Can someone explain what this code is doing?
a = np.array([[1, 2], [3, 4]])
a[..., [True, False]]
What is the [True, False] doing there?
Ellipsis Notation and Booleans as Integers
From the numpy docs:
Ellipsis expand to the number of : objects needed to make a selection tuple of the same length as x.ndim. There may only be a single ellipsis present
True and False are just obfuscated 0 and 1. Taking the example from the docs:
x = np.array([[[1],[2],[3]], [[4],[5],[6]]])
x[...,0]
# outputs: array([[1, 2, 3],
# [4, 5, 6]])
x[..., False] # same thing
The boolean values are specifying an index, just like the numbers 0 or 1 would.
In response to your question in the comments
It first seems magical that
a = np.array([[1, 2], [3, 4]])
a[..., [True, True]] # = [[2,2],[4,4]]
But when we consider it as
a[..., [1,1]] # = [[2,2],[4,4]]
It seems less impressive.
Similarly:
b = array([[1,2,3],[4,5,6]])
b[...,[2,2]] # = [[3,3],[5,5]]
After applying the ellipsis rules; the true and false grab column indices, just like 0, 1, or 17 would have
Boolean Arrays for Complex Indexing
There are some subtle differences (bool's have a different type than ints). A lot of the hairy details can be found here. These do not seem to have any roll in your code, but they are interesting in figuring out how numpy indexing works.
In particular, this line is probably what you're looking for:
In the future Boolean array-likes (such as lists of python bools) will
always be treated as Boolean indexes
On this page, they talk about boolean arrays, which are quite complex as an indexing tool
Boolean arrays used as indices are treated in a different manner
entirely than index arrays. Boolean arrays must be of the same shape
as the initial dimensions of the array being indexed
Skipping down a bit
Unlike in the case of integer index arrays, in the boolean case, the
result is a 1-D array containing all the elements in the indexed array
corresponding to all the true elements in the boolean array. The
elements in the indexed array are always iterated and returned in
row-major (C-style) order. The result is also identical to
y[np.nonzero(b)]. As with index arrays, what is returned is a copy of
the data, not a view as one gets with slices.
Related
I have been learning Fancy indexing but when I observed the behavior of the following code I got a couple of questions...
According to my understanding,
Fancy Indexing is:
ndArray[ [0,1,2] ] i.e. passing a list of rows / columns
and
Slicing is:
ndArray[ 0:3 ] i.e. giving a range of rows / columns
Now, the problem
A numpy array,
arr = [ [1,2,3],
[4,5,6],
[7,8,9] ]
When I try fancy indexing:
arr[ [0,1], [1,2] ]
>>> [2, 6]
And when slice it,
arr[:2, 1:]
>>> [ [2, 3],
[5, 6] ]
Essentially both of them should return the two-dimension array as both of them mean the same, as they are used interchangeably!
:2 should be equivalent to [0,1] #For rows
1: should be equivalent to [1,2] #For cols
The question:
Why Fancy indexing is not returning as the slice notation? And how to achieve that?
Please enlighten me.
Thanks
Fancy indexing and slicing behave differently by definition / by numpy specification.
So, instead of questioning why that is so, it is better to:
Be able to recognize / distinguish / tell them apart (i.e., have a clear understanding of when does the indexing become fancy indexing, and when is it slicing).
Be aware of the differences in their semantics (outcomes).
In your example:
In the case of fancy indexing, the indices generated for the two axes are combined "in tandem" (similar to how the zip function combines two input sequences "in tandem". (In the words of the official numpy documentation, the two index arrays are "iterated together"). We are passing the list [0, 1] for indexing the array on axis 0, and passing the list [1, 2] for indexing the array on axis 1. The index 0 from the index array [0, 1] is combined only with the corresponding index 1 of the index array [1, 2]. Similarly, the index 1 of the index array [0, 1] is combined only with the corresponding index 2 of the index array [1, 2]. In other words, the index arrays do not combine with each other in a many-to-many fashion. All this was about fancy indexing.
In the case of slicing, the slice :2 that is specified for axis 0 conceptually generates indices '0' and '1' for axis 0; and the slice 1: specified for axis 1 conceptually generates indices 1 and 2 for axis 1. But these generated indices combine in a many-to-many fashion, unlike in the case of fancy indexing. So, they produce four combinations rather than just two.
