I am trying to calculate the combinations of elements of a matrix but each element should appear only once.
The (real) matrix is symmetric, and can have more then 5 elements (up to ~2000):
o <- matrix(runif(25), ncol = 5, nrow = 5)
dimnames(o) <- list(LETTERS[1:5], LETTERS[1:5])
# A B C D E
# A 0.4400317 0.1715681 0.7319108946 0.3994685 0.4466997
# B 0.5190471 0.1666164 0.3430245044 0.3837903 0.9322599
# C 0.3249180 0.6122229 0.6312876740 0.8017402 0.0141673
# D 0.1641411 0.1581701 0.0001703419 0.7379847 0.8347536
# E 0.4853255 0.5865909 0.6096330935 0.8749807 0.7230507
I desire to calculate the product of all the combinations of pairs (If possible it should appear all elements:AB, CD, EF if the matrix is of 6 elements), where for each pair one letter is the column, the other one is the row. Here are some combinations:
AB, CD, E
AC, BD, E
AD, BC, E
AE, BC, D
AE, BD, C
Where the value of the single element is just 1.
Combinations not desired:
AB, BC: Element B appears twice
AB, AC: Element A appears twice
Things I tried:
I thought about removing the unwanted part of the matrix:
out <- which(upper.tri(o), arr.ind = TRUE)
out <- cbind.data.frame(out, value = o[upper.tri(o)])
out[, 1] <- colnames(o)[out[, 1]]
out[, 2] <- colnames(o)[out[, 2]]
# row col value
# 1 A B 0.1715681
# 2 A C 0.7319109
# 3 B C 0.3430245
# 4 A D 0.3994685
# 5 B D 0.3837903
# 6 C D 0.8017402
# 7 A E 0.4466997
# 8 B E 0.9322599
# 9 C E 0.0141673
# 10 D E 0.8347536
My attempt involves the following process:
Make a copy of the matrix (out)
Store first value of the first row.
Remove all the pairs that involve any of the pair.
Select the next pair of the resulting matrix
Repeat until all rows are removed of the matrix
Repeat 2:5 starting from a different row
However, this method has one big problem, it doesn't guarantee that all the combinations are stored, and it could store several times the same combination.
My expected output is a vector, where each element is the product of the values in the cell selected by the combination:
AB, CD: 0.137553
How can I extract all those combinations efficiently?
This might work. I tested this on N elements = 5 and 6.
Note that this is not optimised, and hopefully can provide a framework for you to work from. With a much larger array, I can see steps involving apply and combn being a bottleneck.
The idea here is to generate a collection of unique sets first before calculating the product of the sets from another data.frame that stores values of sets.
Unique sets are identified by counting the number of unique elements in all combination pairs. For example, if N elements = 6, we expect length(unlist(combination)) == 6. The same is true if N elements = 7 (there will only be 3 pairs plus a remainder element). In cases where N elements is odd, we can ignore the remaining, unpaired element since it is constrained by the other elements.
library(dplyr)
library(reshape2)
## some functions
unique_by_n <- function(inlist, N){
## select unique combinations by count
## if unique, expect n = 6 if n elements = 6)
if(N %% 2) N <- N - 1 ## for odd numbers
return(length(unique(unlist(inlist))) == N)
}
get_combs <- function(x,xall){
## format and catches remainder if matrix of odd elements
xu <- unlist(x)
remainder <- setdiff(xall,xu) ## catch remainder if any
xset <- unlist(lapply(x, paste0, collapse=''))
finalset <- c(xset, remainder)
return(finalset)
}
## make dataset
set.seed(0) ## set reproducible example
#o <- matrix(runif(25), ncol = 5, nrow = 5) ## uncomment to test 5
#dimnames(o) <- list(LETTERS[1:5], LETTERS[1:5])
o <- matrix(runif(36), ncol = 6, nrow = 6)
dimnames(o) <- list(LETTERS[1:6], LETTERS[1:6])
o[lower.tri(o)] <- t(o)[lower.tri(o)] ## make matrix symmetric
n_elements = nrow(o)
#### get matrix
dat <- melt(o, varnames = c('Rw', 'Cl'), as.is = TRUE)
dat$Set <- apply(dat, 1, function(x) paste0(sort(unique(x[1:2])), collapse = ''))
## get unique sets (since your matrix is symmetric)
dat <- subset(dat, !duplicated(Set))
