Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper provides details and a comparative review of change-order-related clauses in major standard contract agreements. The information from the review is used to highlight the impact of the contractual agreements and their general conditions on change order procedures and pricing. The main categories of analysis include the change order process, direct and overhead cost items, and overhead and profit practices and percentages. Four sets of standard contract documents are reviewed: American Institute of Architects (AIA) A201-2007 and A401-2007, ConsensusDocs 200 and 750, Engineers Joint Contract Document Committee (EJCDC) C-700 and C-523, and Canadian Construction Documents Committee (CCDC) 2-2008/Canadian Construction Association (CCA) 1-2008. The comparative review points to the prevailing confusion and conflicts related to change order procedures and pricing among owners, designers, general contractors, construction managers, and subcontractors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.058 | 0.176 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.019 | 0.033 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".