Remove outliers (+/- 3 std) and replace with np.nan in Python/pandas - python

I have seen several solutions that come close to solving my problem
link1
link2
but they have not helped me succeed thus far.
I believe that the following solution is what I need, but continue to get an error (and I don't have the reputation points to comment/question on it): link
(I get the following error, but I don't understand where to .copy() or add an "inplace=True" when administering the following command df2=df.groupby('install_site').transform(replace):
SettingWithCopyWarning:
A value is trying to be set on a copy of a slice from a DataFrame.
Try using .loc[row_indexer,col_indexer] = value instead
See the the caveats in the documentation: link
SO, I have attempted to come up with my own version, but I keep getting stuck. Here goes.
I have a data frame indexed by time with columns for site (string values for many different sites) and float values.
time_index site val
I would like to go through the 'val' column, grouped by site, and replace any outliers (those +/- 3 standard deviations from the mean) with a NaN (for each group).
When I use the following function, I cannot index the data frame with my vector of True/Falses:
def replace_outliers_with_nan(df, stdvs):
dfnew=pd.DataFrame()
for i, col in enumerate(df.sites.unique()):
dftmp = pd.DataFrame(df[df.sites==col])
idx = [np.abs(dftmp-dftmp.mean())<=(stdvs*dftmp.std())] #boolean vector of T/F's
dftmp[idx==False]=np.nan #this is where the problem lies, I believe
dfnew[col] = dftmp
return dfnew
In addition, I fear the above function will take a very long time on 7 million+ rows, which is why I was hoping to use the groupby function option.

If I have understood you right, there is no need to iterate over the columns. This solution replaces all values which deviates more than three group standard deviations with NaN.
def replace(group, stds):
group[np.abs(group - group.mean()) > stds * group.std()] = np.nan
return group
# df is your DataFrame
df.loc[:, df.columns != group_column] = df.groupby(group_column).transform(lambda g: replace(g, 3))

Related

Best method for non-regular index-based interpolation on grouped dataframes

Problem statement
I had the following problem:
I have samples that ran independent tests. In my dataframe, tests of sample with the same "test name" are also independent. So the couple (test,sample) is independent and unique.
data are collected at non regular sampling rates, so we're speaking about unequaly spaced indices. This "time series" index is called unreg_idx in the example. For the sake of simplicity, it is a float between 0 & 1.
I want to figure out what the value at a specific index, e.g. for unreg_idx=0.5. If the value is missing, I just want a linear interpolation that depends on the index. If extrapolating because the value is at an extremum in the sorted unreg_idx of the group (test,sample), it can leave NaN.
Note the following from pandas documentation:
Please note that only method='linear' is supported for
DataFrame/Series with a MultiIndex.
’linear’: Ignore the index and treat the values as equally spaced.
This is the only method supported on MultiIndexes.
The only solution I found is long, complex and slow. I am wondering if I am missing out on something, or on the contrary something is missing from the pandas library. I believe this is a typical issue in scientific and engineering fields to have independent tests on various samples with non regular indices.
What I tried
sample data set preparation
This part is just for making an example
import pandas as pd
import numpy as np
tests = (f'T{i}' for i in range(20))
samples = (chr(i) for i in range(97,120))
idx = pd.MultiIndex.from_product((tests,samples),names=('tests','samples'))
idx
dfs=list()
for ids in idx:
group_idx = pd.MultiIndex.from_product(((ids[0],),(ids[1],),tuple(np.random.random_sample(size=(90,))))).sort_values()
dfs.append(pd.DataFrame(1000*np.random.random_sample(size=(90,)),index=group_idx))
df = pd.concat(dfs)
df = df.rename_axis(index=('test','sample','nonreg_idx')).rename({0:'value'},axis=1)
The (bad) solution
add_missing = df.index.droplevel('nonreg_idx').unique().to_frame().reset_index(drop=True)
add_missing['nonreg_idx'] = .5
add_missing = pd.MultiIndex.from_frame(add_missing)
added_missing = df.reindex(add_missing)
df_full = pd.concat([added_missing.loc[~added_missing.index.isin(df.index)], df])
df_full.sort_index(inplace=True)
def interp_fnc(group):
try:
return group.reset_index(['test','sample']).interpolate(method='slinear').set_index(['test','sample'], append=True).reorder_levels(['test','sample','value']).sort_index()
except:
return group
grouped = df_full.groupby(level=['test','sample'])
df_filled = grouped.apply(
interp_fnc
)
Here, the wanted values are in df_filled. So I can do df_filled.loc[(slice(None), slice(None), .5),'value'] to get what I need for each sample/test.
I would have expected to be able to do the same within 1 or maximum 2 lines of code. I have 14 here. apply is quite a slow method. I can't even use numba.
Question
Can someone propose a better solution?
If you think there is no better alternative, please comment and I'll open an issue...

