Hindawi

Advances in Civil Engineering

Volume 2019, Article ID 8290935, 10 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/8290935

Research Article
Cost Estimation Model Using Modified Parameters for
Construction Projects

Sae-Hyun Ji ,1 Joseph Ahn ,2 Hyun-Soo Lee,3 and Kyeongjin Han4

1
Ph.D., Research Associate Professor, Institute of Construction and Environmental Engineering, Seoul National University,
Seoul 08826, Republic of Korea
2
Assistant Professor, Division of Architecture, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Hoseo University,
Asan 31499, Republic of Korea
3
Professor, Department of Architecture & Architectural Engineering, Seoul National University, Seoul 151-742, Republic of Korea
4
Manager, Samsung C&T, Seoul 05288, Republic of Korea

Correspondence should be addressed to Joseph Ahn; josephahn@hoseo.edu

Received 22 February 2019; Revised 26 May 2019; Accepted 3 July 2019; Published 30 July 2019

Academic Editor: Behzad Esmaeili

Copyright © 2019 Sae-Hyun Ji et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License,
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Construction projects require huge amounts of capital and have many risk factors due to the unique industry characteristics. For a
project to be successful, accurate cost estimation during the design phase is very important. Thus, this research aims to develop a
cost estimation model where a modification method integrates influential factors with significant parameters. This study identified
a modified parameter-making process, which integrates many influential factors into a small number of significant parameters.
The proposed model estimates the cost using quantity-based modified parameters multiplied by their price. A case study was
conducted with 24-residence building project, and the estimation accuracy of the suggested method and a CBR model were
compared. The proposed model achieved higher overall cost-estimation accuracy and stability. A large number of influence factors
can be modified as simple representatives and overcome the limitations of a conventional cost estimation model. The paper
originality relates to providing a modified parameter-making process to enhance reliability of a cost estimation. In addition, the
suggested cost model can actively respond to the iterative requirements of recalculation of the cost.

1. Introduction phase, information is prone to change according to the

project scope. Clients require rapid and satisfactory re-
In the production process, only 10 to 15% of the total cost is sponses to all aspects of project management. However,
consumed to design a manufactured good. The rest of 80% of despite the environment of these changing dynamics, pre-
a project cost is designated to where it is needed at this stage. vious research focuses on cost estimation models based on
The more a project progresses, the less the possibility there is similar cases that reflect practical business demands
of controlling the project cost because of the high costs of insufficiently.
modifications [1]. Also, construction projects require huge Moreover, the estimation method tends to become more
amounts of capital and have many risk factors due to the complicated due to the diversification of cost factors [2], so it
unique industry characteristics. Therefore, cost estimating is difficult for users who directly perform the cost estimation
plays a significant role during the design stage of a project. to apply recent research results to the construction project in
For a project to be successful, it is crucial to develop a useful practice. This implies that cost models should have the
model and system for cost estimation in construction accuracy of prediction, user-centered efficiency, and sus-
projects [2]. tainability that can accommodate cost variance factors.
As construction projects keep growing in size and To deal with these challenging issues, this research aims
complexity, uncertainties are also increasing, which can be to develop a cost estimation model where a modification
represented by the project cost [3]. Especially in the design method integrates influential factors with significant
2 Advances in Civil Engineering

