下面是@Ari Onasafari的scipy版本，回答“在向量数组中找到最近的向量”

In [1]: from scipy import spatial

In [2]: import numpy as np

In [3]: A = np.random.random((10,2))*100

In [4]: A
Out[4]:
array([[ 68.83402637,  38.07632221],
       [ 76.84704074,  24.9395109 ],
       [ 16.26715795,  98.52763827],
       [ 70.99411985,  67.31740151],
       [ 71.72452181,  24.13516764],
       [ 17.22707611,  20.65425362],
       [ 43.85122458,  21.50624882],
       [ 76.71987125,  44.95031274],
       [ 63.77341073,  78.87417774],
       [  8.45828909,  30.18426696]])

In [5]: pt = [6, 30]  # <-- the point to find

In [6]: A[spatial.KDTree(A).query(pt)[1]] # <-- the nearest point 
Out[6]: array([  8.45828909,  30.18426696])

#how it works!
In [7]: distance,index = spatial.KDTree(A).query(pt)

In [8]: distance # <-- The distances to the nearest neighbors
Out[8]: 2.4651855048258393

In [9]: index # <-- The locations of the neighbors
Out[9]: 9

#then 
In [10]: A[index]
Out[10]: array([  8.45828909,  30.18426696])

这是unutbu答案的矢量化版本:

def find_nearest(array, values):
    array = np.asarray(array)

    # the last dim must be 1 to broadcast in (array - values) below.
    values = np.expand_dims(values, axis=-1) 

    indices = np.abs(array - values).argmin(axis=-1)

    return array[indices]


image = plt.imread('example_3_band_image.jpg')

print(image.shape) # should be (nrows, ncols, 3)

quantiles = np.linspace(0, 255, num=2 ** 2, dtype=np.uint8)

quantiled_image = find_nearest(quantiles, image)

print(quantiled_image.shape) # should be (nrows, ncols, 3)

答案总结:如果有一个排序的数组，那么平分代码(如下所示)执行最快。大型数组快100-1000倍，小型数组快2-100倍。它也不需要numpy。 如果你有一个未排序的数组，那么如果数组很大，应该首先考虑使用O(n logn)排序，然后平分，如果数组很小，那么方法2似乎是最快的。

First you should clarify what you mean by nearest value. Often one wants the interval in an abscissa, e.g. array=[0,0.7,2.1], value=1.95, answer would be idx=1. This is the case that I suspect you need (otherwise the following can be modified very easily with a followup conditional statement once you find the interval). I will note that the optimal way to perform this is with bisection (which I will provide first - note it does not require numpy at all and is faster than using numpy functions because they perform redundant operations). Then I will provide a timing comparison against the others presented here by other users.

二等分的一半:

def bisection(array,value):
    '''Given an ``array`` , and given a ``value`` , returns an index j such that ``value`` is between array[j]
    and array[j+1]. ``array`` must be monotonic increasing. j=-1 or j=len(array) is returned
    to indicate that ``value`` is out of range below and above respectively.'''
    n = len(array)
    if (value < array[0]):
        return -1
    elif (value > array[n-1]):
        return n
    jl = 0# Initialize lower
    ju = n-1# and upper limits.
    while (ju-jl > 1):# If we are not yet done,
        jm=(ju+jl) >> 1# compute a midpoint with a bitshift
        if (value >= array[jm]):
            jl=jm# and replace either the lower limit
        else:
            ju=jm# or the upper limit, as appropriate.
        # Repeat until the test condition is satisfied.
    if (value == array[0]):# edge cases at bottom
        return 0
    elif (value == array[n-1]):# and top
        return n-1
    else:
        return jl

现在我将从其他答案定义代码，它们都返回一个索引:

import math
import numpy as np

def find_nearest1(array,value):
    idx,val = min(enumerate(array), key=lambda x: abs(x[1]-value))
    return idx

def find_nearest2(array, values):
    indices = np.abs(np.subtract.outer(array, values)).argmin(0)
    return indices

def find_nearest3(array, values):
    values = np.atleast_1d(values)
    indices = np.abs(np.int64(np.subtract.outer(array, values))).argmin(0)
    out = array[indices]
    return indices

def find_nearest4(array,value):
    idx = (np.abs(array-value)).argmin()
    return idx