#### get sets
elements <- rownames(o)
allpairs <- expand.grid(Rw = elements, Cl = elements) %>%
filter(Rw != Cl) ## get all pairs
uniqpairsgrid <- unique(t(apply(allpairs,1,sort)))
uniqpairs <- split(uniqpairsgrid, seq(nrow(uniqpairsgrid))) ## get unique pairs
allpaircombs <- combn(uniqpairs,floor(n_elements/2)) ## get combinations of pairs
uniqcombs <- allpaircombs[,apply(allpaircombs, 2, unique_by_n, N = n_elements)] ## remove pairs with repeats
finalcombs <- apply(uniqcombs, 2, get_combs, xall=elements)
#### calculate results
res <- apply(finalcombs, 2, function(x) prod(subset(dat, Set %in% x)$value)) ## calculate product
names(res) <- apply(finalcombs, 2, paste0, collapse=',') ## add names
resdf <- data.frame(Sets = names(res), Products = res, stringsAsFactors = FALSE, row.names = NULL)
print(resdf)
#> Sets Products
#> 1 AB,CD,EF 0.130063454
#> 2 AB,CE,DF 0.171200062
#> 3 AB,CF,DE 0.007212619
#> 4 AC,BD,EF 0.012494787
#> 5 AC,BE,DF 0.023285088
#> 6 AC,BF,DE 0.001139712
#> 7 AD,BC,EF 0.126900247
#> 8 AD,BE,CF 0.158919605
#> 9 AD,BF,CE 0.184631344
#> 10 AE,BC,DF 0.042572488
#> 11 AE,BD,CF 0.028608495
#> 12 AE,BF,CD 0.047056905
#> 13 AF,BC,DE 0.003131029
#> 14 AF,BD,CE 0.049941770
#> 15 AF,BE,CD 0.070707311
Created on 2018-07-23 by the [reprex package](http://reprex.tidyverse.org) (v0.2.0.9000).
Maybe the following does what you want.
Note that I was more interested in being right than in performance.
Also, I have set the RNG seed, to have reproducible results.
set.seed(9840) # Make reproducible results
o <- matrix(runif(25), ncol = 5, nrow = 5)
dimnames(o) <- list(LETTERS[1:5], LETTERS[1:5])
cmb <- combn(LETTERS[1:5], 2)
n <- ncol(cmb)
res <- NULL
nms <- NULL
for(i in seq_len(n)){
for(j in seq_len(n)[-seq_len(i)]){
x <- unique(c(cmb[, i], cmb[, j]))
if(length(x) == 4){
res <- c(res, o[cmb[1, i], cmb[2, i]] * o[cmb[1, j], cmb[2, j]])
nms <- c(nms, paste0(cmb[1, i], cmb[2, i], '*', cmb[1, j], cmb[2, j]))
}
}
}
names(res) <- nms
res
Related
I have two large sparse matrices (about 41,000 x 55,000 in size). The density of nonzero elements is around 10%. They both have the same row index and column index for nonzero elements.
I now want to modify the values in the first sparse matrix if values in the second matrix are below a certain threshold.
library(Matrix)
# Generating the example matrices.
set.seed(42)
# Rows with values.
i <- sample(1:41000, 227000000, replace = TRUE)
# Columns with values.
j <- sample(1:55000, 227000000, replace = TRUE)
# Values for the first matrix.
x1 <- runif(227000000)
# Values for the second matrix.
x2 <- sample(1:3, 227000000, replace = TRUE)
# Constructing the matrices.
m1 <- sparseMatrix(i = i, j = j, x = x1)
m2 <- sparseMatrix(i = i, j = j, x = x2)
I now get the rows, columns and values from the first matrix in a new matrix. This way, I can simply subset them and only the ones I am interested in remain.
# Getting the positions and values from the matrices.
position_matrix_from_m1 <- rbind(i = m1#i, j = summary(m1)$j, x = m1#x)
position_matrix_from_m2 <- rbind(i = m2#i, j = summary(m2)$j, x = m2#x)
# Subsetting to get the elements of interest.
position_matrix_from_m1 <- position_matrix_from_m1[,position_matrix_from_m1[3,] > 0 & position_matrix_from_m1[3,] < 0.05]
# We add 1 to the values, since the sparse matrix is 0-based.
position_matrix_from_m1[1,] <- position_matrix_from_m1[1,] + 1
position_matrix_from_m1[2,] <- position_matrix_from_m1[2,] + 1
Now I am getting into trouble. Overwriting the values in the second matrix takes too long. I let it run for several hours and it did not finish.
# This takes hours.
m2[position_matrix_from_m1[1,], position_matrix_from_m1[2,]] <- 1
m1[position_matrix_from_m1[1,], position_matrix_from_m1[2,]] <- 0
I thought about pasting the row and column information together. Then I have a unique identifier for each value. This also takes too long and is probably just very bad practice.
