I wrote a little function dictTranslator to translate multiple strings into abbreviations or group them into categories... I use a list as a dictionary and have a data frame column with abbreviations and I want a column category with the related category name.
dictTranslator <- function(x, dict) {
sapply(x, function(a) {
result <- names(which(sapply(dict, function(b) {a %in% b})))
if(identical(result, character(0))) {
warning(sprintf('NAs are introduced, "%s" not found!', a), call.=FALSE)
NA
} else {
result
}
})
}
my_dictionary <-
list(embryo=c('00h','01h','02h','e02','03h','04h','05h','06h','e06',
'08h','10h','12h','e12','14h','16h','18h','20h','e20'),
larvae=c('L1','L2','L3e','L3l'),
pupae=c('p1','p2','p3','p4','p5'),
adult=c('vm','m','vf','f'))
sample data:
df <- data.frame(abbreviation=rep(unlist(my_dictionary), 30000))
nrow(df)
# [1] 930000
system.time(df$category <- dictTranslator(df$abbreviation, my_dictionary))
The function works as expected but the performance is pretty slow (about a minute). Has anyone an idea to speed this up or is there maybe a better solution to this?
The result looks like:
> head(df,40)
abbreviation category
1 00h embryo
2 01h embryo
...
19 L1 larvae
20 L2 larvae
21 L3e larvae
22 L3l larvae
23 p1 pupae
24 p2 pupae
25 p3 pupae
26 p4 pupae
27 p5 pupae
28 vm adult
29 m adult
30 vf adult
31 f adult
32 00h embryo
33 01h embryo
34 02h embryo
35 e02 embryo
36 03h embryo
I would use match on a named vector, plus removal of the numbers generated by unlisting my_dictionary (for which I used sub). This way you can avoid costly loops.
x <- unlist(my_dictionary)
df$category <- sub('\\d+$', '', names(x)[match(df$abbreviation, x)])
Run time is less than a second:
df <- data.frame(abbreviation=rep(unlist(my_dictionary), 30000),
stringsAsFactors = FALSE)
system.time({df$category <- sub('\\d+$', '', names(x)[match(df$abbreviation, x)])})
# User System elapsed
# 0.634 0.003 0.639
I found this approach finished fastest on my machine. Note that the input data is character which results in speed gains when compared with factor input.
## non-factor sample data
my_dictionary <- unlist(my_dictionary)
df <- data.frame(abbreviation = rep(my_dictionary, 30000),
stringsAsFactors = FALSE)
system.time({
## names
result <- sapply(df$abbreviation, function(i) {
names(which(i == my_dictionary))
})
## discard numbers
df$category <- gsub("\\d", "", result)
})
# user system elapsed
# 3.993 0.000 3.991
As regards the code you provided (i.e., using multiple sapply loops in combination with %in%), keep in mind that %in% (or match) perform rather poorly when you are searching for a single entry (see e.g. this question).
I suggest another data format for dictionary, also use data.table library:
library(data.table)
md <- list()
for(i in 1:length(my_dictionary)) {
md[[i]] <- data.table(abbreviation = my_dictionary[[i]], category = names(my_dictionary[i]))
}
md <- rbindlist(md)
Then you simply join:
df <- data.table(df, key = 'abbreviation')
df <- df[md]
Comparison. I did ran a comparison of three approaches and here are the results:
Data preparation:
#docendo-discimus and #fdetsch use same data format
md1 <- unlist(my_dictionary)
df1 <- df
#danas.zuokas uses
library(data.table)
md2 <- list()
for(i in 1:length(my_dictionary)) {
md2[[i]] <- data.table(abbreviation = my_dictionary[[i]], category = names(my_dictionary[i]))
}
md2 <- rbindlist(md2)
df2 <- data.table(df, key = 'abbreviation')
Here are three functions to compare
f_dd <- function(x, y) { x$category <- sub('\\d+$', '', names(y)[match(x$abbreviation, y)]); x } #docendo-discimus
f_dz <- function(x, y) { x <- x[y]; x } #danas.zuokas
f_fd <- function(x, y) { x$category <- gsub('\\d', '', sapply(x$abbreviation, function(i) names(which(i == y)))); x } #fdetsch
And here are the results
library(microbenchmark)
microbenchmark(f_dd(df1, md1), f_fd(df1, md1), f_dz(df2, md2), times = 10)
Unit: milliseconds
expr min lq mean median uq max neval
f_dd(df1, md1) 1041.9195 1142.8361 1236.2033 1224.498 1266.9600 1469.7119 10
f_fd(df1, md1) 7106.6641 7417.5538 7924.3541 7868.716 8304.7760 8961.2615 10
f_dz(df2, md2) 35.6389 41.7524 77.2347 63.478 70.1699 183.9867 10
I will use a named vector for this:
a2c <- c ("larvae", "larvae", "larvae", "pupae", "pupae", ...)
names (a2e) <- c ('L1','L2','L3e','p1', 'p2', ...)
