I have two dataframes as:
df1.ix[1:3]
DateTime
2018-01-02 [-0.0031537018416199097, 0.006451397621428631,...
2018-01-03 [-0.0028882814454597745, -0.005829869983964528...
df2.ix[1:3]
DateTime
2018-01-02 [-0.03285881500135208, -0.027806145786217932, ...
2018-01-03 [-0.0001314381449719178, -0.006278235444742629...
len(df1.ix['2018-01-02'][0])
500
len(df2.ix['2018-01-02'][0])
500
When I do df1 + df2 I get:
len((df1 + df2).ix['2018-01-02'][0])
1000
So, the lists instead of being summation is being concatenated.
How do I add element wise the lists in the dataframes df1 and df2.
When an operation is applied between two dataframes, it gets broadcasted at element level. Element in your case is a list and when '+' operator is applied between two lists, it concatenates them. That's why resulting dataframe contains concatenated lists.
There can be multiple approaches for actually summing up elements of lists instead of concatenating.
One approach can be converting list elements into columns and then adding dataframes and then merging columns back to a single list.(which has been suggested in first answer but in a wrong way)
Step 1: Converting list elements to columns
df1=df1.apply(lambda row:pd.Series(row[0]), axis=1)
df2=df2.apply(lambda row:pd.Series(row[0]), axis=1)
We need to pass row[0] instead of row to get rid of column index associated with series.
Step 2: Add dataframes
df=df1+df2 #this dataframe will have 500 columns
Step 3: Merge columns back to lists
df=df.apply(lambda row:pd.Series({0:list(row)}),axis=1)
This is an interesting part. Why are we returning a series here? Why only returning list(row) doesn't work and keep retaining 500 columns?
Reason is - if length of list returned is same as length of columns in the beginning, then this list gets fit in columns and to us it seems nothing happened. Whereas if length of the list is not equal to number of columns, then it is returned as single list.
Let's look at an example.
Suppose I've a dataframe, having columns 0 ,1 and 2.
df=pd.DataFrame({0:[1,2,3],1:[4,5,6],2:[7,8,9]})
0 1 2
0 1 4 7
1 2 5 8
2 3 6 9
Number of columns in original dataframe are 3. If I try to return a list with two columns, it works and a series is returned,
df1=df.apply(lambda row:[row[0],row[1]],axis=1)
0 [1, 4]
1 [2, 5]
2 [3, 6]
dtype: object
Instead if try to return list of three numbers, it would get fit in columns.
df1=df.apply(list,axis=1)
0 1 2
0 1 4 7
1 2 5 8
2 3 6 9
So if we want to return list of same size as number of columns, we'll have to return it in form of Series where one row's value has been given as list.
Another approach can be, introduce one column of a dataframe into other and then add columns using apply function.
df1[1]=df2[0]
df=df1.apply(lambda r: list(np.array(r[0])+np.array(r[1])),axis=1)
We can take advantage of numpy arrays here. '+' operator on numpy arrays sums up corresponding values and gives a single numpy array.
Cast them to series so that they become columns, then add your dfs:
df1 = df1.apply(pd.Series, axis=1)
df2 = df2.apply(pd.Series, axis=1)
df1 + df2
Related
I have two data frames which look like df1 and df2 below and I want to create df3 as shown.
I could do this using a left join to have all the rows in one dataframe and then did a numpy.where to see if they are matching or not.
I could get what I want but I feel there should be an elegant way of doing this which will eliminate renaming columns, reshuffling columns in dataframe and then using np.where.
Is there a better way to do this?
code to reproduce dataframes:
import pandas as pd
df1=pd.DataFrame({'product':['apples','bananas','oranges','pineapples'],'price':[1,2,3,7],'quantity':[5,7,11,4]})
df2=pd.DataFrame({'product':['apples','bananas','oranges'],'price':[2,2,4],'quantity':[5,7,13]})
df3=pd.DataFrame({'product':['apples','bananas','oranges'],'price_df1':[1,2,3],'price_df2':[2,2,4],'price_match':['No','Yes','No'],'quantity':[5,7,11],'quantity_df2':[5,7,13],'quantity_match':['Yes','Yes','No']})
An elegant way to do your task is to:
generate "partial" DataFrames from each source column,
and then concatenate them.
