Under the hood, sapply() is also a loop (at the interpreted level). As
is lapply(), etc.
-- Bert
On Sun, Oct 15, 2023 at 2:34?AM Jason Stout, M.D. <jason.stout at
duke.edu> wrote:>
> That's very helpful and instructive, thank you!
>
> Jason Stout, MD, MHS
> Box 102359-DUMC
> Durham, NC 27710
> FAX 919-681-7494
> ________________________________
> From: John Fox <jfox at mcmaster.ca>
> Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2023 10:13 AM
> To: Jason Stout, M.D. <jason.stout at duke.edu>
> Cc: r-help at r-project.org <r-help at r-project.org>
> Subject: Re: [R] Create new data frame with conditional sums
>
> Dear Jason,
>
> I don't think that there's anything wrong with using a loop to
solve
> this problem, but it's generally a good idea to pre-allocate space for
> the result rather than build it up one value at a time, which may cause
> unnecessary copying of the object.
>
> Here are three solutions:
>
> f1 <- function(Cutoff, Pct, Totpop){
> Pop <- numeric(0)
> for (i in seq_along(Cutoff))
> Pop[i] <- sum(Totpop[Pct >= Cutoff[i]])
> cbind(Cutoff, Pop)
> }
>
> f2 <- function(Cutoff, Pct, Totpop){
> Pop <- numeric(length(Cutoff))
> for (i in seq_along(Cutoff))
> Pop[i] <- sum(Totpop[Pct >= Cutoff[i]])
> cbind(Cutoff, Pop)
> }
>
> f3 <- function(Cutoff, Pct, Totpop){
> Pop <- sapply(Cutoff, function(c) sum(Totpop[Pct >= c]))
> cbind(Cutoff, Pop)
> }
>
> The first is similar to yours; the second pre-allocates space for the
> result but still uses a loop; and the third avoids the loop. All produce
> the same result, for example,
>
> > with(dummydata, f3(seq(0, 0.15, by=0.01), Pct, Totpop))
> Cutoff Pop
> [1,] 0.00 43800
> [2,] 0.01 43800
> [3,] 0.02 39300
> [4,] 0.03 39300
> [5,] 0.04 31000
> [6,] 0.05 26750
> [7,] 0.06 22750
> [8,] 0.07 17800
> [9,] 0.08 12700
> [10,] 0.09 12700
> [11,] 0.10 8000
> [12,] 0.11 8000
> [13,] 0.12 8000
> [14,] 0.13 3900
> [15,] 0.14 3900
> [16,] 0.15 3900
>
> Here are some timings:
>
> > microbenchmark::microbenchmark(
> + preallocate=with(dummydata, f2(seq(0, 0.15, by=0.01),
> + Pct, Totpop)),
> + yourloop=with(dummydata, f1(seq(0, 0.15, by=0.01),
> + Pct, Totpop)),
> + sapply=with(dummydata, f3(seq(0, 0.15, by=0.01),
> + Pct, Totpop)),
> + times=1000
> + )
> Unit: microseconds
> expr min lq mean median uq max neval cld
> preallocate 13.776 14.3910 15.74195 14.9240 16.318 56.908 1000 a
> yourloop 15.129 15.7645 17.26809 16.3795 18.368 73.964 1000 b
> sapply 22.304 23.2060 25.19868 24.1080 26.814 48.544 1000 c
>
> So, for this very small problem, there are small but reliable
> differences in timing among the three solutions, and the version that
> avoids the loop is slowest. I suspect, but haven't verified, that for a
> much larger problem, your solution would be slowest.
>
> I hope this helps,
> John
>
> --
> John Fox, Professor Emeritus
> McMaster University
> Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
> web:
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.john-fox.ca/__;!!OToaGQ!s5vzmg4dxnnS0zohDtpWBBey7cb53uSXIPTTqs5fgaz-BKlNnWzpCfBz6aP0YhCGemy-bP6xEtJEwobdDQ$
> On 2023-10-13 4:13 p.m., Jason Stout, M.D. wrote:
> > Caution: External email.
> >
> >
> > This seems like it should be simple but I can't get it to work
properly. I'm starting with a data frame like this:
> >
> > Tract Pct Totpop
> > 1 0.05 4000
> > 2 0.03 3500
> > 3 0.01 4500
> > 4 0.12 4100
> > 5 0.21 3900
> > 6 0.04 4250
> > 7 0.07 5100
> > 8 0.09 4700
> > 9 0.06 4950
> > 10 0.03 4800
> >
> > And I want to end up with a data frame with two columns, a
"Cutoff" column that is a simple sequence of equally spaced cutoffs
(let's say in this case from 0-0.15 by 0.01) and a "Pop" column
which equals the sum of "Totpop" in the prior data frame in which
"Pct" is greater than or equal to "cutoff." So in this toy
example, this is what I want for a result:
> >
> > Cutoff Pop
> > 1 0.00 43800
> > 2 0.01 43800
> > 3 0.02 39300
> > 4 0.03 39300
> > 5 0.04 31000
> > 6 0.05 26750
> > 7 0.06 22750
> > 8 0.07 17800
> > 9 0.08 12700
> > 10 0.09 12700
> > 11 0.10 8000
> > 12 0.11 8000
> > 13 0.12 8000
> > 14 0.13 3900
> > 15 0.14 3900
> > 16 0.15 3900
> >
> > I can do this with a for loop but it seems there should be an easier,
vectorized way that would be more efficient. Here is a reproducible example:
> >
> >
dummydata<-data.frame(Tract=seq(1,10,by=1),Pct=c(0.05,0.03,0.01,0.12,0.21,0.04,0.07,0.09,0.06,0.03),Totpop=c(4000,3500,4500,4100,
> >
3900,4250,5100,4700,
> >
4950,4800))
> >
dfrm<-data.frame(matrix(ncol=2,nrow=0,dimnames=list(NULL,c("Cutoff","Pop"))))
> > for (i in seq(0,0.15,by=0.01)) {
> > temp<-sum(dummydata[dummydata$Pct>=i,"Totpop"])
> > dfrm[nrow(dfrm)+1,]<-c(i,temp)
> > }
> >
> > Jason Stout, MD, MHS
> > Division of Infectious Diseases
> > Dept of Medicine
> > Duke University
> > Box 102359-DUMC
> > Durham, NC 27710
> > FAX 919-681-7494
> >
> >
> > [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
> >
> > ______________________________________________
> > R-help at r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
> >
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help__;!!OToaGQ!s5vzmg4dxnnS0zohDtpWBBey7cb53uSXIPTTqs5fgaz-BKlNnWzpCfBz6aP0YhCGemy-bP6xEtL8RrekaA$
> > PLEASE do read the posting guide
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html__;!!OToaGQ!s5vzmg4dxnnS0zohDtpWBBey7cb53uSXIPTTqs5fgaz-BKlNnWzpCfBz6aP0YhCGemy-bP6xEtKGvEhDNw$
> > and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
>
>
> [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
>
> ______________________________________________
> R-help at r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
> PLEASE do read the posting guide
http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
> and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.