In your case you can easily build the vector doing:
a2c <- rep (names (my_dictionary), times = sapply (my_dictionary, length))
names (a2c) <- unlist (my_dictionary)
Make sure they match:
cbind (names (a2c), a2c)
And then:
df[,"category"] <- a2c[df$abbreviation]
In your example df$abbreviation is a factor so you may need to turn it into character
df[,"category"] <- a2c[as.character (df$abbreviation)]
Related
I am trying to identify likely last name from parts of name strings in various formats in R. What is the fastest way to identify the longest string match from the dataset of last names to a given name string (I'm using the wru surnames2010 dataset)?
I need the longest possibility rather than any possibility. I.e. in the example below the first string "scottcampbell" contains possible surnames "scott" and "campbell". I want to only return the longest of the possible matches, in this case only "campbell".
Reproduce example data:
library(wru)
data("surnames2010")
#filter out names under 4 characters
lnames <- surnames2010[nchar(as.character(surnames2010$surname))>3,]
testvec <- c("scottcampbell","mattbaker","tsmith","watkins","burnsmary","terri","frankrodriguez","neal")
Desired imagined function+result:
foo_longest_matches(testvec)
#Desired imagined result:
[1] "campbell" "baker" "smith" "watkins" "burns" "terri" "rodriguez" "neal")
You could use adist. Please note that you are doing more than 1million comparisons to obtain the longest. I would prefer you use a different method. The best so far that I have in mind is
a <- adist(toupper(testvec), surnames2010$surname, counts = TRUE)
b <- attr(a, "trafos")
d <- array(grepl("S|I", b) + nchar(gsub("(.)\\1++", "1",b, perl=TRUE)), dim(a)) * 10 + a
as.character(surnames2010$surname[max.col(-d)])
[1] "CAMPBELL" "BAKER" "SMITH" "WATKINS" "BURNS" "TERRI" "RODRIGUEZ" "NEAL"
benchmark:
longest <- function(testvec,namevec){
a <- adist(testvec, namevec, counts = TRUE)
b <- attr(a, "trafos")
d <- array(grepl("S|I", b) + nchar(gsub("(.)\\1++", "1",b, perl=TRUE)), dim(a)) * 10 + a
as.character(namevec[max.col(-d)])
}
EDIT: Was able to obtain a faster method(Not necessarily the fastest)
longest2 <- function(testvec,namevec){
a <- stack(sapply(namevec,grep,testvec,value = TRUE,simplify = FALSE))
tapply(as.character(a[, 2]), a[, 1], function(x) x[which.max(nchar(x))])[testvec]
}
microbenchmark::microbenchmark(longest(testvec,lnames$surname),longest2(testvec,lnames$surname),foo_longest_matches(testvec),times = 5)
Unit: seconds
expr min lq mean median uq max neval
longest(testvec, lnames$surname) 3.316550 3.984128 5.308339 6.265192 6.396348 6.579477 5
longest2(testvec, lnames$surname) 1.817059 1.917883 2.835354 3.350068 3.538278 3.553481 5
foo_longest_matches(testvec) 10.093179 10.325489 11.610619 10.756714 10.889326 15.988384 5
Not sure about fastest but here is a method to test:
library(wru)
data("surnames2010")
lnames <- surnames2010[nchar(as.character(surnames2010$surname))>3,]
testvec <- c("scottcampbell","mattbaker","tsmith","watkins","burnsmary","terri","frankrodriguez","neal")
lnames$surname <- tolower(lnames$surname)
testvec <- tolower(testvec)
foo_longest_matches <- function(string_vector) {
outdf <- c()
for (name in string_vector) {
print(name)
ting <- lnames[sapply(lnames$surname, function(x) grepl(x, name)),]
# you only care about the longest, remove the next line to get all matches
ting <- ting[which.max(nchar(ting$surname)),]
outdf <- rbind(outdf, ting)
}
return(outdf)
}
get_matches <- foo_longest_matches(testvec)
get_matches
