I'm trying to rename rows in a matrix as follows:
M = matrix(0,50,1)
nf = 50
for (k in 1:50) {
filtro = k*(1/nf)
rownames(M[k,]) <- paste("p.v",filtro)
}
it gives me the following error:
Error in `rownames<-`(`*tmp*`, value = paste("p.v", filtro)) :
attempt to set 'rownames' on an object with no dimensions
In general, you can't use rownames(M[k,]) <- ... instead you must use rownames(M)[k] <- .... Why: the inner expression M[k,] returns a vector, which does not have a row name. What you are trying to do is change an attribute of the object M, so rownames(M) <- .. flows a little better.
Internally, there is a function called `rownames<-` that changes row names for its first argument. Technically, its two arguments are x (matrix or frame) and value (the new name(s)); this is called even if subsequently indexed with [ (as in bullet 2).
You can't use rownames(.)[k] <- ... because there are initially no row names, i.e., rownames(M) is initially NULL. You can get around this by assigning some names, even if arbitary:
rownames(M) <- seq(nrow(M)) # arbitrary, must be same length
for (k in 1:50) {
filtro = k*(1/nf)
rownames(M)[k] <- paste("p.v",filtro)
}
Better, though, use a vectorized approach, no for loop required:
rownames(M) <- paste("p.v", (1:50)/nf)
head(M)
# [,1]
# p.v 0.02 0
# p.v 0.04 0
# p.v 0.06 0
# p.v 0.08 0
# p.v 0.1 0
# p.v 0.12 0
I have a global variable x and want to build a function f that returns the value of x at the time the function is created. Example:
x <- 5
f <- function() return(x)
f()
> 5
x <- 10
f()
> 10 # Should return 5
I want a function that always return 5 (or whatever the value of x is at the time of function creation) without using another global variable. Is that possible?
Still another option using body:
f<-`body<-`(function() {},value=x)
Example:
x<-10
f<-`body<-`(function() {},value=x)
f()
#[1] 10
x<-100
f()
#[1] 10
Digging the source code of body, here is an even cleaner solution equivalent to the above using as.function:
f<-as.function(list(x))
This is not possible with global variables alone. When a function is defined, none of the variables in the function body are actually evaluated till the function is called. What you want seems to be a closure to hold the value at the time of creation. Instead write a function that returns a function
x <- 5
getfun <- function() {z<-x; function() return(z)}
f <- getfun()
x<- 10
g <- getfun()
f()
# [1] 5
g()
# [1] 10
Or even better, don't implicitly use global variables. Create a function that takes a certain set of parameters and returns a new function
returnVal <- function(x) {force(x); function() return(x)}
f<-returnVal(5)
g<-returnVal(10)
f()
# [1] 5
g()
# [1] 10
1) This saves the value of x the first time f is called and then uses that value of x even if x has been changed the next time f is called. Create f in a local environment and have f place x in that environment. If x was not previously there it will now be. If it was previously there then it will be the x retrieved and placed back. The result is that the first x encountered will always be used.
f <- local(function() {
p <- parent.env(environment())
p$x <- x
x
})
x <- 5
f()
## [1] 5
x <- 10
f()
## [1] 5
2) In comments #Konrad and #Frank have suggested the following variation in which we remove the assignment from f and put it in the local.
There is one difference from the viewpoint of the user of the function. This instantiates the value of x at the time the function is defined whereas (1) instantiates x the first time that the function is called and that might be an advantage if you want to separate the definition and the instantiation.
x <- 5
f <- local({ x <- x; function() x })
f()
## [1] 5
x <- 10
f()
## [1] 5
3) We can also consider completely separating the function from the instantiation. This would also allow re-initialization at any time by calling e$init() again.
