Ammar, M. A. and Alattyih, W. (2026) Lingo optimization modelling of construction scheduling. International Journal of Construction Management, 26(9), pp. 1746-1760. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
Scheduling techniques (e.g. CPM and LOB) help decision making objectively; however, they produce good rather than optimal solutions. Moreover, CPM and LOB assume deterministic rather than stochastic values of construction activities' duration and cost. Mathematical programming was early used to optimally solve construction problems; however, modelling of real-life projects is tedious, time-consuming, and prone to errors. LINGO system can handle stochastic behaviour of project parameters and express large-size optimization problems concisely and solve them optimally. In this paper, LINGO's modelling language is used to automatically formulate core mathematical models of real-life construction problems. The scheduling algorithms of CPM and LOB are transformed into the corresponding core optimization models. LINGO modelling language is illustrated by an example project and three case studies are used to prove their power features. The primary contributions of the present work are (1) an easy and simple modelling language is used to formulate optimization models of scheduling techniques, (2) models of large-size projects can be formulated with few LINGO statements, and (3) LINGO optimization modelling opens the door to analyse scholastic behaviour of construction parameters. LINGO language can be easily used to formulate the mathematical moles of complex optimization problems and then solve them optimally.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | chance-constrained programming; critical path method; decision-making; line of balance; lingo modelling language; mathematical programming; optimization; scheduling |
| Index terms: | line of balance, critical path method, programming, construction activity, construction scheduling, mathematical model, modelling, scheduling, case study, decision-making, duration, mathematical programming |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, decision analysis, project controls, mathematical modelling, analytical methods, programming, construction operations, operations research, algorithms |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Risk Management, Site Management, Research Practice, Time Control, Digital Applications |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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