# surname p_whi p_bla p_his p_asi p_oth
# 47 campbell 0.7366 0.2047 0.02490000 0.00530000 0.02840000
# 44 baker 0.7983 0.1444 0.02280000 0.00560000 0.02890000
# 1 smith 0.7090 0.2311 0.02400000 0.00500000 0.03080000
# 240 watkins 0.6203 0.3227 0.02090000 0.00420000 0.03200000
# 155 burns 0.8026 0.1406 0.02480000 0.00590000 0.02610000
# 110133 terri 0.7453 0.1801 0.01243333 0.01243333 0.04973333
# 9 rodriguez 0.0475 0.0054 0.93770000 0.00570000 0.00360000
# 337 neal 0.6210 0.3184 0.02160000 0.00600000 0.03290000
I have a list of data frames with different sets of columns. I would like to combine them by rows into one data frame. I use plyr::rbind.fill to do that. I am looking for something that would do this more efficiently, but is similar to the answer given here
require(plyr)
set.seed(45)
sample.fun <- function() {
nam <- sample(LETTERS, sample(5:15))
val <- data.frame(matrix(sample(letters, length(nam)*10,replace=TRUE),nrow=10))
setNames(val, nam)
}
ll <- replicate(1e4, sample.fun())
rbind.fill(ll)
UPDATE: See this updated answer instead.
UPDATE (eddi): This has now been implemented in version 1.8.11 as a fill argument to rbind. For example:
DT1 = data.table(a = 1:2, b = 1:2)
DT2 = data.table(a = 3:4, c = 1:2)
rbind(DT1, DT2, fill = TRUE)
# a b c
#1: 1 1 NA
#2: 2 2 NA
#3: 3 NA 1
#4: 4 NA 2
FR #4790 added now - rbind.fill (from plyr) like functionality to merge list of data.frames/data.tables
Note 1:
This solution uses data.table's rbindlist function to "rbind" list of data.tables and for this, be sure to use version 1.8.9 because of this bug in versions < 1.8.9.
Note 2:
rbindlist when binding lists of data.frames/data.tables, as of now, will retain the data type of the first column. That is, if a column in first data.frame is character and the same column in the 2nd data.frame is "factor", then, rbindlist will result in this column being a character. So, if your data.frame consisted of all character columns, then, your solution with this method will be identical to the plyr method. If not, the values will still be the same, but some columns will be character instead of factor. You'll have to convert to "factor" yourself after. Hopefully this behaviour will change in the future.
And now here's using data.table (and benchmarking comparison with rbind.fill from plyr):
require(data.table)
rbind.fill.DT <- function(ll) {
# changed sapply to lapply to return a list always
all.names <- lapply(ll, names)
unq.names <- unique(unlist(all.names))
ll.m <- rbindlist(lapply(seq_along(ll), function(x) {
tt <- ll[[x]]
setattr(tt, 'class', c('data.table', 'data.frame'))
data.table:::settruelength(tt, 0L)
invisible(alloc.col(tt))
tt[, c(unq.names[!unq.names %chin% all.names[[x]]]) := NA_character_]
setcolorder(tt, unq.names)
}))
}
rbind.fill.PLYR <- function(ll) {
rbind.fill(ll)
}
require(microbenchmark)
microbenchmark(t1 <- rbind.fill.DT(ll), t2 <- rbind.fill.PLYR(ll), times=10)
# Unit: seconds
# expr min lq median uq max neval
# t1 <- rbind.fill.DT(ll) 10.8943 11.02312 11.26374 11.34757 11.51488 10
# t2 <- rbind.fill.PLYR(ll) 121.9868 134.52107 136.41375 184.18071 347.74724 10
# for comparison change t2 to data.table
setattr(t2, 'class', c('data.table', 'data.frame'))
data.table:::settruelength(t2, 0L)
invisible(alloc.col(t2))
setcolorder(t2, unique(unlist(sapply(ll, names))))
identical(t1, t2) # [1] TRUE
It should be noted that plyr's rbind.fill edges past this particular data.table solution until list size of about 500.
Benchmarking plot:
Here's the plot on runs with list length of data.frames with seq(1000, 10000, by=1000). I've used microbenchmark with 10 reps on each of these different list lengths.
Benchmarking gist:
Here's the gist for benchmarking, in case anyone wants to replicate the results.
