Creating one variable from a list of variables in R? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern) Data science time! April 2019 and salary with experience The Ask Question Wizard is Live!R dplyr/tidyr: “mutate” new columns with data from other observationsFunction for Tidy chisq.test Output for Visualizing or Filtering P-ValuesShiny: Create reactive filter using different variables.Create a Table with Alternating Total Rows Followed by Sub-Rows Using Dplyr and TidyverseUsing switch statement within dplyr's mutateConditional Recoding - Using a Vector of Columns within Mutate_at Together with If_else and Dplyr::RecodeCreating and using new variables in function in R: NSE programing error in the tidyversedplyr mutate-ifelse combination not creating correct conditional variableTidyverse — integrating mutate select and case when to likert scalesCan I create a new numerical variable using dplyr and <= and >= operators to subset values from an existing vector?

How to break 信じようとしていただけかも知れない into separate parts?

Is my guitar’s action too high?

Pointing to problems without suggesting solutions

Can 'non' with gerundive mean both lack of obligation and negative obligation?

Is Bran literally the world's memory?

Who can become a wight?

Etymology of 見舞い

What helicopter has the most rotor blades?

Why is one lightbulb in a string illuminated?

What is the ongoing value of the Kanban board to the developers as opposed to management

“Since the train was delayed for more than an hour, passengers were given a full refund.” – Why is there no article before “passengers”?

How to get a single big right brace?

Why did Israel vote against lifting the American embargo on Cuba?

Network questions

A journey... into the MIND

Why is ArcGIS Pro not symbolizing my entire range of values?

Raising a bilingual kid. When should we introduce the majority language?

How to create a command for the "strange m" symbol in latex?

What could prevent concentrated local exploration?

Is it OK if I do not take the receipt in Germany?

Why did Europeans not widely domesticate foxes?

What's the connection between Mr. Nancy and fried chicken?

Compiling and throwing simple dynamic exceptions at runtime for JVM

What's the difference between using dependency injection with a container and using a service locator?



Creating one variable from a list of variables in R?



Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)
Data science time! April 2019 and salary with experience
The Ask Question Wizard is Live!R dplyr/tidyr: “mutate” new columns with data from other observationsFunction for Tidy chisq.test Output for Visualizing or Filtering P-ValuesShiny: Create reactive filter using different variables.Create a Table with Alternating Total Rows Followed by Sub-Rows Using Dplyr and TidyverseUsing switch statement within dplyr's mutateConditional Recoding - Using a Vector of Columns within Mutate_at Together with If_else and Dplyr::RecodeCreating and using new variables in function in R: NSE programing error in the tidyversedplyr mutate-ifelse combination not creating correct conditional variableTidyverse — integrating mutate select and case when to likert scalesCan I create a new numerical variable using dplyr and <= and >= operators to subset values from an existing vector?



.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty height:90px;width:728px;box-sizing:border-box;








6















I have a sequence of variables in a dataframe (over 100) and I would like to create an indicator variable for if particular text patterns are present in any of the variables. Below is an example with three variables. One solution I've found is using tidyr::unite() followed by dplyr::mutate(), but I'm interested in a solution where I do not have to unite the variables.



c1<-c("T1", "X1", "T6", "R5")
c2<-c("R4", "C6", "C7", "X3")
c3<-c("C5", "C2", "X4", "T2")

df<-data.frame(c1, c2, c3)

c1 c2 c3
1 T1 R4 C5
2 X1 C6 C2
3 T6 C7 X4
4 R5 X3 T2

code.vec<-c("T1", "T2", "T3", "T4") #Text patterns of interest
code_regex<-paste(code.vec, collapse="|")

new<-df %>%
unite(all_c, c1:c3, remove=FALSE) %>%
mutate(indicator=if_else(grepl(code_regex, all_c), 1, 0)) %>%
select(-(all_c))

c1 c2 c3 indicator
1 T1 R4 C5 1
2 X1 C6 C2 0
3 T6 C7 X4 0
4 R5 X3 T2 1


Above is an example that produces the desired result, however I feel as if there should be a way of doing this in tidyverse without having to unite the variables. This is something that SAS handles very easily using an ARRAY statement and a DO loop, and I'm hoping R has a good way of handling this.



