I'm working with a 4-dimensional matrix (Year, Simulation, Flow, Time instant: 10x5x20x10) in R. I need to remove some values from the matrix. For example, for year 1 I need to remove simulations number 1 and 2; for year 2 I need to remove simulation number 5.
Can anyone suggest me how I can make such changes?
Arrays (which is how R documentation usually refers to higher-dimensional 'matrices') can be indexed with negative values in the same way as matrices or vectors: a negative value removes the corresponding row/column/slice. So if you wanted to remove year 1 completely (for example), you could use a[-1,,,]; to remove simulation 5 completely, a[,-5,,].
However, arrays can't be "ragged", there has to be something in every row/column/slice combination. You could replace the values you want to remove with NAs (and then make sure to account for the NAs appropriately when computing, e.g. using na.rm = TRUE in sum()/min()/max()/median()/etc.): a[1,1:2,,] <- NA or a[2,5,,] <- NA in your examples.
If you knew that all values of Flow and Time would always be present, you could store your data as a list of lists of matrices: e.g.
results <- list(Year1 = list(Simulation1 = matrix(...),
Simulation2 = matrix(...),
...),
Year2 = list(Simulation1 = matrix(...),
Simulation2 = matrix(...),
...))
Then you could easily remove years or simulations within years (by setting them to NULL, but it would make indexing a little bit harder (e.g. "retrieve Simulation1 values for all years" would require an lapply or a loop across years).
Related
I have mirrored some code to perform an analysis, and everything is working correctly (I believe). However, I am trying to understand a few lines of code related to splitting the data up into 40% testing and 60% training sets.
To my current understanding, the code randomly assigns each row into group 1 or 2. Subsequently, all the the rows assigned to 1 are pulled into the training set, and the 2's into the testing.
Later, I realized that sampling with replacement is not want I wanted for my data analysis. Although in this case I am unsure of what is actually being replaced. Currently, I do not believe it is the actual data itself being replaced, rather the "1" and "2" place holders. I am looking to understand exactly how these lines of code work. Based on my results, it seems as it is working accomplishing what I want. I need to confirm whether or not the data itself is being replaced.
To test the lines in question, I created a dataframe with 10 unique values (1 through 10).
If the data values themselves were being sampled with replacement, I would expect to see some duplicates in "training1" or "testing2". I ran these lines of code 10 times with 10 different set.seed numbers and the data values were never duplicated. To me, this suggest the data itself is not being replaced.
If I set replace= FALSE I get this error:
Error in sample.int(x, size, replace, prob) :
cannot take a sample larger than the population when 'replace = FALSE'
set.seed(8)
test <-sample(2, nrow(df), replace = TRUE, prob = c(.6,.4))
training1 <- df[test==1,]
testing2 <- df[test==2,]
Id like to split up my data into 60-40 training and testing. Although I am not sure that this is actually happening. I think the prob function is not doing what I think it should be doing. I've noticed the prob function does not actually split the data exactly into 60percent and 40percent. In the case of the n=10 example, it can result in 7 training 2 testing, or even 6 training 4 testing. With my actual larger dataset with ~n=2000+, it averages out to be pretty close to 60/40 (i.e., 60.3/39.7).
The way you are sampling is bound to result in a undesired/ random split size unless number of observations are huge, formally known as law of large numbers. To make a more deterministic split, decide on the size/ number of observation for the train data and use it to sample from nrow(df):
set.seed(8)
# for a 60/40 train/test split
train_indx = sample(x = 1:nrow(df),
size = 0.6*nrow(df),
replace = FALSE)
train_df <- df[train_indx,]
test_df <- df[-train_indx,]
I recommend splitting the code based on Mankind_008's answer. Since I ran quite a bit of analysis based on the original code, I spent a few hours looking into what it does exactly.
The original code:
test <-sample(2, nrow(df), replace = TRUE, prob = c(.6,.4))
Answer From ( https://www.datacamp.com/community/tutorials/machine-learning-in-r ):
"Note that the replace argument is set to TRUE: this means that you assign a 1 or a 2 to a certain row and then reset the vector of 2 to its original state. This means that, for the next rows in your data set, you can either assign a 1 or a 2, each time again. The probability of choosing a 1 or a 2 should not be proportional to the weights amongst the remaining items, so you specify probability weights. Note also that, even though you don’t see it in the DataCamp Light chunk, the seed has still been set to 1234."
