Figures showing sweeps across TGF funding scenarios

[tbhallett]

@mehrhos request that the MCP can produce graphs of this format. This PR brings in the associated scripts.

Fixes #30

[tbhallett]

So far, we have done the ones for the LHS:

To do

• [x] RHS plots
• [x] xtick labels to show scenarios
• [x] regeneration with all the scenarios

[tbhallett]

from @mehrhos :

Dear Tim and Mikaela,

Many thanks for this. I wanted to comment on this in git, but I was not sure how to do it. So I am doing it here, sorry for that. I have two additional thoughts/suggestions for our discussion in 11am meeting:

I think it would be useful to add “with innovation” and “including unallocated” to approach B as additional data points in these graphs (e.g. below). The reason is that there is a higher chance that we end up choosing approach B, and it would be useful to see the impact of innovation and including unallocated to approach B.

I recall from last time that we wanted to know what would be the impact of these choices on % reduction on incidence, mortality, cases-infections and deaths from baseline to the last year of IC (i.e. from 2023 to 2029). I wonder if we could have a version of these graphs where y axis is that metric, i.e. showing the ratio of % reduction from 2023 to 2029 according to IC vs. same % according to GP, e.g. with 18bn GF funding applying approach B including unallocated and adjusting for innovation, we would reduce number of deaths from 2023 to 2029 by 60% compared to 80% in GP, so the % impact achieved is 60% / 80% = 75%.

Best, Mehran

Will add those in Yes, can create variant of these plots for that metric too.

Ps. Replying to the notification emails will automatically put the message onto the ‘conversation’ on the website.