MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2507296671 · doi:10.5539/mas.v10n12p197

Identify and Prioritize Risks of Construction Projects Based on Fuzzy Logic (Case Study: Construction Project of Iranian Investment and Sustainable Development Company)

2016· article· en· W2507296671 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shima Ahmadi Aras, Zahra Amirhosseini

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicConstruction Project Management and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeightingTOPSISFuzzy logicReliability (semiconductor)Investment (military)Sustainable developmentRank (graph theory)Computer scienceRisk analysis (engineering)Project risk managementProcess (computing)BusinessOperations researchProject managementMathematicsEngineeringProject portfolio managementArtificial intelligenceSystems engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of the research was to identify and rank risks in construction projects of Iranians investment and Sustainable Development Company. This descriptive study based on purpose and on the basis of data collection is the survey. The study society consisted of 25 experts in construction projects. The data collected through a questionnaire which is then used to calculate the reliability and validity researcher.Thus, using literature review and interviews with experts, more than 100 risks were identified and were divided based on risk factors and risk breakdown structure, for weighting criteria, network analysis process which is used to obtain the internal relationship between the criteria of DIMATEL fuzzy method is used, then rankings risks were done using fuzzy TOPSIS algorithm. The results showed that, given the vague nature of the data in most projects, the proposed model is suitable for the real world.

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)0.004
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.648
Threshold uncertainty score0.791

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.151
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designOther design
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicConstruction Project Management and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207