Forecasting Payments Made Under Construction Contracts: Payout Curves and Cash Management in the North Carolina Department of Transportation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Staff at the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) have close control over each highway construction project until the construction contract is let; thereafter, the contractor manages the pace of work, which dictates the flow of payments. These payments make up about one-third of all NCDOT expenditures, so reliable forecasts are important in programming and in cash management. With no other means to predict the pace of construction through the duration of the contract, NCDOT must rely on statistical analyses of past payments to forecast future payments to contractors. Dye Management Group, Inc., which was retained by NCDOT to implement cash management strategies at the department, designed two statistical models of payments to contractors: the first to estimate payments on individual contracts, or the “payout curve,” and the second to estimate total payments made under all contracts in a month. The parameters in both models were initially estimated with data from 4,128 payments made under 336 highway construction contracts completed between August 2000 and June 2002. The first model achieved an adjusted R2 of .93. Although it was useful to engineers in managing individual projects, the model required awkward specifications of seasonal effects to forecast aggregate cash flows. Seasonality was simply accommodated in the second model, which achieved an adjusted R2 of .92. Dye Management Group and NCDOT have operated the second model for more than 2 years and, with a database that has grown to more than 11,000 monthly payments, have consistently achieved mean absolute percentages of error under 10%.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.011 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".