I was looking at the benchmarks in this answer, and wanted to compare them with diag
(used in a different answer). Unfortunately, it seems that diag
takes ages:
nc <- 1e4
set.seed(1)
m <- matrix(sample(letters,nc^2,replace=TRUE), ncol = nc)
microbenchmark(
diag = diag(m),
cond = m[row(m)==col(m)],
vec = m[(1:nc-1L)*nc+1:nc],
mat = m[cbind(1:nc,1:nc)],
times=10)
Comments: I tested these with identical
. I took "cond" from one of the answers to this homework question. Results are similar with a matrix of integers, 1:26
instead of letters
.
Results:
Unit: microseconds
expr min lq mean median uq max neval
diag 604343.469 629819.260 710371.3320 706842.3890 793144.019 837115.504 10
cond 3862039.512 3985784.025 4175724.0390 4186317.5260 4312493.742 4617117.706 10
vec 317.088 329.017 432.9099 350.1005 629.460 651.376 10
mat 272.147 292.953 441.7045 345.9400 637.506 706.860 10
It is just a matrix-subsetting operation, so I don't know why there's so much overhead. Looking inside the function, I see a few checks and then c(m)[v]
, where v
is the same vector used in the "vec" benchmark. Timing these two...
v <- (1:nc-1L)*nc+1:nc
microbenchmark(diaglike=c(m)[v],vec=m[v])
# Unit: microseconds
# expr min lq mean median uq max neval
# diaglike 579224.436 664853.7450 720372.8105 712649.706 767281.5070 931976.707 100
# vec 334.843 339.8365 568.7808 646.799 663.5825 1445.067 100
...it seems I have found my culprit. So, the new variation on my question is: Why is there a seemingly unnecessary and very time-consuming c
in diag
?