshape(-1, 10) << np.arange(10)).reshape(A.shape[0], -1), A.index)
Use it like
f(A)
Timing
FindAinB3 is an order of magnitude faster
So I have two pandas dataframes, A and B.
A is 1000 rows x 500 columns, filled with binary values indicating either presence or absence.
B is 1024 rows x 10 columns, and is a full iteration of 0's and 1's, hence having 1024 rows.
I am trying to find which rows in A, at a particular 10 columns of A, correspond with a given row in B. I need the whole row to match up, rather than element by element.
For example, I would want
A[(A.ix[:,(1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10)==(1,0,1,0,1,0,0,1,0,0)).all(axis=1)]
To return something that rows (3,5,8,11,15) in A match up with that (1,0,1,0,1,0,0,1,0,0) row of B at those particular columns (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10)
And I want to do this over every row in B.
The best way I could figure out to do this was:
import numpy as np
for i in B:
B_array = np.array(i)
Matching_Rows = A[(A.ix[:,(1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10)] == B_array).all(axis=1)]
Matching_Rows_Index = Matching_Rows.index
This isn't terrible for one instance, but I use it in a while loop that runs around 20,000 times; therefore, it slows it down quite a bit.
I have been messing around with DataFrame.apply to no avail. Could map work better?
I was just hoping someone saw something obviously more efficient as I am fairly new to python.
Thanks and best regards!
We can abuse the fact that both dataframes have binary values 0 or 1 by collapsing the relevant columns from A and all columns from B into 1D arrays each, when considering each row as a sequence of binary numbers that could be converted to decimal number equivalents. This should reduce the problem set considerably, which would help with performance. Now, after getting those 1D arrays, we can use np.in1d to look for matches from B in A and finally np.where on it to get the matching indices.
Thus, we would have an implementation like so -
# Setup 1D arrays corresponding to selected cols from A and entire B
S = 2**np.arange(10)
A_ID = np.dot(A[range(1,11)],S)
B_ID = np.dot(B,S)
# Look for matches that exist from B_ID in A_ID, whose indices
# would be desired row indices that have matched from B
out_row_idx = np.where(np.in1d(A_ID,B_ID))[0]
Sample run -
In [157]: # Setup dataframes A and B with rows 0, 4 in A having matches from B
...: A_arr = np.random.randint(0,2,(10,14))
...: B_arr = np.random.randint(0,2,(7,10))
...:
...: B_arr[2] = A_arr[4,1:11]
...: B_arr[4] = A_arr[4,1:11]
...: B_arr[5] = A_arr[0,1:11]
...:
...: A = pd.DataFrame(A_arr)
...: B = pd.DataFrame(B_arr)
...:
In [158]: S = 2**np.arange(10)
...: A_ID = np.dot(A[range(1,11)],S)
...: B_ID = np.dot(B,S)
...: out_row_idx = np.where(np.in1d(A_ID,B_ID))[0]
...:
In [159]: out_row_idx
Out[159]: array([0, 4])
You can use merge with reset_index - output are indexes of B which are equal in A in custom columns:
A = pd.DataFrame({'A':[1,0,1,1],
'B':[0,0,1,1],
'C':[1,0,1,1],
'D':[1,1,1,0],
'E':[1,1,0,1]})
print (A)
A B C D E
0 1 0 1 1 1
1 0 0 0 1 1
2 1 1 1 1 0
3 1 1 1 0 1
B = pd.DataFrame({'0':[1,0,1],
'1':[1,0,1],
'2':[1,0,0]})
print (B)
0 1 2
0 1 1 1
1 0 0 0
2 1 1 0
print (pd.merge(B.reset_index(),
A.reset_index(),
left_on=B.columns.tolist(),
right_on=A.columns[[0,1,2]].tolist(),
suffixes=('_B','_A')))
index_B 0 1 2 index_A A B C D E
0 0 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 0
1 0 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 0 1
2 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1
print (pd.merge(B.reset_index(),
A.reset_index(),
left_on=B.columns.tolist(),
right_on=A.columns[[0,1,2]].tolist(),
suffixes=('_B','_A'))[['index_B','index_A']])
index_B index_A
0 0 2
1 0 3
2 1 1
You can do it in pandas by using loc or ix and telling it to find the rows where the ten columns are all equal. Like this:
A.loc[(A[1]==B[1]) & (A[2]==B[2]) & (A[3]==B[3]) & A[4]==B[4]) & (A[5]==B[5]) & (A[6]==B[6]) & (A[7]==B[7]) & (A[8]==B[8]) & (A[9]==B[9]) & (A[10]==B[10])]
This is quite ugly in my opinion but it will work and gets rid of the loop so it should be significantly faster. I wouldn't be surprised if someone could come up with a more elegant way of coding the same operation.
In this special case, your rows of 10 zeros and ones can be interpreted as 10 digit binaries. If B is in order, then it can be interpreted as a range from 0 to 1023. In this case, all we need to do is take A's rows in 10 column chunks and calculate what its binary equivalent is.
I'll start by defining a range of powers of two so I can do matrix multiplication with it.
twos = pd.Series(np.power(2, np.arange(10)))
Next, I'll relabel A's columns into a MultiIndex and stack to get my chunks of 10.
A = pd.DataFrame(np.random.binomial(1, .5, (1000, 500)))
A.columns = pd.MultiIndex.from_tuples(zip((A.columns / 10).tolist(), (A.columns % 10).tolist()))
A_ = A.stack(0)
A_.head()
Finally, I'll multiply A_ with twos to get integer representation of each row and unstack.
A_.dot(twos).unstack()
This is now a 1000 x 50 DataFrame where each cell represents which of B's rows we matched for that particular 10 column chunk for that particular row of A. There isn't even a need for B.
My basic task is to take vector x=[x1,x2,x3,x4] (which in my case is presented by a row of a Pandas dataframe, lets say a row with an index = 1), multiply it by scalar k and to sum up the results -> x1*k + x2*k + x3*k + x4*k.
I did not find a function that would do it in one step (Is there such a function/operation?), so i do it in two steps. First i multiply my vector x by scalar k, and then i sum up the results:
x_by_k = my_df.loc[[1]]*k
sum = x_by_k.sum(axis=1)
One of the problems i have here is that the resulting sum is of Series type, although effectively it is a number.
Is there a way to perform this sum operation with a number as an output?
Can i do the above described in one step?
IIUC select row in df by ix, then sum and multiple by k:
df = pd.DataFrame({'A':[1,2,3],
'B':[4,5,6],
'C':[7,8,9]})
print (df)
A B C
0 1 4 7
1 2 5 8
2 3 6 9
k = 2
sum = df.ix[1].sum()* k
print (sum)
30