Now that rbindlist (and rbind) for data.table has improved functionality and speed with the recent changes/commits in v1.9.3 (development version), and dplyr has a faster version of plyr's rbind.fill, named rbind_all, this answer of mine seems a bit too outdated.
Here's the relevant NEWS entry for rbindlist:
o 'rbindlist' gains 'use.names' and 'fill' arguments and is now implemented entirely in C. Closes #5249
-> use.names by default is FALSE for backwards compatibility (doesn't bind by
names by default)
-> rbind(...) now just calls rbindlist() internally, except that 'use.names'
is TRUE by default, for compatibility with base (and backwards compatibility).
-> fill by default is FALSE. If fill is TRUE, use.names has to be TRUE.
-> At least one item of the input list has to have non-null column names.
-> Duplicate columns are bound in the order of occurrence, like base.
-> Attributes that might exist in individual items would be lost in the bound result.
-> Columns are coerced to the highest SEXPTYPE, if they are different, if/when possible.
-> And incredibly fast ;).
-> Documentation updated in much detail. Closes DR #5158.
So, I've benchmarked the newer (and faster versions) on relatively bigger data below.
New Benchmark:
We'll create a total of 10,000 data.tables with columns ranging from 200-300 with the total number of columns after binding to be 500.
Functions to create data:
require(data.table) ## 1.9.3 commit 1267
require(dplyr) ## commit 1504 devel
set.seed(1L)
names = paste0("V", 1:500)
foo <- function() {
cols = sample(200:300, 1)
data = setDT(lapply(1:cols, function(x) sample(10)))
setnames(data, sample(names)[1:cols])
}
n = 10e3L
ll = vector("list", n)
for (i in 1:n) {
.Call("Csetlistelt", ll, i, foo())
}
And here are the timings:
## Updated timings on data.table v1.9.5 - three consecutive runs:
system.time(ans1 <- rbindlist(ll, fill=TRUE))
# user system elapsed
# 1.993 0.106 2.107
system.time(ans1 <- rbindlist(ll, fill=TRUE))
# user system elapsed
# 1.644 0.092 1.744
system.time(ans1 <- rbindlist(ll, fill=TRUE))
# user system elapsed
# 1.297 0.088 1.389
## dplyr's rbind_all - Timings for three consecutive runs
system.time(ans2 <- rbind_all(ll))
# user system elapsed
# 9.525 0.121 9.761
# user system elapsed
# 9.194 0.112 9.370
# user system elapsed
# 8.665 0.081 8.780
identical(ans1, setDT(ans2)) # [1] TRUE
There is still something to be gained if you parallelize both rbind.fill and rbindlist.
The results are done with data.table version 1.8.8 as version 1.8.9 got bricked when I tried it with the parallelized function. So the results aren't identical between data.table and plyr, but they are identical within data.table or plyr solution. Meaning parallel plyr matches to unparallel plyr, and vice versa.
Here's the benchmark/scripts. The parallel.rbind.fill.DT looks horrible, but that's the fastest one I could pull.
require(plyr)
require(data.table)
require(ggplot2)
require(rbenchmark)
require(parallel)
# data.table::rbindlist solutions
rbind.fill.DT <- function(ll) {
all.names <- lapply(ll, names)
unq.names <- unique(unlist(all.names))
rbindlist(lapply(seq_along(ll), function(x) {
tt <- ll[[x]]
setattr(tt, 'class', c('data.table', 'data.frame'))
data.table:::settruelength(tt, 0L)
invisible(alloc.col(tt))
tt[, c(unq.names[!unq.names %chin% all.names[[x]]]) := NA_character_]
setcolorder(tt, unq.names)
}))
}
parallel.rbind.fill.DT <- function(ll, cluster=NULL){
all.names <- lapply(ll, names)
unq.names <- unique(unlist(all.names))
