MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3193955682 · doi:10.3390/a14090254

Prioritizing Construction Labor Productivity Improvement Strategies Using Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision Making and Fuzzy Cognitive Maps

2021· article· en· W3193955682 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAlgorithms · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Science and Mapping
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFuzzy cognitive mapComputer scienceProductivityFuzzy logicSelection (genetic algorithm)Operations researchRisk analysis (engineering)Management scienceFuzzy setArtificial intelligenceEngineeringBusinessFuzzy numberEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Construction labor productivity (CLP) is affected by various interconnected factors, such as crew motivation and working conditions. Improved CLP can benefit a construction project in many ways, such as a shortened project life cycle and lowering project cost. However, budget, time, and resource restrictions force companies to select and implement only a limited number of CLP improvement strategies. Therefore, a research gap exists regarding methods for supporting the selection of CLP improvement strategies for a given project by quantifying the impact of strategies on CLP with respect to interrelationships among CLP factors. This paper proposes a decision support model that integrates fuzzy multi-criteria decision making with fuzzy cognitive maps to prioritize CLP improvement strategies based on their impact on CLP, causal relationships among CLP factors, and project characteristics. The proposed model was applied to determine CLP improvement strategies for concrete-pouring activities in building projects as an illustrative example. This study contributes to the body of knowledge by providing a systematic approach for selecting appropriate CLP improvement strategies based on interrelationships among the factors affecting CLP and the impact of such strategies on CLP. The results are expected to support construction practitioners with identifying effective improvement strategies to enhance CLP in their projects.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score0.921

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.287 · 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