1
It isn't accurate when used with my scaled IllustrativeDNA coordinates (made with raw data)
See:
Target: cmt160_scaled
Distance: 3.7342% / 0.03734163
36.0 TUR_Tepecik_Ciftlik_N
26.2 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
21.0 TUR_Barcin_N
11.6 WHG
4.8 MAR_Taforalt
0.4 Gambian
But when I run this calc DIRECTLY with my raw data (with this tool https://www.exploreyourdna.com/rawtosimg25.aspx ) I get a very accurate result, stereotypical spanish, nothing "off".
See:
Yours results on Davidski G25 Standard model :
TUR_Barcin_N: 54.35 %
Yamnaya_RUS_Samara: 31.21 %
WHG: 9.61 %
MAR_Taforalt: 4.28 %
TUR_Tepecik_Ciftlik_N: 0.56 %
When I upload the simulated coords made directly with the raw data through that tool (which i guess uses a similar algorithm to IllustrativeDNA, unless the coords in illustrativeDNA are manually created/"curated" [which I have no information about and I seriously doubt it]) to davidski calculator on vahaduo itself I get similar results to the ones made directly with the raw data (the raw data ones are more accurate cuz it has two decimal columns rather than only one, that is all the difference actually it seems)
Target: cmt160_simulated_g25_scaled
Distance: 2.4696% / 0.02469626
54.2 TUR_Barcin_N
31.2 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
9.6 WHG
4.2 MAR_Taforalt
0.8 TUR_Tepecik_Ciftlik_N
I removed the tepecik reference and i got this with illustrativedna coords:
Target: cmt160_scaled
Distance: 3.9153% / 0.03915272
50.0 TUR_Barcin_N
25.8 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
11.6 WHG
6.4 Kura-Araxes_ARM_Kaps
6.0 MAR_Taforalt
0.2 Dinka
Kura araxes and ssa showing, the SSA being "noise"/miscall. Probably the "kura araxes" being too, since it doesn't show with the coords made with the rawdata-to-sim coords (when tepecik is removed, and kura araxes still there in the "source"/reference, meaning it should pop up)
See:
Target: cmt160_simulated_g25_scaled
Distance: 2.4700% / 0.02469976
54.8 TUR_Barcin_N
31.2 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
9.6 WHG
4.4 MAR_Taforalt
Latest calculation I guess is the most accurate. Stereotypically spanish.
Bookmarks