I have some very nested data. Within my list-column-dataframes, there are some pieces I need to put together and I've done so in a single instance to get my desired dataframe:
a <- df[[2]][["result"]]#data
b <- df[[2]][["result"]]#coords
desired_df <- cbind(a, b)
My original Large list has 171 elements, meaning I have 1:171 (3.3 GB) to go inside those square brackets and would ideally end up with 171 desired dataframes (which I would then bind all together).
I haven't needed to write a loop in 10 years, but I don't see a tidyverse way to deal with this. I also no longer know how to write loops. There are definitely some elements in there that are junk and will fail.
You haven't provided any sort of minimal example of the data.
I've condensed it to mean something like this
base_data <- data.frame(group = c("a", "b", "c"), var1 = c(3, 1, 2),
var2 = c( 2, 4, 8))
base_data2 = matrix(
c(1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9),
nrow = 3,
ncol = 3,
byrow = TRUE
)
rownames(base_data2) = c("d", "e", "f")
methods::setClass(
"weird_object",
slots = c(data = "data.frame", coords = "matrix"),
prototype = list(data = base_data, coords = base_data2)
)
df <- list(
list(
result = new("weird_object")
),list(
result = new("weird_object")
),list(
result = new("weird_object")
),list(
result = new("weird_object")
)
)
And if I had such a list with these objects, then I could do
df %>%
map(. %>% {
list(data = .$result#data,
cooords = .$result#coords)
}) %>%
enframe() %>%
unnest_wider(value)
But the selecting / hoisting function might fail, thus
one can wrap it in a purrr::possibly, and
choose a reasonable default:
df %>%
map(possibly(. %>% {
list(data = .$result#data,
cooords = .$result#coords)
},
otherwise = list(data = NA, coords = NA))) %>%
enframe() %>%
unnest_wider(value)
Hopefully, this could be a step forward.
Next step is probably something resembling this:
df %>%
map(. %>% {
list(data = .$result#data,
coords = .$result#coords)
}) %>%
enframe() %>%
unnest_wider(value) %>%
mutate(coords = coords %>% map(. %>% as_tibble(rownames = "rowid"))) %>%
unnest(cols = c(data, coords)) %>%
#' rotating the thing now
pivot_longer(cols = c(group, rowid),
names_to = "var_name",
values_to = "var") %>%
select(-var_name) %>%
pivot_longer(cols = c(var1, var2, V1, V2, V3),
names_to = "var_name") %>%
pivot_wider(names_from = var, values_from = value) %>%
identity()
If I understand your data structure, which I probably don't, you could do:
library(tidyverse)
# Create dummy data
df <- mtcars
df$mpg <- list(result = I(list('test')))
df$mpg$result <- list("#data" = I(list('your data')))
df <- df %>% select(mpg, cyl)
df1 <- df
df2 <- df
# Pull data you're interested in.
# The index is 1 here, instead of 2, because it's fake data and not your data.
# Assuming the # is not unique, and is just parsed from JSON or some other format.
dont_at_me <- function(x){
a <- x[[1]][["result"]][["#data"]]
a
}
# Get a list of all of your data.frames
all_dfs <- Filter(function(x) is(x, "data.frame"), mget(ls()))
# Vectorize
purrr::map(all_dfs, ~dont_at_me(.))
Related
I'm trying to apply the data_color() function from the gt package to several columns in my data frame, but each with their own color palette domain. So far, what I have is:
df <- data.frame(Var1 = rnorm(30),
Var2 = rnorm(30),
Var3 = rnorm(30),
Var4 = rnorm(30),
Var5 = rnorm(30),
Var6 = rnorm(30))
mypals <- list()
for (i in 2:6){
mypals[[i]] <- scales::col_bin(colpal,
domain = c(min(df[,i]), max(df[,i])))
}
df %>%
gt() %>%
data_color(columns = 2, colors = mypals[[2]]) %>%
data_color(columns = 3, colors = mypals[[3]]) %>%
data_color(columns = 4, colors = mypals[[4]]) %>%
data_color(columns = 5, colors = mypals[[5]]) %>%
data_color(columns = 6, colors = mypals[[6]])
Is there a way to do a "recursive" piping, something similar to this perhaps?
df %>%
gt() %>% seq(2:6) %>% (function(x){
data_color(columns = x, colors = mypals[[x]])
}
)
Thanks in advance for all your suggestions.
I'm new to the gt package, so forgive me if there's an easier way to do this.
