Just because it didn't die doesn't make your narrative correct.
Also the sample size is too small to be confident about anything.
Your previous 80 DLI application:
What is likely occuring is called photoinhibition - light-enduced reduction of photosynthesis. The plant merely adapted to a harsh environment.
If you don't increase grams per sq ft while dumping 2-3x the amount of light and watts for this experiement, then it's just light inhibition. This is where the small sample size still makes whatever you 'learn' far from fact / far from proven. Genetic variety is already a wide range... a shitty pheno might only get 30g/sq ft. a really good pheno might hit 70g/sq ft and that's with ambient CO2 conditions. Anything that falls in that general range will be impossible to discern from normal volatility.
The 'correct' DLI relative to local variables is all you need - whether provided over 12h or 24h at the end (assuming you don't give 24h long enough for a re-vege). if you try to give more DLI it'll just adapt to it and reduce the amount of photosynthesis taking place so it doesn't cannibalize itself. Pigment in leaves will be less concentrated whether your naked eye can see it or not.
1 week of 24h may not cause a revege, but there's no circumventing the limiting factor of CO2 intake. Can't manifest plant mass from nothing - law of conservation of mass applies. We proved spontaneous manifestation as 'bro science' back in the 1800s thanks to groundwork by Pasteur.
all you will do is waste a lot of electricity for anything above and beyond what the 'max' DLI is for your local variables - temp, rh, amtospheric co2. On top of that, risk stem elongation due to a re-vege. What is th emeasureable benefit? If you can't compare to a control group, you've proven nothing.