The real dataframe has many additional variables besides from the "c" fields to search, so a solution that involves searching every column would require subsetting the dataframe to first only contain the variables I want to search, and then joining the data back with the other variables.










share|improve this question
























  • You said you don't want to use unite, but it's worth noting that passing the argument remove = FALSE has unite create a column of the united variables leaving the others intact. Might be convenient in this case.

    – camille
    9 hours ago











  • Yes, it is convenient. And it does work. I just feel like there may be a simpler approach I'm missing that doesn't need to create a united variable.

    – patward5656
    9 hours ago

















6















I have a sequence of variables in a dataframe (over 100) and I would like to create an indicator variable for if particular text patterns are present in any of the variables. Below is an example with three variables. One solution I've found is using tidyr::unite() followed by dplyr::mutate(), but I'm interested in a solution where I do not have to unite the variables.



c1<-c("T1", "X1", "T6", "R5")
c2<-c("R4", "C6", "C7", "X3")
c3<-c("C5", "C2", "X4", "T2")

df<-data.frame(c1, c2, c3)

c1 c2 c3
1 T1 R4 C5
2 X1 C6 C2
3 T6 C7 X4
4 R5 X3 T2

code.vec<-c("T1", "T2", "T3", "T4") #Text patterns of interest
code_regex<-paste(code.vec, collapse="|")

new<-df %>%
unite(all_c, c1:c3, remove=FALSE) %>%
mutate(indicator=if_else(grepl(code_regex, all_c), 1, 0)) %>%
select(-(all_c))

c1 c2 c3 indicator
1 T1 R4 C5 1
2 X1 C6 C2 0
3 T6 C7 X4 0
4 R5 X3 T2 1


Above is an example that produces the desired result, however I feel as if there should be a way of doing this in tidyverse without having to unite the variables. This is something that SAS handles very easily using an ARRAY statement and a DO loop, and I'm hoping R has a good way of handling this.



The real dataframe has many additional variables besides from the "c" fields to search, so a solution that involves searching every column would require subsetting the dataframe to first only contain the variables I want to search, and then joining the data back with the other variables.










share|improve this question
























  • You said you don't want to use unite, but it's worth noting that passing the argument remove = FALSE has unite create a column of the united variables leaving the others intact. Might be convenient in this case.

    – camille
    9 hours ago











  • Yes, it is convenient. And it does work. I just feel like there may be a simpler approach I'm missing that doesn't need to create a united variable.

    – patward5656
    9 hours ago













6












6








6








I have a sequence of variables in a dataframe (over 100) and I would like to create an indicator variable for if particular text patterns are present in any of the variables. Below is an example with three variables. One solution I've found is using tidyr::unite() followed by dplyr::mutate(), but I'm interested in a solution where I do not have to unite the variables.



c1<-c("T1", "X1", "T6", "R5")
c2<-c("R4", "C6", "C7", "X3")
c3<-c("C5", "C2", "X4", "T2")

df<-data.frame(c1, c2, c3)

c1 c2 c3
1 T1 R4 C5
2 X1 C6 C2
3 T6 C7 X4
4 R5 X3 T2

code.vec<-c("T1", "T2", "T3", "T4") #Text patterns of interest
code_regex<-paste(code.vec, collapse="|")

new<-df %>%
unite(all_c, c1:c3, remove=FALSE) %>%
mutate(indicator=if_else(grepl(code_regex, all_c), 1, 0)) %>%
select(-(all_c))

c1 c2 c3 indicator
1 T1 R4 C5 1
2 X1 C6 C2 0
3 T6 C7 X4 0
4 R5 X3 T2 1


Above is an example that produces the desired result, however I feel as if there should be a way of doing this in tidyverse without having to unite the variables. This is something that SAS handles very easily using an ARRAY statement and a DO loop, and I'm hoping R has a good way of handling this.



The real dataframe has many additional variables besides from the "c" fields to search, so a solution that involves searching every column would require subsetting the dataframe to first only contain the variables I want to search, and then joining the data back with the other variables.










share|improve this question
















I have a sequence of variables in a dataframe (over 100) and I would like to create an indicator variable for if particular text patterns are present in any of the variables. Below is an example with three variables. One solution I've found is using tidyr::unite() followed by dplyr::mutate(), but I'm interested in a solution where I do not have to unite the variables.



