效果很好

> a<-c(1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,5)
> names(table(a))[table(a)==max(table(a))]

模式并不是在所有情况下都有用。所以函数应该处理这种情况。试试下面的函数。

Mode <- function(v) {
  # checking unique numbers in the input
  uniqv <- unique(v)
  # frquency of most occured value in the input data
  m1 <- max(tabulate(match(v, uniqv)))
  n <- length(tabulate(match(v, uniqv)))
  # if all elements are same
  same_val_check <- all(diff(v) == 0)
  if(same_val_check == F){
    # frquency of second most occured value in the input data
    m2 <- sort(tabulate(match(v, uniqv)),partial=n-1)[n-1]
    if (m1 != m2) {
      # Returning the most repeated value
      mode <- uniqv[which.max(tabulate(match(v, uniqv)))]
    } else{
      mode <- "Two or more values have same frequency. So mode can't be calculated."
    }
  } else {
    # if all elements are same
    mode <- unique(v)
  }
  return(mode)
}

输出,

x1 <- c(1,2,3,3,3,4,5)
Mode(x1)
# [1] 3

x2 <- c(1,2,3,4,5)
Mode(x2)
# [1] "Two or more varibles have same frequency. So mode can't be calculated."

x3 <- c(1,1,2,3,3,4,5)
Mode(x3)
# [1] "Two or more values have same frequency. So mode can't be calculated."

我将使用density()函数来确定一个(可能是连续的)分布的平滑最大值:

function(x) density(x, 2)$x[density(x, 2)$y == max(density(x, 2)$y)]

其中x是数据集合。注意调节平滑的密度函数的调节参数。

在r邮件列表中发现了这个，希望对你有帮助。我也是这么想的。您将希望table()数据，排序，然后选择第一个名称。这有点粗俗，但应该有用。

names(sort(-table(x)))[1]

R有如此多的附加包，其中一些可以很好地提供数字列表/系列/向量的[统计]模式。

然而，R的标准库本身似乎没有这样一个内置的方法!解决这个问题的一种方法是使用一些像下面这样的结构(如果你经常使用…则将其转换为函数):

mySamples <- c(19, 4, 5, 7, 29, 19, 29, 13, 25, 19)
tabSmpl<-tabulate(mySamples)
SmplMode<-which(tabSmpl== max(tabSmpl))
if(sum(tabSmpl == max(tabSmpl))>1) SmplMode<-NA
> SmplMode
[1] 19

对于更大的示例列表，应该考虑使用一个临时变量max(tabSmpl)值(我不知道R会自动优化这个)

参考:参见KickStarting R课程中的“How about median and mode? 这似乎证实了(至少在写这节课的时候)R中没有模态函数(嗯…你会发现Mode()用于断言变量的类型)。

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.