Pairplot does not actually accept grid/axis argument
See original GitHub issueThis example I would expect to have two different scatter plots on each axis, but it only plots the first one:
import arviz as az
centered = az.load_arviz_data('centered')
axes, gridspec = az.plot_pair(
centered.posterior,
var_names=['theta', 'mu'],
coords={'school': ['Choate', 'Deerfield']},
plot_kwargs={'c': 'C0'})
az.plot_pair(
centered.prior,
var_names=['theta', 'mu'],
coords={'school': ['Choate', 'Deerfield']},
ax=axes,
gs=gridspec,
plot_kwargs={'c': 'C1'})
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 5 years ago
- Comments:5 (4 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
Why seaborn's pairplot does not plot the first plot?
I know you've already accepted a solution. But if this can help someone in the future. It is worth mentioning. I saw a...
Read more >Building structured multi-plot grids - Seaborn - PyData |
It must accept the data that it plots in positional arguments. Internally, FacetGrid will pass a Series of data for each of the...
Read more >Making publication-quality figures in Python (Part I): Fig and ...
In this whole series, I will share with you how I usually make publication-quality figures in Python. I want to really convey the...
Read more >How to make a pairplot in Python and the Seaborn ... - YouTube
I then discuss the kind of figures that can be used on a pairplot by changing the diag_kind or kind arguments : scatterplot,...
Read more >Setting the size of a figure in matplotlib and seaborn
We can set the size by adding a figsize keyword argument to our pandas plot() function. The value has to be a tuple...
Read more >
Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start Free
Top Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
I think I’ll quickly fix this, settling for your first option above (remove those arguments). Three appears to be dangerous (as it will be hard to distinguish cases where axes are deleted etc, and that might lead to fairly hard-to-debug bugs), two might be added in the future, but essentially will also come down to first implementing the first option as far as I can tell.
Thanks for checking – I just reran the initial code, and it now works with a little tweak: