An Adaptive Hybrid Model for Determining Subjective Causal Relationships in Fuzzy System Dynamics Models for Analyzing Construction Risks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modeling risk management systems in construction projects is a complex process because of various internal and external factors and their interrelationships. Fuzzy system dynamics (FSD) have been commonly employed to model and analyze construction risk management systems. To run FSD simulation models, all hard (objective) and soft (subjective) causal relationships between variables must be quantified. However, a research gap exists regarding structured methods for constructing soft causal relationships in FSD models. This paper proposes an adaptive hybrid model consisting of fuzzy analytical hierarchy process, weighted principle of justifiable granularity, and fuzzy aggregation operators to determine crisp values of causality degree for soft (subjective) causal relationships in FSD modeling of construction risk analysis. The proposed model is implemented in analyzing construction risks of a windfarm project to illustrate its applicability. The proposed model generates two results: (1) optimized membership functions for linguistic terms representing the causality degree of soft relationships and (2) the crisp value for the causality degree of soft relationships. The contribution of study is to propose a structured model to improve efficiency and effectiveness of developing FSD quantitative modeling by addressing soft causal relationships between different variables in FSD models and considering multiple risk expertise of heterogeneous experts in construction risk assessment.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".