I am trying to implement a time fold function to be 'map'ed to various partitions of a dask dataframe which in turn changes the shape of the dataframe in question (or alternatively produces a new dataframe with the altered shape). This is how far I have gotten. The result 'res' returned on compute is a list of 3 delayed objects. When I try to compute each of them in a loop (last tow lines of code) this results in a "TypeError: 'DataFrame' object is not callable" After going through the examples for map_partitions, I also tried altering the input DF (inplace) in the function with no return value which causes a similar TypeError with NoneType. What am I missing?
Also, looking at the visualization (attached) I feel like there is a need for reducing the individually computed (folded) partitions into a single DF. How do I do this?
#! /usr/bin/env python
# Start dask scheduler and workers
# dask-scheduler &
# dask-worker --nthreads 1 --nprocs 6 --memory-limit 3GB localhost:8786 --local-directory /dev/shm &
from dask.distributed import Client
from dask.delayed import delayed
import pandas as pd
import numpy as np
import dask.dataframe as dd
import math
foldbucketsecs=30
periodicitysecs=15
secsinday=24 * 60 * 60
chunksizesecs=60 # 1 minute
numts = 5
start = 1525132800 # 01/05
end = 1525132800 + (3 * 60) # 3 minute
c = Client('127.0.0.1:8786')
def fold(df, start, bucket):
return df
def reduce_folds(df):
return df
def load(epoch):
idx = []
for ts in range(0, chunksizesecs, periodicitysecs):
idx.append(epoch + ts)
d = np.random.rand(chunksizesecs/periodicitysecs, numts)
ts = []
for i in range(0, numts):
tsname = "ts_%s" % (i)
ts.append(tsname)
gts.append(tsname)
res = pd.DataFrame(index=idx, data=d, columns=ts, dtype=np.float64)
res.index = pd.to_datetime(arg=res.index, unit='s')
return res
gts = []
load(start)
cols = len(gts)
idx1 = pd.DatetimeIndex(start=start, freq=('%sS' % periodicitysecs), end=start+periodicitysecs, dtype='datetime64[s]')
meta = pd.DataFrame(index=idx1[:0], data=[], columns=gts, dtype=np.float64)
dfs = [delayed(load)(fn) for fn in range(start, end, chunksizesecs)]
from_delayed = dd.from_delayed(dfs, meta, 'sorted')
nfolds = int(math.ceil((end - start)/foldbucketsecs))
cprime = nfolds * cols
gtsnew = []
for i in range(0, cprime):
gtsnew.append("ts_%s,fold=%s" % (i%cols, i/cols))
idx2 = pd.DatetimeIndex(start=start, freq=('%sS' % periodicitysecs), end=start+foldbucketsecs, dtype='datetime64[s]')
meta = pd.DataFrame(index=idx2[:0], data=[], columns=gtsnew, dtype=np.float64)
folded_df = from_delayed.map_partitions(delayed(fold)(from_delayed, start, foldbucketsecs), meta=meta)
result = c.submit(reduce_folds, folded_df)
c.gather(result).visualize(filename='/usr/share/nginx/html/svg/df4.svg')
res = c.gather(result).compute()
for f in res:
f.compute()
Never mind! It was my fault, instead of wrapping my function in delayed I simply passed it to the map_partitions call like so and it worked.
folded_df = from_delayed.map_partitions(fold, start, foldbucketsecs, nfolds, meta=meta)
Related
In my code, I am trying to extract data from csv file to use in the function, but it doesnt output anything, and gives no error. My code works because I tried it with just numpy array as inputs. not sure why it doesnt work with panda.