# We would get the unique identifiers after the subsetting.
m1_identifiers <- paste0(position_matrix_from_m1[1,], "_", position_matrix_from_m1[2,])
m2_identifiers <- paste0(position_matrix_from_m2[1,], "_", position_matrix_from_m2[2,])
# Now, I could use which and get the position of the values I want to change.
# This also uses to much memory.
m2_identifiers_of_interest <- which(m2_identifiers %in% m1_identifiers)
# Then I would modify the x values in the position_matrix_from_m2 matrix and overwrite m2#x in the sparse matrix object.
Is there a fundamental error in my approach? What should I do to run this efficiently?
Is there a fundamental error in my approach?
Yes. Here it is.
# This takes hours.
m2[position_matrix_from_m1[1,], position_matrix_from_m1[2,]] <- 1
m1[position_matrix_from_m1[1,], position_matrix_from_m1[2,]] <- 0
Syntax as mat[rn, cn] (whether mat is a dense or sparse matrix) is selecting all rows in rn and all columns in cn. So you get a length(rn) x length(cn) matrix. Here is a small example:
A <- matrix(1:9, 3, 3)
# [,1] [,2] [,3]
#[1,] 1 4 7
#[2,] 2 5 8
#[3,] 3 6 9
rn <- 1:2
cn <- 2:3
A[rn, cn]
# [,1] [,2]
#[1,] 4 7
#[2,] 5 8
What you intend to do is to select (rc[1], cn[1]), (rc[2], cn[2]) ..., only. The correct syntax is then mat[cbind(rn, cn)]. Here is a demo:
A[cbind(rn, cn)]
#[1] 4 8
So you need to fix your code to:
m2[cbind(position_matrix_from_m1[1,], position_matrix_from_m1[2,])] <- 1
m1[cbind(position_matrix_from_m1[1,], position_matrix_from_m1[2,])] <- 0
Oh wait... Based on your construction of position_matrix_from_m1, this is just
ij <- t(position_matrix_from_m1[1:2, ])
m2[ij] <- 1
m1[ij] <- 0
Now, let me explain how you can do better. You have underused summary(). It returns a 3-column data frame, giving (i, j, x) triplet, where both i and j are index starting from 1. You could have worked with this nice output directly, as follows:
# Getting (i, j, x) triplet (stored as a data.frame) for both `m1` and `m2`
position_matrix_from_m1 <- summary(m1)
# you never seem to use `position_matrix_from_m2` so I skip it
# Subsetting to get the elements of interest.
position_matrix_from_m1 <- subset(position_matrix_from_m1, x > 0 & x < 0.05)
Now you can do:
ij <- as.matrix(position_matrix_from_m1[, 1:2])
m2[ij] <- 1
m1[ij] <- 0
Is there a even better solution? Yes! Note that nonzero elements in m1 and m2 are located in the same positions. So basically, you just need to change m2#x according to m1#x.
ind <- m1#x > 0 & m1#x < 0.05
m2#x[ind] <- 1
m1#x[ind] <- 0
A complete R session
I don't have enough RAM to create your large matrix, so I reduced your problem size a little bit for testing. Everything worked smoothly.
library(Matrix)
# Generating the example matrices.
set.seed(42)
## reduce problem size to what my laptop can bear with
squeeze <- 0.1
# Rows with values.
i <- sample(1:(41000 * squeeze), 227000000 * squeeze ^ 2, replace = TRUE)
# Columns with values.
j <- sample(1:(55000 * squeeze), 227000000 * squeeze ^ 2, replace = TRUE)
# Values for the first matrix.
x1 <- runif(227000000 * squeeze ^ 2)
# Values for the second matrix.
x2 <- sample(1:3, 227000000 * squeeze ^ 2, replace = TRUE)
# Constructing the matrices.
m1 <- sparseMatrix(i = i, j = j, x = x1)
m2 <- sparseMatrix(i = i, j = j, x = x2)
## give me more usable RAM
rm(i, j, x1, x2)
##
## fix to your code
##
m1a <- m1
m2a <- m2
# Getting (i, j, x) triplet (stored as a data.frame) for both `m1` and `m2`
position_matrix_from_m1 <- summary(m1)
# Subsetting to get the elements of interest.
position_matrix_from_m1 <- subset(position_matrix_from_m1, x > 0 & x < 0.05)
ij <- as.matrix(position_matrix_from_m1[, 1:2])
m2a[ij] <- 1
m1a[ij] <- 0
##
## the best solution
##
m1b <- m1
m2b <- m2
ind <- m1#x > 0 & m1#x < 0.05
m2b#x[ind] <- 1
m1b#x[ind] <- 0
##
## they are identical
##
all.equal(m1a, m1b)
#[1] TRUE
all.equal(m2a, m2b)
#[1] TRUE
Caveat:
I know that some people may propose
m1c <- m1
m2c <- m2
logi <- m1 > 0 & m1 < 0.05
m2c[logi] <- 1
m1c[logi] <- 0
It looks completely natural in R's syntax. But trust me, it is extremely slow for large matrices.
