Optimal Release Timing: A Decision-Theoretic Framework for Perturbation Drafts

AbstractThe perturbation draft methodology advocates early release of scholarly work tomaximise the feedback integration window. But 'early' is not a universal prescription: aphilologist and an AI safety researcher face fundamentally different publicationlandscapes. This paper presents a decision-theoretic framework for determining optimalrelease timing based on field characteristics, audience characteristics, workcharacteristics, and personal stakes.I define seventeen variables across four categories - including friction coefficient, rigourthreshold, field velocity, earnest reader ratio, critique capacity, transmission clarity,reputation sensitivity, and scoop sensitivity - and show how these combine to determinethe costs and benefits of early versus delayed release. The framework does not promiseprecise calculation; all parameters are subjective estimates. Its value lies in makingexplicit the factors that authors typically weigh implicitly and inconsistently, enablingstructured thinking about a decision that is usually made by intuition alone.I provide illustrative field profiles (classical philology, AI safety, empirical socialpsychology) demonstrating how different parameter configurations yield differentoptimal strategies. I introduce the weighted priority vector as a tool for personalcalibration, and argue that the weight-assignment exercise itself generates self-insightinto what an author actually values. Finally, I offer calibration heuristics for parameterestimation and discuss how estimates should be updated based on experience.