-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 93
fix: #1162; preserving order of obs after _filter_table_by_elements #1193
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Changes from all commits
828faab
d61c0ca
d58e21d
1e3c764
62cee0b
b91f8b2
c6a415f
50ccc63
4d71d2a
13391ad
3959019
3baa5a5
0fed6d7
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -1,5 +1,9 @@ | ||
| from __future__ import annotations | ||
|
|
||
| import re | ||
| import warnings | ||
| from dataclasses import dataclass, field | ||
|
|
||
| import annsel as an | ||
| import numpy as np | ||
| import pandas as pd | ||
|
|
@@ -940,6 +944,166 @@ def test_filter_table_categorical_bug(shapes): | |
| shapes.filter_by_coordinate_system("global") | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| @dataclass | ||
| class _JoinOutcome: | ||
| """Expected outcome of a `join_spatialelement_table()` call, for a given `how`/`match_rows` pair.""" | ||
|
|
||
| # expected `joined_table.obs["label"]`, in order; `None` when no table is expected to be returned | ||
| table_order: list[str] | None = None | ||
| # whether a "Matching rows '<...>' is not supported for '<...>' join." UserWarning is expected to be emitted | ||
| warns: bool = False | ||
| # expected values of `element_dict[name].index` for element name in {"a", "b"}; `None` for a element name whose | ||
| # returned join result is expected to be `None` (e.g. fully excluded, or not returned by this join type) | ||
| element_index: dict[str, list[int] | None] = field(default_factory=dict) | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| def _make_interleaved_regions_sdata() -> tuple[SpatialData, dict[str, dict[str, _JoinOutcome]]]: | ||
| from geopandas import GeoDataFrame | ||
| from shapely.geometry import Point | ||
|
|
||
| from spatialdata.models import ShapesModel | ||
|
|
||
| def circles(indices): | ||
| # `indices` gives both the number of circles and the (non-default) row order of the element. | ||
| gdf = GeoDataFrame( | ||
| {"geometry": [Point(i, i) for i in range(len(indices))], "radius": [1.0] * len(indices)}, | ||
| index=pd.Index(indices), | ||
| ) | ||
| return ShapesModel.parse(gdf) | ||
|
|
||
| # assumptions/comments: | ||
| # - no duplicate values in the index of each spatial element (duplicate values are tested elsewhere) | ||
| # - no duplicate values for the instance_key column of the table (duplicate values are tested elsewhere) | ||
| # | ||
| # edge cases being tested: | ||
| # - instance_id values are non-monotonic | ||
| # - the index in each spatial element is non-monotonic | ||
| # - we also set the index of the table obs to random values; these should be ignored (in the code we call .index on | ||
| # a region_key column, but the index is freshly reset by a nearby call of .reset_index() inside the join | ||
| # machinery) | ||
| obs = pd.DataFrame( | ||
| { | ||
| "region": pd.Categorical(["b", "b", "a", "b", "a", "a", "b"]), | ||
| "instance_id": [2, 1, 2, 3, 1, 0, 0], | ||
| "label": ["b2", "b1", "a2", "b3", "a1", "a0", "b0"], | ||
| }, | ||
| index=np.random.default_rng(0).integers(0, 3, size=7).astype(str), | ||
| ) | ||
| shapes = {"a": circles([2, 1, 0]), "b": circles([1, 2, 0])} | ||
| # to make understanding easier, you may want to refer to the figure on joins from the docs: | ||
| # https://spatialdata.scverse.org/en/stable/tutorials/notebooks/notebooks/examples/tables.html | ||
| expected = { | ||
| "left": { | ||
| "no": _JoinOutcome( | ||
| table_order=["b2", "b1", "a2", "a1", "a0", "b0"], element_index={"a": [2, 1, 0], "b": [1, 2, 0]} | ||
| ), | ||
| "left": _JoinOutcome( | ||
| table_order=["a2", "a1", "a0", "b1", "b2", "b0"], element_index={"a": [2, 1, 0], "b": [1, 2, 0]} | ||
| ), | ||
| "right": _JoinOutcome( | ||
| table_order=["b2", "b1", "a2", "a1", "a0", "b0"], | ||
| warns=True, | ||
| element_index={"a": [2, 1, 0], "b": [1, 2, 0]}, | ||
| ), | ||
| }, | ||
| "left_exclusive": { | ||
| # TODO: make this test more interesting by adding indices 5, 4 to "a" and 4, 6 to "b" | ||
| # by design, "left_exclusive" never returns a table (only filtered elements), regardless of | ||
| # match_rows or whether anything was actually excluded. | ||
|
Comment on lines
+1010
to
+1012
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. We can do in this PR or leave for the future. It is beyond the scope of the original fix anyway. |
||
| "no": _JoinOutcome(table_order=None, element_index={"a": None, "b": None}), | ||
| "left": _JoinOutcome(table_order=None, element_index={"a": None, "b": None}), | ||
| "right": _JoinOutcome(table_order=None, warns=True, element_index={"a": None, "b": None}), | ||
| }, | ||
| "inner": { | ||
| "no": _JoinOutcome( | ||
| table_order=["b2", "b1", "a2", "a1", "a0", "b0"], | ||
| element_index={"a": [2, 1, 0], "b": [1, 2, 0]}, | ||
| ), | ||