I have two data frames, df1 with reference data and df2 with new data. For each row in df2, I need to find the best (and the second best) matching row to df1 in terms of hamming distance.
I used e1071 package to compute hamming distance. Hamming distance between two vectors x and y can be computed as for example:
x <- c(356739, 324074, 904133, 1025460, 433677, 110525, 576942, 526518, 299386,
92497, 977385, 27563, 429551, 307757, 267970, 181157, 3796, 679012, 711274,
24197, 610187, 402471, 157122, 866381, 582868, 878)
y <- c(356739, 324042, 904133, 959893, 433677, 110269, 576942, 2230, 267130,
92496, 960747, 28587, 429551, 438825, 267970, 181157, 36564, 677220,
711274, 24485, 610187, 404519, 157122, 866413, 718036, 876)
xm <- sapply(x, intToBits)
ym <- sapply(y, intToBits)
distance <- sum(sapply(1:ncol(xm), function(i) hamming.distance(xm[,i], ym[,i])))
and the resulting distance is 25. Yet I need to do this for all rows of df1 and df2. A trivial method takes a double loop nest and looks terribly slow.
Any ideas how to do this more efficiently? In the end I need to append to df2:
a column with the row id from df1 that gives the lowest distance;
a column with the lowest distance;
a column with the row id from df1 that gives the 2nd lowest distance;
a column with the second lowest distance.
Thanks.
Fast computation of hamming distance between two integers vectors of equal length
As I said in my comment, we can do:
hmd0 <- function(x,y) sum(as.logical(xor(intToBits(x),intToBits(y))))
to compute hamming distance between two integers vectors of equal length x and y. This only uses R base, yet is more efficient than e1071::hamming.distance, because it is vectorized!
For the example x and y in your post, this gives 25. (My other answer will show what we should do, if we want pairwise hamming distance.)
Fast hamming distance between a matrix and a vector
If we want to compute the hamming distance between a single y and multiple xs, i.e., the hamming distance between a vector and a matrix, we can use the following function.
hmd <- function(x,y) {
rawx <- intToBits(x)
rawy <- intToBits(y)
nx <- length(rawx)
ny <- length(rawy)
if (nx == ny) {
## quick return
return (sum(as.logical(xor(rawx,rawy))))
} else if (nx < ny) {
## pivoting
tmp <- rawx; rawx <- rawy; rawy <- tmp
tmp <- nx; nx <- ny; ny <- tmp
}
if (nx %% ny) stop("unconformable length!") else {
nc <- nx / ny ## number of cycles
return(unname(tapply(as.logical(xor(rawx,rawy)), rep(1:nc, each=ny), sum)))
}
}
Note that:
hmd performs computation column-wise. It is designed to be CPU cache friendly. In this way, if we want to do some row-wise computation, we should transpose the matrix first;
there is no obvious loop here; instead, we use tapply().
Fast hamming distance computation between two matrices/data frames
This is what you want. The following function foo takes two data frames or matrices df1 and df2, computing the distance between df1 and each row of df2. argument p is an integer, showing how many results you want to retain. p = 3 will keep the smallest 3 distances with their row ids in df1.
foo <- function(df1, df2, p) {
## check p
if (p > nrow(df2)) p <- nrow(df2)
## transpose for CPU cache friendly code
xt <- t(as.matrix(df1))
yt <- t(as.matrix(df2))
## after transpose, we compute hamming distance column by column
## a for loop is decent; no performance gain from apply family
n <- ncol(yt)
id <- integer(n * p)
d <- numeric(n * p)
k <- 1:p
for (i in 1:n) {
distance <- hmd(xt, yt[,i])
minp <- order(distance)[1:p]
id[k] <- minp
d[k] <- distance[minp]
k <- k + p
}
## recode "id" and "d" into data frame and return
id <- as.data.frame(matrix(id, ncol = p, byrow = TRUE))
colnames(id) <- paste0("min.", 1:p)
d <- as.data.frame(matrix(d, ncol = p, byrow = TRUE))
colnames(d) <- paste0("mindist.", 1:p)
list(id = id, d = d)
}
Note that:
transposition is done at the beginning, according to reasons before;
a for loop is used here. But this is actually efficient because there is considerable computation done in each iteration. It is also more elegant than using *apply family, since we ask for multiple output (row id id and distance d).
Experiment
This part uses small dataset to test/demonstrate our functions.
Some toy data:
set.seed(0)
df1 <- as.data.frame(matrix(sample(1:10), ncol = 2)) ## 5 rows 2 cols
df2 <- as.data.frame(matrix(sample(1:6), ncol = 2)) ## 3 rows 2 cols
Test hmd first (needs transposition):
hmd(t(as.matrix(df1)), df2[1, ]) ## df1 & first row of df2
# [1] 2 4 6 2 4
Test foo:
foo(df1, df2, p = 2)
# $id
# min1 min2
# 1 1 4
# 2 2 3
# 3 5 2
# $d
# mindist.1 mindist.2
# 1 2 2
# 2 1 3
# 3 1 3
If you want to append some columns to df2, you know what to do, right?
