Cost analysis method, device and equipment, storage medium and program product

Abstract

The invention provides a cost analysis method, device and equipment, a storage medium and a program product, and relates to the technical field of project cost, the method comprises the following steps: obtaining a candidate system set meeting user project requirements, the candidate system set comprising a plurality of candidate systems provided for user projects; obtaining a to-be-evaluated price of the candidate system according to a price evaluation model and the current price of the candidate system, the price evaluation model being used for performing alignment processing on the current price on at least one of a brand, a region, a purchasing mode and time; evaluating the candidate system on at least two dimensions of a technical dimension, a performance dimension, a historical use frequency dimension and a price dimension to obtain a multi-dimensional evaluation result; and selecting a target system from the candidate system set according to the to-be-evaluated price and / or the multi-dimensional evaluation result, and according to the scheme of the invention, the project cost scheme can be intelligently recommended.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of engineering cost technology, specifically to a cost analysis method, apparatus, equipment, storage medium, and program product. Background Technology

[0002] As a core component of the entire lifecycle management of construction projects, the accuracy of engineering cost analysis directly impacts project investment decisions, cost control, and economic benefit assessment. According to the 2023 annual report of the China Construction Engineering Cost Management Association, inaccurate cost estimations accounted for 35.7% of all investment overruns in my country's construction sector, with an average error rate ranging from 10% to 15%. Among these errors, the equipment selection and price evaluation stages contributed over 60%. With the advancement of the "New Infrastructure" strategy and the accelerated digital transformation of the construction industry, existing cost analysis methods face unprecedented challenges. For example, most projects use single-equipment pricing, lacking a complete system for pricing; price analysis is based on static prices, leading to significant price fluctuations due to brand, region, procurement method, and time; and reliance on expert experience to evaluate system solutions prevents quantitative assessment of system solutions. Summary of the Invention

[0003] At least one embodiment of the present invention provides a cost analysis method, apparatus, device, storage medium, and program product to solve the problem of recommending engineering cost schemes in the prior art.

[0004] To solve the above-mentioned technical problems, the present invention is implemented as follows:

[0005] In a first aspect, embodiments of the present invention provide a cost analysis method, including:

[0006] Obtain a set of candidate systems that meet the user's engineering requirements, the set of candidate systems including multiple candidate systems provided for the user's engineering;

[0007] Based on the price evaluation model and the current price of the candidate system, the price to be evaluated of the candidate system is obtained. The price evaluation model is used to align the current price in at least one of the following: brand, region, procurement method, and time.

[0008] The candidate system is evaluated on at least two of the following dimensions: technology, performance, historical usage frequency, and price, to obtain multi-dimensional evaluation results.

[0009] The target system is selected from the candidate system set based on the price to be evaluated and / or the multi-dimensional evaluation results.

[0010] Optionally, the cost analysis method, wherein obtaining a set of candidate systems that meet the user's engineering requirements includes:

[0011] Based on the user's engineering requirements, obtain the equipment parameter constraints;

[0012] Based on the device parameter constraints, candidate systems that meet the user's engineering requirements are obtained from the device knowledge base to form a candidate system set. The device knowledge base is constructed based on historical engineering project information and includes information on multiple historical systems, device information of devices in the historical systems, and parameters of the devices.

[0013] Optionally, in the aforementioned cost analysis method, after obtaining a set of candidate systems that meet the user's engineering requirements, the method further includes:

[0014] Obtain the current price of the candidate system, and obtain the historical usage frequency of the candidate system according to the system solution template library. The system solution template library is constructed based on historical engineering project information, and the system solution template library includes information on multiple historical systems, the historical usage frequency of the historical systems, equipment information of the equipment in the historical systems, and the historical usage quantity of the equipment.

[0015] Optionally, the cost analysis method, wherein obtaining the price to be evaluated for the candidate system based on the price evaluation model and the current price of the candidate system includes:

[0016] Obtain the price correlation coefficient corresponding to the candidate system, wherein the price correlation coefficient includes at least one of the brand coefficient, region coefficient, procurement method coefficient, and time coefficient;

[0017] The price to be evaluated for the candidate system is obtained based on the price evaluation model, the price correlation coefficient, and the median of multiple current prices of the candidate system.

