Skip to contents

Introduction

The vignette benchmarks plotjs against various other plotting systems for R, namely plotly. Two basic plots will be used for this benchmark, a basic scatter plot and a grouped line plot. I am uncertain if JavaScript execution time is counted by microbenchmark. Even if we assume it isn’t, the benchmark results are informative because it’s always better if the R process gets tied up for less time per plot. First, let’s load the visualization packages to compare:

library(plotjs)
library(plotly)
#> Loading required package: ggplot2
#> 
#> Attaching package: 'plotly'
#> The following object is masked from 'package:ggplot2':
#> 
#>     last_plot
#> The following object is masked from 'package:stats':
#> 
#>     filter
#> The following object is masked from 'package:graphics':
#> 
#>     layout
library(ggplot2)

Scatter Plot

First, we will benchmark the creation of simple scatter plots using data from the gapminder package. To begin, we will define functions to create similar scatterplots using each of the packages to be compared. The plots themselves are not important but are shown to demonstrate that they work and produce roughly similar plots.

library(gapminder)

gapminder <- gapminder

plot_base <- function(x){
  
  plot(x = x$gdpPercap, y = x$lifeExp)
}

plot_base(gapminder)

plot_plotjs <- function(x){
 
  plotjs(x = x$gdpPercap, y = x$lifeExp, sci.x = TRUE)
}
plot_plotjs(gapminder)
plot_plotly <- function(x){
  plot_ly(data = x, x = ~gdpPercap, y = ~lifeExp, type = "scatter")
}
plot_plotly(gapminder)
#> No scatter mode specifed:
#>   Setting the mode to markers
#>   Read more about this attribute -> https://plotly.com/r/reference/#scatter-mode
plot_ggplotly <- function(x){
  g <- ggplot(x, aes(x = gdpPercap, y = lifeExp)) + geom_point() + theme_minimal()
  ggplotly(g)
}
plot_ggplotly(gapminder)
plot_ggplot <- function(x){
  ggplot(x, aes(x = gdpPercap, y = lifeExp)) + geom_point() + theme_minimal()
}
plot_ggplot(gapminder)

Now, these functions are benchmarked:

library(microbenchmark)
m <- microbenchmark(base = plot_base(gapminder),
               plotjs = plot_plotjs(gapminder),
               plotly = plot_plotly(gapminder),
               ggplotly = plot_ggplotly(gapminder),
               ggplot = plot_ggplot(gapminder),
               unit = "ms",
               times = 50)
m
#> Unit: milliseconds
#>      expr        min         lq        mean      median         uq        max
#>      base  24.243720  61.029375  60.7712529  61.3285775  61.721425  64.879847
#>    plotjs   0.076883   0.114964   0.1599492   0.1313800   0.150151   1.590076
#>    plotly   0.331369   0.406007   0.5553723   0.5453075   0.641436   2.216734
#>  ggplotly 163.537707 170.994476 179.6019770 181.5625975 184.671927 204.551888
#>    ggplot  33.788794  37.762696  42.2488308  39.3883040  42.950153 152.003613
#>  neval
#>     50
#>     50
#>     50
#>     50
#>     50

On my main development machine, plotjs was the quickest by an order of magnitude. This can vary, but plotly is roughly 20 times slower, and ggplotly() is hundreds of times slower. However, plotly was still quick enough that the performance difference with plotjs would be imperceptible to users.

plot(m)

Let’s look at kernel density plots of the time distributions for plotjs and plotly.

density_plotjs <- density(m$time[m$expr == "plotjs"])
plotjs(density_plotjs)
density_plotly <- density(m$time[m$expr == "plotly"])
plotjs(density_plotly)

Let’s use a two-sample Wilcoxon test to compare the means of execution time for plotjs and plotly. A t-test would not be suitable because we cannot assume normality. The null hypothesis is that plotjs and plotly will have the same mean execution time for these scatter plots.

w <- wilcox.test(m$time[m$expr == "plotjs"],
                 m$time[m$expr == "plotly"],
                 alternative = "less",
                 paired = FALSE)
w
#> 
#>  Wilcoxon rank sum test with continuity correction
#> 
#> data:  m$time[m$expr == "plotjs"] and m$time[m$expr == "plotly"]
#> W = 49, p-value < 2.2e-16
#> alternative hypothesis: true location shift is less than 0