Please don't be surprised why I take another section. This part gives something relevant. It is not what OP asks for, but may help any readers.
General hamming distance computation
In the previous answer, I start from a function hmd0 that computes hamming distance between two integer vectors of the same length. This means if we have 2 integer vectors:
set.seed(0)
x <- sample(1:100, 6)
y <- sample(1:100, 6)
we will end up with a scalar:
hmd0(x,y)
# 13
What if we want to compute pairwise hamming distance of two vectors?
In fact, a simple modification to our function hmd will do:
hamming.distance <- function(x, y, pairwise = TRUE) {
nx <- length(x)
ny <- length(y)
rawx <- intToBits(x)
rawy <- intToBits(y)
if (nx == 1 && ny == 1) return(sum(as.logical(xor(intToBits(x),intToBits(y)))))
if (nx < ny) {
## pivoting
tmp <- rawx; rawx <- rawy; rawy <- tmp
tmp <- nx; nx <- ny; ny <- tmp
}
if (nx %% ny) stop("unconformable length!") else {
bits <- length(intToBits(0)) ## 32-bit or 64 bit?
result <- unname(tapply(as.logical(xor(rawx,rawy)), rep(1:ny, each = bits), sum))
}
if (pairwise) result else sum(result)
}
Now
hamming.distance(x, y, pairwise = TRUE)
# [1] 0 3 3 2 5 0
hamming.distance(x, y, pairwise = FALSE)
# [1] 13
Hamming distance matrix
If we want to compute the hamming distance matrix, for example,
set.seed(1)
x <- sample(1:100, 5)
y <- sample(1:100, 7)
The distance matrix between x and y is:
outer(x, y, hamming.distance) ## pairwise argument has no effect here
# [,1] [,2] [,3] [,4] [,5] [,6] [,7]
# [1,] 2 3 4 3 4 4 2
# [2,] 7 6 3 4 3 3 3
# [3,] 4 5 4 3 6 4 2
# [4,] 2 3 2 5 6 4 2
# [5,] 4 3 4 3 2 0 2
We can also do:
outer(x, x, hamming.distance)
# [,1] [,2] [,3] [,4] [,5]
# [1,] 0 5 2 2 4
# [2,] 5 0 3 5 3
# [3,] 2 3 0 2 4
# [4,] 2 5 2 0 4
# [5,] 4 3 4 4 0
In the latter situation, we end up with a symmetric matrix with 0 on the diagonal. Using outer is inefficient here, but it is still more efficient than writing R loops. Since our hamming.distance is written in R code, I would stay with using outer. In my answer to this question, I demonstrate the idea of using compiled code. This of course requires writing a C version of hamming.distance, but I will not show it here.
Here's an alternative solution that uses only base R, and should be very fast, especially when your df1 and df2 have many rows. The main reason for this is that it does not use any R-level looping for calculating the Hamming distances, such as for-loops, while-loops, or *apply functions. Instead, it uses matrix multiplication for computing the Hamming distance. In R, this is much faster than any approach using R-level looping. Also note that using an *apply function will not necessarily make your code any faster than using a for loop. Two other efficiency-related features of this approach are: (1) It uses partial sorting for finding the best two matches for each row in df2, and (2) It stores the entire bitwise representation of df1 in one matrix (same for df2), and does so in one single step, without using any R-level loops.
The function that does all the work:
# INPUT:
# X corresponds to your entire df1, but is a matrix
# Y corresponds to your entire df2, but is a matrix
# OUTPUT:
# Matrix with four columns corresponding to the values
# that you specified in your question
fun <- function(X, Y) {
# Convert integers to bits
X <- intToBits(t(X))
# Reshape into matrix
dim(X) <- c(ncols * 32, nrows)
# Convert integers to bits
Y <- intToBits(t(Y))
# Reshape into matrix
dim(Y) <- c(ncols * 32, nrows)
# Calculate pairwise hamming distances using matrix
# multiplication.
# Columns of H index into Y; rows index into X.
# The code for the hamming() function was retrieved
# from this page:
# https://johanndejong.wordpress.com/2015/10/02/faster-hamming-distance-in-r-2/
H <- hamming(X, Y)
# Now, for each row in Y, find the two best matches
# in X. In other words: for each column in H, find
# the two smallest values and their row indices.
t(apply(H, 2, function(h) {
mindists <- sort(h, partial = 1:2)
c(
ind1 = which(h == mindists[1])[1],
val1 = mindists[1],
hmd2 = which(h == mindists[2])[1],
val2 = mindists[2]
)
}))
}
To call the function on some random data:
# Generate some random test data with no. of columns
# corresponding to your data
nrows <- 1000
ncols <- 26
# X corresponds to your df1
X <- matrix(
sample(1e6, nrows * ncols, replace = TRUE),
nrow = nrows,
ncol = ncols
)
# Y corresponds to your df2
Y <- matrix(
sample(1e6, nrows * ncols, replace = TRUE),
nrow = nrows,
ncol = ncols
)
res <- fun(X, Y)
The above example with 1000 rows in both X (df1) and Y (df2) took about 1.1 - 1.2 seconds to run on my laptop.
