I need to organize a large df adding values of a column by a column ID (the ID is not sequencial), keeping some columns of the df that have repeated values by ID and excluding column that have different values by ID. Below I inserted a reproducible example and the output I need. I think there is a simple way to do that, but I am not soo familiar with R.
df=read.table(textConnection("
ID spp effort generalist specialist
1 a 10 1 0
1 b 10 1 0
1 c 10 0 1
1 d 10 0 1
2 a 16 1 0
2 b 16 1 0
2 e 16 0 1
"), header = TRUE)
The output I need:
ID effort generalist specialist
1 10 2 2
2 16 2 1
I have a data set :
data have;
input group $ value;
datalines;
A 4
A 3
A 2
A 1
B 1
C 1
D 2
D 1
E 1
F 1
G 2
G 1
H 1
;
run;
The first variable is a group identifier, the second a value.
For each group, I want a new variable "sum" with the sum of all values in the column, exept for the group the observation is in.
My issue is having to do that on nearly 30 millions of observations, so efficiency matters.
I found that using data step was more efficient than using procs.
The final database should looks like :
data want;
input group $ value $ sum;
datalines;
A 4 11
A 3 11
A 2 11
A 1 11
B 1 20
C 1 20
D 2 18
D 1 18
E 1 20
F 1 20
G 2 18
G 1 20
H 1 20
;
run;
Any idea how to perform this please?
Edit: I don't know if this matter but the example I gave is a simplified version of my issue. In the real case, I have 2 other group variable, thus taking the sum of the whole column and substract the sum in the group is not a viable solution.
The requirement
sum of all values in the column, except for the group the observation is in
indicates two passes of the data must occur:
Compute the all_sum and each group's group_sumA hash can store each group's sum -- computed via a specified suminc: variable and .ref() method invocation. A variable can accumulate allsum.
Compute allsum - group_sum for each row of a group.The group_sum is retrieved from hash and subtracted from allsum.
Example:
data want;
if 0 then set have; * prep pdv;
declare hash sums (suminc:'value');
sums.defineKey('group');
sums.defineDone();
do while (not hash_loaded);
set have end=hash_loaded;
sums.ref(); * adds value to internal sum of hash data record;
allsum + value;
end;
do while (not last_have);
set have end=last_have;
sums.sum(sum:sum); * retrieve groups sum. Do you hear the Dragnet theme too?;
sum = allsum - sum; * subtract from allsum;
output;
end;
stop;
run;
What is wrong with a straight forward approach? You need to make two passes no matter what you do.
Like this. I included extra variables so you can see how the values are derived.
proc sql ;
create table want as
select a.*,b.grand,sum(value) as total, b.grand - sum(value) as sum
from have a
, (select sum(value) as grand from have) b
group by a.group
;
quit;
Results:
Obs group value grand total sum
1 A 3 21 10 11
2 A 1 21 10 11
3 A 2 21 10 11
4 A 4 21 10 11
5 B 1 21 1 20
6 C 1 21 1 20
7 D 2 21 3 18
8 D 1 21 3 18
9 E 1 21 1 20
10 F 1 21 1 20
11 G 1 21 3 18
12 G 2 21 3 18
13 H 1 21 1 20
Note it does not matter what you have as your GROUP BY clause.
Do you really need to output all of the original observations? Why not just output the summary table?
proc sql ;
create table want as
select a.group, b.grand - sum(value) as sum
from have a
, (select sum(value) as grand from have) b
group by a.group
;
quit;
Results
Obs group total sum
1 A 10 11
2 B 1 20
3 C 1 20
4 D 3 18
5 E 1 20
6 F 1 20
7 G 3 18
8 H 1 20
I would break this out into two different segments:
1.) You could start by using PROC SQL to get the sums by the group
2.) Then use some IF/THEN statements to reassign the values by group
Suppose I have pandas DataFrame like this:
df = pd.DataFrame({'id':[1,1,1,2,2,2,2,3,4], 'value':[1,2,3,1,2,3,4,1,1]})
which looks like:
id value
0 1 1
1 1 2
2 1 3
3 2 1
4 2 2
5 2 3
6 2 4
7 3 1
8 4 1
I want to get a new DataFrame with top 2 records for each id, like this:
id value
0 1 1
1 1 2
3 2 1
4 2 2
7 3 1
8 4 1
I can do it with numbering records within group after groupby:
dfN = df.groupby('id').apply(lambda x:x['value'].reset_index()).reset_index()
which looks like:
id level_1 index value
0 1 0 0 1
1 1 1 1 2
2 1 2 2 3
3 2 0 3 1
4 2 1 4 2
5 2 2 5 3
6 2 3 6 4
7 3 0 7 1
8 4 0 8 1
then for the desired output:
dfN[dfN['level_1'] <= 1][['id', 'value']]
Output:
id value
0 1 1
1 1 2
3 2 1
4 2 2
7 3 1
8 4 1
But is there more effective/elegant approach to do this? And also is there more elegant approach to number records within each group (like SQL window function row_number()).
