In economics, total-factor productivity (TFP), also called multi-factor productivity, is usually measured as the ratio of aggregate output (e.g., GDP) to aggregate inputs.1 Under some simplifications about the production technology, growth in TFP becomes the portion of growth in output not explained by growth in traditionally measured inputs of labour and capital used in production.
How can factors "not explained by growth in traditionally measured inputs of labour and capital" come to be described as "total"? Etymology, please. It would seem like "not explained" implies "complements" and "complementary" so CFP sounds better than TFP.
Addendum... It turns out that TFP has another name... the "Solow residual". A quote from the Economist on 2022 May 7.
Statistical techniques that try to measure the concept of “knowledge” typically bundle all the variation in growth that cannot be explained by changes in the workforce or investment into the black box. Hence TFP’s other, less flattering name—the “Solow residual”. Rather than a reliable metric of society’s level of knowledge, TFP so far seems to remain, in the words of a Solow critic, a “measure of our ignorance”.