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

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 .

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。

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)

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

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。