MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2262769147

Model-Based Recommendation System In Support Of Construction Equipment Management - A Case Study

2006· article· en· W2262769147 on OpenAlexaff
Hongqin Fan, Hyoungkwan Kim, Simaan AbouRizk

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Joint CIB W78, W102, ICCCBE, ICCC, and DMUCE International Conference on Computing and Decision Making in Civil and Building Engineering, Montreal, Canada, 14-16 June · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Mining Algorithms and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMobile deviceData managementManagement systemWork (physics)Data miningData scienceRisk analysis (engineering)EngineeringOperations managementWorld Wide Web
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Major contractors are relying increasingly on computerized equipment management systems to accomplish their objectives in construction equipment management, including maintenance, repair, operations and other managerial tasks. Though the automatic or semi-automatic collection of electronic data for equipment management has been made possible via on-board controls, handheld devices, and electronic fuel data transfer, the output of most current management systems are still delivered through reports that represent facts “as-it-is” and lack a mechanism for automatic knowledge discovery and utilization of the collected data. By means of a case study on real-time work order evaluation, this paper presents our research on embedding data mining modules into current equipment management information systems so that the hidden patterns in the data can be explicitly discovered and represented to the user. This paper will also demonstrate how new cases are predicted using the trained predictive model. The proposed approach is capable of making real-time predictions based on facts rather than experiences; in addition, it explains the logic of reasoning using the transparent data mining models.

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 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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.806
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Joint CIB W78, W102, ICCCBE, ICCC, and DMUCE International Conference on Computing and Decision Making in Civil and Building Engineering, Montreal, Canada, 14-16 JuneSame topicData Mining Algorithms and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207