I need to concatenate multiple matrices (containing numbers and strings) in a loop, so far I wrote this solution but I don't like to use a dummy variable (h) and I'm sure the code could be improved.
Here it is:
h = 0
for name in list_of_matrices:
h +=1
Matrix = pd.read_csv(name)
if h == 1:
Matrix_final = Matrix
continue
Matrix_final = pd.concat([Matrix_final,Matrix])
For some reason if I use the following code I end up having 2 matrices one after the other and not a joint one (so this code is not fitting):
li = []
for filename in all_files:
df = pd.read_csv(filename, index_col=None, header=0)
li.append(df)
I am trying to create a plot of arrays where one is calculated based on my x-axis calculated in a for loop. I've gone through my code multiple times and tested in between what exactly the lengths are for my arrays, but I can't seem to think of a solution that makes them equal length.
This is the code I have started with:
import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
a = 1 ;b = 2 ;c = 3; d = 1; e = 2
t0 = 0
t_end = 10
dt = 0.05
t = np.arange(t0, t_end, dt)
n = len(t)
fout = 1
M = 1
Ca = np.zeros(n)
Ca[0] = a; Cb[0] = b
Cc[0] = 0;
k1 = 1
def rA(Ca, Cb, Cc, t):
-k1 * Ca**a * Cb**b * dt
return -k1 * Ca**a * Cb**b * dt
while e > 1e-3:
t = np.arange(t0, t_end, dt)
n = len(t)
for i in range(1,n-1):
Ca[i+1] = Ca[i] + rA(Ca[i], Cb[i], Cc[i], t[i])
e = abs((M-Ca[n-1])/M)
M = Ca[n-1]
dt = dt/2
plt.plot(t, Ca)
plt.grid()
plt.show()
Afterwards, I try to calculate a second function for different y-values. Within the for loop I added:
Cb[i+1] = Cb[i] + rB(Ca[i], Cb[i], Cc[i], t[i])
While also defining rB in a similar manner as rA. The error code I received at this point is:
IndexError: index 200 is out of bounds for axis 0 with size 200
I feel like it has to do with the way I'm initializing the arrays for my Ca. To put it in MatLab code, something I'm more familiar with, looks like this in MatLab:
Ca = zeros(1,n)
I have recreated the code I have written here in MatLab and I do receive a plot. So I'm wondering where I am going wrong here?
So I thought my best course of action was to change n to an int by just changing it in the while loop.
but after changing n = len(t) to n = 100 I received the following error message:
ValueError: x and y must have same first dimension, but have shapes (200,) and (400,)
As my previous question was something trivial I just kept on missing out on, I feel like this is the same. But I have spent over an hour looking and trying fixes without succes.
I've created a software so that text box inputs are calculated through a table but when a coefficient is added, such as "2X" the table cannot compute it and doesn't output the desired solution to the function. I've tried different methods but I need a way so that the table can understand a coefficient. below shows what I have already:
Dim n As Integer
Dim v As Integer
n = txtNeg.Text
v = txtPos.Text
Dim table = New DataTable()
For x As Integer = n To v Step 1
Dim y = table.Compute(txtY.Text.Replace("x", x).Replace("X", x).Replace("s", (Math.Sin(x / 57.3))).Replace("S", (Math.Sin(x / 57.3))).Replace("c", (Math.Cos(x / 57.3))).Replace("C", (Math.Cos(x / 57.3))).Replace("x2", x * x).Replace("X2", x * x).Replace("L", Math.Abs(Math.Log(x))).Replace("l", Math.Abs(Math.Log(x))).Replace("e", Math.Exp(x)), Nothing)
Chart1.Series("plot1").Points.AddXY(x, y)
I can make it so that it pre-exists in the code, for example:
If txtY.Text = "2x" Then y = x * 2
If txtY.Text = "3x" Then y = x * 3
etc, but i would like it so that it understands the coefficient without it needing to be pre-existing if anyone knows how
I've roughly got something like
A = np.random.random([n, 2])
B = np.random.random([3, 2])
...
ret = 0
for b in B:
for a in A:
start = np.max([a[0], b[0]])
end = np.min([a[1], b[1]])
ret += np.max([0, end - start])
return ret
Putting it into words, A is an input array of n 2D intervals and B is a known array of 2D intervals, and I'm trying to compute the length of total intersection between all intervals.
