loop and modular operation in R - r

I want to make such a loop using R.
for i=1 output will be
1
2
3
for i=2 output will be
2
3
1
for i=3 output will be
3
1
2
Namely the outputs are successive integers. It is just when the integer reaches 4 it returns 1 and goes on. I guess I must use modular operations, how can I do that?

If you have
a <- 1:3
for a value if i, you get the the sequence with
f <- function(i) (a+i+1) %% length(a) +1
f(1)
# [1] 1 2 3
f(2)
# [1] 2 3 1
f(3)
# [1] 3 1 2
f(4)
# [1] 1 2 3
Note that it starts over again at 4

This is my solution:
f <- function(i) { x <- i:(i+2) %% 3; x[x==0] <- 3; x }
for (i in 1:5) print(f(i))
Here is a second solution:
r <- matrix(c(3,1,2, 1,2,3, 2,3,1),3)
for (i in 1:5) print(r[i %% 3 + 1,])

Related

Avoid for loop when loop has an increment

In R, I try systematically to avoid "for" loops and use lapply() family instead.
But how to do so when an iteration contains an increment step ?
For example : is it possible to obtain the same result as below with a lapply approach ?
a <- c()
b <- c()
set.seed(1L) # required for reproducible data
for (i in 1:10){
a <- c(a, sample(c(0,1), 1))
b <- c(b, (paste(a, collapse = "-")))
}
data.frame(a, b)
> data.frame(a, b)
> a b
> 1 0 0
> 2 1 0-1
> 3 0 0-1-0
> 4 0 0-1-0-0
> 5 1 0-1-0-0-1
> 6 0 0-1-0-0-1-0
> 7 0 0-1-0-0-1-0-0
> 8 0 0-1-0-0-1-0-0-0
> 9 1 0-1-0-0-1-0-0-0-1
> 10 1 0-1-0-0-1-0-0-0-1-1
EDIT
My question was very badly redacted. The below new example is much more illustrative : is it anyway to use lapply family if each iteration is calculated from the previous one ?
a <- c()
b <- c()
for (i in 1:10){
a <- c(a, sample(c(0,1), 1))
b <- c(b, (paste(a, collapse = "-")))
}
data.frame(a, b)
> data.frame(a, b)
a b
1 0 0
2 1 0-1
3 0 0-1-0
4 1 0-1-0-1
5 1 0-1-0-1-1
6 1 0-1-0-1-1-1
7 1 0-1-0-1-1-1-1
8 0 0-1-0-1-1-1-1-0
9 1 0-1-0-1-1-1-1-0-1
10 1 0-1-0-1-1-1-1-0-1-1
For the sake of completeness, there is also the accumulate() function from the purrr package.
So, building on the answers of Sotos and ThomasIsCoding:
df <- data.frame(a = 1:10)
df$b <- purrr::accumulate(df$a, paste, sep = "-")
df
a b
1 1 1
2 2 1-2
3 3 1-2-3
4 4 1-2-3-4
5 5 1-2-3-4-5
6 6 1-2-3-4-5-6
7 7 1-2-3-4-5-6-7
8 8 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8
9 9 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9
10 10 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10
The difference to Reduce() is
that accumulate() is a function verb on its own (no additional parameter accumulate = TRUE required)
and that additional arguments like sep = "-" can be passed on to the mapped function which may help to avoid the creation of an anonymous function.
EDIT
If I understand correctly OP's edit of the question, the OP is asking if a for loop which computes a result iteratively can be replaced by lapply().
This is difficult to answer for me. Here are some thoughts and observations:
First, accumulate() still will work:
set.seed(1L) # required for reproducible data
df <- data.frame(a = sample(0:1, 10L, TRUE))
df$b <- purrr::accumulate(df$a, paste, sep = "-")
df
a b
1 0 0
2 1 0-1
3 0 0-1-0
4 0 0-1-0-0
5 1 0-1-0-0-1
6 0 0-1-0-0-1-0
7 0 0-1-0-0-1-0-0
8 0 0-1-0-0-1-0-0-0
9 1 0-1-0-0-1-0-0-0-1
10 1 0-1-0-0-1-0-0-0-1-1
This is possible because the computation of a can be pulled out off the loop as it does not depend on b.
IMHO, accumulate() and Reduce() do what the OP is looking for but is not called lapply(): They take the result of the previous iteration and combine it with the actual value, for instance
Reduce(`+`, 1:3)
returns the sum of 1, 2, and 3 by iteratively computing (((0 + 1) + 2) + 3). This can be visualised by using the accumulate parameter
Reduce(`+`, 1:3, accumulate = TRUE)
[1] 1 3 6
Second, there is a major difference between a for loop and functions of the lapply() family: lapply(X, FUN, ...) requires a function FUN to be called on each element of X. So, scoping rules for functions apply.