c1<-c("T1", "X1", "T6", "R5")
c2<-c("R4", "C6", "C7", "X3")
c3<-c("C5", "C2", "X4", "T2")

df<-data.frame(c1, c2, c3)

c1 c2 c3
1 T1 R4 C5
2 X1 C6 C2
3 T6 C7 X4
4 R5 X3 T2

code.vec<-c("T1", "T2", "T3", "T4") #Text patterns of interest
code_regex<-paste(code.vec, collapse="|")

new<-df %>%
unite(all_c, c1:c3, remove=FALSE) %>%
mutate(indicator=if_else(grepl(code_regex, all_c), 1, 0)) %>%
select(-(all_c))

c1 c2 c3 indicator
1 T1 R4 C5 1
2 X1 C6 C2 0
3 T6 C7 X4 0
4 R5 X3 T2 1


Above is an example that produces the desired result, however I feel as if there should be a way of doing this in tidyverse without having to unite the variables. This is something that SAS handles very easily using an ARRAY statement and a DO loop, and I'm hoping R has a good way of handling this.



The real dataframe has many additional variables besides from the "c" fields to search, so a solution that involves searching every column would require subsetting the dataframe to first only contain the variables I want to search, and then joining the data back with the other variables.







r dplyr tidyverse mutate






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 9 hours ago







patward5656

















asked 10 hours ago









patward5656patward5656

425




425












  • You said you don't want to use unite, but it's worth noting that passing the argument remove = FALSE has unite create a column of the united variables leaving the others intact. Might be convenient in this case.

    – camille
    9 hours ago











  • Yes, it is convenient. And it does work. I just feel like there may be a simpler approach I'm missing that doesn't need to create a united variable.

    – patward5656
    9 hours ago

















  • You said you don't want to use unite, but it's worth noting that passing the argument remove = FALSE has unite create a column of the united variables leaving the others intact. Might be convenient in this case.

    – camille
    9 hours ago











  • Yes, it is convenient. And it does work. I just feel like there may be a simpler approach I'm missing that doesn't need to create a united variable.

    – patward5656
    9 hours ago
















You said you don't want to use unite, but it's worth noting that passing the argument remove = FALSE has unite create a column of the united variables leaving the others intact. Might be convenient in this case.

– camille
9 hours ago





You said you don't want to use unite, but it's worth noting that passing the argument remove = FALSE has unite create a column of the united variables leaving the others intact. Might be convenient in this case.

– camille
9 hours ago













Yes, it is convenient. And it does work. I just feel like there may be a simpler approach I'm missing that doesn't need to create a united variable.

– patward5656
9 hours ago





Yes, it is convenient. And it does work. I just feel like there may be a simpler approach I'm missing that doesn't need to create a united variable.

– patward5656
9 hours ago












3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















3














We can use tidyverse



library(tidyverse)
df %>%
mutate_all(str_detect, pattern = code_regex) %>%
reduce(`+`) %>%
mutate(df, indicator = .)
# c1 c2 c3 indicator
#1 T1 R4 C5 1
#2 X1 C6 C2 0
#3 T6 C7 X4 0
#4 R5 X3 T2 1



Or using base R



Reduce(`+`, lapply(df, grepl, pattern = code_regex))
#[1] 1 0 0 1





share|improve this answer























  • This tidyverse solution seems to only work in the scenario where all of the columns are being searched. I have other variables in my real dataset, and when using it for that the output is all NA. Does this have something to do with the reduce function?

    – patward5656
    8 hours ago











  • @patward5656 That is an easy fix. df %>% mutate_at(vars(starts_with("c")), str_detect, pattern = code_regex) %>% reduce("+") %>% mutate(df, indicator = .)

    – akrun
    8 hours ago












  • c1<-c("T1", "X1", "T6", "R5") c2<-c("R4", "C6", "C7", "X3") c3<-c("C5", "C2", "X4", "T2") z1<-c("C5", "C2", "X4", "T2") df<-data.frame(c1, c2, c3, z1) df %>% mutate_at(vars(starts_with("c")), str_detect, pattern = code_regex) %>% reduce(+) %>% mutate(df, indicator = .) c1 c2 c3 z1 indicator 1 T1 R4 C5 C5 NA 2 X1 C6 C2 C2 NA 3 T6 C7 X4 X4 NA 4 R5 X3 T2 T2 NA Warning message: In Ops.factor(.x, .y) : ‘+’ not meaningful for factors This produced NAs, it seems.

    – patward5656
    8 hours ago







  • 1





    @patward5656 I would use transmute_at instead of mutate_at df %>% transmute_at(vars(starts_with("c")), str_detect, pattern = code_regex) %>% reduce(+)

    – akrun
    8 hours ago







  • 1





    Thanks. I believe transmute_at() solves it perfectly.

    – patward5656
    8 hours ago



















6














Using base R, we can use sapply and use grepl to find pattern in every column and assign 1 to rows where there is more than 0 matches.



df$indicator <- as.integer(rowSums(sapply(df, grepl, pattern = code_regex)) > 0)

df
# c1 c2 c3 indicator
#1 T1 R4 C5 1
#2 X1 C6 C2 0
#3 T6 C7 X4 0
#4 R5 X3 T2 1


If there are few other columns and we are interested to apply it only for columns which start with "c" we can use grep to filter them.



cols <- grep("^c", names(df))
as.integer(rowSums(sapply(df[cols], grepl, pattern = code_regex)) > 0)



Using dplyr we can do



library(dplyr)

df$indicator <- as.integer(df %>%
mutate_at(vars(c1:c3), ~grepl(code_regex, .)) %>%
rowSums() > 0)





share|improve this answer

























  • This is a good solution, but in the real data there are additional variables that I do not want to pattern search, so this would require me to index the dataframe to include only the columns I want to search first. Will edit my original post to include this information.

    – patward5656
    9 hours ago











  • The purr solution looks like what I was looking for--one line of code that doesn't involve uniting the variables.

    – patward5656
    9 hours ago











  • @patward5656 I think the purrr solution would not give you the expected output. I changed it to use mutate_at which should work on range of columns. Moreover, you can use column numbers directly in cols for sapply ., say columns 3:5 or 1:3 to find pattern in those column.

    – Ronak Shah
    9 hours ago



















1














Base R with apply



apply(df[cols], 1, function(x) sum(grepl(code_regex, x)))
# [1] 1 0 0 1





share|improve this answer























    Your Answer






    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function ()
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function ()
    StackExchange.snippets.init();
    );
    );
    , "code-snippets");

    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "1"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f55795925%2fcreating-one-variable-from-a-list-of-variables-in-r%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes








    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    3














    We can use tidyverse



    library(tidyverse)
    df %>%
    mutate_all(str_detect, pattern = code_regex) %>%
    reduce(`+`) %>%
    mutate(df, indicator = .)
    # c1 c2 c3 indicator
    #1 T1 R4 C5 1
    #2 X1 C6 C2 0
    #3 T6 C7 X4 0
    #4 R5 X3 T2 1



    Or using base R



    Reduce(`+`, lapply(df, grepl, pattern = code_regex))
    #[1] 1 0 0 1





    share|improve this answer























    • This tidyverse solution seems to only work in the scenario where all of the columns are being searched. I have other variables in my real dataset, and when using it for that the output is all NA. Does this have something to do with the reduce function?

      – patward5656
      8 hours ago











    • @patward5656 That is an easy fix. df %>% mutate_at(vars(starts_with("c")), str_detect, pattern = code_regex) %>% reduce("+") %>% mutate(df, indicator = .)

      – akrun
      8 hours ago












    • c1<-c("T1", "X1", "T6", "R5") c2<-c("R4", "C6", "C7", "X3") c3<-c("C5", "C2", "X4", "T2") z1<-c("C5", "C2", "X4", "T2") df<-data.frame(c1, c2, c3, z1) df %>% mutate_at(vars(starts_with("c")), str_detect, pattern = code_regex) %>% reduce(+) %>% mutate(df, indicator = .) c1 c2 c3 z1 indicator 1 T1 R4 C5 C5 NA 2 X1 C6 C2 C2 NA 3 T6 C7 X4 X4 NA 4 R5 X3 T2 T2 NA Warning message: In Ops.factor(.x, .y) : ‘+’ not meaningful for factors This produced NAs, it seems.

      – patward5656
      8 hours ago







    • 1





      @patward5656 I would use transmute_at instead of mutate_at df %>% transmute_at(vars(starts_with("c")), str_detect, pattern = code_regex) %>% reduce(+)

      – akrun
      8 hours ago







    • 1





      Thanks. I believe transmute_at() solves it perfectly.

