However, the problem is not acceleration capability but risk of yaw departure.
The two are inextricably linked. Accelerate, and the yaw departure risk disappears.
This is mainly a worry for min speed schedule takeoffs at low weights for aircraft which are Vmcg/Vmca limited. Hiccup once and you are in a world of hurt.
All multi-engine aircraft are Vmcg/Vmca limited. There are very few (if any) situations where an aircraft being used for training, with no payload and low-ish fuel (ie very light) NEEDS to be flown at, or anywhere near, limiting speeds. it's simple airmanship. I can't recall one transport category aircraft that I have flown, that REQUIRES you to fly at minimum speeds at light weights - they all allow you to maintain an achieved speed, as long as the required climb gradient is being maintained (and that is rarely more than 500'/min).
So I guess my point is, there is no need to ever go to the place you are describing. It's a theoretical exercise that only needs to be carried out in the sim.
V1 is NOT the latest speed for a stop decision, V1 is a GO speed, the difference is significant and critical.
Please explain the difference. You have a binary state of affairs, stopping or going. You are either doing one or the other. The speed at which you can no longer safely do one of them (probably) is called V1.
So what is your point, other than semantics?
For what it is worth, I always expect to stop until I hear V1, at which point I am absolutely going unless I cannot control the aircraft, or we have an uncontained fire.
Interesting development in the media...
Pilot deaths spark risk debate - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)