I have two data frames of same number of columns (but not rows) df1 and df2. For each row in df2, I was able to find the best (and second best) matching rows from df1 in terms of hamming distance, in my previous post. In that post, we have been using the following example data:
set.seed(0)
df1 <- as.data.frame(matrix(sample(1:10), ncol = 2)) ## 5 rows 2 cols
df2 <- as.data.frame(matrix(sample(1:6), ncol = 2)) ## 3 rows 2 cols
I now need to compute the number of bits equal to 1 for:
each row in df2
the best matching rows in df1
the second matching rows in df1
The number of bits equal to 1 of an integer a maybe computed as
sum(as.integer(intToBits(a)))
And I have applied this to #ZheyuanLi's original function, so I have got item 1>. However I'm unable to apply the same logic to get item 2> and 3>, by simple modification of #ZheyuanLi's function.
Below are the functions from #ZheyuanLi's with modification:
hmd <- function(x,y) {
rawx <- intToBits(x)
rawy <- intToBits(y)
nx <- length(rawx)
ny <- length(rawy)
if (nx == ny) {
## quick return
return (sum(as.logical(xor(rawx,rawy))))
} else if (nx < ny) {
## pivoting
tmp <- rawx; rawx <- rawy; rawy <- tmp
tmp <- nx; nx <- ny; ny <- tmp
}
if (nx %% ny) stop("unconformable length!") else {
nc <- nx / ny ## number of cycles
return(unname(tapply(as.logical(xor(rawx,rawy)), rep(1:nc, each=ny), sum)))
}
}
foo <- function(df1, df2, p = 2) {
## check p
if (p > nrow(df2)) p <- nrow(df2)
## transpose for CPU cache friendly code
xt <- t(as.matrix(df1))
yt <- t(as.matrix(df2))
## after transpose, we compute hamming distance column by column
## a for loop is decent; no performance gain from apply family
n <- ncol(yt)
id <- integer(n * p)
d <- numeric(n * p)
sb <- integer(n)
k <- 1:p
for (i in 1:n) {
set.bits <- sum(as.integer(intToBits(yt[,i])))
distance <- hmd(xt, yt[,i])
minp <- order(distance)[1:p]
id[k] <- minp
d[k] <- distance[minp]
sb[i] <- set.bits
k <- k + p
}
## recode "id", "d" and "sb" into data frame and return
id <- as.data.frame(matrix(id, ncol = p, byrow = TRUE))
colnames(id) <- paste0("min.", 1:p)
d <- as.data.frame(matrix(d, ncol = p, byrow = TRUE))
colnames(d) <- paste0("mindist.", 1:p)
sb <- as.data.frame(matrix(sb, ncol = 1)) ## no need for byrow as you have only 1 column
colnames(sb) <- "set.bits.1"
list(id = id, d = d, sb = sb)
}
Running these gives:
> foo(df1, df2)
$id
min1 min2 ## row id for best/second best match in df1
1 1 4
2 2 3
3 5 2
$d
mindist.1 mindist.2 ## minimum 2 hamming distance
1 2 2
2 1 3
3 1 3
$sb
set.bits.1 ## number of bits equal to 1 for each row of df2
1 3
2 2
3 4
OK, after reading through while re-editing your question (many times!), I think I know what you want. Essentially we need change nothing to hmd(). Your required items 1>, 2>, 3> can all be computed after the for loop in foo().
To get item 1>, which you called sb, we can use a tapply(). However, your computation of sb along the for loop is fine, so I will not change it. In the following, I will demonstrate the basic procedure to get item 2> and item 3>.
