使用pandas模块:

>>> import pandas as pd
>>> import numpy as np
>>> x = np.array([1,1,1,2,2,2,5,25,1,1])
>>> pd.value_counts(x)
1     5
2     3
25    1
5     1
dtype: int64

为了计算唯一的非整数——类似于Eelco Hoogendoorn的答案，但速度要快得多(在我的机器上是5倍)，我使用了weave。内联组合numpy。只有一点c代码;

import numpy as np
from scipy import weave

def count_unique(datain):
  """
  Similar to numpy.unique function for returning unique members of
  data, but also returns their counts
  """
  data = np.sort(datain)
  uniq = np.unique(data)
  nums = np.zeros(uniq.shape, dtype='int')

  code="""
  int i,count,j;
  j=0;
  count=0;
  for(i=1; i<Ndata[0]; i++){
      count++;
      if(data(i) > data(i-1)){
          nums(j) = count;
          count = 0;
          j++;
      }
  }
  // Handle last value
  nums(j) = count+1;
  """
  weave.inline(code,
      ['data', 'nums'],
      extra_compile_args=['-O2'],
      type_converters=weave.converters.blitz)
  return uniq, nums

配置文件信息

> %timeit count_unique(data)
> 10000 loops, best of 3: 55.1 µs per loop

Eelco的纯numpy版本:

> %timeit unique_count(data)
> 1000 loops, best of 3: 284 µs per loop

Note

这里存在冗余(unique也执行排序)，这意味着可以通过将唯一功能放入c-code循环中来进一步优化代码。

Most of simple problems get complicated because simple functionality like order() in R that gives a statistical result in both and descending order is missing in various python libraries. But if we devise our thinking that all such statistical ordering and parameters in python are easily found in pandas, we can can result sooner than looking in 100 different places. Also, development of R and pandas go hand-in-hand because they were created for same purpose. To solve this problem I use following code that gets me by anywhere:

unique, counts = np.unique(x, return_counts=True)
d = {'unique':unique, 'counts':count}  # pass the list to a dictionary
df = pd.DataFrame(d) #dictionary object can be easily passed to make a dataframe
df.sort_values(by = 'count', ascending=False, inplace = True)
df = df.reset_index(drop=True) #optional only if you want to use it further

from collections import Counter
x = array( [1,1,1,2,2,2,5,25,1,1] )
mode = counter.most_common(1)[0][0]

这是迄今为止最通用和性能最好的解决方案;很惊讶它还没有发布。

import numpy as np

def unique_count(a):
    unique, inverse = np.unique(a, return_inverse=True)
    count = np.zeros(len(unique), np.int)
    np.add.at(count, inverse, 1)
    return np.vstack(( unique, count)).T

print unique_count(np.random.randint(-10,10,100))

与目前接受的答案不同，它适用于任何可排序的数据类型(不仅仅是正整数)，并且具有最佳性能;唯一重要的开销是np.unique所做的排序。

使用numpy。唯一的return_counts=True (NumPy 1.9+):

import numpy as np

x = np.array([1,1,1,2,2,2,5,25,1,1])
unique, counts = np.unique(x, return_counts=True)

>>> print(np.asarray((unique, counts)).T)
 [[ 1  5]
  [ 2  3]
  [ 5  1]
  [25  1]]

与scipy.stats.itemfreq相比:

In [4]: x = np.random.random_integers(0,100,1e6)

In [5]: %timeit unique, counts = np.unique(x, return_counts=True)
10 loops, best of 3: 31.5 ms per loop

In [6]: %timeit scipy.stats.itemfreq(x)
10 loops, best of 3: 170 ms per loop