Skip to main content

list manipulation - Lookup construction using data matrix and Reap/Sow versus AppendTo`s


I am a user of MMA9 and made my own kind of Lookup, which is now a standard command in Version 10.


In my program there is a section in which by means of a StringReplace[ ]-command containing a lot of rules the necessary work is done really very fast.


I tried to do the same in the following way but this appears to be very slow (a factor of 10).


tabel[n_] := Table[{k, k, k, k, k, k}, {k, 1, n}];
tblhoogteABg = 434; ABg = tabel@tblhoogteABg;
dABg = Import["ABbis2175B(434)klaar.xlsx"];

eABg = Partition[Flatten[dABg], 5] // Transpose;
Do[ABg[[i, j]] = ToString[ eABg[[j]][[i]]], {i, 1, tblhoogteABg}, {j, 1, 3}];
Do[ABg[[i, j]] = ToExpression[ eABg[[j]][[i]]], {i, 1, tblhoogteABg}, {j, 4, 5}]

The items of colums 1,2 and 3 are String, those of colums 4 and 5 are Expressions (lists).


fff = ABg[[433, 2]];
rl = fff // ToExpression;
ffr = {};
ll = Length[rl];
Do[

Do[rlp = rl[[el]]; (* rlp is a part of rl *)
If[rlp == (ABg[[m, 1]] // ToExpression),
ffr = (ffr~AppendTo~ABg[[m, 5]]) // ToExpression // Flatten],
{el,1,ll}], {m, 1, tblhoogteABg}];
Print[fff, "->", ffr]

fff is a string in column 2 of ABg[[ , ]] and this is changed into a list rl = fff//ToExpression and transformed into ffr.


ffr is build up via a series of ffr~AppendTo~ABg[[m, 5]] commands, as many as there are parts rlp in rl, a list with length ll.


The row number m is found via the If-statement (the actual lookup part).


The result is:



{25B,75A,725B}->{151,12301,1451,5315701,17431901,
199005929846082820906192074956026987594151}

I learned in some Q&A discussion concerning Reap and Sow that the combination of them is more efficient than the AppendTo-commands.


However, up to now I did not succeed in using Reap and Sow in the above fragment. I hope that someone can give me some help and that this method appears to be more rapid.



Answer



Adding elements to a growing list is slow in general. We get much better performance out of Mathematica if we treat data in chunks, and use high level functions as much as we can. This usually translates to a functional style of programming, as opposed to procedural programming. Do, While and For as therefore best to try to avoid altogether, in favor of Nest, Map and Apply.


As I understand it your code can be written like this (cannot tell whether it has bugs or not without sample data):


createTable[n_] := Table[{k, k, k, k, k, k}, {k, 1, n}];


numberOfRows = 434;
table = createTable[numberOfRows];

data = Import["ABbis2175B(434)klaar.xlsx"];
data = Partition[Flatten[data], 5];

table = MapAt[ToString, data, {All, {2, 3}}];
table = MapAt[ToExpression, data, {All, {1, 4, 5}}];

fff = table[[433, 2]];


fffElements = ToExpression@fff;
fffLength = Length@fffElements;
results = Flatten[Last /@ Select[table[[All, {1, 5}]], MemberQ[fffElements, First@#] &],2];

Print[fff, "->", results]

Basically, as you can see, Part ([[ ]]) and Map are the workhorses now rather than Do. There are probably things I would have written differently if I had the file, but the main idea is evident in this piece of code.


I don't know if this helps you. I'm kind of asking you to adopt a new programming paradigm... but it's the way to get more performance out of Mathematica.


But I've also been thinking about how I can address your actual question, that is, how can Sow be incorporated? I think this should work:



ffr = Last@Reap@Do[
rlp = rl[[el]];(*rlp is a part of rl*)
If[
rlp == (ABg[[m, 1]] // ToExpression),
Sow[ABg[[m, 5]] // ToExpression // Flatten]
],
{el, 1, ll}, {m, 1, tblhoogteABg}
];

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.