Taghizadeh, K; Alizadeh, M and Yavari Roushan, T (2021) Cooperative game theory solution to design liability assignment issues in BIM projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 147(9): 04021103, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
In building information modeling (BIM) projects, more interactions between parties and more data input to the model lead to changes in roles and design processes, which require redefining parties' responsibilities for design. The authors could hardly find solutions to this design liability assignment issue in neither previous studies, contractual standards, nor the contracts of BIM projects. Hence, we utilized cooperative game theory, particularly the liability game model, to analyze the issue. Using Core and Shapley value, different project conditions were compared based on five scenarios and parameters affecting parties' shares of the damage. Both methods resulted in optimistic choices in all the scenarios. Findings were as follows: in all scenarios, the team that caused the first damage holds the biggest share, an increase in players' weights will increase their share, and generally, all the parameters have more effect on the first player than on the others. The paper also analyzes a case study. Research results can result in better risk allocation and consequently less uncertainty in BIM projects, manipulating entrepreneurs into using BIM, and reaching a more productive industry.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building information modeling; cooperative games; core; disputes; game theory; liability; shapely value |
| Index terms: | game theory, design process, liability, design liability, dispute, case study, building information modelling, interaction, risk allocation |
| Subjects: | decision models, design methods, dispute resolution, data collection methods, behavioral psychology, information systems, liability law, financial risk |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Legal Issues, Design Practice, Cost Management, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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