[0018] Optionally, the cost analysis method wherein the candidate system is evaluated on at least two of the following dimensions: technical dimension, performance dimension, historical usage frequency dimension, and price dimension, to obtain multi-dimensional evaluation results, including:

[0019] The evaluation results for each of at least two of the following dimensions are obtained for the candidate system: technology dimension, performance dimension, historical usage frequency dimension, and price dimension.

[0020] A multi-dimensional evaluation result is obtained based on the evaluation result of each of the at least two dimensions and the weight of each of the dimensions.

[0021] Optionally, the cost analysis method, wherein selecting the target system from the candidate system set based on the price to be evaluated and / or the multi-dimensional evaluation results, includes at least one of the following:

[0022] If the user's engineering requirements meet the first requirement scenario, then the candidate system with the multi-dimensional score corresponding to the multi-dimensional evaluation result that is greater than the score threshold and the lowest price to be evaluated is selected from the candidate system set as the target system. The first requirement scenario is a requirement scenario related to the system price.

[0023] If the user engineering requirements meet the second requirement scenario, then the candidate system with the highest multi-dimensional score corresponding to the multi-dimensional evaluation result is selected from the candidate system set as the target system. The second requirement scenario is a requirement scenario related to multi-dimensional evaluation.

[0024] If the user's engineering requirements meet the third requirement scenario, then the candidate system with the highest performance dimension score corresponding to the multi-dimensional evaluation results is selected from the candidate system set as the target system. The third requirement scenario is a requirement scenario related to system performance.

[0025] Secondly, embodiments of the present invention also provide a cost analysis device, comprising:

[0026] The acquisition module is used to acquire a set of candidate systems that meet the user's project requirements. The set of candidate systems includes multiple candidate systems provided for the user's project.

[0027] The acquisition module is used to obtain the price to be evaluated of the candidate system based on the price evaluation model and the current price of the candidate system. The price evaluation model is used to align the current price in at least one of the following: brand, region, procurement method, and time.

[0028] The evaluation module is used to evaluate the candidate system on at least two of the following dimensions: technology, performance, historical usage frequency, and price, to obtain multi-dimensional evaluation results.

[0029] The selection module is used to select a target system from the candidate system set based on the price to be evaluated and / or the multi-dimensional evaluation results.

[0030] Thirdly, embodiments of the present invention also provide a cost analysis device, comprising: a processor, a memory, and a program or instructions stored in the memory and executable on the processor, wherein the processor executes the program or instructions to implement the cost analysis method as described in the first aspect.

[0031] Fourthly, embodiments of the present invention also provide a computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program, which, when executed by a processor, implements the cost analysis method as described in the first aspect.

[0032] Compared with existing technologies, embodiments of the present invention provide a cost analysis method, apparatus, equipment, storage medium, and program product. This method acquires a set of candidate systems that meet user engineering needs, including multiple candidate systems provided for the user's project. Based on a price evaluation model and the current price of the candidate systems, it obtains a price to be evaluated for each candidate system. The price evaluation model aligns the current price based on at least one of brand, region, procurement method, and time. The method evaluates the candidate systems on at least two dimensions: technology, performance, historical usage frequency, and price, obtaining multi-dimensional evaluation results. Based on the price to be evaluated and / or the multi-dimensional evaluation results, a target system is selected from the candidate system set. This approach considers the impact of brand, region, procurement method, and time on the current price of the candidate systems, ensuring the obtained price to be evaluated is comparable and timely, achieving a complete system quotation. Furthermore, by comprehensively considering the price to be evaluated and / or the multi-dimensional evaluation results, the method recommends a target system to the user, solving the problem of a single recommendation mechanism. Moreover, the target system meets the user's engineering needs, achieving accurate recommendation of engineering cost solutions. Attached Figure Description

[0033] Various other advantages and benefits will become apparent to those skilled in the art upon reading the following detailed description of preferred embodiments. The accompanying drawings are for illustrative purposes only and are not intended to limit the invention. Furthermore, the same reference numerals denote the same parts throughout the drawings. In the drawings:

[0034] Figure 1 This is a flowchart illustrating the cost analysis method described in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0035] Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of the architecture of the application system of the cost analysis method described in the embodiments of the present invention;

[0036] Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of the modules of the cost analysis device described in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0037] Figure 4 This is a hardware block diagram of the cost analysis device described in an embodiment of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0038] To make the technical problems, technical solutions and advantages of the present invention clearer, a detailed description will be given below in conjunction with the accompanying drawings and specific embodiments.

