TLDR: I think The Red Pill is ready to step up its game in regards to some of the common terminology. It is my belief that many of these concepts are accurate yet over-simplified when it comes to projecting female behavior. Below is my model of the AWALT variables that impact female decision making.

Analysis:

The concept of AWALT is dichotomous. You are either a hypergamous whore, or a unicorn, which no TRPer believes in unicorns and rightfully so. But women would never simply think "I'm a big whore, so I'll fuck this guy tonight." The binary of slut or not with all women being sluts is not very useful as an analytic tool. So why do we always say AWALT? I think AWALT is more of a coping mechanism that we use to rationalize why we are unable to find reliable and faithful women, or why women perform other types of sexually deviant behavior. As prideful men, AWALT means that her conduct is not a result of our action or inaction, but just a natural skanky predisposition.

This is hollow in its ability to help us forecast her likeliness to cheat or hook up. Instead of treating cheating/willingness to slut it up as inevitable, we should be treating skankness as a spectrum with women maintaining either a high or low predisposition which is then affected by the contextual environment, risk, your SMV, and her potential options.

I propose that her innate skankiness is the most important variable. This is encapsulated in her resistance to sex with different partners (I would say Chads but I'm sure betas score committed skanks too) while in a relationship or her resistance to sex when meeting someone new while uncommitted. This openness to sexual experiences will be represented by the skank index. What level of the skank index you can bring out in her is directly correlated to your SMV. The higher your SMV, the less likely her skank qualities will be to come out in a committed relationship, or the faster her skank qualities will appear when she is presenting to you during an uncommitted encounter. So now our equation is taking shape.

Skank Index / Your SMV = Sexual Deviance Likelihood.*

Now we know that context is important. I submit that a girl out getting hammered with her slutty friends will be more likely to skank out than if that same girl were spending an afternoon in a library. Granted, you could argue that this would be part of a skank index since a skank is as a skank does. However, I disagree. Context could be that a woman works in the military and is surrounded by thousands of Chads every day. Context could be that a girl got a DUI so she is putting her Kesha routine on hold for a year. But since it is related to skankness, I propose that we enter it into the equation like so:

(Skank Index * Context) / Your SMV = Sexual Deviance Likelihood

Now there is risk. Risk is essential to her hamstering. As long as there is plausible deniability, the girl's concept of self will remain in tact. In a high risk situation, her hamster will be confronted with reality due to her skankness being unveiled and held accountable. The risk of a girl's skank index being directly revealed while she is backpacking through Europe when she returns to her life in America is negligible. Save for some direct evidence like porn or a child, she can rest assured that her hoevendetures will disappear like a fart in the wind. However, if she is on vacation with her parents, the likelihood that she will be as receptive to Chads drops dramatically. As such, exposure risk will be modeled as such:

[(Skank Index * Context)/ Your SMV] / Risk = Sexual Deviance Likelihood

The final piece of the model comes from her available options. If she is a HB9 and hanging out at a life guard training school, that brings on a lot of competition. If she is a programmer hanging around a bunch of white knight virgins all day, her appealing options will significantly dwindle. Alternatives will be directly impacted by your SMV. I propose it would fit the model like so:

[(Skank Index * Context) / (Your SMV/Alternate Options)] / Risk = Sexual Deviance Likelihood

So now you are probably asking, how does this help me? Well that is simple, you can use this index to judge your likelihood to score a ONS or be cheated on by a skank. Did she just get a new job at a modeling agency filled with dudes and their ripped abs? The sexual deviance likelihood will increase. Did you just lose your job? Increases. Did her slutty girls night friend move to another state? Decreases. Does she visit her on weekend trips? Hugely increases.

Granted, this isn't fool proof, but it certainly will be more accurate than just spouting AWALT after a woman cheats on you. I'm not suggesting that you should freak out if your SDL increases either. That will just lower your SMV and raise the SDL. But it would be a good indicator that it is time to start divesting yourself emotionally and prepping new plates or LTRs. Or if you are hoping to ONS, trying to gauge these variables will help you predict your likelihood of success.

Lessons Learned

AWALT is not predictive. It is reactive. Trying to understand the variables that lead to her sexual deviance likelihood will help you focus your energy on women who are more likely to pay off for LTRs and ONS. This is not meant to discourage people from pursuing women who are a greater challenge, but if you have a HB9 in the proper context with low risk to her hamster, she might take less effort than the HB7 who is in a bad context with high risk.