You cannot select more than 25 topics
			Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.
		
		
		
		
		
			
		
			
				
	
	
		
			237 lines
		
	
	
		
			9.6 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			ReStructuredText
		
	
			
		
		
	
	
			237 lines
		
	
	
		
			9.6 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			ReStructuredText
		
	
==================================
 | 
						|
A guide to masked arrays in NumPy
 | 
						|
==================================
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
.. Contents::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
See http://www.scipy.org/scipy/numpy/wiki/MaskedArray (dead link)
 | 
						|
for updates of this document.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
History
 | 
						|
-------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
As a regular user of MaskedArray, I (Pierre G.F. Gerard-Marchant) became
 | 
						|
increasingly frustrated with the subclassing of masked arrays (even if
 | 
						|
I can only blame my inexperience). I needed to develop a class of arrays
 | 
						|
that could store some additional information along with numerical values,
 | 
						|
while keeping the possibility for missing data (picture storing a series
 | 
						|
of dates along with measurements, what would later become the `TimeSeries
 | 
						|
Scikit <http://projects.scipy.org/scipy/scikits/wiki/TimeSeries>`__
 | 
						|
(dead link).
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
I started to implement such a class, but then quickly realized that
 | 
						|
any additional information disappeared when processing these subarrays
 | 
						|
(for example, adding a constant value to a subarray would erase its
 | 
						|
dates). I ended up writing the equivalent of *numpy.core.ma* for my
 | 
						|
particular class, ufuncs included. Everything went fine until I needed to
 | 
						|
subclass my new class, when more problems showed up: some attributes of
 | 
						|
the new subclass were lost during processing. I identified the culprit as
 | 
						|
MaskedArray, which returns masked ndarrays when I expected masked
 | 
						|
arrays of my class. I was preparing myself to rewrite *numpy.core.ma*
 | 
						|
when I forced myself to learn how to subclass ndarrays. As I became more
 | 
						|
familiar with the *__new__* and *__array_finalize__* methods,
 | 
						|
I started to wonder why masked arrays were objects, and not ndarrays,
 | 
						|
and whether it wouldn't be more convenient for subclassing if they did
 | 
						|
behave like regular ndarrays.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
The new *maskedarray* is what I eventually come up with. The
 | 
						|
main differences with the initial *numpy.core.ma* package are
 | 
						|
that MaskedArray is now a subclass of *ndarray* and that the
 | 
						|
*_data* section can now be any subclass of *ndarray*. Apart from a
 | 
						|
couple of issues listed below, the behavior of the new MaskedArray
 | 
						|
class reproduces the old one. Initially the *maskedarray*
 | 
						|
implementation was marginally slower than *numpy.ma* in some areas,
 | 
						|
but work is underway to speed it up; the expectation is that it can be
 | 
						|
made substantially faster than the present *numpy.ma*.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Note that if the subclass has some special methods and
 | 
						|
attributes, they are not propagated to the masked version:
 | 
						|
this would require a modification of the *__getattribute__*
 | 
						|
method (first trying *ndarray.__getattribute__*, then trying
 | 
						|
*self._data.__getattribute__* if an exception is raised in the first
 | 
						|
place), which really slows things down.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Main differences
 | 
						|
----------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 * The *_data* part of the masked array can be any subclass of ndarray (but not recarray, cf below).
 | 
						|
 * *fill_value* is now a property, not a function.
 | 
						|
 * in the majority of cases, the mask is forced to *nomask* when no value is actually masked. A notable exception is when a masked array (with no masked values) has just been unpickled.
 | 
						|
 * I got rid of the *share_mask* flag, I never understood its purpose.
 | 
						|
 * *put*, *putmask* and *take* now mimic the ndarray methods, to avoid unpleasant surprises. Moreover, *put* and *putmask* both update the mask when needed.  * if *a* is a masked array, *bool(a)* raises a *ValueError*, as it does with ndarrays.
 | 
						|
 * in the same way, the comparison of two masked arrays is a masked array, not a boolean
