[12 piece bucket]

Compensations may infer a standard "Uncompensated Pattern". But, I think that if we look to the component level, we can compare one procedure to another on the basis of their relative simplicity, reliability, and compatibility with other components.

A good example of this would be to compare 10-18-A to 10-18-B. 10-18-A appears to be the more simple procedure.

Another example is Plane Shifting. Procedurally, Single Shift is more direct than a Double or Triple Shift.

I would say that a pattern is efficient in how it is complicit to 1-L . . . . rather than a component listing. Much of this starting with selected plane . . . components to match the plane angle to a large degree.