MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3182703823 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2020-0012

An analysis of quality liability insurance for prefabricated components using evolutionary game theory

2021· article· en· W3182703823 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Yan Liu, Chenyao Lv, Hong Li, Yan Li, Zhen Lei, Yingbo Ji

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicConstruction Project Management and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New BrunswickUniversity of Alberta
FundersNorth China University of Technology
KeywordsEvolutionary game theoryGame theoryStochastic gameGovernment (linguistics)Quality (philosophy)Risk analysis (engineering)LiabilityComputer scienceCorporate governanceSample (material)BusinessEconomicsMicroeconomicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Managing quality risks of prefabricated components is one of the challenges for prefabricated construction. The quality liability insurance for prefabricated components (QLIPC) is an effective approach to transfer such risks; however, limited research has been conducted on the development of QLIPC. This study introduces an evolutionary game theory (EGT)-based approach incorporating decisions from both government and insurance companies. In the EGT model, a payoff matrix under disparate strategies is constructed and the evolutionary stable strategies (ESS) are deduced. The simulation calculation is then carried out by MATLAB using virtual sample data to demonstrate the analysis. The results show that the government should act as the game promoter because the QLIPC can reduce governance cost and has significant social benefits. This research contributes a theoretical framework to analyze the QLIPC development using the EGT theory, and it could help the government develop long-term strategies for developing the QLIPC market.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.312
Threshold uncertainty score0.745

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicConstruction Project Management and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207