 | 
						|
 * *filled(a)* returns an array of the same subclass as *a._data*, and no test is performed on whether it is contiguous or not.
 | 
						|
 * the mask is always printed, even if it's *nomask*, which makes things easy (for me at least) to remember that a masked array is used.
 | 
						|
 * *cumsum* works as if the *_data* array was filled with 0. The mask is preserved, but not updated.
 | 
						|
 * *cumprod* works as if the *_data* array was filled with 1. The mask is preserved, but not updated.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
New features
 | 
						|
------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
This list is non-exhaustive...
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 * the *mr_* function mimics *r_* for masked arrays.
 | 
						|
 * the *anom* method returns the anomalies (deviations from the average)
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Using the new package with numpy.core.ma
 | 
						|
----------------------------------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
I tried to make sure that the new package can understand old masked
 | 
						|
arrays. Unfortunately, there's no upward compatibility.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
For example:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
>>> import numpy.core.ma as old_ma
 | 
						|
>>> import maskedarray as new_ma
 | 
						|
>>> x = old_ma.array([1,2,3,4,5], mask=[0,0,1,0,0])
 | 
						|
>>> x
 | 
						|
array(data =
 | 
						|
 [     1      2 999999      4      5],
 | 
						|
      mask =
 | 
						|
 [False False True False False],
 | 
						|
      fill_value=999999)
 | 
						|
>>> y = new_ma.array([1,2,3,4,5], mask=[0,0,1,0,0])
 | 
						|
>>> y
 | 
						|
array(data = [1 2 -- 4 5],
 | 
						|
      mask = [False False True False False],
 | 
						|
      fill_value=999999)
 | 
						|
>>> x==y
 | 
						|
array(data =
 | 
						|
 [True True True True True],
 | 
						|
      mask =
 | 
						|
 [False False True False False],
 | 
						|
      fill_value=?)
 | 
						|
>>> old_ma.getmask(x) == new_ma.getmask(x)
 | 
						|
array([True, True, True, True, True])
 | 
						|
>>> old_ma.getmask(y) == new_ma.getmask(y)
 | 
						|
array([True, True, False, True, True])
 | 
						|
>>> old_ma.getmask(y)
 | 
						|
False
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Using maskedarray with matplotlib
 | 
						|
---------------------------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Starting with matplotlib 0.91.2, the masked array importing will work with
 | 
						|
the maskedarray branch) as well as with earlier versions.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
By default matplotlib still uses numpy.ma, but there is an rcParams setting
 | 
						|
that you can use to select maskedarray instead.  In the matplotlibrc file
 | 
						|
you will find::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
  #maskedarray : False       # True to use external maskedarray module
 | 
						|
                             # instead of numpy.ma; this is a temporary #
 | 
						|
                             setting for testing maskedarray.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Uncomment and set to True to select maskedarray everywhere.
 | 
						|
Alternatively, you can test a script with maskedarray by using a
 | 
						|
command-line option, e.g.::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
  python simple_plot.py --maskedarray
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Masked records
 | 
						|
--------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Like *numpy.ma.core*, the *ndarray*-based implementation
 | 
						|
of MaskedArray is limited when working with records: you can
 | 
						|
mask any record of the array, but not a field in a record. If you
 | 
						|
need this feature, you may want to give the *mrecords* package
 | 
						|
a try (available in the *maskedarray* directory in the scipy
 | 
						|
sandbox). This module defines a new class, *MaskedRecord*. An
 | 
						|
instance of this class accepts a *recarray* as data, and uses two
 | 
						|
masks: the *fieldmask* has as many entries as records in the array,
 | 
						|
each entry with the same fields as a record, but of boolean types:
 | 
						|
they indicate whether the field is masked or not; a record entry
 | 
						|
is flagged as masked in the *mask* array if all the fields are
 | 
						|
masked. A few examples in the file should give you an idea of what
 | 
						|
can be done. Note that *mrecords* is still experimental...
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Optimizing maskedarray
 | 
						|