The first step is to define a function to join 2 source columns and append "match" column:
def myJoin(s1, s2):
rv = s1.to_frame().join(s2.to_frame(), how='inner',
lsuffix='_df1', rsuffix='_df2')
rv[s1.name + '_match'] = np.where(rv.iloc[:,0] == rv.iloc[:,1], 'Yes', 'No')
return rv
Then, from df1 and df2, generate 2 auxiliary DataFrames setting product as the index:
wrk1 = df1.set_index('product')
wrk2 = df2.set_index('product')
And the final step is:
result = pd.concat([ myJoin(wrk1[col], wrk2[col]) for col in wrk1.columns ], axis=1)\
.reset_index()
Details:
for col in wrk1.columns - generates names of columns to join.
myJoin(wrk1[col], wrk2[col]) - generates the partial result for this column from
both source DataFrames.
[…] - a list comprehension, collecting the above partial results in a list.
pd.concat(…) - concatenates these partial results into the final result.
reset_index() - converts the index (product names) into a regular column.
For your source data, the result is:
product price_df1 price_df2 price_match quantity_df1 quantity_df2 quantity_match
0 apples 1 2 No 5 5 Yes
1 bananas 2 2 Yes 7 7 Yes
2 oranges 3 4 No 11 13 No
I have a pandas dataframe where some values are integers and other values are an array. I simply want to drop all of the rows that contain the array (object datatype I believe) in my "ORIGIN_AIRPORT_ID" column, but I have not been able to figure out how to do so after trying many methods.
Here is what the first 20 rows of my dataframe looks like. The values that show up like a list are the ones I want to remove. The dataset is a couple million rows, so I just need to write code that removes all of the array-like values in that specific dataframe column if that makes sense.
df = df[df.origin_airport_ID.str.contains(',') == False]
You should consider next time giving us a data sample in text, instead of a figure. It's easier for us to test your example.
Original data:
ITIN_ID ORIGIN_AIRPORT_ID
0 20194146 10397
1 20194147 10397
2 20194148 10397
3 20194149 [10397, 10398, 10399, 10400]
4 20194150 10397
In your case, you can use the .to_numeric pandas function:
df['ORIGIN_AIRPORT_ID'] = pd.to_numeric(df['ORIGIN_AIRPORT_ID'], errors='coerce')
It replaces every cell that cannot be converted into a number to a NaN ( Not a Number ), so we get:
ITIN_ID ORIGIN_AIRPORT_ID
0 20194146 10397.0
1 20194147 10397.0
2 20194148 10397.0
3 20194149 NaN
4 20194150 10397.0
To remove these rows now just use .dropna
df = df.dropna().astype('int')
Which results in your desired DataFrame
ITIN_ID ORIGIN_AIRPORT_ID
0 20194146 10397
1 20194147 10397
2 20194148 10397
4 20194150 10397
I'm attempting to determine the number of widget failures from a test population.
Each widget can fail in 0, 1, or multiple ways. I'd like to calculate the number of failures of for each failure method, but once a widget is known to have failed, it should be excluded from future sums. In other words, the failure modes are known and ordered. If a widget fails via mode 1 and mode 3, I don't care about mode 3: I just want to count mode 1.
I have a dataframe with one row per item, and one column per failure mode. If the widget fails in that mode, the column value is 1, else it is 0.
d = {"item_1":
{"failure_1":0, "failure_2":0},
"item_2":
{"failure_1":1, "failure_2":0},
"item_3":
{"failure_1":0, "failure_2":1},
"item_4":
{"failure_1":1, "failure_2":1}}
df = pd.DataFrame(d).T
display(df)
Output:
failure_1 failure_2
item_1 0 0
item_2 1 0
item_3 0 1
item_4 1 1
If I just want to sum the columns, that's easy: df.sum(). And if I want to calculate percentage failures, easy too: df.sum()/len(df). But this counts widgets that fail in multiple ways, multiple times. For the problem stated, the best I can come up with is this:
# create empty df to store results
df2 = pd.DataFrame(columns=["total_failures"])
for col in df.columns:
# create a row, named after the column, and assign it the value of the sum
df2.loc[col] = df[col].sum()
# drop rows in the df column that are equal to 1
df = df.loc[df[col] != 1]
display(df2)
Output:
total_failures
failure_1 2
failure_2 1
This requires creating another dataframe (that's fine), but also requires iterating over the existing dataframe columns and deleting it a couple of rows at a time. If the dataframe takes a while to generate, or is needed for future calculations, this is not workable. I can deal with iterating over the columns.
Is there a way to do this without deleting the original df, or making a temporary copy? (Not workable with large data sets.)
You can do a cumsum on axis=1 and wherever the value is greater than 1 , mask it as 0 and then take sum:
out = df.mask(df.cumsum(axis=1).gt(1), 0).sum().to_frame('total_failures')
print(out)
total_failures
failure_1 2
failure_2 1
This way the original df is retained too.