So, the crucial difference in the defined semantics of fancy indexing and slicing is that in the case of fancy indexing, the fancy index arrays are iterated together.
I have a matrix m = [[1,2,3],[4,5,6],[7,8,9]] and a vector v=[1,2,0] that contains the indices of the rows I want to return for each column of my matrix.
the results I expect should be r=[4,8,3], but I can not find out how to get this result using numpy.
By applying the vector to the index, for each columns I get this : m[v,[0,1,2]] = [4, 8, 3], which is roughly my quest.
To prevent hardcoding the columns, I'm using np.arange(m.shape[1]) and the my final formula looks like r=m[v,np.arange(m.shape[1])]
This sounds weird to me and a little complicated for something that should be quite common.
Is there a clean way to get such result ?
In [157]: m = np.array([[1,2,3],[4,5,6],[7,8,9]]);v=np.array([1,2,0])
In [158]: m
Out[158]:
array([[1, 2, 3],
[4, 5, 6],
[7, 8, 9]])
In [159]: v
Out[159]: array([1, 2, 0])
In [160]: m[v,np.arange(3)]
Out[160]: array([4, 8, 3])
We are choosing 3 elements, with indices (1,0),(2,1),(0,2).
Closer to the MATLAB approach:
In [162]: np.ravel_multi_index((v,np.arange(3)),(3,3))
Out[162]: array([3, 7, 2])
In [163]: m.flat[_]
Out[163]: array([4, 8, 3])
Octave/MATLAB equivalent
>> m = [1 2 3;4 5 6;7 8 9];
>> v = [2 3 1]
v =
2 3 1
>> m = [1 2 3;4 5 6;7 8 9];
>> v = [2 3 1];
>> sub2ind([3,3],v,[1 2 3])
ans =
2 6 7
>> m(sub2ind([3,3],v,[1 2 3]))
ans =
4 8 3
The same broadcasting is used to access a block, as illustrated in this recent question:
Is there a way in Python to get a sub matrix as in Matlab?
Well, this 'weird/complicated' thing is actually mentioned as a "straight forward" scenario, in the documentation of Integer array andexing, which is a sub-topic under the broader topic of "Advanced Indexing".
To quote some extract:
When the index consists of as many integer arrays as the array being
indexed has dimensions, the indexing is straight forward, but
different from slicing. Advanced indexes always are broadcast and iterated as one. Note that the result shape is identical to the (broadcast) indexing array shapes
Blockquote
If it makes it seem any less complicated/weird, you could use range(m.shape[1]) instead of np.arange(m.shape[1]). It just needs to be any array or array-like structure.
Visualization / Intuition:
When I was learning this (integer array indexing), it helped me to visualize things in the following way:
I visualized the indexing arrays standing side-by-side, all having exactly the same shape (perhaps as a consequence of getting broadcasted together). I also visualized the result array, which also has the same shape as the indexing arrays. In each of these indexing arrays and the result array, I visualized a monkey, capable of doing a walk-through of its own array, hopping to successive elements of its own array. Note that, in general, this identical shape of the indexing arrays and the result array, can be n-dimensional, and this identical shape can be very different from the shape of the source array whose values are actually being indexed.
In your own example, the source array m has shape (3,3), and the indexing arrays and the result array each have a shape of (3,).
Inn your example, there is a monkey in each of those three arrays (the two indexing arrays and the result array). We then visualize the monkeys doing a walk-through of their respective array elements in tandem. Here, "in tandem" means all the three monkeys start at the first element of their respective arrays, and whenever a monkey hops to the next element of its own array, the other monkeys in the other arrays also hop to the next element in their respective arrays. As it hops to each successive element, the monkey in each indexing array calls out the value of the element it has just visited. So the two monkeys in the two indexing arrays read out the values they've just visited, in their respective indexing arrays. The monkey in the result array also hops in tandem with the monkeys in the indexing arrays. It hears the values being called out by the monkeys in the indexing arrays, uses those values as indices into the source array m, and thus determines the value to be picked from source array m. The monkey in the result array picks up this value from the source array m, and stores it the value in the result array, at the location it has just hopped to. Thus, for example, when all the three monkeys are in the second element of their respective arrays, the second position of the result array would get its value determined.
