MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2936490869 · doi:10.14455/isec.res.2019.179

THE POTENTIAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT ON CONSTRUCTION SITES

2019· article· en· W2936490869 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Cornelia Ninaus, David Knapp

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of International Structural Engineering and Construction · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCivil and Structural Engineering Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKnowledge managementBusinessMultidisciplinary approachProcess (computing)Investment (military)Variety (cybernetics)Knowledge sharingKnowledge transferPhase (matter)Quarter (Canadian coin)Order (exchange)Operations managementComputer scienceEngineeringFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Knowledge management is the process of creating, sharing, using, and managing knowledge, one of the most valuable organizational resources. This approach is well-known in Austria's industrial sector, but applied only in major construction companies. It is mainly used to share knowledge between different departments, but it is not commonly found on construction sites. During the construction phase a variety of separate firms build a temporary multidisciplinary organization, to produce investment goods. To show the potential of knowledge management on building sites in Austria, 78 interviews were conducted. Construction sites of different types (new construction and refurbishment of buildings) were taken into account in order to guarantee a representative outcome. The highest cost-benefit ratio for knowledge management can be seen in knowledge intensive processes. The execution phase is characterized by craftwork which often includes many routine steps. But the survey shows that almost a quarter of the daily business is about knowledge intensive processes while the amount doesn't correlate with the working experience. Furthermore, on construction sites with many trades the lack of information and knowledge transfer is the cause of nearly a quarter of the problems faced. The findings indicate the need for knowledge management on construction sites and the potential grows with the number of trades. The teambuilding process can be seen as the most important step for an efficient knowledge management during the execution phase.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.010
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of International Structural Engineering and ConstructionSame topicCivil and Structural Engineering ResearchFrench-language works237,207