e <- local({
init <- function() {
p <- parent.env(environment())
p$x <- x
}
run = function() x
environment()
})
x <- 5
e$init()
e$run()
## [1] 5
x <- 10
e$run()
## [1] 5
4) (3) could be implemented using a variety of object oriented frameworks such as Reference Classes, proto or R6. In proto it would be like this:
library(proto)
p <- proto(init = function(.) .$x <- x, run = function(.) x)
x <- 5
p$init()
p$run()
## [1] 5
x <- 10
p$run()
## [1] 5
Say I have a two objects, a and b, and a function f1 in R
a<- 5
b<- 10
f1<-function(){
out<- a+b
return(out)
I want to write a for loop that evaluates the sensitivity of this function to the values of a and b by changing them each and running the function again. I imagine creating a vector of the objects and then running some code like this:
params<- c(a,b)
for(i in params){
store<- i #save the initial value of the object so I can restore it later.
base<-f1() #save function output with original object value
i<- i*1.1 #increase object value by 10%
base.10<- f1() #recalculate and save function output with new object value
calc<- base.10/base #generate a response metric
i<- store #reset the object value to its original value
return(calc)
}
It sounds like you have a function f1 that relies on objects a and b (which are not defined in that function), and you want to test the sensitivity of its output to values of a and b. One way to approach this would be looping through the values you want for the sensitivity analysis and manipulating the parent environment of f1 so it uses these values:
f1 <- function() a + b
sensitivity <- function(params) {
old.f1.env <- environment(f1)
grid <- expand.grid(lapply(params, function(x) x * c(1, 1.1)))
grid$outcome <- apply(grid, 1, function(x) {
for (n in names(x)) {
assign(n, x[n])
}
environment(f1) <- environment()
ret <- f1()
environment(f1) <- old.f1.env
ret
})
grid
}
sensitivity(list(a=5, b=10))
# a b outcome
# 1 5.0 10 15.0
# 2 5.5 10 15.5
# 3 5.0 11 16.0
# 4 5.5 11 16.5
Here, we've performed computed the function value for a grid of a and b values, both at the original a and b value and at a 10% increased value.
Note that a lot of our work came from specifying the variables in the parent environment of f1. I would encourage you to restructure your code so your function f1 takes the relevant parameters as input. Then you could use:
f1 <- function(a, b) a + b
sensitivity <- function(params) {
grid <- expand.grid(lapply(params, function(x) x * c(1, 1.1)))
grid$outcome <- apply(grid, 1, function(x) do.call(f1, as.list(x)))
grid
}
sensitivity(list(a=5, b=10))
# a b outcome
# 1 5.0 10 15.0
# 2 5.5 10 15.5
# 3 5.0 11 16.0
# 4 5.5 11 16.5
This sounds like a perfect use case for closures.
get_f1 <- function(a, b) {
f1<-function(){
out<- a+b
return(out)
}
return(f1)
}
Then:
my_f1 <- get_f1(a=5, b=10)
my_f1() #uses a=5 and b=10 because they are defined in the envir associated with my_f1
So in your loop you could simply do:
base <- (get_f1(a, b))()
base.10 <- (get_f1(a*1.1, b*1.1))()
Obviously you could define get_f1 with arguments i=c(a, b).
Use a closure (function attached to an environment) rather than tinkering with environments!
tl;dr: closures are awesome
Reading some of your comments, I think this is actually what you want: sensitivity takes a function and a list of arguments and returns the sensitivity of the function to its arguments. (BTW what you call sensitivity, already means something else)
sensitivity <- function(fun, args) {
out <- lapply(names(args), function(cur) {
base10 <- do.call(fun, `[[<-`(args, cur, `[[`(args,cur)*1.1))
base10 / do.call(fun, args)
})
names(out) <- names(args)
return(out)
}
Example:
f1 <- function(a,b) a+b
a1 <- list(a=5, b=2)
sensitivity(f1, a1)
This gives
$a
[1] 1.03
$b
[1] 1.07
Example 2:
f2 <- function(x, y, z) x^2 +3*y*z
sensitivity(f2, list(x=1, y=2, z=3))
$x
[1] 1.011053
$y
[1] 1.094737
$z
[1] 1.094737
It works "plug-and-play" with any function, BUT it requires you to define f differently (one would say, correctly). I could write something that would work with your function f as it is written but it would be much work and bad taste. If you want code modularity, you just cannot use side effects...
