MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Graphical Approach for Manpower Planning in Infrastructure Networks

2005· article· en· W2122351176 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed Elhakeem, Tarek Hegazy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Construction Engineering and Management · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUSableComputer scienceScheduling (production processes)Operations researchEngineeringOperations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Infrastructure networks such as highways and pipelines have recently been at the center of attention for contractors and owner organizations. Due to their large size and their repetitive/distributed nature, construction and/or maintenance operations for such networks become complex tasks that require huge resources, particularly manpower. In order to provide a transparent tool for quick manpower planning and sensitivity analysis, a graphical approach (using nomographs) is introduced in this paper. The nomographs encode the mathematical formulation, and the results of many optimization experiments, of a distributed model for scheduling large projects with multiple sites. Accordingly, the nomographs can be readily utilized by practitioners to estimate the manpower needed to meet a predefined deadline, under anticipated network-level risks due to unfavorable site conditions. Details on the development of the nomographs are presented in the paper along with an example to demonstrate their usefulness for supporting manpower planning decisions and for what-if analysis. The nomographs also present researchers with a simple yet powerful approach to make research results readily usable by practitioners.

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 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.847
Threshold uncertainty score0.404

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Construction Engineering and ManagementSame topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207