Did you try
df.groupby('id').head(2)
Output generated:
id value
id
1 0 1 1
1 1 2
2 3 2 1
4 2 2
3 7 3 1
4 8 4 1
(Keep in mind that you might need to order/sort before, depending on your data)
EDIT: As mentioned by the questioner, use
df.groupby('id').head(2).reset_index(drop=True)
to remove the MultiIndex and flatten the results:
id value
0 1 1
1 1 2
2 2 1
3 2 2
4 3 1
5 4 1
Since 0.14.1, you can now do nlargest and nsmallest on a groupby object:
In [23]: df.groupby('id')['value'].nlargest(2)
Out[23]:
id
1 2 3
1 2
2 6 4
5 3
3 7 1
4 8 1
dtype: int64
There's a slight weirdness that you get the original index in there as well, but this might be really useful depending on what your original index was.
If you're not interested in it, you can do .reset_index(level=1, drop=True) to get rid of it altogether.
(Note: From 0.17.1 you'll be able to do this on a DataFrameGroupBy too but for now it only works with Series and SeriesGroupBy.)
Sometimes sorting the whole data ahead is very time consuming.
We can groupby first and doing topk for each group:
g = df.groupby(['id']).apply(lambda x: x.nlargest(topk,['value'])).reset_index(drop=True)
df.groupby('id').apply(lambda x : x.sort_values(by = 'value', ascending = False).head(2).reset_index(drop = True))
Here sort values ascending false gives similar to nlargest and True gives similar to nsmallest.
The value inside the head is the same as the value we give inside nlargest to get the number of values to display for each group.
reset_index is optional and not necessary.
This works for duplicated values
If you have duplicated values in top-n values, and want only unique values, you can do like this:
import pandas as pd
ifile = "https://raw.githubusercontent.com/bhishanpdl/Shared/master/data/twitter_employee.tsv"
df = pd.read_csv(ifile,delimiter='\t')
print(df.query("department == 'Audit'")[['id','first_name','last_name','department','salary']])
id first_name last_name department salary
24 12 Shandler Bing Audit 110000
25 14 Jason Tom Audit 100000
26 16 Celine Anston Audit 100000
27 15 Michale Jackson Audit 70000
If we do not remove duplicates, for the audit department we get top 3 salaries as 110k,100k and 100k.
If we want to have not-duplicated salaries per each department, we can do this:
(df.groupby('department')['salary']
.apply(lambda ser: ser.drop_duplicates().nlargest(3))
.droplevel(level=1)
.sort_index()
.reset_index()
)
This gives
department salary
0 Audit 110000
1 Audit 100000
2 Audit 70000
3 Management 250000
4 Management 200000
5 Management 150000
6 Sales 220000
7 Sales 200000
8 Sales 150000
To get the first N rows of each group, another way is via groupby().nth[:N]. The outcome of this call is the same as groupby().head(N). For example, for the top-2 rows for each id, call:
N = 2
df1 = df.groupby('id', as_index=False).nth[:N]
To get the largest N values of each group, I suggest two approaches.
First sort by "id" and "value" (make sure to sort "id" in ascending order and "value" in descending order by using the ascending parameter appropriately) and then call groupby().nth[].
N = 2
df1 = df.sort_values(by=['id', 'value'], ascending=[True, False])
df1 = df1.groupby('id', as_index=False).nth[:N]
Another approach is to rank the values of each group and filter using these ranks.
