Eli Bressert wrote:

Hi,

I'm using masked arrays to compute large-scale standard deviation, multiplication, gaussian, and weighted averages. At first I thought using the masked arrays would be a great way to sidestep looping (which it is), but it's still slower than expected. Here's a snippet of the code that I'm using it for.

# Computing nearest neighbor distances. # Output will be about 270,000 rows long for the index # and 270,000x50 for the dist array. tree = ann.kd_tree(np.column_stack([l,b])) index, dist = tree.search(np.column_stack([l,b]),k=nth)

# Clipping bad values by replacing them acceptable values av[np.where(av<=-10)] = -10 av[np.where(av>=50)] = 50

# Distance clipping and creating mask dist_arcsec = np.sqrt(dist)*3600 mask = dist_arcsec <= d_thresh

# Creating masked array av_good = ma.array(av[index],mask=mask) dist_good = ma.array(dist_arcsec,mask=mask)

# Reason why I'm using masked arrays. If these were # ndarrays with nan's, then the output would be nan. Std = np.array(np.std(av_good,axis=1)) Var = Std*Std

Rho = np.zeros( (len(av), nth) ) Rho2 = np.zeros( (len(av), nth) )

dist_std = np.std(dist_good,axis=1)

for j in range(nth): Rho[:,j] = dist_std Rho2[:,j] = Var

# This part takes about 20 seconds to compute for a 270,000x50 masked array. # Using ndarrays of the same size takes about 2 second spatial_weight = 1.0 / (Rho*np.sqrt(2*np.pi)) * np.exp( - dist_good / (2*Rho**2))

# Like the spatial_weight section, this takes about 20 seconds W = spatial_weight / Rho2

The short answer to your subject line is "yes". A simple illustration of division: In [11]:x = np.ones((270000,50), float) In [12]:y = np.ones((270000,50), float) In [13]:timeit x/y 10 loops, best of 3: 199 ms per loop In [14]:x = np.ma.ones((270000,50), float) In [15]:y = np.ma.ones((270000,50), float) In [16]:x[1,1] = np.ma.masked In [17]:y[1,2] = np.ma.masked In [18]:timeit x/y 10 loops, best of 3: 2.45 s per loop So it is slower by more than a factor of 10. That's much worse than I expected for division (and multiplication is similar). It makes me suspect there is might be a simple way to improve it greatly, but I haven't looked.

# Takes less than one second. Ave = np.average(av_good,axis=1,weights=W)

Any ideas on why it would take such a long time for processing? Especially the spatial_weight and W variables? Would there be a faster way to do this? Or is there a way that numpy.std can process ignore nan's when processing?

There is a numpy.nansum; and see the following thread: http://www.mail-archive.com/numpy-discussion@scipy.org/msg09407.html Eric

Thanks,

Eli Bressert _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion