coefficient of X n.
Hackish speech makes heavy use of pseudo-mathematical
metaphors. Four particularly important ones involve the terms
`coefficient', `factor', `index of X', and `quotient'. They are
often loosely applied to things you cannot really be quantitative
about, but there are subtle distinctions among them that convey
information about the way the speaker mentally models whatever he
or she is describing.
`Foo factor' and `foo quotient' tend to describe something for
which the issue is one of presence or absence. The canonical
example is fudge factor.
It's not important how much you're fudging; the term simply
acknowledges that some fudging is needed. You might talk of
liking a movie for its silliness factor. Quotient tends to imply
that the property is a ratio of two opposing factors: "I would
have won except for my luck quotient." This could also be "I
would have won except for the luck factor", but using
quotient emphasizes that it was bad luck overpowering
good luck (or someone else's good luck overpowering your
own).
`Foo index' and `coefficient of foo' both tend to imply that
foo is, if not strictly measurable, at least something that can
be larger or smaller. Thus, you might refer to a paper or person
as having a `high bogosity index', whereas you would be less
likely to speak of a `high bogosity factor'. `Foo index' suggests
that foo is a condensation of many quantities, as in the mundane
cost-of-living index; `coefficient of foo' suggests that foo is a
fundamental quantity, as in a coefficient of friction. The choice
between these terms is often one of personal preference; e.g.,
some people might feel that bogosity is a fundamental attribute
and thus say `coefficient of bogosity', whereas others might feel
it is a combination of factors and thus say `bogosity index'.