When we transplant the body of the loop into an anonymous function within lapply()
a <- c()
b <- c()
set.seed(1L) # required for reproducible data
lapply(1:10, function(i) {
a <- c(a, sample(c(0,1), 1))
b <- c(b, (paste(a, collapse = "-")))
})
we get
[[1]]
[1] "0"
[[2]]
[1] "1"
[[3]]
[1] "0"
[[4]]
[1] "0"
[[5]]
[1] "1"
[[6]]
[1] "0"
[[7]]
[1] "0"
[[8]]
[1] "0"
[[9]]
[1] "1"
[[10]]
[1] "1"
data.frame(a, b)
data frame with 0 columns and 0 rows data.frame(a, b)
Due to the scoping rules, a and b inside the function are considered as local to the function. No reference is made to a and b defined outside of the function.
This can be fixed by global assignment using the global assignment operator <<-:
a <- c()
b <- c()
set.seed(1L) # required for reproducible data
lapply(1:10, function(i) {
a <<- c(a, sample(c(0,1), 1))
b <<- c(b, (paste(a, collapse = "-")))
})
data.frame(a, b)
a b
1 0 0
2 1 0-1
3 0 0-1-0
4 0 0-1-0-0
5 1 0-1-0-0-1
6 0 0-1-0-0-1-0
7 0 0-1-0-0-1-0-0
8 0 0-1-0-0-1-0-0-0
9 1 0-1-0-0-1-0-0-0-1
10 1 0-1-0-0-1-0-0-0-1-1
However, global assignment is considered bad programming practice and should be avoided, see, e.g., the 6th Circle of Patrick Burns' The R Inferno and many questions on SO.
Third, the way the loop is written grows vectors in the loop. This also is considered bad practice as it requires to copy the data over and over again which may slow down tremendously with increasing size. See, e.g., the 2nd Circle of Patrick Burns' The R Inferno.
However, the original code
a <- c()
b <- c()
set.seed(1L) # required for reproducible data
for (i in 1:10) {
a <- c(a, sample(c(0,1), 1))
b <- c(b, (paste(a, collapse = "-")))
}
data.frame(a, b)
can be re-written as
a <- integer(10)
b <- character(10)
set.seed(1L) # required for reproducible data
for (i in seq_along(a)) {
a[i] <- sample(c(0,1), 1)
b[i] <- if (i == 1L) a[1] else paste(b[i-1], a[i], sep = "-")
}
data.frame(a, b)
Here, vectors are pre-allocated with the required size to hold the result. Elements to update are identified by subscripting.
Calculation of b[i] still depends only the value of the previous iteration b[i-1] and the actual value a[i] as requested by the OP.
Another way is to use Reduce with accumulate = TRUE, i.e.
df$new <- do.call(rbind, Reduce(paste, split(df, seq(nrow(df))), accumulate = TRUE))
which gives,
a new
1 1 1
2 2 1 2
3 3 1 2 3
4 4 1 2 3 4
5 5 1 2 3 4 5
6 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
You can use sapply (lapply would work too but it returns a list) and iterate over every value of a in df and create a sequence and paste the value together.
df <- data.frame(a = 1:10)
df$b <- sapply(df$a, function(x) paste(seq(x), collapse = "-"))
df
# a b
#1 1 1
#2 2 1-2
#3 3 1-2-3
#4 4 1-2-3-4
#5 5 1-2-3-4-5
#6 6 1-2-3-4-5-6
#7 7 1-2-3-4-5-6-7
#8 8 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8
#9 9 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9
#10 10 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10
If there could be non-numerical values in data on which we can not use seq like
df <- data.frame(a =letters[1:10])
In those case, we can use
df$b <- sapply(seq_along(df$a), function(x) paste(df$a[seq_len(x)], collapse = "-"))
df
# a b
#1 a a
#2 b a-b
#3 c a-b-c
#4 d a-b-c-d
#5 e a-b-c-d-e
#6 f a-b-c-d-e-f
#7 g a-b-c-d-e-f-g
#8 h a-b-c-d-e-f-g-h
#9 i a-b-c-d-e-f-g-h-i
#10 j a-b-c-d-e-f-g-h-i-j
Another way of using Reduce, different to the approach by #Sotos
df$b <- Reduce(function(...) paste(...,sep = "-"), df$a, accumulate = T)
such that
> df
a b
1 1 1
2 2 1-2
3 3 1-2-3
4 4 1-2-3-4
5 5 1-2-3-4-5
6 6 1-2-3-4-5-6
7 7 1-2-3-4-5-6-7
8 8 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8
9 9 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9
10 10 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10

