Python-如何检查列表单调性
检查列表单调性的有效方法是什么?即它具有单调递增或递减的值 示例:Python-如何检查列表单调性,python,list,performance,Python,List,Performance,检查列表单调性的有效方法是什么?即它具有单调递增或递减的值 示例: [0, 1, 2, 3, 3, 4] # This is a monotonically increasing list [4.3, 4.2, 4.2, -2] # This is a monotonically decreasing list [2, 3, 1] # This is neither 这种方法在列表长度上是O(N) 最好避免使用诸如“增加”或“减少”之类的模棱两可的术语,因为不清楚平
[0, 1, 2, 3, 3, 4] # This is a monotonically increasing list
[4.3, 4.2, 4.2, -2] # This is a monotonically decreasing list
[2, 3, 1] # This is neither
这种方法在列表长度上是
O(N)
最好避免使用诸如“增加”或“减少”之类的模棱两可的术语,因为不清楚平等是否可以接受。您应该始终使用例如“非递增”(显然相等被接受)或“严格递减”(显然相等被不接受)
def严格递增(L):
返回全部(xy表示x,y表示zip(L,L[1:]))
def不增加(L):
返回全部(x>=y表示x,y在zip中(L,L[1:]))
def非衰减(L):
返回全部(x如果您有大量的数字列表,最好使用numpy,如果您是:
import numpy as np
def monotonic(x):
dx = np.diff(x)
return np.all(dx <= 0) or np.all(dx >= 0)
将numpy导入为np
def单调(x):
dx=np.diff(x)
返回np.all(dx=0)
应该可以了。@6502有完美的列表代码,我只想添加一个适用于所有序列的通用版本:
import operator, itertools
def is_monotone(lst):
op = operator.le # pick 'op' based upon trend between
if not op(lst[0], lst[-1]): # first and last element in the 'lst'
op = operator.ge
return all(op(x,y) for x, y in itertools.izip(lst, lst[1:]))
def pairwise(seq):
items = iter(seq)
last = next(items)
for item in items:
yield last, item
last = item
def strictly_increasing(L):
return all(x<y for x, y in pairwise(L))
def strictly_decreasing(L):
return all(x>y for x, y in pairwise(L))
def non_increasing(L):
return all(x>=y for x, y in pairwise(L))
def non_decreasing(L):
return all(x<=y for x, y in pairwise(L))
def成对(seq):
项目=国际热核试验堆(序号)
最后一个=下一个(项目)
对于项目中的项目:
最后一项
最后一项=项目
def严格增加(L):
返回全部(xy代表x,y成对(L))
def不增加(L):
返回全部(x>=y表示x,y成对(L))
def非衰减(L):
return all(x这是一个功能解决方案,它使用复杂度O(n)
的reduce
:
第二个元素的大小写为假:[4,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,7]
:
# my solution ..
$ python -m timeit "inc = lambda L: reduce(lambda a,b: b if a < b else 9999 , L)!=9999; inc([4,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,7])"
1000000 loops, best of 3: 1.87 usec per loop
# while the other solution:
$ python -m timeit "inc = lambda L: all(x<y for x, y in zip(L, L[1:]));inc([4,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,7])"
100000 loops, best of 3: 2.15 usec per loop
#我的解决方案。。
$python-m timeit“inc=lambda L:reduce(如果a$python-m timeit“inc=lambda L:all(xI在不同的条件下对这个问题的所有答案进行计时,并发现:
- 如果列表已经单调增加,那么排序是最快的
- 如果列表是无序的/随机的,或者如果无序元素的数量大于~1,则排序速度最慢。当然,无序越多的列表对应的结果越慢
- 如果列表大多是单调递增的,或者完全随机的,则Michael J.Barbers方法是最快的
以下是试用代码:
import timeit
setup = '''
import random
from itertools import izip, starmap, islice
import operator
def is_increasing_normal(lst):
for i in range(0, len(lst) - 1):
if lst[i] >= lst[i + 1]:
return False
return True
def is_increasing_zip(lst):
return all(x < y for x, y in izip(lst, islice(lst, 1, None)))
def is_increasing_sorted(lst):
return lst == sorted(lst)
def is_increasing_starmap(lst):
pairs = izip(lst, islice(lst, 1, None))
return all(starmap(operator.le, pairs))
if {list_method} in (1, 2):
lst = list(range({n}))
if {list_method} == 2:
for _ in range(int({n} * 0.0001)):
lst.insert(random.randrange(0, len(lst)), -random.randrange(1,100))
if {list_method} == 3:
lst = [int(1000*random.random()) for i in xrange({n})]
'''
n = 100000
iterations = 10000
list_method = 1
timeit.timeit('is_increasing_normal(lst)', setup=setup.format(n=n, list_method=list_method), number=iterations)
