I develop an application that builds pairs of words in (tokenised) text and produces the number of times each pair occurs (even when same-word pairs occur multiple times, it's OK as it'll be evened out later in the algorithm).
When I use
elements groupBy()
I want to group by the elements' content itself, so I wrote the following:
def self(x: (String, String)) = x
/**
* Maps a collection of words to a map where key is a pair of words and the
* value is number of
* times this pair
* occurs in the passed array
*/
def producePairs(words: Array[String]): Map[(String,String), Double] = {
var table = List[(String, String)]()
words.foreach(w1 =>
words.foreach(w2 =>
table = table ::: List((w1, w2))))
val grouppedPairs = table.groupBy(self)
val size = int2double(grouppedPairs.size)
return grouppedPairs.mapValues(_.length / size)
}
Now, I fully realise that this self() trick is a dirty hack. So I thought a little a came out with a:
grouppedPairs = table groupBy (x => x)
This way it produced what I want. However, I still feel that I clearly miss something and there should be easier way of doing it. Any ideas at all, dear all?
Also, if you'd help me to improve the pairs extraction part, it'll also help a lot – it looks very imperative, C++ - ish right now. Many thanks in advance!
I'd suggest this:
def producePairs(words: Array[String]): Map[(String,String), Double] = {
val table = for(w1 <- words; w2 <- words) yield (w1,w2)
val grouppedPairs = table.groupBy(identity)
val size = grouppedPairs.size.toDouble
grouppedPairs.mapValues(_.length / size)
}
The for comprehension is much easier to read, and there is already a predifined function identity, with is a generalized version of your self.
you are creating a list of pairs of all words against all words by iterating over words twice, where i guess you just want the neighbouring pairs. the easiest is to use a sliding view instead.
def producePairs(words: Array[String]): Map[(String, String), Int] = {
val pairs = words.sliding(2, 1).map(arr => arr(0) -> arr(1)).toList
val grouped = pairs.groupBy(t => t)
grouped.mapValues(_.size)
}
another approach would be to fold the list of pairs by summing them up. not sure though that this is more efficient:
def producePairs(words: Array[String]): Map[(String, String), Int] = {
val pairs = words.sliding(2, 1).map(arr => arr(0) -> arr(1))
pairs.foldLeft(Map.empty[(String, String), Int]) { (m, p) =>
m + (p -> (m.getOrElse(p, 0) + 1))
}
}
i see you are return a relative number (Double). for simplicity i have just counted the occurances, so you need to do the final division. i think you want to divide by the number of total pairs (words.size - 1) and not by the number of unique pairs (grouped.size)..., so the relative frequencies sum up to 1.0
Alternative approach which is not of order O(num_words * num_words) but of order O(num_unique_words * num_unique_words) (or something like that):
def producePairs[T <% Traversable[String]](words: T): Map[(String,String), Double] = {
val counts = words.groupBy(identity).map{case (w, ws) => (w -> ws.size)}
val size = (counts.size * counts.size).toDouble
for(w1 <- counts; w2 <- counts) yield {
((w1._1, w2._1) -> ((w1._2 * w2._2) / size))
}
}
Related
I would like to get the mode (the most common number) from an rdd using Spark + Scala.
I can get it doing the following but I think it could be a better way to calculate this. The most important thing is if more than one value has the same number of repetition, I need to return both of them.
Let's see my example code:
val l = List(3,4,4,3,3,7,7,7,9)
val rdd = spark.sparkContext.parallelize(l)
val grouped = rdd.map (e => (e, 1)).groupBy(_._1).map(e=> (e._1, e._2.size))
val maxRep = grouped.collect().maxBy(_._2)._2
val mode = grouped.filter(e => e._2 == maxRep).map(e => e._1).collect
And the result is right:
Array[Int] = Array(3, 7)
but is there a better way to do this? I mean considering the performance because the original RDD would be much bigger than this.
This should work and be a little bit more efficient.
