MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Genetic Optimization for Dynamic Project Control

2003· article· en· W2127396715 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 · 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.

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 score0.711
Threshold uncertainty score0.333

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 head0.179
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