Yun, S and Caldas, C H (2009) Analysing decision variables that influence preliminary feasibility studies using data mining techniques. Construction Management and Economics, 27(1), pp. 73-87. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
The development of infrastructure contributes to the social and economic improvement of a country, and generally requires huge and immediate investments. To decide on appropriate infrastructure projects, many countries use preliminary feasibility studies (PFS). However, a preliminary feasibility study takes a relatively long time to complete. During this time, decision-making parameters such as the estimated project cost as well as the project environment may change. To identify the decision parameters that affect the feasibility analysis, data mining techniques are applied to analyse the Go/No Go decision-making process in infrastructure projects. The data mining analysis uses PFS data obtained from large-scale infrastructure projects in Korea. Classification models found 57 hidden rules in the PFS. Prediction models were also developed for Go/No Go decision making using an artificial neural network (ANN) and logistic regression analysis. In order to validate the results, the study evaluated the accuracies and errors of both the classification and the prediction model.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | data mining; feasibility; forecasting; infrastructure |
| Index terms: | decision-making, feasibility study, artificial neural network, prediction model, accuracy, project cost, logistic regression analysis, infrastructure project, data mining, forecasting, decision-making process |
| Subjects: | prediction and forecasting, data science, design stages, modelling and simulation, statistical analysis, infrastructure and transport systems, decision analysis, professional development, economics |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Information Management, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Cost Management, Risk Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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