(only if you are sure the total number of elements is small)
val counted = rdd.countByValue()
val max = counted.valuesIterator.max
val maxElements = count.collect { case (k, v) if (v == max) => k }
If there could be many elements, consider this alternative which is memory safe.
val counted = rdd.map(x => (x, 1L)).reduceByKey(_ + _).cache()
val max = counted.values.max
val maxElements = counted.map { case (k, v) => (v, k) }.lookup(max)
How about get the max key-value pair from a double groupBy? This works even better for bigger data size.
rdd.groupBy(identity).mapValues(_.size).groupBy(_._2).max
// res1: (Int, Iterable[(Int, Int)]) = (3,CompactBuffer((3,3), (7,3)))
To get the element
rdd.groupBy(identity).mapValues(_.size).groupBy(_._2).max._2.map(_._1)
// res4: Iterable[Int] = List(3, 7)
The first groupBy will get element into (element -> count) with type Map[Int, Long], the second groupBy will group (element -> count) by count, like (count -> Iterable((element, count)), then simply max to get the key-value pair with the maximum key value, which is the count.
I have a List[(String, Double)] variable where the second element of tuple denotes the probability of the string in first element appearing in a corpus. An example would be [(Apple, 0.2), (Banana, 0.3), (Lemon, 0.5)] where an Apple appears with a probability of 0.2 in the list of strings. I want to randomly sample from the list of strings based on their probability of appearance something along the lines of numpy random.choice() method. What would be the correct way to do this in Scala?
Another solution:
def choice(samples: Seq[(String, Double)], n: Int): Seq[String] = {
val (strings, probs) = samples.unzip
val cumprobs = probs.scanLeft(0.0){ _ + _ }.init
def p2s(p: Double): String = strings(cumprobs.lastIndexWhere(_ <= p))
Seq.fill(n)(math.random).map(p2s)
}
An usage (and verify):
>> val ss = choice(Seq(("Apple", 0.2), ("Banana", 0.3), ("Lemon", 0.5)), 10000)
>> ss.groupBy(identity).map{ case(k, v) => (k, v.size)}
Map[String, Int] = Map(Banana -> 3013, Lemon -> 4971, Apple -> 2016)
A very naive (and inefficient) solution would be to create a List of 100 elements that repeats each of the original elements the amount of times needed to respect its probabilities. Then you can randomly shuffle that List and finally take the first element.
import scala.util.Random
final val percent_100 = BigDecimal(100)
def choice[T](data: List[(T, Double)]): T = {
val distribution = data.flatMap {
case (elem, probability) =>
val scaledProbability = BigDecimal(probability).setScale(
scale = 2,
BigDecimal.RoundingMode.HALF_EVEN
)
val n = (scaledProbability * percent_100).toIntExact
List.fill(n)(elem)
}
Random.shuffle(distribution).head
}
However, I am sure there should be better ways of solving this.
I'm trying to copy a column of a matrix into an array, also I want to make this matrix public.
Heres my code:
val years = Array.ofDim[String](1000, 1)
val bufferedSource = io.Source.fromFile("Top_1_000_Songs_To_Hear_Before_You_Die.csv")
val i=0;
//println("THEME, TITLE, ARTIST, YEAR, SPOTIFY_URL")
for (line <- bufferedSource.getLines) {
val cols = line.split(",").map(_.trim)
years(i)=cols(3)(i)
}
I want the cols to be a global matrix and copy the column 3 to years, because of the method of that I get cols I dont know how to define it
There're three different problems in your attempt:
Your regexp will fail for this dataset. I suggest you change it to:
val regex = ",(?=(?:[^\"]*\"[^\"]*\")*(?![^\"]*\"))"
This will capture the blocks wrapped in double quotes but containing commas (courtesy of Luke Sheppard on regexr)
This val i=0; is not very scala-ish / functional. We can replace it by a zipWithIndex in the for comprehension:
for ((line, count) <- bufferedSource.getLines.zipWithIndex)
You can create the "global matrix" by extracting elements from each line (val Array (...)) and returning them as the value of the for-comprehension block (yield):
It looks like that:
for ((line, count) <- bufferedSource.getLines.zipWithIndex) yield {
val Array(theme,title,artist,year,spotify_url) = line....
...
