.. currentmodule:: pandas
.. ipython:: python :suppress: import os import numpy as np from pandas import * randn = np.random.randn np.set_printoptions(precision=4, suppress=True)
For lack of NA
(missing) support from the ground up in NumPy and Python in
general, we were given the difficult choice between either
- A masked array solution: an array of data and an array of boolean values indicating whether a value
- Using a special sentinel value, bit pattern, or set of sentinel values to
denote
NA
across the dtypes
For many reasons we chose the latter. After years of production use it has
proven, at least in my opinion, to be the best decision given the state of
affairs in NumPy and Python in general. The special value NaN
(Not-A-Number) is used everywhere as the NA
value, and there are API
functions isnull
and notnull
which can be used across the dtypes to
detect NA values.
However, it comes with it a couple of trade-offs which I most certainly have not ignored.
In the absence of high performance NA
support being built into NumPy from
the ground up, the primary casualty is the ability to represent NAs in integer
arrays. For example:
.. ipython:: python s = Series([1, 2, 3, 4, 5], index=list('abcde')) s s.dtype s2 = s.reindex(['a', 'b', 'c', 'f', 'u']) s2 s2.dtype
This trade-off is made largely for memory and performance reasons, and also so
that the resulting Series continues to be "numeric". One possibility is to use
dtype=object
arrays instead.
When introducing NAs into an existing Series or DataFrame via reindex
or
some other means, boolean and integer types will be promoted to a different
dtype in order to store the NAs. These are summarized by this table:
Typeclass | Promotion dtype for storing NAs |
---|---|
floating |
no change |
object |
no change |
integer |
cast to float64 |
boolean |
cast to object |
While this may seem like a heavy trade-off, in practice I have found very few cases where this is an issue in practice. Some explanation for the motivation here in the next section.
Many people have suggested that NumPy should simply emulate the NA
support
present in the more domain-specific statistical programming langauge R. Part of the reason is the NumPy type hierarchy:
Typeclass | Dtypes |
---|---|
numpy.floating |
float16, float32, float64, float128 |
numpy.integer |
int8, int16, int32, int64 |
numpy.unsignedinteger |
uint8, uint16, uint32, uint64 |
numpy.object_ |
object_ |
numpy.bool_ |
bool_ |
numpy.character |
string_, unicode_ |
The R language, by contrast, only has a handful of built-in data types:
integer
, numeric
(floating-point), character
, and
boolean
. NA
types are implemented by reserving special bit patterns for
each type to be used as the missing value. While doing this with the full NumPy
type hierarchy would be possible, it would be a more substantial trade-off
(especially for the 8- and 16-bit data types) and implementation undertaking.
An alternate approach is that of using masked arrays. A masked array is an
array of data with an associated boolean mask denoting whether each value
should be considered NA
or not. I am personally not in love with this
approach as I feel that overall it places a fairly heavy burden on the user and
the library implementer. Additionally, it exacts a fairly high performance cost
when working with numerical data compared with the simple approach of using
NaN
. Thus, I have chosen the Pythonic "practicality beats purity" approach
and traded integer NA
capability for a much simpler approach of using a
special value in float and object arrays to denote NA
, and promoting
integer arrays to floating when NAs must be introduced.
Label-based indexing with integer axis labels is a thorny topic. It has been
discussed heavily on mailing lists and among various members of the scientific
Python community. In pandas, our general viewpoint is that labels matter more
than integer locations. Therefore, with an integer axis index only
label-based indexing is possible with the standard tools like .ix
. The
following code will generate exceptions:
s = Series(range(5))
s[-1]
df = DataFrame(np.random.randn(5, 4))
df
df.ix[-2:]
This deliberate decision was made to prevent ambiguities and subtle bugs (many users reported finding bugs when the API change was made to stop "falling back" on position-based indexing).
