Figures (10)  Tables (10)

    • Figure 1. 

      Digital framework.

    • Figure 2. 

      Distribution of circadian rhythms in crew members based on t-test cortisol concentration results.

    • Figure 3. 

      Trend of the navigator's states.

    • Figure 4. 

      Correlation field for yt.

    • Figure 5. 

      Correlation field for $ {y}_{T{{S}_{i}}} $.

    • Figure 6. 

      Relationship between heart rate and circadian rhythm weighting.

    • Figure 7. 

      Adaptation coefficient graph: (a) increasing trend; (b) decreasing trend.

    • Figure 8. 

      Model of the monitoring and forecasting system for the psychophysiological states of the ship navigator.

    • Figure 9. 

      Simulation of the state with predominance of fatigue.

    • Figure 10. 

      Simulation of the state with predominance of stress.

    • Rank 2nd Officer (a) Ch. Officer (b) Master (c) 2nd Officer (d) Ch. Officer (e) Ch. Officer (f) 2nd Officer (g)
      2nd Officer (a) − SZ NSZ NSZ NSZ NSZ NSZ
      Ch. Officer (b) SZ − NSZ UZ NSZ UZ SZ
      Master (c) NSZ NSZ − NSZ NSZ NSZ NSZ
      2nd Officer (d) NSZ UZ NSZ − NSZ NSZ NSZ
      Ch. Officer (e) NSZ NSZ NSZ NSZ − NSZ NSZ
      Ch. Officer (f) NSZ ЗНВ NSZ NSZ NSZ − NSZ
      2nd Officer (g) NSZ SZ NSZ NSZ NSZ NSZ −
      SZ - Significance Zone, NSZ - Non-significance Zone, UZ - Uncertainty Zone.

      Table 1. 

      Similarity of circadian rhythms according to the t-test.

    • Rank 2nd Officer (a) Ch. Officer (b) Master (c) 2nd Officer (d) Ch. Officer (e) Ch. Officer (f) 2nd Officer (g)
      R2 0.46 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.27 0.14 0.47
      F 83.9 11.3 22.14 17.05 20.53 7.9 86.25

      Table 2. 

      Coefficients of determination and F-test values for the experiment participants.

    • y t a b x y xy S ( x )2 S ( y )2 S ( x ) S ( y ) β A R R2 F
      2nd Officer (a) 2.0082 −0.00076 110 1.925 208.612 4070 0.00807 63.797 0.0898 −0.54 3.18% 0.54 0.291 90.009
      Ch. Officer (b) 1.8574 −0.00128 24 1.827 43.583 200 0.00796 14.142 0.0892 −0.203 3.96% 0.203 0.04131 2.025
      Master (c) 1.8737 0.00021 93.5 1.893 177.64 2,945.22 0.00487 54.27 0.0698 0.163 2.97% 0.163 0.026 5.082
      2nd Officer (d) 1.9049 0.0001 42 1.909 80.244 602 0.0682 24.536 0.0826 0.0299 3.45% 0.0299 0.000891 0.074
      Ch. Officer (e) 1.8935 0.000839 29 1.918 55.844 270.67 0.00839 16.452 0.0916 0.151 3.99% 0.151 0.0227 1.277
      Ch. Officer (f) 1.9618 −0.00117 24 1.934 46.176 200 0.00462 14.142 0.068 −0.243 2.57% 0.243 0.0592 2.957
      2nd Officer (g) 1.876 −5.603 92 1.871 171.989 28.52 0.00757 53.404 0.087 −0.0344 3.77% 0.0344 0.0012 0.217

      Table 3. 

      Estimated coefficients of the regression equation.

    • $ {{y}}_{{T}\cdot {{{S}}_{{i}}}} $ a b x y xy S(x)2 S(y)2 S(x) S(y) β A R R2 F
      2nd Officer (a) 1.688 0.00281 85.814 1.929 166.325 289.64 0.00419 17.019 0.0648 0.737 1.80% 0.737 0.544 260.765
      Ch. Officer (b) 1.7355 0.00144 68.551 1.834 126.039 214.08 0.0023 14.632 0.048 0.438 1.84% 0.438 0.192 11.176
      Master (c) 1.7504 0.00176 79.266 1.89 150.144 181.04 0.00202 13.455 0.0449 0.528 1.60% 0.528 0.279 71.941
      2nd Officer (d) 1.8459 0.000844 82.588 1.916 158.411 243.96 0.00101 15.619 0.0319 0.414 1.22% 0.414 0.171 17.153
      Ch. Officer (e) 1.7984 0.00149 84.596 1.925 163.337 341.19 0.00278 18.471 0.0527 0.523 2.03% 0.523 0.274 20.714
      Ch. Officer (f) 1.8777 0.000698 86.939 1.938 168.661 202.34 0.000672 14.225 0.0259 0.383 1.02% 0.383 0.147 8.072
      2nd Officer (g) 1.7222 0.00205 75.859 1.878 142.973 245.31 0.00286 15.662 0.0535 0.602 1.93% 0.602 0.363 104.097

      Table 4. 

      Estimated coefficients of the regression equation.