Is there a way to vectorize it? My first though was using the np.maximize and np.minimize along with broadcasting, but nothing seems to work.
Broadcast after extending dimensions to vectorize things -
p1 = np.maximum(A[:,None,0],B[:,0])
p2 = np.minimum(A[:,None,1],B[:,1])
ret = np.maximum(0,p2-p1).sum()
What is the fastest way to iterate over all elements in a 3D NumPy array? If array.shape = (r,c,z), there must be something faster than this:
x = np.asarray(range(12)).reshape((1,4,3))
#function that sums nearest neighbor values
x = np.asarray(range(12)).reshape((1, 4,3))
#e is my element location, d is the distance
def nn(arr, e, d=1):
d = e[0]
r = e[1]
c = e[2]
return sum(arr[d,r-1,c-1:c+2]) + sum(arr[d,r+1, c-1:c+2]) + sum(arr[d,r,c-1]) + sum(arr[d,r,c+1])
Instead of creating a nested for loop like the one below to create my values of e to run the function nn for each pixel :
for dim in range(z):
for row in range(r):
for col in range(c):
e = (dim, row, col)
I'd like to vectorize my nn function in a way that extracts location information for each element (e = (0,1,1) for example) and iterates over ALL elements in my matrix without having to manually input each locational value of e OR creating a messy nested for loop. I'm not sure how to apply np.vectorize to this problem. Thanks!
It is easy to vectorize over the d dimension:
def nn(arr, e):
r,c = e # (e[0],e[1])
return np.sum(arr[:,r-1,c-1:c+2],axis=2) + np.sum(arr[:,r+1,c-1:c+2],axis=2) +
np.sum(arr[:,r,c-1],axis=?) + np.sum(arr[:,r,c+1],axis=?)
now just iterate over the row and col dimensions, returning a vector, that is assigned to the appropriate slot in x.
for row in <correct range>:
for col in <correct range>:
x[:,row,col] = nn(data, (row,col))
The next step is to make
rows = [:,None]
cols =
arr[:,rows-1,cols+2] + arr[:,rows,cols+2] etc.
This kind of problem has come up many times, with various descriptions - convolution, smoothing, filtering etc.
We could do some searches to find the best, or it you prefer, we could guide you through the steps.
Converting a nested loop calculation to Numpy for speedup
is a question similar to yours. There's only 2 levels of looping, and sum expression is different, but I think it has the same issues:
for h in xrange(1, height-1):
for w in xrange(1, width-1):
new_gr[h][w] = gr[h][w] + gr[h][w-1] + gr[h-1][w] +
t * gr[h+1][w-1]-2 * (gr[h][w-1] + t * gr[h-1][w])
Here's what I ended up doing. Since I'm returning the xv vector and slipping it in to the larger 3D array lag, this should speed up the process, right? data is my input dataset.
def nn3d(arr, e):
r,c = e
n = np.copy(arr[:,r-1:r+2,c-1:c+2])
n[:,1,1] = 0
n3d = np.ma.masked_where(n == nodata, n)
xv = np.zeros(arr.shape[0])
for d in range(arr.shape[0]):
if np.ma.count(n3d[d,:,:]) < 2:
element = nodata
else:
element = np.sum(n3d[d,:,:])/(np.ma.count(n3d[d,:,:])-1)
xv[d] = element
return xv
lag = np.zeros(shape = data.shape)
for r in range(1,data.shape[1]-1): #boundary effects
for c in range(1,data.shape[2]-1):
lag[:,r,c] = nn3d(data,(r,c))
What you are looking for is probably array.nditer:
a = np.arange(6).reshape(2,3)
for x in np.nditer(a):
print(x, end=' ')
which prints
0 1 2 3 4 5