parameters. This study identified a modified parameter- 2.2. Cost Model Evaluation Factors. As mentioned, the key
making process, which integrates many influential factors issues regarding cost estimation are accuracy, change
into a small number of significant parameters. Major com- management, applicability, and data acquisition. Improving
ponents for cost model evaluation are presented by analyzing the accuracy of cost prediction is generally the purpose of
previous research. The development process of a cost esti- previous studies. Kim et al. [11] compared the performance
mation model is then presented. A case study was conducted of cost models between case-based reasoning (CBR) and
to estimate the cost of reinforced concrete work of residential artificial neural network (ANN) methods. Artificial in-
buildings in Korea. The research outcomes are expected to telligence (AI) approaches are being employed as an effective
support decision-making in response to project progress. strategy [12–21]. The objectives of cost estimation are to
predict the accurate bid price and to support successful
2. Literature Review decision-making. Therefore, accuracy is the fundamental
standard of a cost model evaluation [22].
2.1. Importance of Accurate Cost Estimation. The estimation As a project proceeds, the availability of information is
of project cost plays a key role in the success of a con- increased. Different types of information and various
struction project [4]. The process of cost estimating is crucial methods are applied at each project stage. As the nature of
as it enables construction companies to determine what their construction projects changes, new methodologies can be
direct costs will be and to provide a “bottom line” cost, below developed. A superior cost estimating model should take
which it would not be economical for the work to be carried various methodologies and different project stages into
out [5]. Cost estimation can be described as the process of account. For successful results, a well-rounded model can
assessing and predicting the total cost of executing items of adapt to internal and external trends. Many resources are
work in a given time using all available project information required to estimate project cost, including time, in-
and resources [6]. Estimates are firstly developed at the formation, various personnel, and the cost model itself.
order-of-magnitude level with an accuracy of −30 to +50% These resources are also required to develop, operate, and
[7]. They are later refined to the budget and conceptual level maintain the cost model. As there are many activities for the
with an accuracy of −15 to +30% and the definitive level with resources in the cost estimation process, it is crucial for a cost
an accuracy of −5 to +15%. estimation model to satisfy the different requirements of
The purpose of cost estimation is to provide appropriate those who develop and utilize the model. For example, an
information for decision-making [8]. Overestimated or estimator may not only require an accurate estimate, but also
underestimated cost has the potential to cause lost strategic that the model be user friendly. Similarly, operators and
opportunities to a construction contractor [9]. However, model developers might want a model that is efficient and
construction contractors continue to use conventional or flexible so that it can be easily and effectively managed. Thus,
traditional techniques for cost estimation, such as estimating various practical perspectives should be considered when
standard procedures or comparison with similar projects developing a cost model to enhance its applicability.
based on documented facts and personal experience. The Since most of the cost models are based on historical
causes of cost estimation inaccuracy are identified as follows: data, it is important to acquire sufficient data for estimation.
(1) insufficient time, (2) poor tender documentation, and (3) Ellsworth [23] believes that the simplest method to establish
insufficient tender document analysis [3, 5, 8, 9]. An ap- a reasonable estimate of facility costs is to identify the costs
praisal framework of cost estimation that can provide a of similar projects and compare these costs with the cost of
benchmark of activities was suggested. the new facility. On the contrary, Kirkham [24] suggests that
To overcome the gap between research and practice and future construction projects are generally nonrepetitive and
evaluate cost estimation models, Carr [8] suggested general tend to have significant and unique features that are likely
estimating principles: realism, level of detail, completeness, novel. Such instability can result in estimators not being able
documentation, attention between direct and indirect costs to obtain sufficient data for the cost estimation of new,
and between variable and fixed costs, and contingency. unique projects. As the amount of project data increases, this
Teicholz [10] asserted the characteristics of desirable fore- situation becomes more and frequent.
casting methods as follows: (1) the method should not require
input data that are difficult or expensive to collect, (2) the
method should be simple enough to permit easy integration 2.3. Major Components for Evaluation. An ideal cost model
into cost systems used for construction projects, and (3) cannot be developed using just the actual cost data of a
forecasts generated by any desirable method should be ac- construction but should utilize many other factors, such as
curate, unbiased, timely, and stable. However, there is a trade- individual selection of construction resources, process
off between these criteria: “a forecasting method that is very planning, and the operation sequence. However, for a
stable can miss spotting significant trends over the recent past, successful project, it is vital to develop a cost model that can
thus waiting too long before reflecting these trends in the overcome such limitations and to make criteria for a “choice
forecast.” This would reduce the accuracy and timeliness of and focus” strategy. Based on the general estimating prin-
the method. Alternatively, a method that reacts too quickly to ciples suggested by Carr [8] and the characteristics of de-
recent trends will tend to be unstable and yield sharp changes sirable forecasting methods identified by Teicholz [10], this
in forecasts that cannot be trusted. Thus, a balance is needed research suggests three major components for developing
that can be measured by tests against actual data. and evaluating cost estimation models: reliability, efficiency,
Advances in Civil Engineering 3