As stated by the numpy documentation, I think the way you mentioned is the standard way to do this task:
Example
From each row, a specific element should be selected. The row index is just [0, 1, 2] and the column index specifies the element to choose for the corresponding row, here [0, 1, 0]. Using both together the task can be solved using advanced indexing:
x = np.array([[1, 2], [3, 4], [5, 6]])
x[[0, 1, 2], [0, 1, 0]]
I have a 2D numpy array and need to update a selection of elements via multiple layers of indexing. The obvious way to do this for me does not work since it seems numpy is only updating a copy of the array and not the array itself:
import numpy as np
# Create an array and indices that should be updated
arr = np.arange(9).reshape(3,3)
idx = np.array([[0,2], [1,1],[2,0]])
bool_idx = np.array([True, True, False])
# This line does not work as intended since the original array stays unchanged
arr[idx[:,0],idx[:,1]][bool_idx] = -1 * arr[idx[:,0],idx[:,1]][bool_idx]
This is the resulting output:
>>> arr
array([[0, 1, 2],
[3, 4, 5],
[6, 7, 8]])
However, I expected this output:
>>> arr
array([[0, 1, -2],
[3, -4, 5],
[6, 7, 8]])
We need to mask the indices with the given mask and then index into arr and assign new values. For indexing, we can use tuple(masked_indices) to index or use the two columns of the index-array for integer-indexing, thus giving us two methods.
Method #1 :
arr[tuple(idx[bool_idx].T)] *= -1
Method #2 :
idx_masked = idx[bool_idx]
arr[idx_masked[:,0],idx_masked[:,1]] *= -1
Why didn't the original method work?
On LHS you were doing arr[idx[:,0],idx[:,1]][bool_idx], which is esssentially two steps : arr[idx[:,0],idx[:,1]], which under the hoods calls arr.__getitem__(indexer)*. When indexer is a slice, the regularity of the elements allows NumPy to return a view (by modifying the strides and offset). When indexer is an arbitrary boolean mask or arbitrary array of integers, there is in general no regularity to the elements selected, so there is no way to return a view. Let's call arr[idx[:,0],idx[:,1]] as arr2.
In the next step, with the combined arr[idx[:,0],idx[:,1]][bool_idx], i.e. arr2[bool_idx], under the hoods it calls arr2.__setitem__(mask), which is implemented to modify arr2 and as such doesn't propagate back to arr.
*Inspiration from - https://stackoverflow.com/a/38768993/.
More info on __getitem__,__setitem__.
Why did the methods posted in this post work?
Because both directly used the indexer on arr with arr.__setitem__(indexer) that modifies arr.
You just need to make a small change to your own attempt -- you need to apply the boolean index array on each of your integer index expressions. In other words, this should work:
arr[idx[:,0][bool_idx],idx[:,1][bool_idx]] *= -1
(I've just moved the [bool_idx] inside the square brackets, to apply it on the both of the integer index expressions -- idx[:,0] and idx[:,1])
In Numpy, nonzero(a), where(a) and argwhere(a), with a being a numpy array, all seem to return the non-zero indices of the array. What are the differences between these three calls?
On argwhere the documentation says:
np.argwhere(a) is the same as np.transpose(np.nonzero(a)).
Why have a whole function that just transposes the output of nonzero ? When would that be so useful that it deserves a separate function?
What about the difference between where(a) and nonzero(a)? Wouldn't they return the exact same result?
nonzero and argwhere both give you information about where in the array the elements are True. where works the same as nonzero in the form you have posted, but it has a second form:
np.where(mask,a,b)
which can be roughly thought of as a numpy "ufunc" version of the conditional expression:
a[i] if mask[i] else b[i]
(with appropriate broadcasting of a and b).
As far as having both nonzero and argwhere, they're conceptually different. nonzero is structured to return an object which can be used for indexing. This can be lighter-weight than creating an entire boolean mask if the 0's are sparse:
mask = a == 0 # entire array of bools
mask = np.nonzero(a)
Now you can use that mask to index other arrays, etc. However, as it is, it's not very nice conceptually to figure out which indices correspond to 0 elements. That's where argwhere comes in.
