Python中是否有SciPy函数或NumPy函数或模块来计算给定特定窗口的1D数组的运行平均值?
当前回答
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)
其他回答
仅使用Python标准库(内存高效)
只提供标准库deque的另一个版本。令我惊讶的是,大多数答案都使用pandas或numpy。
def moving_average(iterable, n=3):
d = deque(maxlen=n)
for i in iterable:
d.append(i)
if len(d) == n:
yield sum(d)/n
r = moving_average([40, 30, 50, 46, 39, 44])
assert list(r) == [40.0, 42.0, 45.0, 43.0]
实际上,我在python文档中找到了另一个实现
def moving_average(iterable, n=3):
# moving_average([40, 30, 50, 46, 39, 44]) --> 40.0 42.0 45.0 43.0
# http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_average
it = iter(iterable)
d = deque(itertools.islice(it, n-1))
d.appendleft(0)
s = sum(d)
for elem in it:
s += elem - d.popleft()
d.append(elem)
yield s / n
然而,在我看来,实现似乎比它应该的要复杂一些。但它肯定在标准python文档中是有原因的,有人能评论一下我的实现和标准文档吗?
这个问题现在甚至比NeXuS上个月写的时候更古老,但我喜欢他的代码处理边缘情况的方式。然而,因为它是一个“简单移动平均”,它的结果滞后于它们应用的数据。我认为,通过对基于卷积()的方法应用类似的方法,可以以比NumPy的模式valid、same和full更令人满意的方式处理边缘情况。
我的贡献使用了一个中央运行平均值,以使其结果与他们的数据相一致。当可供使用的全尺寸窗口的点太少时,将从数组边缘的连续较小窗口计算运行平均值。[实际上,从连续较大的窗口,但这是一个实现细节。]
import numpy as np
def running_mean(l, N):
# Also works for the(strictly invalid) cases when N is even.
if (N//2)*2 == N:
N = N - 1
front = np.zeros(N//2)
back = np.zeros(N//2)
for i in range(1, (N//2)*2, 2):
front[i//2] = np.convolve(l[:i], np.ones((i,))/i, mode = 'valid')
for i in range(1, (N//2)*2, 2):
back[i//2] = np.convolve(l[-i:], np.ones((i,))/i, mode = 'valid')
return np.concatenate([front, np.convolve(l, np.ones((N,))/N, mode = 'valid'), back[::-1]])
它相对较慢,因为它使用了卷积(),并且可能会被真正的Pythonista修饰很多,但是,我相信这个想法是成立的。
更新:下面的例子展示了老熊猫。Rolling_mean函数,该函数在最近版本的pandas中已被删除。该函数调用的现代等价函数将使用pandas.Series.rolling:
In [8]: pd.Series(x).rolling(window=N).mean().iloc[N-1:].values
Out[8]:
array([ 0.49815397, 0.49844183, 0.49840518, ..., 0.49488191,
0.49456679, 0.49427121])
pandas比NumPy或SciPy更适合这一点。它的函数rolling_mean很方便地完成了这项工作。当输入是一个数组时,它还返回一个NumPy数组。
使用任何定制的纯Python实现都很难在性能上击败rolling_mean。下面是针对两个提议的解决方案的性能示例:
In [1]: import numpy as np
In [2]: import pandas as pd
In [3]: def running_mean(x, N):
...: cumsum = np.cumsum(np.insert(x, 0, 0))
...: return (cumsum[N:] - cumsum[:-N]) / N
...:
In [4]: x = np.random.random(100000)
In [5]: N = 1000
In [6]: %timeit np.convolve(x, np.ones((N,))/N, mode='valid')
10 loops, best of 3: 172 ms per loop
In [7]: %timeit running_mean(x, N)
100 loops, best of 3: 6.72 ms per loop
In [8]: %timeit pd.rolling_mean(x, N)[N-1:]
100 loops, best of 3: 4.74 ms per loop
In [9]: np.allclose(pd.rolling_mean(x, N)[N-1:], running_mean(x, N))
Out[9]: True
关于如何处理边缘值,也有很好的选项。
从其他答案来看,我不认为这是问题所要求的,但我需要保持一个不断增长的值列表的运行平均值。
因此,如果你想保持从某个地方(站点,测量设备等)获取的值的列表和最近n个值更新的平均值,你可以使用下面的代码,这将最大限度地减少添加新元素的工作:
class Running_Average(object):
def __init__(self, buffer_size=10):
"""
Create a new Running_Average object.
This object allows the efficient calculation of the average of the last
`buffer_size` numbers added to it.
Examples
--------
>>> a = Running_Average(2)
>>> a.add(1)
>>> a.get()
1.0
>>> a.add(1) # there are two 1 in buffer
>>> a.get()
1.0
>>> a.add(2) # there's a 1 and a 2 in the buffer
>>> a.get()
1.5
>>> a.add(2)
>>> a.get() # now there's only two 2 in the buffer
2.0
"""
self._buffer_size = int(buffer_size) # make sure it's an int
self.reset()
def add(self, new):
"""
Add a new number to the buffer, or replaces the oldest one there.
