Skip to main content

functions - Partitioning a list when the cumulative sum exceeds 1


I have a long list of say 1 million Uniform(0,1) random numbers, such as:


 dat = {0.71, 0.685, 0.16, 0.82, 0.73, 0.44, 0.89, 0.02, 0.47, 0.65}

I want to partition this list whenever the cumulative sum exceeds 1. For the above data, the desired output would be:



{{0.71, 0.685}, {0.16, 0.82, 0.73}, {0.44, 0.89}, {0.02, 0.47, 0.65}}



I was trying to find a neat way to do this efficiently with Split combined with say Accumulate or FoldList or Total, but my attempts with Split have not been fruitful. Any suggestions?



Answer




dat = {0.71, 0.685, 0.16, 0.82, 0.73, 0.44, 0.89, 0.02, 0.47, 0.65};

Module[{t = 0},
Split[dat, (t += #) <= 1 || (t = 0) &]
]


{{0.71, 0.685}, {0.16, 0.82, 0.73}, {0.44, 0.89}, {0.02, 0.47, 0.65}}

Credit to Simon Woods for getting me to think about using Or in applications like this.





Performance


I decided to make an attempt at a higher performing solution at the cost of elegance and clarity.


f2[dat_List] := Module[{bin, lns},
bin = 1 - Unitize @ FoldList[If[# <= 1`, #, 0`] & @ +## &, dat];
lns = SparseArray[bin]["AdjacencyLists"] ~Prepend~ 0 // Differences;
Internal`PartitionRagged[dat,
If[# > 0, Append[lns, #], lns] &[Length @ dat - Tr @ lns]
]
]


And a second try at performance using Szabolcs's inversion:


f3[dat_List] :=
Module[{bin},
bin = 1 - Unitize @ FoldList[If[# <= 1`, #, 0`] & @ +## &, dat];
bin = Reverse @ Accumulate @ Reverse @ bin;
dat[[#]] & /@ GatherBy[Range @ Length @ dat, bin[[#]] &]
]

Using SplitBy seems natural here but it tested slower than GatherBy.



Modified October 2018 to use Carl Woll's GatherByList:


GatherByList[list_, representatives_] := Module[{func},
func /: Map[func, _] := representatives;
GatherBy[list, func]
]

f4[dat_List] :=
Module[{bin},
bin = 1 - Unitize @ FoldList[If[# <= 1`, #, 0`] & @ +## &, dat];
bin = Reverse @ Accumulate @ Reverse @ bin;

GatherByList[dat, bin]
]

The other functions to compare:


f1[dat_List] := Module[{t = 0}, Split[dat, (t += #) <= 1 || (t = 0) &]]

fqwerty[dat_List] :=
Module[{f},
f[x_, y_] := Module[{new}, If[Total[new = Append[x, y]] >= 1, Sow[new]; {}, new]];
Reap[Fold[f, {}, dat]][[2, 1]]

]

fAlgohi[dat_List] :=
Module[{i = 0, r},
Split[dat, (If[r, , i = 0]; i += #; r = i <= 1) &]
]

And a single point benchmark using "a long list of say 1 million Uniform(0,1) random numbers:"


SeedRandom[0]
test = RandomReal[1, 1*^6];


fqwerty[test] // Length // RepeatedTiming
fAlgohi[test] // Length // RepeatedTiming
f1[test] // Length // RepeatedTiming
f2[test] // Length // RepeatedTiming
f3[test] // Length // RepeatedTiming
f4[test] // Length // RepeatedTiming
main1[test] // Length // RepeatedTiming (* from LLlAMnYP's answer *)



{6.54, 368130}

{1.59, 368131}

{1.29, 368131}

{0.474, 368131}

{0.8499, 368131}


{0.4921, 368131}

{0.2622, 368131}

I note that qwerty's solution has one less sublist in the output because he does not include the final trailing elements if they do not exceed one. I do not know which behavior is desired.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

mathematical optimization - Minimizing using indices, error: Part::pkspec1: The expression cannot be used as a part specification

I want to use Minimize where the variables to minimize are indices pointing into an array. Here a MWE that hopefully shows what my problem is. vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@ { Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; Minimize[{Total@((vec1[[#]] - vec2[[u[#]]])^2 & /@ Range[1, 3]), cons}, vars, Integers] The error I get: Part::pkspec1: The expression u[1] cannot be used as a part specification. >> Answer Ok, it seems that one can get around Mathematica trying to evaluate vec2[[u[1]]] too early by using the function Indexed[vec2,u[1]] . The working MWE would then look like the following: vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@{ Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; NMinimize[ {Total@((vec1[[#]] - Indexed[vec2, u[#]])^2 & /@ R...

functions - Get leading series expansion term?

Given a function f[x] , I would like to have a function leadingSeries that returns just the leading term in the series around x=0 . For example: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x)] x and leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x^3)/4)/(4 + x)] -(1/(16 x^3)) Is there such a function in Mathematica? Or maybe one can implement it efficiently? EDIT I finally went with the following implementation, based on Carl Woll 's answer: lds[ex_,x_]:=( (ex/.x->(x+O[x]^2))/.SeriesData[U_,Z_,L_List,Mi_,Ma_,De_]:>SeriesData[U,Z,{L[[1]]},Mi,Mi+1,De]//Quiet//Normal) The advantage is, that this one also properly works with functions whose leading term is a constant: lds[Exp[x],x] 1 Answer Update 1 Updated to eliminate SeriesData and to not return additional terms Perhaps you could use: leadingSeries[expr_, x_] := Normal[expr /. x->(x+O[x]^2) /. a_List :> Take[a, 1]] Then for your examples: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x), x] leadingSeries[Exp[x], x] leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x...

What is and isn't a valid variable specification for Manipulate?

I have an expression whose terms have arguments (representing subscripts), like this: myExpr = A[0] + V[1,T] I would like to put it inside a Manipulate to see its value as I move around the parameters. (The goal is eventually to plot it wrt one of the variables inside.) However, Mathematica complains when I set V[1,T] as a manipulated variable: Manipulate[Evaluate[myExpr], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, T], 0, 1}] (*Manipulate::vsform: Manipulate argument {V[1,T],0,1} does not have the correct form for a variable specification. >> *) As a workaround, if I get rid of the symbol T inside the argument, it works fine: Manipulate[ Evaluate[myExpr /. T -> 15], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, 15], 0, 1}] Why this behavior? Can anyone point me to the documentation that says what counts as a valid variable? And is there a way to get Manpiulate to accept an expression with a symbolic argument as a variable? Investigations I've done so far: I tried using variableQ from this answer , but it says V[1...