An earned-value-analysis (EVA)-based project control framework in large-scale scaffolding projects using linear regression modeling
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
In large-scale industrial construction projects, scaffolding activities account for a large amount of the construction budget, and overlooking the scaffolding management can lead to budget overruns and schedule delays. The scaffolding activities can be categorized by classifications and types based on the nature of the scaffold builds. To ensure the project progress on track, it is critical to measure project performance based on project progress data. However, given the nature of scaffolding activities, it has been challenging to track and utilize the scaffolding data for analytical purposes. Therefore, this paper proposes a project control framework based on Earned-value analysis (EVA), in which linear regression models are used for productivity prediction. Three scenarios of productivity based on historical data (i.e., low, medium, and high productivity) are introduced. The proposed framework is implemented in a real construction project for validation. The results have shown that the proposed framework can efficiently evaluate the project progresses integrated with the EVA. The construction companies, such as general contractors and scaffolding sub-contractors, can use this method for site progress tracking. For future work, the EVA can be integrated with other non-linear predictive models (e.g., neural network) for productivity prediction. The EVA results can be integrated with data visualization to create situational awareness for construction practitioners.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it