My dataset is as following:
salary number
1500-1600 110
1600-1700 180
1700-1800 320
1800-1900 460
1900-2000 850
2000-2100 250
2100-2200 130
2200-2300 70
2300-2400 20
2400-2500 10
How can I calculate the median of this dataset? Here's what I have tried:
x <- c(110, 180, 320, 460, 850, 250, 130, 70, 20, 10)
colnames <- "numbers"
rownames <- c("[1500-1600]", "(1600-1700]", "(1700-1800]", "(1800-1900]",
"(1900-2000]", "(2000,2100]", "(2100-2200]", "(2200-2300]",
"(2300-2400]", "(2400-2500]")
y <- matrix(x, nrow=length(x), dimnames=list(rownames, colnames))
data.frame(y, "cumsum"=cumsum(y))
numbers cumsum
[1500-1600] 110 110
(1600-1700] 180 290
(1700-1800] 320 610
(1800-1900] 460 1070
(1900-2000] 850 1920
(2000,2100] 250 2170
(2100-2200] 130 2300
(2200-2300] 70 2370
(2300-2400] 20 2390
(2400-2500] 10 2400
Here, you can see the half-way frequency is 2400/2=1200. It is between 1070 and 1920. Thus the median class is the (1900-2000] group. You can use the formula below to get this result:
Median = L + h/f (n/2 - c)
where:
L is the lower class boundary of median class
h is the size of the median class i.e. difference between upper and lower class boundaries of median class
f is the frequency of median class
c is previous cumulative frequency of the median class
n/2 is total no. of observations divided by 2 (i.e. sum f / 2)
Alternatively, median class is defined by the following method:
Locate n/2 in the column of cumulative frequency.
Get the class in which this lies.
And in code:
> 1900 + (1200 - 1070) / (1920 - 1070) * (2000 - 1900)
[1] 1915.294
Now what I want to do is to make the above expression more elegant - i.e. 1900+(1200-1070)/(1920-1070)*(2000-1900). How can I achieve this?
Since you already know the formula, it should be easy enough to create a function to do the calculation for you.
Here, I've created a basic function to get you started. The function takes four arguments:
frequencies: A vector of frequencies ("number" in your first example)
intervals: A 2-row matrix with the same number of columns as the length of frequencies, with the first row being the lower class boundary, and the second row being the upper class boundary. Alternatively, "intervals" may be a column in your data.frame, and you may specify sep (and possibly, trim) to have the function automatically create the required matrix for you.
sep: The separator character in your "intervals" column in your data.frame.
trim: A regular expression of characters that need to be removed before trying to coerce to a numeric matrix. One pattern is built into the function: trim = "cut". This sets the regular expression pattern to remove (, ), [, and ] from the input.
Here's the function (with comments showing how I used your instructions to put it together):
GroupedMedian <- function(frequencies, intervals, sep = NULL, trim = NULL) {
# If "sep" is specified, the function will try to create the
# required "intervals" matrix. "trim" removes any unwanted
# characters before attempting to convert the ranges to numeric.
if (!is.null(sep)) {
if (is.null(trim)) pattern <- ""
else if (trim == "cut") pattern <- "\\[|\\]|\\(|\\)"
else pattern <- trim
intervals <- sapply(strsplit(gsub(pattern, "", intervals), sep), as.numeric)
}
Midpoints <- rowMeans(intervals)
cf <- cumsum(frequencies)
Midrow <- findInterval(max(cf)/2, cf) + 1
L <- intervals[1, Midrow] # lower class boundary of median class
h <- diff(intervals[, Midrow]) # size of median class
f <- frequencies[Midrow] # frequency of median class
cf2 <- cf[Midrow - 1] # cumulative frequency class before median class
n_2 <- max(cf)/2 # total observations divided by 2
unname(L + (n_2 - cf2)/f * h)
}
Here's a sample data.frame to work with:
mydf <- structure(list(salary = c("1500-1600", "1600-1700", "1700-1800",
"1800-1900", "1900-2000", "2000-2100", "2100-2200", "2200-2300",
"2300-2400", "2400-2500"), number = c(110L, 180L, 320L, 460L,
850L, 250L, 130L, 70L, 20L, 10L)), .Names = c("salary", "number"),
class = "data.frame", row.names = c(NA, -10L))
mydf
# salary number
# 1 1500-1600 110
# 2 1600-1700 180
# 3 1700-1800 320
# 4 1800-1900 460
# 5 1900-2000 850
# 6 2000-2100 250
# 7 2100-2200 130
# 8 2200-2300 70
# 9 2300-2400 20
# 10 2400-2500 10
Now, we can simply do:
GroupedMedian(mydf$number, mydf$salary, sep = "-")
# [1] 1915.294
Here's an example of the function in action on some made up data:
set.seed(1)
x <- sample(100, 100, replace = TRUE)
y <- data.frame(table(cut(x, 10)))