[0039] In various embodiments of the present invention, it should be understood that the sequence number of each process described below does not imply the order of execution. The execution order of each process should be determined by its function and internal logic, and should not constitute any limitation on the implementation process of the embodiments of the present invention.

[0040] In addition, the terms "system" and "network" are often used interchangeably in this article.

[0041] The terms "first," "second," etc., used in the specification and claims of this invention are used to distinguish similar objects and not to describe a specific order or sequence. It should be understood that such data can be interchanged where appropriate so that embodiments of this application can be implemented in orders other than those illustrated or described herein, and the objects distinguished by "first" and "second" are generally of the same class, not limited in number; for example, the first object can be one or more. Furthermore, in the specification and claims, "and / or" indicates at least one of the connected objects, and the character " / " generally indicates that the preceding and following objects are in an "or" relationship.

[0042] Reference Figure 1 This invention provides a cost analysis method, including:

[0043] Step 101: Obtain a set of candidate systems that meet the user's engineering requirements. The set of candidate systems includes multiple candidate systems provided for the user's engineering.

[0044] In this embodiment of the invention, the user engineering requirements are used to indicate the system requirements provided for the user engineering project, including equipment parameter constraints. Taking the user engineering project as an office building central air conditioning system selection project, and the system as an air conditioning system, as an example, the equipment parameter constraints include at least one of the following: cooling capacity requirement, voltage requirement, energy efficiency ratio requirement, and noise requirement. For example, the cooling capacity requirement is ≥500kW; the voltage requirement is ≤10kV; the energy efficiency ratio requirement is ≥3.5; and the noise requirement is ≤75dB.

[0045] It is understood that the cooling capacity, voltage, energy efficiency ratio, and noise of each candidate system provided to the user project in the candidate system set meet the above-mentioned equipment parameter constraints.

[0046] Step 102: Obtain the price to be evaluated for the candidate system based on the price evaluation model and the current price of the candidate system. The price evaluation model is used to align the current price in at least one of the following: brand, region, procurement method, and time.

[0047] It should be noted that, since the current price of the candidate systems may be affected by at least one of the following factors: brand, region, procurement method, and time, it is necessary to align the current prices of multiple candidate systems to address the issues of timeliness and accuracy in price evaluation. The price model is used to align the current prices, mapping the current prices of multiple candidate systems to a unified price space to eliminate the influence of at least one of the following factors on the current price of the candidate systems: brand, region, procurement method, and time.

[0048] It is understood that the price assessment model is related to at least one of the following: brand coefficient, region coefficient, procurement method coefficient, and time coefficient.

[0049] Preferably, the price evaluation model is as shown in the following formula (1):

[0050] (1);

[0051] in, This represents the price to be evaluated for the candidate system; This represents the median of multiple current prices for the candidate systems, which is related to the device model and specifications; Indicates the brand coefficient; Indicates the regional coefficient; Indicates the procurement method coefficient; Indicates the time coefficient.

[0052] Among them, the above coefficients The values ​​of each coefficient can be preset based on experience, as shown in Table 1 below.

[0053] Table 1: Examples of coefficient values ​​in the price assessment model

[0054]

[0055] The values ​​of the coefficients in the price assessment model can be updated periodically, such as quarterly, or when there are market changes (such as fluctuations in raw material prices).

[0056] Step 103: Evaluate the candidate system in at least two of the following dimensions: technology, performance, historical usage frequency, and price, to obtain multi-dimensional evaluation results.

[0057] Preferably, the candidate system is evaluated in four dimensions: technology, performance, historical usage frequency, and price, to obtain multi-dimensional evaluation results.

[0058] In this embodiment of the invention, the multi-dimensional evaluation result can indicate a multi-dimensional score, so that in the subsequent step 104, a target system can be selected from the candidate system set based on the multi-dimensional score.

[0059] Step 104: Select a target system from the candidate system set based on the price to be evaluated and / or the multi-dimensional evaluation results.

[0060] It should be noted that selecting a target system from the candidate system set in step 104 is essentially recommending a candidate system, i.e., the target system, to the user from the candidate system set.

