Construction Dispute Potentials: Mechanism versus Empiricism in Artificial Neural Networks

Peipei Wang, Yunhan Huang (), Jianguo Zhu and Ming Shan
Additional contact information
Peipei Wang: School of Civil and Ocean Engineering, Jiangsu Ocean University, Lianyungang 222000, China
Yunhan Huang: School of Civil and Ocean Engineering, Jiangsu Ocean University, Lianyungang 222000, China
Jianguo Zhu: School of Civil and Ocean Engineering, Jiangsu Ocean University, Lianyungang 222000, China
Ming Shan: School of Civil and Ocean Engineering, Jiangsu Ocean University, Lianyungang 222000, China

Sustainability, 2022, vol. 14, issue 22, 1-23

Abstract: The booming development of neural network algorithms has shifted the research focus in the field of construction project management from causal investigation to statistical approximation and hence from mechanistic models to empirical models. This paper took construction dispute avoidance as an example and enabled the best efforts to establish paired mechanistic and empirical models to investigate if the pursuit of a mechanistic understanding of construction disputes should be continued. A Bayesian belief network and multilayer perceptron were used for mechanistic and empirical simulations, respectively. A list of critical dispute factors was first identified from the literature and shortlisted by Pearson’s chi-square tests and Pearson product-moment correlational coefficient tests. The structure of the Bayesian belief network was constructed with logical deduction assisted by a further literature review and Delphi surveys. A structured questionnaire survey was conducted to collect quantitative data for factor shortlisting and model quantification. It was revealed that, being assisted with machine learning techniques, both mechanistic and empirical models achieved an accuracy rate of over 95% under ideal conditions. However, Bayesian belief network models predicted better with fewer constraints due to their advantages in reflecting the formation mechanism of construction disputes, while multilayer perceptron models were more constrained by the inconvenience of sourcing high-quality data as model input. This paper demonstrated that it is still necessary to investigate the formation mechanism of construction disputes further for more efficient avoidance strategies. During the investigation of model construction and comparison, this paper also reflected on the interpretation of statistical threshold and proposed that an arbitrary single cut-off point for statistical tests could potentially eliminate factors that should have been included.

Keywords: construction disputes; neural networks; mechanical mode; empirical model (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/22/15239/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/22/15239/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:22:p:15239-:d:975176

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().