if(is.null(cluster)){
ll.m <- rbindlist(lapply(seq_along(ll), function(x) {
tt <- ll[[x]]
setattr(tt, 'class', c('data.table', 'data.frame'))
data.table:::settruelength(tt, 0L)
invisible(alloc.col(tt))
tt[, c(unq.names[!unq.names %chin% all.names[[x]]]) := NA_character_]
setcolorder(tt, unq.names)
}))
}else{
cores <- length(cluster)
sequ <- as.integer(seq(1, length(ll), length.out = cores+1))
Call <- paste(paste("list", seq(cores), sep=""), " = ll[", c(1, sequ[2:cores]+1), ":", sequ[2:(cores+1)], "]", sep="", collapse=", ")
ll <- eval(parse(text=paste("list(", Call, ")")))
rbindlist(clusterApply(cluster, ll, function(ll, unq.names){
rbindlist(lapply(seq_along(ll), function(x, ll, unq.names) {
tt <- ll[[x]]
setattr(tt, 'class', c('data.table', 'data.frame'))
data.table:::settruelength(tt, 0L)
invisible(alloc.col(tt))
tt[, c(unq.names[!unq.names %chin% colnames(tt)]) := NA_character_]
setcolorder(tt, unq.names)
}, ll=ll, unq.names=unq.names))
}, unq.names=unq.names))
}
}
# plyr::rbind.fill solutions
rbind.fill.PLYR <- function(ll) {
rbind.fill(ll)
}
parallel.rbind.fill.PLYR <- function(ll, cluster=NULL, magicConst=400){
if(is.null(cluster) | ceiling(length(ll)/magicConst) < length(cluster)){
rbind.fill(ll)
}else{
cores <- length(cluster)
sequ <- as.integer(seq(1, length(ll), length.out = ceiling(length(ll)/magicConst)))
Call <- paste(paste("list", seq(cores), sep=""), " = ll[", c(1, sequ[2:(length(sequ)-1)]+1), ":", sequ[2:length(sequ)], "]", sep="", collapse=", ")
ll <- eval(parse(text=paste("list(", Call, ")")))
rbind.fill(parLapply(cluster, ll, rbind.fill))
}
}
# Function to generate sample data of varying list length
set.seed(45)
sample.fun <- function() {
nam <- sample(LETTERS, sample(5:15))
val <- data.frame(matrix(sample(letters, length(nam)*10,replace=TRUE),nrow=10))
setNames(val, nam)
}
ll <- replicate(10000, sample.fun())
cl <- makeCluster(4, type="SOCK")
clusterEvalQ(cl, library(data.table))
clusterEvalQ(cl, library(plyr))
benchmark(t1 <- rbind.fill.PLYR(ll),
t2 <- rbind.fill.DT(ll),
t3 <- parallel.rbind.fill.PLYR(ll, cluster=cl, 400),
t4 <- parallel.rbind.fill.DT(ll, cluster=cl),
replications=5)
stopCluster(cl)
# Results for rbinding 10000 dataframes
# done with 4 cores, i5 3570k and 16gb memory
# test reps elapsed relative
# rbind.fill.PLYR 5 321.80 16.682
# rbind.fill.DT 5 26.10 1.353
# parallel.rbind.fill.PLYR 5 28.00 1.452
# parallel.rbind.fill.DT 5 19.29 1.000
# checking are results equal
t1 <- as.matrix(t1)
t2 <- as.matrix(t2)
t3 <- as.matrix(t3)
t4 <- as.matrix(t4)
t1 <- t1[order(t1[, 1], t1[, 2]), ]
t2 <- t2[order(t2[, 1], t2[, 2]), ]
t3 <- t3[order(t3[, 1], t3[, 2]), ]
t4 <- t4[order(t4[, 1], t4[, 2]), ]
identical(t2, t4) # TRUE
identical(t1, t3) # TRUE
identical(t1, t2) # FALSE, mismatch between plyr and data.table
As you can see parallesizing rbind.fill made it comparable to data.table, and you could get marginal increase of speed by parallesizing data.table even with this low of a dataframe count.
simply dplyr::bind_rows will do the job, as
library(dplyr)
merged_list <- bind_rows(ll)
#check it
> nrow(merged_list)
[1] 100000
> ncol(merged_list)
[1] 26
Time taken
> system.time(merged_list <- bind_rows(ll))
user system elapsed
0.29 0.00 0.28
Suppose I have the following named numeric vector:
a <- 1:8
names(a) <- rep(c('I', 'II'), each = 4)
How can I convert this vector to a list of length 2 (shown below)?
a.list
# $I
# [1] 1 2 3 4
# $II
# [1] 5 6 7 8
Note that as.list(a) is not what I'm looking for.
