I've learned R by toying, and I'm starting to think that I'm abusing the tapply function. Are there better ways to do some of the following actions? Granted, they work, but as they get more complex I wonder if I'm losing out on better options. I'm looking for some criticism, here:
tapply(var1, list(fac1, fac2), mean, na.rm=T)
tapply(var1, fac1, sum, na.rm=T) / tapply(var2, fac1, sum, na.rm=T)
cumsum(tapply(var1, fac1, sum, na.rm=T)) / sum(var1)
Update: Here's some example data...
var1 var2 fac1 fac2
1 NA 275.54 10 (266,326]
2 NA 565.89 10 (552,818]
3 NA 815.41 6 (552,818]
4 NA 281.77 6 (266,326]
5 NA 640.24 NA (552,818]
6 NA 78.42 NA [78.4,266]
7 NA 1027.06 NA (818,1.55e+03]
8 NA 355.20 NA (326,552]
9 NA 464.52 NA (326,552]
10 NA 1397.11 10 (818,1.55e+03]
11 NA 229.82 NA [78.4,266]
12 NA 542.77 NA (326,552]
13 NA 829.32 NA (818,1.55e+03]
14 NA 284.78 NA (266,326]
15 NA 194.97 10 [78.4,266]
16 NA 672.55 8 (552,818]
17 NA 348.01 10 (326,552]
18 NA 1550.79 9 (818,1.55e+03]
19 101.98 101.98 4 [78.4,266]
20 NA 292.80 6 (266,326]
Update data dump:
structure(list(var1 = c(NA, NA, NA, NA, NA, NA, NA, NA, NA, NA,
NA, NA, NA, NA, NA, NA, NA, NA, 101.98, NA), var2 = c(275.54,
565.89, 815.41, 281.77, 640.24, 78.42, 1027.06, 355.2, 464.52,
1397.11, 229.82, 542.77, 829.32, 284.78, 194.97, 672.55, 348.01,
1550.79, 101.98, 292.8), fac1 = c(10L, 10L, 6L, 6L, NA, NA, NA,
NA, NA, 10L, NA, NA, NA, NA, 10L, 8L, 10L, 9L, 4L, 6L), fac2 = structure(c(2L,
4L, 4L, 2L, 4L, 1L, 5L, 3L, 3L, 5L, 1L, 3L, 5L, 2L, 1L, 4L, 3L,
5L, 1L, 2L), .Label = c("[78.4,266]", "(266,326]", "(326,552]",
"(552,818]", "(818,1.55e+03]"), class = "factor")), .Names = c("var1",
"var2", "fac1", "fac2"), row.names = c(NA, -20L), class = "data.frame")
For part 1 I prefer aggregate
because it keeps the data in a more R-like one observation per row format.
aggregate(var1, list(fac1, fac2), mean, na.rm=T)
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With