The purpose of this exploration was to determine which of the research items, 1 and 3, performed better under various conditions. Additionally, various methods of use were evaluated, methods 1 and 2. The dataset consists of a series of different types of exposures, 1, 2, 3, and 4. The dataset is visualized below based on the results of the statistical testing done.
In Exposure Type 1, the two research items are pictured below in Figure 1. Research Item 1 is on the left, and Research Item 3 is pictured on the left. In this exposure study, higher results are more desirable. Thus, Research Item 1 outperformed Research Item 3. This is reinforced by the two research items being statistically different, with Research Item 1's mean being higher.
In this exposure study, there was no statistical difference between the methods of use.
In Exposure Type 2, the research items are pictured below in Figure 2. Research Item 1 is purple and Research Item 3 is orange. In the figure, Research Item 1's peak is further to the right, and a higher value, than Research Item 3's peak. Again, in this exposure type, higher values are more desirable. So, Research Item 1 outperformed Research Item 3. This is again backed up with statistically different results, and a higher mean for Research Item 1.
In this exposure study, the different methods of use are pictured below in Figure 3. Method 1 is in purple, and Method 2 is in orange. In this evaluation, Method 1 outperformed Method 2. This is shown by a slightly shifted to the right peak. This was affirmed by the two methods of use being statistically different from one another, and Method 1 having a higher mean. In this case, a higher value, which are to the right in the graph, are more desirable.
In Exposure Type 3, there was no statistical difference between Research Item 1 and Research Item 3.
In this exposure study, the different methods of use are pictured below in Figure 4. Method 1 is in blue, and Method 2 is in orange. In this evaluation, higher values on the y axis are desirable, while the x axis shows the passage of time. Methods 1 and 2 are statistically different with Method 1 achieving a higher mean value. So, Method 1 outperforms Method 2.
In Exposure Type 4, the different Research Items, 1 and 3, are pictured below in Figure 5. Research Item 1 is blue, while Research Item 3 is orange. In this graph, higher values on the y axis are desirable, while the x axis shows the passage of time. The vertical lines on the graph show predicted dates of failure for Research Items 1 and 3 respectively. The Research Items 1 and 3 were statistically different from each other, with Research Item 1 lasting 25% longer than Research Item 3. However, the shaded areas on the graph represent uncertainty. The data for Research Item 1 varied much more than the data for Research Item 3, and is more unreliable. More data collection is necessary to make any official predictions on date of failure.
In this exposure study, there was no statistical difference between the methods of use, Method 1 and Method 2.
Research Item 1 outperformed Research Item 3 in three of the exposure studies. Method 1 for use outperformed Method 2 in one of the exposure studies. It would be my recommendation for Research Item 1 to be used with Method 1 to produce ideal results.
The point of creating Research Items 1 and 3 was explored in Exposure Type 4, with performance in the other exposure types being necessary for product functionality. Ultimately these research products did not meet the goals established at the onset of the project. However, Research Item 1 shows promise in a potential pathway to achieving the original goals. I would recommend further exploration into the decisions used to create Research Item 1 to determine if they can be further optimized for Exposure Type 4.