PS: if you would prefer to have a vector returned instead of a list, simply change lapply to sapply in the definition of sensitivity.
This would give for the last example:
> sensitivity(f2, list(x=1, y=2, z=3))
x y z
1.011053 1.094737 1.094737
PPS: any reason why you are not computing the gradient of f rather than doing what you are doing?
I'm new to R (and programming generally), and confused about why the following bits of code yield different results:
x <- 100
for(i in 1:5){
x <- x + 1
print(x)
}
This incrementally prints the sequence 101:105 as I would expect.
x <- 100
f <- function(){
x <- x + 1
print(x)
}
for(i in 1:5){
f()
}
But this just prints 101 five times.
Why does packaging the logic into a function cause it to revert to the original value on each iteration rather than incrementing? And what can I do to make this work as a repeatedly-called function?
The problem
It is because in your function you are dealing with a local variable x on the left side, and a global variable x on the right side. You are not updating the global x in the function, but assigning the value of 101 to the local x. Each time you call the function, the same thing happens, so you assign local x to be 101 5 times, and print it out 5 times.
To help visualize:
# this is the "global" scope
x <- 100
f <- function(){
# Get the "global" x which has value 100,
# add 1 to it, and store it in a new variable x.
x <- x + 1
# The new x has a value of 101
print(x)
}
This would be similar to the following code:
y <- 100
f <- function(){
x <- y + 1
print(x)
}
One possible fix
As for what to do to fix it. Take the variable as the argument, and pass it back as the update. Something like this:
f <- function(old.x) {
new.x <- old.x + 1
print(new.x)
return(new.x)
}
You would want to store the return value, so your updated code would look like:
x <- 100
f <- function(old.x) {
new.x <- old.x + 1
print(new.x)
return(new.x)
}
for (i in 1:5) {
x <- f(x)
}
This does what you want:
f <- function(){
x <<- x + 1
print(x)
}
But you shouldn't do this. Globals are not a good construct. Functions with side-effects cause code to be hard to understand and hard to debug.
A safer way to use a global is to encapsulate it into another environment. Here is an example:
create.f <- function(x) {
return(function() {
x <<- x + 1
print(x)
})
}
f <- create.f(100)
for (i in 1:5) f()
## [1] 101
## [1] 102
## [1] 103
## [1] 104
## [1] 105
Here, the "global" x is in the environment of the body of create.f, where f is defined, and not the global environment. The environment of a function is the environment in which it is defined (and not that in which it is called).
Still trying to get into the R logic... what is the "best" way to unpack (on LHS) the results from a function returning multiple values?
I can't do this apparently:
R> functionReturningTwoValues <- function() { return(c(1, 2)) }
R> functionReturningTwoValues()
[1] 1 2
R> a, b <- functionReturningTwoValues()
Error: unexpected ',' in "a,"
R> c(a, b) <- functionReturningTwoValues()
Error in c(a, b) <- functionReturningTwoValues() : object 'a' not found
must I really do the following?
R> r <- functionReturningTwoValues()
R> a <- r[1]; b <- r[2]
or would the R programmer write something more like this:
R> functionReturningTwoValues <- function() {return(list(first=1, second=2))}
R> r <- functionReturningTwoValues()
R> r$first
[1] 1
R> r$second
[1] 2
--- edited to answer Shane's questions ---
I don't really need giving names to the result value parts. I am applying one aggregate function to the first component and an other to the second component (min and max. if it was the same function for both components I would not need splitting them).
(1) list[...]<- I had posted this over a decade ago on r-help. Since then it has been added to the gsubfn package. It does not require a special operator but does require that the left hand side be written using list[...] like this:
library(gsubfn) # need 0.7-0 or later
list[a, b] <- functionReturningTwoValues()
If you only need the first or second component these all work too:
list[a] <- functionReturningTwoValues()
list[a, ] <- functionReturningTwoValues()
list[, b] <- functionReturningTwoValues()
(Of course, if you only needed one value then functionReturningTwoValues()[[1]] or functionReturningTwoValues()[[2]] would be sufficient.)
