MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400322366 · doi:10.3390/buildings14072041

Factor Analysis for In Situ Reinforced Concrete Beam Production: A Principal Component Analysis Approach

2024· article· en· W4400322366 on OpenAlexaff
Ronald Ekyalimpa, Carlton Kanyike, Methodius Ruhangaatwiine, Getaneh Gezahegne Tiruneh, Hexu Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueBuildings · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsEllisDon (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrincipal component analysisRanking (information retrieval)Production (economics)Beam (structure)ProductivityPrincipal (computer security)Duration (music)EngineeringEnvironmental scienceMathematicsStructural engineeringStatisticsComputer scienceEconomicsArtificial intelligenceEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The construction industry, a driver for economic development worldwide, faces productivity challenges in Uganda, particularly in labour-intensive activities like in situ concrete beam construction. This study aims to identify and rank the factors influencing the production rate of reinforced in situ concrete beam construction in Kampala and Wakiso districts using principal component analysis (PCA). These factors including but not limited to weather, beam design and site conditions represent the independent variables while the production rate is the dependent variable. These variables were contextualized using a mixed-method approach in which data were collected from 20 construction sites through on-site measurements, a literature review and interviews. PCA was then employed to analyse the data and isolate the most influential factors on production rate, singling out beam length, daily temperature, the number of helpers, and the number of steel fixers, with average coefficients of 0.98, 0.882, 0.78, and 0.36, respectively, as the most significant. Therefore, this study provides an empirical ranking of factors influencing in situ concrete beam construction production rates, offering a foundation for better resource allocation and project management in Uganda’s construction sector.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.210
Threshold uncertainty score0.561

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBuildingsSame topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207