[BUG] cudf.Series.duplicated returns error 'Series' object has no attribute 'duplicated'

[tiraldj]

Describe the bug
I am trying to see if there are duplicate values in a feature within a dataframe using duplicated()

Steps/Code to reproduce bug

first i tried using the duplicated() on the column itself

df['job_title'].duplicated()
then explicitly made it a series of string values then ran duplicated().
`dups = cudf.Series(df['job_title']).astype('string')

dups = dups.duplicated()
`
in these cases i get the error: 'Series' object has no attribute 'duplicated'

Expected behavior
Something like this, where 'True' means duplicate of something that came before:

0 False
1 False
2 True
3 False
4 True
dtype: bool

Environment overview (please complete the following information)

• Environment location: [Bare-metal, Docker, Cloud(specify cloud provider)] Cloud (Paperspace, RAPIDS image)
• Method of cuDF install: [conda, Docker, or from source] image came with cudf preinstalled

Environment details
Please run and paste the output of the cudf/print_env.sh script here, to gather any other relevant environment details
I couldn't run the print_env.sh, wasn't found in the directory

nvidia-smi says: NVIDIA-SMI 525.116.04 Driver Version: 525.116.04 CUDA Version: 12.0
I was using a P5000 on paperspace

Additional context
Add any other context about the problem here.

[mroeschke]

Thanks for the report. Could you share what version of cudf you are running as well as a reproducible example? For example, this works on cudf 24.04

>>> import cudf
>>> cudf.Series(list("121")).duplicated()
0    False
1    False
2     True
dtype: bool
>>> cudf.__version__
'24.04.00'

[tiraldj]

thank you for the reply

cudf.version says '22.10.01+2.gca9a422da9'

again this is the Paperspace cloud service's RAPIDS image. I will come back with a reproducible code later today.

[mroeschke]

I do not see duplicated implemented for 22.10.01 so that's the reason for the failure.

It appears 23.02 is the first release where duplicated is implemented.

[tiraldj]

thank you for the clarification

[mroeschke]

Closing as the OP was the expected behavior given the cudf version