My very unsatisfying (and slow for large vectors) solution is:
names.uniq <- unique(names(a))
a.list <- setNames(vector('list', length(names.uniq)), names.uniq)
for(i in 1:length(names.uniq)) {
names.i <- names.uniq[i]
a.i <- a[names(a)==names.i]
a.list[[names.i]] <- unname(a.i)
}
Thank you in advance for your help,
Devin
Like I said in the comment, you can use split to create a list.
a.list <- split(a, names(a))
a.list <- lapply(a.list, unname)
A one-liner would be
a.list <- lapply(split(a, names(a)), unname)
#$I
#[1] 1 2 3 4
#
#$II
#[1] 5 6 7 8
EDIT.
Then, thelatemail posted a simplification of this in his comment. I've timed it using Devin King's way and it's not only simpler it's also 25% faster.
a.list <- split(unname(a),names(a))
I'd suggest looking at packages that excel at working with aggregating large amounts of data, like the data.table package. With data.table, you could do:
a <- 1:5e7
names(a) <- c(rep('I',1e7), rep('II',1e7), rep('III',1e7),
rep('IV',1e7), rep('V',1e7))
library(data.table)
temp <- data.table(names(a), a)[, list(V2 = list(a)), V1]
a.list <- setNames(temp[["V2"]], temp[["V1"]])
Here are some functions to test the various options out with:
myFun <- function(invec) {
x <- data.table(names(invec), invec)[, list(V2 = list(invec)), V1]
setNames(x[["V2"]], x[["V1"]])
}
rui1 <- function(invec) {
a.list <- split(invec, names(invec))
lapply(a.list, unname)
}
rui2 <- function(invec) {
split(unname(invec), names(invec))
}
op <- function(invec) {
names.uniq <- unique(names(invec))
a.list <- setNames(vector('list', length(names.uniq)), names.uniq)
for(i in 1:length(names.uniq)) {
names.i <- names.uniq[i]
a.i <- a[names(invec) == names.i]
a.list[[names.i]] <- unname(a.i)
}
a.list
}
And the results of microbenchmark on 10 replications:
library(microbenchmark)
microbenchmark(myFun(a), rui1(a), rui2(a), op(a), times = 10)
# Unit: milliseconds
# expr min lq mean median uq max neval
# myFun(a) 698.1553 768.6802 932.6525 934.6666 1056.558 1168.889 10
# rui1(a) 2967.4927 3097.6168 3199.9378 3185.1826 3319.453 3413.185 10
# rui2(a) 2152.0307 2285.4515 2372.9896 2362.7783 2426.821 2643.033 10
# op(a) 2672.4703 2872.5585 2896.7779 2901.7979 2971.782 3039.663 10
Also, note that in testing the different solutions, you might want to consider other scenarios, for instance, cases where you expect to have lots of different names. In that case, your for loop slows down significantly. Try, for example, the above functions with the following data:
set.seed(1)
b <- sample(100, 5e7, TRUE)
names(b) <- sample(c(letters, LETTERS, 1:100), 5e7, TRUE)
Testing Rui Barradas' solution vs my original solution on a larger vector
a <- 1:5e7
names(a) <- c(rep('I',1e7), rep('II',1e7), rep('III',1e7), rep('IV',1e7), rep('V',1e7))
Rui's
st1 <- Sys.time()
a.list <- split(a, names(a))
a.list <- lapply(a.list, unname)
Sys.time() - st1
Time difference of 2.560906 secs
Mine
st1 <- Sys.time()
names.uniq <- unique(names(a))
a.list <- setNames(vector('list', length(names.uniq)), names.uniq)
for(i in 1:length(names.uniq)) {
names.i <- names.uniq[i]
a.i <- a[names(a)==names.i]
a.list[[names.i]] <- unname(a.i)
}
Sys.time() - st1
Time difference of 2.712066 secs
thelatemail's
st1 <- Sys.time()
a.list <- split(unname(a),names(a))
Sys.time() - st1
Time difference of 1.62851 secs
To handle also unnamed vectors, use then:
vec_to_list <- function(vec) {
if (is.null(names(vec))) names(vec) <- 1:length(vec)
split(unname(vec), names(vec))
}
Hello everyone,
I am working with large list, which contains lists. Each of the sub lists contains n elements. I always want to get the 3rd one, e.g.
l = list()
l[[1]] = list(A=runif(1), B=runif(1), C=runif(1))
l[[2]] = list(A=runif(1), B=runif(1), C=runif(1))
l[[3]] = list(A=runif(1), B=runif(1), C=runif(1))
res = sapply(l, function(x) x$C)
res = sapply(l, function(x) x[[3]]) #alternative
But my list contains several thousands of elements and I am performing this operation a lot of times. So, is there a faster way to do the operation above?