y
# Var1 Freq
# 1 (1.9,11.7] 8
# 2 (11.7,21.5] 8
# 3 (21.5,31.4] 8
# 4 (31.4,41.2] 15
# 5 (41.2,51] 13
# 6 (51,60.8] 5
# 7 (60.8,70.6] 11
# 8 (70.6,80.5] 15
# 9 (80.5,90.3] 11
# 10 (90.3,100] 6
### Here's GroupedMedian's output on the grouped data.frame...
GroupedMedian(y$Freq, y$Var1, sep = ",", trim = "cut")
# [1] 49.49231
### ... and the output of median on the original vector
median(x)
# [1] 49.5
By the way, with the sample data that you provided, where I think there was a mistake in one of your ranges (all were separated by dashes except one, which was separated by a comma), since strsplit uses a regular expression by default to split on, you can use the function like this:
x<-c(110,180,320,460,850,250,130,70,20,10)
colnames<-c("numbers")
rownames<-c("[1500-1600]","(1600-1700]","(1700-1800]","(1800-1900]",
"(1900-2000]"," (2000,2100]","(2100-2200]","(2200-2300]",
"(2300-2400]","(2400-2500]")
y<-matrix(x,nrow=length(x),dimnames=list(rownames,colnames))
GroupedMedian(y[, "numbers"], rownames(y), sep="-|,", trim="cut")
# [1] 1915.294
I've written it like this to clearly explain how it's being worked out. A more compact version is appended.
library(data.table)
#constructing the dataset with the salary range split into low and high
salarydata <- data.table(
salaries_low = 100*c(15:24),
salaries_high = 100*c(16:25),
numbers = c(110,180,320,460,850,250,130,70,20,10)
)
#calculating cumulative number of observations
salarydata <- salarydata[,cumnumbers := cumsum(numbers)]
salarydata
# salaries_low salaries_high numbers cumnumbers
# 1: 1500 1600 110 110
# 2: 1600 1700 180 290
# 3: 1700 1800 320 610
# 4: 1800 1900 460 1070
# 5: 1900 2000 850 1920
# 6: 2000 2100 250 2170
# 7: 2100 2200 130 2300
# 8: 2200 2300 70 2370
# 9: 2300 2400 20 2390
# 10: 2400 2500 10 2400
#identifying median group
mediangroup <- salarydata[
(cumnumbers - numbers) <= (max(cumnumbers)/2) &
cumnumbers >= (max(cumnumbers)/2)]
mediangroup
# salaries_low salaries_high numbers cumnumbers
# 1: 1900 2000 850 1920
#creating the variables needed to calculate median
mediangroup[,l := salaries_low]
mediangroup[,h := salaries_high - salaries_low]
mediangroup[,f := numbers]
mediangroup[,c := cumnumbers- numbers]
n = salarydata[,sum(numbers)]
#calculating median
median <- mediangroup[,l + ((h/f)*((n/2)-c))]
median
# [1] 1915.294
The compact version -
EDIT: Changed to a function at #AnandaMahto's suggestion. Also, using more general variable names.
library(data.table)
#Creating function
CalculateMedian <- function(
LowerBound,
UpperBound,
Obs
)
{
#calculating cumulative number of observations and n
dataset <- data.table(UpperBound, LowerBound, Obs)
dataset <- dataset[,cumObs := cumsum(Obs)]
n = dataset[,max(cumObs)]
#identifying mediangroup and dynamically calculating l,h,f,c. We already have n.
median <- dataset[
(cumObs - Obs) <= (max(cumObs)/2) &
cumObs >= (max(cumObs)/2),
LowerBound + ((UpperBound - LowerBound)/Obs) * ((n/2) - (cumObs- Obs))
]
return(median)
}
# Using function
CalculateMedian(
LowerBound = 100*c(15:24),
UpperBound = 100*c(16:25),
Obs = c(110,180,320,460,850,250,130,70,20,10)
)
# [1] 1915.294
(Sal <- sapply( strsplit(as.character(dat[[1]]), "-"),
function(x) mean( as.numeric(x) ) ) )
[1] 1550 1650 1750 1850 1950 2050 2150 2250 2350 2450
require(Hmisc)
wtd.mean(Sal, weights = dat[[2]])
[1] 1898.75
wtd.quantile(Sal, weights=dat[[2]], probs=0.5)
Generalization to a weighed median might require looking for a package that has such.
Have you tried median or apply(yourobject,2,median) if it is a matrix or data.frame ?
What about this way? Create vectors for each salary bracket, assuming an even spread over each band. Then make one big vector from those vectors, and take the median. Similar to you, but a slightly different result. I'm not a mathematician, so the method could be incorrect.
dat <- matrix(c(seq(1500, 2400, 100), seq(1600, 2500, 100), c(110, 180, 320, 460, 850, 250, 130, 70, 20, 10)), ncol=3)
median(unlist(apply(dat, 1, function(x) { ((1:x[3])/x[3])*(x[2]-x[1])+x[1] })))
Returns 1915.353
I think this concept should work you.
$salaries = array(
array("1500","1600"),
array("1600","1700"),
array("1700","1800"),
array("1800","1900"),
array("1900","2000"),
array("2000","2100"),
array("2100","2200"),
array("2200","2300"),
array("2300","2400"),
array("2400","2500"),
);
$numbers = array("110","180","320","460","850","250","130","70","20","10");
$cumsum = array();
$n = 0;
$count = 0;
foreach($numbers as $key=>$number){
$cumsum[$key] = $number;
$n += $number;
if($count > 0){
$cumsum[$key] += $cumsum[$key-1];
}
++$count;
}
$classIndex = 0;
foreach($cumsum as $key=>$cum){
if($cum < ($n/2)){
$classIndex = $key+1;
}
}
$classRange = $salaries[$classIndex];
$L = $classRange[0];
$h = (float) $classRange[1] - $classRange[0];
$f = $numbers[$classIndex];
$c = $numbers[$classIndex-1];
$Median = $L + ($h/$f)*(($n/2)-$c);
echo $Median;
Related
I have a data set of real estate data. I'm trying to create a new column of days on market groups (labeled DOM_Groups) and group them into 15-day intervals (i.e. 0-14, 15-29, etc.). Then I'm trying to summarize() these groupings by the count of observations and the average sale price for each 15-day group.
