MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409618273 · doi:10.1080/01446193.2025.2479764

Machine learning and optimization strategies for infrastructure projects risk management

2025· article· en· W4409618273 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed Moussa, Mohamed Ezzeldin, Wael El‐Dakhakhni

Bibliographic record

VenueConstruction Management and Economics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicConstruction Project Management and Performance
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRisk managementComputer scienceBusinessRisk analysis (engineering)Engineering managementEngineeringKnowledge managementFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Infrastructure projects often encounter significant performance challenges due to their inherent complexities. Two primary factors contributing to these challenges are risk interactions—occur when one risk amplifies another—and systemic risks, where disruptions in individual components can cascade into project-wide failures. Despite their critical importance, the combined impacts of these risks remain underexplored, particularly through practical and scalable methodologies. This study introduces an integrated machine learning (ML) and optimization-driven approach for assessing and mitigating these combined impacts on infrastructure project performance. Historical project data is leveraged to predict the performance impacts, measured through key performance indicators (KPIs). To enhance predictive accuracy and minimize computational costs, genetic algorithm-based hyperparameter tuning is employed, outperforming traditional methods such as grid search. Building on these predictions, multi-objective optimization is applied to devise effective response strategies that improve the project KPIs while adhering to predefined constraints. The utility of the proposed approach is illustrated through a demonstration application, showcasing its ability to generate optimized schedules and risk registers. These outputs offer actionable insights and decision support tools for project managers. The study contributes a scalable and practical solution that enhances the performance of infrastructure projects under the combined impacts of risk interactions and systemic risks.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConstruction Management and EconomicsSame topicConstruction Project Management and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207