Dawood, N N and Bates, W (1998) Forecasting indices for construction activities in the heavy civil engineering industry: A joint approach methodology. In: Hughes, W (ed.) Proceedings of 14th Annual ARCOM Conference, 9-11 September 1998, Reading, UK.
Abstract
There are several forms of technique available for use in the prediction of time series data and not one method can be applied to all time series. Essentially, there are only two forms of approach to forecasting: Subjective, which incorporates the judgement of 'experts' (persons who work closely with the industry or product they are set to forecast), and objective, which apply a scientific process to the analysis of previous data using a statistical approach to create 'a fit' to the historic data then applying the 'model' to predict future occurrences. The objective techniques vary in complexity. However, it does not follow that the more complex the approach the better the forecast. The author would like to state that where accuracy is required, a combination of objective statistical analyses with subjective evaluation can be shown to be the most efficient.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | forecasting; heavy engineering; indices |
| Index terms: | time series, forecasting, construction activity, statistical analysis, accuracy, methodology, complexity |
| Subjects: | data science, construction operations, prediction and forecasting, systems engineering, research methods, professional development |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Information Management, Research Practice, Site Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here