"Radiative forcing" (W/m^2) is the term to understand regarding global warming. There are lots of variables and in many areas of science are able to get a handle on how much increase or decrease there is or will be to radiative forcing (heat).
I'm no climatologist, but if I am understanding the paper referenced, it seems to be talking about the change in the net difference between the energy we get from the Sun and the amount we vent back into space. Currently about 0.3%.
All planets reach a balance in this, so they will all, eventually, be at 0% on average. For instance, an incoming comet will get hotter due to getting closer to the Sun. This causes the surface to got hotter and hotter until the radiation (IR) as able to dump all that incoming heat. But some of that energy is absorbed by the ice to become a gas, which vents and lowers that ratio of in and out energy, temporarily.
Thus, small variations are expected, especially for planets with dynamic oceans and atmospheres.
But the following got my attention regarding their confidence, or
range of confidence:
We show that independent satellite and in situ observations each yield statistically indistinguishable decadal increases in EEI from mid-2005 to mid-2019 of
0.50 plus or minus 0.47 W/m^2 decade (5%-95% confidence interval).
That energy range seems very large, so it is then a range of 0.03 to 0.97 watts/ sq. meter. [That is a standard deviation statistical method, so it may prove to be greater or lower still.]