numpy：数组中唯一值的最有效频率计数

Question 1

In numpy / scipy, is there an efficient way to get frequency counts for unique values in an array?

Something along these lines:

x = array( [1,1,1,2,2,2,5,25,1,1] )
y = freq_count( x )
print y

>> [[1, 5], [2,3], [5,1], [25,1]]

( For you, R users out there, I’m basically looking for the table() function )

Question 2

Take a look at np.bincount:

http://docs.scipy.org/doc/numpy/reference/generated/numpy.bincount.html

import numpy as np
x = np.array([1,1,1,2,2,2,5,25,1,1])
y = np.bincount(x)
ii = np.nonzero(y)[0]

And then:

zip(ii,y[ii]) 
# [(1, 5), (2, 3), (5, 1), (25, 1)]

or:

np.vstack((ii,y[ii])).T
# array([[ 1,  5],
         [ 2,  3],
         [ 5,  1],
         [25,  1]])

or however you want to combine the counts and the unique values.

Question 3

As of Numpy 1.9, the easiest and fastest method is to simply use , which now has a return_counts keyword argument:

import numpy as np

x = np.array([1,1,1,2,2,2,5,25,1,1])
unique, counts = np.unique(x, return_counts=True)

print np.asarray((unique, counts)).T

Which gives:

 [[ 1  5]
  [ 2  3]
  [ 5  1]
  [25  1]]

A quick comparison with scipy.stats.itemfreq:

In [4]: x = np.random.random_integers(0,100,1e6)

In [5]: %timeit unique, counts = np.unique(x, return_counts=True)
10 loops, best of 3: 31.5 ms per loop

In [6]: %timeit scipy.stats.itemfreq(x)
10 loops, best of 3: 170 ms per loop

Question 4

Update: The method mentioned in the original answer is deprecated, we should use the new way instead:

>>> import numpy as np
>>> x = [1,1,1,2,2,2,5,25,1,1]
>>> np.array(np.unique(x, return_counts=True)).T
    array([[ 1,  5],
           [ 2,  3],
           [ 5,  1],
           [25,  1]])

Original answer:

you can use scipy.stats.itemfreq

>>> from scipy.stats import itemfreq
>>> x = [1,1,1,2,2,2,5,25,1,1]
>>> itemfreq(x)
/usr/local/bin/python:1: DeprecationWarning: `itemfreq` is deprecated! `itemfreq` is deprecated and will be removed in a future version. Use instead `np.unique(..., return_counts=True)`
array([[  1.,   5.],
       [  2.,   3.],
       [  5.,   1.],
       [ 25.,   1.]])

Question 5

I was also interested in this, so I did a little performance comparison (using perfplot, a pet project of mine). Result:

y = np.bincount(a)
ii = np.nonzero(y)[0]
out = np.vstack((ii, y[ii])).T

is by far the fastest. (Note the log-scaling.)

Code to generate the plot:

import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import perfplot
from scipy.stats import itemfreq


def bincount(a):
    y = np.bincount(a)
    ii = np.nonzero(y)[0]
    return np.vstack((ii, y[ii])).T


def unique(a):
    unique, counts = np.unique(a, return_counts=True)
    return np.asarray((unique, counts)).T


def unique_count(a):
    unique, inverse = np.unique(a, return_inverse=True)
    count = np.zeros(len(unique), np.int)
    np.add.at(count, inverse, 1)
    return np.vstack((unique, count)).T


def pandas_value_counts(a):
    out = pd.value_counts(pd.Series(a))
    out.sort_index(inplace=True)
    out = np.stack([out.keys().values, out.values]).T
    return out


perfplot.show(
    setup=lambda n: np.random.randint(0, 1000, n),
    kernels=[bincount, unique, itemfreq, unique_count, pandas_value_counts],
    n_range=[2 ** k for k in range(26)],
    logx=True,
    logy=True,
    xlabel="len(a)",
)

Question 6

Using pandas module:

