Atmosphere and Population anomalies: "Hellhome sweet Hellhome"
There's a less consensus about what constitutes too much population or what atmospheres are the issue.
I'll use two population cuts:
Not Lo Pop (6+)
and High Pop (9+)
I see two main subgroups of hellhole planets, based on engineering issues and different stretches of disbelief:
hostile atmospheres (A/B+ ATM) and
insufficient atmospheres ( <4):
I'll call the first group "hostile Hellholes" , and the second "suffocating hellholes"
I'll use ATM B+ for hostile status with A+ as an option, also; and ATM <4 for suffocating status.
I'll run both for both population groups options
Hostile Hellholes
first: most egregious case:
Hi Pop, B+ ATM
Code:
ATM Pop 9
----------------------------
11 152 0.15
12 154 0.15
ATM Pop 10
----------------------------
11 63 0.06
12 86 0.09
Including ATM A (exotic)
ATM Pop 9
----------------------------
10 241 0.24
11 152 0.15
12 154 0.15
ATM Pop 10
----------------------------
10 113 0.11
11 63 0.06
12 86 0.09
So looking at the stats for these, there really aren't very many of them: .46%. as an expected result, with a per subsector count of ~ .18. Note that that's eight-tenths of one hostile hellhole (now
that's a name for an album) so you you get something like 1 per five subsectors .
The chance of getting at least one in any given subsectoris 1 - (.99.54 ^40) or 17%. or, alternatively an 83% chance of none.
Adding A (exotic) ups it some, to 809 or about .81%....(again, note the decimal. ) with a per subsector count of ~ . 32...so you need three -four subsectors to get the expected count to exceed 1. About one per quadrant, and almost half of them will be ATM A hostile hellholes. Again, still not long odds of getting at least one.
That said, The type A hellholes really fit in the other category of suggested disbelievable worlds: suffocating. It contains the worlds that mainly kill thorough suffocation or decompression.
Suffocating hellholes (no, not just my hometown)
Code:
ATM 0-3,A; pop 9+
Total, all ATM
N %
------------------
3098 3.1
all ATM
N %
---------------------------------
ATM =A 354 0.35
ATM =3 784 0.78
ATM =2 660 0.65
ATM =1 496 0.49
ATM =0 804 0.80
Average will be 1.24 per subsector
with a72% chance of getting at least one suffocating hellhole (9+Pop) per subsector - or 28% chance of none. If present, most likely type is 0 (vac) or 3 (V thin).
Settin the population cut at 6+ (as suggested)
we get:
Code:
N %
---------------------------------
ALL ATM 15672 15.67
ATM =A 1795 1.79
ATM =3 4022 4.02
ATM =2 3332 3.33
ATM =1 2564 2.56
ATM =0 3959 3.95
As expected, the rate goes way up.
At these levels you certainly get at least one example, and probably several - in fact, three of the specific exaples have a good (50%< chance of showing up). (rule of thumb: for 40 iterations, 2% is about the 50/50 point for getting at least one example)
Of course, it is important to note this does tend to change the nature of the anomaly from Extreme overpopulation + lousy atmosphere" to "somewhat greater than average population + lousy atmosphere", so the belief stretching is different enough to make them less than useful comparisons for each other.
Expanding the POP criterea for the Hostile Hellholes, we get:
Code:
The SAS System 12:15 February 8, 2008 105
N %
---------------------------------
ALL ATM 2222 2.22
ATM =B 1091 1.09
ATM =C 1131 1.13
So, with the expanded population.: expected value of .8-.9 per subsector with about a 60% chance of getting one or more per subsector.
In many ways, given the atmosphere issues, this anomaly is likely more comprable to its alternate harsh atmosphere grouping- the question is really much more along the lines of " How do they live there" than "why".
Starports and population: "Ghost towns and potemkin villages"
Again, I'll stay away from the tech anomalies (for now)
Anomolous ports come in two flavors, again varying by the population. The most obvious case is the 0 population planet with A or B starport status. These I'll categorize as "Phantom Ports" - much like the old western Ghost towns - a facility with
no local population to support the infrastructure.
Heres the breakdown for Ghost ports
A/B and 0 pop
Code:
PORT N %
---------------------------------
PORTS A and B 816 0.82
PORTS A 239 0.24
PORTS B 577 0.58
Expected frequency per subsector is .32 (note the decimal); or about 1.3 per quadrant. More than half of those phantom ports will be class B.
For a subsector, the chance of getting at least one is: 28%, or another way, a 72% chance of not having one in any given subsector.
Expected frequency for a sector is about 5.
Adding in Starports that aren't expected to be unmanned (such as E,X), we get:
D+ and Pop 0:
Code:
PORT N %
-----------------------------
PORTS A-D 2419 2.41
PORT A 239 0.24
PORT B 577 0.58
PORT C 896 0.9
PORT D 707 0.71
Additionally, there is a larger group of oddities that include the above, adding low population worlds- I'll call these "Potemkin ports"
[The reference is to a series of fake farming villages in an impoverished area set up by a government official to impress his superior. An alternate description is "porkbarrel ports"; a situation where an area gets a way bigger government project than it needs simply to create wealth locall, and votes specifically]
When expanding the population criterea it seems that the target group is best defined by B+ port and 3- pop.
N %
-----------------------------
PORTS A & B 7795 7.80
PORT A 2318 2.32
PORTS 5477 5.48
Giving expected frequency of about 3 per subsector, with a 96% chance of getting at least one per subsector.
However, this does change the nature of the anomaly from "why is it there "to how is it supported"
Thats enough for now, I suspect. Work (paid work) calls
: 31551 (12.62%)
. 
.