I can' test this answer throughy, because I cant install this gt package, but I believe you are looking for the accumulate or reduce functions from the purrr package.
library(purrr)
my_data_color <- \(x, y, z) data_color(x, columns = y, colors = z[[y]])
reduce2(df %>% gt(),
1:6,
~ my_data_color(x = .x,
y = .y,
z = mypals))
From the man page:
reduce() is an operation that combines the elements of a vector into a single value. The combination is driven by .f, a binary function that takes two values and returns a single value: reducing f over 1:3 computes the value f(f(1, 2), 3).
One approach would be generate your statement and use eval(parse(text=<stment>)), as below:
eval(parse(text=paste(
"df %>% gt() %>%",
paste0("data_color(columns=",2:6,",color='",mypals,"')", collapse=" %>% ")
)))
I have a list of tidygraph objects. I am trying to reorder the list elements based on a certain criteria. That is, each element of my list has a column called name. I am trying to group together the list elements that have identical name columns... but also I would like to group them in descending order of their count as well (i.e., the count of equal name columns in each list element). Hopefully my example will explain more clearly.
To begin, I create some data, turn them into tidygraph objects and put them together in a list:
library(tidygraph)
library(tidyr)
# create some node and edge data for the tbl_graph
nodes1 <- data.frame(
name = c("x4", NA, NA),
val = c(1, 5, 2)
)
nodes2 <- data.frame(
name = c("x4", "x2", NA, NA, "x1", NA, NA),
val = c(3, 2, 2, 1, 1, 2, 7)
)
nodes3 <- data.frame(
name = c("x1", "x2", NA),
val = c(7, 4, 2)
)
nodes4 <- nodes1
nodes5 <- nodes2
nodes6 <- nodes1
edges <- data.frame(from = c(1, 1), to = c(2, 3))
edges1 <- data.frame(
from = c(1, 2, 2, 1, 5, 5),
to = c(2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7)
)
# create the tbl_graphs
tg_1 <- tbl_graph(nodes = nodes1, edges = edges)
tg_2 <- tbl_graph(nodes = nodes2, edges = edges1)
tg_3 <- tbl_graph(nodes = nodes3, edges = edges)
tg_4 <- tbl_graph(nodes = nodes4, edges = edges)
tg_5 <- tbl_graph(nodes = nodes5, edges = edges1)
tg_6 <- tbl_graph(nodes = nodes6, edges = edges)
# put into list
myList <- list(tg_1, tg_2, tg_3, tg_4, tg_5, tg_6)
So, we can see that there are 6 tidygraph objects in myList.
Examining each element we can see that 3 objects have identical name columns (i.e., x4,NA,NA).... 2 objects have identical name columns ("x4", "x2", NA, NA, "x1", NA, NA).. and 1 object remains(x1,x2,NA).
Using a little function to get the counts of equal name columns:
# get a count of identical list elements based on `name` col
counts <- lapply(myList, function(x) {
x %>%
pull(name) %>%
paste0(collapse = "")
}) %>%
unlist(use.names = F) %>%
as_tibble() %>%
group_by(value) %>%
mutate(val = n():1) %>%
slice(1) %>%
arrange(-val)
Just for clarity:
> counts
# A tibble: 3 × 2
# Groups: value [3]
value val
<chr> <int>
1 x4 NA NA 3
2 x4 x2 NA NA x1 NA NA 2
3 x1 x2 NA 1
I would like to rearrange the order of list elements in myList based on the val column in my counts object.
My desired output would look something like this (which I am just manually reordering):
myList <- list(tg_1, tg_4, tg_6, tg_2, tg_5, tg_3)
Is there a way to automate the reordering of my list based on the count of identical name columns?
UPDATE:
So my attempted solution is to do the following:
ind <- map(myList, function(x){
x %>%
pull(name) %>%
replace_na("..") %>%
paste0(collapse = "")
}) %>%
unlist(use.names = F) %>%
as_tibble() %>%
mutate(ids = 1:n()) %>%
group_by(value) %>%
mutate(val = n():1) %>%
arrange(value) %>%
pull(ids)
# return new list of trees
myListNew <- myList[ind]
The above code groups the list elements by the name column and returns an index called ind. I'm then indexing my original list by the ind index to rearrange my list.
However, I would still like to find a way to sort the new list based on the total amount of each identical name variable... I still haven't figured that out yet.
After hours of testing, I eventually have a working solution.
ind <- map(myList, function(x){
x %>%
pull(name) %>%
replace_na("..") %>%
paste0(collapse = "")
}) %>%
unlist(use.names = F) %>%
as_tibble() %>%
mutate(ids = 1:n()) %>%
group_by(value) %>%
mutate(val = n():1) %>%
arrange(value)
ind <- ind %>%
group_by(value) %>%
mutate(valrank = min(ids)) %>%
ungroup() %>%
arrange(valrank, value, desc(val)) %>%
pull(ids)
# return new list of trees
myListNew <- myList[ind]
The above code arranges the list by name alphabetically. Then I group by the name and create another column that ranks the row. I can then rearrange the rows based on this variable. Finally I index by the result.
