I have a large data table Divvy (over 2.4 million records) that appears as such (some columns removed):
X trip_id from_station_id.x to_station_id.x
1 1109420 94 69
2 1109421 69 216
3 1109427 240 245
4 1109431 113 94
5 1109433 127 332
3 1109429 240 245
I would like to find the number of trips from each station to each opposing station. So for example,
From X To Y Sum
94 69 1
240 245 2
etc. and then join it back to the inital table using dplyr to make something like the below and then limit it to distinct from_station_id/to_combos, which I'll use to map routes (I have lat/long for each station):
X trip_id from_station_id.x to_station_id.x Sum
1 1109420 94 69 1
2 1109421 69 216 1
3 1109427 240 245 2
4 1109431 113 94 1
5 1109433 127 332 1
3 1109429 240 245 1
I successfully used count to get some of this, such as:
count(Divvy$from_station_id.x==94 & Divvy$to_station_id.x == 69)
x freq
1 FALSE 2454553
2 TRUE 81
But this is obviously labor intensive as there are 300 unique stations, so well over 44k poss combinations. I created a helper table thinking I could loop it.
n <- select(Divvy, from_station_id.y )
from_station_id.x
1 94
2 69
3 240
4 113
5 113
6 127
count(Divvy$from_station_id.x==n[1,1] & Divvy$to_station_id.x == n[2,1])
x freq
1 FALSE 2454553
2 TRUE 81
I felt like a loop such as
output <- matrix(ncol=variables, nrow=iterations)
output <- matrix()
for(i in 1:n)(output[i, count(Divvy$from_station_id.x==n[1,1] & Divvy$to_station_id.x == n[2,1]))
should work but come to think of it that will still only return 300 rows, not 44k, so it would have to then loop back and do n[2] & n[1] etc...
I felt like there might also be a quicker dplyr solution that would let me return a count of each combo and append it directly without the extra steps/table creation, but I haven't found it.
I'm newer to R and I have searched around/think I'm close, but I can't quite connect that last dot of joining that result to Divvy. Any help appreciated.
#Here is the data.table solution, which is useful if you are working with large data:
library(data.table)
setDT(DF)[,sum:=.N,by=.(from_station_id.x,to_station_id.x)][] #DF is your dataframe
X trip_id from_station_id.x to_station_id.x sum
1: 1 1109420 94 69 1
2: 2 1109421 69 216 1
3: 3 1109427 240 245 2
4: 4 1109431 113 94 1
5: 5 1109433 127 332 1
6: 3 1109429 240 245 2
Since you said "limit it to distinct from_station_id/to_combos", the following code seems to provide what you are after. Your data is called mydf.
library(dplyr)
group_by(mydf, from_station_id.x, to_station_id.x) %>%
count(from_station_id.x, to_station_id.x)
# from_station_id.x to_station_id.x n
#1 69 216 1
#2 94 69 1
#3 113 94 1
#4 127 332 1
#5 240 245 2
I'm not entirely sure that's what you're looking for as a result, but this calculates the number of trips having the same origin and destination. Feel free to comment and let me know if that's not quite what you expect as a final result.
dat <- read.table(text="X trip_id from_station_id.x to_station_id.x
1 1109420 94 69
2 1109421 69 216
3 1109427 240 245
4 1109431 113 94
5 1109433 127 332
3 1109429 240 245", header=TRUE)
dat$from.to <- paste(dat$from_station_id.x, dat$to_station_id.x, sep="-")
freqs <- as.data.frame(table(dat$from.to))
names(freqs) <- c("from.to", "sum")
dat2 <- merge(dat, freqs, by="from.to")
dat2 <- dat2[order(dat2$trip_id),-1]
Results
dat2
# X trip_id from_station_id.x to_station_id.x sum
# 6 1 1109420 94 69 1
# 5 2 1109421 69 216 1
# 3 3 1109427 240 245 2
# 4 3 1109429 240 245 2
# 1 4 1109431 113 94 1
# 2 5 1109433 127 332 1
Related
I have a dataframe containing location data of different animals. Each animal has a unique id and each observation has a time stamp and some further metrics of the location observation. See a subset of the data below. The subset contains the first two observations of each id.
