Construction knowledge discovery system using fuzzy approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most research works in simulating construction operations have predominantly focused on modeling and mistreated data preparation that is paramount for simulation. To prepare data for simulation process, a knowledge discovery system (KDS) is indispensable in extracting hidden knowledge from construction data sets. This knowledge is typically hard to obtain using traditional means, such as statistical analysis. The presented research develops, using fuzzy approach, a KDS to prepare, utilize, analyze, and extract the hidden patterns from construction data to predict work task durations. The KDS depends mainly on finding the relation between quantitative and qualitative variables, which affect the duration of construction operations and work tasks as well as prepare data for simulation modeling. It consists of two stages: data processing and mining. Data processing consists of cleaning, integrating, transforming, and selecting the appropriate knowledge. Data mining consists of selecting the factors that affect a construction operation, generating their fuzzy sets, defining fuzzy rule and models, developing a fuzzy knowledge base, and testing the effectiveness of this knowledge base in predicting work task durations. The developed KDS has been tested using a construction case study in which the results found satisfactory with an average validity percent of 92%. The developed system assists researchers and practitioners in utilizing historical construction data to extract knowledge that could not be obtained by traditional techniques and precisely predicting work task durations.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".