See the cited r-help thread for more examples.
(2) with If the intent is merely to combine the multiple values subsequently and the return values are named then a simple alternative is to use with :
myfun <- function() list(a = 1, b = 2)
list[a, b] <- myfun()
a + b
# same
with(myfun(), a + b)
(3) attach Another alternative is attach:
attach(myfun())
a + b
ADDED: with and attach
I somehow stumbled on this clever hack on the internet ... I'm not sure if it's nasty or beautiful, but it lets you create a "magical" operator that allows you to unpack multiple return values into their own variable. The := function is defined here, and included below for posterity:
':=' <- function(lhs, rhs) {
frame <- parent.frame()
lhs <- as.list(substitute(lhs))
if (length(lhs) > 1)
lhs <- lhs[-1]
if (length(lhs) == 1) {
do.call(`=`, list(lhs[[1]], rhs), envir=frame)
return(invisible(NULL))
}
if (is.function(rhs) || is(rhs, 'formula'))
rhs <- list(rhs)
if (length(lhs) > length(rhs))
rhs <- c(rhs, rep(list(NULL), length(lhs) - length(rhs)))
for (i in 1:length(lhs))
do.call(`=`, list(lhs[[i]], rhs[[i]]), envir=frame)
return(invisible(NULL))
}
With that in hand, you can do what you're after:
functionReturningTwoValues <- function() {
return(list(1, matrix(0, 2, 2)))
}
c(a, b) := functionReturningTwoValues()
a
#[1] 1
b
# [,1] [,2]
# [1,] 0 0
# [2,] 0 0
I don't know how I feel about that. Perhaps you might find it helpful in your interactive workspace. Using it to build (re-)usable libraries (for mass consumption) might not be the best idea, but I guess that's up to you.
... you know what they say about responsibility and power ...
Usually I wrap the output into a list, which is very flexible (you can have any combination of numbers, strings, vectors, matrices, arrays, lists, objects int he output)
so like:
func2<-function(input) {
a<-input+1
b<-input+2
output<-list(a,b)
return(output)
}
output<-func2(5)
for (i in output) {
print(i)
}
[1] 6
[1] 7
I put together an R package zeallot to tackle this problem. zeallot includes a multiple assignment or unpacking assignment operator, %<-%. The LHS of the operator is any number of variables to assign, built using calls to c(). The RHS of the operator is a vector, list, data frame, date object, or any custom object with an implemented destructure method (see ?zeallot::destructure).
Here are a handful of examples based on the original post,
library(zeallot)
functionReturningTwoValues <- function() {
return(c(1, 2))
}
c(a, b) %<-% functionReturningTwoValues()
a # 1
b # 2
functionReturningListOfValues <- function() {
return(list(1, 2, 3))
}
c(d, e, f) %<-% functionReturningListOfValues()
d # 1
e # 2
f # 3
functionReturningNestedList <- function() {
return(list(1, list(2, 3)))
}
c(f, c(g, h)) %<-% functionReturningNestedList()
f # 1
g # 2
h # 3
functionReturningTooManyValues <- function() {
return(as.list(1:20))
}
c(i, j, ...rest) %<-% functionReturningTooManyValues()
i # 1
j # 2
rest # list(3, 4, 5, ..)
Check out the package vignette for more information and examples.
functionReturningTwoValues <- function() {
results <- list()
results$first <- 1
results$second <-2
return(results)
}
a <- functionReturningTwoValues()
I think this works.
There's no right answer to this question. I really depends on what you're doing with the data. In the simple example above, I would strongly suggest:
Keep things as simple as possible.
Wherever possible, it's a best practice to keep your functions vectorized. That provides the greatest amount of flexibility and speed in the long run.
