Pra*_*een 5 python arrays numpy distance scipy
我有两个点向量x和y,形状分别为(n, p)和(m, p)。举个例子:
x = np.array([[ 0. , -0.16341, 0.98656],
[-0.05937, -0.25205, 0.96589],
[ 0.05937, -0.25205, 0.96589],
[-0.11608, -0.33488, 0.93508],
[ 0. , -0.33416, 0.94252]])
y = np.array([[ 0. , -0.36836, 0.92968],
[-0.12103, -0.54558, 0.82928],
[ 0.12103, -0.54558, 0.82928]])
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)
我想计算一个(n, m)大小的矩阵,其中包含两点之间的角度,就像这个问题一样。即,矢量化版本:
theta = np.array(
[ np.arccos(np.dot(i, j) / (la.norm(i) * la.norm(j)))
for i in x for j in y ]
).reshape((n, m))
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)
注意:每个n和m的数量级可以约为 10000。
有多种方法可以做到这一点:
import numpy.linalg as la
from scipy.spatial import distance as dist
# Manually
def method0(x, y):
dotprod_mat = np.dot(x, y.T)
costheta = dotprod_mat / la.norm(x, axis=1)[:, np.newaxis]
costheta /= la.norm(y, axis=1)
return np.arccos(costheta)
# Using einsum
def method1(x, y):
dotprod_mat = np.einsum('ij,kj->ik', x, y)
costheta = dotprod_mat / la.norm(x, axis=1)[:, np.newaxis]
costheta /= la.norm(y, axis=1)
return np.arccos(costheta)
# Using scipy.spatial.cdist (one-liner)
def method2(x, y):
costheta = 1 - dist.cdist(x, y, 'cosine')
return np.arccos(costheta)
# Realize that your arrays `x` and `y` are already normalized, meaning you can
# optimize method1 even more
def method3(x, y):
costheta = np.einsum('ij,kj->ik', x, y) # Directly gives costheta, since
# ||x|| = ||y|| = 1
return np.arccos(costheta)
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)
(n, m) = (1212, 252) 的计时结果:
>>> %timeit theta = method0(x, y)
100 loops, best of 3: 11.1 ms per loop
>>> %timeit theta = method1(x, y)
100 loops, best of 3: 10.8 ms per loop
>>> %timeit theta = method2(x, y)
100 loops, best of 3: 12.3 ms per loop
>>> %timeit theta = method3(x, y)
100 loops, best of 3: 9.42 ms per loop
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)
时间差异随着元素数量的增加而减小。对于 (n, m) = (6252, 1212):
>>> %timeit -n10 theta = method0(x, y)
10 loops, best of 3: 365 ms per loop
>>> %timeit -n10 theta = method1(x, y)
10 loops, best of 3: 358 ms per loop
>>> %timeit -n10 theta = method2(x, y)
10 loops, best of 3: 384 ms per loop
>>> %timeit -n10 theta = method3(x, y)
10 loops, best of 3: 314 ms per loop
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)
但是,如果您省略了该np.arccos步骤,即假设您可以仅使用costheta, 并且不需要本身进行 theta管理,那么:
>>> %timeit costheta = np.einsum('ij,kj->ik', x, y)
10 loops, best of 3: 61.3 ms per loop
>>> %timeit costheta = 1 - dist.cdist(x, y, 'cosine')
10 loops, best of 3: 124 ms per loop
>>> %timeit costheta = dist.cdist(x, y, 'cosine')
10 loops, best of 3: 112 ms per loop
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)
这是针对(6252, 1212)的情况。所以实际上np.arccos占用了80%的时间。在这种情况下,我发现np.einsum这比dist.cdist. 所以你肯定想使用einsum.
摘要:的结果theta在很大程度上相似,但np.einsum对我来说是最快的,特别是当您没有额外计算规范时。尽量避免theta仅使用costheta.
注意:我没有提到的重要一点是浮点精度的有限性可能会导致np.arccos给出nan值。method[0:3]自然地,它适用于 的值x并且y尚未得到适当的标准化。但method3给了几个nans。我通过预归一化修复了这个问题,这自然会破坏使用 的任何增益method3,除非您需要对一小组预归一化矩阵进行多次计算(无论出于何种原因)。