Value –Based Maintenance Management Model for University Buildings in Malaysia-A Critical Review
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
The essence of building maintenance is to increase the service life of a building by delaying deterioration, decay and failure. Building maintenance must therefore be considered as a strategic process if the value of a building is to be sustained. Building maintenance management is a complex and multi-faceted thought process that involves planning, directing, controlling and organizing maintenance services for the sustenance of the value of a building. It entails making intricate decisions under complex algorithms, uncertainty and risks within organizational resources. The purpose of this paper is to propose an alternative maintenance management model for university buildings in Malaysia. The proposed model reflects current thinking on building maintenance management. A number of studies have investigated the maintenance management of university buildings in Malaysia; however, all the studies have observed maintenance management procedures that are corrective and condition based. Nonetheless, this is contributing to the spate of maintenance backlogs and the lack of value delivery to the stakeholders. Although the research specifically focused on university buildings, many public and private sector organizations face similar maintenance management problems. Therefore this research has broader applications. The outcome of this research is to come up with a prototype maintenance management model that can facilitate university institutions to carry out buildings maintenance management services that meet the expectations and perceptions of the stakeholders.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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