I'm using the cut() function attempting to break my DOM_Groups into these 15-day intervals. In the base spreadsheet that I imported, the column containing the days on market has a unique observation in each cell, and the data in that column are numeric whole numbers...no decimals, no negative numbers.
When I run the following code, the tibble output is not grouping correctly, and it is including a negative number with a decimal, which does not exist in my data set. I'm not sure what to do to correct this.
gibbsMkt %>%
mutate(DOM_Groups = cut(DOM, breaks = 15, dig.lab = 2)) %>%
filter(Status == "SOLD") %>%
group_by(DOM_Groups) %>%
summarize(numDOM = n(),
avgSP = mean(`Sold Price`, na.rm = TRUE))
The tibble output I get is this:
DOM_Groups numDOM avgSP
<fct> <int> <dbl>
1 (-0.23,16] 74 561675.
2 (16,31] 18 632241.
3 (31,47] 11 561727.
4 (47,63] 8 545862.
5 (63,78] 7 729286.
6 (78,94] 6 624167.
7 (1.4e+02,1.6e+02] 2 541000
8 (1.6e+02,1.7e+02] 1 535395
Also, for rows 7 & 8 in the tibble, the largest number is 164, so I also don't understand why these rows are being converted to scientific notation.
When I use an Excel pivot table, I get the output that I want to reproduce in R, which is depicted below:
How can I reproduce this in R with the correct code?
cut(x, breaks = 15) means x will be cut into 15 intervals--it cannot guess that you want 15-unit intervals starting with 0 and ending with 150. This is in the docs for ?cut:
breaks either a numeric vector of two or more unique cut points or a single number (greater than or equal to 2) giving the number of intervals into which x is to be cut.
You will need to define your own start and end to each interval such as:
seq(0, max(x), 15)
# [1] 0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150
cut(x, seq(0, max(x), 15))
However, if you set it up correctly, you can define your intervals and make labels at the same time.
set.seed(1)
x <- floor(runif(500, 0, 164))
from <- seq(0, max(x), 15)
to <- from + 15 - 1
labs <- sprintf('%s-%s', from, to)
# [1] "0-14" "15-29" "30-44" "45-59" "60-74" "75-89" "90-104" "105-119" "120-134" "135-149" "150-164"
data.frame(table(cut(x, c(from, Inf), right = FALSE)), labels = labs)
# Var1 Freq labels
# 1 [0,15) 35 0-14
# 2 [15,30) 57 15-29
# 3 [30,45) 45 30-44
# 4 [45,60) 44 45-59
# 5 [60,75) 57 60-74
# 6 [75,90) 55 75-89
# 7 [90,105) 33 90-104
# 8 [105,120) 47 105-119
# 9 [120,135) 40 120-134
# 10 [135,150) 39 135-149
# 11 [150,Inf) 48 150-164
DOM_Groups <- cut(x, c(from, Inf), labs, right = FALSE)
data.frame(table(DOM_Groups))
# DOM_Groups Freq
# 1 0-14 35
# 2 15-29 57
# 3 30-44 45
# 4 45-59 44
# 5 60-74 57
# 6 75-89 55
# 7 90-104 33
# 8 105-119 47
# 9 120-134 40
# 10 135-149 39
# 11 150-164 48
Your other question of "why am I getting negative numbers," as I mentioned this does not mean that you have negatives in your data--these are just labels generated by using breaks = 15 with your data.
These are the relevant lines in cut.default
if (length(breaks) == 1L) {
if (is.na(breaks) || breaks < 2L)
stop("invalid number of intervals")
nb <- as.integer(breaks + 1)
dx <- diff(rx <- range(x, na.rm = TRUE))
if (dx == 0) {
dx <- if (rx[1L] != 0)
abs(rx[1L])
else 1
breaks <- seq.int(rx[1L] - dx/1000, rx[2L] + dx/1000,
length.out = nb)
}
else {
breaks <- seq.int(rx[1L], rx[2L], length.out = nb)
breaks[c(1L, nb)] <- c(rx[1L] - dx/1000, rx[2L] +
dx/1000)
}
Using the x from before and breaks = 15, you can see how negatives are introduced:
breaks <- 15
nb <- as.integer(breaks + 1)
dx <- diff(rx <- range(x, na.rm = TRUE))
if (dx == 0) {
dx <- if (rx[1L] != 0)
abs(rx[1L])
else 1
breaks <- seq.int(rx[1L] - dx/1000, rx[2L] + dx/1000,
length.out = nb)
} else {
breaks <- seq.int(rx[1L], rx[2L], length.out = nb)
breaks[c(1L, nb)] <- c(rx[1L] - dx/1000, rx[2L] + dx/1000)
}
breaks
# [1] -0.16300 10.86667 21.73333 32.60000 43.46667 54.33333 65.20000 76.06667 86.93333 97.80000 108.66667 119.53333 130.40000
# [14] 141.26667 152.13333 163.16300
levels(cut(x, breaks = 15))
# [1] "(-0.163,10.9]" "(10.9,21.7]" "(21.7,32.6]" "(32.6,43.5]" "(43.5,54.3]" "(54.3,65.2]" "(65.2,76.1]" "(76.1,86.9]"
# [9] "(86.9,97.8]" "(97.8,109]" "(109,120]" "(120,130]" "(130,141]" "(141,152]" "(152,163]"
Here's a simple solution with my santoku package:
library(santoku)
gibbsMkt %>%
mutate(DOM_Groups = chop_width(DOM, 15, labels = lbl_dash("-")))
# then proceed as before
You can use the start argument to chop_width if you want to start the intervals at a particular number.
