Pandas describe vs scipy.stats percentileofscore with NaN?

Question

I\'m having a weird situation, where pd.describe is giving me percentile markers that disagree with scipy.stats percentileofscore, because of NaNs, I think.

My df is:

Answer 1

scipy.stats.percentileofscore does not ignore nan, nor does it check for the value and handle it in some special way. It is just another floating point value in your data. This means the behavior of percentileofscore with data containing nan is undefined, because of the behavior of nan in comparisons:

In [44]: np.nan > 0
Out[44]: False

In [45]: np.nan < 0
Out[45]: False

In [46]: np.nan == 0
Out[46]: False

In [47]: np.nan == np.nan
Out[47]: False

Those results are all correct--that is how nan is supposed to behave. But that means, in order to know how percentileofscore handles nan, you have to know how the code does comparisons. And that is an implementation detail that you shouldn't have to know, and that you can't rely on to be the same in future versions of scipy.

If you investigate the behavior of percentfileofscore, you'll find that it behaves as if nan was infinite. For example, if you replace nan with a value larger than any other value in the input, you'll get the same results:

In [53]: percentileofscore([10, 20, 25, 30, np.nan, np.nan], 18)
Out[53]: 16.666666666666664

In [54]: percentileofscore([10, 20, 25, 30, 999, 999], 18)
Out[54]: 16.666666666666664

Unfortunately, you can't rely on this behavior. If the implementation changes in the future, nan might end up behaving like negative infinity, or have some other unspecified behavior.

The solution to this "problem" is simple: don't give percentileofscore any nan values. You'll have to clean up your data first. Note that this can be as simple as:

result = percentileofscore(a[~np.isnan(a)], score)