Moussa, A; Ezzeldin, M and El-Dakhakhni, W (2025) Machine learning and optimization strategies for infrastructure projects risk management. Construction Management and Economics, 43(8), pp. 557-582. ISSN 0144-6193
Abstract
Infrastructure projects often encounter significant performance challenges due to their inherent complexities. Two primary factors contributing to these challenges are risk interactions—occur when one risk amplifies another—and systemic risks, where disruptions in individual components can cascade into project-wide failures. Despite their critical importance, the combined impacts of these risks remain underexplored, particularly through practical and scalable methodologies. This study introduces an integrated machine learning (ML) and optimization-driven approach for assessing and mitigating these combined impacts on infrastructure project performance. Historical project data is leveraged to predict the performance impacts, measured through key performance indicators (KPIs). To enhance predictive accuracy and minimize computational costs, genetic algorithm-based hyperparameter tuning is employed, outperforming traditional methods such as grid search. Building on these predictions, multi-objective optimization is applied to devise effective response strategies that improve the project KPIs while adhering to predefined constraints. The utility of the proposed approach is illustrated through a demonstration application, showcasing its ability to generate optimized schedules and risk registers. These outputs offer actionable insights and decision support tools for project managers. The study contributes a scalable and practical solution that enhances the performance of infrastructure projects under the combined impacts of risk interactions and systemic risks.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | complexity; machine learning; mitigation strategies; optimization; risk interactions; risk management; systemic risks |
| Index terms: | strategy, project data, risk register, accuracy, decision support, genetic algorithm, machine learning, complexity, methodology, mitigation, key performance indicator, project manager, infrastructure project, interaction, multi-objective optimization, risk management |
| Subjects: | artificial intelligence, project delivery, risk assessment, profession, data collection methods, decision analysis, infrastructure and transport systems, systems engineering, management, professional development, behavioral psychology, algorithms, research methods, financial risk |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Business Strategy, Information Management, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Digital Applications, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Risk Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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