Gedmatch calculators on Vahaduo

[Abriekman]

And I have a question why is Bulgaria_Northeastern average is more southern, than Bulgarian_Southeastern, Bulgarian_Southcsntral and all other Bulgarian averages?

[Dunai]

And I have a question why is Bulgaria_Northeastern average is more southern, than Bulgarian_Southeastern, Bulgarian_Southcsntral and all other Bulgarian averages?

Another question is, why are there so many regional averages for an otherwise pretty uniform medium-sized country?

[Ion Basescul]

And I have a question why is Bulgaria_Northeastern average is more southern, than Bulgarian_Southeastern

It isn't, unless you guys are not using my averages.

Name	Number of Samples	N_Atlantic	Baltic	West_Med	West_Asian	East_Med	Red_Sea	South_Asian	East_Asian	Siberian	Amerindian	Oceanian	NE_African	Sub-Saharan	NE+NW Euro	Med Euro	Caucasus	SW Asia	Siberia	India
Bulgaria_Northeastern	9	22.15	22.37	17.46	13.43	19.44	2.56	0.46	0.32	0.49	0.24	0.29	0.11	0.10	44.52	36.90	13.43	2.67	1.06	0.46
Bulgaria_Northcentral	15	21.30	24.45	17.41	11.88	19.86	2.33	0.65	0.28	0.99	0.37	0.28	0.07	0.14	45.75	37.27	11.88	2.40	1.63	0.65
Bulgaria_Northwestern	27	22.04	26.19	17.58	10.15	19.05	2.31	0.40	0.52	0.70	0.51	0.38	0.07	0.09	48.24	36.63	10.15	2.38	1.73	0.40
Bulgaria_Southeastern	12	20.13	21.81	18.44	13.87	20.44	2.92	0.43	0.30	0.48	0.44	0.47	0.11	0.07	41.95	38.88	13.87	3.03	1.21	0.43
Bulgaria_Southcentral	33	21.27	23.54	18.13	11.65	20.17	2.46	0.60	0.36	0.90	0.35	0.32	0.21	0.04	44.81	38.31	11.65	2.67	1.60	0.60
Bulgaria_Southwestern	31	22.81	24.21	17.86	11.56	18.51	2.23	0.59	0.54	0.85	0.39	0.33	0.07	0.06	47.02	36.37	11.56	2.30	1.78	0.59
Bulgaria_average	127	21.74	24.31	17.91	11.52	19.38	2.40	0.53	0.44	0.80	0.41	0.36	0.12	0.07	46.04	37.29	11.52	2.52	1.65	0.53

[Ion Basescul]

Another question is, why are there so many regional averages for an otherwise pretty uniform medium-sized country?

Why are we even having this conversation? The whole point of the updated spreadsheet is to have regional averages, sure not in the range of 15-20 as in the past, but up to 10 depending on the size of the country is pretty reasonable.
Otherwise, we might as well delete it and return to the original spreadsheet with 1-3 averages, depending on the country.
I think that some of you are arguing because you are bored.

[Dunai]

Why are we even having this conversation? The whole point of the updated spreadsheet is to have regional averages, sure not in the range of 15-20 as in the past, but up to 10 depending on the size of the country is pretty reasonable.
Otherwise, we might as well delete it and return to the original spreadsheet with 1-3 averages, depending on the country.
I think that some of you are arguing because you are bored.

I'm expressing my opinion, which was from the beginning, that broader regions and national (cross-border where it's the case) averages are more interesting, than small region averages. At the end it's not me who decides, but I can make suggestions when I see it fit and substantiated.

[Kyp]

For Dodecadk12b:

Iran_Arab,18.52,0.29,2.61,0.21,6.69,3.63,4.18,3.35,23.35,0.45,34.63,1.87

[MoroLP]

I am for more concise database... It's just better optics and better usage of space...

To you maybe is, to others, it's not - but it depends on what you want to do. If it is needed to edit the source for required distance, multiple, and PCA.

In other words, again, we should have a general and well-detailed database source on Vahaduo which would be an intermediate between the concise minimum and sub-regional maximum.

@Lucas, can you create a sticky thread that will be easily accessible for others with spreadsheets of a minimum number, which is roughly 1 national average + 1-3 regional averages depending on the country, and of a maximum number, which is all these regional and sub-regional averages we are speaking about? All happy.

[MoroLP]

It isn't, unless you guys are not using my averages.

