MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392896810 · doi:10.1061/9780784485286.060

Application of Chaos Theory in Project Management

2024· article· en· W4392896810 on OpenAlexaff
Elyar Pourrahimian, Diana Salhab, Lynn Shehab, Farook Hamzeh, Simaan AbouRizk

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicConstruction Project Management and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaAlberta Environment and Protected Areas
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChaos theoryComputer scienceCHAOS (operating system)Management scienceContext (archaeology)Project managementSystems engineeringEngineeringArtificial intelligenceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chaos theory, a mathematical discipline, delves into the behavior of dynamic systems highly susceptible to initial conditions, often called the butterfly effect. In project management, chaos theory becomes a tool for comprehending and predicting intricate systems, exemplified by large-scale engineering projects. Its application involves identifying and mitigating risks, improving decision-making, and enhancing overall project performance. By harnessing chaos theory, project managers attain profound insights into project dynamics, leading to more adept strategies for control and optimization. Consequently, the incorporation of chaos theory revolutionizes the management and refinement of complex systems. Nevertheless, scholarly exploration of chaos theory’s role in project management remains limited. This article aims to analyze the integration of chaos theory in project management and its specific benefits in the context of substantial engineering endeavors. It encompasses fundamental chaos theory principles, implementation techniques in project management, instances of successful real-world engineering projects, and prospects for future research in this domain.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.914
Threshold uncertainty score0.577

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.339 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicConstruction Project Management and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207