MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387452690 · doi:10.1061/jcemd4.coeng-13672

Fuzzy Agent–Based Modeling of Competency and Performance Measures in Construction

2023· article· en· W4387452690 on OpenAlexaff
Yisshak Tadesse Gebretekle, Aminah Robinson Fayek

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Construction Engineering and Management · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicConstruction Project Management and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFuzzy logicComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Construction organizations are project-based organizations in which both competencies and performance develop through project execution. A competency measure is a combination of knowledge, skill, processes, practices, and/or technology possessed by a construction organization. Performance measures are used to assess an organization’s competitiveness within its industry. An organization can analyze competencies to predict and improve performance. Previous studies investigated project- and organization-level competencies with respect to performance measures. However, multilevel assessment is needed, although it is challenging because the nature of construction competency and performance measures is complex, dynamic, and subjectively uncertain. To address these challenges, this paper presents a methodology for developing a fuzzy agent–based model (FABM) of competency and performance that models a set of organizational- and project-level competency measures as decision-making entities (i.e., agents) and predicts multiple performance measures as their emergent behavior. A case study was implemented to demonstrate, verify, and validate the proposed FABM model, with encouraging results in performance prediction. The academic contribution of this paper is providing a novel systematic, bottom-up modeling approach for measuring and assessing competencies at the project and organization levels and mapping these multilevel competencies to construction performance measures. Furthermore, the outcomes of this study are expected to support construction practitioners by providing a set of comprehensive hierarchical competency and performance metrics at the project and organization levels for managerial actions taken to identify, construct, and develop competency models to assess performance at both levels.

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 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)0.002
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 score0.546
Threshold uncertainty score0.422

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Construction Engineering and ManagementSame topicConstruction Project Management and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207