timeit.timeit('is_increasing_zip(lst)', setup=setup.format(n=n, list_method=list_method), number=iterations)
timeit.timeit('is_increasing_sorted(lst)', setup=setup.format(n=n, list_method=list_method), number=iterations)
timeit.timeit('is_increasing_starmap(lst)', setup=setup.format(n=n, list_method=list_method), number=iterations)
import timeit
设置=“”
随机输入
从itertools导入izip、星图、islice
进口经营者
def正在增加正常值(lst):
对于范围(0,len(lst)-1内的i:
如果lst[i]>=lst[i+1]:
返回错误
返回真值
def正在增加压缩(lst):
返回全部(x
如果列表已经单调递增(list\u method==1
),则从最快到最慢的是:
分类
星图
正常的
拉链
如果列表基本上是单调递增的(list\u method==2
),则最快到最慢的是:
星图
拉链
正常的
分类
(星图或zip是否最快取决于执行情况,我无法确定模式。星图似乎通常更快)
如果列表是完全随机的(list\u method==3
),则最快到最慢的是:
星图
拉链
正常的
分类(非常糟糕)
这个包裹使这很方便
import pandas as pd
以下命令用于整数或浮点数列表
(≥):
严格单调递增(>):
使用未记录的私有方法的替代方法:
pd.Index(mylist)._is_strictly_monotonic_increasing
pd.Index(mylist)._is_strictly_monotonic_decreasing
(≤):
严格单调递减(这里有一个变量,它同时接受物化序列和非物化序列。它自动确定它是否是单调序列,如果是,它的方向(即增加
或减少
)和strict
ness。提供了内联注释以帮助读者。与结尾提供的测试用例类似
def isMonotonic(seq):
"""
seq.............: - A Python sequence, materialized or not.
Returns.........:
(True,0,True): - Mono Const, Strict: Seq empty or 1-item.
(True,0,False): - Mono Const, Not-Strict: All 2+ Seq items same.
(True,+1,True): - Mono Incr, Strict.
(True,+1,False): - Mono Incr, Not-Strict.
(True,-1,True): - Mono Decr, Strict.
(True,-1,False): - Mono Decr, Not-Strict.
(False,None,None) - Not Monotonic.
"""
items = iter(seq) # Ensure iterator (i.e. that next(...) works).
prev_value = next(items, None) # Fetch 1st item, or None if empty.
if prev_value == None: return (True,0,True) # seq was empty.
# ============================================================
# The next for/loop scans until it finds first value-change.
# ============================================================
# Ex: [3,3,3,78,...] --or- [-5,-5,-5,-102,...]
# ============================================================
# -- If that 'change-value' represents an Increase or Decrease,
# then we know to look for Monotonically Increasing or
# Decreasing, respectively.
# -- If no value-change is found end-to-end (e.g. [3,3,3,...3]),
# then it's Monotonically Constant, Non-Strict.
# -- Finally, if the sequence was exhausted above, which means
# it had exactly one-element, then it Monotonically Constant,
# Strict.
# ============================================================
isSequenceExhausted = True
curr_value = prev_value
for item in items:
isSequenceExhausted = False # Tiny inefficiency.
if item == prev_value: continue
curr_value = item
break
else:
return (True,0,True) if isSequenceExhausted else (True,0,False)
# ============================================================
# ============================================================
# If we tricked down to here, then none of the above
# checked-cases applied (i.e. didn't short-circuit and
# 'return'); so we continue with the final step of
# iterating through the remaining sequence items to
# determine Monotonicity, direction and strictness.
# ============================================================
strict = True
if curr_value > prev_value: # Scan for Increasing Monotonicity.
for item in items:
if item < curr_value: return (False,None,None)
if item == curr_value: strict = False # Tiny inefficiency.