      – patward5656
      8 hours ago
















    3














    We can use tidyverse



    library(tidyverse)
    df %>%
    mutate_all(str_detect, pattern = code_regex) %>%
    reduce(`+`) %>%
    mutate(df, indicator = .)
    # c1 c2 c3 indicator
    #1 T1 R4 C5 1
    #2 X1 C6 C2 0
    #3 T6 C7 X4 0
    #4 R5 X3 T2 1



    Or using base R



    Reduce(`+`, lapply(df, grepl, pattern = code_regex))
    #[1] 1 0 0 1





    share|improve this answer























    • This tidyverse solution seems to only work in the scenario where all of the columns are being searched. I have other variables in my real dataset, and when using it for that the output is all NA. Does this have something to do with the reduce function?

      – patward5656
      8 hours ago











    • @patward5656 That is an easy fix. df %>% mutate_at(vars(starts_with("c")), str_detect, pattern = code_regex) %>% reduce("+") %>% mutate(df, indicator = .)

      – akrun
      8 hours ago












    • c1<-c("T1", "X1", "T6", "R5") c2<-c("R4", "C6", "C7", "X3") c3<-c("C5", "C2", "X4", "T2") z1<-c("C5", "C2", "X4", "T2") df<-data.frame(c1, c2, c3, z1) df %>% mutate_at(vars(starts_with("c")), str_detect, pattern = code_regex) %>% reduce(+) %>% mutate(df, indicator = .) c1 c2 c3 z1 indicator 1 T1 R4 C5 C5 NA 2 X1 C6 C2 C2 NA 3 T6 C7 X4 X4 NA 4 R5 X3 T2 T2 NA Warning message: In Ops.factor(.x, .y) : ‘+’ not meaningful for factors This produced NAs, it seems.

      – patward5656
      8 hours ago







    • 1





      @patward5656 I would use transmute_at instead of mutate_at df %>% transmute_at(vars(starts_with("c")), str_detect, pattern = code_regex) %>% reduce(+)

      – akrun
      8 hours ago







    • 1





      Thanks. I believe transmute_at() solves it perfectly.

      – patward5656
      8 hours ago














    3












    3








    3







    We can use tidyverse



    library(tidyverse)
    df %>%
    mutate_all(str_detect, pattern = code_regex) %>%
    reduce(`+`) %>%
    mutate(df, indicator = .)
    # c1 c2 c3 indicator
    #1 T1 R4 C5 1
    #2 X1 C6 C2 0
    #3 T6 C7 X4 0
    #4 R5 X3 T2 1



    Or using base R



    Reduce(`+`, lapply(df, grepl, pattern = code_regex))
    #[1] 1 0 0 1





    share|improve this answer













    We can use tidyverse



    library(tidyverse)
    df %>%
    mutate_all(str_detect, pattern = code_regex) %>%
    reduce(`+`) %>%
    mutate(df, indicator = .)
    # c1 c2 c3 indicator
    #1 T1 R4 C5 1
    #2 X1 C6 C2 0
    #3 T6 C7 X4 0
    #4 R5 X3 T2 1



    Or using base R



    Reduce(`+`, lapply(df, grepl, pattern = code_regex))
    #[1] 1 0 0 1






    share|improve this answer












    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer










    answered 9 hours ago









    akrunakrun

    424k13209287




    424k13209287












    • This tidyverse solution seems to only work in the scenario where all of the columns are being searched. I have other variables in my real dataset, and when using it for that the output is all NA. Does this have something to do with the reduce function?

      – patward5656
      8 hours ago











    • @patward5656 That is an easy fix. df %>% mutate_at(vars(starts_with("c")), str_detect, pattern = code_regex) %>% reduce("+") %>% mutate(df, indicator = .)

      – akrun
      8 hours ago












    • c1<-c("T1", "X1", "T6", "R5") c2<-c("R4", "C6", "C7", "X3") c3<-c("C5", "C2", "X4", "T2") z1<-c("C5", "C2", "X4", "T2") df<-data.frame(c1, c2, c3, z1) df %>% mutate_at(vars(starts_with("c")), str_detect, pattern = code_regex) %>% reduce(+) %>% mutate(df, indicator = .) c1 c2 c3 z1 indicator 1 T1 R4 C5 C5 NA 2 X1 C6 C2 C2 NA 3 T6 C7 X4 X4 NA 4 R5 X3 T2 T2 NA Warning message: In Ops.factor(.x, .y) : ‘+’ not meaningful for factors This produced NAs, it seems.

      – patward5656
      8 hours ago







    • 1





      @patward5656 I would use transmute_at instead of mutate_at df %>% transmute_at(vars(starts_with("c")), str_detect, pattern = code_regex) %>% reduce(+)

      – akrun
      8 hours ago







    • 1





      Thanks. I believe transmute_at() solves it perfectly.

