Prioritizing Preproject Planning Activities Using Value of Information Analysis
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Preproject planning is becoming a widespread best management practice. Potentially, it can be an extremely time and resource intensive practice and, as such, presents challenges in the management, allocation, and prioritization of the resources applied to it. This research presents a novel solution to this challenge. The solution prioritizes preproject planning activities using the value-of-information analysis and simple optimization methods applied to a modified project definition rating index (PDRI). First, scope definition elements are identified from a PDRI, and expected cost-to-benefit ratios for each element are quantified. Then, an optimized resource allocation is performed to prioritize the elements in the scope definition improvement process. We demonstrate this framework in a case study for adaptive building reuse because these are complex projects whose overall success can be directly linked to effective preproject planning using constrained resources. Results of this case study find that optimizing preproject planning using the proposed methodology resulted in approximately $127,000 of cost-savings, representing 5% of the total project cost.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it