Integrating the Last Planner System and Immersive Virtual Reality: Exploring the Social Mechanisms Produced by Using LPS in Projects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the last 30 years, the last planner system (LPS), as a Lean-driven production planning and control tool, has consistently demonstrated its capability to improve planning reliability and overall performance in construction projects. Recent research provides evidence suggesting that the LPS ability to do good to projects has not reached its full potential yet. In fact, it has been observed that by identifying the missing social mechanisms in its implementation process and managing more effectively the complex socio-technical nature of the LPS, its implementation effectiveness is improved. However, commonly used research approaches, such as the case study method, have been criticized for lacking scientific control, replicability, and external validity. Alternatively, immersive virtual reality (IVR)-based simulation games have the methodological capability to enable the study of the social mechanisms that the LPS engenders when implemented in projects, by providing a highly controlled, reproducible, and ecologically valid experimental environment. However, how to leverage effectively IVR-based gaming technology to study the social mechanisms that the LPS engenders in construction organizations is not well understood. In order to bridge this gap, this paper established the conceptual and technical foundations to set IVR-based experimental environments and developed an IVR prototype encompassing nonlean and LPS-based rounds. The evaluation of the IVR prototype involved both quantitative and qualitative research approaches, focusing on its functionality, user-perceived presence and usability, task performance, and lean expert feedback. The results demonstrated the prototype’s capability to create a controlled experimental environment while offering participants a user-friendly, immersive, and realistic LPS simulation experience. The contributions of this study are twofold: (1) the addition of a new method to the research methodology toolbox in construction engineering and management; and (2) the generation of design insights to develop IVR prototypes for research in construction engineering and management, and preliminary evidence for its ecological validity.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".