Is it important that the values 1 and 2 above have names? In other words, why is it important in this example that 1 and 2 be named a and b, rather than just r[1] and r[2]? One important thing to understand in this context is that a and b are also both vectors of length 1. So you're not really changing anything in the process of making that assignment, other than having 2 new vectors that don't need subscripts to be referenced:
> r <- c(1,2)
> a <- r[1]
> b <- r[2]
> class(r)
[1] "numeric"
> class(a)
[1] "numeric"
> a
[1] 1
> a[1]
[1] 1
You can also assign the names to the original vector if you would rather reference the letter than the index:
> names(r) <- c("a","b")
> names(r)
[1] "a" "b"
> r["a"]
a
1
[Edit] Given that you will be applying min and max to each vector separately, I would suggest either using a matrix (if a and b will be the same length and the same data type) or data frame (if a and b will be the same length but can be different data types) or else use a list like in your last example (if they can be of differing lengths and data types).
> r <- data.frame(a=1:4, b=5:8)
> r
a b
1 1 5
2 2 6
3 3 7
4 4 8
> min(r$a)
[1] 1
> max(r$b)
[1] 8
If you want to return the output of your function to the Global Environment, you can use list2env, like in this example:
myfun <- function(x) { a <- 1:x
b <- 5:x
df <- data.frame(a=a, b=b)
newList <- list("my_obj1" = a, "my_obj2" = b, "myDF"=df)
list2env(newList ,.GlobalEnv)
}
myfun(3)
This function will create three objects in your Global Environment:
> my_obj1
[1] 1 2 3
> my_obj2
[1] 5 4 3
> myDF
a b
1 1 5
2 2 4
3 3 3
Lists seem perfect for this purpose. For example within the function you would have
x = desired_return_value_1 # (vector, matrix, etc)
y = desired_return_value_2 # (vector, matrix, etc)
returnlist = list(x,y...)
} # end of function
main program
x = returnlist[[1]]
y = returnlist[[2]]
Yes to your second and third questions -- that's what you need to do as you cannot have multiple 'lvalues' on the left of an assignment.
How about using assign?
functionReturningTwoValues <- function(a, b) {
assign(a, 1, pos=1)
assign(b, 2, pos=1)
}
You can pass the names of the variable you want to be passed by reference.
> functionReturningTwoValues('a', 'b')
> a
[1] 1
> b
[1] 2
If you need to access the existing values, the converse of assign is get.
[A]
If each of foo and bar is a single number, then there's nothing wrong with c(foo,bar); and you can also name the components: c(Foo=foo,Bar=bar). So you could access the components of the result 'res' as res[1], res[2]; or, in the named case, as res["Foo"], res["BAR"].
[B]
If foo and bar are vectors of the same type and length, then again there's nothing wrong with returning cbind(foo,bar) or rbind(foo,bar); likewise nameable. In the 'cbind' case, you would access foo and bar as res[,1], res[,2] or as res[,"Foo"], res[,"Bar"]. You might also prefer to return a dataframe rather than a matrix:
data.frame(Foo=foo,Bar=bar)
and access them as res$Foo, res$Bar. This would also work well if foo and bar were of the same length but not of the same type (e.g. foo is a vector of numbers, bar a vector of character strings).
[C]
If foo and bar are sufficiently different not to combine conveniently as above, then you shuld definitely return a list.
For example, your function might fit a linear model and
also calculate predicted values, so you could have
LM<-lm(....) ; foo<-summary(LM); bar<-LM$fit
and then you would return list(Foo=foo,Bar=bar) and then access the summary as res$Foo, the predicted values as res$Bar
source: http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/How-to-return-multiple-values-in-a-function-td858528.html
Year 2021 and this is something I frequently use.
tidyverse package has a function called lst that assigns name to the list elements when creating the list.