> sub
id lc lon lat a b c date
1 111 3 -79.2975 25.6996 414 51 77 2019-04-01 22:08:50
2 111 3 -79.2975 25.6996 414 51 77 2019-04-01 22:08:50
3 222 3 -79.2970 25.7001 229 78 72 2019-01-07 20:36:27
4 222 3 -79.2970 25.7001 229 78 72 2019-01-07 20:36:27
5 333 B -80.8211 24.8441 11625 6980 37 2018-12-17 20:45:05
6 333 3 -80.8137 24.8263 155 100 69 2018-12-17 21:00:43
7 444 3 -80.4535 25.0848 501 33 104 2019-10-20 19:44:16
8 444 1 -80.8086 24.8364 6356 126 87 2020-01-18 20:32:28
9 555 3 -77.7211 24.4887 665 45 68 2020-07-12 21:09:17
10 555 3 -77.7163 24.4897 285 129 130 2020-07-12 21:10:35
11 666 2 -77.7221 24.4902 1129 75 66 2020-07-12 21:09:02
12 666 2 -77.7097 24.4905 314 248 164 2020-07-12 21:11:37
13 777 3 -77.7133 24.4820 406 58 110 2020-06-20 11:18:18
14 777 3 -77.7218 24.4844 170 93 107 2020-06-20 11:51:06
15 888 3 -79.2975 25.6996 550 34 79 2017-11-25 19:10:45
16 888 3 -79.2975 25.6996 550 34 79 2017-11-25 19:10:45
However, I need to do some data housekeeping, i.e. I need to include the day/time and location each animal was released. And after that I need to filter out observations for each animal that occurred pre-release of the corresponding animal.
I have a an additional dataframe that contains the necessary release metadata:
> stack
id release lat lon
1 888 2017-11-27 14:53 25.69201 -79.31534
2 333 2019-01-31 16:09 25.68896 -79.31326
3 222 2019-02-02 15:55 25.70051 -79.31393
4 111 2019-04-02 10:43 25.68534 -79.31341
5 444 2020-03-13 15:04 24.42892 -77.69518
6 666 2020-10-27 09:40 24.58290 -77.69561
7 555 2020-01-21 14:38 24.43333 -77.69637
8 777 2020-06-25 08:54 24.42712 -77.76427
So my question is: how can I add the release information (time and lat/lon) to the dataframe fore each id (while the columns a, b, and c can be NA). And how can I then filter out the observations that occured before each animal's release time? I have been looking into possibilites using dplyr but was not yet able to resolve my issue.
You've not provided an easy way of obtaining your data (dput()) is by far the best and you have issues with your date time values (release uses Y-M-D H:M whereas date uses Y:M:D H:M:S) so for clarity I've included code to obtain the data frames I use at the end of this post.
First, the solution:
library(tidyverse)
library(lubridate)
sub %>%
left_join(stack, by="id") %>%
mutate(
release=ymd_hms(paste0(release, ":00")),
date=ymd_hms(date)
) %>%
filter(date >= release)
id lc lon.x lat.x a b c date release lat.y lon.y
1 555 3 -77.7211 24.4887 665 45 68 2020-07-12 21:09:17 2020-01-21 14:38:00 24.43333 -77.69637
2 555 3 -77.7163 24.4897 285 129 130 2020-07-12 21:10:35 2020-01-21 14:38:00 24.43333 -77.69637
As I indicated in comments.
