下面是一个查找模式的函数:

mode <- function(x) {
  unique_val <- unique(x)
  counts <- vector()
  for (i in 1:length(unique_val)) {
    counts[i] <- length(which(x==unique_val[i]))
  }
  position <- c(which(counts==max(counts)))
  if (mean(counts)==max(counts)) 
    mode_x <- 'Mode does not exist'
  else 
    mode_x <- unique_val[position]
  return(mode_x)
}

抱歉，我可能把它理解得太简单了，但这不是可以工作的吗?(我的机器上的1E6值在1.3秒内):

t0 <- Sys.time()
summary(as.factor(round(rnorm(1e6), 2)))[1]
Sys.time()-t0

你只需要用你的向量替换“round(rnorm(1e6)，2)”。

另一个简单的选项是使用rle来给出所有按频率排序的值:

df = as.data.frame(unclass(rle(sort(mySamples))))
df = df[order(-df$lengths),]
head(df)

这个黑客应该工作良好。给你的值以及模式的计数:

Mode <- function(x){
a = table(x) # x is a vector
return(a[which.max(a)])
}

如果你问R中的内置函数，也许你可以在软件包pracma中找到它。在这个包中，有一个叫做Mode的函数。

我浏览了所有这些选项，开始想知道它们的相对特性和性能，所以我做了一些测试。如果其他人也好奇，我在这里分享我的结果。

我不想为这里发布的所有函数而烦恼，我选择了一个基于一些标准的示例:函数应该对字符、因子、逻辑和数字向量都有效，它应该适当地处理na和其他有问题的值，输出应该是“合理的”，即没有数字作为字符或其他类似的愚蠢行为。

我还添加了一个我自己的函数，它是基于与chrispy相同的想法，除了适应更一般的用途:

library(magrittr)

Aksel <- function(x, freq=FALSE) {
    z <- 2
    if (freq) z <- 1:2
    run <- x %>% as.vector %>% sort %>% rle %>% unclass %>% data.frame
    colnames(run) <- c("freq", "value")
    run[which(run$freq==max(run$freq)), z] %>% as.vector   
}

set.seed(2)

F <- sample(c("yes", "no", "maybe", NA), 10, replace=TRUE) %>% factor
Aksel(F)

# [1] maybe yes  

C <- sample(c("Steve", "Jane", "Jonas", "Petra"), 20, replace=TRUE)
Aksel(C, freq=TRUE)

# freq value
#    7 Steve

最后，我通过微基准测试在两组测试数据上运行了五个函数。函数名指的是它们各自的作者:

Chris的函数被设置为method="modes"和na。rm=TRUE默认值，以使其更具可比性，但除此之外，这里使用的函数是由它们的作者提供的。

In matter of speed alone Kens version wins handily, but it is also the only one of these that will only report one mode, no matter how many there really are. As is often the case, there's a trade-off between speed and versatility. In method="mode", Chris' version will return a value iff there is one mode, else NA. I think that's a nice touch. I also think it's interesting how some of the functions are affected by an increased number of unique values, while others aren't nearly as much. I haven't studied the code in detail to figure out why that is, apart from eliminating logical/numeric as a the cause.