and flexibility. During the decision-making process, esti- Framework selection

mators and managers should consider contingency in the
project cost due to the difference between research and Estimation method selection
practice. Therefore, to support confident decision-making,
the cost model should be stable and clear. In this study,
Item simplification
accuracy, stability, and clarity are considered to be com-
ponents of reliability.
Estimation is implemented at a given time using all Influence factor selection
available project information and resources. In many cases,
estimators can predict cost with limited resources, while Modified parameter making
operators and developers should manage cost estimation in
an efficient manner without critical endeavor. Efficiency is Database establishment
an important condition for all those who engage in cost
estimation because the time for estimating or updating the Figure 1: Cost model development process.
model is not often sufficient. In this research, efficiency
refers to the model simplicity, accessibility, and the in- four processes: (1) retrieving the most similar case or cases,
expensive acquisition of resources. (2) reusing the information and knowledge in those cases to
As construction trends change and technology continues solve the problem, (3) revising the proposed solution, and
to develop, cost data and new estimation methods will be (4) retaining the parts of this experience that are likely to be
constantly added and modified. In response to project data useful for future problem solving [26].
additions and deletions, an integrated cost model with flexible From a task-oriented viewpoint, the CBR problem solving
characteristics would be very useful because it ensures that mechanism can be described as follows: (1) identifying fea-
separate models are not necessary. Models without flexibility tures, searching, initially matching, and selecting in retrieving,
prevent estimators from consistently utilizing the same (2) k-NN (Nearest Neighbor) and adapting in reuse,
model. A flexible model can be applied to various project (3) evaluating solutions and repairing faults in revision, and
stages, and it is also easy to add data to a flexible model and (4) integrating, indexing, and extracting in retention. In this
modify it according to current construction trends. process, retrieve tasks are controlled by influential factors,
and reuse tasks are decided by estimation methods. Thus, the
database covers all the processes and tasks because it involves
3. Model Development all general knowledge involved in all of the previous cases of
This research introduces a cost estimation model based on historical data (Figure 2). From this point of view, this re-
major components. For the model development, public search uses the CBR method as a cost model framework.
residential building data from Korea are used. Reinforced
concrete (RC) work is selected because it occupies over 40% 3.2. Estimation Method Selection. There are two unit cost
of the total cost of building construction. The development application methods: (1) a method based on cost and (2) a
process is divided into the following six steps: (1) framework method based on quantities. The cost-based method mul-
selection, (2) estimation method selection, (3) item sim- tiplies quantities and unit cost for estimating, and the
plification, (4) influence factor selection, (5) modified pa- quantities-based method multiplies unit cost after prediction
rameter making, and (6) database establishment. Figure 1 of the quantities. The method based on cost is suitable for the
shows the development process of the cost estimation model. early design stage and for works in which it is difficult to
Its framework draws from Porter’s value-chain management predict quantities because there are many items. However,
framework [25]. this method is not suitable for works which have a
changeable unit cost, and escalation needs to be applied.
The method based on quantities is suitable for works
3.1. Framework Selection. The process framework plays a which have a small number of items and for the schematic
significant role in maintaining consistency during the model design stage, which has an abundance of information. This
development process. To estimate construction cost, it is method can also be easily used during the definitive design
crucial to acquire previous cases while constantly obtaining stage and does not require escalation to be applied. Gen-
new cases. To ensure that the model is improved and modified erally, when the cost-based method is used, the efficiency
continuously, a framework should be chosen that has a cycle, remains higher than the reliability. The application of the
such as the Plan, Do, Check, and Act (PDCA) cycle. quantity-based method yields an opposite effect. Because
To satisfy the cycle, it is very useful to apply CBR to the these methods both have advantages and disadvantages, it is
cost estimation model. Aamodt and Plaza [26] defines CBR appropriate to apply either one method or a combination of
as basically solving a new problem by using information and the two methods, depending on the conditions and par-
knowledge from similar previous situation. CBR enhances ticular cost-estimating situation.
computer intelligence and makes it more human-like, and
there are real values, not artificial [21]. Therefore, it is ap-
propriate to apply CBR to the proposed cost model. The CBR 3.3. Item Simplification. Item simplification is divided into
cycle of the highest level may be described by the following five steps (Table 1), and it starts with analyzing the bill of
4 Advances in Civil Engineering

Tasks Controlled by influential factors

(i) Identifying features
(ii) Searching
(iii) Initially matching
(iv) Selecting

Retrieve

Retain Database Reuse

(previous cases)
Tasks Tasks
(i) Integrating (i) k-NN
(ii) Indexing (ii) Adapting
(iii) Extracting
Decided by estimation methods

Revise

Tasks
(i) Evaluating solutions
(ii) Repairing faults

Figure 2: Relationship between CBR process and model tasks.

Table 1: Item simplification.

No. of
Step Contents Method Specifications
items
1 Investigating the no. of items Analyzing bill of quantities 24 —
No. of items: concrete (5), forms (6), steel
2 Grouping items Concrete, forms, steel bar, and other 24
bars (7), and other (3)
Cost ratio: concrete 24.88%, forms
Concrete, forms, and steel bar: quantity
3 Selecting a unit cost application 21 49.73%, steel bar 25.17%, and other
based; other: cost based
0.22%
Integrating items which have similar unit Ratio of unit cost error: 180 concrete (2):
4 Item simplification 15
costs 1.42%, steel bar (6): 1.56%
Exception of items estimated by Concrete pouring � concrete × 1.01
5 Concrete pouring and steel cutting 12
automation Steel cutting � steel bar/1.03

