MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417229414 · doi:10.1061/9780784486115.025

Dynamic Allocation of Unionized Skilled Trades in Multi-Project Reactive Scheduling Context: Uber-Inspired Application Framework

2025· article· W4417229414 on OpenAlexaff
X. Ge, Ali Bayesteh, Ming Lu, Yasser Abdel‐Rady I. Mohamed

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicResource-Constrained Project Scheduling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScheduling (production processes)IdleWork (physics)Resource allocationService (business)Decision support systemProject management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Concurrent construction projects are usually distributed across various geographical locations, each generating labor resource demand for various skilled trades over its project duration. Coupled with the limited and unpredictable availability of skilled trades, this creates a dynamic situation that necessitates reliable and adaptive resource-constrained project scheduling. The management of labor unions needs to cope with this challenge in allocating skilled trades per project demands while addressing constant changes that cause delays, cancellations, or idle time. Additionally, non-unionized workers from open shops who are ready to work can be scheduled to meet the demands. Uber, a ride-hailing service provider, has effectively tackled an analogous scheduling problem. Available drivers are driving in the city, waiting for calls, and signing out whenever they choose. Orders can be placed anytime, and trip information is unpredictable. With drivers’ statuses dynamically updated, Uber utilizes proprietary algorithms to assign orders to drivers based on specific optimization rules. Inspired by the Uber approach, this paper aims to develop a conceptual framework to support union managers in (1) updating the status of trades, projects, and activities; (2) setting various optimization objectives; and (3) rescheduling within a short timeframe. Three application scenarios are postulated to account for the decision support needs of union managers in project planning.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.346 · 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 topicResource-Constrained Project SchedulingFrench-language works237,207