The id vector inside foo() stores all matching rows in df1:
id <- c(1, 4, 2, 3, 5, 2)
so we can simply extract those rows of df1 (actually, columns of xt), to compute the number of bits equal to 1. As you can see, there are lots of duplicity in id, so we can only computes on unique(id):
id0 <- sort(unique(id))
## [1] 1 2 3 4 5
We now extract those subset columns of xt:
sub_xt <- xt[, id0]
## [,1] [,2] [,3] [,4] [,5]
## V1 9 3 10 5 6
## V2 2 4 8 7 1
To compute the number of bits equal to 1 for each column of sub_xt, we again use tapply() and vectorized approach.
rawbits <- as.integer(intToBits(as.numeric(sub_xt))) ## convert sub_xt to binary
sbxt0 <- unname(tapply(X = rawbits,
INDEX = rep(1:length(id0), each = length(rawbits) / length(id0)),
FUN = sum))
## [1] 3 3 3 5 3
Now we need to map sbxt0 to sbxt:
sbxt <- sbxt0[match(id, id0)]
## [1] 3 5 3 3 3 3
Then we can convert sbxt to a data frame sb1:
sb1 <- as.data.frame(matrix(sbxt, ncol = p, byrow = TRUE))
colnames(sb1) <- paste(paste0("min.", 1:p), "set.bits.1", sep = ".")
## min.1.set.bits.1 min.2.set.bits.1
## 1 3 5
## 2 3 3
## 3 3 3
Finally we can assemble these things up:
foo <- function(df1, df2, p = 2) {
## check p
if (p > nrow(df2)) p <- nrow(df2)
## transpose for CPU cache friendly code
xt <- t(as.matrix(df1))
yt <- t(as.matrix(df2))
## after transpose, we compute hamming distance column by column
## a for loop is decent; no performance gain from apply family
n <- ncol(yt)
id <- integer(n * p)
d <- numeric(n * p)
sb2 <- integer(n)
k <- 1:p
for (i in 1:n) {
set.bits <- sum(as.integer(intToBits(yt[,i])))
distance <- hmd(xt, yt[,i])
minp <- order(distance)[1:p]
id[k] <- minp
d[k] <- distance[minp]
sb2[i] <- set.bits
k <- k + p
}
## compute "sb1"
id0 <- sort(unique(id))
sub_xt <- xt[, id0]
rawbits <- as.integer(intToBits(as.numeric(sub_xt))) ## convert sub_xt to binary
sbxt0 <- unname(tapply(X = rawbits,
INDEX = rep(1:length(id0), each = length(rawbits) / length(id0)),
FUN = sum))
sbxt <- sbxt0[match(id, id0)]
sb1 <- as.data.frame(matrix(sbxt, ncol = p, byrow = TRUE))
colnames(sb1) <- paste(paste0("min.", 1:p), "set.bits.1", sep = ".")
## recode "id", "d" and "sb2" into data frame and return
id <- as.data.frame(matrix(id, ncol = p, byrow = TRUE))
colnames(id) <- paste0("min.", 1:p)
d <- as.data.frame(matrix(d, ncol = p, byrow = TRUE))
colnames(d) <- paste0("mindist.", 1:p)
sb2 <- as.data.frame(matrix(sb2, ncol = 1)) ## no need for byrow as you have only 1 column
colnames(sb2) <- "set.bits.1"
list(id = id, d = d, sb1 = sb1, sb2 = sb2)
}
Now, running foo(df1, df2) gives:
> foo(df1,df2)
$id
min.1 min.2
1 1 4
2 2 3
3 5 2
$d
mindist.1 mindist.2
1 2 2
2 1 3
3 1 3
$sb1
min.1.set.bits.1 min.2.set.bits.1
1 3 5
2 3 3
3 3 3
$sb2
set.bits.1
1 3
2 2
3 4
Note that I have renamed the sb you used to sb2.
I have a matrix temp1 (dimensions Nx16) (generally, NxM)
I would like to sum every k columns in each row to one value.
Here is what I got to so far:
cbind(rowSums(temp1[,c(1:4)]), rowSums(temp1[,c(5:8)]), rowSums(temp1[,c(9:12)]), rowSums(temp1[,c(13:16)]))
There must be a more elegant (and generalized) method to do it.
I have noticed similar question here:
sum specific columns among rows
couldn't make it work with Ananda's solution;
Got following error:
sapply(split.default(temp1, 0:(length(temp1)-1) %/% 4), rowSums)
Error in FUN(X[[1L]], ...) :
'x' must be an array of at least two dimensions
Please advise.
