MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163787508 · doi:10.1139/l11-025

Schematic cost estimating model for super tall buildings using a high-rise premium ratio

2011· article· en· W2163787508 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jong‐San Lee, Hyun‐Soo Lee, Moonseo Park

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSchematicCost estimateUnit costProductivityCost databaseComputer scienceIndustrial engineeringEngineeringEconomicsSystems engineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Super tall building construction involves considerable financial uncertainty due to its potentially low returns despite high investments. To reduce this financial risk, it is crucial to accurately estimate the schematic construction cost of such projects. However, traditional cost estimating practices (TCEP) are not effective at predicting the cost of schematic design phase design alternatives that involve the change in the number of building stories. To address these issues, this research proposes a schematic cost estimating model (SCEM). The SCEM estimates the schematic construction cost of super tall building alternatives using a simulation mechanism that considers variation in the number of building stories (i.e., ±5, ±10, ±15, ±20 stories). First, the limitations of the traditional practices are identified. Then, three pilot alternatives (i.e., one schematic design and two design alternatives) are designed and estimated in detail. Next, cost simulation mechanism is constructed based on the relationships between design scale, material quantity, unit cost rate, and construction cost. In addition, after determining which dominant factors affect construction cost when the number of building stories changes, the high-rise premium ratio and its theoretical framework are introduced. This ratio is used to identify the productivity ratios of super tall buildings and to simulate construction cost as the building design changes. Finally, the SCEM is validated through a case study of an actual super tall building. It is found that schematic construction cost increases as the unit cost rate rises due to a low productivity ratio in the case of a higher number of building stories. Conversely, this cost decreases as the unit cost rate goes down due to a high productivity ratio in the case of a lower number of building stories. Ultimately, the SCEM is developed to support effective decision-making during the schematic design phase.

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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.175 · 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

Citations7
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207