Reputation: 635
I have to shuffle elements of a string. I wrote a code:
sequ <- "GCTTCG"
set.seed(2017)
i <- sample(1:nchar(sequ))
separate.seq.letters <- unlist(strsplit(sequ, ""))
paste(separate.seq.letters[i], collapse = "")
[1] "GTCGTC"
This code shuffles elements one time. The main question would be is there a better (more effective) way to do that? For very long sequences and huge amount of shuffles strsplit
, paste
commands takes some extra time.
Upvotes: 4
Views: 3272
Reputation: 3174
Making use of the Rcpp package to handle in C is probably fastest.
Below I've done some benchmarking of a handful of approaches suggested so far, including:
Except for the stringi function, here are the others wrapped into functions for testing:
f_question <- function(s) {
i <- sample(1:nchar(s))
separate.seq.letters <- unlist(strsplit(s, ""))
paste(separate.seq.letters[i], collapse = "")
}
f_comment <- function(s) {
s1 <- unlist(strsplit(s, ""))
paste(s1[sample(nchar(s))], collapse="")
}
library(Biostrings)
f_biostring <- function(s) {
probes <- DNAStringSet(s)
lapply(probes, sample)
}
Rcpp::cppFunction(
'std::string shuffleString(std::string s) {
int x = s.length();
for (int y = x; y > 0; y--) {
int pos = rand()%x;
char tmp = s[y-1];
s[y-1] = s[pos];
s[pos] = tmp;
}
return s;
}'
)
For testing, load libraries and write function to generate sequences of length n:
library(microbenchmark)
library(tidyr)
library(ggplot2)
generate_string <- function(n) {
paste(sample(c("A", "C", "G", "T"), n, replace = TRUE), collapse = "")
}
sequ <- generate_string(10)
# Test example....
sequ
#> [1] "TTATCAAGGC"
f_question(sequ)
#> [1] "CATGGTACAT"
f_comment(sequ)
#> [1] "GATTATAGCC"
f_biostring(sequ)
#> [[1]]
#> 10-letter "DNAString" instance
#> seq: TAGATCGCAT
shuffleString(sequ)
#> [1] "GATTAATCGC"
stringi::stri_rand_shuffle(sequ)
#> [1] "GAAGTCCTTA"
Testing all functions with small n (10 - 100):
ns <- seq(10, 100, by = 10)
times <- sapply(ns, function(n) {
string <- generate_string(n)
op <- microbenchmark(
QUESTION = f_question(string),
COMMENT = f_comment(string),
BIOSTRING = f_biostring(string),
RCPP = shuffleString(string),
STRINGI = stringi::stri_rand_shuffle(string)
)
by(op$time, op$expr, function(t) mean(t) / 1000)
})
times <- t(times)
times <- as.data.frame(cbind(times, n = ns))
times <- gather(times, -n, key = "fun", value = "time")
pd <- position_dodge(width = 0.2)
ggplot(times, aes(x = n, y = time, group = fun, color = fun)) +
geom_point(position = pd) +
geom_line(position = pd) +
theme_bw()
Biostrings approach is pretty slow.
Dropping this and moving up to 100 - 1000 (code stays same except ns
):
The R-based functions (from the question and comment) are comparable, but falling behind.
Dropping these and moving up to 1000 - 10000:
Looks like the custom Rcpp function is the winner, particularly as the string length grows. However, if choosing between these, consider that the stringi function, stri_rand_shuffle, will be more robust (e.g., better tested and designed to handle corner cases).
Upvotes: 7
Reputation: 99341
You could have a look at stri_rand_shuffle()
, from the stringi package. It is written entirely in C and should be very efficient. According to the documentation, it
Generates a (pseudo)random permutation of code points in each string.
Let's try it out:
replicate(5, stringi::stri_rand_shuffle("GCTTCG"))
# [1] "GTTCCG" "CCGTTG" "CTCTGG" "CCGGTT" "GTCGCT"
Upvotes: 6
Reputation: 9295
You can use the Biostrings package from the Bioconductor repository to do this. Slightly modified from the PDF of the Biostrings Documentation:
# source("https://bioconductor.org/biocLite.R")
# biocLite("Biostrings") # installs the package
library(Biostrings)
sequ <- "GCTTCG" # .... in reality much longer
probes <- DNAStringSet(sequ)
probes
probes10 <- head(probes, n=10) #shorter substring
set.seed(33)
shuffled_nucleotides <- lapply(probes10, sample)
shuffled_nucleotides
# optional
DNAStringSet(shuffled_nucleotides) # does NOT copy the sequence data!
Upvotes: 0