A Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Model for Selecting the Best Project Delivery Systems for Offsite Construction Projects
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
Off-site construction (OSC) is an innovative construction method that transfers most of the site-based work to a more controlled environment. Construction waste minimization, speedy schedules, higher sustainability, and better quality are some of the perceived benefits of OSC. Therefore, significant research attention has been given to OSC. However, minimal research attention has been given to procurement management in OSC, which could impact its pace of adoption. Existing studies on the procurement methods of OSC projects have overlooked several criteria related to OSC that impact the selection of the appropriate procurement methods (i.e., design-build, construction management, etc.). In addition, the literature lacks decision-making tools to assist OSC practitioners in selecting the appropriate procurement method. In this regard, this study contributes to the body of knowledge by (1) identifying the criteria that impact the selection of OSC procurement methods; (2) developing a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) model to select the appropriate OSC procurement methods. The developed MCDM model uses a hybrid approach of analytic network process (ANP) and evidential reasoning (ER). The ANP, which considers the interdependencies among the collected OSC procurement criteria, is used to calculate the relative importance weights through questionnaire surveys. The ER method evaluates various OSC procurement methods in accordance with the criteria importance weights. The results indicate that project quality, cost control, and funding arrangement are the prominent selection factors. On the other hand, the model reveals that the integrated project delivery (IPD) and construction management (CM) methods have the highest utility scores. The MCDM model has been validated by comparing the results with similar studies. The present study could assist OSC practitioners in selecting the appropriate procurement method for OSC 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.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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