def find_nearest5(array, value):
    idx_sorted = np.argsort(array)
    sorted_array = np.array(array[idx_sorted])
    idx = np.searchsorted(sorted_array, value, side="left")
    if idx >= len(array):
        idx_nearest = idx_sorted[len(array)-1]
    elif idx == 0:
        idx_nearest = idx_sorted[0]
    else:
        if abs(value - sorted_array[idx-1]) < abs(value - sorted_array[idx]):
            idx_nearest = idx_sorted[idx-1]
        else:
            idx_nearest = idx_sorted[idx]
    return idx_nearest

def find_nearest6(array,value):
    xi = np.argmin(np.abs(np.ceil(array[None].T - value)),axis=0)
    return xi

现在我来计时代码: 注意方法1、2、4、5没有正确给出间隔。方法1、2、4四舍五入到数组中最近的点(例如>=1.5 -> 2)，方法5总是四舍五入(例如1.45 -> 2)。只有方法3和6，当然还有对半给出了正确的间隔。

array = np.arange(100000)
val = array[50000]+0.55
print( bisection(array,val))
%timeit bisection(array,val)
print( find_nearest1(array,val))
%timeit find_nearest1(array,val)
print( find_nearest2(array,val))
%timeit find_nearest2(array,val)
print( find_nearest3(array,val))
%timeit find_nearest3(array,val)
print( find_nearest4(array,val))
%timeit find_nearest4(array,val)
print( find_nearest5(array,val))
%timeit find_nearest5(array,val)
print( find_nearest6(array,val))
%timeit find_nearest6(array,val)

(50000, 50000)
100000 loops, best of 3: 4.4 µs per loop
50001
1 loop, best of 3: 180 ms per loop
50001
1000 loops, best of 3: 267 µs per loop
[50000]
1000 loops, best of 3: 390 µs per loop
50001
1000 loops, best of 3: 259 µs per loop
50001
1000 loops, best of 3: 1.21 ms per loop
[50000]
1000 loops, best of 3: 746 µs per loop

对于一个大数组的对半分割是4us，而次之的是180us，最长的是1.21ms(快100 - 1000倍)。对于较小的数组，它要快2-100倍。

所有的答案都有助于收集信息来编写高效的代码。但是，我已经编写了一个小的Python脚本来针对各种情况进行优化。如果提供的数组已排序，则将是最佳情况。如果搜索一个指定值的最近点的索引，那么对半模块是最省时的。当一个索引对应一个数组时，numpy searchsorted是最有效的。

import numpy as np
import bisect
xarr = np.random.rand(int(1e7))

srt_ind = xarr.argsort()
xar = xarr.copy()[srt_ind]
xlist = xar.tolist()
bisect.bisect_left(xlist, 0.3)

In[63]: %时间平分。bisect_left (xlist, 0.3) CPU次数:user 0ns, sys: 0ns, total: 0ns 壁时间:22.2µs

np.searchsorted(xar, 0.3, side="left")

In [64]: %time np。Searchsorted (xar, 0.3, side="left") CPU次数:user 0ns, sys: 0ns, total: 0ns 壁时间:98.9µs

randpts = np.random.rand(1000)
np.searchsorted(xar, randpts, side="left")

%的时间np。Searchsorted (xar, randpts, side="left") CPU次数:用户4ms, sys: 0ns, total: 4ms 壁时间:1.2 ms

如果我们遵循乘法规则，那么numpy应该花费~100 ms，这意味着快了~83倍。

下面是一个处理非标量“values”数组的版本:

import numpy as np

def find_nearest(array, values):
    indices = np.abs(np.subtract.outer(array, values)).argmin(0)
    return array[indices]

如果输入是标量，则返回数字类型(例如int, float)的版本:

def find_nearest(array, values):
    values = np.atleast_1d(values)
    indices = np.abs(np.subtract.outer(array, values)).argmin(0)
    out = array[indices]
    return out if len(out) > 1 else out[0]

import numpy as np
def find_nearest(array, value):
    array = np.array(array)
    z=np.abs(array-value)
    y= np.where(z == z.min())
    m=np.array(y)
    x=m[0,0]
    y=m[1,0]
    near_value=array[x,y]

    return near_value

array =np.array([[60,200,30],[3,30,50],[20,1,-50],[20,-500,11]])
print(array)
value = 0
print(find_nearest(array, value))