Study Analysis¶
Use this page when you already have multiple run folders and need one defensible summary for review, comparison, or presentation.
Read before: Scientific Workflow if you have not created a study bundle yet.
Read next: Evidence Base when you need to explain what the metrics mean.
What The Analyzer Produces¶
iints analyze scans run folders with results.csv and summarizes:
- mean time in range and out-of-range exposure
- severe hypo and hyper exposure
- supervisor interventions
- mean glucose and coefficient of variation
- descriptive statistics including standard deviation and 95% confidence intervals
- baseline comparisons when available
- certification splits when certification JSON exists
- failure analysis for worst runs, severe hypo, and early termination
- optional plausibility deltas against CareLink-style real-world metrics
Fastest Useful Flow¶
for seed in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10; do
iints run-full \
--algo algorithms/example_algorithm.py \
--seed "$seed" \
--duration 1440 \
--output-dir "results/study/run_$seed"
done
iints analyze results/study \
--output-json results/study_summary.json \
--output-markdown results/study_summary.md \
--output-csv results/evidence_table.csv \
--output-evidence-markdown results/evidence_table.md
Common Follow-Up Commands¶
Compare two study arms¶
iints compare-study results/study_certified results/study_uncertified \
--output-json results/study_comparison.json \
--output-markdown results/study_comparison.md
Build a poster¶
iints poster-study results/study_summary.json \
--output-path results/study_poster.png
Start from a written protocol¶
iints study-protocol --output-dir results/study_protocol
iints run-study --experiment results/study_protocol/study_experiment.yaml
Create a controlled corrupted arm¶
iints data corrupt-for-study data/demo/diabetes_cgm.csv \
--output-csv data/demo/diabetes_cgm_corrupted.csv \
--mode timestamp_shift \
--mode missing_block \
--mode glucose_spikes
Output Files¶
study_summary.json: machine-readable aggregate summarystudy_summary.md: readable narrative summaryevidence_table.csv: poster- and paper-ready rowsevidence_table.md: markdown table for docs or slidesexternal_validation: optional real-world plausibility deltasfailure_analysis: worst runs and safety-heavy casesaggregate_stats: descriptive statistics and confidence intervals
Each run entry records:
- run id
- scenario
- algorithm
- TIR 70-180
- supervisor interventions
- certification grade
- baseline delta when available
- quality badges such as
strong_tir,stable_variability, orsupervisor_heavy
Official Study Pack¶
iints scenarios export-study-pack --output-dir scenarios/study_pack
This writes reusable scenario JSON files, a manifest with the recommended seed list, and a short README with the batch pattern.
Why This Matters¶
Study analysis is the step that turns “we ran the simulator” into evidence you can defend:
- repeated-run performance rather than one cherry-picked trace
- explicit safety behavior across scenarios
- candidate-versus-baseline comparison
- certified-versus-uncertified comparison when both exist
- a written study protocol instead of an undocumented benchmark
Where To Go Next¶
| If you want to... | Continue with |
|---|---|
| build the study from scratch | Scientific Workflow |
| certify or corrupt data deliberately | MDMP Quickstart |
| create presentation assets | Booth Demo Guide |
| explain source claims | Evidence Base |