To obtain the data
sub <- read.table(textConnection("id lc lon lat a b c date
1 111 3 -79.2975 25.6996 414 51 77 '2019-04-01 22:08:50'
2 111 3 -79.2975 25.6996 414 51 77 '2019-04-01 22:08:50'
3 222 3 -79.2970 25.7001 229 78 72 '2019-01-07 20:36:27'
4 222 3 -79.2970 25.7001 229 78 72 '2019-01-07 20:36:27'
5 333 B -80.8211 24.8441 11625 6980 37 '2018-12-17 20:45:05'
6 333 3 -80.8137 24.8263 155 100 69 '2018-12-17 21:00:43'
7 444 3 -80.4535 25.0848 501 33 104 '2019-10-20 19:44:16'
8 444 1 -80.8086 24.8364 6356 126 87 '2020-01-18 20:32:28'
9 555 3 -77.7211 24.4887 665 45 68 '2020-07-12 21:09:17'
10 555 3 -77.7163 24.4897 285 129 130 '2020-07-12 21:10:35'
11 666 2 -77.7221 24.4902 1129 75 66 '2020-07-12 21:09:02'
12 666 2 -77.7097 24.4905 314 248 164 '2020-07-12 21:11:37'
13 777 3 -77.7133 24.4820 406 58 110 '2020-06-20 11:18:18'
14 777 3 -77.7218 24.4844 170 93 107 '2020-06-20 11:51:06'
15 888 3 -79.2975 25.6996 550 34 79 '2017-11-25 19:10:45'
16 888 3 -79.2975 25.6996 550 34 79 '2017-11-25 19:10:45'"), header=TRUE)
stack <- read.table(textConnection("id release lat lon
1 888 '2017-11-27 14:53' 25.69201 -79.31534
2 333 '2019-01-31 16:09' 25.68896 -79.31326
3 222 '2019-02-02 15:55' 25.70051 -79.31393
4 111 '2019-04-02 10:43' 25.68534 -79.31341
5 444 '2020-03-13 15:04' 24.42892 -77.69518
6 666 '2020-10-27 09:40' 24.58290 -77.69561
7 555 '2020-01-21 14:38' 24.43333 -77.69637
8 777 '2020-06-25 08:54' 24.42712 -77.76427"), header=TRUE)
This question already has answers here:
Reshape horizontal to to long format using pivot_longer
(3 answers)
Closed 2 years ago.
Thank you all for your answers, I thought I was smarter than I am and hoped I would've understood any of it. I think I messed up my visualisation of my data aswell. I have edited my post to better show my sample data. Sorry for the inconvenience, and I truly hope that someone can help me.
I have a question about reshaping my data. The data collected looks as such:
data <- read.table(header=T, text='
pid measurement1 Tdays1 measurement2 Tdays2 measurement3 Tdays3 measurment4 Tdays4
1 1356 1435 1483 1405 1563 1374 NA NA
2 943 1848 1173 1818 1300 1785 NA NA
3 1590 185 NA NA NA NA 1585 294
4 130 72 443 70 NA NA 136 79
4 140 82 NA NA NA NA 756 89
4 220 126 266 124 NA NA 703 128
4 166 159 213 156 476 145 776 166
4 380 189 583 173 NA NA 586 203
4 353 231 510 222 656 217 526 240
4 180 268 NA NA NA NA NA NA
4 NA NA NA NA NA NA 580 278
4 571 334 596 303 816 289 483 371
')
Now i would like it to look something like this:
PID Time Value
1 1435 1356
1 1405 1483
1 1374 1563
2 1848 943
2 1818 1173
2 1785 1300
3 185 1590
... ... ...
How would i tend to get there? I have looked up some things about wide to longformat, but it doesn't seem to do the trick. Am reletively new to Rstudio and Stackoverflow (if you couldn't tell that already).
Kind regards, and thank you in advance.
