MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2264686095

IT And Systemic Approach For Managing Sustainable Urban Infrastructure Rehabilitation

2006· article· en· W2264686095 on OpenAlexaff
Yves Dion, Saâd Bennis, Robert Häusler, Mathias Glaus

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
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsset (computer security)Process managementTask (project management)Risk analysis (engineering)Process (computing)Computer scienceSustainabilityAsset managementBusinessEngineeringComputer securitySystems engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Urban development sustainability calls for new approaches involving economic, social political and environmental dimensions in order to face the institutional complexity of decision-making. That situation imposes increasingly growing constrains and challenges upon administrations in large cities. Therefore the decision to rehabilitate a particular asset in a strongly urbanize area is a complex task witch depends on many parameters. Often lack of relevant information during infrastructures life cycle results in imprecise definition of what has to be done creating unexpected changes and costly impacts. This paper presents a general approach develop base on some work implemented for urban s network rehabilitation. In Verdun by the use of total quality management and knowledge management the project team adopted a systemic approach and developed an integrated management system to manage project information flows, mobilized the internal human resources, managed the dynamics of the process, reduced uncertainties to solved problems. The propose methodology allows manager to control information feedback loops to manage budget, program, conformance, risk and uncertainties. Development of a conceptual framework is described. The model enables managers to use IT and monitoring equipments to handle information, resource, material and people flows in the most efficient manner to generate add value to a rehabilitated asset and to maximize results integrities during planning and execution phases.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207