Plan vs reality

This grades the Twin's weight projections (not the calorie plan). We run two ways of estimating side by side: the adaptive plan uses a 28-day maintenance window and steers your daily target (the headline above grades the adaptive plan only); the challenger runs on a shorter 15-day window — quicker to react, but built on fewer weigh-ins — and is graded against the same weigh-in history yet never changes your food. Comparing their typical miss is an honest test of whether a more responsive method would actually track better before we'd ever promote it. The challenger needs two weigh-ins a full 14 days apart inside its 15-day window, so it legitimately opens fewer weeks than the adaptive plan under sparse or mid-cadence logging — its open and expired weeks are counted above so that gap stays visible. The head-to-head line compares the two only on weeks where both were graded against the same weigh-in — an exact, like-for-like comparison — so its figures can differ from, and occasionally order differently than, the per-version rows above, which also count weeks only one version resolved or where each landed on a different nearby weigh-in (those shared-but-split weeks are disclosed in the line itself). If too few weeks share the exact same weigh-in to score precisely, the line says how many exact weeks are still needed and then adds an approximate comparison over every week both versions resolved (clearly labelled, since some of those weeks were graded against different weigh-ins), so an occasional logger still gets a meaningful comparison. The separate history of your daily plan before the adaptive version took over is in the plan-assumptions section above.