I've got a grouped data frame, like so:
df <- data.frame(group = rep(1:4, each=3),
lets = rep(LETTERS[1:4], times=3))
For each row I would now like to identify all lets within the same group other than the lets of the row itself. Using dplyr I can get all lets thus:
df %>%
group_by(group) %>%
mutate(all_lets_in_group = paste(lets, collapse=','))
But how do I exclude the lets of the current row from what I feed into paste()?
The purpose of this task is not very clear, so the code clarity thus suffers as well, but still:
library(tidyverse)
df %>%
group_by(group) %>%
mutate(
all_lets_in_group = lets %>%
map(function(l) setdiff(., l)) %>%
map_chr(function(x) paste(x, collapse=',')))
Uses set operation setdiff to subtract current letter provided by purrr::map from the group's set, then reformats the list of vectors with paste and returns as character vector.
Not sure about a dplyr solution, but you can use lapply.
df$all_lets_in_group <- lapply(1:nrow(df), function(x)
paste(with(df, lets[group == group[x] & lets != lets[x]]), collapse = ','))
Another base R method that uses ave, sapply, and setdiff
ave(df$lets, df$group,
FUN=function(i) sapply(i, function(j) paste(setdiff(i, j), collapse=",")))
[1] "B,C" "A,C" "A,B" "A,B" "D,B" "D,A" "D,A" "C,A" "C,D" "C,D" "B,D" "B,C"
Related
I have a data.frame which maps an id column to a group column, and the id column is not unique because the same id can map to multiple groups:
set.seed(1)
df <- data.frame(id = paste0("id", sample(1:10,300,replace = T)), group = c(rep("A",100), rep("B",100), rep("C",100)), stringsAsFactors = F)
I'd like to convert this data.frame into a list where each element is the ids in each group.
This seems a bit slow for the size of data I'm working with:
library(dplyr)
df.list <- lapply(unique(df$group), function(g) dplyr::filter(df, group == g)$id)
So I was thinking about this:
df.list <- df %>%
dplyr::group_by(group) %>%
dplyr::group_split()
Assuming it is faster than my first option, any idea how to get it to return the same output as in the first option rather than a list of data.frames?
Using base R only with split. It should be faster than the == with unique
with(df, split(id, group))
Or with tidyverse we can pull the column after the group_split. The group_split returns a data.frame/tibble and could be slower compared to the split only method above. But, here, we can make some performance improvements by removing the group column (keep = FALSE) and then in the list, pull the 'id' column to create the list of vectors
library(dplyr)
library(purrr)
df %>%
group_split(group, keep = FALSE) %>%
map(~ .x %>%
pull(id))
Or use {} with pipe
df %>%
{split(.$id, .$group)}
Or wrap with with
df %>%
with(., split(id, group))
I'm tring to filter something across a list of dataframes for a specific column. Typically across a single dataframe using dplyr I would use:
#creating dataframe
df <- data.frame(a = 0:10, d = 10:20)
# filtering column a for rows greater than 7
df %>% filter(a > 7)
I've tried doing this across a list using the following:
# creating list
x <- list(data.frame(a = 0:10, b = 10:20),
data.frame(c = 11:20, d = 21:30),
data.frame(e = 15:25, f = 35:45))
# selecting the appropriate column and trying to filter
# this is not working
x[1][[1]][1] %>% lapply(. %>% {filter(. > 2)})
# however, if I use the min() function it works
x[1][[1]][1] %>% lapply(. %>% {min(.)})
I find the %>% syntax quite easy to understand and carry out. However, in this case, selecting a specific column and doing something quite simple like filtering is not working. I'm guessing map could be equally useful. Any help is appreciated.
You can use filter_at to refer column by position.
library(dplyr)
purrr::map(x, ~.x %>% filter_at(1, any_vars(. > 7)))
In filter, you can subset the column and use it
purrr::map(x, ~.x %>% filter(.[[1]] > 7))
In base R, that would be :
lapply(x, function(y) y[y[[1]] > 7, ])
It seems you are interested in checking the condition on the first column of each dataframe in your list.
One solution using dplyr would be
lapply(x, function(df) {df %>% filter_at(1, ~. > 7)})
The 1 in filter_at indicates that I want to check the condition on the first column (1 is a positional index) of each dataframe in the list.