    • уc a b x y xy S(x)2 S(y)2 S(x) S(y) β A R R2 F
      2nd Officer (a) 1.882 0.1009 0.422 1.925 0.825 0.13 0.00807 0.363 0.0898 0.408 3.34% 0.408 0.167 43.811
      Ch. Officer (b) 1.7723 0.09586 0.556 1.827 1.048 0.14 0.00796 0.368 0.0892 0.395 3.76% 0.395 0.156 8.694
      Master (c) 1.8406 0.08972 0.588 1.893 1.125 0.14 0.00487 0.372 0.0698 0.478 2.42% 0.478 0.228 55.028
      2nd Officer (d) 1.8621 0.09085 0.518 1.909 1.001 0.12 0.00682 0.353 0.0826 0.389 3.13% 0.389 0.151 14.772
      Ch. Officer (e) 1.8419 0.125 0.607 1.918 1.182 0.14 0.00839 0.375 0.0916 0.512 3.44% 0.512 0.262 19.513
      Ch. Officer (f) 1.9095 0.056 0.433 1.934 0.847 0.15 0.00462 0.39 0.068 0.321 2.65% 0.321 0.103 5.411
      2nd Officer (g) 1.8072 0.1176 0.544 1.871 1.035 0.14 0.00757 0.38 0.087 0.514 3.23% 0.514 0.264 65.575

      Table 5. 

      Estimated coefficients of the regression equation.

    • y b0 b1 b2 b3 ԑ/Y A Se2 R2 F
      2nd Officer (a) 0.4845 −0.00203 1.611 0.9893 24.62 11.09% 28,537.288 0.6 108.993
      Ch. Officer (b) 0.4573 0.00149 −2.7542 1.0138 7.682 15.36% 8,453.35 0.44 12.048
      Master (c) 3.9055 −0.0129 −0.7099 0.9859 20.067 10.62% 24,409.705 0.3941 40.105
      2nd Officer (d) 1.3395 0.00619 1.4031 0.9713 20.796 14.34% 31,341.188 0.4841 44.108
      Ch. Officer (e) 0.3255 −0.00137 1.1833 0.9908 5.547 11.09% 8,470.239 0.511 16.024
      Ch. Officer (f) 33.9381 0.07623 12.8967 0.4795 8.787 15.42% 14,024.849 0.2788 6.831
      2nd Officer (g) −1.1437 −0.00045 −0.2643 1.0145 23.554 12.66% 28,909.747 0.4343 46.579

      Table 6. 

      Estimated coefficients of the multiple regression equation.

    • Rank A R2
      2nd Officer (a) 2.89 0.54
      Ch. Officer (b) 2.76 0.115
      Master (c) 2.38 0.303
      2nd Officer (d) 3.11 0.153
      Ch. Officer (e) 3.43 0.277
      Ch. Officer (f) 2.49 0.198
      2nd Officer (g) 2.92 0.379

      Table 7. 

      Assessment of the accuracy of fatigue-related factors' influence on the navigator's overall condition.

    • Rank ast bst A R2
      2nd Officer (a) 1.5385 0.000585 0.68 0.027
      Ch. Officer (b) 1.1455 0.00642 1.64 0.887
      Master (c) 0.9162 0.0082 3.24 0.757
      2nd Officer (d) 1.0212 0.00799 1.43 0.929
      Ch. Officer (e) 0.9576 0.00789 2.95 0.857
      Ch. Officer (f) 1.2038 0.00646 0.71 0.964
      2nd Officer (g) 0.2027 0.000766 6.04 0.05

      Table 8. 

      Estimated parameters of the relationship between overall condition and the stress component.

    • Rank R2 rX1 rX2 rX3 rX4 β1 β2 β3 β4
      2nd Officer (a) 0.6 −0.78 −0.54 0.031 −0.54 −0.75 −0.032 0.0506 0
      Ch. Officer (b) 0.33 0.073 0.073 0.39 −0.073 34.39 0 0.992 −35.13
      Master (c) 0.06 −0.075 0.18 0.21 0.18 −0.219 11.259 0.0004 −10.984
      2nd Officer (d) 0.12 0.0766 0.34 0.32 0.34 0.154 −40.99 0.506 40.83
      Ch. Officer (s) 0.1146 0.0462 0.3 0.33 0.3 0.0838 −0.197 0.51 1.2Е-5
      Ch. Officer (f) 0.08 0.11 0.241 0.240 0.242 0.385 −52.38 0.433 52.06
      2nd Officer (g) 0.9968 0.988 0.0685 0.054 0.0685 0.998 0.0096 −0.00419 0

      Table 9. 

      Indicators of the stress component's dependence on fatigue-associated factors.

    • Rank R2 rX1 rX2 rX3 rX4 rX5 β1 β2 β3 β4 β5
      2nd Officer (a) 0.946 −0.019 0.55 0.74 0.45 0.742 0.999 0.843 0.687 0.0048 0
      Ch. Officer (b) 0.985 0.96 0.34 0.34 0.57 0.42 0.94 −0.98 0 −0.02 1.263
      Master (c) 0.977 0.91 0.2 0.53 0.45 0.53 0.857 0.125 1.773 0.0176 −1.459
      2nd Officer (d) 0.968 0.98 0.083 0.41 0.39 0.41 0.95 −0.0247 6.333 −0.143 −6.102
      Ch. Officer (e) 0.975 0.96 0.12 0.52 0.51 0.52 0.886 0.0227 0.37 −0.131 2E-6
      Ch. Officer (f) 0.971 0.97 0.26 0.38 0.3 0.38 0.973 0.119 −3.05 0.0213 3.18
      2nd Officer (g) 0.372 0.035 −0.0347 0.6 0.42 0.6 −1.177 −1.172 0.606 −0.00488 2Е-6

      Table 10. 

      Indicators of the dependence of overall conditions on the stress component and fatigue-associated factors.