Identification and comparative analysis of key parameters influencing construction labour productivity in building and industrial projects
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parameters (factors and practices) influencing construction labour productivity are multi-faceted and project dependent. A proven measurement scheme and modeling approach to investigate the effect of parameters on construction labour productivity has not yet been developed. This study identifies key parameters influencing labour productivity using context-sensitive surveys that reveal contextual differences between key parameters. The study relies on data collected through 141 surveys administered to project management and trade respondents from six Canadian projects in either of two contexts: building and industrial. Analysis revealed the top parameters influencing labour productivity on building and industrial projects. Consensus between project management and trade level respondents regarding parameters’ effects within and between contexts was evaluated using statistical analysis; results indicated some differences in perception. The methodology and findings from this paper are useful for identifying enablers of and barriers to better productivity, developing context-sensitive labour productivity models for use in analysis, and developing productivity improvement strategies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it