CC7 over 30,000 aka Seven Circles Magic

Question

A few months ago, we were amazed by Patty LaPlante's CC7 breaking the 20,000 wall. Today she passed another milestone with a CC7 over 30,000. Wow! But the challenger Jim Loden is on her tracks, with a CC7 over 23,000.

To celebrate this event, I invite you to discover a bit of the magic around CC7 in this brand new page : Seven Circles Magic. Have fun with magic numbers!

Answer 1

Congrats Patty!  I know how much work Patty has put into creating profiles and connecting.  I've even tried to grab her coat tails with my own CC7 and she graciously volunteered to research and find the closest connection we had.

I am so proud of you and happy to call you my friend.

Answer 2

Excellent work, Bernard!

Comments

Thanks Eric!

Answer 3

Thank you Bernard and Sandy. Both of you have helped so much with this CC7 adventure! I'm excited to see where it all goes next... 

Answer 4

I liked your comparison of the "national" clusters. Of course from Sweden we don't have anybody approaching a CC7 of 10 000. But my interest in exploring Swedish members as a cluster was sparked anew... I'm still not sure I have even a grasp of all acrive Swedes, and how to delimit a cluster.

But I found something nice while poking around a bit: there is a longstanding and pretty active Swede, whose closest connection to me has gone through America since forever. Now "all of a sudden" we finally have an all-Swedish connection, as if by magic.  Turns out I added, in my seventh circle, last summer, a husband of a granddaughter of the brother of one of my great grandfathers. Then in January someone else came along and added the father of this husband, in the process of filling out the brothers and sisters of their great grandparents.

Comments

Is there any analysis on clusters?

I've been wondering about the biggest 'dead ends'. With that I mean branches that are only connected through a single profile. That could even be a metric, similar to the cc7 score each profile has. Just with a downside: at one point people would overexpand and their branch would merge with the tree at another point, bringing the score back to 0.

---

You have the Unconnected lists https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:DBE_Unconnected - where you can find the largest clusters that don't connect to the Global Tree yet.

And you have the Outer Rim page, listing profiles with the longest paths - https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:The_outer_rim_of_the_global_tree

But as far as I know nobody keeps track of clusters connected only through a bottleneck of a single profile - I don't know if there's an algorithm for finding them. Although I know I have come across clusters where there was a long bottleneck of several profiles, any of which would break the chain if disconnected.

---

Such clusters connected only through a single point of failure path tend to be quite small compared to the size of the Big Tree. Most of the time, they appear when a previously unconnected branch has been recently connected.

My guess is that, like the largest unconnected branches,  their size should not pass much the critical size sqrt(P),  currently around 5,500. Passed this threshold, new connection paths are likely to be found. 

Confirmed by my own experience with the Kreiz Breizh cluster around my paternal lines. When I started from scratch in 2019, I had a couple of more or less dubious paths putting this cluster about 40 degrees from the bulk. It's now rather around 30 degrees, with a resilient network of completely different paths (not only the ones passing by me).