Beste regards,
Mario
If you do this mulitple times, then it would be better to convert your list to an easier structure like data.table.
library(data.table)
DT=rbindlist(l);
res = DT$C
# or if you prefer the 3rd element, not necessarily called 'C' then:
res = DT[[3]] # or DT[,C] which might be faster. Please check #richard-scriven comment
Alternatively if you want to keep base R you could use rbind
res = do.call(rbind.data.frame, l)$C # or [[3]]
Would this make things easier?
UPDATE
Here are some benchmarks showing different solutions to the problem:
preparations:
library(data.table)
library(microbenchmark)
# creating a list and filling it with items
nbr = 1e5;
l = vector("list",nbr)
for (i in 1:nbr) {
l[[i]] = list(A=runif(1), B=runif(1), C=runif(1))
}
# creating data.frame and data.table versions
DT <- rbindlist(l)
DF <- data.frame(rbindlist(l))
benchmarking:
# doing the benchmarking
op <-
microbenchmark(
LAPPLY.1 = lapply(l, function(x) x$C),
LAPPLY.2 = lapply(l, `[`, "C"),
LAPPLY.3 = lapply(l, `[[`, "C"),
SAPPLY.1 = sapply(l, function(x) x$C),
SAPPLY.2 = sapply(l, function(x) x[[3]]),
SAPPLY.3 = sapply(l, `[[`, 3),
DT.1 = rbindlist(l)$C,
DT.2 = DT$C,
DF.2 = DF$C,
times = 100
)
results:
op
## Unit: microseconds
## expr min lq mean median uq max neval
## LAPPLY.1 124088 142390 161672 154415 163240 396761 100
## LAPPLY.2 111397 134745 156012 150062 165229 364539 100
## LAPPLY.3 66965 71608 82975 77329 84949 323041 100
## SAPPLY.1 133220 149093 166653 159222 172495 311857 100
## SAPPLY.2 105917 119533 137990 133364 139216 346759 100
## SAPPLY.3 70391 74726 81910 80520 85792 110062 100
## DT.1 46895 48943 49113 49178 49391 51377 100
## DT.2 8 18 37 47 49 58 100
## DF.2 7 13 33 40 42 82 100
(1) In general it would be best to use a table like structure like data.frame or data.table in the first place - selecting columns from those costs the least of time.
(2) If this is not possible it is better to first turn the list into a data.frame or data.table to than extract the values in one single operation.
(3) Interestingly using sapply or lapply with the base R (optimized) [[-function results in process times that are only twice as bad as using rbind and than extracting the values as column.
I have a large table consisting of several genes (newID) with associated values. Some genes (newID) are unique, some have several instances (appear in multiple rows). How to exclude from the table those with only one occurrence (row)? IN the example below, only the last row would be removed as it is unique.
head(exons.s, 10)
Row.names exonID pvalue log2fold.5_t.GFP_t. newID
1 ENSMUSG00000000001_Gnai3:E001 E001 0.3597070 0.029731989 ENSMUSG00000000001
2 ENSMUSG00000000001_Gnai3:E002 E002 0.6515167 0.028984837 ENSMUSG00000000001
3 ENSMUSG00000000001_Gnai3:E003 E003 0.8957798 0.009665072 ENSMUSG00000000001
4 ENSMUSG00000000001_Gnai3:E004 E004 0.5308266 -0.059273822 ENSMUSG00000000001
5 ENSMUSG00000000001_Gnai3:E005 E005 0.4507640 -0.061276835 ENSMUSG00000000001
6 ENSMUSG00000000001_Gnai3:E006 E006 0.5147357 -0.068357886 ENSMUSG00000000001
7 ENSMUSG00000000001_Gnai3:E007 E007 0.5190718 -0.063959853 ENSMUSG00000000001
8 ENSMUSG00000000001_Gnai3:E008 E008 0.8999434 0.032186993 ENSMUSG00000000001
9 ENSMUSG00000000001_Gnai3:E009 E009 0.5039369 0.133313175 ENSMUSG00000000001
10 ENSMUSG00000000003_Pbsn:E001 E001 NA NA ENSMUSG00000000003
> dim(exons.s)
[1] 234385 5
With plyr I would go about it like this:
## remove single exon genes:
multEx <- function(df){
if (nrow(df) > 1){return(df)}
}
genes.mult.ex <- ddply(exons.s , .(newID), multEx, .parallel=TRUE)
But this is very slow. I thought this would be easy with data.table but I can't figure it out:
exons.s <- data.table(exons.s, key="newID")
x.dt.out <- exons.s[, lapply(.SD, multEx), by=newID]
I am new to data.table so any pointers in the right direction would be welcome.
