{"title":"Artificial intelligence for multi-objective optimization of time, cost, quality, and safety risks in construction projects","authors":"Vishnu Lakkamraju, Gyana Ranjana Panigrahi, Ramesh Chandra Sahoo, Tushar Savale, Tarun Madan Kanade, Abdul Habib Zaray","doi":"10.1007/s42107-026-01720-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Modern construction project planning increasingly requires the simultaneous optimization of multiple conflicting objectives, particularly time, cost, quality, and safety risk. This study presents an artificial intelligence-based multi-objective optimization framework for addressing the construction time–cost–quality–safety risk trade-off (TCQSRT) problem. A 37-activity project is considered as a case study, where each activity is associated with multiple execution modes characterized by different combinations of duration, cost, quality, and safety risk, resulting in a large-scale combinatorial optimization problem. To effectively solve this complex problem, an enhanced Aquila Optimizer (OBL–AO) integrated with opposition-based learning is proposed. The Aquila Optimizer, inspired by the hunting behavior of Aquila eagles, provides a balanced exploration and exploitation mechanism, while opposition-based learning improves population diversity and accelerates convergence by simultaneously evaluating candidate solutions and their opposite solutions. The proposed model simultaneously minimizes project duration, total cost, and safety risk while maximizing quality, generating a diverse set of Pareto-optimal solutions for decision-making. The performance of the proposed OBL–AO approach is evaluated using standard multi-objective metrics, including Spacing (Sp), Mean Ideal Distance (MID), and Hypervolume (HV). The results indicate that OBL–AO achieves a Sp value of 0.647, reflecting a competitive distribution of solutions across the Pareto front. In terms of convergence, it attains a MID value of 2.01, which is lower than NDSII-TLBO (2.21) and close to OBL-TLBO (1.97), demonstrating strong proximity to the ideal solution set. Most notably, OBL–AO achieves the highest HV value of 0.79 compared to OBL-TLBO (0.77) and NDSII-TLBO (0.74), indicating superior overall performance in terms of convergence and diversity balance. Overall, comparative analysis confirms that the proposed OBL–AO framework generates a more robust and well-distributed Pareto front than benchmark methods. These results demonstrate its effectiveness in producing high-quality trade-off solutions for the TCQSRT problem and highlight its potential as a reliable decision-support tool for improving sustainability, safety, and efficiency in modern construction project management.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8513,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Civil Engineering","volume":"27 9","pages":"4261 - 4274"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Journal of Civil Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s42107-026-01720-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Engineering","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Modern construction project planning increasingly requires the simultaneous optimization of multiple conflicting objectives, particularly time, cost, quality, and safety risk. This study presents an artificial intelligence-based multi-objective optimization framework for addressing the construction time–cost–quality–safety risk trade-off (TCQSRT) problem. A 37-activity project is considered as a case study, where each activity is associated with multiple execution modes characterized by different combinations of duration, cost, quality, and safety risk, resulting in a large-scale combinatorial optimization problem. To effectively solve this complex problem, an enhanced Aquila Optimizer (OBL–AO) integrated with opposition-based learning is proposed. The Aquila Optimizer, inspired by the hunting behavior of Aquila eagles, provides a balanced exploration and exploitation mechanism, while opposition-based learning improves population diversity and accelerates convergence by simultaneously evaluating candidate solutions and their opposite solutions. The proposed model simultaneously minimizes project duration, total cost, and safety risk while maximizing quality, generating a diverse set of Pareto-optimal solutions for decision-making. The performance of the proposed OBL–AO approach is evaluated using standard multi-objective metrics, including Spacing (Sp), Mean Ideal Distance (MID), and Hypervolume (HV). The results indicate that OBL–AO achieves a Sp value of 0.647, reflecting a competitive distribution of solutions across the Pareto front. In terms of convergence, it attains a MID value of 2.01, which is lower than NDSII-TLBO (2.21) and close to OBL-TLBO (1.97), demonstrating strong proximity to the ideal solution set. Most notably, OBL–AO achieves the highest HV value of 0.79 compared to OBL-TLBO (0.77) and NDSII-TLBO (0.74), indicating superior overall performance in terms of convergence and diversity balance. Overall, comparative analysis confirms that the proposed OBL–AO framework generates a more robust and well-distributed Pareto front than benchmark methods. These results demonstrate its effectiveness in producing high-quality trade-off solutions for the TCQSRT problem and highlight its potential as a reliable decision-support tool for improving sustainability, safety, and efficiency in modern construction project management.
期刊介绍:
The Asian Journal of Civil Engineering (Building and Housing) welcomes articles and research contributions on topics such as:- Structural analysis and design - Earthquake and structural engineering - New building materials and concrete technology - Sustainable building and energy conservation - Housing and planning - Construction management - Optimal design of structuresPlease note that the journal will not accept papers in the area of hydraulic or geotechnical engineering, traffic/transportation or road making engineering, and on materials relevant to non-structural buildings, e.g. materials for road making and asphalt. Although the journal will publish authoritative papers on theoretical and experimental research works and advanced applications, it may also feature, when appropriate: a) tutorial survey type papers reviewing some fields of civil engineering; b) short communications and research notes; c) book reviews and conference announcements.