MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Estimating Labor Production Rates for Industrial Construction Activities

2001· article· en· W2094757630 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Construction Engineering and Management · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicManufacturing Process and Optimization
Canadian institutionsPCL Construction (Canada)University of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial neural networkMultiplier (economics)Production (economics)EstimatorIndustrial production indexProduction rateComputer scienceIndex (typography)Industrial engineeringEconometricsEngineeringOperations researchStatisticsArtificial intelligenceEconomicsMathematicsMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper discusses an approach based on artificial neural networks that enables an estimator to produce accurate labor production rates (labor/unit) for industrial construction tasks such as welding and pipe installation. The paper first reviews factors that were found to affect labor production rates on industrial construction tasks, current estimating practices and their limitations, and the process followed in collecting historical production rates. An artificial neural network model is then described. The model is composed of a two-stage artificial neural network, which is used to predict an efficiency multiplier (an index) based on input factors identified by the user. The multiplier is then used to adjust an average production rate given in man-hours/unit for use on a specific project. Estimates of production rates from the new approach are compared to the existing estimating practices and conclusions are presented.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.306
Threshold uncertainty score0.442

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.204 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it