| "left": _JoinOutcome( | ||
| table_order=["a2", "a1", "a0", "b1", "b2", "b0"], element_index={"a": [2, 1, 0], "b": [1, 2, 0]} | ||
| ), | ||
| "right": _JoinOutcome( | ||
| table_order=["b2", "b1", "a2", "a1", "a0", "b0"], element_index={"a": [2, 1, 0], "b": [2, 1, 0]} | ||
| ), | ||
| }, | ||
| "right": { | ||
| "no": _JoinOutcome( | ||
| table_order=["b2", "b1", "a2", "b3", "a1", "a0", "b0"], | ||
| element_index={"a": [2, 1, 0], "b": [1, 2, 0]}, | ||
| ), | ||
| "left": _JoinOutcome( | ||
| table_order=["b2", "b1", "a2", "b3", "a1", "a0", "b0"], | ||
| warns=True, | ||
| element_index={"a": [2, 1, 0], "b": [1, 2, 0]}, | ||
| ), | ||
| "right": _JoinOutcome( | ||
| table_order=["b2", "b1", "a2", "b3", "a1", "a0", "b0"], element_index={"a": [2, 1, 0], "b": [2, 1, 0]} | ||
| ), | ||
| }, | ||
| "right_exclusive": { | ||
| "no": _JoinOutcome(table_order=["b3"], element_index={"a": None, "b": None}), | ||
| "left": _JoinOutcome(table_order=["b3"], warns=True, element_index={"a": None, "b": None}), | ||
| "right": _JoinOutcome(table_order=["b3"], element_index={"a": None, "b": None}), | ||
| }, | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| table = TableModel.parse( | ||
| AnnData(X=np.zeros((len(obs), 1)), obs=obs), | ||
| region=["a", "b"], | ||
| region_key="region", | ||
| instance_key="instance_id", | ||
| ) | ||
| sdata = SpatialData(shapes=shapes, tables={"table": table}) | ||
| return sdata, expected | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| @pytest.mark.parametrize("match_rows", ["no", "left", "right"]) | ||
| @pytest.mark.parametrize("how", ["left", "left_exclusive", "inner", "right", "right_exclusive"]) | ||
| def test_join_preserves_row_order_multiple_interleaved_regions(how, match_rows): | ||
| # generalization to all the join types of the bug reported in https://github.com/scverse/spatialdata/issues/1162 | ||
| # covering all `how` values of `join_spatialelement_table`, crossed with all values of `match_rows`, and checking | ||
| # whether the row orders of the returned spatial elements and table are correct and if the "match_rows not | ||
| # supported" UserWarning is (or isn't) actually raised (see `_make_interleaved_regions_sdata` and `_JoinOutcome`). | ||
| sdata, expected_by_how_and_match_rows = _make_interleaved_regions_sdata() | ||
| outcome = expected_by_how_and_match_rows[how][match_rows] | ||
|
|
||
| with warnings.catch_warnings(record=True) as record: | ||
| warnings.simplefilter("always") | ||
| element_dict, joined_table = join_spatialelement_table( | ||
| sdata=sdata, | ||
| spatial_element_names=["a", "b"], | ||
| table_name="table", | ||
| how=how, | ||
| match_rows=match_rows, | ||
| ) | ||
|
|
||
| # other UserWarnings can also fire here (e.g. anndata's "Observation names are not unique", triggered by | ||
| # the fixture's duplicated obs_names), so only look for the one this test is actually about. The message | ||
| # looks like "Matching rows 'right' is not supported for 'left_exclusive' join; it will be treated as 'no'.", | ||
| # with the two quoted values varying by `match_rows` / `how`. | ||
| unsupported_match_rows_re = re.compile( | ||
| r"Matching rows '[^']+' is not supported for '[^']+' join; it will be treated as 'no'\." | ||
| ) | ||
| unsupported_match_rows_warnings = [ | ||
| w for w in record if issubclass(w.category, UserWarning) and unsupported_match_rows_re.search(str(w.message)) | ||
| ] | ||
| assert bool(unsupported_match_rows_warnings) == outcome.warns | ||
|
|
||
| if outcome.table_order is None: | ||
| assert joined_table is None | ||
| else: | ||
| assert joined_table is not None | ||
| assert list(joined_table.obs["label"]) == outcome.table_order | ||
|
|
||
| for name, expected_index in outcome.element_index.items(): | ||
| actual_element = element_dict[name] | ||
| if expected_index is None: | ||
| assert actual_element is None | ||
| else: | ||
| assert actual_element is not None | ||
| assert list(actual_element.index) == expected_index | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| def test_filter_table_non_annotating(full_sdata): | ||
|
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Test LGTM
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I expanded them, please can you re-review? |
||
| obs = pd.DataFrame({"test": ["a", "b", "c"]}, index=list(map(str, range(3)))) | ||
| adata = AnnData(obs=obs) | ||
|
|
||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Truth be told, for left join we could support the right match_rows, and for right join we could support the left match_rows. But we can skip it for now (since also it was not supported before this PR), and eventually do it in the future.
For left_exclusive, right match_rows does not make sense, so it is not supported. Same for right_exclusive: left match_rows does not make sense there.