MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W91616806

Project Schedule Compression Considering Multi-objective Decision Environment

2011· dissertation· en· W91616806 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University) · 2011
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicResource-Constrained Project Scheduling
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsScheduleComputer scienceProcess (computing)NoveltyOperations researchAllowance (engineering)Duration (music)Harmony searchIterative and incremental developmentIndustrial engineeringRisk analysis (engineering)EngineeringOperations managementArtificial intelligenceSoftware engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research aims to present a new method to circumvent the limitations of current schedule compression methods, which reduce schedule crashing to the traditional time-cost trade-off analysis, where only cost is considered. In this research the schedule compression process is modeled as a multi-attributed decision making problem in which different factors contribute to priority setting for activity crashing. For this purpose, a modified format of the Multiple Binary Decision Method (MBDM) and an iterative crashing process are utilized. The developed method is implemented in Visual Basic 2010 environment, with a dynamic link to MS-Project to facilitate the needed iterative rescheduling of project activities. To demonstrate the use of the developed method and to highlight its capabilities, 3 case examples drawn from literature were analyzed. When considering cost only, the generated results were in good agreement with those generated using the Harmony Search method, Genetic Algorithms and iterative crashing process used in original examples, particularly in capturing the project least-cost duration. However, when other factors in addition to cost were considered, as expected, different project least-cost and associated durations were obtained. 
\nThe novelty of the developed method lies in its capacity to allow for the consideration of a number of factors in addition to cost. Also through its allowance for possible variations in the relative importance of these factors at the individual activity level, it provides contractors with a number of compression execution plans and assists them in identifying the most suitable plan. Accordingly, it enables the integration of contractors’ judgment and experience in the crashing process and permits consideration of different project environments and constraints.

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.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.216
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.237 · 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