Assuming a loguniform distribution for the cost-effectiveness of corporate campaigns for chicken welfare as a fraction of the cost-effectiveness of GiveWellās top charities ranging from 0.5 to 100 k, there would be 75.5 % (= (ln(10^5) - ln(10))/ā(ln(10^5) - ln(0.5))) chance of corporate campaigns being at least 10 times as cost-effective as GiveWellās top charities. So I agree my wording above (āunder almost any plausible assumptionā) was too strong in light of Lukeās 2018 guesses. I changed the wording to āunder most plausible assumptionsā.
Rethink Prioritiesā welfare range estimates seem roughly in line with the above. Rethinkās 5th and 95th percentile welfare range for chickens are 0.602 % (= 0.002/ā0.332) and 2.62 times (= 0.869/ā0.332) the median welfare range I used to estimate corporate campaigns increase welfare 1.71 k times as cost-effective as GiveWellās top charities. If I had used the 5th and 95th percentile welfare range, I would have concluded corporate campaigns increase welfare 10.3 (= 0.00602*1.71*10^3) and 4.48 k times as cost-effectively as GiveWellās top charities. In reality, there are uncertainty in other inputs, so maybe the plausible range of values is actually similar to what Luke guesses back in 2018 (one roughly gets Lukeās interval of 0.5 to 100 k multiplying 10.3 and 4.48 k by 1ā20 and 20).
Thanks, Joshua!
Assuming a loguniform distribution for the cost-effectiveness of corporate campaigns for chicken welfare as a fraction of the cost-effectiveness of GiveWellās top charities ranging from 0.5 to 100 k, there would be 75.5 % (= (ln(10^5) - ln(10))/ā(ln(10^5) - ln(0.5))) chance of corporate campaigns being at least 10 times as cost-effective as GiveWellās top charities. So I agree my wording above (āunder almost any plausible assumptionā) was too strong in light of Lukeās 2018 guesses. I changed the wording to āunder most plausible assumptionsā.
Rethink Prioritiesā welfare range estimates seem roughly in line with the above. Rethinkās 5th and 95th percentile welfare range for chickens are 0.602 % (= 0.002/ā0.332) and 2.62 times (= 0.869/ā0.332) the median welfare range I used to estimate corporate campaigns increase welfare 1.71 k times as cost-effective as GiveWellās top charities. If I had used the 5th and 95th percentile welfare range, I would have concluded corporate campaigns increase welfare 10.3 (= 0.00602*1.71*10^3) and 4.48 k times as cost-effectively as GiveWellās top charities. In reality, there are uncertainty in other inputs, so maybe the plausible range of values is actually similar to what Luke guesses back in 2018 (one roughly gets Lukeās interval of 0.5 to 100 k multiplying 10.3 and 4.48 k by 1ā20 and 20).