JSL tip: finding unique values in a list

[WP_Comment]

Michael Crotty wrote:

Another built-in JSL function that can help with this problem is the Design() function:

answers = {"like", "dislike", "like", "neutral", "dislike", "like"};

design(answers, < < Levels)[2]

[WP_Comment]

Guillaume wrote:

Another way is to use loop statement and Loc() function to find unique values

answers = {"like", "dislike", "like", "neutral", "dislike", "like"};

unique_answers = List();

For (i=1,i<=Nitems(answers),i++,

If (Nrows(Loc(unique_answers,answers[i])) == 0,

InsertInto (unique_answers,answers[i])

);

);

[WP_Comment]

Pmroz wrote:

Finding unique values in a list came up

in the JMP discussion forum a while back.  Here's the function

that I use, which is based on the technique Xan showed.:

/*

Function Name: get_unique_values

Description: Find the unique values in a list. 

Uses an associative array

Arguments:

in_list     List to get unique values for

*/

Get_unique_values = Function( {in_list}, {Default Local},

   tmp = [=> 0];

   Insert Into( tmp, in_list );

   tmp << get keys;

);

[WP_Comment]

Leighton Spadone wrote:

//JSL Matrix functions used to reduce a List to Unique Values;

//A List with duplicate values;

answers = {"like", "dislike", "like", "neutral", "dislike", "like"};

//Colapse a design matrix to single row with 1 for 1st occurrence and 0 for duplicates;

DesignMatrix =VMax(design(answers, answers));

//Result: DesignMatrix = [1 1 0 1 0 0];

//Subset List of answers to unique values;

UniqueAnswers=answers[Loc(DesignMatrix)];

//Result: UniqueAnsers = {"dislike", "like", "neutral"};

[WP_Comment]

Eric Wittry wrote:

If I have a key=>value pair, and I want to sort the values and return the keys in that order (*based on sorted value), how would I do that in JMP. Thanks Eric

[XanGregg]

Xan Gregg wrote:

If you iterate through an associative array (with the First and Next messages), the entries are returned in order of the sorted keys. If the values are unique, you can use them as keys, but if not, I think it will require explicit sorting. You might try the JMP Community Forum for ideas on the latter.

[WP_Comment]

James Cultra wrote:

This method works better for matrices as the associative array function appears to round the values in the matrix (thus the unique list doesn't match the actual values in the matrix)