IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i11p6938-d832751.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Contractor’s Risk Analysis of Engineering Procurement and Construction (EPC) Contracts Using Ontological Semantic Model and Bi-Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) Technology

Author

Listed:
  • So-Won Choi

    (Graduate Institute of Ferrous and Energy Materials Technology, Pohang University of Science and Technology (POSTECH), Pohang 37673, Korea)

  • Eul-Bum Lee

    (Graduate Institute of Ferrous and Energy Materials Technology, Pohang University of Science and Technology (POSTECH), Pohang 37673, Korea
    Department of Industrial and Management Engineering, Pohang University of Science and Technology (POSTECH), Pohang 37673, Korea)

Abstract

The development of intelligent information technology in the era of the fourth industrial revolution requires the EPC (engineering, procurement, and construction) industry to increase productivity through a digital transformation. This study aims to automatically analyze the critical risk clauses in the invitation to bid (ITB) at the bidding stage to strengthen their competitiveness for the EPC contractors. To this end, we developed an automated analysis technology that effectively analyzes a large amount of ITB documents in a short time by applying natural language processing (NLP) and bi-directional long short-term memory (bi-LSTM) algorithms. This study proposes two models. First, the semantic analysis (SA) model is a rule-based approach that applies NLP to extract key risk clauses. Second, the risk level ranking (RLR) model is a train-based approach that ranks the risk impact for each clause by applying bi-LSTM. After developing and training an artificial intelligent (AI)-based ITB analysis model, its performance was evaluated through the actual project data. As a result of validation, the SA model showed an F1 score of 86.4 percent, and the RLR model showed an accuracy of 46.8 percent. The RLR model displayed relatively low performance because the ITB used in the evaluation test included the contract clauses that did not exist in the training dataset. Therefore, this study illustrated that the rule-based approach performed superior to the training-based method. The authors suggest that EPC contractors should apply both the SA and RLR modes in the ITB analysis, as one supplements the other. The two models were embedded in the Engineering Machine-learning Automation Platform (EMAP), a cloud-based platform developed by the authors. Rapid analysis through applying both the rule-based and AI-based automatic ITB analysis technology can contribute to securing timeliness for risk response and supplement possible human mistakes in the bidding stage.

