MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2579467647 · doi:10.1108/ecam-10-2015-0165

A multi-dimensional joint confidence limit approach to mixed mode planning for round-the-clock projects

2017· article· en· W2579467647 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEngineering Construction & Architectural Management · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Safety Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScheduleInterdependenceComputer scienceWorkflowLimit (mathematics)Operations researchProject planningTime limitIndustrial engineeringProject managementRisk analysis (engineering)Reliability engineeringSystems engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose Good planning is key to good project performance. However, for the sub-class of round-the-clock projects requiring mixed mode planning a suitable planning approach does not exist. The purpose of this paper is to develop and validate such an approach. Design/methodology/approach Development of the approach builds on a synthesis and extensions of previous work related to projects with round-the-clock schedules, containing multiple workflows (sequential/cyclical). This approach considers the interdependence among shift-schedule, productivity, calendar duration, and risk registers. It quantifies the confidence in those strategies using a Monte Carlo and a multi-dimensional joint confidence limit (JCL) simulation platform. Findings n of workflows and their interdependencies. Also, the platform results show that the deviation between the deterministic outcomes and the simulated ones are a good indicator when dealing with projects with minimal tolerance for possible imposed mitigation strategies (e.g. round-the-clock projects). Research limitations/implications The validation of the approach is limited to a multi-billion dollar nuclear refurbishment case study and functional demonstration. The applicable class of projects is limited, and includes those for which failure of cost, schedule, or quality implies project failure. Originality/value It is anticipated that the proposed approach will assist with developing a realistic planning strategy by incorporating various factors and constraints under the impact of risks and uncertainty. This may lead to a more reliable determination of outcomes for round-the-clock projects.

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.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.530
Threshold uncertainty score0.770

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.221 · 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