Can ChatGPT exceed humans in construction project risk management?

IF 3.6 2区 工程技术 Q1 ENGINEERING, CIVIL
Roope Nyqvist, Antti Peltokorpi, Olli Seppänen
{"title":"Can ChatGPT exceed humans in construction project risk management?","authors":"Roope Nyqvist, Antti Peltokorpi, Olli Seppänen","doi":"10.1108/ecam-08-2023-0819","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>The objective of this research is to investigate the capabilities of the ChatGPT GPT-4 model, a form of artificial intelligence (AI), in comparison to human experts in the context of construction project risk management.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>Employing a mixed-methods approach, the study draws a qualitative and quantitative comparison between 16 human risk management experts from Finnish construction companies and the ChatGPT AI model utilizing anonymous peer reviews. It focuses primarily on the areas of risk identification, analysis, and control.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>ChatGPT has demonstrated a superior ability to generate comprehensive risk management plans, with its quantitative scores significantly surpassing the human average. Nonetheless, the AI model's strategies are found to lack practicality and specificity, areas where human expertise excels.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>This study marks a significant advancement in construction project risk management research by conducting a pioneering blind-review study that assesses the capabilities of the advanced AI model, GPT-4, against those of human experts. Emphasizing the evolution from earlier GPT models, this research not only underscores the innovative application of ChatGPT-4 but also the critical role of anonymized peer evaluations in enhancing the objectivity of findings. It illuminates the synergistic potential of AI and human expertise, advocating for a collaborative model where AI serves as an augmentative tool, thereby optimizing human performance in identifying and managing risks.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":11888,"journal":{"name":"Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ecam-08-2023-0819","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, CIVIL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

The objective of this research is to investigate the capabilities of the ChatGPT GPT-4 model, a form of artificial intelligence (AI), in comparison to human experts in the context of construction project risk management.

Design/methodology/approach

Employing a mixed-methods approach, the study draws a qualitative and quantitative comparison between 16 human risk management experts from Finnish construction companies and the ChatGPT AI model utilizing anonymous peer reviews. It focuses primarily on the areas of risk identification, analysis, and control.

Findings

ChatGPT has demonstrated a superior ability to generate comprehensive risk management plans, with its quantitative scores significantly surpassing the human average. Nonetheless, the AI model's strategies are found to lack practicality and specificity, areas where human expertise excels.

Originality/value

This study marks a significant advancement in construction project risk management research by conducting a pioneering blind-review study that assesses the capabilities of the advanced AI model, GPT-4, against those of human experts. Emphasizing the evolution from earlier GPT models, this research not only underscores the innovative application of ChatGPT-4 but also the critical role of anonymized peer evaluations in enhancing the objectivity of findings. It illuminates the synergistic potential of AI and human expertise, advocating for a collaborative model where AI serves as an augmentative tool, thereby optimizing human performance in identifying and managing risks.

ChatGPT 能否在建筑项目风险管理方面超越人类?
本研究的目的是调查 ChatGPT GPT-4 模型这种人工智能(AI)形式与人类专家在建筑项目风险管理方面的能力对比。研究结果ChatGPT在生成全面的风险管理计划方面表现出了卓越的能力,其量化得分大大超过了人类的平均水平。然而,人工智能模型的策略缺乏实用性和针对性,而这正是人类专家所擅长的领域。原创性/价值本研究通过开展一项开创性的盲审研究,评估先进的人工智能模型 GPT-4 与人类专家的能力,标志着建筑项目风险管理研究取得了重大进展。该研究强调了早期 GPT 模型的演变,不仅强调了 ChatGPT-4 的创新应用,还强调了匿名同行评估在提高研究结果客观性方面的关键作用。它揭示了人工智能与人类专业知识的协同潜力,倡导建立一种合作模式,将人工智能作为一种辅助工具,从而优化人类在识别和管理风险方面的表现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management
Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management Business, Management and Accounting-General Business,Management and Accounting
CiteScore
8.10
自引率
19.50%
发文量
226
期刊介绍: ECAM publishes original peer-reviewed research papers, case studies, technical notes, book reviews, features, discussions and other contemporary articles that advance research and practice in engineering, construction and architectural management. In particular, ECAM seeks to advance integrated design and construction practices, project lifecycle management, and sustainable construction. The journal’s scope covers all aspects of architectural design, design management, construction/project management, engineering management of major infrastructure projects, and the operation and management of constructed facilities. ECAM also addresses the technological, process, economic/business, environmental/sustainability, political, and social/human developments that influence the construction project delivery process. ECAM strives to establish strong theoretical and empirical debates in the above areas of engineering, architecture, and construction research. Papers should be heavily integrated with the existing and current body of knowledge within the field and develop explicit and novel contributions. Acknowledging the global character of the field, we welcome papers on regional studies but encourage authors to position the work within the broader international context by reviewing and comparing findings from their regional study with studies conducted in other regions or countries whenever possible.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信