Growing degree days is a concept in plant phenology where a given crop needs to accumulate certain amount of thermal units every day in order to move from one stage to the other.
I have thermal units data available at daily resolution for a given site for 10 years as follows:
set.seed(1)
avg_temp <- data.frame(year_ref = rep(2001:2010, each = 365),
doy = rep(1:365, times = 10),
thermal.units = sample(0:40, 3650, replace=TRUE))
I also have a crop grown in this site that should take 110 days to mature if planted on day 152
planting_date <- 152
observed_days_to_mature <- 110
I also have some initial random guess on how many thermal units this crop in general might accumulate in each stage starting from planting to reach full maturity. For e.g. in the below example, stage 1 needs to accumulate 50 thermal units since planting, stage2 needs 120 thermal units since
planting, stage 3 needs 190 thermal units since planting and so on.
gdd_data <- data.frame(stage_id = 1:4,
gdd_required = c(50, 120, 190, 250))
So given the gdd requirement, I can calculate for each year, how many days does this crop take to mature.
library(dplyr)
library(data.table)
days_to_mature_func <- function(gdd_data_df, avg_temp_df, planting_date_d){
gdd.vec <- gdd_data_df$gdd_required
year_vec <- sort(unique(avg_temp_df$year_ref))
temp_ls <- list()
for(y in seq_along(year_vec)){
year_id <- year_vec[y]
weather_sub <- avg_temp_df %>%
dplyr::filter(year_ref == year_id &
doy >= planting_date_d)
stage_vec <- unlist(lapply(1:length(gdd.vec), function(x) planting_date_d - 1 + which.max(cumsum(weather_sub$thermal.units) >= gdd.vec[x])))
stage_vec[length(stage_vec)] <- ifelse(stage_vec[length(stage_vec)] <= stage_vec[length(stage_vec) - 1], NA, stage_vec[length(stage_vec)])
gdd_doy <- as.data.frame(t(as.data.frame(stage_vec)))
names(gdd_doy) <- paste0('stage_doy', 1:length(stage_vec))
gdd_doy$year_ref <- year_id
temp_ls[[y]] <- gdd_doy
}
days_to_mature_mod <- rbindlist(temp_ls)
return(days_to_mature_mod)
}
days_to_mature_mod <- days_to_mature_func(gdd_data, avg_temp, planting_date)
days_to_mature_mod
stage_doy1 stage_doy2 stage_doy3 stage_doy4 year_ref
1: 154 160 164 167 2001
2: 154 157 159 163 2002
3: 154 157 160 162 2003
4: 155 157 163 165 2004
5: 154 156 160 164 2005
6: 154 161 164 168 2006
7: 154 156 159 161 2007
8: 155 158 161 164 2008
9: 154 156 160 163 2009
10: 154 158 160 163 2010
Since the crop should be taking 110 days to mature, I define the error as:
error_mod <- mean(days_to_mature_mod$stage_doy4 - observed_days_to_mature)^2
My question is how do I optimise the gdd_required in the gdd_data to produce the minimal error.
One method I have implemented is to loop over a sequence of factors that reduces the gdd_required in
each step and calculates the error. the factor with the lowest error is the final factor that I apply
to the gdd_required data. I am reading about the gradient descent algorithm that might make this processquicker but unfortunately I don't have enough techincal expertise yet to achieve this.
From comment: I do have a condition that wasn't explicit - the x in the function that I am optimising are ordered i.e. x[1] < x[2] < x[3] < x[4] since they are cumulative.
Building on your example, you can define a function that takes arbitrary gdd_required and returns the fit:
optim_function <- function(x){
gdd_data <- data.frame(stage_id = 1:4, gdd_required = x)
days_to_mature_mod <- days_to_mature_func(gdd_data, avg_temp, planting_date)
error_mod <- mean(days_to_mature_mod$stage_doy4 - observed_days_to_mature)^2
}
The function optim allows you to find the parameters that reach a minimum, starting from the initial set you used e.g.
optim(c(50, 120, 190, 250), optim_function)
#$par
#[1] 266.35738 199.59795 -28.35870 30.21135
#
#$value
#[1] 1866.24
#
#$counts
#function gradient
# 91 NA
#
#$convergence
#[1] 0
#
#$message
#NULL
So a best fit of around 1866 is found with parameters 266.35738, 199.59795, -28.35870, 30.21135.
The help page gives some pointers on doing constrained optimisation if it is important that they are in a specific range.