I can't comment on the usefulness of having a separate convenience function that transposes the result of another, but I can comment on where vs nonzero. In it's simplest use case, where is indeed the same as nonzero.
>>> np.where(np.array([[0,4],[4,0]]))
(array([0, 1]), array([1, 0]))
>>> np.nonzero(np.array([[0,4],[4,0]]))
(array([0, 1]), array([1, 0]))
or
>>> a = np.array([[1, 2],[3, 4]])
>>> np.where(a == 3)
(array([1, 0]),)
>>> np.nonzero(a == 3)
(array([1, 0]),)
where is different from nonzero in the case when you wish to pick elements of from array a if some condition is True and from array b when that condition is False.
>>> a = np.array([[6, 4],[0, -3]])
>>> b = np.array([[100, 200], [300, 400]])
>>> np.where(a > 0, a, b)
array([[6, 4], [300, 400]])
Again, I can't explain why they added the nonzero functionality to where, but this at least explains how the two are different.
EDIT: Fixed the first example... my logic was incorrect previously
I have something like
m = array([[1, 2],
[4, 5],
[7, 8],
[6, 2]])
and
select = array([0,1,0,0])
My target is
result = array([1, 5, 7, 6])
I tried _ix as I read at Simplfy row AND column extraction, numpy, but this did not result in what I wanted.
p.s. Please change the title of this question if you can think of a more precise one.
The numpy way to do this is by using np.choose or fancy indexing/take (see below):
m = array([[1, 2],
[4, 5],
[7, 8],
[6, 2]])
select = array([0,1,0,0])
result = np.choose(select, m.T)
So there is no need for python loops, or anything, with all the speed advantages numpy gives you. m.T is just needed because choose is really more a choise between the two arrays np.choose(select, (m[:,0], m[:1])), but its straight forward to use it like this.
Using fancy indexing:
result = m[np.arange(len(select)), select]
And if speed is very important np.take, which works on a 1D view (its quite a bit faster for some reason, but maybe not for these tiny arrays):
result = m.take(select+np.arange(0, len(select) * m.shape[1], m.shape[1]))
I prefer to use NP.where for indexing tasks of this sort (rather than NP.ix_)
What is not mentioned in the OP is whether the result is selected by location (row/col in the source array) or by some condition (e.g., m >= 5). In any event, the code snippet below covers both scenarios.
Three steps:
create the condition array;
generate an index array by calling NP.where, passing in this
condition array; and
apply this index array against the source array
>>> import numpy as NP
>>> cnd = (m==1) | (m==5) | (m==7) | (m==6)
>>> cnd
matrix([[ True, False],
[False, True],
[ True, False],
[ True, False]], dtype=bool)
>>> # generate the index array/matrix
>>> # by calling NP.where, passing in the condition (cnd)
>>> ndx = NP.where(cnd)
>>> ndx
(matrix([[0, 1, 2, 3]]), matrix([[0, 1, 0, 0]]))
>>> # now apply it against the source array
>>> m[ndx]
matrix([[1, 5, 7, 6]])
The argument passed to NP.where, cnd, is a boolean array, which in this case, is the result from a single expression comprised of compound conditional expressions (first line above)
If constructing such a value filter doesn't apply to your particular use case, that's fine, you just need to generate the actual boolean matrix (the value of cnd) some other way (or create it directly).
What about using python?
result = array([subarray[index] for subarray, index in zip(m, select)])
IMHO, this is simplest variant:
m[np.arange(4), select]
Since the title is referring to indexing a 2D array with another 2D array, the actual general numpy solution can be found here.
In short:
A 2D array of indices of shape (n,m) with arbitrary large dimension m, named inds, is used to access elements of another 2D array of shape (n,k), named B:
# array of index offsets to be added to each row of inds
offset = np.arange(0, inds.size, inds.shape[1])
# numpy.take(B, C) "flattens" arrays B and C and selects elements from B based on indices in C
Result = np.take(B, offset[:,np.newaxis]+inds)
Another solution, which doesn't use np.take and I find more intuitive, is the following:
B[np.expand_dims(np.arange(B.shape[0]), -1), inds]
The advantage of this syntax is that it can be used both for reading elements from B based on inds (like np.take), as well as for assignment.
result = array([m[j][0] if i==0 else m[j][1] for i,j in zip(select, range(0, len(m)))])