Here is a slightly different pivot_longer() version.
library(tidyr)
library(dplyr)
dw %>%
pivot_longer(cols = -PID, names_to =".value", names_pattern = "(.+)[0-9]")
# A tibble: 9 x 3
PID T measurement
<dbl> <dbl> <dbl>
1 1 1 100
2 1 4 200
3 1 7 50
4 2 2 150
5 2 5 300
6 2 8 60
7 3 3 120
8 3 6 210
9 3 9 70
The names_to = ".value" argument creates new columns from column names based on the names_pattern argument. The names_pattern argument takes a special regex input. In this case, here is the breakdown:
(.+) # match everything - anything noted like this becomes the ".values"
[0-9] # numeric characters - tells the pattern that the numbers
# at the end are excluded from ".values". If you have multiple digit
# numbers, use [0-9*]
In the last edit you asked for a solution that is easy to understand. A very simple approach would be to stack the measurement columns on top of each other and the Tdays columns on top of each other. Although specialty packages make things very concise and elegant, for simplicity we can solve this without additional packages. Standard R has a convenient function aptly named stack, which works like this:
> exp <- data.frame(value1 = 1:5, value2 = 6:10)
> stack(exp)
values ind
1 1 value1
2 2 value1
3 3 value1
4 4 value1
5 5 value1
6 6 value2
7 7 value2
8 8 value2
9 9 value2
10 10 value2
We can stack measurements and Tdays seperately and then combine them via cbind:
data <- read.table(header=T, text='
pid measurement1 Tdays1 measurement2 Tdays2 measurement3 Tdays3 measurement4 Tdays4
1 1356 1435 1483 1405 1563 1374 NA NA
2 943 1848 1173 1818 1300 1785 NA NA
3 1590 185 NA NA NA NA 1585 294
4 130 72 443 70 NA NA 136 79
4 140 82 NA NA NA NA 756 89
4 220 126 266 124 NA NA 703 128
4 166 159 213 156 476 145 776 166
4 380 189 583 173 NA NA 586 203
4 353 231 510 222 656 217 526 240
4 180 268 NA NA NA NA NA NA
4 NA NA NA NA NA NA 580 278
4 571 334 596 303 816 289 483 371
')
cbind(stack(data, c(measurement1, measurement2, measurement3, measurement4)),
stack(data, c(Tdays1, Tdays2, Tdays3, Tdays4)))
Which keeps measurements and Tdays neatly together but leaves us without pid which we can add using rep to replicate the original pid 4 times:
result <- cbind(pid = rep(data$pid, 4),
stack(data, c(measurement1, measurement2, measurement3, measurement4)),
stack(data, c(Tdays1, Tdays2, Tdays3, Tdays4)))
The head of which looks like
> head(result)
pid values ind values ind
1 1 1356 measurement1 1435 Tdays1
2 2 943 measurement1 1848 Tdays1
3 3 1590 measurement1 185 Tdays1
4 4 130 measurement1 72 Tdays1
5 4 140 measurement1 82 Tdays1
6 4 220 measurement1 126 Tdays1
As I said above, this is not the order you expected and you can try to sort this data.frame, if that is of any concern:
result <- result[order(result$pid), c(1, 4, 2)]
names(result) <- c("pid", "Time", "Value")
leading to the final result
> head(result)
pid Time Value
1 1 1435 1356
13 1 1405 1483
25 1 1374 1563
37 1 NA NA
2 2 1848 943
14 2 1818 1173
tidyverse solution
library(tidyverse)
dw %>%
pivot_longer(-PID) %>%
mutate(name = gsub('^([A-Za-z]+)(\\d+)$', '\\1_\\2', name )) %>%
separate(name, into = c('A', 'B'), sep = '_', convert = T) %>%
pivot_wider(names_from = A, values_from = value)
Gives the following output
# A tibble: 9 x 4
PID B T measurement
<int> <int> <int> <int>
1 1 1 1 100
2 1 2 4 200
3 1 3 7 50
4 2 1 2 150
5 2 2 5 300
6 2 3 8 60
7 3 1 3 120
8 3 2 6 210
9 3 3 9 70
Considering a dataframe, df like the following:
PID T1 measurement1 T2 measurement2 T3 measurement3
1 1 100 4 200 7 50
2 2 150 5 300 8 60
3 3 120 6 210 9 70
You can use this solution to get your required dataframe:
iters = seq(from = 4, to = length(colnames(df))-1, by = 2)
finalDf = df[, c(1,2,3)]
for(j in iters){
tobind = df[, c(1,j,j+1)]
finalDf = rbind(finalDf, tobind)
}
finalDf = finalDf[order(finalDf[,1]),]
print(finalDf)
The output of the print statement is this:
PID T1 measurement1
1 1 1 100
4 1 4 200
7 1 7 50
2 2 2 150
5 2 5 300
8 2 8 60
3 3 3 120
6 3 6 210
9 3 9 70
Maybe you can try reshape like below
reshape(
setNames(data, gsub("(\\d+)$", "\\.\\1", names(data))),
direction = "long",
varying = 2:ncol(data)
)
I have a large dataset, 4666972 obs. of 5 variables.