(theme,title,artist,year,spotify_url)
}
And here is the complete solution:
val bufferedSource = io.Source.fromFile("/tmp/Top_1_000_Songs_To_Hear_Before_You_Die.csv")
val years = Array.ofDim[String](1000, 1)
val regex = ",(?=(?:[^\"]*\"[^\"]*\")*(?![^\"]*\"))"
val iteratorMatrix = for ((line, count) <- bufferedSource.getLines.zipWithIndex) yield {
val Array(theme,title,artist,year,spotify_url) = line.split(regex, -1).map(_.trim)
years(count) = Array(year)
(theme,title,artist,year,spotify_url)
}
// will actually consume the iterator and fill in globalMatrix AND years
val globalMatrix = iteratorMatrix.toList
Here's a function that will get the col column from the CSV. There is no error handling here for any empty row or other conditions. This is a proof of concept so add your own error handling as you see fit.
val years = (fileName: String, col: Int) => scala.io.Source.fromFile(fileName)
.getLines()
.map(_.split(",")(col).trim())
Here's a suggestion if you are looking to keep the contents of the file in a map. Again there's no error handling just proof of concept.
val yearColumn = 3
val fileName = "Top_1_000_Songs_To_Hear_Before_You_Die.csv"
def lines(file: String) = scala.io.Source.fromFile(file).getLines()
val mapRow = (row: String) => row.split(",").zipWithIndex.foldLeft(Map[Int, String]()){
case (acc, (v, idx)) => acc.updated(idx,v.trim())}
def mapColumns = (values: Iterator[String]) =>
values.zipWithIndex.foldLeft(Map[Int, Map[Int, String]]()){
case (acc, (v, idx)) => acc.updated(idx, mapRow(v))}
val parser = lines _ andThen mapColumns
val matrix = parser(fileName)
val years = matrix.flatMap(_.swap._1.get(yearColumn))
This will build a Map[Int,Map[Int, String]] which you can use elsewhere. The first index of the map is the row number and the index of the inner map is the column number. years is an Iterable[String] that contains the year values.
Consider adding contents to a collection at the same time as it is created, in contrast to allocate space first and then update it; for instance like this,
val rawSongsInfo = io.Source.fromFile("Top_Songs.csv").getLines
val cols = for (rsi <- rawSongsInfo) yield rsi.split(",").map(_.trim)
val years = cols.map(_(3))
I'm new to Scala and trying to figure out the best way to filter & map a collection. Here's a toy example to explain my problem.
Approach 1: This is pretty bad since I'm iterating through the list twice and calculating the same value in each iteration.
val N = 5
val nums = 0 until 10
val sqNumsLargerThanN = nums filter { x: Int => (x * x) > N } map { x: Int => (x * x).toString }
Approach 2: This is slightly better but I still need to calculate (x * x) twice.
val N = 5
val nums = 0 until 10
val sqNumsLargerThanN = nums collect { case x: Int if (x * x) > N => (x * x).toString }
So, is it possible to calculate this without iterating through the collection twice and avoid repeating the same calculations?
Could use a foldRight
nums.foldRight(List.empty[Int]) {
case (i, is) =>
val s = i * i
if (s > N) s :: is else is
}
A foldLeft would also achieve a similar goal, but the resulting list would be in reverse order (due to the associativity of foldLeft.
Alternatively if you'd like to play with Scalaz
import scalaz.std.list._
import scalaz.syntax.foldable._
nums.foldMap { i =>
val s = i * i
if (s > N) List(s) else List()
}
The typical approach is to use an iterator (if possible) or view (if iterator won't work). This doesn't exactly avoid two traversals, but it does avoid creation of a full-sized intermediate collection. You then map first and filter afterwards and then map again if needed:
xs.iterator.map(x => x*x).filter(_ > N).map(_.toString)
The advantage of this approach is that it's really easy to read and, since there are no intermediate collections, it's reasonably efficient.
If you are asking because this is a performance bottleneck, then the answer is usually to write a tail-recursive function or use the old-style while loop method. For instance, in your case
def sumSqBigN(xs: Array[Int], N: Int): Array[String] = {
val ysb = Array.newBuilder[String]
def inner(start: Int): Array[String] = {
if (start >= xs.length) ysb.result
else {
val sq = xs(start) * xs(start)
if (sq > N) ysb += sq.toString
inner(start + 1)
}
}
inner(0)
}
You can also pass a parameter forward in inner instead of using an external builder (especially useful for sums).
I have yet to confirm that this is truly a single pass, but:
val sqNumsLargerThanN = nums flatMap { x =>
val square = x * x
if (square > N) Some(x) else None
}
You can use collect which applies a partial function to every value of the collection that it's defined at. Your example could be rewritten as follows:
val sqNumsLargerThanN = nums collect {
case (x: Int) if (x * x) > N => (x * x).toString
}
A very simple approach that only does the multiplication operation once. It's also lazy, so it will be executing code only when needed.
nums.view.map(x=>x*x).withFilter(x => x> N).map(_.toString)
Take a look here for differences between filter and withFilter.