EDIT
After the discussion in the comments, I propose the following solution
lapply(x, function(df) {df %>% filter(a > 7) %>% select(a) %>% slice(1)})
Input data
x <- list(data.frame(a = 0:10, b = 10:20),
data.frame(a = 11:20, b = 21:30),
data.frame(a = 15:25, b = 35:45))
Output
[[1]]
a
1 8
[[2]]
a
1 11
[[3]]
a
1 15
Using filter with across
library(dplyr)
library(purrr)
map(x, ~ .x %>%
filter(across(names(.)[1], ~ .> 7)))
I am working with a dataset of which I want to calculate rowSums of columns that start with a certain string and end with an other specified string, using dplyr (in my example: starts_with('c_') & ends_with('_f'))
My current code is as follows (and works fine):
df <- df %>% mutate(row.sum = rowSums(select(select(., starts_with('c_')), ends_with('_f'))))
However, as you can see, using the select() function within a select() function seems a bit messy. Is there a way to combine the starts_with and ends_with within just one select() function? Or do you have other ideas to make this line of code more elegant via using dplyr?
EDIT:
To make the example reproducible:
names <- c('c_first_f', 'c_second_o', 't_third_f', 'c_fourth_f')
values <- c(5, 3, 2, 5)
df <- t(values)
colnames(df) <- names
> df
c_first_f c_second_o t_third_f c_fourth_f
[1,] 5 3 2 5
Thus, here I want to sum the first and fourth column, making the summed value 10.
We could use select_at with matches
library(dplyr)
df %>% select_at(vars(matches("^c_.*_f$"))) %>% mutate(row.sum = rowSums(.))
and with base R :
df$row.sum <- rowSums(df[grep("^c_.*_f$", names(df))])
We can use tidyverse approaches
library(dplyr)
library(purrr)
df %>%
select_at(vars(matches("^c_.*_f$"))) %>%
mutate(rowSum = reduce(., `+`))
Or with new versions of tidyverse, select can take matches
df %>%
select(matches("^c_.*_f$")) %>%
mutate(rowSum = reduce(., `+`))
Given
base <- data.frame( a = 1)
f <- function() c(2,3,4)
I am looking for a solution that would result in a function f being applied to each row of base data frame and the result would be appended to each row. Neither of the following works:
result <- base %>% rowwise() %>% mutate( c(b,c,d) = f() )
result <- base %>% rowwise() %>% mutate( (b,c,d) = f() )
result <- base %>% rowwise() %>% mutate( b,c,d = f() )
What is the correct syntax for this task?
This appears to be a similar problem (Assign multiple new variables on LHS in a single line in R) but I am specifically interested in solving this with functions from tidyverse.
I think the best you are going to do is a do() to modify the data.frame. Perhaps
base %>% do(cbind(., setNames(as.list(f()), c("b","c","d"))))
would probably be best if f() returned a list in the first place for the different columns.
In case you're willing to do this without dplyr:
# starting data frame
base_frame <- data.frame(col_a = 1:10, col_b = 10:19)
# the function you want applied to a given column
add_to <- function(x) { x + 100 }
# run this function on your base data frame, specifying the column you want to apply the function to:
add_computed_col <- function(frame, funct, col_choice) {
frame[paste(floor(runif(1, min=0, max=10000)))] = lapply(frame[col_choice], funct)
return(frame)
}
Usage:
df <- add_computed_col(base_frame, add_to, 'col_a')
head(df)
And add as many columns as needed:
df_b <- add_computed_col(df, add_to, 'col_b')
head(df_b)
Rename your columns.
I am trying to use pipe mutate statement using a custom function. I looked a this somewhat similar SO post but in vain.
Say I have a data frame like this (where blob is some variable not related to the specific task but is part of the entire data) :
df <-
data.frame(exclude=c('B','B','D'),
B=c(1,0,0),
C=c(3,4,9),
D=c(1,1,0),
blob=c('fd', 'fs', 'sa'),
stringsAsFactors = F)
I have a function that uses the variable names so select some based on the value in the exclude column and e.g. calculates a sum on the variables not specified in exclude (which is always a single character).
