we're still missing the hutchens index [1](https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-4896(00)00070-6), [2](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2354.2004.00136.x). <img width="921" height="686" alt="Image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/da932834-d938-413a-ba37-0df548833f2a" /> <img width="889" height="104" alt="Image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/0bda22ee-6dc3-47f6-871d-948b9d5c912c" /> (also related to #239 as it's one of the three indices in the reardon paper)
we're still missing the hutchens index 1, 2.
(also related to #239 as it's one of the three indices in the reardon paper)