或用于python计算的模块

在我在Tradewave.net的测试中，TA-lib总是赢:

import talib as ta
import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import scipy
from scipy import signal
import time as t

PAIR = info.primary_pair
PERIOD = 30

def initialize():
    storage.reset()
    storage.elapsed = storage.get('elapsed', [0,0,0,0,0,0])

def cumsum_sma(array, period):
    ret = np.cumsum(array, dtype=float)
    ret[period:] = ret[period:] - ret[:-period]
    return ret[period - 1:] / period

def pandas_sma(array, period):
    return pd.rolling_mean(array, period)

def api_sma(array, period):
    # this method is native to Tradewave and does NOT return an array
    return (data[PAIR].ma(PERIOD))

def talib_sma(array, period):
    return ta.MA(array, period)

def convolve_sma(array, period):
    return np.convolve(array, np.ones((period,))/period, mode='valid')

def fftconvolve_sma(array, period):    
    return scipy.signal.fftconvolve(
        array, np.ones((period,))/period, mode='valid')    

def tick():

    close = data[PAIR].warmup_period('close')

    t1 = t.time()
    sma_api = api_sma(close, PERIOD)
    t2 = t.time()
    sma_cumsum = cumsum_sma(close, PERIOD)
    t3 = t.time()
    sma_pandas = pandas_sma(close, PERIOD)
    t4 = t.time()
    sma_talib = talib_sma(close, PERIOD)
    t5 = t.time()
    sma_convolve = convolve_sma(close, PERIOD)
    t6 = t.time()
    sma_fftconvolve = fftconvolve_sma(close, PERIOD)
    t7 = t.time()

    storage.elapsed[-1] = storage.elapsed[-1] + t2-t1
    storage.elapsed[-2] = storage.elapsed[-2] + t3-t2
    storage.elapsed[-3] = storage.elapsed[-3] + t4-t3
    storage.elapsed[-4] = storage.elapsed[-4] + t5-t4
    storage.elapsed[-5] = storage.elapsed[-5] + t6-t5    
    storage.elapsed[-6] = storage.elapsed[-6] + t7-t6        

    plot('sma_api', sma_api)  
    plot('sma_cumsum', sma_cumsum[-5])
    plot('sma_pandas', sma_pandas[-10])
    plot('sma_talib', sma_talib[-15])
    plot('sma_convolve', sma_convolve[-20])    
    plot('sma_fftconvolve', sma_fftconvolve[-25])

def stop():

    log('ticks....: %s' % info.max_ticks)

    log('api......: %.5f' % storage.elapsed[-1])
    log('cumsum...: %.5f' % storage.elapsed[-2])
    log('pandas...: %.5f' % storage.elapsed[-3])
    log('talib....: %.5f' % storage.elapsed[-4])
    log('convolve.: %.5f' % storage.elapsed[-5])    
    log('fft......: %.5f' % storage.elapsed[-6])

结果:

[2015-01-31 23:00:00] ticks....: 744
[2015-01-31 23:00:00] api......: 0.16445
[2015-01-31 23:00:00] cumsum...: 0.03189
[2015-01-31 23:00:00] pandas...: 0.03677
[2015-01-31 23:00:00] talib....: 0.00700  # <<< Winner!
[2015-01-31 23:00:00] convolve.: 0.04871
[2015-01-31 23:00:00] fft......: 0.22306

我的解决方案是基于维基百科上的“简单移动平均”。

from numba import jit
@jit
def sma(x, N):
    s = np.zeros_like(x)
    k = 1 / N
    s[0] = x[0] * k
    for i in range(1, N + 1):
        s[i] = s[i - 1] + x[i] * k
    for i in range(N, x.shape[0]):
        s[i] = s[i - 1] + (x[i] - x[i - N]) * k
    s = s[N - 1:]
    return s

