Before we proceed, confirm the intended use.
Is this ERCOT test being used only to evaluate an observable public claim about grid burden under heat/population normalization, or is it being used to support a pre-decided thesis that data centers, AI compute, crypto mining, or “compute banks” are causing Texas grid stress?
If the second, we stop or redesign. That would be an inappropriate use of the tool at this stage.
This framework can detect candidate sustained divergent drift in observable grid burden. It cannot assign causation to data centers, AI, crypto, industrial load, population growth, weather, market design, policy, or any actor without separate attribution evidence.
So please state the use clearly:
Allowed use: Level 1 detection only: does normalized ERCOT burden drift from baseline?
Not allowed use: using the drift test as evidence that compute/data centers caused the drift.
Separate future use: if drift survives controls, then we may design an attribution audit with separate load-growth, interconnection, industrial demand, crypto/data-center, and market data.
Until that is clear, do not compute or interpret the ERCOT result.