MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4365814559 · doi:10.1108/ecam-07-2022-0674

Formalizing the information requirements for decision-making of field managers during indoor construction activities

2023· article· en· W4365814559 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEngineering Construction & Architectural Management · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScope (computer science)Computer scienceDecision support systemField (mathematics)Quality (philosophy)Work (physics)Task (project management)OriginalityInformation systemStatement of workKnowledge managementInformation qualityBusiness decision mappingProcess managementRisk analysis (engineering)Management scienceSystems engineeringEngineeringBusinessQualitative research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose Information technology provides important support for on-site decision-making of field personnel. Most literature focuses on the technological aspects of decision-support systems, without fully understanding the information required for effective decision-making. This study aimed to formalize decision-makers’ requirements in terms of the major goals, decisions and information. Design/methodology/approach The situation awareness (SA) approach was applied through the goal-directed task analysis (GDTA) method, narrowing the scope to field managers’ decision-making during indoor construction activities. This method was based on a series of interviews to define, revise and validate the decision-making requirements for the given scope. Findings The study yielded 1,056 highly interrelated elements. The results indicate that the field manager’s overall goal is to execute and handoff work within the established deadlines, with the required quality, maximizing profits, within a safe work environment. The overall goal construes into five main goals regarding work progress, quality, costs, safety and communication. These goals include subgoals, decisions, and the information necessary to attain them, depicted in diagrams. Practical implications The findings allow enhancing the design of decision-support solutions by identifying information required for future developments and showing the interrelations between goals and information requirements that need to be addressed to present interfaces for effectively assisting on-site decision-making. Moreover, the results allow for the assessment of solutions regarding the sufficiency of information. Originality/value This is the first effort to fully understand the information required by field managers for on-site decision-making during indoor construction activities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.709
Threshold uncertainty score0.776

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.206 · 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