Can someone explain this behavior to me?
import pandas as pd
dates = pd.date_range('1/1/2000', periods=8)
df = pd.DataFrame(np.random.randn(8, 4), index=dates, columns=['A', 'B', 'C', 'D'])
df.ix['2000-01-01':'2000-01-02', ['A', 'C']]
## Output:
A C
2000-01-01 0.224944 -0.689382
2000-01-02 -0.824735 -0.805512
df.ix[['2000-01-01', '2000-01-02'], ['A', 'C']]
## Output:
A C
2000-01-01 NaN NaN
2000-01-02 NaN NaN
I was expecting both indexing operations to return the same (first) result.
Then I sort of got it:
from datetime import datetime
df.loc[[datetime(2000, 1, 1), datetime(2000, 1, 5)], ['A','C']]
## Output
A C
2000-01-01 0.224944 -0.689382
2000-01-05 -0.393747 0.462126
Now, I don't know the internals of pandas and why it implicitly converts strings to dates when given a range but not when given a list, but my guess is that a range makes it clear that we mean an object with ordinal nature so pandas perhaps checks the index, sees that it is a datetime and so parses the strings as dates.
But then the question becomes, why does it do the right thing when we supply a single string?
df.loc['2000-01-01', ['A','C']]
## Output:
A 0.224944
C -0.689382
Name: 2000-01-01 00:00:00, dtype: float64
Is it a performance issue of not trying to convert multiple values when given a list? Some other design decision?
Accessing DatetimeIndex with strings is kind-of hacked in (because R does this it's in there, but easy to find some edge cases like this). That is to say:
It's much better to use Timestamps rather than strings:
In [11]: df.ix[pd.Timestamp('2000-01-01'), ['A','C']]
Out[11]:
A 0.480959
C 0.468689
Name: 2000-01-01 00:00:00, dtype: float64
In [12]: df.ix[pd.Timestamp('2000-01-01'):pd.Timestamp('2000-01-02'), ['A','C']]
Out[12]:
A C
2000-01-01 0.480959 0.468689
2000-01-02 -0.971965 -0.840954
In [13]: df.ix[[pd.Timestamp('2000-01-01'), pd.Timestamp('2000-01-02')], ['A', 'C']]
Out[13]:
A C
2000-01-01 0.480959 0.468689
2000-01-02 -0.971965 -0.840954
In [14]: df.ix[pd.to_datetime(['2000-01-01', '2000-01-02']), ['A', 'C']]
Out[14]:
A C
2000-01-01 0.480959 0.468689
2000-01-02 -0.971965 -0.840954
As mentioned in your answer, this is a little cleaner (though there is no ambiguity in this case) as .loc
rather than .ix
.
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