      – patward5656
      8 hours ago


















    • This tidyverse solution seems to only work in the scenario where all of the columns are being searched. I have other variables in my real dataset, and when using it for that the output is all NA. Does this have something to do with the reduce function?

      – patward5656
      8 hours ago











    • @patward5656 That is an easy fix. df %>% mutate_at(vars(starts_with("c")), str_detect, pattern = code_regex) %>% reduce("+") %>% mutate(df, indicator = .)

      – akrun
      8 hours ago












    • c1<-c("T1", "X1", "T6", "R5") c2<-c("R4", "C6", "C7", "X3") c3<-c("C5", "C2", "X4", "T2") z1<-c("C5", "C2", "X4", "T2") df<-data.frame(c1, c2, c3, z1) df %>% mutate_at(vars(starts_with("c")), str_detect, pattern = code_regex) %>% reduce(+) %>% mutate(df, indicator = .) c1 c2 c3 z1 indicator 1 T1 R4 C5 C5 NA 2 X1 C6 C2 C2 NA 3 T6 C7 X4 X4 NA 4 R5 X3 T2 T2 NA Warning message: In Ops.factor(.x, .y) : ‘+’ not meaningful for factors This produced NAs, it seems.

      – patward5656
      8 hours ago







    • 1





      @patward5656 I would use transmute_at instead of mutate_at df %>% transmute_at(vars(starts_with("c")), str_detect, pattern = code_regex) %>% reduce(+)

      – akrun
      8 hours ago







    • 1





      Thanks. I believe transmute_at() solves it perfectly.

      – patward5656
      8 hours ago

















    This tidyverse solution seems to only work in the scenario where all of the columns are being searched. I have other variables in my real dataset, and when using it for that the output is all NA. Does this have something to do with the reduce function?

    – patward5656
    8 hours ago





    This tidyverse solution seems to only work in the scenario where all of the columns are being searched. I have other variables in my real dataset, and when using it for that the output is all NA. Does this have something to do with the reduce function?

    – patward5656
    8 hours ago













    @patward5656 That is an easy fix. df %>% mutate_at(vars(starts_with("c")), str_detect, pattern = code_regex) %>% reduce("+") %>% mutate(df, indicator = .)

    – akrun
    8 hours ago






    @patward5656 That is an easy fix. df %>% mutate_at(vars(starts_with("c")), str_detect, pattern = code_regex) %>% reduce("+") %>% mutate(df, indicator = .)

    – akrun
    8 hours ago














    c1<-c("T1", "X1", "T6", "R5") c2<-c("R4", "C6", "C7", "X3") c3<-c("C5", "C2", "X4", "T2") z1<-c("C5", "C2", "X4", "T2") df<-data.frame(c1, c2, c3, z1) df %>% mutate_at(vars(starts_with("c")), str_detect, pattern = code_regex) %>% reduce(+) %>% mutate(df, indicator = .) c1 c2 c3 z1 indicator 1 T1 R4 C5 C5 NA 2 X1 C6 C2 C2 NA 3 T6 C7 X4 X4 NA 4 R5 X3 T2 T2 NA Warning message: In Ops.factor(.x, .y) : ‘+’ not meaningful for factors This produced NAs, it seems.

    – patward5656
    8 hours ago






    c1<-c("T1", "X1", "T6", "R5") c2<-c("R4", "C6", "C7", "X3") c3<-c("C5", "C2", "X4", "T2") z1<-c("C5", "C2", "X4", "T2") df<-data.frame(c1, c2, c3, z1) df %>% mutate_at(vars(starts_with("c")), str_detect, pattern = code_regex) %>% reduce(+) %>% mutate(df, indicator = .) c1 c2 c3 z1 indicator 1 T1 R4 C5 C5 NA 2 X1 C6 C2 C2 NA 3 T6 C7 X4 X4 NA 4 R5 X3 T2 T2 NA Warning message: In Ops.factor(.x, .y) : ‘+’ not meaningful for factors This produced NAs, it seems.

    – patward5656
    8 hours ago





    1




    1





    @patward5656 I would use transmute_at instead of mutate_at df %>% transmute_at(vars(starts_with("c")), str_detect, pattern = code_regex) %>% reduce(+)

    – akrun
    8 hours ago






    @patward5656 I would use transmute_at instead of mutate_at df %>% transmute_at(vars(starts_with("c")), str_detect, pattern = code_regex) %>% reduce(+)

    – akrun
    8 hours ago





    1




    1





    Thanks. I believe transmute_at() solves it perfectly.