quantities (BOQ). The RC work of residential buildings At the item simplification stage, as items become simpler,
consists of 24 items, and the numbers are usually smaller the efficiency is improved naturally due to the decrease in the
than those of other works. The items are divided into four number of items. However, the reliability decreases because
groups: concrete (5), forms (6), steel (7), and “other” (3). The errors might occur in item integration and the ratio ap-
total cost of the “other” group has a very small percentage in plication stage. Thus, for item simplification, it is important
RC work (0.22% on average). Therefore, instead of esti- to balance between efficiency and reliability in advance.
mating “other” directly, it is more efficient to first estimate
the other groups and to use equation (1) for the total cost:
3.4. Influential Factor Selection. Influential factors of cost are
100
total cost � the cost of concrete, forms, and steel × . elements which represent a building’s features and impact its
99.78 cost. A project is defined by influential factors, and it is
(1) possible to describe a project more exactly as the number of
Items which have similar unit costs are then integrated. influential factors increases [27]. However, if the number of
In this case, although the accuracy of the reliability decreases influential factors is large, the number of cases for estimating
a little, the efficiency of estimating is improved. Lastly, items will also be large. Therefore, it is important to select the
which have no quantities, such as concrete pouring and steel appropriate number of factors to improve the efficiency of
cutting, are calculated automatically by quantities of con- estimation [28]. Table 2 shows the influential factors of
crete and steel, so they are separated from the other items. Korean residential buildings.
Advances in Civil Engineering 5

Table 2: Influential factors of Korean residential buildings. type, unit/floor, core, and pilotis. As an example, Table 3
Influential factor Contents
shows the data grouping of 84 m2 unit size buildings.
Basement Matt (all same)
Gross area (m2) 1508–10318 3.5.2. Parameter Modification. After the five major in-
Building coverage fluential factors are selected for data grouping, it is necessary
243–914
(m2) to select parameters (or independent variables) for the
Units/building 22–56 simple regression among the influential factors that are left
Units/standard floor 2–10
over. As an example, Figure 4 shows the parameter selection
Floors of base 1-2
Roof type Slop, flat of a reinforced concrete item.
Floors 11–15 Among the 102 historical data, 24 data which have
Cores 1–4 characteristics of 84 m2 and 4 units/floor are selected.
Pilots type Partial, whole 1st floor Figure 4 uses the number of units as a parameter, and
Pilotis 0–8 statistical effectiveness cannot be guaranteed because the
Building type Flat, tower, flat + tower number of units cannot describe all the basement’s features.
Floor height (m) 2.8 m (all same) If the modified number of units which cover the basement’s
Unit size (m2) 49, 59, 84, 114 features is applied, the statistical effectiveness is improved.
Combination of unit 49, 59, 84, 114, 49 + 59, 49 + 84, 59 + 84, The modified number of units is calculated by using the
(m2) 84 + 114
following equation:
Type of pubic area Hall, corridor
Structure type Wall type (all same) modified number of units � number of units
Level of finish All same
+ number of units per a floor
× number of basement floors.
3.5. Modified Parameter Making. All new projects cannot
agree completely with previous projects. Hence, if such a (2)
disagreement occurs during the retrieval process of CBR, we
Table 4 illustrates the relationship between the 12 items
must adapt these values to the current case. In this research,
of reinforced concrete work and 5 major influential factors,
a simple statistical regression method is applied for the
as well as each item’s parameters. Column and beam forms
adaptation of the model, and the process is divided into three
use all major factors for data grouping. Stair forms use only
steps: (1) influential factor grouping, (2) parameter modi-
two factors (unit size and cores), and the other items except
fication, and (3) statistical analysis.
pilotis use four factors. Among the parameters, the modified
unit slab includes roof slabs, basement slabs, and unit slabs.
3.5.1. Influential Factor Grouping. It is necessary to acquire The modified unit slab is calculated by using the following
valid data to use the simple regression method. Although equation:
there are many data in the database, all the data are not modified number of slabs � number of units
necessarily valid when a project cost is estimated due to the
various characteristics of the data. Therefore, to acquire valid + number of units per a floor
data, data grouping is conducted using influential factors. × number of basement floors
Data grouping classification is determined by how much
+ pilotis of 1st floor.
information is acquired. Figure 3 explains the different levels
of data grouping. (3)
Once project information A is acquired, the 1st esti-
mation can be undertaken, and the valid data are ABD, ABE,
ACD, and ACE. Subsequently, once C is added, the 2nd 3.5.3. Analysis. As more project information is obtained,
estimation has two valid data: ACD and ACE. Lastly, if E is data groups are subdivided, and the number of cases in the
added, the 3rd estimation has only one valid data: ACE. data group decreases more and more (Figure 3). Therefore,
Additionally, if B or C is not decided and E is acquired, the to satisfy the reliability of cost estimation using the data
estimation can use ABE and ACE as valid data. Generally, group, the statistical significance of the detailed data group
the 1st estimation has the most data, but it also tends to have should be guaranteed. The statistical effectiveness of the
lower accuracy than the other estimations. While the 3rd detailed data group should also be higher than that of the
estimation has the least amount of data, it still tends to be superior data group. To analyze and verify these conditions,
more accurate than the other estimations. This indicates that this research presents an example that has a unit size of
data grouping with a tree structure can be applied to various 84 m2 and 4 units/floor. The results are shown in Figure 5.
project stages which have different amounts of project Figures 5(b) and 5(c) show the situation to acquire
information. another factor, the building type, under Figure 5(a). Al-
Data grouping helps the cost model’s level of flexibility though the number of (b)’s data is smaller than (a)’s, (b)’s
as it helps the model in taking each project stage into ac- coefficient of determination (R squared) is improved from
count. From the influential factors in Table 2, five major 0.810 to 0.881, and the significance levels of (a) and (b) are
factors are selected for data grouping: unit size, building almost the same. On the contrary, (c)’s coefficient of
6 Advances in Civil Engineering

