MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226391331 · doi:10.5267/j.jpm.2022.3.001

Monte Carlo simulation in an elementary school building

2022· article· en· W4226391331 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anderson Edwin Antialon Macias, Deiby Luis Medina Corilloclla, Marcia Yesenia Jeremias Porras, Roy Monteagudo Venero, Jimmy Alberth Deza Quispe

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Project Management · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicConstruction Project Management and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityStatisticMonte Carlo methodProfitability indexAttendanceEnvironmental economicsPovertyInvestment (military)BusinessRisk analysis (engineering)Actuarial scienceComputer scienceEconomicsEconomic growthFinancePolitical scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Education is the future. Education is the only way for a country to start developing and reducing poverty. In countries with medium incomes like Peru, the resources to spend on education is not unlimited. Therefore, it is necessary to have quality in investment. However, risks and uncertainty can make a project surpass its initial budget. Therefore, statistic based methods like Monte Carlo simulation is a powerful tool to forecast possible events that might endanger the profitability and sustainability of a project. Although there is not plenty of academic literature about Monte Carlo empirical usage, many projects employ this method to manage the possible risks the project could have. In consequence, the current research analyzed both risk and sensitivity of an elementary school building project. Both analyses showed that this project had huge probabilities to surpass the current profit and return estimations. However, the sensitivity analysis portrayed that the project could be endangered because of infrastructure overspending. Moreover, it indicated that students’ attendance is also a critical factor to ensure the sustainability of the project.

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)0.005
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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.321 · 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Project ManagementSame topicConstruction Project Management and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207