Compared with standard Python sequence slicing in which the slice endpoint is not inclusive, label-based slicing in pandas is inclusive. The primary reason for this is that it is often not possible to easily determine the "successor" or next element after a particular label in an index. For example, consider the following Series:
.. ipython:: python s = Series(randn(6), index=list('abcdef')) s
Suppose we wished to slice from c
to e
, using integers this would be
.. ipython:: python s[2:5]
However, if you only had c
and e
, determining the next element in the
index can be somewhat complicated. For example, the following does not work:
s.ix['c':'e'+1]
A very common use case is to limit a time series to start and end at two specific dates. To enable this, we made the design design to make label-based slicing include both endpoints:
.. ipython:: python s.ix['c':'e']
This is most definitely a "practicality beats purity" sort of thing, but it is something to watch out for if you expect label-based slicing to behave exactly in the way that standard Python integer slicing works.
Many users will find themselves using the ix
indexing capabilities as a
concise means of selecting data from a pandas object:
.. ipython:: python df = DataFrame(randn(6, 4), columns=['one', 'two', 'three', 'four'], index=list('abcdef')) df df.ix[['b', 'c', 'e']]
This is, of course, completely equivalent in this case to using th
reindex
method:
.. ipython:: python df.reindex(['b', 'c', 'e'])
Some might conclude that ix
and reindex
are 100% equivalent based on
this. This is indeed true except in the case of integer indexing. For
example, the above operation could alternately have been expressed as:
.. ipython:: python df.ix[[1, 2, 4]]
If you pass [1, 2, 4]
to reindex
you will get another thing entirely:
.. ipython:: python df.reindex([1, 2, 4])
So it's important to remember that reindex
is strict label indexing
only. This can lead to some potentially surprising results in pathological
cases where an index contains, say, both integers and strings:
.. ipython:: python s = Series([1, 2, 3], index=['a', 0, 1]) s s.ix[[0, 1]] s.reindex([0, 1])
Because the index in this case does not contain solely integers, ix
falls
back on integer indexing. By contrast, reindex
only looks for the values
passed in the index, thus finding the integers 0
and 1
. While it would
be possible to insert some logic to check whether a passed sequence is all
contained in the index, that logic would exact a very high cost in large data
sets.
The use of reindex_like
can potentially change the dtype of a Series
.
series = pandas.Series([1, 2, 3])
x = pandas.Series([True])
x.dtype
x = pandas.Series([True]).reindex_like(series)
x.dtype
This is because reindex_like
silently inserts NaNs
and the dtype
changes accordingly. This can cause some issues when using numpy
ufuncs
such as numpy.logical_and
.
See the this old issue for a more detailed discussion.
Since pandas represents timestamps in nanosecond resolution, the timespan that can be represented using a 64-bit integer is limited to approximately 584 years:
.. ipython:: python begin = Timestamp(-9223285636854775809L) begin end = Timestamp(np.iinfo(np.int64).max) end
If you need to represent time series data outside the nanosecond timespan, use PeriodIndex:
.. ipython:: python span = period_range('1215-01-01', '1381-01-01', freq='D') span
When parsing multiple text file columns into a single date column, the new date column is prepended to the data and then index_col specification is indexed off of the new set of columns rather than the original ones:
.. ipython:: python :suppress: data = ("KORD,19990127, 19:00:00, 18:56:00, 0.8100\n" "KORD,19990127, 20:00:00, 19:56:00, 0.0100\n" "KORD,19990127, 21:00:00, 20:56:00, -0.5900\n" "KORD,19990127, 21:00:00, 21:18:00, -0.9900\n" "KORD,19990127, 22:00:00, 21:56:00, -0.5900\n" "KORD,19990127, 23:00:00, 22:56:00, -0.5900") with open('tmp.csv', 'w') as fh: fh.write(data)
.. ipython:: python print open('tmp.csv').read() date_spec = {'nominal': [1, 2], 'actual': [1, 3]} df = read_csv('tmp.csv', header=None, parse_dates=date_spec, keep_date_col=True, index_col=0) # index_col=0 refers to the combined column "nominal" and not the original # first column of 'KORD' strings df
.. ipython:: python :suppress: os.remove('tmp.csv')
For Series and DataFrame objects, var
normalizes by N-1
to produce
unbiased estimates of the sample variance, while NumPy's var
normalizes
by N, which measures the variance of the sample. Note that cov
normalizes by N-1
in both pandas and NumPy.