Given your comment that the parameters should be strictly increasing, you can transform arbitrary values into increasing ones with cumsum(exp()) so your code would become
optim_function_plus <- function(x){
gdd_data <- data.frame(stage_id = 1:4, gdd_required = cumsum(exp(x)))
days_to_mature_mod <- days_to_mature_func(gdd_data, avg_temp, planting_date)
error_mod <- mean(days_to_mature_mod$stage_doy4 - observed_days_to_mature)^2
}
opt <- optim(log(c(50, 70, 70, 60)), optim_function_plus)
opt
# $par
# [1] 1.578174 2.057647 2.392850 3.241456
#
# $value
# [1] 1953.64
#
# $counts
# function gradient
# 57 NA
#
# $convergence
# [1] 0
#
# $message
# NULL
To get the parameters back on the scale you're interested, you'd need to do:
cumsum(exp(opt$par))
# [1] 4.846097 12.673626 23.618263 49.189184
I have a dataframe of many rows with only one column, the column having strings of variable lengths, ranging from 30000 to 200000 characters(DNA sequence). [Below is a sample of 150 characters]
TTCCCCAAACAGCAACTTTAAGGAGCAGCTTCCTTTATGATCCCTGATTGCCTCCCCTTTGTTCCCATAACAAGTAGTTTAAATTTTCTGTTAAAGTCCAAACCACATATTTACAATACCTCGCACC
Here is the full dataset: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1f9prtKW5NnS-BLI5lqsl4FEi4PvRfxGR
I have a code in R, which divides each row into 20 bins depending on its length, and counts the occurrence of G's and C's for each bin, and gives me back a matrix of 20 columns. Here is the code:
library(data.table)
data <- fread("string.fa", header = F)
loopchar <- function(data){ bins <- sapply(seq(1, nchar(data), nchar(data)/20), function(x) substr(data, x, x + nchar(data)/20 - 1))output <- (str_count(bins, c("G"))/nchar(bins) + str_count(bins, c("C"))/nchar(bins))*100}
result <- data.frame(t(apply(data,1,loopchar)))
However, now I want to do something different. Instead of nchar(data)/20, I want the substring segments (20) to vary from a list I have. So now for my data frame, the first row should be divided into 22 bins/segments, and the code would be nchar(data)/22.
The second row should be divided into 21 bins, and the code would be nchar(data)/21, and so on. I want the function to keep changing the number of bins for the data. Both my data dataframe with strings and vector list of numbers with bins are of the same length.
What is the best way to do this?
It's more natural to use some of the Bioconductor's libraries for such tasks. In my case I use Biostrings, but maybe you could find another way.
Data
Your file is too big, so I have created a text file (in memory), which contains random DNA for each line:
# set seed to create reproducible example
set.seed(53101614)
# create an example text file in memory
temp <- tempfile()
writeLines(
sapply(1:100, function(i){
paste(sample(c("A", "T", "C", "G"), sample(100:6000),
replace = T), collapse = "")
}),
con = temp
)
# read lines from tmp file
dna <- readLines(temp)
# unlink file
unlink(temp)
Data preprocessing
Creating Biostrings::DNAStringSet object
Using Biostrings::DNAStringSet() function we can read character vector to create DNAStringSet object. Note that I assume that all the records are in standard DNA alphabet i.e. each string contains only A, T, C, G symbols. If it does not hold in your case, refer to Biostrings documentation.
dna <- DNAStringSet(dna, use.names = F)
# inspect the output
dna
A DNAStringSet instance of length 100
width seq
[1] 2235 GGGCTTCCGGTGGTTGTAGGCCCATAAGGTGGGAAATATACA...GAAACGTCGACAAGATACAAACGAGTGGTCAACAGGCCAGCC
[2] 1507 ATGCGGTCTATCTACTTGTTCGGCCGAACCTTGAGGGCAGCC...AACGCTTTGTACCTGTCCCAGAGTCAGAAGTAACAGTTTAGC
[3] 1462 CATTGGAGTACATAGGGTATTCCCTCTCGTTGTATAACTCCA...TCCTACTTGCGAAGGCAGTCGCACACAAGGGTCTATTTCGTC
[4] 1440 ATGCTACGTTGGTAGGGTAACGCAGACTAGAACCACACGGGA...ATAAAGCCGTCACAAGGAATGTTAGCACTCAATGGCTCGCTA
[5] 3976 AAGCGGAAGTACACGTACCCGCGTAGATTACGTATAGTCGCC...TTACGCGTTGCTCAAATCGTTCGGTGCAGTTTTATAGTGATG
... ... ...
[96] 4924 AGTAAGCAGATCCAGAGTACTGTGAAAGACGTCAGATCCCGA...TATAATGGGTTGCGTGTTTGATTCTGCCATGAATCCTATGTT
[97] 5702 CCTGAAGAGGACGTTTCCCCCTACATCCAGTAGTATTGGTGT...TCTGCTTTGCGCGGCGGGGCCGGACTGTCCATGGCTCACTTG
[98] 5603 GCGGCTGATTATTGCCCGTCTGCCTGCATGATCGAGCAGAAC...CTCTTTACATGCTCATAGGAATCGGCAACGAAGGAGAGAGTC
[99] 3775 GGCAAGACGGTCAGATGTTTTGATGTCCGGGCGGATATCCTT...CGCTGCCCGTGACAATAGTTATCATAAGGAGACCTGGATGGT
[100] 407 TGTCGCAACCTCTCTTGCACGTCCAATTCCCCGACGGTTCTA...GCGACATTCCGGAGTCTGCGCAGCCTATGTATACCCTACAGA
Create the vector of random N numbers of bins
set.seed(53101614)
k <- sample(100, 100, replace = T)
# inspect the output
head(k)
[1] 37 32 63 76 19 41
Create Views object were each DNA sequence represented by N = k[i] chunks
It is much easier to solve your problem using IRanges::Views container. This thing is furiously fast and beautiful.
