Maghrebi, M; Travis Waller, S and Sammut, C (2014) Assessing the accuracy of expert-based decisions in dispatching ready mixed concrete. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 140(6): 6014004, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
In ready mixed concrete (RMC) dispatching, common practice is to rely on human experts for any necessary real-time decision making. This is because of the perceived complexity of RMC dispatching and the general lack of highly applicable optimization tools for the task. Critically, the accuracy of expert decisions (compared to optimization approaches) has not been comprehensively examined in the literature. To address the question of current practice expert accuracy in the context of optimized outcomes, this paper first mathematically models the RMC dispatching problem according to methods introduced in the literature. Two approaches are taken: integer programming (without time windows) and mixed-integer programming (with time windows). Further, the constructed models are tested with field data and compared to the decisions made by experts. The RMC data set has four depots and approximately 40 trucks that typically supply 40-200 deliveries per day. The results show that, on average, experts' decisions are 90% accurate compared to the optimization models under examination. Finally, further investigation suggests that at least a portion of this optimality gap between expert and optimization models occurs because experts in critical situations accept a higher cost to ensure a more stable dispatching system.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | expert decision-making; integer programming; optimization; quantitative methods; ready mixed concrete |
| Index terms: | decision-making, integer programming, investigation, ready mixed concrete, quantitative method, complexity, window, accuracy |
| Subjects: | systems engineering, materials science, professional development, algorithms, architectural elements, data analysis and analytics, data collection methods, decision analysis |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Risk Management, Digital Applications, Information 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