curr_value = item
return (True,+1,strict)
else: # Scan for Decreasing Monotonicity.
for item in items:
if item > curr_value: return (False,None,None)
if item == curr_value: strict = False # Tiny inefficiency.
curr_value = item
return (True,-1,strict)
# ============================================================
# Test cases ...
assert isMonotonic([1,2,3,4]) == (True,+1,True)
assert isMonotonic([4,3,2,1]) == (True,-1,True)
assert isMonotonic([-1,-2,-3,-4]) == (True,-1,True)
assert isMonotonic([]) == (True,0,True)
assert isMonotonic([20]) == (True,0,True)
assert isMonotonic([-20]) == (True,0,True)
assert isMonotonic([1,1]) == (True,0,False)
assert isMonotonic([1,-1]) == (True,-1,True)
assert isMonotonic([1,-1,-1]) == (True,-1,False)
assert isMonotonic([1,3,3]) == (True,+1,False)
assert isMonotonic([1,2,1]) == (False,None,None)
assert isMonotonic([0,0,0,0]) == (True,0,False)
def isMonotonic(seq):
"""
seq………:-一个Python序列,具体化与否。
返回………:
(True,0,True):-Mono-Const,Strict:Seq-empty或1-item。
(真、0、假):-单常数,不严格:所有2+序列项相同。
(正确,+1,正确):-Mono Incr,Strict。
(真、+1、假):-Mono Incr,不严格。
(正确,-1,正确):-Mono Decr,Strict。
(真,-1,假):-Mono Decr,不严格。
(假,无,无)-不是单调的。
"""
items=iter(seq)#确保迭代器(即下一个(…)工作)。
prev_值=下一个(项目,无)#获取第一个项目,如果为空,则获取无。
如果prev_value==None:return(True,0,True)#seq为空。
# ============================================================
#下一个for/loop扫描,直到找到第一个值更改。
# ============================================================
#例:[3,3,
# my solution ..
$ python -m timeit "inc = lambda L: reduce(lambda a,b: b if a < b else 9999 , L)!=9999; inc([4,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,7])"
1000000 loops, best of 3: 1.87 usec per loop
# while the other solution:
$ python -m timeit "inc = lambda L: all(x<y for x, y in zip(L, L[1:]));inc([4,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,7])"
100000 loops, best of 3: 2.15 usec per loop
import timeit
setup = '''
import random
from itertools import izip, starmap, islice
import operator
def is_increasing_normal(lst):
for i in range(0, len(lst) - 1):
if lst[i] >= lst[i + 1]:
return False
return True
def is_increasing_zip(lst):
return all(x < y for x, y in izip(lst, islice(lst, 1, None)))
def is_increasing_sorted(lst):
return lst == sorted(lst)
def is_increasing_starmap(lst):
pairs = izip(lst, islice(lst, 1, None))
return all(starmap(operator.le, pairs))
if {list_method} in (1, 2):
lst = list(range({n}))
if {list_method} == 2:
for _ in range(int({n} * 0.0001)):
lst.insert(random.randrange(0, len(lst)), -random.randrange(1,100))
if {list_method} == 3:
lst = [int(1000*random.random()) for i in xrange({n})]
'''
n = 100000
iterations = 10000
list_method = 1
timeit.timeit('is_increasing_normal(lst)', setup=setup.format(n=n, list_method=list_method), number=iterations)
timeit.timeit('is_increasing_zip(lst)', setup=setup.format(n=n, list_method=list_method), number=iterations)
timeit.timeit('is_increasing_sorted(lst)', setup=setup.format(n=n, list_method=list_method), number=iterations)
timeit.timeit('is_increasing_starmap(lst)', setup=setup.format(n=n, list_method=list_method), number=iterations)
import pandas as pd
pd.Series(mylist).is_monotonic_increasing
myseries = pd.Series(mylist)
myseries.is_unique and myseries.is_monotonic_increasing
pd.Index(mylist)._is_strictly_monotonic_increasing
pd.Series(mylist).is_monotonic_decreasing
myseries = pd.Series(mylist)
myseries.is_unique and myseries.is_monotonic_decreasing
pd.Index(mylist)._is_strictly_monotonic_decreasing
def isMonotonic(seq):
"""
seq.............: - A Python sequence, materialized or not.
