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

出于教学目的，让我再添加两个Numpy解决方案(比cumsum解决方案慢):

import numpy as np
from numpy.lib.stride_tricks import as_strided

def ra_strides(arr, window):
    ''' Running average using as_strided'''
    n = arr.shape[0] - window + 1
    arr_strided = as_strided(arr, shape=[n, window], strides=2*arr.strides)
    return arr_strided.mean(axis=1)

def ra_add(arr, window):
    ''' Running average using add.reduceat'''
    n = arr.shape[0] - window + 1
    indices = np.array([0, window]*n) + np.repeat(np.arange(n), 2)
    arr = np.append(arr, 0)
    return np.add.reduceat(arr, indices )[::2]/window

使用的函数:as_strided, add.reduceat

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。

对于一个简短、快速的解决方案，在一个循环中完成所有事情，没有依赖关系，下面的代码工作得很好。

mylist = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]
N = 3
cumsum, moving_aves = [0], []

for i, x in enumerate(mylist, 1):
    cumsum.append(cumsum[i-1] + x)
    if i>=N:
        moving_ave = (cumsum[i] - cumsum[i-N])/N
        #can do stuff with moving_ave here
        moving_aves.append(moving_ave)

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)