Define comparable groups
Classify rest opportunities, crew role, nap status, and flight timepoints before making a comparison.
CASE STUDY 06 / MODELING
Comparing rest patterns while keeping subgroup size and uncertainty visible.
How do fatigue, sleepiness, sleep, and cognitive measures vary across rest schedules and pre-flight nap groups?
The analysis classifies first, middle, second, and split-break patterns across four routes, separating flying and relief crew and examining multiple measurement timepoints.
THE STORY IN PLAIN LANGUAGE
Operational groups differ in rest opportunities, crew roles, and measurement timing. The analysis moves from those definitions to subgroup availability, visual comparisons, and effect-size estimates so the size and uncertainty of a pattern can be understood together.
The stack follows the analytical task: prepare the data, fit or apply the method, check the result, and communicate the output.
See how the libraries connect to the wider portfolio →THE PROJECT, STEP BY STEP
Classify rest opportunities, crew role, nap status, and flight timepoints before making a comparison.
Produce subgroup counts and complete-case availability tables so sparse comparisons are visible.
Use timepoint plots, Welch comparisons, confidence intervals, and effect-size estimates for observational patterns.
THE TECHNICAL CASE
Operational subgroup comparisons need careful definitions and visible sample availability. The work connects rest schedules and pre-flight nap patterns with fatigue, sleepiness, sleep, and cognitive-performance summaries.
The reports distinguish first, middle, second, and split-break patterns and separate flying from relief crew across four routes. The same label must represent comparable timing before a pooled contrast is interpretable.
Subgroup counts and complete-case availability tables clarify which measurements enter each comparison. Repeated timepoints can have different denominators even within the same operational group.
The implemented notebooks use Welch comparisons, confidence intervals, and effect-size estimates including Cohen’s d. Welch’s procedure relaxes equal-variance assumptions for a two-group mean comparison but does not solve confounding or repeated-observation dependence.
Plots summarize outcomes at flight and rest timepoints. A start-break measurement and a top-of-descent measurement answer different questions, so the subset used for a test must match the label in the report.
Observed group difference = mean(group A) − mean(group B)
A difference is an observational association unless the design supports a causal interpretation. Its uncertainty and practical scale matter alongside its p-value.
EXPLORE THE METHOD
Synthetic differences and 95% intervals illustrate precision. They are not findings about actual nap or rest groups.
QUALITY OF THE EVIDENCE
Check crew role, break type, route, nap status, and timepoint before comparing records.
Display usable outcome counts rather than implying all trip records contribute to every endpoint.
Treat a broad set of subgroup/timepoint comparisons as exploratory unless a confirmatory plan specifies the contrasts.
Do not attribute improved performance to naps or claim an optimized operational schedule from observational comparisons alone.
FOR THE TECHNICAL CONVERSATION
An interviewer can probe repeated-measures dependence, multiple comparisons, confounding by crew role or route, and how to present an effect size when subgroup estimates are imprecise.
WHAT IT DEMONSTRATES
The reports provide interpretable subgroup comparisons and visual summaries for research discussion.