Developing a Value Dashboard for Tracking Value Alignment during Design
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
Delivering value to the customer and to the internal and external stakeholders on construction projects is deemed essential for projects’ success. However, literature is limited in reference to the methods offered to track value alignment on projects. Defining and agreeing on what constitute project value early on would help in providing a clear starting point to capture value generation along project phases. Accordingly, this research advises first on the main steps to evaluate and classify project value, then proposes a design for a value dashboard (VDB) to visualize and track value on projects. The suggested dashboard acts as a visual management tool to guide project managers with the decision-making process considering the evolving understanding of value. The advocated value dashboard for the design phase is discussed and vetted with experts from the construction industry. Future research will further test the VDB on real life projects to demonstrates its applicability. This visual dashboard is a novel tool that provides tracking for value generation and delivery, and it is complementary to the existing project management dashboards that focus on schedule and cost considerations.
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 | 0.003 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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