MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2810316557 · doi:10.1177/875697280003100406

Resource Optimization in a Design Office Using Simulation

2000· article· en· W2810316557 on OpenAlex
Tarek Hegazy, Donald E. Grierson, Amr Ayed, Essam Zaneldin

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

VenueProject Management Journal · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsStantec (Canada)University of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTeamworkProductivityComputer scienceWork (physics)Industrial engineeringSimulation modelingResource (disambiguation)Engineering managementManufacturing engineeringOperations researchSystems engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, the work operations in an actual small-to-medium sized design office have been analyzed for the purpose of optimizing the use of resources and improving work productivity. Using simulation, a model of the office operations was developed, incorporating all design steps and their employed resources. Several simulation experiments were then conducted to determine the optimum number of resources with balanced workloads and to optimize the teamwork strategy on projects. Details of the model and the simulation experiments are described and the advantages of the model to the management of engineering organizations are discussed.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.886
Threshold uncertainty score0.371

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.225 · 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