I want to impute one column, MPR, with Kalman method based on each groups.
> str(dt)
Classes ‘data.table’ and 'data.frame': 4666972 obs. of 5 variables:
$ Year : int 1999 2000 2001 1999 2000 2001 1999 2000 2001 1999 ...
$ State: int 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ...
$ CC : int 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ...
$ ID : chr "1" "1" "1" "2" ...
$ MPR : num 54 54 55 52 52 53 60 60 65 70 ...
I tried the code below but it crashed after a while.
> library(imputeTS)
> data.table::setDT(dt)[, MPR_kalman := with(dt, ave(MPR, State, CC, ID, FUN=na_kalman))]
I don't know how to improve the time efficiency and impute successfully without crashed.
Is it better to split the dataset with ID to list and impute each of them with for loop?
> length(unique(hpms_S3$Section_ID))
[1] 668184
> split(dt, dt$ID)
However, I think this will not save too much of memory use or avoid crashed since when I split the dataset to 668184 lists and impute, I need to do multiple times and then combine to one dataset at last.
Is there any great way to do or how can I optimize code I did?
I provide the simple sample here:
# dt
Year State CC ID MPR
2002 15 3 3 NA
2003 15 3 3 NA
2004 15 3 3 193
2005 15 3 3 193
2006 15 3 3 348
2007 15 3 3 388
2008 15 3 3 388
1999 53 33 1 NA
2000 53 33 1 NA
2002 53 33 1 NA
2003 53 33 1 NA
2004 53 33 1 NA
2005 53 33 1 170
2006 53 33 1 170
2007 53 33 1 330
2008 53 33 1 330
EDIT:
As #r2evans mentioned in comment, I modified the code:
> setDT(dt)[, MPR_kalman := ave(MPR, State, CC, ID, FUN=na_kalman), by = .(State, CC, ID)]
Error in optim(init[mask], getLike, method = "L-BFGS-B", lower = rep(0, :
L-BFGS-B needs finite values of 'fn'
I got the error above. I found the post here for this error discussions. However, even I use na_kalman(MPR, type = 'level'), I still got error. I think there might be some repeated values within groups so that it produced error.
Perhaps splitting should be done using data.table's by= operator, perhaps more efficient.
Since I don't have imputeTS installed (there are several nested dependencies I don't have), I'll fake imputation using zoo::na.locf, both forward/backwards. I'm not suggesting this be your imputation mechanism, I'm using it to demonstrate a more-common pattern with data.table.