I have a list of strings, and two separate pandas dataframes. One of the dataframes contains NaNs. I am trying to find a fast way of checking if any item in the list is contained in either of the dataframes, and if so, to remove it from the list.
Currently, I do this with list comprehension. I first concatenate the two dataframes. I then loop through the list, and using an if statement check if it is contained in the concatenated dataframe values.
patches = [patch for patch in patches if not patch in bad_patches.values]
The first 5 elements of my list of strings:
patches[1:5]
['S2A_MSIL2A_20170613T101031_11_52',
'S2A_MSIL2A_20170717T113321_35_89',
'S2A_MSIL2A_20170613T101031_12_39',
'S2A_MSIL2A_20170613T101031_11_77']
An example of one of my dataframes, with the second being the same but containing less rows. Note first row contains patches[2].
cloud_patches.head()
0 S2A_MSIL2A_20170717T113321_35_89
1 S2A_MSIL2A_20170717T113321_39_84
2 S2B_MSIL2A_20171112T114339_0_13
3 S2B_MSIL2A_20171112T114339_0_52
4 S2B_MSIL2A_20171112T114339_0_53
The concatenated dataframe:
bad_patches = pd.concat([cloud_patches, snow_patches], axis=1)
bad_patches.head()
0 S2A_MSIL2A_20170717T113321_35_89 S2B_MSIL2A_20170831T095029_27_76
1 S2A_MSIL2A_20170717T113321_39_84 S2B_MSIL2A_20170831T095029_27_85
2 S2B_MSIL2A_20171112T114339_0_13 S2B_MSIL2A_20170831T095029_29_75
3 S2B_MSIL2A_20171112T114339_0_52 S2B_MSIL2A_20170831T095029_30_75
4 S2B_MSIL2A_20171112T114339_0_53 S2B_MSIL2A_20170831T095029_30_78
and the tail, showing the NaNs of one column:
bad_patches.tail()
61702 NaN S2A_MSIL2A_20180228T101021_43_6
61703 NaN S2A_MSIL2A_20180228T101021_43_8
61704 NaN S2A_MSIL2A_20180228T101021_43_11
61705 NaN S2A_MSIL2A_20180228T101021_43_13
61706 NaN S2A_MSIL2A_20180228T101021_43_16
Column headers are all (poorly) named 0.
The second element of patches should be removed as it's contained in the first row of bad_patches. My method does work but takes absolutely ages. Bad_patches is 60,000 rows and the length of patches is variable. Right now for a length of 1000 patches it takes a 2.04 seconds but I need to scale up to 500k patches so hoping there is a faster way. Thanks!
I would create a set with the values from cloud_patches and snow_patches. Then also create a set of patches:
patch_set = set(cloud_patches[0]).union(set(snow_patches[0])
patches = set(patches)
Now you just subtract all values in patch_set from the values in patches, and you will be left with only values in patches that do not show up in cloud_patches nor snow_patches:
cleaned_list = list(patches - patch_set)
I am new to pandas. I know how to use drop_duplicates and take the last observed row in a dataframe. Is there any way that I can use it to take only second last observed. Or any other way of doing it.
For example:
I would like to go from
df = pd.DataFrame(data={'A':[1,1,1,2,2,2],'B':[1,2,3,4,5,6]}) to
df1 = pd.DataFrame(data={'A':[1,2],'B':[2,5]})
The idea is that you'll group the data by the duplicate column , then check the length of group , if the length of group is greater than or equal 2 this mean that you can slice the second element of group , if the group has a length of one which mean that this value is not duplicated , then take index 0 which is the only element in the grouped data
df.groupby(df['A']).apply(lambda x : x.iloc[1] if len(x) >= 2 else x.iloc[0])
The first answer I think was on the right track, but possibly not quite right. I have extended your data to include 'A' groups with two observations, and an 'A' group with one observation, for the sake of completeness.
import pandas as pd
df = pd.DataFrame(data={'A':[1,1,1,2,2,2, 3, 3, 4],'B':[1,2,3,4,5,6, 7, 8, 9]})
def user_apply_func(x):
if len(x) == 2:
return x.iloc[0]
if len(x) > 2:
return x.iloc[-2]
return
df.groupby('A').apply(user_apply_func)
Out[7]:
A B
A
1 1 2
2 2 5
3 3 7
4 NaN NaN
For your reference the apply method automatically passes the data frame as the first argument.
Also, as you are always going to be reducing each group of data to a single observation you could also use the agg method (aggregate). apply is more flexible in terms of the length of the sequences that can be returned whereas agg must reduce the data to a single value.
df.groupby('A').agg(user_apply_func)