MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2155647581 · doi:10.1139/l04-029

Conceptual cost estimation of building projects with regression analysis and neural networks

2004· article· en· W2155647581 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCost estimateArtificial neural networkEstimationRegression analysisComputer scienceScope (computer science)RegressionRange (aeronautics)Conceptual modelLinear regressionConceptual designMachine learningData miningEconometricsStatisticsEngineeringMathematicsSystems engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conceptual cost estimates play a crucial role in initial project decisions, although scope is not finalized and very limited design information is available during early project stages. In this paper, the advantages and disadvantages of the current conceptual cost estimation methods are discussed and the use of regression, neural network, and range estimation techniques for conceptual cost estimation of building projects are presented. Historical cost data of continuing care retirement community projects were compiled to develop regression and neural network models. Three linear regression models were considered to identify the significant variables affecting project cost. Two neural network models were developed to examine the possible need for nonlinear or interaction terms in the regression model. Prediction intervals were constructed for the regression model to quantify the level of uncertainty for the estimates. Advantages of simultaneous use of regression analysis, neural networks, and range estimation for conceptual cost estimating are discussed.Key words: conceptual cost estimation, regression analysis, neural networks, range estimation.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.472
Threshold uncertainty score0.422

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.183 · 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