>>> import pandas as pd
>>> import numpy as np
>>> x = np.array([1,1,1,2,2,2,5,25,1,1])
>>> pd.value_counts(x)
1     5
2     3
25    1
5     1
dtype: int64

Question 7

This is by far the most general and performant solution; surprised it hasn’t been posted yet.

import numpy as np

def unique_count(a):
    unique, inverse = np.unique(a, return_inverse=True)
    count = np.zeros(len(unique), np.int)
    np.add.at(count, inverse, 1)
    return np.vstack(( unique, count)).T

print unique_count(np.random.randint(-10,10,100))

Unlike the currently accepted answer, it works on any datatype that is sortable (not just positive ints), and it has optimal performance; the only significant expense is in the sorting done by np.unique.

Question 8

numpy.bincount is the probably the best choice. If your array contains anything besides small dense integers it might be useful to wrap it something like this:

def count_unique(keys):
    uniq_keys = np.unique(keys)
    bins = uniq_keys.searchsorted(keys)
    return uniq_keys, np.bincount(bins)

For example:

>>> x = array([1,1,1,2,2,2,5,25,1,1])
>>> count_unique(x)
(array([ 1,  2,  5, 25]), array([5, 3, 1, 1]))

Question 9

Even though it has already been answered, I suggest a different approach that makes use of numpy.histogram. Such function given a sequence it returns the frequency of its elements grouped in bins.

Beware though: it works in this example because numbers are integers. If they where real numbers, then this solution would not apply as nicely.

>>> from numpy import histogram
>>> y = histogram (x, bins=x.max()-1)
>>> y
(array([5, 3, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
       1]),
 array([  1.,   2.,   3.,   4.,   5.,   6.,   7.,   8.,   9.,  10.,  11.,
        12.,  13.,  14.,  15.,  16.,  17.,  18.,  19.,  20.,  21.,  22.,
        23.,  24.,  25.]))

Question 10

import pandas as pd
import numpy as np
x = np.array( [1,1,1,2,2,2,5,25,1,1] )
print(dict(pd.Series(x).value_counts()))

This gives you: {1: 5, 2: 3, 5: 1, 25: 1}

Question 11

To count unique non-integers – similar to Eelco Hoogendoorn’s answer but considerably faster (factor of 5 on my machine), I used weave.inline to combine numpy.unique with a bit of c-code;

import numpy as np
from scipy import weave

def count_unique(datain):
  """
  Similar to numpy.unique function for returning unique members of
  data, but also returns their counts
  """
  data = np.sort(datain)
  uniq = np.unique(data)
  nums = np.zeros(uniq.shape, dtype='int')

  code="""
  int i,count,j;
  j=0;
  count=0;
  for(i=1; i<Ndata[0]; i++){
      count++;
      if(data(i) > data(i-1)){
          nums(j) = count;
          count = 0;
          j++;
      }
  }
  // Handle last value
  nums(j) = count+1;
  """
  weave.inline(code,
      ['data', 'nums'],
      extra_compile_args=['-O2'],
      type_converters=weave.converters.blitz)
  return uniq, nums

Profile info

> %timeit count_unique(data)
> 10000 loops, best of 3: 55.1 µs per loop

Eelco’s pure numpy version:

> %timeit unique_count(data)
> 1000 loops, best of 3: 284 µs per loop

Note

There’s redundancy here (unique performs a sort also), meaning that the code could probably be further optimized by putting the unique functionality inside the c-code loop.

Question 12

Old question, but I’d like to provide my own solution which turn out to be the fastest, use normal instead of np.array as input (or transfer to list firstly), based on my bench test.

Check it out if you encounter it as well.

def count(a):
    results = {}
    for x in a:
        if x not in results:
            results[x] = 1
        else:
            results[x] += 1
    return results

For example,

>>>timeit count([1,1,1,2,2,2,5,25,1,1]) would return:

100000 loops, best of 3: 2.26 µs per loop

>>>timeit count(np.array([1,1,1,2,2,2,5,25,1,1]))

100000 loops, best of 3: 8.8 µs per loop

>>>timeit count(np.array([1,1,1,2,2,2,5,25,1,1]).tolist())

100000 loops, best of 3: 5.85 µs per loop

While the accepted answer would be slower, and the scipy.stats.itemfreq solution is even worse.