A 1st estimation
Available case: ABD, ABE, ACD, ACE

2nd estimation
AB AC Available case: ACD, ACE

3rd estimation
ABD ABE ACD ACE Available case: ACE

Figure 3: Tree structure for concept of case classification.

Table 3: Data grouping by influential factors (e.g., 84 m2 group).

Unit size (A) 84 m2
Building type (B) Flat Tower
Units/floor (C) 2 4 4 4 5
Cores (D) 1 2 1 1 1
Pilotis (E) 2 (2) 1 (2) 2 (2) 2 (4) 1 (4) 2 (2) 2 (4) 1 (4) 2 (2) 2 (4) 1 (4) 2 (2) 2 (4) 1 (5)
Parameter (independent variables) Grouping Grouping
Pilotis (E): the number of pilotis floors (the number of units excepted by pilotis).

5500 5500
Y = 73.3X + 762.5 Y = 72.6X + 462.0
Reinforced concrete
Reinforced concrete

5000 5000

4500 4500

4000 R Sq Linear = 0.654 4000 R Sq Linear = 0.81

Sig. = 0.00 Sig. = 0.00
3500 3500
40 45 50 55 60 65 40 45 50 55 60 65
Number of units Modified number of units
(a) (b)

Figure 4: Regression analysis (e.g., reinforced concrete).

Table 4: Influential factors and parameter of each item.

Items Influential factors for grouping Parameter
Reinforced concrete A, B, C, D The modified number of units
Concrete A, B, C, D —
Steel cutting A, B, C, D The modified number of units
Form_basement A, B, C, D —
Form_column A, B, C, D, E The number of basement floors
Form_beam A, B, C, D, E —
Form_flat slab A, B, C, D The modified number of slabs
Form_slope slab A, B, C, D —
Form_inner wall A, B, C, D The modified number of units
Form_outside wall A, B, C, D The number of units
Form_stair A, D The total number of floors
Form_etc. A, B, C, D —
A: unit size; B: building type; C: units/floor; D: cores; E: pilotis.

determination is deteriorated to 0.552, and its significance (1) The coefficient of determination and significance
level is also worse than (a)’s. Through these results, the levels can help estimators classify a data group
following was deduced: logically and statistically, as they allow estimators to
Advances in Civil Engineering 7

5500 5500
Y = 72.6X + 462.0 Y = 70.2X + 662.0

Reinforced concrete
Reinforced concrete

5000 5000

4500 4500

4000 4000 R Sq Linear = 0.881

R Sq Linear = 0.81
Sig. = 0.00 Sig. = 0.00
3500 3500
40 45 50 55 60 65 40 45 50 55 60 65
Modified number of units Modified number of units
(a) (b)
5500
Y = 34.9X + 2252.3
Reinforced concrete

5000

4500

4000
R Sq Linear = 0.552
3500 Sig. = 0.35

40 45 50 55 60 65
Modified number of units
(c)

Figure 5: Statistical analysis (e.g., reinforced concrete). (a) Data group � 84 m2, 4 units/floor. (b) Data group � 84 m2, tower, 4 units/floor.
(c) Data group � 84 m2, flat, 4 units/floor.