Time Series Stationary Technique

I am working with time series data (non-stationary), I have applied .diff(periods=n) for differencing the data to eliminate trends and seasonality factors from data.
By using .diff(periods=n), the observation from the previous time step (t-1) is subtracted from the current observation (t).
Now I want to invert back the differenced data to its original scale, but I am having issues with that. You can find the code here.
My code for differencing:
data_diff = df.diff(periods=1)
data_diff.head(5)
My code for inverting the differenced data back to its original scale:
cols = df.columns
x = []
for col in cols:
diff_results = df[col] + data_diff[col].shift(-1)
x.append(diff_results)
diff_df_inverted = pd.concat(x, axis=1)
diff_df_inverted
As you can see from last output in the code, I have successfully inverted my data back to its original scale. However, I do not get the inverted data for row 1. It inverts and shifts the values up a row. My question is, why? What am I missing?
thank you!
In this line:
diff_results = df[col] + data_diff[col].shift(-1)
data_diff starts from the second row and that is the reason it appears as it could be shifted up.
The reason for this is because you use .shift(-1).
An easy solution would be using df.cumsum() as it is the exact opposite of df.diff().
The only thing you have to do is get the first row to replace the NaN values from your data_diff dataframe. You need to do this because it is the original row that every other row would be added to. After that, you call data_diff.cumsum() and now you have the original data.
Here is the detailed code.
data_diff.iloc[0]=df.iloc[0]
a = data_diff.cumsum()

Rolling Standard Deviation in Pandas Returning Zeroes for One Column

Has anyone had issues with rolling standard deviations not working on only one column in a pandas dataframe?
I have a dataframe with a datetime index and associated financial data. When I run df.rolling().std() (psuedo code, see actual below), I get correct data for all columns except one. That column returns 0's where there should be standard deviation values. I also get the same error when using .rolling_std() and I get an error when trying to run df.rolling().skew(), all the other columns work and this column gives NaN.
What's throwing me off about this error is that the other columns work correctly and for this column, df.rolling().mean() works. In addition, the column has dtype float64, which shouldn't be a problem. I also checked and don't see missing data. I'm using a rolling window of 30 days and if I try to get the last standard deviation value using series[-30:].std() I get a correct result. So it seems like something specifically about the rolling portion isn't working. I played around with the parameters of .rolling() but couldn't get anything to change.
# combine the return, volume and slope data
raw_factor_data = pd.concat([fut_rets, vol_factors, slope_factors], axis=1)
# create new dataframe for each factor type (mean,
# std dev, skew) and combine
mean_vals = raw_factor_data.rolling(window=past, min_periods=past).mean()
mean_vals.columns = [column + '_mean' for column in list(mean_vals)]
std_vals = raw_factor_data.rolling(window=past, min_periods=past).std()
std_vals.columns = [column + '_std' for column in list(std_vals)]
skew_vals = raw_factor_data.rolling(window=past, min_periods=past).skew()
skew_vals.columns = [column + '_skew' for column in list(skew_vals)]
fact_data = pd.concat([mean_vals, std_vals, skew_vals], axis=1)
The first line combines three dataframes together. Then I create separate dataframes with rolling mean, std and skew (past = 30), and then combine those into a single dataframe.
The name of the column I'm having trouble with is 'TY1_slope'. So I've run some code as follows to see where there is an error.
print raw_factor_data['TY1_slope'][-30:].std()
print raw_factor_data['TY1_slope'][-30:].mean()
print raw_factor_data['TY1_slope'].rolling(window=30, min_periods=30).std()
print raw_factor_data['TY1_slope'].rolling(window=30, min_periods=30).mean()
The first two lines of code output a correct standard deviation and mean (.08 and .14). However, the third line of code produces zeroes but the fourth line produces accurate mean values (the final values in those series are 0.0 and .14).
If anyone can help with how to look at the .rolling source code that would be helpful too. I'm new to doing that and tried the following, but just got a few lines that didn't seem very helpful.
import inspect
import pandas as pd
print inspect.getsourcelines(pd.rolling_std)
Quoting JohnE's comment since it worked (although still not sure the root cause of the issue). JohnE, feel free to change to an answer and I'll upvote.
shot in the dark, but you could try rolling(30).apply( lambda x: np.std(x,ddof=1) ) in case it's some weird syntax bug with rolling + std – JohnE

