I am going to put some simulation results for hand evaluation in this section. This is a very difficult subject and some simulation is just for very specific situations. You must be very careful when interpreting the data. Extrapolation of the data is especially dangerous and could be completely wrong. 

One conclusion I have made in hand evaluation is that the most important adjustment is in duplication of values between you and your partner's hand. The only way you can get this information is from the bidding. This include opponents bidding. The more discipline your opponents are the more information their bid gives you.

I also recommend you to go to Thomas Andrew’s web site for many excellent discussions and data for hand evaluation. 

The length of a suit looks like the easiest subject. But it produces some data that I cannot explain using my bridge logic. 

Honor combination is very difficult to analyze. I have done a few special situations and before any conclusion can be drawn a lot more work needed to be done. 

High card point count system has been discussed extensively by Thomas Andrews in his web site. My result indicated A=6, K = 4 Q = 1.8 J=0.8 T=0.4 (for NT 9=0.2) is the best I found when simple numbers (<10) with one decimal places. There is a question of whether the Q is undervalued in double dummy analysis and if it is by how much. It is very possible A=6 K=4 Q=2 and J=1 is the best simple numbers with no fractions. Note that you cannot compare HCP with other point count systems that make adjustments with suit lengths. You have to use HCL (with long suit length) or HCLS (with long suit and short suit) when comparing with those system. In suit contracts I have found HCLS using simple A=4 K=3 Q=2 J=1 to be very good. You will gain more by adjusting HCLS counts base on the bidding then using some other more complicated point count system. A computer bidding point count systems using very complicated numbers may have 1 to 3% improvements over the simple HCLS system.