You can use by:
do.call(cbind, by(t(temp1), (seq(ncol(temp1)) - 1) %/% 4, FUN = colSums))
If the dimensions are equal for the sub matrices, you could change the dimensions to an array and then do the rowSums
m1 <- as.matrix(temp1)
n <- 4
dim(m1) <- c(nrow(m1), ncol(m1)/n, n)
res <- matrix(rowSums(apply(m1, 2, I)), ncol=n)
identical(res[,1],rowSums(temp1[,1:4]))
#[1] TRUE
Or if the dimensions are unequal
t(sapply(seq(1,ncol(temp2), by=4), function(i) {
indx <- i:(i+3)
rowSums(temp2[indx[indx <= ncol(temp2)]])}))
data
set.seed(24)
temp1 <- as.data.frame(matrix(sample(1:20, 16*4, replace=TRUE), ncol=16))
set.seed(35)
temp2 <- as.data.frame(matrix(sample(1:20, 17*4, replace=TRUE), ncol=17))
Another possibility:
x1<-sapply(1:(ncol(temp1)/4),function(x){rowSums(temp1[,1:4+(x-1)*4])})
## check
x0<-cbind(rowSums(temp1[,c(1:4)]), rowSums(temp1[,c(5:8)]), rowSums(temp1[,c(9:12)]), rowSums(temp1[,c(13:16)]))
identical(x1,x0)
# TRUE
Here's another approach. Convert the matrix to an array and then use apply with sum.
n <- 4
apply(array(temp1, dim=c(dim(temp1)/c(1,n), n)), MARGIN=c(1,3), FUN=sum)
Using #akrun's data
set.seed(24)
temp1 <- matrix(sample(1:20, 16*4, replace=TRUE), ncol=16)
a function which sums matrix columns with each group of size n columns
set.seed(1618)
mat <- matrix(rnorm(24 * 16), 24, 16)
f <- function(mat, n = 4) {
if (ncol(mat) %% n != 0)
stop()
cols <- split(colSums(mat), rep(1:(ncol(mat) / n), each = n))
## or use this to have n mean the number of groups you want
# cols <- split(colSums(mat), rep(1:n, each = ncol(mat) / n))
sapply(cols, sum)
}
f(mat, 4)
# 1 2 3 4
# -17.287137 -1.732936 -5.762159 -4.371258
c(sum(mat[,1:4]), sum(mat[,5:8]), sum(mat[,9:12]), sum(mat[,13:16]))
# [1] -17.287137 -1.732936 -5.762159 -4.371258
More examples:
## first 8 and last 8 cols
f(mat, 8)
# 1 2
# -19.02007 -10.13342
## each group is 16 cols, ie, the entire matrix
f(mat, 16)
# 1
# -29.15349
sum(mat)
# [1] -29.15349
I would like to calculate name number for a set of given names.
Name number is calculated by summing the value assigned to each alphabet. The values are given below:
a=i=j=q=y=1
b=k=r=2
c=g=l=s=3
d=m=t=4
h=e=n=x=5
u=v=w=6
o=z=7
p=f=8
Example: Name number of David can be calculated as follows:
D+a+v+i+d
4+1+6+1+4
16=1+6=7
Name number of David is 7.
I would like to write a function in R for doing this.
I am thankful for any directions or tips or package suggestions that I should look into.
This code snippet will accomplish what you want:
# Name for which the number should be computed.
name <- "David"
# Prepare letter scores array. In this case, the score for each letter will be the array position of the string it occurs in.
val <- c("aijqy", "bkr", "cgls", "dmt", "henx", "uvw", "oz", "pf")
# Convert name to lowercase.
lName <- tolower(name)
# Compute the sum of letter scores.
s <- sum(sapply(unlist(strsplit(lName,"")), function(x) grep(x, val)))
# Compute the "number" for the sum of letter scores. This is a recursive operation, which can be shortened to taking the mod by 9, with a small correction in case the sum is 9.
n <- (s %% 9)
n <- ifelse(n==0, 9, n)
'n' is the result that you want for any 'name'
You will want to create a vector of values, in alphabetical order, then use match to get their indices. Something like this:
a <- i <- j <- q <- y <- 1
b <- k <- r <- 2
c <- g <- l <- s <- 3
d <- m <- t <- 4
h <- e <- n <- x <- 5
u <- v <- w <- 6
o <- z <- 7
p <- f <- 8
vals <- c(a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h,i,j,k,l,m,n,o,p,q,r,s,t,u,v,w,x,y,z)
sum(vals[match(c("d","a","v","i","d"), letters)])
I'm sure there are several ways to do this, but here's an approach using a named vector:
x <- c(
"a"=1,"i"=1,"j"=1,"q"=1,"y"=1,
"b"=2,"k"=2,"r"=2,
"c"=3,"g"=3,"l"=3,"s"=3,
"d"=4,"m"=4,"t"=4,
"h"=5,"e"=5,"n"=5,"x"=5,
"u"=6,"v"=6,"w"=6,
"o"=7,"z"=7,
"p"=8,"f"=8)
##
name_val <- function(Name, mapping=x){
split <- tolower(unlist(strsplit(Name,"")))
total <-sum(mapping[split])
##
sum(as.numeric(unlist(strsplit(as.character(total),split=""))))
}
##
Names <- c("David","Betty","joe")
##
R> name_val("David")
[1] 7
R> sapply(Names,name_val)
David Betty joe
7 7 4