First of all we divide each DNA sequenced into k[i] ranges:
seqviews <- lapply(seq_along(dna), function(i){
seq = dna[[i]]
seq_length = length(seq)
starts = seq(1, seq_length - seq_length %% k[i], seq_length %/% k[i])
Views(seq, start = starts, end = c(starts[-1] - 1, seq_length))
}
)
# inspect the output for k[2] and seqviews[2]
k[2]
seqviews[2]
32
Views on a 1507-letter DNAString subject subject: ATGCGGTCTATCTACTTG...GTCAGAAGTAACAGTTTAG
views:
start end width
[1] 1 47 47 [ATGCGGTCTATCTACTTGTTCGGCCGAACCTTGAGGGCAGCCAGCTA]
[2] 48 94 47 [ACCGCCGGAGACCTGAGTCCACCACACCCATTCGATCTCCATGGTTG]
[3] 95 141 47 [GCGCTCTCCGAGGTGCCACGTCAAGTTGTACTACTCTCTCAGACCTC]
[4] 142 188 47 [TTGTTAGAAGTCCCGAGGTATATGCGCAATACCTCAACCGAAGCGCC]
[5] 189 235 47 [TGATGAGCAAACGTTTCTTATAGTCGCGACCTTGTCCCGAGGACTTG]
... ... ... ... ...
[28] 1270 1316 47 [AGGCGAGGGCAGGGCACATGTTTCTACAGTGAGGCGTGATCCGCTCC]
[29] 1317 1363 47 [GAGGCAAGCTCGTGAACTGTCGTGGCAAGTTACTTATGAGGATGTCA]
[30] 1364 1410 47 [TGGGCAGATGCAACAGACTGCTATTGGCGGGAGAGAGGCATCGACAT]
[31] 1411 1457 47 [ACCGTCTCAAGTACCACAGCTGAGAGGCTCTCGTGGAGATGCGCACA]
[32] 1458 1507 50 [TGAGTCGTAACGCTTTGTACCTGTCCCAGAGTCAGAAGTAACAGTTTAGC]
After that, we check if all sequences have been divided to desired number of chunks:
all(sapply(seq_along(k), function(i) k[i] == length(seqviews[[i]])))
[1] TRUE
Important observation
Before we proceed, there is one important observation about your function.
Your function produces N chunks with variable length (because the indices it produces are floats but not integers, so substr() when you call it, rounds provided indices to the nearest integer.
As an example, extracting 1st record from the dna set, and splitting this sequence into 37 bins using your code will produce following results:
dna_1 <- as.character(dna[[1]])
sprintf("DNA#1: %d bp long, 37 chunks", nchar(dna_1))
[1] "DNA#1: 2235 bp long, 37 chunks"
bins <- sapply(seq(1, nchar(dna_1), nchar(dna_1)/37),
function(x){
substr(dna_1, x, x + nchar(dna_1)/37 - 1)
}
)
bins_length <- sapply(bins, nchar)
barplot(table(bins_length),
xlab = "Bin's length",
ylab = "Count",
main = "Bin's length variability"
)
The approach I use in my code, while length(dna[[i]]) %% k[i] != 0 (reminder), produces k[i] - 1 bins of equal lengths, and only the last bin has its length equal to length(dna[i]) %/% k[i] + length(dna[[i]] %% k[i]:
bins_length <- sapply(seqviews, length)
barplot(table(bins_length),
xlab = "Bin's length",
ylab = "Count",
main = "Bin's length variability"
)
GC content calculation
As it is mentioned above, Biostrings::letterFrequency() applied to IRanges::Views allows you to calculate GC content easily:
Find the GC frequency for each bin in every DNA sequence
GC <- lapply(seqviews, letterFrequency, letters = "GC", as.prob = TRUE)
Convert to percents
GC <- lapply(GC, "*", 100)
Inspect the output
head(GC[[1]])
G|C
[1,] 53.33333
[2,] 46.66667
[3,] 50.00000
[4,] 55.00000
[5,] 60.00000
[6,] 45.00000
Plot GC content for DNAs 1:9
par(mfrow = c(3, 3))
invisible(
lapply(1:9, function(i){
plot(GC[[i]],
type = "l",
main = sprintf("DNA #%d, %d bp, %d bins", i, length(dna[[i]]), k[i]),
xlab = "N bins",
ylab = "GC content, %",
ylim = c(0, 100)
)
abline(h = 50, lty = 2, col = "red")
}
)
)
I have a data frame similar to the following with a total of 500 columns:
Probes <- data.frame(Days=seq(0.01, 4.91, 0.01), B1=5:495,B2=-100:390, B3=10:500,B4=-200:290)
I would like to calculate a rolling window linear regression where my window size is 12 data points and each sequential regression is separated by 6 data points. For each regression, "Days" will always be the x component of the model, and the y's would be each of the other columns (B1, followed by B2, B3, etc). I would then like to save the co-efficients as a dataframe with the existing column titles (B1, B2, etc).
I think my code is close, but is not quite working. I used rollapply from the zoo library.
slopedata<-rollapply(zoo(Probes), width=12, function(Probes) {
coef(lm(formula=y~Probes$Days, data = Probes))[2]
}, by = 6, by.column=TRUE, align="right")
If possible, I would also like to have the "xmins" saved to a vector to add to the dataframe. This would mean the smallest x value used in each regression (basically it would be every 6 numbers in the "Days" column.)
Thanks for your help.