How to increment vector in r by a fixed value and generate histogram of each iteration

I'm looking to iterate each value in the vector by 1 until a set value is reached and saving each iteration in a vector, and further iterations do not include values past the set value. So for instance say the set value is 3. Consider this vector, A <- c(1,1,2). Then the desired outcome should be:
Outcome:
1 1 2
2 2 3
3 3
Then I want to store each line in a vector so I can plot a histogram
so with each vector outcome including the original vector.
hist(c(1,1,2))
hist(c(2,2,3))
hist(c(3,3))
Potential code:
for (i in 1:length(A)) {
A[i] <- A + 1
}
# given values
A <- c(1, 1, 2)
value <- 3
# incrementations
out_lst <- lapply(A, function(x) x : 3)
# [[1]]
# [1] 1 2 3
#
# [[2]]
# [1] 1 2 3
#
# [[3]]
# [1] 2 3
# histograms
hist_lst <- list()
max_len <- max(sapply(out_lst, function(x) length(x)))
for(l in 1:max_len) {
hist_lst[[l]] <- sapply(out_lst, function(x) x[l])
}
hist_lst
# [[1]]
# [1] 1 1 2
#
# [[2]]
# [1] 2 2 3
#
# [[3]]
# [1] 3 3 NA
par(mfrow = c(1, length(hist_lst)))
invisible(lapply(hist_lst, hist))
You can use a while loop:
funfun=function(vec,max){
y=list()
i=1
while(length(vec)!=0){
y[[i]]=vec
vec=vec+1
vec=`attributes<-`(na.omit(replace(vec,vec>max,NA)),NULL)
i=i+1
}
y
}
funfun(c(1,1,2),3)
[[1]]
[1] 1 1 2
[[2]]
[1] 2 2 3
[[3]]
[1] 3 3
you can now do
sapply(funfun(c(1,1,2),3),hist)

Subsetting vector: how to programatically pass negative index safely?