consider both the obtained project information and more approximate cost estimation. For example, 9 form
the number of data. For example, after the “tower” items (Table 4) would be integrated into only 1 item in the
building-type factor is obtained in this case, the early design stage with little information. Third, unit costs
84 m2-tower-4 units/floor data group (b) will be used should be updated frequently so that estimators can use the
for the cost model because it has an improved co- latest ones. Finally, ratios for other items estimation should
efficient of determination and a similar significance be updated and stored.
level related to the 84 m2-4 units/floor data group (a).
On the contrary, although the “flat” building type 4. Validation
factor is obtained, the 84 m2-flat-4 units/floor data
group (c), which has 6 cases, will not be used because Among the major components, the most important factor
it yields an opposite result in comparison with (b). for decision-making is reliability. Efficiency and flexibility
Therefore, the 84 m2-flat-4 units/floor data group are necessary for mainly using and developing a cost model.
will not be used until the number of data is sufficient Efficiency and flexibility cannot be evaluated until the model
for the results to have statistical validity. is computerized and practically applied, so the verification of
(2) The cost model is qualified as a decision-making tool the cost model is conducted with a focus on model reliability.
when the estimating results and basis for contin- To verify the model, the model results of 3 new cases are
gency are clear. The statistical values of the co- compared with the actual results. Table 5 shows the profiles
efficient of determination and significance level of the validation cases.
easily guarantee this clarity in the estimating process. k-nearest neighbor (k-NN) principle uses a distance
measure to classify the k-nearest cases in relation to the
target case [29]. Then, a selected case is reused to estimate
3.6. Database Establishment. The database from this process the costs. In this research, 1-NN (the most similar case) is
consists of influential factors, item quantities, item unit applied and reused to estimate the costs. The 1-NN method
costs, and ratios that can be used to estimate other items. In is one of the tasks in the CBR reuse process and is com-
this process, it is most important for the database’s structure pared with the proposed research model. For the cost
to have flexibility, especially if the cost model is to be estimate in the database without a great deal of modifi-
computerized eventually. Once the database is built with cation, the 1-NN method just uses the most similar pre-
flexibility, it will be possible to add or modify influential vious case to a new case (Figure 6). Figure 6 is reproduced
factors in response to changing construction trends. from Ahn et al. [30]. The results of this comparison are
In building a database, it is recommended that a function shown in Table 6.
for additional item simplification be included. This function The average error rates in the quantities of this research
is required for item simplification (Step 3) and conducting method (a) and the 1-NN method (b) are 6.28% and 18.72%,
8 Advances in Civil Engineering

Table 5: Profiles of validation cases.

B C
Building name A
a b a b
Unit size 84 84 114 84 114
No. of units 58 48 24 42 22
Units/standard floor 4 4 2 4 2
No. of elev. 2 1 1 1 1
No. of floors (ground) 15 13 13 11 12
No. of floors (underground) 1 1 1 1 1
Pilotis × 2 (4) 2 (2) 2 (4) 2 (2)
Building type Flat Tower Flat Tower Flat

New case

(2) Inputting project information (3) Retrieving similar case

(i) Unit size
(ii) No. of units Searching similar cases
(iii) Units/standard floor
(iv) No. of elev.
(v) No. of floors (ground)
(vi) No. of floors (underground) Similarity function Attribute weight function
(vii) Pilotis
(viii) Building type
Measuring attribute and
case similarity

Classifying cases by
1-nearest neighbor algorithm
(1) Case-base construction
Retaining learned cases

(6) Comparing estimated cost with actual cost

Reusing retrieved cases

(5) Utilizing estimated costs for budgeting (4) Estimating construction costs
Proposing new solutions
(i) Estimated costs by Computing average quantities and
-CBR-based cost models costs of 1-NN
-Average cost of k-NN cases
(ii) Decision-making references Confirming estimated cost
-List of cases with attribute information
-CBR-based cost estimation analysis report

Figure 6: The CBR-based cost estimation procedures for validation (revised from Ahn et al. [30]).

respectively, and the average error rates of the total cost are deviation of the items’ error rate of the two methods
2.55% and 7.25%, respectively. These results confirm that the demonstrates that the proposed method has better stability
proposed method has better accuracy than the 1-NN than the 1-NN method.
method. An accuracy rate above 97% satisfies the accuracy The proposed model clearly shows how believable the
requirement. estimation result is because all the items have particular data
More cases are required to verify the stability. However, groups, and the estimator can analyze each group separately.
Table 6 shows that method a has better stability in the error For example, the error rates of “base” and “stair” are lower
rate more than method b. In addition, the stability of items than all the other items because their statistical values are
in a case is also as important as the stability of total cases. The lower. Through such an analysis, estimators can capture a
total cost in a case is the sum of each item’s cost, which is contingency range of each result.
determined by multiplying the item’s unit cost by its
quantity. Even if the accuracy of the total cost is high in a 5. Conclusion
specific case, such a result is hard to be admitted if each
item’s error range is too high to be stable. To verify the This research developed a cost estimation model where a
degree of model stability, the standard deviation of the items’ modification method integrates influential factors with
error rate can be used. A comparison of the standard significant parameters. A case study was conducted using
Advances in Civil Engineering 9

Table 6: Validation results.

