3.
Results
3.1 Model Performance Analysis
3.1.1 Overall Model Metrics
1. Primary Model (XGBoost)
– R² Score: 0.83 ±0.02
– Mean Absolute Error: 58.4 points
– Root Mean Square Error: 87.2 points
– Cross-validation stability: ±0.03
2. Comparative Model Performance
Model R² MAE RMSE
-----------------------------------------
XGBoost 0.83 58.4 87.2
Random Forest 0.79 62.8 91.5
SVR 0.71 75.3 103.8
Neural Network 0.75 68.9 96.4
3.1.2 Category-Specific Performance
1. 10k COTS Division
– R² = 0.85
– Key predictors:
• Build quality (31%)
• Design documentation (28%)
• Flight performance (22%)
2. 30k COTS Division
– R² = 0.81
– Key predictors:
• Technical report (33%)
• Flight performance (29%)
• Design quality (25%)
3. SRAD Categories
Category R² Key Predictors
----------------------------------
10k SRAD 0.79 Innovation (35%)
Testing (30%)
Documentation (25%)
30k SRAD 0.76 Testing (38%)
Innovation (32%)
Safety (20%)
3.2 Feature Importance Analysis
3.2.1 Technical Factors
1. Design Quality (27% overall importance)
Component Weight
---------------------------------
CAD Documentation 32%
Analysis Depth 28%
Innovation 22%
Safety Considerations 18%
2. Build Quality (25% overall importance)
Component Weight
---------------------------------
Construction Precision 35%
Integration Quality 30%
Quality Control 20%
Finish & Aesthetics 15%
3. Technical Report (18% overall importance)
– Documentation completeness: 40%
– Analysis quality: 35%
– Test results: 25%
3.2.2 Performance Metrics
1. Flight Performance (15%)
Metric Success Rate
---------------------------------
Altitude Accuracy ±2%: 85% success
±5%: 92% success
±10%: 97% success
Recovery Success Full: 78%
Partial: 15%
Failure: 7%
2. Administrative Components (15%)
Component Impact on Score
---------------------------------
Progress Updates +15% average
Documentation +12% average
Penalty Avoidance +8% average
3.3 Pattern Analysis
3.3.1 Success Patterns by Category
1. COTS Categories
Success Factor Correlation
---------------------------------
Testing Completeness 0.82
Documentation 0.78
Integration Quality 0.75
Weather Planning 0.70
2. SRAD Categories
Success Factor Correlation
---------------------------------
Innovation 0.85
Testing Rigor 0.83
Safety Margins 0.80
Documentation 0.76
3.3.2 Temporal Trends
1. Year-over-Year Analysis
Year Avg Score Top Factors
---------------------------------
2024 785.3 Documentation
2023 762.8 Testing
2022 744.1 Innovation
2021 738.9 Safety
2020 721.5 Integration
2. Evolution of Success Factors
– Increasing importance of documentation
– Growing emphasis on testing
– Rising safety requirements
– Enhanced innovation expectations
4. Discussion
4.1 Key Findings Interpretation
4.1.1 Technical Excellence Impact
1. Design and Build Quality
– Teams in top quartile for both metrics:
• 3.2x more likely for top-10 finish
• 2.8x higher flight success rate
• 2.5x better score consistency
2. Innovation vs. Reliability
Approach Success Rate Risk Level
-----------------------------------------
Conservative 82% Low
Balanced 78% Medium
Innovative 68% High
4.1.2 Documentation Effectiveness
1. Correlation Analysis
Documentation Type Impact
-----------------------------------------
Regular Updates +23% average score
Detailed Testing +18% average score
Design Reviews +15% average score
Post-Flight +12% average score
2. Timeline Impact
Milestone Optimal Timing
-----------------------------------------
Design Freeze T-4 months
Testing Complete T-2 months
Documentation Weekly minimum
Final Review T-2 weeks
[Continued in Part 4 with Practical Implications and Conclusions…]