Chao, L C and Kuo, C P (2018) Neural-network-centered approach to determining lower limit of combined rate of overheads and markup. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 144(2): 04017117, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
In bidding for construction projects, a contractor often uses the simple method of adding a combined rate of overheads and markup on top of the estimated direct cost for arriving at a bid. If the rate is subjectively charged, a greater loss risk is involved. An improved approach to determining the lower limit of the rate for a project is proposed. A neural network model built from recent winning bids and project attributes maps the rate in the winning bid for a project and is used to estimate the probabilities of winning for various rate levels. Then, the minimum rate to be charged is determined based on minimization of the overall loss risk defined by a probabilistic model with the estimated probabilities of winning and project cost variability. The approach is illustrated by an example using a firm's bidding cases in Taiwan; the results are consistent with the features of the approach. In setting the lower limit of the overheads-cum-markup rate, the approach can be used to prevent arbitrary overcuts in bids under intense competition, thereby filling a gap among existing works and advancing the field of bidding.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | bids; competition; loss risk; markup; neural networks; overheads; quantitative methods; regression analysis |
| Index terms: | Taiwan, minimization, maps, neural network, project cost, construction project, competition, quantitative method, bidding, direct cost, estimate, overheads, regression analysis, variability |
| Subjects: | data analysis and analytics, bidding, artificial intelligence, financial and cost management, economics, spatial and geospatial analysis, algorithms, Geography, production management, market analysis, statistical analysis, financial analysis |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Cost Management, Project Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Procurement |
| 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