Consider this for comprehension,
for (x <- 0 until 10; v = x*x if v > N) yield v.toString
which unfolds to a flatMap over the range and a (lazy) withFilter onto the once only calculated square, and yields a collection with filtered results. To note one iteration and one calculation of square is required (in addition to creating the range).
You can use flatMap.
val sqNumsLargerThanN = nums flatMap { x =>
val square = x * x
if (square > N) Some(square.toString) else None
}
Or with Scalaz,
import scalaz.Scalaz._
val sqNumsLargerThanN = nums flatMap { x =>
val square = x * x
(square > N).option(square.toString)
}
The solves the asked question of how to do this with one iteration. This can be useful when streaming data, like with an Iterator.
However...if you are instead wanting the absolute fastest implementation, this is not it. In fact, I suspect you would use a mutable ArrayList and a while loop. But only after profiling would you know for sure. In any case, that's for another question.
Using a for comprehension would work:
val sqNumsLargerThanN = for {x <- nums if x*x > N } yield (x*x).toString
Also, I'm not sure but I think the scala compiler is smart about a filter before a map and will only do 1 pass if possible.
I am also beginner did it as follows
for(y<-(num.map(x=>x*x)) if y>5 ) { println(y)}
I have this function to compute the distance between two n-dimensional points using Pythagoras' theorem.
def computeDistance(neighbour: Point) = math.sqrt(coordinates.zip(neighbour.coordinates).map {
case (c1: Int, c2: Int) => math.pow(c1 - c2, 2)
}.sum)
The Point class (simplified) looks like:
class Point(val coordinates: List[Int])
I'm struggling to refactor the method so it's a little easier to read, can anybody help please?
Here's another way that makes the following three assumptions:
The length of the list is the number of dimensions for the point
Each List is correctly ordered, i.e. List(x, y) or List(x, y, z). We do not know how to handle List(x, z, y)
All lists are of equal length
def computeDistance(other: Point): Double = sqrt(
coordinates.zip(other.coordinates)
.flatMap(i => List(pow(i._2 - i._1, 2)))
.fold(0.0)(_ + _)
)
The obvious disadvantage here is that we don't have any safety around list length. The quick fix for this is to simply have the function return an Option[Double] like so:
def computeDistance(other: Point): Option[Double] = {
if(other.coordinates.length != coordinates.length) {
return None
}
return Some(sqrt(coordinates.zip(other.coordinates)
.flatMap(i => List(pow(i._2 - i._1, 2)))
.fold(0.0)(_ + _)
))
I'd be curious if there is a type safe way to ensure equal list length.
EDIT
It was politely pointed out to me that flatMap(x => List(foo(x))) is equivalent to map(foo) , which I forgot to refactor when I was originally playing w/ this. Slightly cleaner version w/ Map instead of flatMap :
def computeDistance(other: Point): Double = sqrt(
coordinates.zip(other.coordinates)
.map(i => pow(i._2 - i._1, 2))
.fold(0.0)(_ + _)
)
Most of your problem is that you're trying to do math with really long variable names. It's almost always painful. There's a reason why mathematicians use single letters. And assign temporary variables.
Try this:
class Point(val coordinates: List[Int]) { def c = coordinates }
import math._
def d(p: Point) = {
val delta = for ((a,b) <- (c zip p.c)) yield pow(a-b, dims)
sqrt(delta.sum)
}
Consider type aliases and case classes, like this,
type Coord = List[Int]
case class Point(val c: Coord) {
def distTo(p: Point) = {
val z = (c zip p.c).par
val pw = z.aggregate(0.0) ( (a,v) => a + math.pow( v._1-v._2, 2 ), _ + _ )
math.sqrt(pw)
}
}
so that for any two points, for instance,
val p = Point( (1 to 5).toList )
val q = Point( (2 to 6).toList )
we have that
p distTo q
res: Double = 2.23606797749979
Note method distTo uses aggregate on a parallelised collection of tuples, and combines the partial results by the last argument (summation). For high dimensional points this may prove more efficient than the sequential counterpart.
For simplicity of use, consider also implicit classes, as suggested in a comment above,
implicit class RichPoint(val c: Coord) extends AnyVal {
def distTo(d: Coord) = Point(c) distTo Point(d)
}
Hence
List(1,2,3,4,5) distTo List(2,3,4,5,6)
res: Double = 2.23606797749979