MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Fuzzy Agent-Based Multicriteria Decision-Making Model for Analyzing Construction Crew Performance

2020· article· en· W3035558579 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

VenueJournal of Management in Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Natural Resources
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrewMultiple-criteria decision analysisScope (computer science)Process (computing)Computer scienceOperations researchFuzzy logicDecision support systemDecision-making modelsManagement scienceRisk analysis (engineering)EngineeringArtificial intelligenceBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Selecting economically feasible policies for maximizing crew motivation and performance is a multifaceted problem, and each aspect of the process poses considerable unique challenges for construction practitioners. Fuzzy agent-based modeling (FABM) addresses some of the challenges of predicting crew performance (e.g., it accounts for both subjective uncertainties and crew dynamics), but strategy selection is a decision-making problem that is also compounded by expert disagreements, insufficient information, and differing stakeholder priorities. This paper proposes a methodology for integrating multicriteria decision-making (MCDM) with FABM to develop a decision support model that simulates the complex relationships and social interactions between crews and crew members for use in decision-making. This model also accounts for dynamic construction environments and captures the subjective factors that influence crew motivation and performance. The contributions of this paper are twofold. First, it proposes a methodology that will help improve decision-making processes in construction by expanding the scope of MCDM through integration with FABM. Second, it develops a fuzzy agent-based multicriteria decision-making model that helps construction practitioners adopt economically feasible strategies for improving the motivation and performance of construction crews. Furthermore, the proposed methodology can be adapted to several construction problems to help decision makers prioritize and select from several strategies intended to improve different crew performance measures.

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 score0.609
Threshold uncertainty score0.553

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.215 · 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