"""
new = float(new) # make sure it's a float
n = len(self._buffer)
if n < self.buffer_size: # still have to had numbers to the buffer.
self._buffer.append(new)
if self._average != self._average: # ~ if isNaN().
self._average = new # no previous numbers, so it's new.
else:
self._average *= n # so it's only the sum of numbers.
self._average += new # add new number.
self._average /= (n+1) # divide by new number of numbers.
else: # buffer full, replace oldest value.
old = self._buffer[self._index] # the previous oldest number.
self._buffer[self._index] = new # replace with new one.
self._index += 1 # update the index and make sure it's...
self._index %= self.buffer_size # ... smaller than buffer_size.
self._average -= old/self.buffer_size # remove old one...
self._average += new/self.buffer_size # ...and add new one...
# ... weighted by the number of elements.
def __call__(self):
"""
Return the moving average value, for the lazy ones who don't want
to write .get .
"""
return self._average
def get(self):
"""
Return the moving average value.
"""
return self()
def reset(self):
"""
Reset the moving average.
If for some reason you don't want to just create a new one.
"""
self._buffer = [] # could use np.empty(self.buffer_size)...
self._index = 0 # and use this to keep track of how many numbers.
self._average = float('nan') # could use np.NaN .
def get_buffer_size(self):
"""
Return current buffer_size.
"""
return self._buffer_size
def set_buffer_size(self, buffer_size):
"""
>>> a = Running_Average(10)
>>> for i in range(15):
... a.add(i)
...
>>> a()
9.5
>>> a._buffer # should not access this!!
[10.0, 11.0, 12.0, 13.0, 14.0, 5.0, 6.0, 7.0, 8.0, 9.0]
Decreasing buffer size:
>>> a.buffer_size = 6
>>> a._buffer # should not access this!!
[9.0, 10.0, 11.0, 12.0, 13.0, 14.0]
>>> a.buffer_size = 2
>>> a._buffer
[13.0, 14.0]
Increasing buffer size:
>>> a.buffer_size = 5
Warning: no older data available!
>>> a._buffer
[13.0, 14.0]
Keeping buffer size:
>>> a = Running_Average(10)
>>> for i in range(15):
... a.add(i)
...
>>> a()
9.5
>>> a._buffer # should not access this!!
[10.0, 11.0, 12.0, 13.0, 14.0, 5.0, 6.0, 7.0, 8.0, 9.0]
>>> a.buffer_size = 10 # reorders buffer!
>>> a._buffer
[5.0, 6.0, 7.0, 8.0, 9.0, 10.0, 11.0, 12.0, 13.0, 14.0]
"""
buffer_size = int(buffer_size)
# order the buffer so index is zero again:
new_buffer = self._buffer[self._index:]
new_buffer.extend(self._buffer[:self._index])
self._index = 0
if self._buffer_size < buffer_size:
print('Warning: no older data available!') # should use Warnings!
else:
diff = self._buffer_size - buffer_size
print(diff)
new_buffer = new_buffer[diff:]
self._buffer_size = buffer_size
self._buffer = new_buffer
buffer_size = property(get_buffer_size, set_buffer_size)
你可以测试它,例如:
def graph_test(N=200):
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
values = list(range(N))
values_average_calculator = Running_Average(N/2)
values_averages = []
for value in values:
values_average_calculator.add(value)
values_averages.append(values_average_calculator())
fig, ax = plt.subplots(1, 1)
ax.plot(values, label='values')
ax.plot(values_averages, label='averages')
ax.grid()
ax.set_xlim(0, N)
ax.set_ylim(0, N)
fig.show()
这使:
你可以使用scipy. nmage .uniform_filter1d:
import numpy as np
from scipy.ndimage import uniform_filter1d
N = 1000
x = np.random.random(100000)
y = uniform_filter1d(x, size=N)
uniform_filter1d:
给出具有相同numpy形状的输出(即点数) 允许多种方式处理边界,其中'reflect'是默认的,但在我的情况下,我更想要'nearest'
它也相当快(比np快近50倍)。卷积,比上述cumsum方法快2-5倍):
%timeit y1 = np.convolve(x, np.ones((N,))/N, mode='same')
100 loops, best of 3: 9.28 ms per loop
%timeit y2 = uniform_filter1d(x, size=N)
10000 loops, best of 3: 191 µs per loop
这里有3个函数可以让你比较不同实现的错误/速度:
from __future__ import division
import numpy as np
import scipy.ndimage as ndi
def running_mean_convolve(x, N):
return np.convolve(x, np.ones(N) / float(N), 'valid')
def running_mean_cumsum(x, N):
cumsum = np.cumsum(np.insert(x, 0, 0))
return (cumsum[N:] - cumsum[:-N]) / float(N)
def running_mean_uniform_filter1d(x, N):
return ndi.uniform_filter1d(x, N, mode='constant', origin=-(N//2))[:-(N-1)]