与之前建议的解决方案相比，它比scipy最快的解决方案“uniform_filter1d”快两倍，并且具有相同的错误顺序。 速度测试:

import numpy as np    
x = np.random.random(10000000)
N = 1000

from scipy.ndimage.filters import uniform_filter1d
%timeit uniform_filter1d(x, size=N)
95.7 ms ± 9.34 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 10 loops each)
%timeit sma(x, N)
47.3 ms ± 3.42 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)

错误的比较:

np.max(np.abs(np.convolve(x, np.ones((N,))/N, mode='valid') - uniform_filter1d(x, size=N, mode='constant', origin=-(N//2))[:-(N-1)]))
8.604228440844963e-14
np.max(np.abs(np.convolve(x, np.ones((N,))/N, mode='valid') - sma(x, N)))
1.41886502547095e-13

高效的解决方案

卷积比直接的方法好得多，但(我猜)它使用FFT，因此相当慢。但是，下面的方法特别适用于计算运行平均值

def running_mean(x, N):
    cumsum = numpy.cumsum(numpy.insert(x, 0, 0)) 
    return (cumsum[N:] - cumsum[:-N]) / float(N)

要检查的代码

In[3]: x = numpy.random.random(100000)
In[4]: N = 1000
In[5]: %timeit result1 = numpy.convolve(x, numpy.ones((N,))/N, mode='valid')
10 loops, best of 3: 41.4 ms per loop
In[6]: %timeit result2 = running_mean(x, N)
1000 loops, best of 3: 1.04 ms per loop

注意numpy。allclose(result1, result2)为True，两个方法等价。 N越大，时间差异越大。

警告:虽然cumsum更快，但会增加浮点错误，这可能导致您的结果无效/不正确/不可接受

这里的评论指出了这个浮点错误问题，但我在回答中让它更明显。

# demonstrate loss of precision with only 100,000 points
np.random.seed(42)
x = np.random.randn(100000)+1e6
y1 = running_mean_convolve(x, 10)
y2 = running_mean_cumsum(x, 10)
assert np.allclose(y1, y2, rtol=1e-12, atol=0)

the more points you accumulate over the greater the floating point error (so 1e5 points is noticable, 1e6 points is more significant, more than 1e6 and you may want to resetting the accumulators) you can cheat by using np.longdouble but your floating point error still will get significant for relatively large number of points (around >1e5 but depends on your data) you can plot the error and see it increasing relatively fast the convolve solution is slower but does not have this floating point loss of precision the uniform_filter1d solution is faster than this cumsum solution AND does not have this floating point loss of precision

我还没有检查这有多快，但你可以试试:

from collections import deque

cache = deque() # keep track of seen values
n = 10          # window size
A = xrange(100) # some dummy iterable
cum_sum = 0     # initialize cumulative sum

for t, val in enumerate(A, 1):
    cache.append(val)
    cum_sum += val
    if t < n:
        avg = cum_sum / float(t)
    else:                           # if window is saturated,
        cum_sum -= cache.popleft()  # subtract oldest value
        avg = cum_sum / float(n)

另一种不使用numpy或pandas找到移动平均线的方法

import itertools
sample = [2, 6, 10, 8, 11, 10]
list(itertools.starmap(
    lambda a,b: b/a, 
    enumerate(itertools.accumulate(sample), 1))
)

将打印[2.0,4.0,6.0,6.5,7.4,7.83333333333333333]

2.0 = (2)/1 4.0 is (2 + 6) / 2 6.0 = (2 + 6 + 10) / 3 .

我觉得使用瓶颈可以很好地解决这个问题

参见下面的基本示例:

import numpy as np
import bottleneck as bn

a = np.random.randint(4, 1000, size=100)
mm = bn.move_mean(a, window=5, min_count=1)

“mm”是“a”的移动平均值。 “窗口”是考虑移动均值的最大条目数。 "min_count"是考虑移动平均值的最小条目数(例如，对于前几个元素或如果数组有nan值)。

好在瓶颈有助于处理nan值，而且非常高效。