MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4221017932 · doi:10.18280/ria.360113

An Effective Optimization of Time and Cost Estimation for Prefabrication Construction Management Using Artificial Neural Networks

2022· article· en· W4221017932 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ratna Kumari Challa, Kanusu Srinivasa Rao

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d intelligence artificielle · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrefabricationProcurementProcess (computing)Artificial neural networkCost estimateKey (lock)Industrial engineeringEngineeringComputer scienceOperations researchConstruction engineeringSystems engineeringArtificial intelligenceCivil engineeringBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The success of every construction business relies on the projects performed in a given period and at the negotiated rate. The construction business includes prefabrication firms, logistics companies, design industries on site and so on. The manufacturing method includes the assembly of structural parts at a development plant and the transport of them onto the building site as finished or semi-assembled components. For optimization, artificial neural networks (ANNs) are used because of their capacity to overcome qualitative and quantitative difficulties in the building industry. An ANN is used to execute the input, hidden, and output layers depending on the weight of the hidden layer. Different modeling strategies maximize the layers. ANN covers a wide variety of issues in construction management, for instance cost analysis, decision making, prediction of the mark-up percentage and the production rate in the construction industry. The main advantage of prefabricated methodology is that the procedure is easily done. The other real benefit of the prefabrication process is its integrated versatility. The present study underlines that the total project period and cost are the key considerations in the current job procurement phase in constructing prefabrication. The results of the proposed model are based on ANN algorithms which mainly achieves the perfect weight values in time and cost estimates.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue d intelligence artificielleSame topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207