Given a vector, say v = 1:10, one can remove elements from v using negative indexing, e.g. v[-1], v[-length(v)], v[-c(2,3)], to remove the first, last and 2nd/3rd element respectively.
I would like to split v by passing in a split index n, taking values 0 to length(v). The code below:
v1 <- v[1:n]
v2 <- v[-c(1:n)]
works perfectly fine except for n = 0. Now I know that 1:n is generally unsafe and should be replaced with seq_len(n), however, the assignment v2 <- v[-seq_len(0)] produces an empty vector.
Is there way of doing this 'safely' using the bracket subsetting notation? Otherwise I know how to do it using head and tails:
v1 <- head(v, n)
v2 <- tail(v, length(v) - n)
Relevant other q/as:
Complement of empty index vector is empty index vector
You could use an if() statement inside the brackets. For example, this will just return the whole vector if n is zero and remove the sequence 1:n otherwise.
x <- 1:10
n <- 0
x[ if(n == 0) TRUE else -seq_len(n) ] ## n == 0 is !n for the golfers
# [1] 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
n <- 5
x[ if(n == 0) TRUE else -seq_len(n) ]
# [1] 6 7 8 9 10
v = 1:10
n = 0; split(v, seq_along(v)/min(n,length(v)) <= 1)
#$`FALSE`
# [1] 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
n = 1; split(v, seq_along(v)/min(n,length(v)) <= 1)
#$`FALSE`
#[1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
#$`TRUE`
#[1] 1
n = 10; split(v, seq_along(v)/min(n,length(v)) <= 1)
#$`TRUE`
# [1] 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
n = -10; split(v, seq_along(v)/min(n,length(v)) <= 1)
#$`TRUE`
# [1] 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
n = 100; split(v, seq_along(v)/min(n,length(v)) <= 1)
#$`TRUE`
# [1] 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Further simplified by thelatemail in comment
split(v, seq_along(v) > n)

use loop to calculate basic sum in R

I set x=1:2,y=1:2,and I would like to display all x+y outcomes 2 3 4. But it just prints 2 and 4.
x<-0
for(y in 1:2){
x<-x+1
print(y+x)
}
# [1] 2
# [1] 4
If you want all combinations, you can do this with outer instead of an explicit loop:
x <- 1:2
y <- 1:2
outer(x, y, FUN='+')
## [,1] [,2]
## [1,] 2 3
## [2,] 3 4
You can then reduce this matrix to a vector with c and use unique to get unique entries:
unique(c(outer(x, y, FUN='+')))
## [1] 2 3 4
You can use expand.grid to get all combinations of x and y
dat <- expand.grid(x=x, y=y)
dat
x y
1 1 1
2 2 1
3 1 2
4 2 2
And then calculate the sums with rowSums
rowSums(dat)
[1] 2 3 3 4
Or the unique rowSums
unique(rowSums(dat))
[1] 2 3 4
If you need all the combinations then use,
i<-0
abc <- array()
for(x in 1:2){
for(y in 1:2){
i <- i + 1
abc[i] <- y+x
}
}
If you need only unique combinatinos,
unique(abc)

