So this issue is correct, as my post is written. I realized after the deadline that I hadn’t spelled this out at all, and I didn’t feel comfortable editing at that point; there’s a little clarification in the post now.
For each time step t=1,…,T, we’re running both of those effects() calls indefinitely. For each time step in the simulation, we penalize those effects which are only in the π:tM simulation at that (simulated) time step and which manifest under the full plan. This means that if M directly caused a side effect, it gets counted exactly once.
I agree that it’s a big ask, modeling butterfly effects like that, but the idea was to get an unbounded solution and see where that left us.
So this issue is correct, as my post is written. I realized after the deadline that I hadn’t spelled this out at all, and I didn’t feel comfortable editing at that point; there’s a little clarification in the post now.
For each time step t=1,…,T, we’re running both of those effects() calls indefinitely. For each time step in the simulation, we penalize those effects which are only in the π:tM simulation at that (simulated) time step and which manifest under the full plan. This means that if M directly caused a side effect, it gets counted exactly once.
I agree that it’s a big ask, modeling butterfly effects like that, but the idea was to get an unbounded solution and see where that left us.