Hi so I am new in R and kind of don't know what I'm looking for. I want to measure probability of each frequency of a dust concentration so I need to divide each frequency to whole total of dust concentration frequency. By then I can continue by looking for CDF and PMF of the dust concentration.
So I have a dust probability data that has two column(Dust Concentration and its Frequencies) and it looks like this:
In my first thought, I have to increment i on this line of R queries
dustProb[i, "Frekuensi"]
that should've take specific frequency in row i so I can sum all frequency queried from it after getting that with for loops like this.
# the dataset is called dustData here
# dustFrequencies = dustData[i, "Frekuensi"]
for(i in dustFrequencies){
print(dustFrequencies)
}
The print() part supposed to be where I sum all the variables earned through that incremented queries.
My question is:
Can I increment the 'i' inside that R queries
Was my way is too complicated or there's other way to measure probability in R?
Sorry for lots of confusion, inneficiency, and holes, I hope I was clear enough here.
Using loops in R isn't very tidy-freindly. You can do:
library(dplyr)
dustData <- dustData %>%
mutate(probabilities = Frekuensi/sum(Frekuensi))
The new column is the frenquency divided by the sum of all frequencies, for each dust concentration.
Related
I have the following data frame in R:
df <- data.frame(time=c("10:01","10:05","10:11","10:21"),
power=c(30,32,35,36))
Problem: I want to calculate the energy consumption, so I need the sum of the time differences multiplied by the power. But every row has one timestamp, meaning I need to do subtraction between two different rows. And that is the part I cannot figure out. I guess I would need some kind of function but I couldn't find online hints.
Example: It has to subtract row2$time from row1$time, and then multiply it to row1$power.
As said, I do not know how to implement the step in one call, I am confused about the subtraction part since it takes values from different rows.
Expected output: E=662
Try this:
tmp = strptime(df$time, format="%H:%M")
df$interval = c(as.numeric(diff(tmp)), NA)
sum(df$interval*df$power, na.rm=TRUE)
I got 662 back.
I am new to R and stuck in computing the proportions of two values.
I got to this point with using the table() function
table(data$subscriptions, data$pickup)
The subscriptions data is divided into casual and registered users per station. Basically, I want to compute the proportion of casual users per station.
Should I be using tapply() to solve this?
Thankful for any help!
There is a function prop.table() that is called on the table to turn counts into proportions. So in your case try something like this:
tab <- table(data$subscriptions, data$pickup)
prop.table(tab, 2)
Where 2 is a margin on which the proportions will be calculated. 2 means columns in your case.
Also see help(prop.table)
I have dataframe which has 253 rows(locations on a chromosome in Mbps) and 1 column (Allele score at each location). I need to produce a dataframe which contains the mean of the allele score at every 0.5 Mbps on the chromosome. Please help with R code that can do this. thanks.
The picture in this case is adequate to construct an answer but not adequate to support testing. You should learn to post data in a form that doesn't require re-entry by hand. (That's why you are accumulating negative votes.)
The basic R strategy would be to use cut to create a grouping variable and then use a loop construct to accumulate and apply the mean function. Presumably this is in a dataframe which I will assume is named something specific like my_alleles:
tapply( my_alleles$Allele_score, # act on this vector
# in groups defined by this factor
cut(my_alleles$Location,
breaks=seq(0, max(my_alleles$Location), by=0.5)
),
# with this function
FUN=mean)
I am looking for a better way to compare a value from a day (day X) to the previous day (day X-1). Here I am using the airquality dataset. Suppose I am interested in comparing the wind from one day to the wind from the previous day. Right now I am using merge() to bring together two dataframes - one current day dataframe and one from the previous day. I am also just subtracting 1 from the Day column to get the PrevDay column:
airquality$PrevDay=airquality$Day-1
airquality.comp <- merge(
airquality[,c("Wind","Day")],
airquality[,c("Temp","PrevDay")],
by.x=c("Day"),by.y=c("PrevDay"))
My issue here is that I'd need to create another dataframe if I wanted to look back 2 days or if I wanted to switch Wind and Temp and look at them the other way. This just seems clunky. Can anyone recommend a better way of doing this?
IMO data.table may be harder to get used to compared to dplyr, but it will save your tail later when you need robust analysis:
setDT(airquality)[, shift(Wind, n=2L, type="lag") < Wind]
In base R, you can add an NA value and eliminate the last for comparison:
with(airquality, c(NA,head(Wind,-1)) < Wind)
Whar kind of comparison do you need?
For example, to check if the followonf values is greater you could use:
library(dplyr)
with(airquality, lag(Wind) < Wind)
Or with two lags:
with(airquality, lag(Wind, 2) < Wind)
It depends on what questions you are trying to answer, but I would look into Autocorrelation (the correlation of a time series with its own lagged values). You may want to look into the acf() function to compare the time series to itself since this will help you highlight which lags are significantly correlated.
Or if you want to compare 2 different metrics (such as Wind and Temp), then you may want to try the ccf() function since it allows you to input 2 different vectors and it will compute the cross correlation with lags. For example:
ccf(airquality$Wind,airquality$Temp)
If you are interested in autocorrelation or cross-correlation, in particular, then you might also consider something like mutual information, which will work for non-Gaussian data as well. Both the infotheo and entropy (more here) packages for R have built-in functions to do so.
I have a data frame (760 rows) with two columns, named Price and Size. I would like to put the data into 4/5 groups based on price that would minimize the variance in each group while preserving the order Size (which is in ascending order). The Jenks natural breaks optimization would be an ideal function however it does not take the order of Size into consideration.
Basically, I have data simlar to the following (with more data)
Price=c(90,100,125,100,130,182,125,250,300,95)
Size=c(10,10,10.5,11,11,11,12,12,12,12.5)
mydata=data.frame(Size,Price)
I would like to group data, to minimize the variance of price in each group respecting 1) The Size value: For example, the first two prices 90 and 100 cannot be in a different groups since they are the same size & 2) The order of the Size: For example, If Group One includes observations (Obs) 1-2 and Group Two includes observations 3-9, observation 10 can only enter into group two or three.
Can someone please give me some advice? Maybe there is already some such function that I can’t find?
Is this what you are looking for? With the dplyr package, grouping is quite easy. The %>%can be read as "then do" so you can combine multiple actions if you like.
See http://cran.rstudio.com/web/packages/dplyr/vignettes/introduction.html for further information.
library("dplyr")
Price <– c(90,100,125,100,130,182,125,250,300,95)
Size <- c(10,10,10.5,11,11,11,12,12,12,12.5)
mydata <- data.frame(Size,Price) %>% # "then"
group_by(Size) # group data by Size column
mydata_mean_sd <- mydata %>% # "then"
summarise(mean = mean(Price), sd = sd(Price)) # calculate grouped
#mean and sd for illustration
I had a similar problem with optimally splitting a day into 4 "load blocks". Adjacent time periods must stick together, of course.
Not an elegant solution, but I wrote my own function that first split up a sorted series at specified break points, then calculates the sum(SDCM) using those break points (using the algorithm underlying the jenks approach from Wiki).
Then just iterated through all valid combinations of break points, and selected the set of points that produced the minimum sum(SDCM).
Would quickly become unmanageable as number of possible breakpoints combinations increases, but it worked for my data set.