4
$\begingroup$

I'm looking for a neater way to achieve this, which to me looks awkward and suggests that I am missing something...

Given a Dataset...

ds = Dataset[{
<|"a"->1,"b"->1,"c"->3|>,
<|"a"->1,"b"->2,"c"->4|>,
<|"a"->2,"b"->3,"c"->5|>}];

Return another Dataset given by the grouping by one column and the maximal by another...

ds[GroupBy[#a &], MaximalBy[#b &]] // Values // Flatten

To return...

Dataset[{<|"a" -> 1, "b" -> 2, "c" -> 4|>, <|"a" -> 2, "b" -> 3, "c" -> 5|>}

The GroupBy and MaximalBy return a list of Associations of row number to a List of Associations (of which there is only one) which then needs (something like) //Values//Flatten to retrieve the Dataset I want.

Is there a more Dataset-eque way of doing this?

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

Since the question states that we need not worry about the case where there are multiple maxima in a group, the following expression eliminates the need for Flatten:

ds[GroupBy[#a &] /* Values, MaximalBy[#b &] /* First]

dataset screenshot

This arbitrarily chooses the First from among potential multiple maxima. The expression also does its work within the confines of the query expression without having specify additional post-processing functions. In principle, the Query optimizer can do a better job when it can see the complete operation.

If desired, we can (notionally) reduce the size of intermediate data structures by supplying a reduction function as the third argument to MaximalBy:

ds[GroupBy[#, #a &, MaximalBy[#b &] /* First] & /* Values]

dataset screenshot

We can see the difference between the plans of the two queries:

Dataset`ShowPlan[GroupBy[#a&] /* Values, MaximalBy[#b&] /* First]
(* GroupBy[#a&] /* Values /* Map[MaximalBy[#b&] /* First] *)

Dataset`ShowPlan[GroupBy[#, #a &, MaximalBy[#b&] /* First]& /* Values]
(* GroupBy[#1, #a&, MaximalBy[#b&] /* First]& /* Values *)

Note how the second plan does not contain the Map operator that is present in the first plan. Instead, GroupBy determines the single maximum for each group directly. Whether this second query results in a material performance difference is something that would need to be determined by benchmarking with real data.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

Typically as soon as I post this occurs to me...

ds[GroupBy[#a &], MaximalBy[#b &]][Values, Merge[First]]

Since Values is a descending operator.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ If MaximalBy gives multiple values, then this gives a different result to that using Values and Flatten. For example, if ds = Dataset[{<|"a" -> 1, "b" -> 1, "c" -> 3|>, <|"a" -> 1, "b" -> 2, "c" -> 4|>, <|"a" -> 1, "b" -> 2, "c" -> 6|>, <|"a" -> 2, "b" -> 3, "c" -> 5|>}]; Is ds[GroupBy[#a &], MaximalBy[#b &]][Values][Flatten] more Dataset-eque? $\endgroup$ – Simplex Oct 23 '14 at 7:47
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you for that suggestion. In the case where MaximalBy returned more than one result, in my particular case, I'd have to choose one of them by some other criteria so would require some kind of tie breaker. $\endgroup$ – Ymareth Oct 27 '14 at 8:57
  • $\begingroup$ OK, makes sense. You can also use MaximalBy to break the tie and failing that, select the first. For example: ds[GroupBy[#a &], MaximalBy[#, {Key["b"], Key["c"]}, 1] &][Values][Flatten] $\endgroup$ – Simplex Oct 28 '14 at 0:26

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.