import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import os
# change the current directory to the directory where the running script file is
os.chdir(os.path.dirname(os.path.abspath(__file__)))
# finding best fit line for y=mx+b by iteration
def gradient_descent(x,y):
m_iter = b_iter = 1 #starting point
iteration = 10000
n = len(x)
learning_rate = 0.05
last_mse = 10000
#take baby steps to reach global minima
for i in range(iteration):
y_predicted = m_iter*x + b_iter
#mse = 1/n*sum([value**2 for value in (y-y_predicted)]) # cost function to minimize
mse = 1/n*sum((y-y_predicted)**2) # cost function to minimize
if (last_mse - mse)/mse < 0.001:
break
# recall MSE formula is 1/n*sum((yi-y_predicted)^2), where y_predicted = m*x+b
# using partial deriv of MSE formula, d/dm and d/db
dm = -(2/n)*sum(x*(y-y_predicted))
db = -(2/n)*sum((y-y_predicted))
# use current predicted value to get the next value for prediction
# by using learning rate
m_iter = m_iter - learning_rate*dm
b_iter = b_iter - learning_rate*db
print('m is {}, b is {}, cost is {}, iteration {}'.format(m_iter,b_iter,mse,i))
last_mse = mse
#x = np.array([1,2,3,4,5])
#y = np.array([5,7,8,10,13])
#gradient_descent(x,y)
df = pd.read_csv('Linear_Data.csv')
x = df['Area']
y = df['Price']
gradient_descent(x,y)
My code works because I tried it with just numpy array as inputs. not sure why it doesnt work with panda.
Well no, your code also works with pandas dataframes:
df = pd.DataFrame({'Area': [1,2,3,4,5], 'Price': [5,7,8,10,13]})
x = df['Area']
y = df['Price']
gradient_descent(x,y)
Above will give you the same output as with numpy arrays.
Try to check what's in Linear_Data.csv and/or add some print statements in the gradient_descent function just to check your assumptions. I would suggest to first of all add a print statement before the condition with the break statement:
print(last_mse, mse)
if (last_mse - mse)/mse < 0.001:
break
Overview
The code below contains a numpy array clusters with values that are compared against each row of a pandas Dataframe using np.where. The SoFunc function returns rows where all conditions are True and takes the clusters array as input.
Question
I can loop through this array to compare each array element against the respective np.where conditions. How do I remove the requirement to loop but still get the same output?
I appreciate looping though numpy arrays is inefficient and want to improve this code. The actual dataset will be much larger.
Prepare the reproducible mock data
def genMockDataFrame(days,startPrice,colName,startDate,seed=None):
periods = days*24
np.random.seed(seed)
steps = np.random.normal(loc=0, scale=0.0018, size=periods)
steps[0]=0
P = startPrice+np.cumsum(steps)
P = [round(i,4) for i in P]
fxDF = pd.DataFrame({
'ticker':np.repeat( [colName], periods ),
'date':np.tile( pd.date_range(startDate, periods=periods, freq='H'), 1 ),
'price':(P)})
fxDF.index = pd.to_datetime(fxDF.date)
fxDF = fxDF.price.resample('D').ohlc()
fxDF.columns = [i.title() for i in fxDF.columns]
return fxDF
def SoFunc(clust):
#generate mock data
df = genMockDataFrame(10,1.1904,'eurusd','19/3/2020',seed=157)
df["Upper_Band"] = 1.1928
df.loc["2020-03-27", "Upper_Band"] = 1.2118
df.loc["2020-03-26", "Upper_Band"] = 1.2200
df["Level"] = np.where((df["High"] >= clust)
& (df["Low"] <= clust)
& (df["High"] >= df["Upper_Band"] ),1,np.NaN
)
return df.dropna()
Loop through the clusters array
clusters = np.array([1.1929 , 1.2118 ])
l = []
for i in range(len(clusters)):
l.append(SoFunc(clusters[i]))
pd.concat(l)
Output
Open High Low Close Upper_Band Level
date
2020-03-19 1.1904 1.1937 1.1832 1.1832 1.1928 1.0
2020-03-25 1.1939 1.1939 1.1864 1.1936 1.1928 1.0
2020-03-27 1.2118 1.2144 1.2039 1.2089 1.2118 1.0
(Edited based on #tdy's comment below)
pandas.merge allows you to make len(clusters) copies of your dataframe and then pare it down to according to the conditions in your SoFunc function.