    – patward5656
    8 hours ago






    Thanks. I believe transmute_at() solves it perfectly.

    – patward5656
    8 hours ago














    6














    Using base R, we can use sapply and use grepl to find pattern in every column and assign 1 to rows where there is more than 0 matches.



    df$indicator <- as.integer(rowSums(sapply(df, grepl, pattern = code_regex)) > 0)

    df
    # c1 c2 c3 indicator
    #1 T1 R4 C5 1
    #2 X1 C6 C2 0
    #3 T6 C7 X4 0
    #4 R5 X3 T2 1


    If there are few other columns and we are interested to apply it only for columns which start with "c" we can use grep to filter them.



    cols <- grep("^c", names(df))
    as.integer(rowSums(sapply(df[cols], grepl, pattern = code_regex)) > 0)



    Using dplyr we can do



    library(dplyr)

    df$indicator <- as.integer(df %>%
    mutate_at(vars(c1:c3), ~grepl(code_regex, .)) %>%
    rowSums() > 0)





    share|improve this answer

























    • This is a good solution, but in the real data there are additional variables that I do not want to pattern search, so this would require me to index the dataframe to include only the columns I want to search first. Will edit my original post to include this information.

      – patward5656
      9 hours ago











    • The purr solution looks like what I was looking for--one line of code that doesn't involve uniting the variables.

      – patward5656
      9 hours ago











    • @patward5656 I think the purrr solution would not give you the expected output. I changed it to use mutate_at which should work on range of columns. Moreover, you can use column numbers directly in cols for sapply ., say columns 3:5 or 1:3 to find pattern in those column.

      – Ronak Shah
      9 hours ago
















    6














    Using base R, we can use sapply and use grepl to find pattern in every column and assign 1 to rows where there is more than 0 matches.



    df$indicator <- as.integer(rowSums(sapply(df, grepl, pattern = code_regex)) > 0)

    df
    # c1 c2 c3 indicator
    #1 T1 R4 C5 1
    #2 X1 C6 C2 0
    #3 T6 C7 X4 0
    #4 R5 X3 T2 1


    If there are few other columns and we are interested to apply it only for columns which start with "c" we can use grep to filter them.



    cols <- grep("^c", names(df))
    as.integer(rowSums(sapply(df[cols], grepl, pattern = code_regex)) > 0)



    Using dplyr we can do



    library(dplyr)

    df$indicator <- as.integer(df %>%
    mutate_at(vars(c1:c3), ~grepl(code_regex, .)) %>%
    rowSums() > 0)





    share|improve this answer

























    • This is a good solution, but in the real data there are additional variables that I do not want to pattern search, so this would require me to index the dataframe to include only the columns I want to search first. Will edit my original post to include this information.

      – patward5656
      9 hours ago











    • The purr solution looks like what I was looking for--one line of code that doesn't involve uniting the variables.

      – patward5656
      9 hours ago











    • @patward5656 I think the purrr solution would not give you the expected output. I changed it to use mutate_at which should work on range of columns. Moreover, you can use column numbers directly in cols for sapply ., say columns 3:5 or 1:3 to find pattern in those column.

      – Ronak Shah
      9 hours ago














    6












    6








    6







    Using base R, we can use sapply and use grepl to find pattern in every column and assign 1 to rows where there is more than 0 matches.



    df$indicator <- as.integer(rowSums(sapply(df, grepl, pattern = code_regex)) > 0)

    df
    # c1 c2 c3 indicator
    #1 T1 R4 C5 1
    #2 X1 C6 C2 0
    #3 T6 C7 X4 0
    #4 R5 X3 T2 1


    If there are few other columns and we are interested to apply it only for columns which start with "c" we can use grep to filter them.



    cols <- grep("^c", names(df))
    as.integer(rowSums(sapply(df[cols], grepl, pattern = code_regex)) > 0)



    Using dplyr we can do



    library(dplyr)

    df$indicator <- as.integer(df %>%
    mutate_at(vars(c1:c3), ~grepl(code_regex, .)) %>%
    rowSums() > 0)





    share|improve this answer















    Using base R, we can use sapply and use grepl to find pattern in every column and assign 1 to rows where there is more than 0 matches.



