A preliminary study of the factors affecting the cost escalation of construction projects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An interview survey of Alberta-based construction contractors was conducted in July and August 1998. The purpose of this survey was to elicit information on the factors that cause unanticipated project cost escalation during construction, from the contractor's perspective. This paper presents the findings of this survey and a proposed method of modeling the factors identified. The majority of factors identified impact labour productivity, which is a major source of cost overruns. A combination of subjective, objective, and secondary indicators are used to measure these factors and to assess their impact on project performance. The main conclusion of this survey is that many of the factors affecting the cost of construction are evaluated in subjective and imprecise terms and are difficult to quantify. This paper presents a method of modeling these factors using fuzzy membership functions, which capture the imprecision and subjectivity associated with the measurement of these factors. It discusses a basis for the definition of these membership functions and a method of calibrating these functions to make them more widely applicable to suit different contexts. These membership functions are being incorporated in a set of expert rules, which reason about the factors affecting costs, their impact on the project, and the appropriate corrective actions. These expert rules are being developed as part of a fuzzy expert system for construction project monitoring and control. A method of calibrating membership functions to suit individual contexts is currently being developed, which would be a significant advancement in the area of fuzzy logic. Key words: construction, costs, expert systems, fuzzy logic, project control, survey.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".