MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W637539963

Change management in procurement of road maintenance

2005· article· en· W637539963 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
J Rissanen

Bibliographic record

VenueTIEHALLINNON SELVITYKSIA, FINNRA REPORTS · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcurementBusinessWork (physics)Service (business)Highway maintenanceContract managementOperations managementPlanned maintenanceTransport engineeringMarketingEconomicsEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Finnish Road Administration (Finnra) is introducing extensive and long-term maintenance contracts. Due to long contract period, it is important to be able to make changes to the contract, as well as changes to the level of services and changes in inventory. The costs of these changes are relatively small compared with the total costs of the maintenance contracts. The main point of this survey is to examine problems when changes are made to the maintenance contracts and consider the possible solutions. To examine problems of today the Finnras maintenance management group and contacts were interviewed. There is not actual agreed method to procure modification and extra work. According to survey, the two biggest problems were the lack of competitive prices and regional differences of procurement of extra work. The procurement methods in Canada, England and other Northern countries were analysed as a part of this study contain interesting details. level of services which are specified in the contract. The winter maintenance is ca. 60% of the costs of the maintenance contracts and thus the costs of changes in the level of service in winter maintenance could grow relatively high. Summer maintenance includes more duties and the costs are lower than winter maintenance. Definition of the costs of a change should be easier. A more comprehensive price list must be attached to the call of bids. For example winter maintenance must be priced by activities and level of service. In case of a change these prices are used to determine the increase or decrease of the costs. The procurement of extra work can be made more effective. The primary way is to create larger packet of extra works and include them in the call of bids. The packets, which are created during the contract period, must be competed separately outside the maintenance contract. The single works should be done through competed unit prices used in the maintenance contract. Besides the actual maintenance work the contracts consist of administrative work such as reporting. As a rule the changes in administrator works should be done without any costs. Only the compensations of major changes should be negotiated between the contractor and the purchaser. This report may be found at http://alk.tiehallinto.fi/julkaisut/pdf/3200966-v-muutostenhall_alueurakan_hankintamenettelyssa.pdf

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.910
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.215 · 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.

Study designOther design
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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTIEHALLINNON SELVITYKSIA, FINNRA REPORTSSame topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207