Towards a Framework for Promoting Communication during Project Definition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Project definition refers to the first three stages of a project life cycle, namely planning, programming, and preliminary design during which client needs are identified and translated into design solutions. An ill-defined hospital project definition may lead to hospital-acquired infections or patient mortality. The traditional management practices have been proved to be inadequate since architects usually do not communicate with users, and thus do not have detailed knowledge about how services are performed in the building. There is the need for more knowledge about the subject to improve and thus promote client value generation. This study first reviews factors that impact the communication between architects and clients during project definition based on the literature. The study then offers a framework based on these factors to help managers assess and improve communication between professionals and clients. The validity of the framework will then be empirically validated and revised based on findings of a longitudinal mega-hospital case study. The main objective of the current investigation is to improve the project definition practices of complex projects, and the assumption is that an effective communication provides more value to end users, as well as better project performance in terms of environmental and social sustainability.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.126 | 0.088 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.040 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.026 | 0.026 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".