MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311884401 · doi:10.3390/buildings12122242

Towards a Data-Rich Era: A Bibliometric Analysis of Construction Management from 2000 to 2020

2022· article· en· W4311884401 on OpenAlexaff
Shi‐Yao Zhu, Dezhi Li, Zhu Jin, Haibo Feng

Bibliographic record

VenueBuildings · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicConstruction Project Management and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Social Science Fund of ChinaNational Office for Philosophy and Social SciencesNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsData managementData scienceBig dataField (mathematics)Computer scienceDomain (mathematical analysis)Technology managementKnowledge managementEmerging technologiesEngineering managementManagement scienceEngineeringData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rapid development of new technologies has made the acquisition and processing of big data much easier and more accessible to various domains including construction management. This trend has resulted in numerous new technical or management issues in the field, as well as increased research needs. Thus, it is very necessary to invest and assess the past, present, and possible future developments of construction management-related studies. This paper provides a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of the articles published in this field over the previous two decades. The seven most popular research themes were identified and discussed with the data adopted in the related studies, including modern technology, waste management, performance management, risk management, project management, knowledge management, and organization management. Typical research data, research approaches, and future research directions were discussed. Emerging topics such as smart technology, sustainability, resilience, and human factors are suggested to be further explored in the domain. The review conducted in this study can provide some insights into what has been done and what can be achieved in future research in the construction management domain towards a data-rich era.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmaBibliometrics
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptBibliometrics
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Other designhigh
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.894
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.1060.177
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

Bibliometrics

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designObservational · Other design
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

Citations17
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBuildingsSame topicConstruction Project Management and PerformanceCategoryBibliometricsFrench-language works237,207