Tan, Y (2006) A case-based reasoning approach to improve risk identification in construction projects. PhD thesis, University of Leeds, UK.
Abstract
Risk management is an important process to enhance the understanding of the project so as to support decision making. Despite well established existing methods, the application of risk management in practice is frequently poor. The reasons for this are investigated as accuracy, complexity, time and cost involved and lack of knowledge sharing. Appropriate risk identification is fundamental for successful risk management. Well known risk identification methods require expert knowledge, hence risk identification depends on the involvement and the sophistication of experts. Subjective judgment and intuition usually from par1t of experts' decision, and sharing and transferring this knowledge is restricted by the availability of experts. Further, psychological research has showed that people have limitations in coping with complex reasoning. In order to reduce subjectivity and enhance knowledge sharing, artificial intelligence techniques can be utilised. An intelligent system accumulates retrievable knowledge and reasoning in an impartial way so that a commonly acceptable solution can be achieved. Case-based reasoning enables learning from experience, which matches the manner that human experts catch and process information and knowledge in relation to project risks. A case-based risk identification model is developed to facilitate human experts making final decisions. This approach exploits the advantage of knowledge sharing, increasing confidence and efficiency in investment decisions, and enhancing communication among the project participants.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | accuracy; artificial intelligence; case-based reasoning; communication; complexity; decision making; efficiency; investment; learning; reasoning; risk identification; risk management; subjectivity |
| Index terms: | efficiency, judgment, intelligent system, coping, risk management, artificial intelligence, investment decision, reasoning, case-based reasoning, subjectivity, knowledge sharing, accuracy, risk identification, construction project, decision-making, intuition, complexity |
| Subjects: | financial risk, professional development, production management, automation and robotics, performance management, systems engineering, behavioral psychology, decision analysis, cognitive psychology, human factors and perception, dispute resolution, risk assessment, economic analysis, knowledge management, artificial intelligence |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Information Management, Research Practice, Legal Issues, Quality Management, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Risk Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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