I'm wondering if the following code can be simplified to allow the data to be piped directly from the summarise command to the pairwise.t.test, without creating the intermediary object?
data_for_PTT <- data %>%
group_by(subj, TT) %>%
summarise(meanRT = mean(RT))
pairwise.t.test(x = data_for_PTT$meanRT, g = data_for_PTT$TT, paired = TRUE)
I tried x = .$meanRT but it didn't like it, returning:
Error in match.arg(p.adjust.method) :
'arg' must be NULL or a character vector
You can use curly braces:
data_for_PTT <- data %>%
group_by(subj, TT) %>%
summarise(meanRT = mean(RT)) %>%
{pairwise.t.test(x = .$meanRT, g = .$TT, paired = TRUE)}
Reproducible:
df <- data.frame(X1 = runif(1000), X2 = runif(1000), subj = rep(c("A", "B")))
df %>%
{pairwise.t.test(.$X1, .$subj, paired = TRUE)}
My question is about performing a calculation between each pair of groups in a data.frame, I'd like it to be more vectorized.
I have a data.frame that has a consists of the following columns: Location , Sample , Var1, and Var2. I'd like to find the closet match for each Sample for each pair of Locations for both Var1 and Var2.
I can accomplish this for one pair of locations as such:
df0 <- data.frame(Location = rep(c("A", "B", "C"), each =30),
Sample = rep(c(1:30), times =3),
Var1 = sample(1:25, 90, replace =T),
Var2 = sample(1:25, 90, replace=T))
df00 <- data.frame(Location = rep(c("A", "B", "C"), each =30),
Sample = rep(c(31:60), times =3),
Var1 = sample(1:100, 90, replace =T),
Var2 = sample(1:100, 90, replace=T))
df000 <- rbind(df0, df00)
df <- sample_n(df000, 100) # data
dfl <- df %>% gather(VAR, value, 3:4)
df1 <- dfl %>% filter(Location == "A")
df2 <- dfl %>% filter(Location == "B")
df3 <- merge(df1, df2, by = c("VAR"), all.x = TRUE, allow.cartesian=TRUE)
df3 <- df3 %>% mutate(DIFF = abs(value.x-value.y))
result <- df3 %>% group_by(VAR, Sample.x) %>% top_n(-1, DIFF)
I tried other possibilities such as using dplyr::spread but could not avoid the "Error: Duplicate identifiers for rows" or columns half filled with NA.
Is there a more clean and automated way to do this for each possible group pair? I'd like to avoid the manual subset and merge routine for each pair.
One option would be to create the pairwise combination of 'Location' with combn and then do the other steps as in the OP's code
library(tidyverse)
df %>%
# get the unique elements of Location
distinct(Location) %>%
# pull the column as a vector
pull %>%
# it is factor, so convert it to character
as.character %>%
# get the pairwise combinations in a list
combn(m = 2, simplify = FALSE) %>%
# loop through the list with map and do the full_join
# with the long format data df1
map(~ full_join(df1 %>%
filter(Location == first(.x)),
df1 %>%
filter(Location == last(.x)), by = "VAR") %>%
# create a column of absolute difference
mutate(DIFF = abs(value.x - value.y)) %>%
# grouped by VAR, Sample.x
group_by(VAR, Sample.x) %>%
# apply the top_n with wt as DIFF
top_n(-1, DIFF))
Also, as the OP mentioned about automatically picking up instead of doing double filter (not clear about the expected output though)
df %>%
distinct(Location) %>%
pull %>%
as.character %>%
combn(m = 2, simplify = FALSE) %>%
map(~ df1 %>%
# change here i.e. filter both the Locations
filter(Location %in% .x) %>%
# spread it to wide format
spread(Location, value, fill = 0) %>%
# create the DIFF column by taking the differene
mutate(DIFF = abs(!! rlang::sym(first(.x)) -
!! rlang::sym(last(.x)))) %>%
group_by(VAR, Sample) %>%
top_n(-1, DIFF))
I have built a function which seems to work, but I don't understand why.
