MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2800225083 · doi:10.7939/r3154dt9g

Developing and Optimizing Context-Specific and Universal Construction Labour Productivity Models

2015· article· en· W2800225083 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Abraham Assefa Tsehayae

Notice bibliographique

RevueUniversity of Alberta Library · 2015
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueBIM and Construction Integration
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésProductivityContext (archaeology)Computer scienceEconomicsRisk analysis (engineering)Labour economicsBusinessEconomic growthGeology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Construction labour productivity (CLP) significantly influences the profitability of construction companies; however, CLP exhibits the highest variability among project resources and is a major source of project risk. The construction industry is thus constantly searching for ways to improve labour productivity. Unfortunately, despite long-term, continued research and industry practice, predicting and improving CLP remains a challenge. Previous productivity studies mainly focus on factor and activity models, using factor models to model productivity with context-specific influencing parameters (factors and practices), and activity models to model the relationship between productivity and work sampling proportions (WSP). However, modeling CLP remains a challenge as for a given context, the complex impact of the multiple subjective and objective variables, made up of critical factors, practices, and WSP; have to be considered simultaneously, while maintaining a high accuracy and interpretability in developed models. To address these challenges, this thesis presents advanced frameworks for the development of a series of interpretable and accurate fuzzy inference based context-specific CLP models, which are then abstracted to develop the universal CLP models, and facilitate a better understanding of the variables that influence CLP. The development of the CLP models included identifying, classifying, quantifying, and documenting the variables influencing CLP. By analyzing existing literature in the field of CLP analysis and modeling, the influencing variables, made up of 169 parameters and 7 work sampling categories, were identified and quantified. The research conducted extensive field data collection from 11 construction projects across Alberta, Canada, spanning over a time period of 29-months; and documented information using factor survey, factors and practices documentation, work sampling studies, foreman delay surveys, craftsman questionnaires, and productivity measurements. First, the research identified the key variables influencing CLP using expert and data-driven approaches in order to reduce the large feature space of the variables. Next, the role of work sampling proportions in CLP modeling was formulated by testing the fundamental assumption of activity models—that CLP improves if more time is spent on direct work activities—and analysis results showed that using work sampling proportions alone, it is not possible to accurately predict CLP. Thus, a system-based modeling framework to incorporate work sampling proportions with factors and practices leading to improved CLP modeling and analysis was developed. Then, an operational definition of context for CLP modeling was formulated and associated context attributes were developed, based on the 5W1H (Who, What, Where, When, Why, and How) question and answers approach, and employed together with the system-based CLP modeling framework for the development of a series of context-specific CLP models after combining projects sharing similar contexts. Using a hybrid fuzzy multi-objective optimization framework, the learning ability of the developed fuzzy inference system CLP models was improved. Finally, a context adaptation framework for transferring knowledge among contexts was developed using linear and non-linear adaptation on the membership functions of the context-specific fuzzy CLP models, and a framework for developing universal CLP models is established. The main contributions of this research to the state of art of CLP modeling and analysis are: (1) evaluation of the usefulness of relying on work sampling proportions like direct work or tool time to predict CLP, (2) development of a system model framework for CLP, which provides a better understanding of CLP and the variables influencing CLP, (3) addressing the challenges faced in past CLP models by developing and optimizing fuzzy inference CLP models, (4) presenting an operational definition of context for CLP modeling for characterizing and classifying construction projects and assisting in the process of grouping similar projects for more accurate context-specific CLP model development, and (5) developing frameworks for adaptation and abstraction of context-specific CLP models. The developed frameworks and findings of this study are of a value to researchers and industry practitioners and provide a better understanding of CLP, the variables influencing CLP, and how work-study methods like work sampling can be integrated to provide an accurate CLP analysis tool.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Simulation ou modélisation · Signal consensuel: Simulation ou modélisation
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,045
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,090

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,005
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0020,001
Science ouverte0,0020,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,015
Tête enseignante GPT0,159
Écart entre enseignants0,144 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSimulation ou modélisation
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations8
Publié2015
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueUniversity of Alberta LibraryMême sujetBIM and Construction IntegrationTravaux en français237 207