Kim, S (2013) Hybrid EVAS-CBR system for the preliminary cost estimation of high-rise buildings. PhD thesis, University of Reading, UK.
Abstract
Cost estimates at any stage need to be sufficiently accurate for cost experts to be able to control cost effectively. However, preliminary cost estimating is still considerably inaccurate (i.e. , ±50% error rate), because limited information is available on the numerous factors affecting project costs: these are either unknown or not appropriately taken into consideration. In spite of the country's experience with Korean High-Rise Buildings (HRBs) construction, cost estimating at the preliminary design phase is still considerably inaccurate. The main aim of this study is to overcome the limitations of existing cost estimation models for Korean HRBs and improve their prediction accuracy (i.e. , to under ± I 0% error rate) of cost estimation at the preliminary design phase through the use of a new hybrid approach, Excel Visual Basic Application System (EVAS)-Case Based Reasoning (CBR). CBR is a relatively new artificial intelligence approach that overcomes most drawbacks of present cost estimation methods by reusing the specific knowledge encapsulated in previously experienced problems when solving similar ones.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | accuracy; reasoning; construction cost; artificial intelligence; cost estimation; estimating; project cost |
| Index terms: | artificial intelligence, preliminary design, cost estimate, cost estimating, accuracy, reasoning, construction cost, case-based reasoning, high-rise building, project cost, estimating |
| Subjects: | design practice, construction type, artificial intelligence, economics, financial and cost management, cognitive psychology, professional development |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Construction Technology, Information Management, Design Practice, Digital Applications, Research Practice |
| 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