[0061] In one implementation, optionally, obtaining a set of candidate systems that meet the user's engineering requirements includes:

[0062] Based on the user's engineering requirements, obtain the equipment parameter constraints;

[0063] Based on the device parameter constraints, candidate systems that meet the user's engineering requirements are obtained from the device knowledge base to form a candidate system set. The device knowledge base is constructed based on historical engineering project information and includes information on multiple historical systems, device information of devices in the historical systems, and parameters of the devices.

[0064] In this embodiment of the invention, candidate systems that meet the device parameter constraints are obtained from the device knowledge base to form the candidate system set.

[0065] Optionally, prior to step 101, the method further includes constructing the device knowledge base through the following steps:

[0066] Obtain the historical engineering project information, which is structured or semi-structured data, including but not limited to: design drawings, design specifications, equipment specifications, and bill of quantities;

[0067] To identify cost-related information in the historical engineering project information, optical character recognition technology can be used.

[0068] Based on engineering expertise, system tags, equipment tags, or parameter tags are assigned to the cost-related information.

[0069] The device knowledge base is constructed based on the mapping relationship between historical systems, devices, and parameters.

[0070] Specifically, Optical Character Recognition (OCR) technology can be used to identify cost-related information in the historical project information. During the recognition process, regular expressions are used to clean up formatted characters in the historical project information and standardize the cost-related information.

[0071] It should be noted that before constructing the equipment knowledge base based on the mapping relationship between historical systems, equipment, and parameters, the descriptions of the same equipment in different historical engineering project information can be matched, such as the descriptions of the same equipment in design drawings and design specifications.

[0072] It is understood that the device knowledge base is used to indicate the mapping relationship between historical systems, devices, and parameters. The relationship between historical systems, devices, and parameters is that historical systems include devices, and devices have parameters.

[0073] In one implementation, optionally, after obtaining a set of candidate systems that meet the user's engineering requirements, the method further includes:

[0074] Obtain the current price of the candidate system, and obtain the historical usage frequency of the candidate system according to the system solution template library. The system solution template library is constructed based on historical engineering project information, and the system solution template library includes information on multiple historical systems, the historical usage frequency of the historical systems, equipment information of the equipment in the historical systems, and the historical usage quantity of the equipment.

[0075] In this embodiment of the invention, the historical usage batches of each candidate system are obtained from the system scheme template library, and the current price of each candidate system is obtained from market information.

[0076] Optionally, prior to step 101, the method further includes constructing the system solution template library through the following steps:

[0077] Identify complete candidate system solutions from historical engineering project information;

[0078] Obtain the equipment type, quantity, and model of each candidate solution, and obtain the current price and historical usage frequency of each candidate system;

[0079] Based on the equipment type, quantity, and model of each candidate solution, as well as the current price and historical usage frequency of each candidate system, a system solution template library is constructed.

[0080] It should be noted that the candidate system can be a central air conditioning system or a power distribution system. The number of devices included in the candidate system refers to the historical usage frequency of the devices. The historical usage frequency refers to the frequency with which the candidate system's design appears in the historical project information.

[0081] In one implementation, optionally, the price to be evaluated for the candidate system is obtained based on the price evaluation model and the current price of the candidate system, including:

[0082] Obtain the price correlation coefficient corresponding to the candidate system, wherein the price correlation coefficient includes at least one of the brand coefficient, region coefficient, procurement method coefficient, and time coefficient;

[0083] The price to be evaluated for the candidate system is obtained based on the price evaluation model, the price correlation coefficient, and the median of multiple current prices of the candidate system.

[0084] Preferably, the price correlation coefficient includes four coefficients: brand coefficient, region coefficient, procurement method coefficient, and time coefficient, and the price evaluation model is correlated with these four coefficients.

[0085] In this embodiment of the invention, the price to be evaluated of the candidate system can be obtained based on the price correlation coefficient, the median of multiple current prices of the candidate system, and the price evaluation model shown in the above formula (1).

[0086] In one implementation, optionally, the candidate system is evaluated on at least two of the following dimensions: technology, performance, historical usage frequency, and price, to obtain a multi-dimensional evaluation result, including:

[0087] The evaluation results for each of at least two of the following dimensions are obtained for the candidate system: technology dimension, performance dimension, historical usage frequency dimension, and price dimension.

[0088] A multi-dimensional evaluation result is obtained based on the evaluation result of each of the at least two dimensions and the weight of each of the dimensions.

[0089] Preferably, the multi-dimensional evaluation result is obtained based on the evaluation result of each of the four dimensions and the weight of each of the four dimensions.

