MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Genetic Optimization for Dynamic Project Control

2003· article· en· W2127396715 on OpenAlexaff
Tarek Hegazy, Kevin Petzold

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Construction Engineering and Management · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUSableScheduleComputer scienceEarned value managementCash flowScheduling (production processes)Resource levelingGenetic algorithmProject managementOperations researchProject planningIndustrial engineeringMathematical optimizationSystems engineeringEngineeringOperations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a comprehensive model for cost optimization and dynamic project control. The model incorporates an integrated formulation for estimating, scheduling, resource management, and cash-flow analysis. The basic premise of the model is to allocate optional construction methods for each activity, varying from cheap and lengthy to expensive and short. Using a genetic algorithms procedure for total cost optimization, the model considers the actual progress of activities and optimizes the schedule of remaining ones (by determining the best combination of construction methods) so that project constraints are respected. The model, as such, is usable not only at the planning stage but also during construction. A description of the model and its application on an example project are provided in this paper. In addition, the paper introduces the recently emerged critical chain method for project control and describes an effort to incorporate some of its features into the earned-value analysis used in the proposed model.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.179
Teacher spread0.176 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations69
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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