Post which I use list2env() to assign variable or use the list directly
library(tidyverse)
fun <- function(){
a<-1
b<-2
lst(a,b)
}
list2env(fun(), envir=.GlobalEnv)#unpacks list key-values to variable-values into the current environment
This is only for the sake of completeness and not because I personally prefer it. You can pipe %>% the result, evaluate it with curly braces {} and write variables to the parent environment using double-arrow <<-.
library(tidyverse)
functionReturningTwoValues() %>% {a <<- .[1]; b <<- .[2]}
UPDATE:
Your can also use the multiple assignment operator from the zeallot package:: %<-%
c(a, b) %<-% list(0, 1)
I will post a function that returns multiple objects by way of vectors:
Median <- function(X){
X_Sort <- sort(X)
if (length(X)%%2==0){
Median <- (X_Sort[(length(X)/2)]+X_Sort[(length(X)/2)+1])/2
} else{
Median <- X_Sort[(length(X)+1)/2]
}
return(Median)
}
That was a function I created to calculate the median. I know that there's an inbuilt function in R called median() but nonetheless I programmed it to build other function to calculate the quartiles of a numeric data-set by using the Median() function I just programmed. The Median() function works like this:
If a numeric vector X has an even number of elements (i.e., length(X)%%2==0), the median is calculated by averaging the elements sort(X)[length(X)/2] and sort(X)[(length(X)/2+1)].
If Xdoesn't have an even number of elements, the median is sort(X)[(length(X)+1)/2].
On to the QuartilesFunction():
QuartilesFunction <- function(X){
X_Sort <- sort(X) # Data is sorted in ascending order
if (length(X)%%2==0){
# Data number is even
HalfDN <- X_Sort[1:(length(X)/2)]
HalfUP <- X_Sort[((length(X)/2)+1):length(X)]
QL <- Median(HalfDN)
QU <- Median(HalfUP)
QL1 <- QL
QL2 <- QL
QU1 <- QU
QU2 <- QU
QL3 <- QL
QU3 <- QU
Quartiles <- c(QL1,QU1,QL2,QU2,QL3,QU3)
names(Quartiles) = c("QL (1)", "QU (1)", "QL (2)", "QU (2)","QL (3)", "QU (3)")
} else{ # Data number is odd
# Including the median
Half1DN <- X_Sort[1:((length(X)+1)/2)]
Half1UP <- X_Sort[(((length(X)+1)/2)):length(X)]
QL1 <- Median(Half1DN)
QU1 <- Median(Half1UP)
# Not including the median
Half2DN <- X_Sort[1:(((length(X)+1)/2)-1)]
Half2UP <- X_Sort[(((length(X)+1)/2)+1):length(X)]
QL2 <- Median(Half2DN)
QU2 <- Median(Half2UP)
# Methods (1) and (2) averaged
QL3 <- (QL1+QL2)/2
QU3 <- (QU1+QU2)/2
Quartiles <- c(QL1,QU1,QL2,QU2,QL3,QU3)
names(Quartiles) = c("QL (1)", "QU (1)", "QL (2)", "QU (2)","QL (3)", "QU (3)")
}
return(Quartiles)
}
This function returns the quartiles of a numeric vector by using three methods:
Discarding the median for the calculation of the quartiles when the number of elements of the numeric vector Xis odd.
Keeping the median for the calculation of the quartiles when the number of elements of the numeric vector Xis odd.
Averaging the results obtained by using methods 1 and 2.
When the number of elements in the numeric vector X is even, the three methods coincide.
The result of the QuartilesFunction() is a vector that depicts the first and third quartiles calculated by using the three methods outlined.
With R 3.6.1, I can do the following
fr2v <- function() { c(5,3) }
a_b <- fr2v()
(a_b[[1]]) # prints "5"
(a_b[[2]]) # prints "3"
To obtain multiple outputs from a function and keep them in the desired format you can save the outputs to your hard disk (in the working directory) from within the function and then load them from outside the function:
myfun <- function(x) {
df1 <- ...
df2 <- ...
save(df1, file = "myfile1")
save(df2, file = "myfile2")
}
load("myfile1")
load("myfile2")