    df$indicator <- as.integer(rowSums(sapply(df, grepl, pattern = code_regex)) > 0)

    df
    # c1 c2 c3 indicator
    #1 T1 R4 C5 1
    #2 X1 C6 C2 0
    #3 T6 C7 X4 0
    #4 R5 X3 T2 1


    If there are few other columns and we are interested to apply it only for columns which start with "c" we can use grep to filter them.



    cols <- grep("^c", names(df))
    as.integer(rowSums(sapply(df[cols], grepl, pattern = code_regex)) > 0)



    Using dplyr we can do



    library(dplyr)

    df$indicator <- as.integer(df %>%
    mutate_at(vars(c1:c3), ~grepl(code_regex, .)) %>%
    rowSums() > 0)






    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited 9 hours ago

























    answered 10 hours ago









    Ronak ShahRonak Shah

    49k104370




    49k104370












    • This is a good solution, but in the real data there are additional variables that I do not want to pattern search, so this would require me to index the dataframe to include only the columns I want to search first. Will edit my original post to include this information.

      – patward5656
      9 hours ago











    • The purr solution looks like what I was looking for--one line of code that doesn't involve uniting the variables.

      – patward5656
      9 hours ago











    • @patward5656 I think the purrr solution would not give you the expected output. I changed it to use mutate_at which should work on range of columns. Moreover, you can use column numbers directly in cols for sapply ., say columns 3:5 or 1:3 to find pattern in those column.

      – Ronak Shah
      9 hours ago


















    • This is a good solution, but in the real data there are additional variables that I do not want to pattern search, so this would require me to index the dataframe to include only the columns I want to search first. Will edit my original post to include this information.

      – patward5656
      9 hours ago











    • The purr solution looks like what I was looking for--one line of code that doesn't involve uniting the variables.

      – patward5656
      9 hours ago











    • @patward5656 I think the purrr solution would not give you the expected output. I changed it to use mutate_at which should work on range of columns. Moreover, you can use column numbers directly in cols for sapply ., say columns 3:5 or 1:3 to find pattern in those column.

      – Ronak Shah
      9 hours ago

















    This is a good solution, but in the real data there are additional variables that I do not want to pattern search, so this would require me to index the dataframe to include only the columns I want to search first. Will edit my original post to include this information.

    – patward5656
    9 hours ago





    This is a good solution, but in the real data there are additional variables that I do not want to pattern search, so this would require me to index the dataframe to include only the columns I want to search first. Will edit my original post to include this information.

    – patward5656
    9 hours ago













    The purr solution looks like what I was looking for--one line of code that doesn't involve uniting the variables.

    – patward5656
    9 hours ago





    The purr solution looks like what I was looking for--one line of code that doesn't involve uniting the variables.

    – patward5656
    9 hours ago













    @patward5656 I think the purrr solution would not give you the expected output. I changed it to use mutate_at which should work on range of columns. Moreover, you can use column numbers directly in cols for sapply ., say columns 3:5 or 1:3 to find pattern in those column.

    – Ronak Shah
    9 hours ago






    @patward5656 I think the purrr solution would not give you the expected output. I changed it to use mutate_at which should work on range of columns. Moreover, you can use column numbers directly in cols for sapply ., say columns 3:5 or 1:3 to find pattern in those column.

    – Ronak Shah
    9 hours ago












    1














    Base R with apply



    apply(df[cols], 1, function(x) sum(grepl(code_regex, x)))
    # [1] 1 0 0 1





    share|improve this answer



























      1














      Base R with apply



      apply(df[cols], 1, function(x) sum(grepl(code_regex, x)))
      # [1] 1 0 0 1





      share|improve this answer

























        1












        1








        1







        Base R with apply



        apply(df[cols], 1, function(x) sum(grepl(code_regex, x)))
        # [1] 1 0 0 1





        share|improve this answer













        Base R with apply



        apply(df[cols], 1, function(x) sum(grepl(code_regex, x)))
        # [1] 1 0 0 1






        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered 9 hours ago









        nsinghsnsinghs

        1,262621




        1,262621



























            draft saved

            draft discarded
















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f55795925%2fcreating-one-variable-from-a-list-of-variables-in-r%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Nidaros erkebispedøme

            Birsay

            Was Woodrow Wilson really a Liberal?Was World War I a war of liberals against authoritarians?Founding Fathers...