[ExI] 23andTriangulation

spike spike at rainier66.com
Tue Jul 9 22:46:01 UTC 2013


 

I am working on an idea that has evolved over the past few days.  If anyone
here is a genealogy hipster and can see that I am reinventing the wheel, do
feel free to offer reproof and correction publicly.  I have thick skin.

 

OK so now we have all this genetic info in a standardized accessible form
from 23andMe.  I am working on an algorithm I call triangulation, which is
where you find two relatives on your list who are both related to you but
not to each other.  Then with either resulting set we should be able to
infer (or narrow down) from that triangulation team the mutual ancestors
from removing the non-mutual ancestors of the non-related pair.  I may be
inventing terminology for concepts that are already well known; do clue me
if you have one. 

 

If we do this iteratively we can create a ring of triads as follows:
Abdulcader, Butthead and Crunk form a triad where Abdulcader and Crunk are
unrelated, Butthead, Crunk, and Doodledum form a triad where Butthead and
Doodledum are unrelated and so on, continue until we figure out a way to
create a triad of Konkleschnortz, Lamedick and Abdulcader, where
Konkleschnortz and Abdulcader are unrelated but both are related to
Lamedick.  Then each person in the ring of 12 people are in three triads
each; in two triads they share DNA with one person and one triad they share
DNA with both.  With that info, we should be able to slice and dice the
ancestors by comparing which names show up where.

 

This seems like something that could have been done a long time ago with
traditional genealogy, but this time we have actual physical evidence, which
would eliminate the risk of errors from misinformation and disinformation.

 

Ideas please: as a test, is there a way to get a dozen of us, or fewer, make
an excel file with columns of 64 numbers, each a random integer between 0
and 255.  We define as sisters those columns which share an average of 32
numbers.  Cousin columns share 16, second cousins 8 and so on.  Next I form
the triads, and see if I can get the algorithm to find which columns are
related to which.  

 

>From that, I should be able to figure out which column is related to which
by triangulation, ja?

 

In real life, I am working on forming my first actual triad with actual DNA
relatives, both of which are dedicated genealogists.  I am having a hell of
a time explaining the concept.

 

If this scheme works, it could cause the phase change Anders warned us
against.  It also points right at the ethical blind spot I mentioned that
started this whole thing: I go into a tailspin as soon as I hold info that
could cause damage, but I shamelessly work on an algorithm that would
blindly triangulate and gigahertzly produce the same information a million
times over.  I work on that algorithm without losing a wink of sleep over
it, knowing that once that algorithm is out there I have zero control over
it.  This is vaguely analogous to those who would work on AI, knowing that
it could escape from the lab and create a completely unpredictable mixture
of good and bad consequences.  

 

Help me, Anders-Wan KeSandberg, you're our only hope.  

 

Actually anyone here is welcome to either instruct on the
rightness/wrongness of even thinking about doing something like this, or
alternately, offer much-needed assistance with the algorithm.

 

spike

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20130709/46c59e64/attachment.html>


More information about the extropy-chat mailing list