Worked example · 01

A valued hour that also helps

Can the same event create an economic output and change the represented human state?

Midday · shared learning

A facilitated learning session is completed, the contribution has an explicit hypothetical rate, and the reviewed variation records a bounded improvement in reliable execution.

This is a synthetic variation on the paper’s redacted public worked day. It teaches a branch of the model; it is not a private record, observed personal event or empirical finding.

World 02 / 03

Performance in Institutions

Performance · valued · positive movement

See the related cases

Short answer

Yes—but the two outcomes are decided separately.

01 · Moment

Observed time slice

A bounded event with context and provenance.

02 · Economic question

Vcom 1000

Typed VC output: 700

03 · Human question

+0.021 WellbeingScore movement

Wbefore 700.000 → Wafter 700.021

One event can produce two independently governed answers. Orange marks an active result; graphite preserves an inactive or unavailable possibility without turning it into zero.

Show the calculation

Four questions, in order.

  1. 01

    Start with the prior state

    The event reads Wbefore = 700.000.

  2. 02

    Ask the economic question

    Validated rate × duration produces Vcom = 1000 hypothetical credits.

  3. 03

    Ask the human-state question

    The reviewed input produces deltaW = 0.021, so Wafter = 700.021.

  4. 04

    Keep the units honest

    VCperformance = (Wbefore / 1000) × Vcom = 700 hypothetical credits.

What this means

The rate and duration constitute Vcom. A separate reviewed decision supplies the human-state movement. Neither result proves the other.

What it does not mean

It does not mean payment caused wellbeing improvement or that the person is worth the calculated output.

Technical layerAudit the calculationInspect statuses, intermediate values, provenance, uncertainty and raw scenario structure.
Source settlement
final
Impact review
applied
Replay eligibility
eligible
Valuation
valued
Projection
canonical
Wbefore
700.000
Component delta
0.07
deltaW
0.021
Wafter
700.021
Vcom_event
1000
VCperformance_event
700

Pinned implementation calculation

Complete component-transition trace

Every input and intermediate value is carried by the stable synthetic fixture or derived from its pinned issuer-policy snapshot.

Components before
{ "Physiology": 700, "Emotion": 700, "Feeling": 700, "Thought": 700, "Habit": 700, "Performance": 700 }
calculated_Wbefore
700
Affected component
Performance
component_before
700
Band
(600,700]
band_rate
0.03
adjustment_factor
0.005
Direction
positive
Intensity
medium
intensity_multiplier
2/3
maximum_move
0.105
calculated_component_delta
0.07
component_after
700.07
component_weight
0.3
calculated_deltaW
0.021
calculated_Wafter
700.021
Typed Vcom_event
1000
Typed VCperformance_event
700

maximum_move = 700 × 0.03 × 0.005 = 0.105

component_delta = 0.105 × 2/3 × 1 = 0.07

component_after = 700 + (0.07) = 700.07

deltaW = 0.07 × 0.3 = 0.021

Wafter = 700 + (0.021) = 700.021

Vcom_event = validated rate × validated duration = 1000

VCperformance_event = (700 / 1000) × 1000 = 700

Required case note

Impact justification

Assumed synthetic evidence
A synthetic source decision validates two hours at 500 hypothetical credits per hour; a separate synthetic HouseOfBros review input records improved completion reliability across the occurrence.
Reviewed decision input
positive · medium
Calculation demonstrated
The calculator applies the pinned HouseOfBros Founder Policy v0.1 transition matrix to the declared component state. It does not infer direction or intensity from the evidence narrative.
Decision rationale
Applied because the reviewed input asserts a bounded improvement rather than routine repetition.
Alternative interpretations
  • Routine delivery could support no_transition.
  • Strain could support negative impact.
Uncertainty
This synthetic case has not been calibrated against observed longitudinal evidence or independent reviewer agreement.
Evidence-to-intensity rubric
unvalidated. Direction and intensity are reviewed inputs; the calculator does not infer them from prose.
Validation research required
Prospective rate-blinded review, repeated within-person observations and inter-rater agreement.