I think combined with your excellent measurements, @MZKM is already doing a brilliant job of that
That's not the question I asked. You said that Sean knew how to distill the spins into a number even if he didn't use the formula from his research. I challenged you to compute such a number. Simple answer is that you can't.
For a company designing a speaker targeting a preference curve, they don't need a single number descriptor. If there is a peak at 5 kHz in on-axis, they know this needs to be brought down. A single number for the entire performance of the speaker does them no good. Ditto for directivity errors and such. Last thing you want as a designer is to be given a number that is a complex sum of multiple values.
Imagine if Z = X + Y. If I gave you Z as 5, what would X and Y be? They could be many combinations, right? Best to be told the X and Y than the Z.
Indeed one of the issues with the formula is that it doesn't encompass what is goodness in a speaker fully. For visual analysis of spins, we want flat on axis and similar off-axis. We don't want the amount of bass to cover deficiencies in either one of these but unfortunately the score does exactly that. Nor is there a complete conversion of flat on-axis and smooth off-axis is what is literally used in the formula. Yet these characteristics sums the opinion and research from Dr. Toole and crew.
In other words, the playing with the formula to fit preference scores, generated some oddities. Those oddities have not been investigated and fully identified independently. Using above analogy, would extra bass compensate for dip in 700 to 2 kHz? Which is more important if you had to pick one.
Mind you, we are lucky that the score does exist. It provides directionality of performance. It is a bit like a compass. It more or less points north but it is not GPS telling you everything you need to know about your route. Or with supreme precision.
Learn to use it as a rough figure to be verified using other means to be on point, or have some errors in it. This is what I do with my listening tests. None of you are in a position to do better since you don't have these speakers in hand to test the correctness of the number.
So don't be dismissive. It is work and frankly pain in the neck to set up each speaker for listening tests and writing up the observations. Don't add to that by complaining in thread after thread without bringing in an ounce of new information we/I don't already know.