Skip to main content

list manipulation - how to efficiently apply function to all pairs of a set (and collect the results)


To build a graph, I need to apply a function f[a_, b_] to all pairs of a list (3500 elements). The function itself returns a link {a <-> b} if a particular relation holds - I collect all the results into a list and use it as input to Graph[].


The question is: is there an efficient and elegant way to do this? I've tried two ways: a recursive method and a (similar) iterative method. The former went over the usual recursion limits, the latter was slow and (I believe) not the optimal way to do it.



Both of these performed by applying f[] to the First[] element vs. the 2nd, 3rd, ...Last[] elements, and collecting the results. Then I'd remove the First[] from the list, and repeat - doing n*(n-1)/2 evaluations of f[]. This many evaluations is required, but I definitely do not have a clean, functional implementation.


So, in short, if this can be turned into an efficient 1-liner, instead of a loop, please do let me know! Thanks in advance.



Answer



There are two built-in functions to generate pairs, either with (Tuples) or without (Subsets) duplication. Since your question states the number of iterations as $n*(n-1)/2$ I believe you want the latter:


set = {1, 2, 3, 4};
Subsets[set, {2}]


{{1, 2}, {1, 3}, {1, 4}, {2, 3}, {2, 4}, {3, 4}}


The short notation for Apply at level 1 is @@@, so this gives f for each pair:


f @@@ Subsets[set, {2}]


{f[1, 2], f[1, 3], f[1, 4], f[2, 3], f[2, 4], f[3, 4]}

This is in my opinion the most elegant code to produce this specific result, and it is quite fast, but it is not memory efficient if you only need to collect a result for a low percentage of the pairs. Let's define f as follows (I use {} here generically):


f[a_, b_] /; b~Divisible~a := {a, b}

f[___] = Sequence[];


If we now compute all the pairs for Range[5000] it takes one gigabyte of memory:


pairs = Range@5000 ~Subsets~ {2};
pairs // ByteCount


1099780032



And applying f we see that of the nearly 12.5 million pairs we need a return for only 38376 of them which takes only 3MB of storage:


r1 = f @@@ pairs;


ByteCount[r1]

Length[r1]


3377120


38376



Yet, the maximum memory used is 1.6GB:



 MaxMemoryUsed[]


1629793536



A simple method to reduce memory consumption is to process the subsets in blocks, rather than all at once, as follows:


set = Range@5000;
n = Length@set;
max = n (n - 1)/2;
block = 10000;


Timing[
r2 =
Join @@ Array[
f @@@ Subsets[set, {2}, block {# - 1, #} + {1, 0}] &,
⌈max/block⌉
];
]

Length[r2]


MaxMemoryUsed[]


{8.299, Null}


38376


19769800



This only uses a maximum of ~20MB of memory, only a few MB over the baseline on my system.
(It issues a Subsets::take message but there is no error.)



My preferred method


Another method, and the one that I prefer, is to compute the pairs more manually allowing f to be embedded in the process so as to not generate all pairs beforehand. This uses Outer to effect the pair generation for each element separately (that is, all pairs starting with a certain element).


pairMap[f_, s_] := Module[{ss = s}, 
Flatten[Outer[f, {#}, ss = Rest@ss, 1] & /@ Most@s, 2] ]

pairMap[f, Range@5000] // Length // Timing

MaxMemoryUsed[]



{7.816, 38376}


19430512



This also uses only a small amount of memory, and testing should bear out that it is faster as well. A variation of this method that may be even faster is to not build an output expression at all, relying instead on Sow and Reap to gather your results:


g[a_, b_] /; b ~Divisible~ a := Sow[ {a, b} ]

pairScan[f_, s_] := Module[{ss = s}, Outer[f, {#}, ss = Rest@ss, 1] & ~Scan~ Most@s ]

Reap[ pairScan[g, Range@5000] ][[2, 1]] // Length // Timing


MaxMemoryUsed[]


{6.583, 38376}


18757552



An argument for Do loops


While Outer is somewhat faster, after further consideration and conferring with jVincent I think perhaps after all a Do loop is as good as anything. One could write pairScan in this way:


pairScan2[f_, s_] := Module[{ss = s}, Do[f[i, j], {i, ss}, {j, ss = Rest@ss}] ]


Reap[ pairScan2[g, Range@5000] ][[2, 1]] // Length // Timing

MaxMemoryUsed[]


{7.613, 38376}


18711080



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

plotting - Filling between two spheres in SphericalPlot3D

Manipulate[ SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, Mesh -> None, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], {n, 0, 1}] I cant' seem to be able to make a filling between two spheres. I've already tried the obvious Filling -> {1 -> {2}} but Mathematica doesn't seem to like that option. Is there any easy way around this or ... Answer There is no built-in filling in SphericalPlot3D . One option is to use ParametricPlot3D to draw the surfaces between the two shells: Manipulate[ Show[SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], ParametricPlot3D[{ r {Sin[t] Cos[1.5 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[1.5 Pi], Cos[t]}, r {Sin[t] Cos[0 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[0 Pi], Cos[t]}}, {r, 1, 2 - n}, {t, 0, Pi}, PlotStyle -> Yellow, Mesh -> {2, 15}]], {n, 0, 1}]

plotting - Plot 4D data with color as 4th dimension

I have a list of 4D data (x position, y position, amplitude, wavelength). I want to plot x, y, and amplitude on a 3D plot and have the color of the points correspond to the wavelength. I have seen many examples using functions to define color but my wavelength cannot be expressed by an analytic function. Is there a simple way to do this? Answer Here a another possible way to visualize 4D data: data = Flatten[Table[{x, y, x^2 + y^2, Sin[x - y]}, {x, -Pi, Pi,Pi/10}, {y,-Pi,Pi, Pi/10}], 1]; You can use the function Point along with VertexColors . Now the points are places using the first three elements and the color is determined by the fourth. In this case I used Hue, but you can use whatever you prefer. Graphics3D[ Point[data[[All, 1 ;; 3]], VertexColors -> Hue /@ data[[All, 4]]], Axes -> True, BoxRatios -> {1, 1, 1/GoldenRatio}]

plotting - Mathematica: 3D plot based on combined 2D graphs

I have several sigmoidal fits to 3 different datasets, with mean fit predictions plus the 95% confidence limits (not symmetrical around the mean) and the actual data. I would now like to show these different 2D plots projected in 3D as in but then using proper perspective. In the link here they give some solutions to combine the plots using isometric perspective, but I would like to use proper 3 point perspective. Any thoughts? Also any way to show the mean points per time point for each series plus or minus the standard error on the mean would be cool too, either using points+vertical bars, or using spheres plus tubes. Below are some test data and the fit function I am using. Note that I am working on a logit(proportion) scale and that the final vertical scale is Log10(percentage). (* some test data *) data = Table[Null, {i, 4}]; data[[1]] = {{1, -5.8}, {2, -5.4}, {3, -0.8}, {4, -0.2}, {5, 4.6}, {1, -6.4}, {2, -5.6}, {3, -0.7}, {4, 0.04}, {5, 1.0}, {1, -6.8}, {2, -4.7}, {3, -1.