myimpute <- function(z) zoo::na.locf(zoo::na.locf(z, na.rm = FALSE), fromLast = TRUE, na.rm = FALSE)
Now some equivalent calls, one with your with(dt, ...) and my alternatives (which are really walk-throughs until my ultimate suggestion of 5):
dt[, MPR_kalman1 := with(dt, ave(MPR, State, CC, ID, FUN = myimpute))]
dt[, MPR_kalman2 := with(.SD, ave(MPR, State, CC, ID, FUN = myimpute))]
dt[, MPR_kalman3 := with(.SD, ave(MPR, FUN = myimpute)), by = .(State, CC, ID)]
dt[, MPR_kalman4 := ave(MPR, FUN = myimpute), by = .(State, CC, ID)]
dt[, MPR_kalman5 := myimpute(MPR), by = .(State, CC, ID)]
# Year State CC ID MPR MPR_kalman1 MPR_kalman2 MPR_kalman3 MPR_kalman4 MPR_kalman5
# 1: 2002 15 3 3 NA 193 193 193 193 193
# 2: 2003 15 3 3 NA 193 193 193 193 193
# 3: 2004 15 3 3 193 193 193 193 193 193
# 4: 2005 15 3 3 193 193 193 193 193 193
# 5: 2006 15 3 3 348 348 348 348 348 348
# 6: 2007 15 3 3 388 388 388 388 388 388
# 7: 2008 15 3 3 388 388 388 388 388 388
# 8: 1999 53 33 1 NA 170 170 170 170 170
# 9: 2000 53 33 1 NA 170 170 170 170 170
# 10: 2002 53 33 1 NA 170 170 170 170 170
# 11: 2003 53 33 1 NA 170 170 170 170 170
# 12: 2004 53 33 1 NA 170 170 170 170 170
# 13: 2005 53 33 1 170 170 170 170 170 170
# 14: 2006 53 33 1 170 170 170 170 170 170
# 15: 2007 53 33 1 330 330 330 330 330 330
# 16: 2008 53 33 1 330 330 330 330 330 330
The two methods produce the same results, but the latter preserves many of the memory-efficiencies that can make data.table preferred.
The use of with(dt, ...) is an anti-pattern in one case, and a strong risk in another. For the "risk" part, realize that data.table can do a lot of things behind-the-scenes so that the calculations/function-calls within the j= component (second argument) only sees data that is relevant. A clear example is grouping, but another (unrelated to this) data.table example is conditional replacement, as in dt[is.na(x), x := -1]. With the reference to the enter table dt inside of this, if there is ever something in the first argument (conditional replacement) or a by= argument, then it fails.
MPR_kalman2 mitigates this by using .SD, which is data.table's way of replacing the data-to-be-used with the "Subset of the Data" (ref). But it's still not taking advantage of data.table's significant efficiencies in dealing in-memory with groups.
MPR_kalman3 works on this by grouping outside, still using with but not (as in 2) in a more friendly way.
MPR_kalman4 removes the use of with, since really the MPR visible to ave is only within each group anyway. And then when you think about it, since ave is given no grouping variables, it really just passes all of the MPR data straight-through to myimpute. From this, we have MPR_kalman5, a direct method that is along the normal patterns of data.table.
While I don't know that it will mitigate your crashing, it is intended very much to be memory-efficient (in data.table's ways).
Hello I have a table like so:
Entry TimeOn TimeOff Alarm
1 60 70 355
2 80 85 455
3 100 150 400
4 105 120 320
5 125 130 254
6 135 155 220
7 160 170 850
I would like to understand how i can group those entries so the ones starting during another alarm and ending either during another alarm or after the other alarm such as entries 4,5 & 6 can be filtered out of the data frame?
so this would be the desired result a dataframe that looked like this:
Entry TimeOn TimeOff Alarm
1 60 70 355
2 80 85 455
3 100 150 400
7 160 170 850
so entries 4, 5 and 6 removed
library(dplyr)
library(data.table)
df$flag <- apply(df, 1, function(x) {
nrow(filter(df, data.table::between(x['TimeOn'],df$TimeOn,df$TimeOff)))
})
df[df$flag > 1, ]
Entry TimeOn TimeOff Alarm flag
4 4 105 120 320 2
5 5 125 130 254 2
6 6 135 155 220 2
#Save option using Base R
df$flag <- apply(df,1,function(x) {nrow(df[x['TimeOn'] >= df$TimeOn & x['TimeOn'] <= df$TimeOff,])})
Suggested by #Andre Elrico
df[apply(df, 1, function(x) { nrow( df[between(x[['TimeOn']],df$TimeOn,df$TimeOff),] ) > 1 }),]
data
df <- read.table(text="
Entry TimeOn TimeOff Alarm
1 60 70 355
2 80 85 455
3 100 150 400
4 105 120 320
5 125 130 254
6 135 155 220
7 160 170 850
",header=T)
I am trying to take the following data, and then uses this data to create a table which has the information broken down by state.