1) Define a zoo object z whose data contains Probes and whose index is taken from the first column of Probes, i.e. Days. Noting that lm allows y to be a matrix define a coefs function which computes the regression coefficients. Finally rollapply over z. Note that the index of the returned object gives xmin.
library(zoo)
z <- zoo(Probes, Probes[[1]])
coefs <- function(z) c(unlist(as.data.frame(coef(lm(z[,-1] ~ z[,1])))))
rz <- rollapply(z, 12, by = 6, coefs, by.column = FALSE, align = "left")
giving:
> head(rz)
B11 B12 B21 B22 B31 B32 B41 B42
0.01 4 100 -101 100 9 100 -201 100
0.07 4 100 -101 100 9 100 -201 100
0.13 4 100 -101 100 9 100 -201 100
0.19 4 100 -101 100 9 100 -201 100
0.25 4 100 -101 100 9 100 -201 100
0.31 4 100 -101 100 9 100 -201 100
Note that DF <- fortify.zoo(rz) could be used if you needed a data frame representation of rz.
2) An alternative somewhat similar approch would be to rollaplly over the row numbers:
library(zoo)
y <- as.matrix(Probes[-1])
Days <- Probes$Days
n <- nrow(Probes)
coefs <- function(ix) c(unlist(as.data.frame(coef(lm(y ~ Days, subset = ix)))),
xmins = Days[ix][1])
r <- rollapply(1:n, 12, by = 6, coefs)
try this:
# here are the xmin values you wanted
xmins <- Probes$Days[seq(1,nrow(Probes),6)]
# here we build a function that will run regressions across the columns
# y1 vs x, y2 vs x, y3 vs x...
# you enter the window and by (12/6) in order to limit the interval being
# regressed. this is later called in do.call
runreg <- function(Probes,m,window=12,by=6){
# beg,end are used to specify the interval
beg <- seq(1,nrow(Probes),by)[m]
end <- beg+window-1
# this is used to go through all the columns
N <- ncol(Probes)-1
tmp <- numeric(N)
# go through each column and store the coefficients in tmp
for(i in 1:N){
y <- Probes[[i+1]][beg:end]
x <- Probes$Days[beg:end]
tmp[i] <- coef(lm(y~x))[2][[1]]
}
# put all our column regressions into a dataframe
res <- rbind('coeff'=tmp)
colnames(res) <- colnames(Probes)[-1]
return(res)
}
# now that we've built the function to do the column regressions
# we just need to go through all the window-ed regressions (row regressions)
res <- do.call(rbind,lapply(1:length(xmins),function(m) runreg(Probes,m)))
# these rownames are the index of the xmin values
rownames(res) <- seq(1,nrow(Probes),6)
res <- data.frame(res,xmins)
You can also use the rollRegres package as follows
# setup data
Probes <- data.frame(
# I changed the days to be intergers
Days=seq(1L, 491L, 1L),
B1=5:495, B2=-100:390, B3=10:500 , B4=-200:290)
# setup grp argument
grp_arg <- as.integer((Probes$Days - 1L) %/% 6)
# estimate coefs. width argument is realtive in grp units
library(rollRegres)
X <- cbind(1, Probes$Days / 100)
Ys <- as.matrix(Probes[, 2:5])
out <- lapply(1:ncol(Ys), function(i)
roll_regres.fit(x = X, y = Ys[, i], width = 2L, grp = grp_arg)$coefs)
out <- do.call(cbind, out)
# only keep the complete.cases and the unique values
colnames(out) <- sapply(1:4, function(i) paste0("B", i, 0:1))
out <- out[c(T, grp_arg[-1] != head(grp_arg, -1)), ]
out <- out[complete.cases(out), ]
head(out)
#R B10 B11 B20 B21 B30 B31 B40 B41
#R [1,] 4 100 -101 100 9 100 -201 100
#R [2,] 4 100 -101 100 9 100 -201 100
#R [3,] 4 100 -101 100 9 100 -201 100
#R [4,] 4 100 -101 100 9 100 -201 100
#R [5,] 4 100 -101 100 9 100 -201 100
#R [6,] 4 100 -101 100 9 100 -201 100
The solution is a lot faster than e.g., the zoo solution
library(zoo) coefs <- function(z) c(unlist(as.data.frame(coef(lm(z[,-1] ~ z[,1]))))) microbenchmark::microbenchmark( rollapply = {
z <- zoo(Probes, Probes[[1]])
rz <- rollapply(z, 12, by = 6, coefs, by.column = FALSE, align = "left") }, roll_regres = {
grp_arg <- as.integer((Probes$Days - 1L) %/% 6)
X <- cbind(1, Probes$Days / 100)
Ys <- as.matrix(Probes[, 2:5])
out <- lapply(1:ncol(Ys), function(i)
roll_regres.fit(x = X, y = Ys[, i], width = 2L, grp = grp_arg)$coefs)
out <- do.call(cbind, out)
colnames(out) <- sapply(1:4, function(i) paste0("B", i, 0:1))
out <- out[c(T, grp_arg[-1] != head(grp_arg, -1)), ]
out <- out[complete.cases(out), ]
head(out) } )
#R Unit: microseconds
#R expr min lq mean median uq max neval
#R rollapply 53392.614 56330.492 59793.106 58363.2825 60902.938 119206.76 100
#R roll_regres 865.186 920.297 1074.161 983.9015 1047.705 5071.41 100
At present you though need to install the package from Github due to an error in the validation in version 0.1.0. Thus, run
devtools::install_github("boennecd/rollRegres", upgrade_dependencies = FALSE,
build_vignettes = TRUE)
I have a very large dataframe (N = 107,251), that I wish to split into relatively equal halves (~53,625). However, I would like the split to be done such that three variables are kept in equal proportion in the two sets (pertaining to Gender, Age Category with 6 levels, and Region with 5 levels).