The cross merge creates a dataframe with a copy of df for each record in clusters_df. The overall result ought to be faster for large dataframes than the loop-based approach, provided you have enough memory to temporarily accommodate the merged dataframe (if not, the operation may spill over onto page / swap and slow down drastically).
import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
def genMockDataFrame(days,startPrice,colName,startDate,seed=None):
''' identical to the example provided '''
periods = days*24
np.random.seed(seed)
steps = np.random.normal(loc=0, scale=0.0018, size=periods)
steps[0]=0
P = startPrice+np.cumsum(steps)
P = [round(i,4) for i in P]
fxDF = pd.DataFrame({
'ticker':np.repeat( [colName], periods ),
'date':np.tile( pd.date_range(startDate, periods=periods, freq='H'), 1 ),
'price':(P)})
fxDF.index = pd.to_datetime(fxDF.date)
fxDF = fxDF.price.resample('D').ohlc()
fxDF.columns = [i.title() for i in fxDF.columns]
return fxDF
# create the base dataframe according to the former SoFunc
df = genMockDataFrame(10,1.1904,'eurusd','19/3/2020',seed=157)
df["Upper_Band"] = 1.1928
df.loc["2020-03-27"]["Upper_Band"] = 1.2118
df.loc["2020-03-26"]["Upper_Band"] = 1.2200
# create a df out of the cluster array
clusters = np.array([1.1929 , 1.2118 ])
clusters_df = pd.DataFrame({"clust": clusters})
# perform the merge, then filter and finally clean up
result_df = (
pd
.merge(df.reset_index(), clusters_df, how="cross") # for each entry in cluster, make a copy of df
.loc[lambda z: (z.Low <= z.clust) & (z.High >= z.clust) & (z.High >= z.Upper_Band), :] # filter the copies down
.drop(columns=["clust"]) # not needed in result
.assign(Level=1.0) # to match your result; not really needed
.set_index("date") # bring back the old index
)
print(result_df)
I recommend inspecting just the result of pd.merge(df.reset_index(), clusters_df, how="cross") to see how it works.
i'm trying to solve tsp with OR-tools for a problem of something like 80,000 nodes, the problem is, I need a huge distance matrix that takes to much memory ,so its infeasible and i don't get a solution.
so:
is there an option to work with partial distance matrix in or-tools?
if not is there a way to improve my code?
is there another external solver that can work for this task in python?
import math
from collections import namedtuple
import random
import time
from collections import namedtuple
from sklearn.metrics.pairwise import euclidean_distances
import numpy as np
import numba
from scipy.spatial import distance_matrix
from sklearn.metrics.pairwise import euclidean_distances
from math import sqrt
Point = namedtuple("Point", ['x', 'y'])
def solve_it(input_data):
# Modify this code to run your optimization algorithm
global POINTS
# parse the input
lines = input_data.split('\n')
nodeCount = int(lines[0])
points = []
for i in range(1, nodeCount+1):
line = lines[i]
parts = line.split()
points.append(Point(float(parts[0]), float(parts[1])))
#2.routing with or tools
def dist_matrix(nodeCount,points):
data=[]
for k in range(len(points)):
data.append([int(points[k].x),int(points[k].y)])
D=euclidean_distances(data, data)
return D
def create_data_model(D):
"""Stores the data for the problem."""
data = {}
data['distance_matrix'] = D # yapf: disable
data['num_vehicles'] = 1
data['depot'] = 0
return data
def print_solution(manager, routing, solution):
index = routing.Start(0)
plan_output = []#Route for vehicle 0:\n'
route_distance = 0
while not routing.IsEnd(index):
plan_output.append(manager.IndexToNode(index))
index = solution.Value(routing.NextVar(index))
return plan_output
def or_main(nodeCount,points):
from ortools.constraint_solver import routing_enums_pb2
from ortools.constraint_solver import pywrapcp
"""Entry point of the program."""
# Instantiate the data problem.
global sol
D=dist_matrix(nodeCount,points)
data = create_data_model(D)
# Create the routing index manager.
manager = pywrapcp.RoutingIndexManager(len(data['distance_matrix']),
data['num_vehicles'], data['depot'])
# Create Routing Model.
routing = pywrapcp.RoutingModel(manager)
def distance_callback(from_index, to_index):
"""Returns the distance between the two nodes."""
