MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Efficient Repetitive Scheduling for High-Rise Construction

2008· article· en· W2141739264 on OpenAlexaff
Tarek Hegazy, Ehab Kamarah

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Construction Engineering and Management · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicResource-Constrained Project Scheduling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceScheduling (production processes)ScheduleOperations researchIndustrial engineeringDistributed computingMathematical optimizationReal-time computingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new scheduling and cost optimization model for high-rise construction is presented in this paper. The model has been formulated with a unique representation of the activities that form the building’s structural core, which need to be dealt with carefully to avoid scheduling errors. In addition, the model has been formulated incorporating: (1) the logical relationships within each floor and among floors of varying sizes; (2) work continuity and crew synchronization; (3) optional estimates and seasonal productivity factors; (4) prespecified deadline, work interruptions, and resource constraints; and (5) a genetic algorithms-based cost optimization that determines the combination of construction methods, number of crews, and work interruptions that meet schedule constraints. A computer prototype was then developed to demonstrate the model’s usefulness on a case study high-rise project. The model is useful to both researchers and practitioners as it better suits the environment of high-rise construction, avoids scheduling errors, optimizes cost, and provides a legible presentation of resource assignments and progress data.

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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations71
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Construction Engineering and ManagementSame topicResource-Constrained Project SchedulingFrench-language works237,207