Zhan, H; Hwang, B G and Jabbar, S B B A (2025) Erratum for: An integrated approach to assessing digitalization of integrated digital delivery projects (journal of construction engineering and management DOI: 10.1061/jcemd4.Coeng-16149). Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 151(10): 08225001, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The following corrections should be made to "An Integrated Approach to Assessing Digitalization of Integrated Digital Delivery Projects"by Hanzhang Zhan, Bon-Gang Hwang, and Srinda Bee Binte Abdul Jabbar, https://doi.org/10.1061/JCEMD4.COENG -16149. The authors discovered a computational error related to a matrix multiplication in their work that requires numerical values to be corrected in several places. • Step 4 of the "FSE"section should define MFi as MFi ¼ ffi5; fi4; fi3; fi2; fi1g. • In the "Developing the IDD-DAS"section, the expression for the maximum DLI for IDD projects should be 38.785 [(45 × 0.254) + (35 × 0.240) + (40 × 0.249) + (35 × 0.257)], and the maximum possible index score for normalizing the DLI score should be 38.785. • In the "Validating the IDD-DAS"section, the overall digitalization scores should be 55% for Case Study 1, 88% for Case Study 2, and 81% for Case Study 3. Table 5. Digitalization level index (DLI) and the coefficient for each digital phase (DP) (Table presented) • In the "Discussion"section, the coefficients derived for the four digital phases should be 0.254, 0.240, 0.249, and 0.257, respectively. • Eqs. (2), (5), (7), and (8) should appear as follows: (Formula presented) Corrected versions of Table 5 and Fig. 1 are provided here. The authors regret the errors. To preserve the published version of record, these details have been corrected only in this erratum. (Figure presented).
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | journal, case study, digitalization, construction engineering, integrated approach |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, engineering methods, research dissemination and communication, data collection methods, digital technology |
| Topics: | Procurement, Digital Applications, Engineering Principles, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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