I can generate the proportions for the variables independently (e.g., via prop.table(xtabs(~dat$Gender))) or in combination (e.g., via prop.table(xtabs(~dat$Gender + dat$Region + dat$Age)), but I'm not sure how to utilise this information to actually do the sampling.
Sample dataset:
set.seed(42)
Gender <- sample(c("M", "F"), 1000, replace = TRUE)
Region <- sample(c("1","2","3","4","5"), 1000, replace = TRUE)
Age <- sample(c("1","2","3","4","5","6"), 1000, replace = TRUE)
X1 <- rnorm(1000)
dat <- data.frame(Gender, Region, Age, X1)
Probabilities:
round(prop.table(xtabs(~dat$Gender)), 3) # 48.5% Female; 51.5% Male
round(prop.table(xtabs(~dat$Age)), 3) # 16.8, 18.2, ..., 16.0%
round(prop.table(xtabs(~dat$Region)), 3) # 21.5%, 17.7, ..., 21.9%
# Multidimensional probabilities:
round(prop.table(xtabs(~dat$Gender + dat$Age + dat$Region)), 3)
The end goal for this dummy example would be two data frames with ~500 observations in each (completely independent, no participant appearing in both), and approximately equivalent in terms of gender/region/age splits. In the real analysis, there is more disparity between the age and region weights, so doing a single random split-half isn't appropriate. In real world applications, I'm not sure if every observation needs to be used or if it is better to get the splits more even.
I have been reading over the documentation from package:sampling but I'm not sure it is designed to do exactly what I require.
You can check out my stratified function, which you should be able to use like this:
set.seed(1) ## just so you can reproduce this
## Take your first group
sample1 <- stratified(dat, c("Gender", "Region", "Age"), .5)
## Then select the remainder
sample2 <- dat[!rownames(dat) %in% rownames(sample1), ]
summary(sample1)
# Gender Region Age X1
# F:235 1:112 1:84 Min. :-2.82847
# M:259 2: 90 2:78 1st Qu.:-0.69711
# 3: 94 3:82 Median :-0.03200
# 4: 97 4:80 Mean :-0.01401
# 5:101 5:90 3rd Qu.: 0.63844
# 6:80 Max. : 2.90422
summary(sample2)
# Gender Region Age X1
# F:238 1:114 1:85 Min. :-2.76808
# M:268 2: 92 2:81 1st Qu.:-0.55173
# 3: 97 3:83 Median : 0.02559
# 4: 99 4:83 Mean : 0.05789
# 5:104 5:91 3rd Qu.: 0.74102
# 6:83 Max. : 3.58466
Compare the following and see if they are within your expectations.
x1 <- round(prop.table(
xtabs(~dat$Gender + dat$Age + dat$Region)), 3)
x2 <- round(prop.table(
xtabs(~sample1$Gender + sample1$Age + sample1$Region)), 3)
x3 <- round(prop.table(
xtabs(~sample2$Gender + sample2$Age + sample2$Region)), 3)
It should be able to work fine with data of the size you describe, but a "data.table" version is in the works that promises to be much more efficient.
Update:
stratified now has a new logical argument "bothSets" which lets you keep both sets of samples as a list.
set.seed(1)
Samples <- stratified(dat, c("Gender", "Region", "Age"), .5, bothSets = TRUE)
lapply(Samples, summary)
# $SET1
# Gender Region Age X1
# F:235 1:112 1:84 Min. :-2.82847
# M:259 2: 90 2:78 1st Qu.:-0.69711
# 3: 94 3:82 Median :-0.03200
# 4: 97 4:80 Mean :-0.01401
# 5:101 5:90 3rd Qu.: 0.63844
# 6:80 Max. : 2.90422
#
# $SET2
# Gender Region Age X1
# F:238 1:114 1:85 Min. :-2.76808
# M:268 2: 92 2:81 1st Qu.:-0.55173
# 3: 97 3:83 Median : 0.02559
# 4: 99 4:83 Mean : 0.05789
# 5:104 5:91 3rd Qu.: 0.74102
# 6:83 Max. : 3.58466
The following code basically creates a key based on the group membership then loops through each group, sampling half to one set and half (roughly) to the other. If you compare the resulting probabilities they are within 0.001 of each other. The downside to this is that its biased to make a larger sample size for the second group due to how rounding of odd-numbered group member number is handled. In this case the first sample is 488 observations and the second is 512. You can probably throw in some logic to account for that and even it out better.
EDIT: Added that logic and it split it up evenly.
set.seed(42)
Gender <- sample(c("M", "F"), 1000, replace = TRUE)
Region <- sample(c("1","2","3","4","5"), 1000, replace = TRUE)
Age <- sample(c("1","2","3","4","5","6"), 1000, replace = TRUE)
X1 <- rnorm(1000)
dat <- data.frame(Gender, Region, Age, X1)
dat$group <- with(dat, paste(Gender, Region, Age))
groups <- unique(dat$group)
setA <- dat[NULL,]
setB <- dat[NULL,]
for (i in 1:length(groups)){
temp <- dat[dat$group==groups[i],]
if (nrow(setA) > nrow(setB)){
tempA <- temp[1:floor(nrow(temp)/2),]
tempB <- temp[(1+floor(nrow(temp)/2)):nrow(temp),]
} else {
tempA <- temp[1:ceiling(nrow(temp)/2),]
tempB <- temp[(1+ceiling(nrow(temp)/2)):nrow(temp),]
}
setA <- rbind(setA, tempA)
setB <- rbind(setB, tempB)
}