That would be a nice outcome but whose responsibility would you make it to encourage it? Judges and juries should not grade on a curve. Prosecutors shouldn't waste taxpayer money chasing convictions that are out of reach. There's nobody with access to that calibration dimetion.

You do realize that what you're advocating for is for prosecutors to bring more cases to trial that previously they would have dropped.

And you think that benefits defendants how???

So prosecutors should bring you to court even if they think there isn’t evidence that you are guilty just to make the conviction rate go down? Today they would let you walk but you would want them to take you to court for a crime the prosecutor don’t even think there is enough evidence?

"When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure."

That is, yes, a ~50% conviction rate would be decent evidence that the Justice system is neither over-aggressive or under-aggressive in pursuing protection.

If it were an explicit goal, it could not serve that purpose any longer.