11

Suppose I have 2 matrices M and N (both have > 1 columns). I also have an index matrix I with 2 columns -- 1 for M and one for N. The indices for N are unique, but the indices for M may appear more than once. The operation I would like to perform is,

for i,j in w:
  M[i] += N[j]

Is there a more efficient way to do this other than a for loop?

3
  • Missing in the question: the obvious M[w[:, 0]] += N[w[:, 1]] fails because the indices in w[:, 0] are not unique, so values get overwritten. Commented May 28, 2014 at 8:55
  • So what happens when you do not do an in-place addition but create a third array. Does that give you the desired result? Commented May 28, 2014 at 9:06
  • 1
    If you don't do the operation in place, you end up with a new array of length matching I with I[i] = M[w[i,0]] + N[w[i,1]]. How do you then group this matrix by w[:,0] and sum its values? Commented May 28, 2014 at 9:22

3 Answers 3

15

For completeness, in numpy >= 1.8 you can also use np.add's at method:

In [8]: m, n = np.random.rand(2, 10)

In [9]: m_idx, n_idx = np.random.randint(10, size=(2, 20))

In [10]: m0 = m.copy()

In [11]: np.add.at(m, m_idx, n[n_idx])

In [13]: m0 += np.bincount(m_idx, weights=n[n_idx], minlength=len(m))

In [14]: np.allclose(m, m0)
Out[14]: True

In [15]: %timeit np.add.at(m, m_idx, n[n_idx])
100000 loops, best of 3: 9.49 us per loop

In [16]: %timeit np.bincount(m_idx, weights=n[n_idx], minlength=len(m))
1000000 loops, best of 3: 1.54 us per loop

Aside of the obvious performance disadvantage, it has a couple of advantages:

  1. np.bincount converts its weights to double precision floats, .at will operate with you array's native type. This makes it the simplest option for dealing e.g. with complex numbers.
  2. np.bincount only adds weights together, you have an at method for all ufuncs, so you can repeatedly multiply, or logical_and, or whatever you feel like.

But for your use case, np.bincount is probably the way to go.

Sign up to request clarification or add additional context in comments.

1 Comment

Your example uses vectors m and n rather than matrices, so np.bincount works in this example but not in my use case. On the other hand, np.add.at does exactly what I'm looking for. Thanks!
3

Using also m_ind, n_ind = w.T, just do M += np.bincount(m_ind, weights=N[n_ind], minlength=len(M))

2 Comments

Much more elegant than my solution; I had a hunch bincount could solve this but I couldn't figure out the pattern.
I think this will only work if N is 1D array. np.bincount is throwing a ValueError for me if N is a matrix.
1

For clarity, let's define

>>> m_ind, n_ind = w.T

Then the for loop

for i, j in zip(m_ind, n_ind):
    M[i] += N[j]

updates the entries M[np.unique(m_ind)]. The values that get written to it are N[n_ind], which must be grouped by m_ind. (The fact that there's an n_ind in addition to m_ind is actually tangential to the question; you could just set N = N[n_ind].) There happens to be a SciPy class that does exactly this: scipy.sparse.csr_matrix.

Example data:

>>> m_ind, n_ind = array([[0, 0, 1, 1], [2, 3, 0, 1]])
>>> M = np.arange(2, 6)
>>> N = np.logspace(2, 5, 4)

The result of the for loop is that M becomes [110002 1103 4 5]. We get the same result with a csr_matrix as follows. As I said earlier, n_ind isn't relevant, so we get rid of that first.

>>> N = N[n_ind]
>>> from scipy.sparse import csr_matrix
>>> update = csr_matrix((N, m_ind, [0, len(N)])).toarray()

The CSR constructor builds a matrix with the required values at the required indices; the third part of its argument is a compressed column index, meaning that the values N[0:len(N)] have the indices m_ind[0:len(N)]. Duplicates are summed:

>>> update
array([[ 110000.,    1100.]])

This has shape (1, len(np.unique(m_ind))) and can be added in directly:

>>> M[np.unique(m_ind)] += update.ravel()
>>> M
array([110002,   1103,      4,      5])

3 Comments

@Veedrac Try again, it actually works. m_ind, n_ind = w.T; N = N[n_ind]; update = csr_matrix((N, m_ind, [0, len(N)])).toarray(); M[np.unique(m_ind)] += update.ravel().
<strike>*That* gives me ValueError: non-broadcastable output operand with shape (1,) doesn't match the broadcast shape (1,1) from the M[np.unique(m_ind)] += update part.</strike> Just missed the ravel, is fine.
@Veedrac: sorry about that. (It is in the answer, fortunately.)

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.