MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412691087 · doi:10.22260/isarc2025/0075

Fuzzy-Chaos Framework for Analyzing and Quantifying Uncertainty in Labour Productivity in Complex Construction Environments

2025· article· en· W4412691087 on OpenAlexaff
Elyar Pourrahimian, Diana Salhab, Aminah Robinson Fayek, Farook Hamzeh

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ... ISARC · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicConstruction Project Management and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProductivityCHAOS (operating system)Fuzzy logicComputer scienceChaos theoryFuzzy setArtificial intelligenceManagement scienceEconomicsChaoticMacroeconomicsComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Effective management of labour productivity in construction projects is important for ensuring project success.This paper introduces a novel approach to quantifying uncertainty in labour productivity through entropy calculations based on outputs from a fuzzy expert system.Two distinct scenarios are analyzed to demonstrate the practical application of the proposed methodology, one representing a week with high variability and the other a stable and predictable week.These scenarios highlight how entropy can be a powerful tool for identifying periods of high uncertainty and assisting project managers in making informed decisions about resource allocation, risk management, and strategic planning.The findings suggest that high entropy values indicate weeks requiring increased management attention and resources, whereas lower entropy values correspond to more stable conditions, allowing for standard operational procedures.This approach enhances understanding of dynamic project conditions and supports proactive project management practices.This study contributes to the body of knowledge by integrating fuzzy logic with entropy calculations, which offers a robust framework for managing the complexities of labour productivity in construction projects.Through realworld application and comparative analysis, this study validates the effectiveness of entropy analysis as a diagnostic and decision-making tool in the construction industry.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the ... ISARCSame topicConstruction Project Management and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207