在二维数组上使用numpy.interp的最快方法

Question

我有以下问题.我试图找到在x坐标的二维数组上使用numpy插值方法的最快方法.

import numpy as np

xp = [0.0, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1.0]

np.random.seed(100)
x = np.random.rand(10)
fp = np.random.rand(10, 5)

所以基本上,xp将是数据点的x坐标,x将是包含我想要插值的值的x坐标的数组,并且fp将是包含数据点的y坐标的2-D数组.

xp
[0.0, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1.0]

x
array([ 0.54340494,  0.27836939,  0.42451759,  0.84477613,  0.00471886,
        0.12156912,  0.67074908,  0.82585276,  0.13670659,  0.57509333])

fp
array([[ 0.89132195,  0.20920212,  0.18532822,  0.10837689,  0.21969749],
       [ 0.97862378,  0.81168315,  0.17194101,  0.81622475,  0.27407375],
       [ 0.43170418,  0.94002982,  0.81764938,  0.33611195,  0.17541045],
       [ 0.37283205,  0.00568851,  0.25242635,  0.79566251,  0.01525497],
       [ 0.59884338,  0.60380454,  0.10514769,  0.38194344,  0.03647606],
       [ 0.89041156,  0.98092086,  0.05994199,  0.89054594,  0.5769015 ],
       [ 0.74247969,  0.63018394,  0.58184219,  0.02043913,  0.21002658],
       [ 0.54468488,  0.76911517,  0.25069523,  0.28589569,  0.85239509],
       [ 0.97500649,  0.88485329,  0.35950784,  0.59885895,  0.35479561],
       [ 0.34019022,  0.17808099,  0.23769421,  0.04486228,  0.50543143]])

期望的结果应如下所示:

array([ 0.17196795,  0.73908678,  0.85459966,  0.49980648,  0.59893702,
        0.9344241 ,  0.19840596,  0.45777785,  0.92570835,  0.17977264])

再一次,寻找最快的方法导致这是我的问题的简化版本,其长度约为100万而不是10.

谢谢

Answer 1

所以基本上你想要输出相当于

np.array([np.interp(x[i], xp, fp[i]) for i in range(x.size)])

但是这个for循环对于大型循环来说会非常缓慢x.size

这应该工作:

def multiInterp(x, xp, fp):
    i, j = np.nonzero(np.diff(np.array(xp)[None,:] < x[:,None]))
    d = (x - xp[j]) / np.diff(xp)[j]
    return fp[i, j] + np.diff(fp)[i, j] * d

编辑: 这工作得更好,可以处理更大的数组:

def multiInterp2(x, xp, fp):
    i = np.arange(x.size)
    j = np.searchsorted(xp, x) - 1
    d = (x - xp[j]) / (xp[j + 1] - xp[j])
    return (1 - d) * fp[i, j] + fp[i, j + 1] * d

测试:

multiInterp2(x, xp, fp)
Out: 
array([ 0.17196795,  0.73908678,  0.85459966,  0.49980648,  0.59893702,
        0.9344241 ,  0.19840596,  0.45777785,  0.92570835,  0.17977264])

使用原始数据进行时序测试:

    %timeit multiInterp2(x, xp, fp)
The slowest run took 6.87 times longer than the fastest. This could mean that an intermediate result is being cached.
10000 loops, best of 3: 25.5 µs per loop

%timeit np.concatenate([compiled_interp(x[[i]], xp, fp[i]) for i in range(fp.shape[0])])
The slowest run took 4.03 times longer than the fastest. This could mean that an intermediate result is being cached.
10000 loops, best of 3: 39.3 µs per loop

即使是小尺寸的,似乎也更快 x

让我们尝试更多,更大的东西:

n = 10000
m = 10000

xp = np.linspace(0, 1, n)
x = np.random.rand(m)
fp = np.random.rand(m, n)

%timeit b()  # kazemakase's above
10 loops, best of 3: 38.4 ms per loop

%timeit multiInterp2(x, xp, fp)
100 loops, best of 3: 2.4 ms per loop

优势的扩展甚至比编译版本还要好得多 np.interp