My initial problem was to take a data.frame which contains counts of a population and expand it to re-create the original population. This is easy enough if you know the column names in advance.
library(tidyverse)
set.seed(121)
test_counts <- tibble(Population = letters[1:4], Length = c(1,1,2,1),
Number = sample(1:100, 4))
expand_counts_v0 <- function(Length, Population, Number) {
tibble(Population = Population,
Length = rep(Length, times = Number))
}
test_counts %>% pmap_dfr(expand_counts_v0) %>% # apply it
group_by(Population, Length) %>% # test it
summarise(Number = n()) %>%
ungroup %>%
{ all.equal(., test_counts)}
# [1] TRUE
However, I wanted to generalise it to a function which didn't need to know at the column names of the data.frame, and I'm interested in NSE, so I wrote:
test_counts1 <- tibble(Population = letters[1:4],
Length = c(1,1,2,1),
Number = sample(1:100, 4),
Height = c(100, 50, 45, 90),
Width = c(700, 50, 60, 90)
)
expand_counts_v1 <- function(df, count = NULL) {
countq <- enexpr(count)
names <- df %>% select(-!!countq) %>% names
namesq <- names %>% map(as.name)
cols <- map(namesq, ~ expr(rep(!!., times = !!countq))
) %>% set_names(namesq)
make_tbl <- function(...) {
expr(tibble(!!!cols)) %>% eval(envir = df)
}
df %>% pmap_dfr(make_tbl)
}
But, when I test this function it seems to duplicate rows 4 times:
test_counts %>% expand_counts_v1(count = Number) %>%
group_by(Population, Length) %>%
summarise(Number = n()) %>%
ungroup %>%
{ sum(.$Number)/sum(test_counts$Number)}
# [1] 4
This lead me to guess a solution, which was
expand_counts_v2 <- function(df, count = NULL) {
countq <- enexpr(count)
names <- df %>% select(-!!countq) %>% names
namesq <- names %>% map(as.name)
cols <- map(namesq, ~ expr(rep(!!., times = !!countq))
) %>% set_names(namesq)
make_tbl <- function(...) {
expr(tibble(!!!cols)) %>% eval(envir = df)
}
df %>% make_tbl
}
This seems to work:
test_counts %>% expand_counts_v2(count = Number) %>%
group_by(Population, Length) %>%
summarise(Number = n()) %>%
ungroup %>%
{ all.equal(., test_counts)}
# [1] TRUE
test_counts1 %>% expand_counts_v2(count = Number) %>%
group_by(Population, Length, Height, Width) %>%
summarise(Number = n()) %>%
ungroup %>%
{ all.equal(., test_counts1)}
# [1] TRUE
But I don't understand why. How is it evaluating for each row, even though I'm not using pmap anymore? The function needs to be applied to each row in order to work, so it must be somehow, but I can't see how it's doing that.
EDIT
After Artem's correct explanation of what was going on, I realised I could do this
expand_counts_v2 <- function(df, count = NULL) {
countq <- enexpr(count)
names <- df %>% select(-!!countq) %>% names
namesq <- names %>% map(as.name)
cols <- map(namesq, ~ expr(rep(!!., times = !!countq))
) %>% set_names(namesq)
expr(tibble(!!!cols)) %>% eval_tidy(data = df)
}
Which gets rid of the unnecessary mk_tbl function. However, as Artem said, that is only really working because rep is vectorised. So, it's working, but not by re-writing the _v0 function and pmapping it, which is the process I was trying to replicate. Eventually, I discovered, rlang::new_function and wrote:
expand_counts_v3 <- function(df, count = NULL) {
countq <- enexpr(count)
names <- df %>% select(-!!countq) %>% names
namesq <- names %>% map(as.name)
cols <- map(namesq, ~ expr(rep(!!., times = !!countq))
) %>% set_names(namesq)
all_names <- df %>% names %>% map(as.name)
args <- rep(0, times = length(all_names)) %>% as.list %>% set_names(all_names)
correct_function <- new_function(args, # this makes the function as in _v0
expr(tibble(!!!cols)) )
pmap_dfr(df, correct_function) # applies it as in _v0
}
which is longer, and probably uglier, but works the way I originally wanted.
The issue is in eval( envir = df ), which exposes the entire data frame to make_tbl(). Notice that you never use ... argument inside make_tbl(). Instead, the function effectively computes the equivalent of
with( df, tibble(Population = rep(Population, times = Number),
Length = rep(Length, times=Number)) )
regardless of what arguments you provide to it. When you call the function via pmap_dfr(), it essentially computes the above four times (once for each row) and concatenates the results by-row, resulting in the duplication of entries you've observed. When you remove pmap_dfr(), the function is called once, but since rep is itself vectorized (try doing rep( test_counts$Population, test_counts$Number ) to see what I mean), make_tbl() computes the entire result in one go.