if white has good suji to block black and black doesn't have anything as natural then that is a big shape thing

All these sente aji exploitations must not distract from Black having the better local result because of having played one excess stone! Suppose your Katago assessment of White's 1.5 global lead is correct (we cannot know yet because you have not stated numbers of playouts), it means that locally Black should be better by 7 (equal to komi to compensate the one excess stone) - 1.5 = 5.5 points for excess territory and territoty potential of the local stones.

Yes, black has one more stone and his position should look more impressive. Also, if we are talking about KataGo evaluation then it would be about the total effect on the whole board. Black could need 7 points in total effect, something between 6 and 8 seems reasonable. But we don't have any real way of estimating the total effect precisely enough, except using a computer.

So I pointed out one reason, or plausible reason rather, why black's position isn't as overwhelming as it could look at first. I think there are other examples of aji and suji that could be invoked. One could also try tewari.

What I don't understand is how one would reach an accurate and precise enough estimate of the total effect in points without accurately treating the follow ups here.

One could of course say
total effect : e := -1.5
moves: t := -7
territory: s := +7
outside: x , it is an unknown
and say total effect is
-1.5 = e = t + s + x = x
therefore outside is -1.5 but then the question is why? "outside" here could also be "everything else", I suppose.

This is somewhat simplistic, probably not exactly what you have in mind. But I have another reason to not trust this kind of formulae in general, which is that the error cascades. If instead t = -6.5, s = 6.5 then x = -2.5, and this problem is magnified by every factor that you add to the simplistic model.

I do not understand this formula e = t + s + x
I guess e takes into account the komi but I do not see the komi in t + s + x. t looks like the komi but if I understand correctly 2t is the temperature of the board not the 2*komi value. Assume a game in which black player is known as far better than white player. In this case the players might agree to use for example a komi = 20. That does not change t but e is very different isn't it?
Could you clarify the meaning of each term of the formula?

I thought I did state the meanings.

If we want the formula to have the following form

e = t + s + x

then one could use these (hopefully clearer) definitions

e : estimate total effect of playing a move, when using katago to evaluate it is the residual of the evaluation before the move and after the move.

t : estimate cost of having played more moves in the position, if the value of one move is k, the count of black and white moves are cB and cW, then t = k * (cW - cB), note that it is negative when black played more moves. Note that k here could also be called a value of a half move, but not in the way we are counting moves in this definition

s : estimate territory score, that is the difference of black and white territory, if we say estimated black and white territory are tB and tW then s = tB - tW

x : in my case I called it outside or everything else, I think that is something some people call influence, basically it should estimate the residual e - (t + s), however you go about it.

I think you can estimate t, s and x to some degree directly, but if you prefer you could write

e = t + s + x = k * (cW - cB) + tB - tW + x

I'm not recommending this or similar formulas as a way to evaluate positions, I don't think it is easy to estimate the factors that go into such a model accurately enough. They may have other uses as models, for example to communicate about which factors that make up the whole. Communicating was my goal and it is often a good idea to avoid delving into every nitty-gritty detail when trying to communicate

I hope this clarifies something.

Thank you very much kvasir. I see more clearly your point. Now I understand that the komi used is not relevant here but I have another issue.
In your post https://lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?p=280063#p280063 you used the value
moves: t := -7
where I expected the value t := -14
Can you clarify why you use this value moves: t := -7 ?

It is a matter of convention.

The way I was counting moves was that if black played cB times and white cW times the difference of moves played (which I think is sometimes called the tally) is cB - cW. Let's say we have a position with a given t and then add a move for black in one case and for white in another:
tB = (cB + 1) - cW = t + 1
tW = cB - (cW + 1) = t - 1

Now tB - tW = 2 and just for the purpose of the original post I call that a two move difference, you could also say it is a one move difference. Depending on your choice you will have to scale other values but I found it natural in this case to work with what others may call half-moves.

For example you could say

t = K * (cW - cB) / 2

and use K = 2 * k.

Now that I think about it one must be careful to match this with the KataGo evaluation function Do you think I made a mistake in that regard? I was of course trying to make a conceptual point more than anything else but I think I matched it correctly, but there are at least two conventions.

I do not know if if you made a mistake but we can try to apply the formula to the following example.

I do not know if if you made a mistake but we can try to apply the formula to the following example.