# Convert from routing variable Index to distance matrix NodeIndex.
from_node = manager.IndexToNode(from_index)
to_node = manager.IndexToNode(to_index)
return data['distance_matrix'][from_node][to_node]
transit_callback_index = routing.RegisterTransitCallback(distance_callback)
# Define cost of each arc.
routing.SetArcCostEvaluatorOfAllVehicles(transit_callback_index)
# Setting first solution heuristic.
search_parameters = pywrapcp.DefaultRoutingSearchParameters()
search_parameters.local_search_metaheuristic = (
routing_enums_pb2.LocalSearchMetaheuristic.GUIDED_LOCAL_SEARCH)
k = 100
if nodeCount <= 100:
k = 30
elif 100 <= nodeCount <= 1000:
k = 300
elif nodeCount > 1000:
k = 17000
search_parameters.time_limit.seconds =k
search_parameters.log_search = True
# Solve the problem.
solution = routing.SolveWithParameters(search_parameters)
# #print solution on console.
if solution:
sol=print_solution(manager, routing, solution)
return sol
######################################################################
solution=or_main(nodeCount,points)
# calculate the length of the tour
obj = length(points[solution[-1]], points[solution[0]])
for index in range(0, nodeCount-1):
obj += length(points[solution[index]], points[solution[index+1]])
# prepare the solution in the specified output format
output_data = '%.2f' % obj + ' ' + str(0) + '\n'
output_data += ' '.join(map(str, solution))
return output_data
if __name__ == '__main__':
import sys
if len(sys.argv) > 1:
file_location = sys.argv[1].strip()
with open(file_location, 'r') as input_data_file:
input_data = input_data_file.read()
#print(solve_it(input_data))
else:
print('This test requires an input file. Please select one from the data directory. (i.e. python solver.py ./data/tsp_51_1)')
I have a large time series of np.float64 with a 5-min frequency (size is ~2,500,000 ~=24 years).
I'm using Xarray to represent it in-memory and the time-dimension is named 'time'.
I want to group-by 'time.hour' and then 'time.dayofyear' (or vice-versa) and remove both their mean from the time-series.
In order to do that efficiently, i need to reorder the time-series into a new xr.DataArray with the dimensions of ['hour', 'dayofyear', 'rest'].
I wrote a function that plays with the GroupBy objects of Xarray and manages to do just that although it takes a lot of memory to do that...
I have a machine with 32GB RAM and i still get the MemoryError from numpy.
I know the code works because i used it on an hourly re-sampled version of my original time-series. so here's the code:
def time_series_stack(time_da, time_dim='time', grp1='hour', grp2='dayofyear'):
"""Takes a time-series xr.DataArray objects and reshapes it using
grp1 and grp2. outout is a xr.Dataset that includes the reshaped DataArray
, its datetime-series and the grps."""
import xarray as xr
import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
# try to infer the freq and put it into attrs for later reconstruction:
freq = pd.infer_freq(time_da[time_dim].values)
name = time_da.name
time_da.attrs['freq'] = freq
attrs = time_da.attrs
# drop all NaNs:
time_da = time_da.dropna(time_dim)
# group grp1 and concat:
grp_obj1 = time_da.groupby(time_dim + '.' + grp1)
s_list = []
for grp_name, grp_inds in grp_obj1.groups.items():
da = time_da.isel({time_dim: grp_inds})
s_list.append(da)
grps1 = [x for x in grp_obj1.groups.keys()]
stacked_da = xr.concat(s_list, dim=grp1)
stacked_da[grp1] = grps1
# group over the concatenated da and concat again:
grp_obj2 = stacked_da.groupby(time_dim + '.' + grp2)
s_list = []
for grp_name, grp_inds in grp_obj2.groups.items():
da = stacked_da.isel({time_dim: grp_inds})
s_list.append(da)
grps2 = [x for x in grp_obj2.groups.keys()]
stacked_da = xr.concat(s_list, dim=grp2)
stacked_da[grp2] = grps2
# numpy part:
# first, loop over both dims and drop NaNs, append values and datetimes:
vals = []
dts = []
for i, grp1_val in enumerate(stacked_da[grp1]):