Create a column giving the number of rows in each group, then subset:
exons.s[,n:=.N,by=newID]
exons.s[n>1]
There is a simpler and more effiecent way of doing this using the duplicated() function instead of counting the group sizes.
First we need to generate a test dastaset:
# Generate test datasets
smallNumberSampled <- 1e3
largeNumberSampled <- 1e6
smallDataset <- data.table(id=paste('id', 1:smallNumberSampled, sep='_'), value1=sample(x = 1:26, size = smallNumberSampled, replace = T), value2=letters[sample(x = 1:26, size = smallNumberSampled, replace = T)])
largeDataset <- data.table(id=paste('id', 1:largeNumberSampled, sep='_'), value1=sample(x = 1:26, size = largeNumberSampled, replace = T), value2=letters[sample(x = 1:26, size = largeNumberSampled, replace = T)])
# add 2 % duplicated rows:
smallDataset <- rbind(smallDataset, smallDataset[sample(x = 1:nrow(smallDataset), size = nrow(smallDataset)* 0.02)])
largeDataset <- rbind(largeDataset, largeDataset[sample(x = 1:nrow(largeDataset), size = nrow(largeDataset)* 0.02)])
Then we implement the three solutions as functions:
# Original suggestion
getDuplicatedRows_Count <- function(dt, columnName) {
dt[,n:=.N,by=columnName]
return( dt[n>1] )
}
# Duplicated using subsetting
getDuplicatedRows_duplicated_subset <- function(dt, columnName) {
# .. means "look up one level"
return( dt[which( duplicated(dt[, ..columnName]) | duplicated(dt[, ..columnName], fromLast = T) ),] )
}
# Duplicated using the "by" argument to avoid copying
getDuplicatedRows_duplicated_by <- function(dt, columnName) {
return( dt[which( duplicated(dt[,by=columnName]) | duplicated(dt[,by=columnName], fromLast = T) ),] )
}
Then we test that they give the same results
results1 <- getDuplicatedRows_Count (smallDataset, 'id')
results2 <- getDuplicatedRows_duplicated_subset(smallDataset, 'id')
results3 <- getDuplicatedRows_duplicated_by(smallDataset, 'id')
> identical(results1, results2)
[1] TRUE
> identical(results2, results3)
[1] TRUE
And the we time the average performance of the 3 solutions:
# Small dataset
> system.time( temp <- replicate(n = 100, expr = getDuplicatedRows_Count (smallDataset, 'id')) ) / 100
user system elapsed
0.00176 0.00007 0.00186
> system.time( temp <- replicate(n = 100, expr = getDuplicatedRows_duplicated_subset(smallDataset, 'id')) ) / 100
user system elapsed
0.00206 0.00005 0.00221
> system.time( temp <- replicate(n = 100, expr = getDuplicatedRows_duplicated_by (smallDataset, 'id')) ) / 100
user system elapsed
0.00141 0.00003 0.00147
#Large dataset
> system.time( temp <- replicate(n = 100, expr = getDuplicatedRows_Count (largeDataset, 'id')) ) / 100
user system elapsed
0.28571 0.01980 0.31022
> system.time( temp <- replicate(n = 100, expr = getDuplicatedRows_duplicated_subset(largeDataset, 'id')) ) / 100
user system elapsed
0.24386 0.03596 0.28243
> system.time( temp <- replicate(n = 100, expr = getDuplicatedRows_duplicated_by (largeDataset, 'id')) ) / 100
user system elapsed
0.22080 0.03918 0.26203
Which shows that the duplicated() approach scales better, especially if the "by=" option is used.
UPDATE: 21 nov 2014. Test of identical output (As suggested by Arun - thanks) identified a problem with me using data.table v 1.9.2 where duplicated's fromLast does not work. I updated to v 1.9.4 and redid the analysis and now the differences is much smaller.
UPDATE: 26 nov 2014. Included and tested the "by=" approach to extract column from the data.table (as suggested by Arun so credit goes there). Furthermore the test of runtime was averaged over 100 test to ensure correctness of result.