Perng, Y H and Chang, C L (2004) Data mining for government construction procurement. Building Research & Information, 32(4), pp. 329-338. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
A new data-mining model for government construction procurement was developed to consider data preparation, domain knowledge and a conceptual model to reflect the needs of the knowledge economy. Prototype experiments and analysis were performed to test the data mining using information from a typical Taiwanese local construction procurement unit. The application of the data-mining algorithm to this construction procurement management model improves government procurement effectiveness and efficiency. By complying with this governmental procurement information system and revealing the information required by the World Trade Organization and the Government Procurement Agreement, the model has the potential to improve government procurement and industry effectiveness and efficiency. It also provides a platform for government access to the international community.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | data mining; government procurement; government procurement agreement; knowledge management; procurement; simulation; Taiwan |
| Index terms: | Taiwan, World Trade Organization, platform, data mining, government procurement, knowledge management, prototype, effectiveness, information system, efficiency, construction procurement, experiment, mining |
| Subjects: | information systems, professional development, digital design, procurement strategy, modelling and simulation, performance management, geotechnical engineering, Geography, data collection methods, data science, institutional frameworks, contractual arrangements |
| Topics: | Information Management, Engineering Principles, Digital Applications, Procurement, Quality Management, Geographical Context, Governance, Research Practice |
| 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