One of my main concerns that the data values themselves were being replaced. Rather it seems it allows the 1 and 2 placeholders to be assigned over again based on the probabilities.
I am having some trouble coming up with a solution that properly handles classifying a variable number of neighbors for any given observation in a data frame based on some condition. I would like to be able to add a simple, binary indicator variable to a data frame that will equal 1 if the condition is satisfied, and 0 if it is not.
Where I am getting stuck is I am unsure how to iteratively check the condition against neighboring observations only, in either direction (i.e., to check if out of 4 neighboring observations in a given column in my data frame, that at least 3 out of 4 of them contain the same value). I have tried first creating another indicator variable indicating if the condition is satisfied or not (1 or 0 = yes or no). Then, I tried setting up a series of ifelse() statements within a loop to try to assign the proper categorization of the observation where the initial condition is satisfied, +/- 2 observations in either direction. However, when I inspect the dataframe after running the loop, only the observation itself (not its neighbors) where the condition is satisfied is receiving the value, rather than all neighboring observations also receiving the value. Here is my code:
#sample data
sample_dat <- data.frame(initial_ind = c(0,1,0,1,0,0,1,1,0,1,0,0))
sample_dat$violate <- NULL
for(i in 1:nrow(dat_date_ord)){
sample_dat$violate[i] <- ifelse(sample_dat$initial_ind[i]==1 &
((sample_dat$initial_ind[i-2]==1 |
sample_dat$initial_ind[i-1]==1) &
(sample_dat$initial_ind[i+2]==1 |
sample_dat$initial_ind[i+1]==1)),
"trending",
"non-trending"
)
}
This loop correctly identifies one of the four points that needs to be labelled "trending", but it does not also assign "trending" to the correct neighbors. In other words, I expect the output to be "trending for observations 7-10, since 3/4 observations in that group of 4 all have a value of 1 in the initial indicator column. I feel like there might be an easier way to accomplish this - but what I need to ensure is that my code is robust enough to identify and assign observations to a group regardless of if I want 3/4 to indicate a group, 5/6, 2/5, etc.
Thank you for any and all advice.
You can use the rollapply function from the zoo package to apply a function to set intervals in your data. The question then becomes about creating a function that satisfies your needs. I'm not sure if I've understood correctly, but it seems you want a function that checks if the condition is true for at least 3/5 of the observation plus its four closest neighbors. In this case just adding the 1s up and checking if they're above 2 works.
library(zoo)
sample_dat <- data.frame(initial_ind = c(0,1,0,1,0,0,1,1,0,1,0,0))
trend_test = function(x){
ifelse(sum(x) > 2, "trending", "non-trending")
}
sample_dat$violate_new = rollapply(sample_dat$initial_ind, FUN = trend_test, width = 5, fill = NA)
Edit: If you want a function that checks if the observation and the next 3 observations have at least 3 1s, you can do something very similar, just by changing the align argument on rollapply:
trend_test_2 = function(x){
ifelse(sum(x) > 2, "trending", "non-trending")
}
sample_dat$violate_new = rollapply(sample_dat$initial_ind, FUN = trend_test_2, width = 4,
fill = NA, align = "left")
I am trying to count the length of occurrances of a value in a vector such as
q <- c(1,1,1,1,1,1,4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4,6,6,6,6,6,6,6,6,6,6,1,1,4,4,4)
Actual vectors are longer than this, and are time based. What I would like would be an output for 4 that tells me it occurred for 12 time steps (before the vector changes to 6) and then 3 time steps. (Not that it occurred 15 times total).
Currently my ideas to do this are pretty inefficient (a loop that looks element by element that I can have stop when it doesn't equal the value I specified). Can anyone recommend a more efficient method?
x <- with(rle(q), data.frame(values, lengths)) will pull the information that you want (courtesy of d.b. in the comments).
From the R Documentation: rle is used to "Compute the lengths and values of runs of equal values in a vector – or the reverse operation."
y <- x[x$values == 4, ] will subset the data frame to include only the value of interest (4). You can then see clearly that 4 ran for 12 times and then later for 3.
Modifying the code will let you check whatever value you want.