FUN <- function(df){
sum(df[c('B', 'C', 'D')] [!names(df[c('B', 'C', 'D')]) %in% df['exclude']] )
}
When I gives a single row (row 1) to FUN I get the the expected sum of C and D (those not mentioned by exclude), namely 4:
FUN(df[1,])
How do I do similarly in a pipe with mutate (adding the result to a variable s). These two tries do not work:
df %>% mutate(s=FUN(.))
df %>% group_by(1:n()) %>% mutate(s=FUN(.))
UPDATE
This also do not work as intended:
df %>% rowwise(.) %>% mutate(s=FUN(.))
This works of cause but is not within dplyr's mutate (and pipes):
df$s <- sapply(1:nrow(df), function(x) FUN(df[x,]))
If you want to use dplyr you can do so using rowwise and your function FUN.
df %>%
rowwise %>%
do({
result = as_data_frame(.)
result$s = FUN(result)
result
})
The same can be achieved using group_by instead of rowwise (like you already tried) but with do instead of mutate
df %>%
group_by(1:n()) %>%
do({
result = as_data_frame(.)
result$s = FUN(result)
result
})
The reason mutate doesn't work in this case, is that you are passing the whole tibble to it, so it's like calling FUN(df).
A much more efficient way of doing the same thing though is to just make a matrix of columns to be included and then use rowSums.
cols <- c('B', 'C', 'D')
include_mat <- outer(function(x, y) x != y, X = df$exclude, Y = cols)
# or outer(`!=`, X = df$exclude, Y = cols) if it's more readable to you
df$s <- rowSums(df[cols] * include_mat)
purrr approach
We can use a combination of nest and map_dbl for this:
library(tidyverse)
df %>%
rowwise %>%
nest(-blob) %>%
mutate(s = map_dbl(data, FUN)) %>%
unnest
Let's break that down a little bit. First, rowwise allows us to apply each subsequent function to support arbitrary complex operations that need to be applied to each row.
Next, nest will create a new column that is a list of our data to be fed into FUN (the beauty of tibbles vs data.frames!). Since we are applying this rowwise, each row contains a single-row tibble of exclude:D.
Finally, we use map_dbl to map our FUN to each of these tibbles. map_dbl is used over the family of other map_* functions since our intended output is numeric (i.e. double).
unnest returns our tibble into the more standard structure.
purrrlyr approach
While purrrlyr may not be as 'popular' as its parents dplyr and purrr, its by_row function has some utility here.
In your above example, we would use your data frame df and user-defined function FUN in the following way:
df %>%
by_row(..f = FUN, .to = "s", .collate = "cols")
That's it! Giving you:
# tibble [3 x 6]
exclude B C D blob s
<chr> <dbl> <dbl> <dbl> <chr> <dbl>
1 B 1 3 1 fd 4
2 B 0 4 1 fs 5
3 D 0 9 0 sa 9
Admittedly, the syntax is a little strange, but here's how it breaks down:
..f = the function to apply to each row
.to = the name of the output column, in this case s
.collate = the way the results should be collated, by list, row, or column. Since FUN only has a single output, we would be fine to use either "cols" or "rows"
See here for more information on using purrrlyr...
Performance
Forewarning, while I like the functionality of by_row, it's not always the best approach for performance! purrr is more intuitive, but also at a rather large speed loss. See the following microbenchmark test:
library(microbenchmark)
mbm <- microbenchmark(
purrr.test = df %>% rowwise %>% nest(-blob) %>%
mutate(s = map_dbl(data, FUN)) %>% unnest,
purrrlyr.test = df %>% by_row(..f = FUN, .to = "s", .collate = "cols"),
rowwise.test = df %>%
rowwise %>%
do({
result = as_tibble(.)
result$s = FUN(result)
result
}),
group_by.test = df %>%
group_by(1:n()) %>%
do({
result = as_tibble(.)
result$s = FUN(result)
result
}),
sapply.test = {df$s <- sapply(1:nrow(df), function(x) FUN(df[x,]))},
times = 1000
)
autoplot(mbm)
You can see that the purrrlyr approach is faster than the approach of using a combination of do with rowwise or group_by(1:n()) (see #konvas answer), and rather on par with the sapply approach. However, the package is admittedly not the most intuitive. The standard purrr approach seems to be the slowest, but also perhaps easier to work with. Different user-defined functions may change the speed order.