insert elements in a vector in R

I have a vector in R,
a = c(2,3,4,9,10,2,4,19)
let us say I want to efficiently insert the following vectors, b, and c,
b = c(2,1)
d = c(0,1)
right after the 3rd and 7th positions (the "4" entries), resulting in,
e = c(2,3,4,2,1,9,10,2,4,0,1,19)
How would I do this efficiently in R, without recursively using cbind or so.
I found a package R.basic but its not part of CRAN packages so I thought about using a supported version.
Try this:
result <- vector("list",5)
result[c(TRUE,FALSE)] <- split(a, cumsum(seq_along(a) %in% (c(3,7)+1)))
result[c(FALSE,TRUE)] <- list(b,d)
f <- unlist(result)
identical(f, e)
#[1] TRUE
EDIT: generalization to arbitrary number of insertions is straightforward:
insert.at <- function(a, pos, ...){
dots <- list(...)
stopifnot(length(dots)==length(pos))
result <- vector("list",2*length(pos)+1)
result[c(TRUE,FALSE)] <- split(a, cumsum(seq_along(a) %in% (pos+1)))
result[c(FALSE,TRUE)] <- dots
unlist(result)
}
> insert.at(a, c(3,7), b, d)
[1] 2 3 4 2 1 9 10 2 4 0 1 19
> insert.at(1:10, c(4,7,9), 11, 12, 13)
[1] 1 2 3 4 11 5 6 7 12 8 9 13 10
> insert.at(1:10, c(4,7,9), 11, 12)
Error: length(dots) == length(pos) is not TRUE
Note the bonus error checking if the number of positions and insertions do not match.
You can use the following function,
ins(a, list(b, d), pos=c(3, 7))
# [1] 2 3 4 2 1 9 10 2 4 0 1 4 19
where:
ins <- function(a, to.insert=list(), pos=c()) {
c(a[seq(pos[1])],
to.insert[[1]],
a[seq(pos[1]+1, pos[2])],
to.insert[[2]],
a[seq(pos[2], length(a))]
)
}
Here's another function, using Ricardo's syntax, Ferdinand's split and #Arun's interleaving trick from another question:
ins2 <- function(a,bs,pos){
as <- split(a,cumsum(seq(a)%in%(pos+1)))
idx <- order(c(seq_along(as),seq_along(bs)))
unlist(c(as,bs)[idx])
}
The advantage is that this should extend to more insertions. However, it may produce weird output when passed invalid arguments, e.g., with any(pos > length(a)) or length(bs)!=length(pos).
You can change the last line to unname(unlist(... if you don't want a's items named.
The straightforward approach:
b.pos <- 3
d.pos <- 7
c(a[1:b.pos],b,a[(b.pos+1):d.pos],d,a[(d.pos+1):length(a)])
[1] 2 3 4 2 1 9 10 2 4 0 1 19
Note the importance of parenthesis for the boundaries of the : operator.
After using Ferdinand's function, I tried to write my own and surprisingly it is far more efficient.
Here's mine :
insertElems = function(vect, pos, elems) {
l = length(vect)
j = 0
for (i in 1:length(pos)){
if (pos[i]==1)
vect = c(elems[j+1], vect)
else if (pos[i] == length(vect)+1)
vect = c(vect, elems[j+1])
else
vect = c(vect[1:(pos[i]-1+j)], elems[j+1], vect[(pos[i]+j):(l+j)])
j = j+1
}
return(vect)
}
tmp = c(seq(1:5))
insertElems(tmp, c(2,4,5), c(NA,NA,NA))
# [1] 1 NA 2 3 NA 4 NA 5
insert.at(tmp, c(2,4,5), c(NA,NA,NA))
# [1] 1 NA 2 3 NA 4 NA 5
And there's the benchmark result :
> microbenchmark(insertElems(tmp, c(2,4,5), c(NA,NA,NA)), insert.at(tmp, c(2,4,5), c(NA,NA,NA)), times = 10000)
Unit: microseconds
expr min lq mean median uq max neval
insertElems(tmp, c(2, 4, 5), c(NA, NA, NA)) 9.660 11.472 13.44247 12.68 13.585 1630.421 10000
insert.at(tmp, c(2, 4, 5), c(NA, NA, NA)) 58.866 62.791 70.36281 64.30 67.923 2475.366 10000
my code works even better for some cases :
> insert.at(tmp, c(1,4,5), c(NA,NA,NA))
# [1] 1 2 3 NA 4 NA 5 NA 1 2 3
# Warning message:
# In result[c(TRUE, FALSE)] <- split(a, cumsum(seq_along(a) %in% (pos))) :
# number of items to replace is not a multiple of replacement length
> insertElems(tmp, c(1,4,5), c(NA,NA,NA))
# [1] NA 1 2 3 NA 4 NA 5
Here's an alternative that uses append. It's fine for small vectors, but I can't imagine it being efficient for large vectors since a new vector is created upon each iteration of the loop (which is, obviously, bad). The trick is to reverse the vector of things that need to be inserted to get append to insert them in the correct place relative to the original vector.
a = c(2,3,4,9,10,2,4,19)
b = c(2,1)
d = c(0,1)
pos <- c(3, 7)
z <- setNames(list(b, d), pos)
z <- z[order(names(z), decreasing=TRUE)]
for (i in seq_along(z)) {
a <- append(a, z[[i]], after = as.numeric(names(z)[[i]]))
}
a
# [1] 2 3 4 2 1 9 10 2 4 0 1 19

Resources