Building name A B C
Method (a) (b) (a) (b) (a) (b)
Quantity result
Reinforced concrete 98.46 96.13 96.56 101.80 97.36 99.46
Concrete 92.49 98.91 100.95 101.08 100.05 93.94
Reinforced concrete pouring 98.46 96.13 96.56 101.80 97.36 99.46
Concrete pouring 92.49 89.91 100.95 101.08 100.50 93.94
Steel bar 86.05 76.23 99.22 113.08 101.50 105.98
Steel cutting 86.05 76.23 99.22 113.08 101.50 105.98
Basement 68.20 52.28 142.55 215.48 147.26 174.87
Column 101.40 107.65 92.09 184.53 124.85 196.76
Beam 94.98 113.91 95.30 153.38 100.97 113.21
Flat slab 96.22 98.41 101.28 105.99 96.49 104.77
Slope slab 95.88 99.91 132.26 183.94 132.26 185.21
Inner wall 97.09 96.86 101.98 102.53 101.60 103.26
Outside wall 95.10 75.99 94.23 95.60 97.41 94.46
Stair 119.16 134.36 116.55 121.50 117.38 123.78
Etc. 0.00 100.00 73.67 0.00 73.67 0.00
Average accuracy (%) 94.43 93.14 104.98 128.21 108.29 121.08
Average error rate (absolute value) (%) 5.57 6.86 4.98 28.21 8.29 21.08
Standard deviation of error rate (%) 10.89 19.62 15.01 39.33 15.87 36.12
Total cost result
Accuracy (%) 94.20 90.42 98.97 107.71 100.81 104.47
Error rate (absolute value) (%) 5.80 9.58 1.03 7.71 0.81 4.47
(a) Proposed model; (b) 1-NN method in CBR.

residential building data from Korea supported by a gov- Data Availability

ernment enterprise. As a result, the cost estimation outputs
were improved in terms of accuracy and stability. The re- The data used to support the findings of this study are
search findings can be summarized as follows: available from the corresponding author upon request.
(1) The case study showed that the suggested cost model
outperforms a typical CBR cost model Conflicts of Interest
(2) This study identified the modified parameter-making The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
process, which integrates many influential factors
into a small number of significant parameters and
has a positive impact on the performance of the cost Acknowledgments
model
This research was supported by a grant (19RERP-B082884-
(3) The proposed model estimates the cost using 06) from Housing Environment Research Program funded
quantity-based modified parameters multiplied by by Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport of Korean
their price, so the cost model can actively respond Government. This research was also supported by the In-
to the iterative requirements of recalculation of the stitute of Construction and Environmental Engineering at
cost Seoul National University and the National Research
The suggested cost model modifies a large number of Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea
influential factors into a small number of simple repre- Government (MSIT) (2019R1F1A1058866).
sentatives, which can overcome the limitations of conven-
tional cost models. The research outcomes could support References
and promote cost estimation by decision makers. However,
it is necessary to verify the generalization by applying the [1] P. Duverlie and J. M. Castelain, “Cost estimation during
suggested cost model to various kinds of work and con- design step: parametric method versus case based reasoning
struction projects besides reinforced concrete work for method,” International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing
Technology, vol. 15, no. 12, pp. 895–906, 1999.
residential projects. The applicability of the modification
[2] A. Alqahtani and A. Whyte, “Evaluation of non-cost factors
method and cost modeling process also need to be tested. affecting the life cycle cost: an exploratory study,” Journal of
Future research will require the development and com- Engineering, Design and Technology, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 818–
parison of various cost estimation models and comparative 834, 2016.
studies with other methodologies besides CBR, such as ANN [3] S. Famiyeh, C. T. Amoatey, E. Adaku, and C. S. Agbenohevi,
and conventional parametric methods. “Major causes of construction time and cost overruns,”
10 Advances in Civil Engineering

Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, vol. 15, no. 2, [22] S. Hassim, R. Muniandy, A. H. Alias, and P. Abdullah,
pp. 181–198, 2017. “Construction tender price estimation standardization
[4] A. Jrade and S. Alkass, “Computer-integrated system for (TPES) in Malaysia,” Engineering, Construction and Archi-
estimating the costs of building projects,” Journal of Archi- tectural Management, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 443–457, 2018.
tectural Engineering, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 205–223, 2007. [23] R. K. Ellsworth, “Cost-to-capacity analysis for estimating
[5] A. J. Smith, Estimating, Tendering and Bidding for Con- waste-to-energy facility costs,” Cost Engineering, vol. 40, no. 6,
struction: Theory and Practice, Springer, Berlin, Germany, pp. 27–30, 1998.
1995. [24] R. Kirkham, Ferry and Brandon’s Cost Planning of Buildings,
[6] A. Kwakye, Understanding Tendering and Estimating, Taylor John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2014.
& Francis Ltd., Gower, UK, 1994. [25] M. E. Porter, Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining
[7] J. Rast and K. M. Peterson, “Parametric cost estimating for Superior Performance, Free Press, New York, NY, USA, 1985.
environmental remediation projects,” AACE International [26] A. Aamodt and E. Plaza, “Case-based reasoning: foundational
Transactions, vol. 9, 1999. issues, methodological variations, and system approaches,” AI
[8] R. I. Carr, “Cost-estimating principles,” Journal of Con- Communications, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 39–59, 1994.
struction Engineering and Management, vol. 115, no. 4, [27] M. T. Hatamleh, M. Hiyassat, G. J. Sweis, and R. J. Sweis,
pp. 545–551, 1989. “Factors affecting the accuracy of cost estimate: case of Jor-
[9] A. Akintoye and E. Fitzgerald, “A survey of current cost dan,” Engineering, Construction and Architectural Manage-
estimating practices in the UK,” Construction Management ment, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 113–131, 2018.
and Economics, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 161–172, 2000. [28] B. Lim, M. P. Nepal, M. Skitmore, and B. Xiong, “Drivers of
[10] P. Teicholz, “Forecasting final cost and budget of construction the accuracy of developers’ early stage cost estimates in
projects,” Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, vol. 7, residential construction,” Journal of Financial Management of
no. 4, pp. 511–529, 1993. Property and Construction, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 4–20, 2016.
[11] S.-Y. Kim, J.-W. Choi, G.-H. Kim, and K.-I. Kang, “Com- [29] B. S. Everitt, S. Landau, M. Leese, and D. Stahl, “Miscellaneous
paring cost prediction methods for apartment housing pro- clustering methods,” in Cluster Analysis, W. A. Shewhart and
jects: CBR versus ANN,” Journal of Asian Architecture and S. S. Wilks, Eds., , John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Chichester, UK,
Building Engineering, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 113–120, 2005. 5th edition, 2011.
[12] S.-H. An, G.-H. Kim, and K.-I. Kang, “A case-based reasoning [30] J. Ahn, M. Park, H. S. Lee et al., “Covariance effect analysis of
cost estimating model using experience by analytic hierarchy similarity measurement methods for early construction cost
process,” Building and Environment, vol. 42, no. 7, estimation using case-based reasoning,” Automation in
pp. 2573–2579, 2007. Construction, vol. 81, pp. 254–266, 2017.
[13] J. Cho and J. Chun, “Cost estimating methods for RC
structures by quantity takeoff and quantity prediction in the
design development stage,” Journal of Asian Architecture and
Building Engineering, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 65–72, 2015.
[14] S. Z. Doğan, D. Arditi, and H. M. Günaydın, “Determining
attribute weights in a CBR model for early cost prediction of
structural systems,” Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management, vol. 132, no. 10, pp. 1092–1098, 2006.
[15] S.-H. Ji, M. Park, and H.-S. Lee, “Cost estimation model for
building projects using case-based reasoning,” Canadian
Journal of Civil Engineering, vol. 38, no. 5, pp. 570–581, 2011.
[16] S.-H. Ji, M. Park, H.-S. Lee, J. Ahn, N. Kim, and B. Son,
“Military facility cost estimation system using case-based
reasoning in Korea,” Journal of Computing in Civil Engi-
neering, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 218–231, 2011.
[17] S. Kim, “Interval estimation of construction cost using case-
based reasoning and genetic algorithms,” Journal of Asian
Architecture and Building Engineering, vol. 11, no. 2,
pp. 327–334, 2012.
[18] C. Koo, T. Hong, C. Hyun, and K. Koo, “A CBR-based hybrid
model for predicting a construction duration and cost based
on project characteristics in multi-family housing projects,”
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, vol. 37, no. 5,
pp. 739–752, 2010.
[19] C.-W. Koo, T. Hong, C.-T. Hyun, S. H. Park, and J.-O. Seo, “A
study on the development of a cost model based on the
owner’s decision making at the early stages of a construction
project,” International Journal of Strategic Property Man-
agement, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 121–137, 2010.
[20] C. K. Riesbeck and R. C. Schank, Inside Case-Based Reasoning,
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, USA, 1989.
[21] N.-J. Yau and J.-B. Yang, “Case-based reasoning in con-
struction management,” Computer-Aided Civil and In-
frastructure Engineering, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 143–150, 1998.
 International Journal of

Rotating Advances in
Machinery Multimedia

The Scientific
Engineering
Journal of
Journal of

Hindawi
World Journal
Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi
Sensors
Hindawi Hindawi
www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 http://www.hindawi.com
www.hindawi.com Volume 2018
2013 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018

Journal of

Control Science
and Engineering

Advances in
Civil Engineering
Hindawi Hindawi
www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018

Submit your manuscripts at

www.hindawi.com

Journal of
Journal of Electrical and Computer
Robotics
Hindawi
Engineering
Hindawi
www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018

VLSI Design
Advances in
OptoElectronics
International Journal of

International Journal of
Modelling &
Simulation
Aerospace
Hindawi Volume 2018
Navigation and
Observation
Hindawi
www.hindawi.com Volume 2018
in Engineering
Hindawi
www.hindawi.com Volume 2018
Engineering
Hindawi
www.hindawi.com Volume 2018
Hindawi
www.hindawi.com www.hindawi.com Volume 2018

International Journal of
International Journal of Antennas and Active and Passive Advances in
Chemical Engineering Propagation Electronic Components Shock and Vibration Acoustics and Vibration
Hindawi Hindawi Hindawi Hindawi Hindawi
www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018