MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3009200285 · doi:10.1108/ecam-04-2019-0222

Revolutionising cost structure for integrated project delivery: a BIM-based solution

2020· article· en· W3009200285 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 · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCost estimateActivity-based costingIntegrated project deliveryBuilding information modelingComputer scienceEstimationRisk analysis (engineering)Work breakdown structureProfit (economics)Project managementReliability engineeringSystems engineeringOperations researchOperations managementProject planningEngineeringBusinessScheduling (production processes)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The amalgamation of integrated project delivery (IPD) and building information modelling (BIM) is highly recommended for successful project delivery. However, IPD lacks an accurate cost estimation methodology at the “front-end” of projects, when little project information is available. This study aims to tackle this issue, through presenting analytical aspects, theoretical grounds and practical steps/procedures for integrating target value design (TVD), activity-based costing (ABC) and Monte Carlo simulation into the IPD cost structure, within a BIM-enabled platform. Design/methodology/approach A critical review was conducted to study the status of cost estimation within IPD, as well as exploring methods and tools that can enhance the cost estimation process for IPD. Thereafter, a framework is developed to present the proposed methodology of cost estimation for IPD throughout its entire stages. A case project is used to validate the practicality of the developed solution through comparing the profit-at-risk percentage for each party, using both traditional cost estimation and the proposed solution. Findings After applying the proposed IPD's cost estimation framework, on a real-life case project, the findings demonstrated significant deviations in the profit-at-risk value for various work packages of the project (approximately 100% of the finishing package and 22% of openings package). By providing a precise allocation of overhead costs, the solution can be used in real-life projects to change the entire IPD cost structure and ensure a fair sharing of risk–rewards among the involved parties in IPD projects. Practical implications Using the proposed methodology of cost estimation for IPD can enhance the relationship among IPD's core team members; all revealed financial deficiencies will be considered (i.e. compensation structure, profit pooling), hence enhancing the IPD performance. Originality/value This paper presents a comprehensive solution for integrating BIM and IPD in terms of cost estimation, offering three main contributions: (1) an innovate approach to utilise five-dimensional (5D) BIM capabilities with Monte Carlo simulation, hence providing reliable cost estimating during the conceptual TVD stage; (2) mathematical models that are developed through integrating ABC into the detailed 5D BIM to determine the three IPD's cost structure limbs; and (3) a novel mechanism of managing cost saving (rewards) through distinguishing between saved resources from organisation level, to daily task level, to increase trust among parties.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.781
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.189 · 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