MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401974641 · doi:10.3390/buildings14082563

Risk Analysis in International Construction Projects: A Look at the Prefabricated Wood Construction Sector in the Province of Quebec

2024· article· en· W4401974641 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Luciana Gondim de Almeida Guimarães, Pierre Blanchet, Yan Cimon

Bibliographic record

VenueBuildings · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicConstruction Project Management and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversité Laval
KeywordsEngineeringArchitectural engineeringCivil engineeringPrefabricationConstruction engineeringConstruction industryForensic engineeringBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Construction projects that are completed abroad involve not only the typical risks that are faced at home but also various complex risks that are specific to international transactions. However, little research has been conducted on the risks that exist in prefabricated construction projects, but they need to be discussed. This paper aims to analyze the operational and financial risks associated with the internationalization of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the province of Quebec operating in the prefabricated wood construction sector in the American market. Firstly, a literature review was carried out on operational and financial risks in overseas construction projects. This research identified 36 risks, including 21 operational and 15 financial. Next, the risks identified were divided into eight categories: design, standards, coordination, resources, internal to the alliance, partner, customer, and market. Professionals from different types of wood prefabrication companies were then asked to identify the probability of occurrence and magnitude of the impact of each identified risk. This information was used to calculate the criticality of each risk using Monte Carlo simulation to generate scenarios for use as a decision-making tool in risk assessment. The results show that highly critical operational risks are concentrated in the operational risk categories of coordination and resources. It should be noted that the most critical risk is that of ineffective communication and coordination, which is linked to project governance. On the other hand, financial risks with high criticality are spread across the four financial risk categories. A comparison of the criticality of the operational and financial risks identified revealed that the financial risks were the most critical.

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)0.003
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.296
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBuildingsSame topicConstruction Project Management and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207