(Source: python-scripts.com)

Contents

- 1. Recently
- 2. Functions
- 3. Calculations
- 4. Deprecated
- 5. Two-dimensional
- 6. Dimensional

I've tried to search the internet and Stack Overflow for this error, but got no results. Just like a lot of cryptic pandas errors, this one too stems from having two columns with the same name.

Devin-petersohn added a commit to devin-petersohn/Odin that referenced this issue Mar 16, 2021 Every once in a while it is useful to take a step back and look at pandas’ functions and see if there is a new or better way to do things.

I was recently working on a problem and noticed that pandas had a Grouper function that I had never used before. I looked into how it can be used and it turns out it is useful for the type of summary analysis I tend to do on a frequent basis.

In addition to functions that have been around a while, pandas continues to provide new and improved capabilities with every release. The updated AGG function is another very useful and intuitive tool for summarizing data.

This article will walk through how and why you may want to use the Grouper and AGG functions on your own data. Pandas’ origins are in the financial industry so it should not be a surprise that it has robust capabilities to manipulate and summarize time series data.

(Source: archimatix.com)

Just look at the extensive time series documentation to get a feel for all the options. These strings are used to represent various common time frequencies like days vs. weeks vs. years.

Since group by is one of my standard functions, this approach seems simpler to me and it is more likely to stick in my brain. The nice benefit of this capability is that if you are interested in looking at data summarized in a different time frame, just change the freq parameter to one of the valid offset aliases.

If your annual sales were on a non-calendar basis, then the data can be easily changed by modifying the freq parameter. When dealing with summarizing time series data, this is incredibly handy.

It is certainly possible (using pivot tables and custom grouping) but I do not think it is nearly as intuitive as the pandas approach. In pandas 0.20.1, there was a new AGG function added that makes it a lot simpler to summarize data in a manner similar to the group by API.

Fortunately we can pass a dictionary to AGG and specify what operations to apply to each column. I find this approach really handy when I want to summarize several columns of data.

(Source: scaquarium.org)

In the past, I would run the individual calculations and build up the resulting data frame a row at a time. For instance, I frequently find myself needing to aggregate data and use a mode function that works on text.

This specification will select a column via the key parameter, or if the level and/or axis parameters are given, a level of the index of the target object. Convention {‘start’, ‘end’, ‘e’, ‘s’} If grouper is PeriodIndex and freq parameter is passed.

Base int, default 0 Only when freq parameter is passed. For frequencies that evenly subdivide 1 day, the “origin” of the aggregated intervals.

Loffset STR, Dateset, time delta object Only when freq parameter is passed. Dropna built, default True If True, and if group keys contain NA values, NA values together with row/column will be dropped.

To replace the use of the deprecated base argument, you can now use offset, in this example it is equivalent to have base=2 : Dense fell OnStar, self on datarammen Ike heir mere end en dimension.

(Source: ultrawidewallpapers.com)

Leg heir first at sage PA interested OG Stack Overflow after dense fell, men fit Inge resulted. Lies mange kryptiske pandafejl stammer GSA dense Frey at have to longer med same Navy.

To find the volume, THREE quantities are multiplied and it is called THREE DIMENSIONAL But when we draw a line with the sharpest instrument and view through a microscope definitely we can see a breadth.

1 dimensional is a mathematical concept, and as such a “line” as people above have argued has width and length under a microscope, is not what we are considering here. Physically, if you DRAW a line or point on paper, yes, it will be two-dimensional.

Anything on paper is two-dimensional, because it is in the physical form on a flat surface. The first dimension, in reality, is invisible, though it exists for our use in grasping mathematical concepts.

With that analogy in place, perhaps the idea can make more sense. Three-D on paper, is in reality two-demensional, but appears three-D because it has the length, width, and height drawn in, and as such so can a 1 dimensional drawing (a line) be in appearance “one-demesional” until further scrutinized with scientific tools like a microscope.

(Source: www2.padi.com)

If you want to see this, draw a line with a very fine pen or pencil and view it under a microscope. You couldn't draw them, because any line/dot you put on paper would have 3 dimensions, no matter how tiny they may be.

I am responding just in case you're looking for another possible answer: a function is 1-dimensional if it only contains one variable. 16 = x ^2 + y^2 is a two-dimensional equation (defining, in this case, a circle, radius 4) using X and Y as the two dimensions.

One dimensional is a thing that can only be measured once as in length and an example is clearly a line as the people stated before and for all I know to this point is the only 1 dimensional figure I should say “ 1 dimensional means something has a length, but no width or height.

It would be completely invisible, have no surface area, have no mass, and would be undetectable by any scientific instrument.