----------------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Should masked arrays be filled before processing or not?
 | 
						|
--------------------------------------------------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
In the current implementation, most operations on masked arrays involve
 | 
						|
the following steps:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 * the input arrays are filled
 | 
						|
 * the operation is performed on the filled arrays
 | 
						|
 * the mask is set for the results, from the combination of the input masks and the mask corresponding to the domain of the operation.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
For example, consider the division of two masked arrays::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
  import numpy
 | 
						|
  import maskedarray as ma
 | 
						|
  x = ma.array([1,2,3,4],mask=[1,0,0,0], dtype=numpy.float64)
 | 
						|
  y = ma.array([-1,0,1,2], mask=[0,0,0,1], dtype=numpy.float64)
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
The division of x by y is then computed as::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
  d1 = x.filled(0) # d1 = array([0., 2., 3., 4.])
 | 
						|
  d2 = y.filled(1) # array([-1.,  0.,  1.,  1.])
 | 
						|
  m = ma.mask_or(ma.getmask(x), ma.getmask(y)) # m =
 | 
						|
  array([True,False,False,True])
 | 
						|
  dm = ma.divide.domain(d1,d2) # array([False,  True, False, False])
 | 
						|
  result = (d1/d2).view(MaskedArray) # masked_array([-0. inf, 3., 4.])
 | 
						|
  result._mask = logical_or(m, dm)
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Note that a division by zero takes place. To avoid it, we can consider
 | 
						|
to fill the input arrays, taking the domain mask into account, so that::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
  d1 = x._data.copy() # d1 = array([1., 2., 3., 4.])
 | 
						|
  d2 = y._data.copy() # array([-1.,  0.,  1.,  2.])
 | 
						|
  dm = ma.divide.domain(d1,d2) # array([False,  True, False, False])
 | 
						|
  numpy.putmask(d2, dm, 1) # d2 = array([-1.,  1.,  1.,  2.])
 | 
						|
  m = ma.mask_or(ma.getmask(x), ma.getmask(y)) # m =
 | 
						|
  array([True,False,False,True])
 | 
						|
  result = (d1/d2).view(MaskedArray) # masked_array([-1. 0., 3., 2.])
 | 
						|
  result._mask = logical_or(m, dm)
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Note that the *.copy()* is required to avoid updating the inputs with
 | 
						|
*putmask*.  The *.filled()* method also involves a *.copy()*.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
A third possibility consists in avoid filling the arrays::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
  d1 = x._data # d1 = array([1., 2., 3., 4.])
 | 
						|
  d2 = y._data # array([-1.,  0.,  1.,  2.])
 | 
						|
  dm = ma.divide.domain(d1,d2) # array([False,  True, False, False])
 | 
						|
  m = ma.mask_or(ma.getmask(x), ma.getmask(y)) # m =
 | 
						|
  array([True,False,False,True])
 | 
						|
  result = (d1/d2).view(MaskedArray) # masked_array([-1. inf, 3., 2.])
 | 
						|
  result._mask = logical_or(m, dm)
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Note that here again the division by zero takes place.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
A quick benchmark gives the following results:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 * *numpy.ma.divide*  : 2.69 ms per loop
 | 
						|
 * classical division     : 2.21 ms per loop
 | 
						|
 * division w/ prefilling : 2.34 ms per loop
 | 
						|
 * division w/o filling   : 1.55 ms per loop
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
So, is it worth filling the arrays beforehand ? Yes, if we are interested
 | 
						|
in avoiding floating-point exceptions that may fill the result with infs
 | 
						|
and nans. No, if we are only interested into speed...
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Thanks
 | 
						|
------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
I'd like to thank Paul Dubois, Travis Oliphant and Sasha for the
 | 
						|
original masked array package: without you, I would never have started
 | 
						|
that (it might be argued that I shouldn't have anyway, but that's
 | 
						|
another story...).  I also wish to extend these thanks to Reggie Dugard
 | 
						|
and Eric Firing for their suggestions and numerous improvements.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Revision notes
 | 
						|
--------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
  * 08/25/2007 : Creation of this page
 | 
						|
  * 01/23/2007 : The package has been moved to the SciPy sandbox, and is regularly updated: please check out your SVN version!
 |