da = stacked_da.sel({grp1: grp1_val})
for j, grp2_val in enumerate(da[grp2]):
val = da.sel({grp2: grp2_val}).dropna(time_dim)
vals.append(val.values)
dts.append(val[time_dim].values)
# second, we get the max of the vals after the second groupby:
max_size = max([len(x) for x in vals])
# we fill NaNs and NaT for the remainder of them:
concat_sizes = [max_size - len(x) for x in vals]
concat_arrys = [np.empty((x)) * np.nan for x in concat_sizes]
concat_vals = [np.concatenate(x) for x in list(zip(vals, concat_arrys))]
# 1970-01-01 is the NaT for this time-series:
concat_arrys = [np.zeros((x), dtype='datetime64[ns]')
for x in concat_sizes]
concat_dts = [np.concatenate(x) for x in list(zip(dts, concat_arrys))]
concat_vals = np.array(concat_vals)
concat_dts = np.array(concat_dts)
# finally , we reshape them:
concat_vals = concat_vals.reshape((stacked_da[grp1].shape[0],
stacked_da[grp2].shape[0],
max_size))
concat_dts = concat_dts.reshape((stacked_da[grp1].shape[0],
stacked_da[grp2].shape[0],
max_size))
# create a Dataset and DataArrays for them:
sda = xr.Dataset()
sda.attrs = attrs
sda[name] = xr.DataArray(concat_vals, dims=[grp1, grp2, 'rest'])
sda[time_dim] = xr.DataArray(concat_dts, dims=[grp1, grp2, 'rest'])
sda[grp1] = grps1
sda[grp2] = grps2
sda['rest'] = range(max_size)
return sda
So for the 2,500,000 items time-series, numpy throws the MemoryError so I'm guessing this has to be my memory bottle-neck. What can i do to solve this ?
Would Dask help me ? and if so how can i implement it ?
Like you, I ran it without issue when inputting a small time series (10,000 long). However, when inputting a 100,000 long time series xr.DataArraythe grp_obj2 for loop ran away and used all the memory of the system.
This is what I used to generate the time series xr.DataArray:
n = 10**5
times = np.datetime64('2000-01-01') + np.arange(n) * np.timedelta64(5,'m')
data = np.random.randn(n)
time_da = xr.DataArray(data, name='rand_data', dims=('time'), coords={'time': times})
# time_da.to_netcdf('rand_time_series.nc')
As you point out, Dask would be a way to solve it but I can't see a clear path at the moment...
Typically, the kind of problem with Dask would be to:
Make the input a dataset from a file (like NetCDF). This will not load the file in memory but allow Dask to pull data from disk one chunk at a time.
Define all calculations with dask.delayed or dask.futures methods for entire body of code up until the writing the output. This is what allows Dask to chunk a small piece of data to read then write.
Calculate one chunk of work and immediately write output to new dataset file. Effectively you ending up steaming one chunk of input to one chunk of output at a time (but also threaded/parallelized).
I tried importing Dask and breaking the input time_da xr.DataArray into chunks for Dask to work on but it didn't help. From what I can tell, the line stacked_da = xr.concat(s_list, dim=grp1) forces Dask to make a full copy of stacked_da in memory and much more...
One workaround to this is to write stacked_da to disk then immediately read it again:
##For group1
xr.concat(s_list, dim=grp1).to_netcdf('stacked_da1.nc')
stacked_da = xr.load_dataset('stacked_da1.nc')
stacked_da[grp1] = grps1
##For group2
xr.concat(s_list, dim=grp2).to_netcdf('stacked_da2.nc')
stacked_da = xr.load_dataset('stacked_da2.nc')
stacked_da[grp2] = grps2
However, the file size for stacked_da1.nc is 19MB and stacked_da2.nc gets huge at 6.5GB. This is for time_da with 100,000 elements... so there's clearly something amiss...
Originally, it sounded like you want to subtract the mean of the groups from the time series data. It looks like Xarray docs has an example for that. http://xarray.pydata.org/en/stable/groupby.html#grouped-arithmetic
The key is to group once and loop over the groups and then group again on each of the groups and append it to list.
Next i concat and use pd.MultiIndex.from_product for the groups.
