Zhou, H; Gao, B; Tang, S; Li, B and Wang, S (2025) Intelligent detection on construction project contract missing clauses based on deep learning and NLP. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 32(3), pp. 1546-1580. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: The number of construction dispute cases has maintained a high growth trend in recent years. The effective exploration and management of construction contract risk can directly promote the overall performance of the project life cycle. The miss of clauses may result in a failure to match with standard contracts. If the contract, modified by the owner, omits key clauses, potential disputes may lead to contractors paying substantial compensation. Therefore, the identification of construction project contract missing clauses has heavily relied on the manual review technique, which is inefficient and highly restricted by personnel experience. The existing intelligent means only work for the contract query and storage. It is urgent to raise the level of intelligence for contract clause management. Therefore, this paper aims to propose an intelligent method to detect construction project contract missing clauses based on Natural Language Processing (NLP) and deep learning technology. Design/methodology/approach: A complete classification scheme of contract clauses is designed based on NLP. First, construction contract texts are pre-processed and converted from unstructured natural language into structured digital vector form. Following the initial categorization, a multi-label classification of long text construction contract clauses is designed to preliminary identify whether the clause labels are missing. After the multi-label clause missing detection, the authors implement a clause similarity algorithm by creatively integrating the image detection thought, MatchPyramid model, with BERT to identify missing substantial content in the contract clauses. Findings: 1,322 construction project contracts were tested. Results showed that the accuracy of multi-label classification could reach 93%, the accuracy of similarity matching can reach 83%, and the recall rate and F1 mean of both can reach more than 0.7. The experimental results verify the feasibility of intelligently detecting contract risk through the NLP-based method to some extent. Originality/value: NLP is adept at recognizing textual content and has shown promising results in some contract processing applications. However, the mostly used approaches of its utilization for risk detection in construction contract clauses predominantly are rule-based, which encounter challenges when handling intricate and lengthy engineering contracts. This paper introduces an NLP technique based on deep learning which reduces manual intervention and can autonomously identify and tag types of contractual deficiencies, aligning with the evolving complexities anticipated in future construction contracts. Moreover, this method achieves the recognition of extended contract clause texts. Ultimately, this approach boasts versatility; users simply need to adjust parameters such as segmentation based on language categories to detect omissions in contract clauses of diverse languages.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction contracts; deep learning; natural language processing; text classification |
| Index terms: | construction contract, construction dispute, compensation, deep learning, life cycle, owner, dispute, exploration, methodology, construction project, complexity, personnel, accuracy |
| Subjects: | professional development, management, systems engineering, sociology, dispute resolution, value management, artificial intelligence, production management, research methods, contract type, environmental resource management |
| Topics: | Legal Issues, Procurement, Sustainability, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Digital Applications, Human Resources, Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Information 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