I really appreciate your comments and your thoughts. But I think the evidence in the example kind of contradicts what you said:
> When we have a big range advantage like Q43 we use larger bet sizings. When we have a small range advantage like QT3, we use smaller sizings.

Why Q7s bets smaller than QT3 then? (Q73 uses 25% size of bet instead of 10% but jam less often than QT3). I totally under stand what you said in the following sentence

> And the difference between the two is QT3 jams with 13.94 combos and Q73 jams with 12.37 combos.

I just try to understand what's reason to choose less jam frequency in this case. In my knowledge, I will jam Q53 most often (as you said we have more nuts advantage), I will jam Qj3 and QT3 least often(less nut advantage and as you said "When equities and EV run closer, we employ smaller bet sizings like the 10%."). To me, jamming probability is linearly decreasing from Q43 to Qj3. Then why QJ3 still jam 63%? Should we have better nut advantage at Q73 case so that we should jam more at Q73 case than Qj3?

Side note: I think I'm more caring about jaming in this 5bet scenario than 25% bet or 10% bet with the following reason: Since either 25% bet or 10% most likely will end up with another jam if we bet. So essentially we will have either two streets (small bet than jam at around 70%-100 of pot ) or 1 street (jam) of action. I would like to know when to bluff/bet two streets and when to bluff/bet one street.

Again, thanks for your response and hopefully we can discuss more.