# for the entire rows
N = 2
msk = df.groupby('id')['value'].rank(method='first', ascending=False) <= N
df1 = df[msk]
# for specific column rows
df1 = df.loc[msk, 'value']
Both of these are much faster than groupby().apply() and groupby().nlargest() calls as suggested in the other answers on here(1, 2, 3). On a sample with 100k rows and 8000 groups, a %timeit test showed that it was 24-150 times faster than those solutions.
Also, instead of slicing, you can also pass a list/tuple/range to a .nth() call:
df.groupby('id', as_index=False).nth([0,1])
# doesn't even have to be consecutive
# the following returns 1st and 3rd row of each id
df.groupby('id', as_index=False).nth([0,2])
From a given table I want to be able to sum values having the same number (should be easy, right?)
Problem: A given value can be assigned from 2 to n consecutive numbers.
For some reasons this information is stored in a single row describing the value, the starting number and the ending number as below.
TABLE A
id | starting_number | ending_number | value
----+-----------------+---------------+-------
1 2 5 8
2 0 3 5
3 4 6 6
4 7 8 10
For instance the first row means:
value '8' is assigned to numbers: 2, 3 and 4 (5 is excluded)
So, I would like the following intermediairy result table
TABLE B
id | number | value
----+--------+-------
1 2 8
1 3 8
1 4 8
2 0 5
2 1 5
2 2 5
3 4 6
3 5 6
4 7 10
So I can sum 'value' for elements having identical 'number'
SELECT number, sum(value)
FROM B
GROUP BY number
TABLE C
number | sum(value)
--------+------------
2 13
3 8
4 14
0 5
1 5
5 6
7 10
I don't know how to do this and didn't find any answer on the web (maybe not looking with appropriate key words...)
Any idea?
You can do what you want with generate_series(). So, TableB is basically:
select id, generate_series(starting_number, ending_number - 1, 1) as n, value
from tableA;
Your aggregation is then:
select n, sum(value)
from (select id, generate_series(starting_number, ending_number - 1, 1) as n, value
from tableA
) a
group by n;
This is in relation to my survey application for our team. I have 3 tables in my database related to this problem.
I apologize if the database is not fully normalized.
TBL_CHURCH columns:
1 FAM_CHURCH_SACRMNT_NUM (Primary Key) Int(15)
2 RSPONDNT_NUM
3 SURVYR_NUM
4 QN_NUMBER
5 CHRCHFAMLY_NAME
6 CHRCHFAMLY_ISBAPTIZED
Sample row based on order of columns above:
1 2 3 4 5 6
6422164 76826499 5712 362 Serio Tecson Jr. Yes
TBL_INTRVW columns:
1 QN_NUMBR (Primary Key)
2 SURVYR_NUM
3 ZONE_NUM
4 RSPONDNT_NUM
Sample row based on order of columns above:
1 2 3 4
362 5712 11 76826499
TBL_AREA columns:
1 BRGY_ZONE_NUM (Primary Key)
2 BRGY_CODE
Sample row based on order of columns above:
1 2
11 2A
21 2A
31 2A
The field CRCHFAMLY_ISBAPTIZED has only two values. A "Yes" or a "No" and each row has a QN_NUMBR value that is referenced to TBL_INTRVW and each QN_NUMBR on TBL_INTRVW has a unique ZONE_NUM that is referenced to TBL_AREA and that ZONE_NUM has a corresponding BRGY_CODE. Each BRGY_CODE have at least 2 ZONE_NUM values
My problem is that I want to count the number of people baptized in a given area.
The output more or less should look like this:
(The output is collected from the 3 different ZONE_NUM)
Zone Name Num of People Baptized
2A 20
I'm having what trouble what to use in my SQL statements. Should I use a WHERE within an INNER JOIN? And how do I go about in my SELECT statements?
SELECT c.BRGY_ZONE_NUM,count(a.CHRCHFAMLY_ISBAPTIZED) as [Num of People Baptized]
from TBL_CHURCH a
left join
TBL_INTRVW b
on a.QN_NUMBER=b.QN_NUMBER
left join
TBL_AREA c
on b.ZONE_NUM=cRGY_ZONE_NUM
where a.CHRCHFAMLY_ISBAPTIZED='Yes'
group by c.BRGY_ZONE_NUM
I dont see Zone Name column on the three table, so i used BRGY_ZONE_NUM