MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168125351 · doi:10.1139/l05-032

Early warning signs for distressed projects

2005· article· en· W2168125351 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Awad S. Hanna, Murat Gündüz

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicConstruction Project Management and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiddingProcurementOutcome (game theory)Logistic regressionWarning systemOperations managementBusinessProject managementChange orderProcess (computing)Risk analysis (engineering)Actuarial scienceProcess managementComputer scienceMarketingProject planningEngineeringProject charterEconomicsSystems engineeringMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are many factors that can affect a project outcome such as management practices of the contractor, involvement and response of the owner, design change and design errors, and procurement delay. It is important for contractors and owners to be able to detect and rectify project stress as early as possible. This paper presents some factors, which if present would enable contractors and owners to predict the outcome of the project. To achieve this purpose, 116 projects were researched and analyzed. The probability of a project becoming distressed is calculated using a logistic regression model, which can be applied to a project early in the bidding process. The results of this paper are of value to owners, electrical and mechanical contractors, and construction managers.Key words: early warning signs, project outcome, bidding, logistic regression.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.042
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.042
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations15
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicConstruction Project Management and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207