count rows with multiple criterion in pandas [duplicate] - pandas

Question

I am trying to modify a DataFrame df to only contain rows for which the values in the column closing_price are between 99 and 101 and trying to do this with the code below.
However, I get the error
ValueError: The truth value of a Series is ambiguous. Use a.empty, a.bool(), a.item(), a.any() or a.all()
and I am wondering if there is a way to do this without using loops.
df = df[(99 <= df['closing_price'] <= 101)]

Answer 1

Consider also series between:
df = df[df['closing_price'].between(99, 101)]

Answer 2

You should use () to group your boolean vector to remove ambiguity.
df = df[(df['closing_price'] >= 99) & (df['closing_price'] <= 101)]

Answer 3

there is a nicer alternative - use query() method:
In [58]: df = pd.DataFrame({'closing_price': np.random.randint(95, 105, 10)})
In [59]: df
Out[59]:
closing_price
0 104
1 99
2 98
3 95
4 103
5 101
6 101
7 99
8 95
9 96
In [60]: df.query('99 <= closing_price <= 101')
Out[60]:
closing_price
1 99
5 101
6 101
7 99
UPDATE: answering the comment:
I like the syntax here but fell down when trying to combine with
expresison; df.query('(mean + 2 *sd) <= closing_price <=(mean + 2
*sd)')
In [161]: qry = "(closing_price.mean() - 2*closing_price.std())" +\
...: " <= closing_price <= " + \
...: "(closing_price.mean() + 2*closing_price.std())"
...:
In [162]: df.query(qry)
Out[162]:
closing_price
0 97
1 101
2 97
3 95
4 100
5 99
6 100
7 101
8 99
9 95

Answer 4

newdf = df.query('closing_price.mean() <= closing_price <= closing_price.std()')
or
mean = closing_price.mean()
std = closing_price.std()
newdf = df.query('#mean <= closing_price <= #std')

Answer 5

If one has to call pd.Series.between(l,r) repeatedly (for different bounds l and r), a lot of work is repeated unnecessarily. In this case, it's beneficial to sort the frame/series once and then use pd.Series.searchsorted(). I measured a speedup of up to 25x, see below.
def between_indices(x, lower, upper, inclusive=True):
"""
Returns smallest and largest index i for which holds
lower <= x[i] <= upper, under the assumption that x is sorted.
"""
i = x.searchsorted(lower, side="left" if inclusive else "right")
j = x.searchsorted(upper, side="right" if inclusive else "left")
return i, j
# Sort x once before repeated calls of between()
x = x.sort_values().reset_index(drop=True)
# x = x.sort_values(ignore_index=True) # for pandas>=1.0
ret1 = between_indices(x, lower=0.1, upper=0.9)
ret2 = between_indices(x, lower=0.2, upper=0.8)
ret3 = ...
Benchmark
Measure repeated evaluations (n_reps=100) of pd.Series.between() as well as the method based on pd.Series.searchsorted(), for different arguments lower and upper. On my MacBook Pro 2015 with Python v3.8.0 and Pandas v1.0.3, the below code results in the following outpu
# pd.Series.searchsorted()
# 5.87 ms ± 321 µs per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 100 loops each)
# pd.Series.between(lower, upper)
# 155 ms ± 6.08 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 10 loops each)
# Logical expressions: (x>=lower) & (x<=upper)
# 153 ms ± 3.52 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 10 loops each)
import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
def between_indices(x, lower, upper, inclusive=True):
# Assumption: x is sorted.
i = x.searchsorted(lower, side="left" if inclusive else "right")
j = x.searchsorted(upper, side="right" if inclusive else "left")
return i, j
def between_fast(x, lower, upper, inclusive=True):
"""
Equivalent to pd.Series.between() under the assumption that x is sorted.
"""
i, j = between_indices(x, lower, upper, inclusive)
if True:
return x.iloc[i:j]
else:
# Mask creation is slow.
mask = np.zeros_like(x, dtype=bool)
mask[i:j] = True
mask = pd.Series(mask, index=x.index)
return x[mask]
def between(x, lower, upper, inclusive=True):
mask = x.between(lower, upper, inclusive=inclusive)
return x[mask]
def between_expr(x, lower, upper, inclusive=True):
if inclusive:
mask = (x>=lower) & (x<=upper)
else:
mask = (x>lower) & (x<upper)
return x[mask]
def benchmark(func, x, lowers, uppers):
for l,u in zip(lowers, uppers):
func(x,lower=l,upper=u)
n_samples = 1000
n_reps = 100
x = pd.Series(np.random.randn(n_samples))
# Sort the Series.
# For pandas>=1.0:
# x = x.sort_values(ignore_index=True)
x = x.sort_values().reset_index(drop=True)
# Assert equivalence of different methods.
assert(between_fast(x, 0, 1, True ).equals(between(x, 0, 1, True)))
assert(between_expr(x, 0, 1, True ).equals(between(x, 0, 1, True)))
assert(between_fast(x, 0, 1, False).equals(between(x, 0, 1, False)))
assert(between_expr(x, 0, 1, False).equals(between(x, 0, 1, False)))
# Benchmark repeated evaluations of between().
uppers = np.linspace(0, 3, n_reps)
lowers = -uppers
%timeit benchmark(between_fast, x, lowers, uppers)
%timeit benchmark(between, x, lowers, uppers)
%timeit benchmark(between_expr, x, lowers, uppers)

Answer 6

Instead of this
df = df[(99 <= df['closing_price'] <= 101)]
You should use this
df = df[(df['closing_price']>=99 ) & (df['closing_price']<=101)]
We have to use NumPy's bitwise Logic operators |, &, ~, ^ for compounding queries.
Also, the parentheses are important for operator precedence.
For more info, you can visit the link
:Comparisons, Masks, and Boolean Logic

Answer 7

If you're dealing with multiple values and multiple inputs you could also set up an apply function like this. In this case filtering a dataframe for GPS locations that fall withing certain ranges.
def filter_values(lat,lon):
if abs(lat - 33.77) < .01 and abs(lon - -118.16) < .01:
return True
elif abs(lat - 37.79) < .01 and abs(lon - -122.39) < .01:
return True
else:
return False
df = df[df.apply(lambda x: filter_values(x['lat'],x['lon']),axis=1)]