I would have assumed that to be a 0/1 decision, too: in balance (meeting a given standard) and out of balance (deviation from given standard) with the countermeasures being taken according to the degree of the deviation from the goal as measured by the sensors.
like (this is no coding, of course, just a sumup of the general idea) :
goal = 0° deviation from the vertical
if sensorinput = not 0°, then correct by (-1) x (sensorinput)
if sensorinput = 0° = goal, then don't correct
That would make a 0/1 decision (meeting goal or not meeting goal). And the correction to make would be the same force the sensors indicate, but in the opposite direction.
As far as I can see, we have different opinions on whether a washing machine's state of balance is relative or absolute. I would have thought it to be absolute, it only changes really quickly which is a challenge for every sensor. If I understand you correctly, you consider the machine's movements rather like the position of electrons in Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle?
(That's something that even as a student I felt sceptical about. If you were fast enough to watch an electron's course and anything that might influence its speed (impuls), shouldn't you be able to predict its movement and position at any given time? Doesn't it just appear to be unpredictable because we are too slow to watch it properly? I'm looking forward to future developments. Maybe one day our sensors will be fast enough after all.)