Galadari, A I (2008) Evaluation of road construction alternatives: A regretful approach. PhD thesis, University of Colorado at Denver, USA.
Abstract
This study's objective is considering two main innovative criteria in evaluating alternatives of different road designs. It focuses on regret theory and its utility in evaluating between different alternative designs and develops new criteria in the assessment of a traffic safety performance indicator. Decisions between different road construction alternative designs are based on multi-criteria factors. This research develops a systematic methodology in considering regret based on a weighted system of performance indicators that include, planning, traffic flow, traffic safety, construction economics, and time. Due to uncertainty, a process to formulate a regret matrix is developed that introduces criteria to evaluate between different alternatives. A full set of procedures for developing the matrices are classified. Sensitivity of weights on the overall results is also tested to ensure reliability of subjective quantities. Meanwhile, most research studies today for evaluating road designs emphasize in traffic flow more than traffic safety. A technique that allows for the quantification of a performance indicator for traffic safety is proposed, based on direct factors and the likelihood of conflict in a microscopic level. The performance indicator for traffic safety is included in the regret matrix for the evaluation between different road design alternatives.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Janson, B |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction economics; reliability; uncertainty; traffic; road construction; safety; quantification |
| Index terms: | road construction, traffic flow, quantification, construction economics, methodology, safety performance, performance indicator |
| Subjects: | civil engineering, performance management, research methods, occupational health and safety management, measurement and scaling, financial analysis, transportation engineering |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Research Practice, Health and Safety, Engineering Principles, Quality 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