Returns.........:
(True,0,True): - Mono Const, Strict: Seq empty or 1-item.
(True,0,False): - Mono Const, Not-Strict: All 2+ Seq items same.
(True,+1,True): - Mono Incr, Strict.
(True,+1,False): - Mono Incr, Not-Strict.
(True,-1,True): - Mono Decr, Strict.
(True,-1,False): - Mono Decr, Not-Strict.
(False,None,None) - Not Monotonic.
"""
items = iter(seq) # Ensure iterator (i.e. that next(...) works).
prev_value = next(items, None) # Fetch 1st item, or None if empty.
if prev_value == None: return (True,0,True) # seq was empty.
# ============================================================
# The next for/loop scans until it finds first value-change.
# ============================================================
# Ex: [3,3,3,78,...] --or- [-5,-5,-5,-102,...]
# ============================================================
# -- If that 'change-value' represents an Increase or Decrease,
# then we know to look for Monotonically Increasing or
# Decreasing, respectively.
# -- If no value-change is found end-to-end (e.g. [3,3,3,...3]),
# then it's Monotonically Constant, Non-Strict.
# -- Finally, if the sequence was exhausted above, which means
# it had exactly one-element, then it Monotonically Constant,
# Strict.
# ============================================================
isSequenceExhausted = True
curr_value = prev_value
for item in items:
isSequenceExhausted = False # Tiny inefficiency.
if item == prev_value: continue
curr_value = item
break
else:
return (True,0,True) if isSequenceExhausted else (True,0,False)
# ============================================================
# ============================================================
# If we tricked down to here, then none of the above
# checked-cases applied (i.e. didn't short-circuit and
# 'return'); so we continue with the final step of
# iterating through the remaining sequence items to
# determine Monotonicity, direction and strictness.
# ============================================================
strict = True
if curr_value > prev_value: # Scan for Increasing Monotonicity.
for item in items:
if item < curr_value: return (False,None,None)
if item == curr_value: strict = False # Tiny inefficiency.
curr_value = item
return (True,+1,strict)
else: # Scan for Decreasing Monotonicity.
for item in items:
if item > curr_value: return (False,None,None)
if item == curr_value: strict = False # Tiny inefficiency.
curr_value = item
return (True,-1,strict)
# ============================================================
# Test cases ...
assert isMonotonic([1,2,3,4]) == (True,+1,True)
assert isMonotonic([4,3,2,1]) == (True,-1,True)
assert isMonotonic([-1,-2,-3,-4]) == (True,-1,True)
assert isMonotonic([]) == (True,0,True)
assert isMonotonic([20]) == (True,0,True)
assert isMonotonic([-20]) == (True,0,True)
assert isMonotonic([1,1]) == (True,0,False)
assert isMonotonic([1,-1]) == (True,-1,True)
assert isMonotonic([1,-1,-1]) == (True,-1,False)
assert isMonotonic([1,3,3]) == (True,+1,False)
assert isMonotonic([1,2,1]) == (False,None,None)
assert isMonotonic([0,0,0,0]) == (True,0,False)
def IsMonotonic(data):
''' Returns true if data is monotonic.'''
data = np.array(data)
# Greater-Equal
if (data[-1] > data[0]):
return np.all(data[1:] >= data[:-1])
# Less-Equal
else:
return np.all(data[1:] <= data[:-1])
a = [1,2,3,4,5]
b = [0,1,6,1,0]
c = [9,8,7,6,5]
def monotonic_increase(x):
if len(x) <= 1: return False
for i in range(1, len(x)):
if x[i-1] >= x[i]:
return False
return True
def monotonic_decrease(x):
if len(x) <= 1: return False
for i in range(1, len(x)):
if x[i-1] <= x[i]:
return False
return True
monotonic_increase = lambda x: len(x) > 1 and all(x[i-1] < x[i] for i in range(1, len(x)))
monotonic_decrease = lambda x: len(x) > 1 and all(x[i-1] > x[i] for i in range(1, len(x)))
print(monotonic_increase(a))
print(monotonic_decrease(c))
print(monotonic_decrease([]))
print(monotonic_increase(c))
print(monotonic_decrease(a))
print(monotonic_increase(b))
print(monotonic_decrease(b))