Conditional mean over a Pandas DataFrame

I have a dataset from which I want a few averages of multiple variables I created.
I started off with:
data2['socialIdeology2'].mean()
data2['econIdeology'].mean()
^ that works perfectly, and gives me the averages I'm looking for.
Now, I'm trying to do a conditional mean, so the mean only for a select group within the data set. (I want the ideologies broken down by whom voted for in the 2016 election) In Stata, the code would be similar to: mean(variable) if voteChoice == 'Clinton'
Looking into it, I came to the conclusion a conditional mean just isn't a thing (although hopefully I am wrong?), so I was writing my own function for it.
This is me just starting out with a 'mean' function, to create a foundation for a conditional mean function:
def mean():
sum = 0.0
count = 0
for index in range(0, len(data2['socialIdeology2'])):
sum = sum + (data2['socialIdeology2'][index])
print(data2['socialIdeology2'][index])
count = count + 1
return sum / count
print(mean())
Yet I keep getting 'nan' as the result. Printing data2['socialIdeology2'][index] within the loop prints nan over and over again.
So my question is: if the data stored within the socialIdeology2 variable really is a nan (which I don't understand how it could be), why is it that the .mean() function works with it?
And how can I get generate means by category?
Conditional mean is indeed a thing in pandas. You can use DataFrame.groupby():
means = data2.groupby('voteChoice').mean()
or maybe, in your case, the following would be more efficient:
means = data2.groupby('voteChoice')['socialIdeology2'].mean()
to drill down to the mean you're looking for. (The first case will calculate means for all columns.) This is assuming that voteChoice is the name of the column you want to condition on.
If you're only interested in the mean for a single group (e.g. Clinton voters) then you could create a boolean series that is True for members of that group, then use this to index into the rows of the DataFrame before taking the mean:
voted_for_clinton = data2['voteChoice'] == 'Clinton'
mean_for_clinton_voters = data2.loc[voted_for_clinton, 'socialIdeology2'].mean()
If you want to get the means for multiple groups simultaneously then you can use groupby, as in Brad's answer. However, I would do it like this:
means_by_vote_choice = data2.groupby('voteChoice')['socialIdeology2'].mean()
Placing the ['socialIdeology2'] index before the .mean() means that you only compute the mean over the column you're interested in, whereas if you place the indexing expression after the .mean() (i.e. data2.groupby('voteChoice').mean()['socialIdeology2']) this computes the means over all columns and then selects only the 'socialIdeology2' column from the result, which is less efficient.
See here for more info on indexing DataFrames using .loc and here for more info on groupby.

Trying to divide a dataframe column by a float yields NaN

Background
I deal with a csv datasheet that prints out columns of numbers. I am working on a program that will take the first column, ask a user for a time in float (ie. 45 and a half hours = 45.5) and then subtract that number from the first column. I have been successful in that regard. Now, I need to find the row index of the "zero" time point. I use min to find that index and then call that off of the following column A1. I need to find the reading at Time 0 to then normalize A1 to so that on a graph, at the 0 time point the reading is 1 in column A1 (and eventually all subsequent columns but baby steps for me)
time_zero = float(input("Which time would you like to be set to 0?"))
df['A1']= df['A1']-time_zero
This works fine so far to set the zero time.
zero_location_series = df[df['A1'] == df['A1'].min()]
r1 = zero_location_series[' A1.1']
df[' A1.1'] = df[' A1.1']/r1
Here's where I run into trouble. The first line will correctly identify a series that I can pull off of for all my other columns. Next r1 correctly identifies the proper A1.1 value and this value is a float when I use type(r1).
However when I divide df[' A1.1']/r1 it yields only one correct value and that value is where r1/r1 = 1. All other values come out NaN.
My Questions:
How to divide a column by a float I guess? Why am I getting NaN?
Is there a faster way to do this as I need to do this for 16 columns.(ie 'A2/r2' 'a3/r3' etc.)
Do I need to do inplace = True anywhere to make the operations stick prior to resaving the data? or is that only for adding/deleting rows?
Example
Dataframe that looks like this
!http://i.imgur.com/ObUzY7p.png
zero time sets properly (image not shown)
after dividing the column
!http://i.imgur.com/TpLUiyE.png
This should work:
df['A1.1']=df['A1.1']/df['A1.1'].min()
I think the reason df[' A1.1'] = df[' A1.1']/r1 did not work was because r1 is a series. Try r1? instead of type(r1) and pandas will tell you that r1 is a series, not an individual float number.
To do it in one attempt, you have to iterate over each column, like this:
for c in df:
df[c] = df[c]/df[c].min()
If you want to divide every value in the column by r1 it's best to apply, for example:
import pandas as pd
df = pd.DataFrame([1,2,3,4,5])
# apply an anonymous function to the first column ([0]), divide every value
# in the column by 3
df = df[0].apply(lambda x: x/3.0, 0)
print(df)
So you'd probably want something like this:
df = df["A1.1"].apply(lambda x: x/r1, 0)
This really only answers part 2 of you question. Apply is probably your best bet for running a function on multiple rows and columns quickly. As for why you're getting nans when dividing by a float, is it possible the values in your columns are anything other than floats or integers?

Categories

Resources