MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307866638 · doi:10.5267/j.jpm.2022.9.001

A risk management model for large projects in the construction phase in Egypt

2022· article· en· W4307866638 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohamed Mostafa Habib, Marwa Ahmed Kamer Eldawla, Mahmoud Ahmed Zaki

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Project Management · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicConstruction Project Management and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRisk analysis (engineering)Risk managementProcess (computing)SustainabilityPre-construction servicesProject risk managementRisk assessmentBusinessRisk management frameworkEngineeringProject managementProcess managementIntervention (counseling)Environmental resource managementIT risk managementProject management triangleComputer scienceSystems engineeringFinanceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The implementation of major projects is complicated by the multiplicity of beneficiaries, owners, and all participants in the project as well as the technical overlap between the various engineering, financial and administrative works, while the specific features of the construction activity have a clear influence in shaping the nature of construction projects because the implementation processes were associated with a deep and long-term intervention in the natural environment, where construction is a burden on the environment, both in the construction phase and during the maintenance and liquidation phases: it requires depreciation of a large number of material resources. Through that, this study focused on clarifying the most important concepts of risk management and modern strategies in risk analysis and how to respond to them and monitor projects. The study then presented a questionnaire for the risks facing major projects in Egypt. Through analyzing the results of the questionnaire, a qualitative risk analysis was conducted that can be used to prioritize response to risks, in addition to conducting a Monte Carlo simulation based on theoretical foundations and providing a new process for prioritizing project risks related to sustainability, where the (Primavera Risk Analysis) program was used to clarify the impact of risks on project time and cost. All analyses are based on the theoretical background regarding risk, risk management process, and project life cycle approach in the sustainable construction sector. with the help of this study, it is possible to address ways of mitigating the harmful effects on the environment through the implementation of sustainable management in the planning of future projects and better management of current projects.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 venueJournal of Project ManagementSame topicConstruction Project Management and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207