Asghari, V; Wang, Y; Biglari, A J; Hsu, S C and Tang, P (2022) Reinforcement learning in construction engineering and management: A review. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 148(11): 03122009, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The construction engineering and management (CEM) domain frequently meets complex tasks due to the unavoidable complicated operation environments and the involvement of numerous workers. Being able to simulate these tasks with promised designed goals, reinforcement learning (RL) can help CEM engineers reach enhanced strategies in multi-/single-objective sequential decision-making under various sources of uncertainties. To provide a better understanding of the status quo of the RL application in CEM and its potential benefits with their strengths and limitations, this study systematically reviewed 85 CEM-related RL-based studies as a result of queries from three main scientific databases, namely Scopus, Science Direct, and Web of Science. The results of this review reveal that researchers have been increasingly applying RL methods in CEM domains, such as building energy management, infrastructure management, construction machinery, and even safety in the last few years. Our analysis showed that the reviewed papers are associated with different limitations such as generalizability, justification of selecting the approaches, and validation. This review paper alongside the presented overview of the RL methodology can assist researchers and practitioners in CEM with (1) gaining a high-level and intuitive understanding of RL algorithms, (2) identifying previous and possible future opportunities for applying RL in complex decision-making, and (3) fine tuning, proper validation, and optimizing to-be-developed RL frameworks in their future studies and applications.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building energy; infrastructure management; Markov decision processes; reinforcement learning; review |
| Index terms: | decision process, database, engineer, infrastructure management, future study, energy management, construction engineering, reinforcement, strategy, science, validation, practitioner, methodology, decision-making |
| Subjects: | data management, decision analysis, management, engineering methods, research methods, infrastructure engineering, professional development, sustainability and energy, building materials, profession, research design and methodology, specialized education, practitioner |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Roles and Professions, Sustainability, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Information Management, Engineering Principles, Construction Materials, Education, Digital Applications |
| 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