MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2493718717 · doi:10.1108/jopp-12-01-2012-b001

Early contractor involvement in dutch infrastructure development: Initial experiences with parallel procedures for planning and procurement

2012· article· en· W2493718717 on OpenAlexaff
Sander Lenferink, Jos Arts, Taede Tillema, Marcelle van Valkenburg, R. Nijsten

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Public Procurement · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicConstruction Project Management and Performance
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Transportation of Ontario
FundersRijkswaterstaat
KeywordsProcurementBusinessOperations managementValue (mathematics)Process managementPublic workEngineeringComputer scienceMarketingPublic administrationPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditionally, in the Netherlands, the procurement procedure for infrastructure does not start until the public decision-making procedure is fully completed. In the new procurement strategy, early contractor involvement is applied by carrying out the procurement procedure and the public planning procedure simultaneously. This article explores the first experiences and lessons learned with early contractor involvement in four Dutch infrastructure projects. It can be concluded that the new strategy adds value in terms of time gains, improved project control and more innovative solutions. However, to optimize early contractor involvement, the differences between the competitive procurement procedures and the open, cooperative public planning procedures need to be bridged.

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.142

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0030.008
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.131
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations39
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Public ProcurementSame topicConstruction Project Management and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207