Apologies if I didn’t explain clearly. Yes, the 10% estimate from GWWC was used as a sense-check, against our own calculation based on the assumptions laid out above (i.e. 1st decile of funding is 10 units of impact out of 55, 2nd decile is 9⁄55, 3rd decile is 8⁄55 … 8th decile is 3⁄55, 9th decile is 2⁄55, and 10th & final decile is 1⁄55 - and since 70% of the budget is already funded, the remaining 30% is 3+2+1=6 units of impact out of 55).
Definitely not scientific, but I wanted to model a smooth decline across each decile of funding, and I ended up not worrying too much as Sjir’s own subjective assessment converging with ours.
Hi Vasco,
Apologies if I didn’t explain clearly. Yes, the 10% estimate from GWWC was used as a sense-check, against our own calculation based on the assumptions laid out above (i.e. 1st decile of funding is 10 units of impact out of 55, 2nd decile is 9⁄55, 3rd decile is 8⁄55 … 8th decile is 3⁄55, 9th decile is 2⁄55, and 10th & final decile is 1⁄55 - and since 70% of the budget is already funded, the remaining 30% is 3+2+1=6 units of impact out of 55).
Definitely not scientific, but I wanted to model a smooth decline across each decile of funding, and I ended up not worrying too much as Sjir’s own subjective assessment converging with ours.
Thanks, Joel! Makes sense. Sorry for not having read the 2nd bullet carefully.