No Memory problems and no Dask needed and it only takes a few seconds to run.
here's the code, enjoy:
def time_series_stack(time_da, time_dim='time', grp1='hour', grp2='month',
plot=True):
"""Takes a time-series xr.DataArray objects and reshapes it using
grp1 and grp2. output is a xr.Dataset that includes the reshaped DataArray
, its datetime-series and the grps. plots the mean also"""
import xarray as xr
import pandas as pd
# try to infer the freq and put it into attrs for later reconstruction:
freq = pd.infer_freq(time_da[time_dim].values)
name = time_da.name
time_da.attrs['freq'] = freq
attrs = time_da.attrs
# drop all NaNs:
time_da = time_da.dropna(time_dim)
# first grouping:
grp_obj1 = time_da.groupby(time_dim + '.' + grp1)
da_list = []
t_list = []
for grp1_name, grp1_inds in grp_obj1.groups.items():
da = time_da.isel({time_dim: grp1_inds})
# second grouping:
grp_obj2 = da.groupby(time_dim + '.' + grp2)
for grp2_name, grp2_inds in grp_obj2.groups.items():
da2 = da.isel({time_dim: grp2_inds})
# extract datetimes and rewrite time coord to 'rest':
times = da2[time_dim]
times = times.rename({time_dim: 'rest'})
times.coords['rest'] = range(len(times))
t_list.append(times)
da2 = da2.rename({time_dim: 'rest'})
da2.coords['rest'] = range(len(da2))
da_list.append(da2)
# get group keys:
grps1 = [x for x in grp_obj1.groups.keys()]
grps2 = [x for x in grp_obj2.groups.keys()]
# concat and convert to dataset:
stacked_ds = xr.concat(da_list, dim='all').to_dataset(name=name)
stacked_ds[time_dim] = xr.concat(t_list, 'all')
# create a multiindex for the groups:
mindex = pd.MultiIndex.from_product([grps1, grps2], names=[grp1, grp2])
stacked_ds.coords['all'] = mindex
# unstack:
ds = stacked_ds.unstack('all')
ds.attrs = attrs
return ds
In the following, func represents a function that uses multiple columns (with coupling across the group) and cannot operate directly on pandas.Series. The 0*d['x'] syntax was the lightest I could think of to force the conversion, but I think it's awkward.
Additionally, the resulting pandas.Series (s) still includes the group index, which must be removed before adding as a column to the pandas.DataFrame. The s.reset_index(...) index manipulation seems fragile and error-prone, so I'm curious if it can be avoided. Is there an idiom for doing this?
import pandas
import numpy
df = pandas.DataFrame(dict(i=[1]*8,j=[1]*4+[2]*4,x=list(range(4))*2))
df['y'] = numpy.sin(df['x']) + 1000*df['j']
df = df.set_index(['i','j'])
print('# df\n', df)
def func(d):
x = numpy.array(d['x'])
y = numpy.array(d['y'])
# I want to do math with x,y that cannot be applied to
# pandas.Series, so explicitly convert to numpy arrays.
#
# We have to return an appropriately-indexed pandas.Series
# in order for it to be admissible as a column in the
# pandas.DataFrame. Instead of simply "return x + y", we
# have to make the conversion.
return 0*d['x'] + x + y
s = df.groupby(df.index).apply(func)
# The Series is still adorned with the (unnamed) group index,
# which will prevent adding as a column of df due to
# Exception: cannot handle a non-unique multi-index!
s = s.reset_index(level=0, drop=True)
print('# s\n', s)
df['z'] = s
print('# df\n', df)
Instead of
0*d['x'] + x + y
you could use
pd.Series(x+y, index=d.index)
When using groupy-apply, instead of dropping the group key index using:
s = df.groupby(df.index).apply(func)
s = s.reset_index(level=0, drop=True)
df['z'] = s
you can tell groupby to drop the keys using the keyword parameter group_keys=False:
df['z'] = df.groupby(df.index, group_keys=False).apply(func)
import pandas as pd
import numpy as np
df = pd.DataFrame(dict(i=[1]*8,j=[1]*4+[2]*4,x=list(range(4))*2))
df['y'] = np.sin(df['x']) + 1000*df['j']
df = df.set_index(['i','j'])
def func(d):
x = np.array(d['x'])
y = np.array(d['y'])
return pd.Series(x+y, index=d.index)
df['z'] = df.groupby(df.index, group_keys=False).apply(func)
print(df)
yields
x y z
i j
1 1 0 1000.000000 1000.000000
1 1 1000.841471 1001.841471
1 2 1000.909297 1002.909297
1 3 1000.141120 1003.141120
2 0 2000.000000 2000.000000
2 1 2000.841471 2001.841471
2 2 2000.909297 2002.909297
2 3 2000.141120 2003.141120