Unsure, but what you want to accomplish that way?
CI=1 means that client not allowing to create new clashes (and removing all existing one) when shake/wiggle (afik).
So higher CI will do what? Make more distances between structures?

Wiggle tries to optimize an error function that takes into account a number of variables, including clashing. I think this would let us "mess" with the error function to good effect. if we could mess with the importance of other variables (voids, hydrophobe exposure, etc) too, I think that would also be helpful.

My thinking is that CI = 1 is the normal setting. If we can go from CI = 0 to CI = 2 then we are exploring from both sides of the clashing importance. What it will achieve I don't know, but I hope something good will come of it.

K, maybe s1 form dev team told us what is even possible :)
S1 told, that lowering CI is like "ignore physics".

I think C > 1 would be a tool to help stir thing up. The gammer could probably tell it the result looks better and persure it; or go back if it looks worse.

I think 'ignoring physics' is why fold it has been so successful ... strange things get tried that would make the biochemist cringe.

The final best valid state would still be C=1.

With any respectable IDE the code should take moments to create ... at least a few days for the team to proof it (beat on it, find errors, debug, polish).

I'll bring this up with the scientists to see if this would be useful with how Rosetta handles clashing importance values.