Here's the data:
> head(mydf2, 10)
lead_id buyer_account_id amount state
1 52055267 62 300 CA
2 52055267 64 264 CA
3 52055305 64 152 CA
4 52057682 62 75 NJ
5 52060519 62 750 OR
6 52060519 64 574 OR
15 52065951 64 152 TN
17 52066749 62 600 CO
18 52062751 64 167 OR
20 52071186 64 925 MN
I've allready subset the states that I'm interested in and have just the data I'm interested in:
mydf2 = subset(mydf, state %in% c("NV","AL","OR","CO","TN","SC","MN","NJ","KY","CA"))
Here's an idea of what I'm looking for:
State Amount Count
NV 1 50
NV 2 35
NV 3 20
NV 4 15
AL 1 10
AL 2 6
AL 3 4
AL 4 1
...
For each state, I'm trying to find a count for each amount "level." I don't necessary need to group the amount variable, but keep in mind that they are are not just 1,2,3, etc
> mydf$amount
[1] 300 264 152 75 750 574 113 152 750 152 675 489 188 263 152 152 600 167 34 925 375 156 675 152 488 204 152 152
[29] 600 489 488 75 152 152 489 222 563 215 452 152 152 75 100 113 152 150 152 150 152 452 150 152 152 225 600 620
[57] 113 152 150 152 152 152 152 152 152 152 640 236 152 480 152 152 200 152 560 152 240 222 152 152 120 257 152 400
Is there an elegant solution for this in R for this or will I be stuck using Excel (yuck!).
Here's my understanding of what you're trying to do:
Start with a simple data.frame with 26 states and amounts only ranging from 1 to 50 (which is much more restrictive than what you have in your example, where the range is much higher).
set.seed(1)
mydf <- data.frame(
state = sample(letters, 500, replace = TRUE),
amount = sample(1:50, 500, replace = TRUE)
)
head(mydf)
# state amount
# 1 g 28
# 2 j 35
# 3 o 33
# 4 x 34
# 5 f 24
# 6 x 49
Here's some straightforward tabulation. I've also removed any instances where frequency equals zero, and I've reordered the output by state.
temp1 <- data.frame(table(mydf$state, mydf$amount))
temp1 <- temp1[!temp1$Freq == 0, ]
head(temp1[order(temp1$Var1), ])
# Var1 Var2 Freq
# 79 a 4 1
# 157 a 7 2
# 391 a 16 1
# 417 a 17 1
# 521 a 21 1
# 1041 a 41 1
dim(temp1) # How many rows/cols
# [1] 410 3
Here's a little bit different tabulation. We are tabulating after grouping the "amount" values. Here, I've manually specified the breaks, but you could just as easily let R decide what it thinks is best.
temp2 <- data.frame(table(mydf$state,
cut(mydf$amount,
breaks = c(0, 12.5, 25, 37.5, 50),
include.lowest = TRUE)))
temp2 <- temp2[!temp2$Freq == 0, ]
head(temp2[order(temp2$Var1), ])
# Var1 Var2 Freq
# 1 a [0,12.5] 3
# 27 a (12.5,25] 3
# 79 a (37.5,50] 3
# 2 b [0,12.5] 2
# 28 b (12.5,25] 6
# 54 b (25,37.5] 5
dim(temp2)
# [1] 103 3
I am not sure if I understand correctly (you have two data.frames mydf and mydf2). I'll assume your data is in mydf. Using aggregate:
mydf$count <- 1:nrow(mydf)
aggregate(data = mydf, count ~ amount + state, length)
Is this what you are looking for?
Note: here count is a variable that is created just to get directly the output of the 3rd column as count.
Alternatives with ddply from plyr:
# no need to create a variable called count
ddply(mydf, .(state, amount), summarise, count=length(lead_id))
Here' one could use any column that exists in one's data instead of lead_id. Even state:
ddply(mydf, .(state, amount), summarise, count=length(state))
Or equivalently without using summarise:
ddply(mydf, .(state, amount), function(x) c(count=nrow(x)))