Can we reject the null hypothesis?

ifelse(w$p.value < .05, "yes", "no")
#> [1] "yes"

Grouped Line plots

Making line plots colored by group is a common plotting task that could potentially expose some slowness in plotjs. We will make line plots of the total GDP by continent by year. First, we must summarize the data and define functions for making this lineplot with various packages.

library(dplyr)
#> 
#> Attaching package: 'dplyr'
#> The following objects are masked from 'package:stats':
#> 
#>     filter, lag
#> The following objects are masked from 'package:base':
#> 
#>     intersect, setdiff, setequal, union
gdp_cont <- gapminder %>%
  mutate(gdp = pop * gdpPercap) %>%
  group_by(continent, year) %>%
  summarize(total_gdp = sum(gdp))
#> `summarise()` has regrouped the output.
#>  Summaries were computed grouped by continent and year.
#>  Output is grouped by continent.
#>  Use `summarise(.groups = "drop_last")` to silence this message.
#>  Use `summarise(.by = c(continent, year))` for per-operation grouping
#>   (`?dplyr::dplyr_by`) instead.

plot_title <- "Total GDP by Continent 1952 - 2007"
plotjs_line <- function(x){
  plotjs(x$year, x$total_gdp, col.group = x$continent, sci.y = TRUE, 
         type = "l", main = plot_title, xlab = "Year", ylab = "GDP",
         legend.title = "Continent")
}

plotjs_line(gdp_cont)
ggplot_line <- function(x){
  ggplot(x, aes(x = year, y = total_gdp, col = continent, group = continent)) +
    geom_line() +
    theme_minimal() +
    labs(title = plot_title, x = "Year", y = "GDP")
}
ggplot_line(gdp_cont)

ggplotly_line <- function(x){
  p <- ggplot(x, aes(x = year, y = total_gdp, col = continent)) +
    geom_line() +
    theme_minimal() +
    labs(title = plot_title, x = "Year", y = "GDP")
  ggplotly(p)
}

ggplotly_line(gdp_cont)
plotly_line <- function(x){
  plot_ly(data = x, x = ~year, y = ~total_gdp, split = ~continent,
          type = "scatter", color  = ~continent, mode = "lines")
}
plotly_line(gdp_cont)

Now let’s benchmark these line plot functions:

m2 <- microbenchmark(plotjs = plotjs_line(gdp_cont),
                     ggplotly = ggplotly_line(gdp_cont),
                     plotly = plotly_line(gdp_cont),
                     ggplot = ggplot_line(gdp_cont),
                     unit = "ms",
                     times = 50)
m2
#> Unit: milliseconds
#>      expr        min         lq        mean      median         uq        max
#>    plotjs   0.440342   0.482269   0.6078713   0.5795355   0.630937   2.655834
#>  ggplotly 173.114470 178.409165 184.1830153 180.2388540 183.813737 330.256258
#>    plotly   0.343531   0.388084   0.5099320   0.4410925   0.559394   2.358809
#>    ggplot  35.238107  36.346625  38.3464542  37.2546840  40.530920  43.770543
#>  neval
#>     50
#>     50
#>     50
#>     50
plot(m2)

Let’s perform the same test as before:

w2 <- wilcox.test(m2$time[m2$expr == "plotjs"],
                 m2$time[m2$expr == "plotly"],
                 alternative = "less",
                 paired = FALSE)
w2
#> 
#>  Wilcoxon rank sum test with continuity correction
#> 
#> data:  m2$time[m2$expr == "plotjs"] and m2$time[m2$expr == "plotly"]
#> W = 1941, p-value = 1
#> alternative hypothesis: true location shift is less than 0

Can we reject the null hypothesis that plotjs and plotly have the same mean?

ifelse(w2$p.value < .05, "yes", "no")
#> [1] "no"

Conclusions

Although benchmark results will vary on different systems, the results on my development machine indicate that plotjs is faster than plotly (and others) for both the scatter plot and grouped line plot tested. Although statistically significant, the difference in performance between plotjs and plotly would almost certainly never be perceptible to users.

Both plotjs and direct use of plotly potentially offer perceptible performance improvements over using ggplotly() to generate interactive visualizations. Shiny developers may find this information useful.