Chao, L C and Skibniewski, M J (1998) Fuzzy logic for evaluating alternative construction technology. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 124(4), pp. 297-304. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The construction environment is changeable and full of uncertainties, so each alternative work method for an operation may have optimistic and pessimistic cost estimates, along with corresponding probabilities. The cost variability and thus the risk of a new technology is often even greater, which affects the acceptability of the technology. The expected monetary values of technology alternatives do not reflect a decision maker's preference for potential gains or his or her aversion to likely adversities. Formal decision analysis techniques, such as the one based on utility theory, must be employed to model a decision maker's value system. As an alternative to those traditional techniques, this paper presents a fuzzy-logic-based, risk-incorporating approach to evaluating new construction technology, intended to produce consistent technology implementation decisions. Its concepts and steps are described in detail, followed by an example in which alternative methods for the formwork operation of a high-rise building project are evaluated. Experimental results show that the approach can produce a consistent evaluation of the available options, according to a set of user-defined linguistic rules that state the priorities in a given project scenario.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | construction technology, option, variability, implementation, cost estimate, formwork, decision analysis, fuzzy logic, new technology, high-rise building, preference, utility theory |
| Subjects: | financial and cost management, innovation and technology management, data science, contractual arrangements, digital engineering, construction type, economic theory, statistical analysis, building construction, decision analysis, decision-making and reasoning |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Risk Management, Construction Technology, Procurement, Cost Management, Engineering Principles, Research Practice |
| 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