Suggested Citation

  • So-Won Choi & Eul-Bum Lee, 2022. "Contractor’s Risk Analysis of Engineering Procurement and Construction (EPC) Contracts Using Ontological Semantic Model and Bi-Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) Technology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-32, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:11:p:6938-:d:832751
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/11/6938/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/11/6938/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Min-Ji Park & Eul-Bum Lee & Seung-Yeab Lee & Jong-Hyun Kim, 2021. "A Digitalized Design Risk Analysis Tool with Machine-Learning Algorithm for EPC Contractor’s Technical Specifications Assessment on Bidding," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-31, September.
    2. Farzad Firouzi Jahantigh & Behnam Malmir & Behzad Aslani Avilaq, 2017. "Economic risk assessment of EPC projects using fuzzy TOPSIS approach," International Journal of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 27(2), pages 161-179.
    3. Aretz, Kevin & Bartram, Söhnke M. & Pope, Peter F., 2011. "Asymmetric loss functions and the rationality of expected stock returns," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 413-437.
    4. Murat Gunduz & Mohammed Almuajebh, 2020. "Critical Success Factors for Sustainable Construction Project Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-17, March.
    5. Su Jin Choi & So Won Choi & Jong Hyun Kim & Eul-Bum Lee, 2021. "AI and Text-Mining Applications for Analyzing Contractor’s Risk in Invitation to Bid (ITB) and Contracts for Engineering Procurement and Construction (EPC) Projects," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-28, July.
    6. Pooyan Amir-Ahmadi & Christian Matthes & Mu-Chun Wang, 2020. "Choosing Prior Hyperparameters: With Applications to Time-Varying Parameter Models," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(1), pages 124-136, January.
    7. Ortwin Renn, 1998. "Three decades of risk research: accomplishments and new challenges," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(1), pages 49-71, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Min-Ji Park & Eul-Bum Lee & Seung-Yeab Lee & Jong-Hyun Kim, 2021. "A Digitalized Design Risk Analysis Tool with Machine-Learning Algorithm for EPC Contractor’s Technical Specifications Assessment on Bidding," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-31, September.
    2. Gundula Glowka & Andreas Kallmünzer & Anita Zehrer, 2021. "Enterprise risk management in small and medium family enterprises: the role of family involvement and CEO tenure," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 1213-1231, September.
    3. Gabriel Arce‐Alfaro & Boris Blagov, 2023. "Monetary Policy Uncertainty and Inflation Expectations," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 85(1), pages 70-94, February.
    4. Magnus Reif, 2020. "Macroeconomics, Nonlinearities, and the Business Cycle," ifo Beiträge zur Wirtschaftsforschung, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 87.
    5. O. Ionuş & M. Licurici & M. Pătroescu & S. Boengiu, 2015. "Assessment of flood-prone stripes within the Danube drainage area in the South-West Oltenia Development Region, Romania," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 75(1), pages 69-88, February.
    6. Dimitris Korobilis, 2021. "High-Dimensional Macroeconomic Forecasting Using Message Passing Algorithms," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(2), pages 493-504, March.
    7. Chan, Joshua C.C., 2021. "Minnesota-type adaptive hierarchical priors for large Bayesian VARs," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 1212-1226.
    8. Fanta Barry & Marie Sawadogo & Maïmouna Bologo (Traoré) & Igor W. K. Ouédraogo & Thomas Dogot, 2021. "Key Barriers to the Adoption of Biomass Gasification in Burkina Faso," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-14, June.
    9. Jieun Ryu & Eun Joo Yoon & Chan Park & Dong Kun Lee & Seong Woo Jeon, 2017. "A Flood Risk Assessment Model for Companies and Criteria for Governmental Decision-Making to Minimize Hazards," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-26, November.
    10. Joshua Chan, 2023. "BVARs and Stochastic Volatility," Papers 2310.14438, arXiv.org.
    11. Tao Ye & Yangbin Liu & Jiwei Wang & Ming Wang & Peijun Shi, 2017. "Farmers’ crop insurance perception and participation decisions: empirical evidence from Hunan, China," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(5), pages 664-677, May.
    12. Gary Koop & Dimitris Korobilis, 2023. "Bayesian Dynamic Variable Selection In High Dimensions," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 64(3), pages 1047-1074, August.
    13. Scott, Susan V. & Perry, Nicholas, 2006. "The enactment of risk categories: organizing and re-organizing risk management practices in the energy industry," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 37868, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    14. Birgit M Beisswingert & Keshun Zhang & Thomas Goetz & Urs Fischbacher, 2016. "Spillover Effects of Loss of Control on Risky Decision-Making," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-19, March.
    15. Terje Aven & Ortwin Renn, 2012. "On the Risk Management and Risk Governance of Petroleum Operations in the Barents Sea Area," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(9), pages 1561-1575, September.
    16. Ahmed S. El Touny & Ahmed H. Ibrahim & Hossam H. Mohamed, 2021. "An Integrated Sustainable Construction Project’s Critical Success Factors (ISCSFs)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-26, August.
    17. Huachen Li, 2023. "The Time‐Varying Response of Hours Worked to a Productivity Shock," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 55(7), pages 1907-1935, October.
    18. Terje Aven, 2012. "Foundational Issues in Risk Assessment and Risk Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(10), pages 1647-1656, October.
    19. Behrens, Christoph & Pierdzioch, Christian & Risse, Marian, 2018. "Testing the optimality of inflation forecasts under flexible loss with random forests," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 270-277.
    20. Min Li & Tsung-Chih Hsiao & Chih-Cheng Chen, 2020. "Exploring the Factors of Cooperation between Artists and Technologists in Creating New Media Art Works: Based on AHP," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-22, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:11:p:6938-:d:832751. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.