Seleção de metodologia de mensuração de retrabalho através da utilização do método AHP
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resumo A construção civil apresenta altos Ãndices de retrabalho, o que acarreta em custos adicionais e atrasos nos prazos dos projetos. Deste modo, diversos autores e entidades têm estudado o problema e buscado soluções para tentar quantificar e minimizar as consequências do retrabalho, tendo sido desenvolvidas diversas metodologias para mensuração de retrabalho: Reduction Rework Program do Construction Industry Institute; Best Productivity Practices Implementation Index do Construction Industry Institute; Metodologia do Construction Owners Association of Alberta; e Measuring and Classifying Construction Field Rework . Neste contexto, o presente artigo tem como objetivo propor um procedimento, com base no método de análise multicritério Analytic Hierarchy Process – AHP, para auxiliar no processo de seleção da metodologia de mensuração de retrabalho mais indicada a ser adotada em subsetores da indústria da construção civil. O procedimento proposto foi aplicado no segmento de montagem industrial, e a metodologia Rework Reduction Program apresentou os melhores resultados em relação à medição de retrabalho conforme cinco critérios selecionados para análise (abrangência, implantação, custos, entrada de dados e operação do sistema), sendo assim a mais indicada a ser adotada.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".