Name	Number of Samples	N_Atlantic	Baltic	West_Med	West_Asian	East_Med	Red_Sea	South_Asian	East_Asian	Siberian	Amerindian	Oceanian	NE_African	Sub-Saharan	NE+NW Euro	Med Euro	Caucasus	SW Asia	Siberia	India
Bulgaria_Northeastern	9	22.15	22.37	17.46	13.43	19.44	2.56	0.46	0.32	0.49	0.24	0.29	0.11	0.10	44.52	36.90	13.43	2.67	1.06	0.46
Bulgaria_Northcentral	15	21.30	24.45	17.41	11.88	19.86	2.33	0.65	0.28	0.99	0.37	0.28	0.07	0.14	45.75	37.27	11.88	2.40	1.63	0.65
Bulgaria_Northwestern	27	22.04	26.19	17.58	10.15	19.05	2.31	0.40	0.52	0.70	0.51	0.38	0.07	0.09	48.24	36.63	10.15	2.38	1.73	0.40
Bulgaria_Southeastern	12	20.13	21.81	18.44	13.87	20.44	2.92	0.43	0.30	0.48	0.44	0.47	0.11	0.07	41.95	38.88	13.87	3.03	1.21	0.43
Bulgaria_Southcentral	33	21.27	23.54	18.13	11.65	20.17	2.46	0.60	0.36	0.90	0.35	0.32	0.21	0.04	44.81	38.31	11.65	2.67	1.60	0.60
Bulgaria_Southwestern	31	22.81	24.21	17.86	11.56	18.51	2.23	0.59	0.54	0.85	0.39	0.33	0.07	0.06	47.02	36.37	11.56	2.30	1.78	0.59
Bulgaria_average	127	21.74	24.31	17.91	11.52	19.38	2.40	0.53	0.44	0.80	0.41	0.36	0.12	0.07	46.04	37.29	11.52	2.52	1.65	0.53

Fine for me, but Northcentral and Southcentral should be merged forming Bulgaria_Central (look at PCA) and so 5/6 regional averages on Vahaduo while 6/6 on the maximum spreadsheet?

[J. Ketch]

To you maybe is, to others, it's not - but it depends on what you want to do. If it is needed to edit the source for required distance, multiple, and PCA.

In other words, again, we should have a general and well-detailed database source on Vahaduo which would be an intermediate between the concise minimum and sub-regional maximum.

@Lucas, can you create a sticky thread that will be easily accessible for others with spreadsheets of a minimum number, which is roughly 1 national average + 1-3 regional averages depending on the country, and of a maximum number, which is all these regional and sub-regional averages we are speaking about? All happy.

A separate sheet for smaller regions/groups is a good idea

[Lucas]

I advocate for these Italian averages getting tossed, many of which are subregional averages that aren't necessary IMO (also, do we really need to divide a subregion like Emilia in two?):

IT_Insubria,32.58,12.51,24.96,7.90,18.79,2.07,0.05,0.27,0.12,0.14,0.21,0.22,0.12
IT_Orobia,33.02,11.21,25.86,6.82,19.58,2.31,0.24,0.13,0.25,0.21,0.05,0.23,0.03
IT_Emilia_ovest,30.28,10.80,24.92,8.49,21.36,2.54,0.31,0.45,0.00,0.32,0.40,0.03,0.04
IT_Emilia_est,28.39,11.31,23.83,8.27,22.84,4.00,0.19,0.30,0.09,0.21,0.32,0.14,0.03
IT_Sannio,18.49,7.95,23.25,13.57,29.86,4.99,0.39,0.03,0.22,0.55,0.15,0.33,0.16
IT_Puglia,18.81,9.37,21.86,14.54,28.77,4.95,0.28,0.05,0.17,0.26,0.44,0.35,0.09
IT_Lucania,20.54,8.01,20.72,14.50,28.73,5.50,0.37,0.08,0.09,0.03,0.46,0.59,0.33
IT_Calabria_citra,16.45,6.16,22.01,14.95,32.59,5.52,0.52,0.23,0.04,0.18,0.6,0.41,0.28
IT_Salento,19.24,6.97,22.95,14.88,30.37,4.23,0.00,0.27,0.03,0.52,0.29,0.16,0.06
IT_Calabria_ultra,16.11,5.87,21.72,14.90,32.65,6.51,0.24,0.34,0.00,0.04,0.17,1.16,0.21

Also, IT_Lucania sample is identical to IT_Basilicata (it's the same region but using an archaic name for it), and we don't need the Puglia sample since we already have one.

Ok removed.