A more indepth testing did not confirm the formulated expectation.

from zmq import Stopwatch
aZmqSTOPWATCH = Stopwatch()

aDataSETasARRAY = ( 100 * abs( np.random.randn( 150000 ) ) ).astype( np.int )
aDataSETasLIST  = aDataSETasARRAY.tolist()

import numba
@numba.jit
def numba_bincount( anObject ):
    np.bincount(    anObject )
    return

aZmqSTOPWATCH.start();np.bincount(    aDataSETasARRAY );aZmqSTOPWATCH.stop()
14328L

aZmqSTOPWATCH.start();numba_bincount( aDataSETasARRAY );aZmqSTOPWATCH.stop()
592L

aZmqSTOPWATCH.start();count(          aDataSETasLIST  );aZmqSTOPWATCH.stop()
148609L

Ref. comments below on cache and other in-RAM side-effects that influence a small dataset massively repetitive testing results.

Question 13

some thing like this should do it:

#create 100 random numbers
arr = numpy.random.random_integers(0,50,100)

#create a dictionary of the unique values
d = dict([(i,0) for i in numpy.unique(arr)])
for number in arr:
    d[j]+=1   #increment when that value is found

Also, this previous post on Efficiently counting unique elements seems pretty similar to your question, unless I’m missing something.

Question 14

multi-dimentional frequency count, i.e. counting arrays.

>>> print(color_array    )
  array([[255, 128, 128],
   [255, 128, 128],
   [255, 128, 128],
   ...,
   [255, 128, 128],
   [255, 128, 128],
   [255, 128, 128]], dtype=uint8)


>>> np.unique(color_array,return_counts=True,axis=0)
  (array([[ 60, 151, 161],
    [ 60, 155, 162],
    [ 60, 159, 163],
    [ 61, 143, 162],
    [ 61, 147, 162],
    [ 61, 162, 163],
    [ 62, 166, 164],
    [ 63, 137, 162],
    [ 63, 169, 164],
   array([     1,      2,      2,      1,      4,      1,      1,      2,
         3,      1,      1,      1,      2,      5,      2,      2,
       898,      1,      1,

Question 15

import pandas as pd
import numpy as np

print(pd.Series(name_of_array).value_counts())

Question 16

from collections import Counter
x = array( [1,1,1,2,2,2,5,25,1,1] )
mode = counter.most_common(1)[0][0]

numpy：数组中唯一值的最有效频率计数

问题：numpy：数组中唯一值的最有效频率计数

回答 0

回答 1

回答 2

回答 3

回答 4

回答 5

回答 6

回答 7

回答 8

回答 9

回答 10

回答 11

回答 12

回答 13

回答 14

排行榜展示

Python 情人节超强技能导出微信聊天记录生成词云

你不得不知道的python超级文献批量搜索下载工具

Python 流程图 — 一键转化代码为流程图

7行代码 Python热力图可视化分析缺失数据处理

Python 优化—算出每条语句执行时间

你的10W块放哪里能赚最多钱？

文章展示

Poetry 简化Python依赖项管理和打包

有人可以用Python解释all吗？

Python3的“函数注释”有什么好的用处

Tsmoothie 这个神奇的Python库，可以将数据平滑化并找到异常点

检查类型==列表在python中

在Python中获取大文件的MD5哈希

numpy：数组中唯一值的最有效频率计数

问题：numpy：数组中唯一值的最有效频率计数

回答 0

回答 1

回答 2

回答 3

回答 4

回答 5

回答 6

回答 7

回答 8

回答 9

回答 10

回答 11

回答 12

回答 13

回答 14

相关文章

排行榜展示

文章展示