30x faster than using numpy.any/all (numpy 1.7), syntactically sweeter than numpy.logical_or/logical_and, trivial implementation, no need for idiomatic approaches to performance.
Switch branches/tags
Nothing to show
Clone or download
Latest commit fa1c3da Sep 11, 2013



Basically a 30x faster implementation of a common use case for numpy.any/all() using numpy.logical_or/and(). Implementation is trivial.

It might be helpful to think of this as an extended version of logical_or/and.

It was written to improve performance in situations where you are overlaying identically shaped arrays and building boolean masks within the shaped array.

For example, if you have 3 raster images, A, B and C, representing different aspects of some data, and in the same shape:

For each pixel location: if A[location] has the value 3,5, or 7, and B[location] has a value <100, and C[location] has a value 8, then output[location]=True

This can be conveniently represented in terms of any() and all(): all(any([A==3, A==5, A==7]), B<100, C==8)

The resulting masks can be combined with simpleselect to enable fast, complex raster-based decisions. This is rather useful for GIS work.

Please note that in the experimental numpy1.8 branch, numpy.any/all are much improved over 1.7, but judging from the approach taken, fast_any_all will still be about 2x as fast.

Performance has been tested with a range of alternative implementations and idiomatic approaches.


Graeme B. Bell


import fast_any_all as faa

faa.any([list of boolean ndarrays]), returns true where at least one element is true in an ndarray at that position.

faa.all([list of boolean ndarrays]), returns true where at least one element is true in an ndarray at that position.


import fast_any_all as faa

import numpy as np

A = np.arange(5000)

print faa.any([A<1, A>5])

Please see BENCHMARK.md for example use.

To run benchmarks: python test_fast_any_all.py


It's possible to make this implement more of the functionality of np.any by using reshape to alter which axis is used.

But for now, it's fast and has a nicer syntax than np.any() or np.logical_or() with my own use case, which is what I care about.




I have also tried:

  1. Using boolean addressing to overlay repeatedly. 15-20% slower than logical_or

  2. Using the ,out facility of logical_or. Appeared to have no effect on performance.

  3. vstack and other idioms (via Julian Taylor)

Thanks & copyleft

Norsk Institutt for Skog og Landskap