Fast miners are more efficient at reporting their work, that is, they have less work go "unreported". Slower miners are less efficient at reporting their work, because the interruption of new blocks makes a larger percentage of their work go unrecognized. They will have been working longer without finding a share at block change.
Result: no change to overall pool profit. The effect is of the distribution if rewards.
Look forward to your simulations...
but.. i think the argument is invalid.
Say the duration to the interruption is 20 seconds.
A 100 GH/s miner will have exactly 10x the odds of finding a share than 10 GH/s miner. irrespective of the share difficulty. Over time its the same distribution of rewards.
The argument sounds like saying : Pools using diff 1 shares is unfair, because I have done many hashes and didnt find a single diff 1 hash to submit. The work was done and went unrecognized.
I am pretty sure when you do the simulation, you will find that over time, at any difficulty, the 100GH/s miner would have submitted 10x of what 10 GH/s miner would have.
Going by h2odysee suggestion, try this. 2 processes generating random numbers between 1 and 1000000. Process A generates 1000 randoms a second, B does 10000 / sec. Log the output in one place if the number is 100 and another place if its below 10. run the processes many times for 10 second intervals.... im pretty sure both A and B will have similar ratio for the 2 difficulties... over time... i.e. B's ratio will be more consistent than A's but over time itll be the same.