Lets say I have this data. My objective is to extraxt combinations of sequences.
I have one constraint, the time between two events may not be more than 5, lets call this maxGap.
User <- c(rep(1,3)) # One users
Event <- c("C","B","C") # Say this is random events could be anything from LETTERS[1:4]
Time <- c(c(1,12,13)) # This is a timeline
df <- data.frame(User=User,
Event=Event,
Time=Time)
If want to use these sequences as binary explanatory variables for analysis.
Given this dataframe the result should be like this.
res.df <- data.frame(User=1,
C=1,
B=1,
CB=0,
BC=1,
CBC=0)
(CB) and (CBC) will be 0 since the maxGap > 5.
I was trying to write a function for this using many for-loops, but it becomes very complex if the sequence becomes larger and the different number of evets also becomes larger. And also if the number of different User grows to 100 000.
Is it possible of doing this in TraMineR with the help of seqeconstraint?
Here is how you would do that with TraMineR
df.seqe <- seqecreate(id=df$User, timestamp=df$Time, event=df$Event)
constr <- seqeconstraint(maxGap=5)
subseq <- seqefsub(df.seqe, minSupport=0, constraint=constr)
(presence <- seqeapplysub(subseq, method="presence"))
which gives
(B) (B)-(C) (C)
1-(C)-11-(B)-1-(C) 1 1 1
presence is a table with a column for each subsequence that occurs at least once in the data set. So, if you have several individuals (event sequences), the table will have one row per individual and the columns will be the binary variable you are looking for. (See also TraMineR: Can I get the complete sequence if I give an event sub sequence? )
However, be aware that TraMineR works fine only with subsequences of length up to about 4 or 5. We suggest to set maxK=3 or 4 in seqefsub. The number of individuals should not be a problem, nor should the number of different possible events (the alphabet) as long as you restrict the maximal subsequence length you are looking for.
Hope this helps
I'm a novice R user, who's learning to use this coding language to deal with data problems in research. I am trying to understand how knowledge evolves within an industry by looking at patenting in subclasses. So far I managed to get the following:
# kn.matrices<-with(patents, table(Class,year,firm))
# kn.ind <- with(patents, table(Class, year))
patents is my datafile, with Subclass, app.yr, and short.name as three of the 14 columns
# for (k in 1:37)
# kn.firms = assign(paste("firm", k ,sep=''),kn.matrices[,,k])
There are 37 different firms (in the real dataset, here only 5)
This has given 37 firm-specific and 1 industry-specific 2635 by 29 matrices (in the real dataset). All firm-specific matrices are called firmk with k going from 1 until 37.
I would like to perform many operations in each of the firm-specific matrices (e.g. compare the numbers in app.yr 't' with the average of the 3 previous years across all rows) so I am looking for a way that allows me to loop the operations for every matrix named firm1,firm2,firm3...,firm37 and that generates new matrices with consistent naming, e.g. firm1.3yearcomparison
Hopefully I framed this question in an appropriate way. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Following comments I'm trying to add a minimal reproducible example
year<-c(1990,1991,1989,1992,1993,1991,1990,1990,1989,1993,1991,1992,1991,1991,1991,1990,1989,1991,1992,1992,1991,1993)
firm<-(c("a","a","a","b","b","c","d","d","e","a","b","c","c","e","a","b","b","e","e","e","d","e"))
class<-c(1900,2000,3000,7710,18000,19000,36000,115000,212000,215000,253600,383000,471000,594000)
These three vectors thus represent columns in a spreadsheet that forms the "patents" matrix mentioned before.
it looks like you already have a 3 dimensional array with all your data. You can basically view this as your 38 matrices all piled one on top of the other. You don't want to split this into 38 matrices and use loops. Instead, you can use R's apply function and extraction functions. Just view the help topic on the apply() family and it should show you how to do what you want. Here are a few basic examples
examples:
# returns the sums of all columns for all matrices
apply(kn.matrices, 3, colSums)
# extract the 5th row of all matrices
kn.matrices[5, , ]
# extract the 5th column of all matrices
kn.matrices[, 5, ]
# extract the 5th matrix
kn.matrices[, , 5]
# mean of 5th column for all matrices
colMeans(kn.matrices[, 5, ])