[0090] In this embodiment of the invention, the multi-dimensional evaluation result can be obtained using the multi-dimensional evaluation model shown in the following formula (2):

[0091]

[0092] (2);

[0093] in, This indicates the results of a multi-dimensional evaluation, i.e., a multi-dimensional score. This indicates the evaluation results for the technology dimension, i.e., the technology dimension score; This represents the evaluation result for the performance dimension, i.e., the performance dimension score; This represents the evaluation result for the historical usage frequency dimension, i.e., the historical usage frequency dimension score; This indicates the evaluation result for the price dimension, i.e., the price dimension score; Indicates the weight of the technical dimension; Indicates the weight of the performance dimension; Weights representing historical usage frequency; This indicates the weight of the price dimension.

[0094] Specifically, based on the actual parameters of the equipment, the indication function, the compliance range of the equipment parameters, and the tolerance parameters, the evaluation results of the technical dimensions are obtained, as shown in the following formulas (3) and (4):

[0095] (3);

[0096] (4);

[0097] in, Indicates the actual parameters of the equipment; Indicates the degree of technical deviation; This indicates the evaluation results for the technology dimension, i.e., the technology dimension score;

[0098] and This indicates an indicator function, which is 1 when the device parameters have lower or upper limits, and 0 otherwise. For example, the cooling capacity requirement is ≥500kW. =1, =0; Voltage requirement is ≤10kV. =0, =1; the energy efficiency ratio requirement is an energy efficiency ratio of 3.5 to 4.0. =1, =1;

[0099] Indicates the compliant range of equipment parameters. This is the lower limit of the compliant range for equipment parameters, for example, a cooling capacity of 500kW; This refers to the upper limit of the compliant range for equipment parameters, such as a noise level of 75dB; when and When =1, 0 indicates insufficient device parameters; when and When =1, 0 indicates that the equipment parameters are out of specification;

[0100] This represents the tolerance parameter, which can be set to 0.1, indicating the allowable relative deviation ratio of the equipment parameter. A value of 0.1 indicates that a 10% deviation in equipment parameters is permissible. For example, when the equipment parameters are 10% below the lower limit of the compliant range, The value remains 1; increasing it... It will be more tolerant of deviations in equipment parameters, lowering the technical threshold; reducing It will impose stricter requirements on equipment parameter deviations and raise the technical threshold; The value range is from 0 to 1.0, with an ideal value of 1.0.

[0101] Specifically, based on the actual parameters of the equipment, the indication function, the compliance range of the equipment parameters, and the performance degradation coefficient, the evaluation results of the performance dimension are obtained, as shown in the following formulas (5) and (6):

[0102] (5);

[0103] (6);

[0104] in, Indicates the actual parameters of the equipment; This indicates the degree of performance deviation, calculated in the same way as the degree of technical deviation. This represents the evaluation result for the performance dimension, i.e., the performance dimension score;

[0105] This represents the performance degradation coefficient, which can be set to 1.0 to control the rate at which performance deviation affects the evaluation results of the performance dimension. The performance dimension evaluation results are more sensitive to performance deviation, the curve decreases faster, and the reduction... The performance dimension evaluation results are less sensitive to performance deviations, and the curve declines more gently;

[0106] The value ranges from 0 to 1.0, with a larger value being better. The ideal value is 1.0, indicating that the performance is just right or has a moderate redundancy. When =0, the parameters are perfect or moderately redundant. =1.0; when At 0 o'clock, 1.0, and with The increase is exponentially diminished, with the aim of punishing excessive performance redundancy, such as the overuse of high-power devices.

[0107] For example, the cooling capacity requirement is ≥500kW. =1.0:

[0108] (1) Actual value 500kW: D=0, =1.0, which just meets the performance requirements;

[0109] (2) Actual value 550kW: D=0.1, = 0.904, 10% performance redundancy, excellent performance;

[0110] (3) Actual value 600kW: D=0.2, = 0.818, 20% performance redundancy, good performance;

[0111] (4) Actual value 750kW: D=0.5, = 0.606, 50% performance redundancy, performance over-provisioning;

[0112] (5) Actual value 1000kW: D=1.0, = 0.367, 100% performance redundancy, serious performance waste;

[0113] Specifically, based on the smoothing index and the historical usage frequency of the candidate system, the evaluation result of the historical usage frequency dimension is obtained, as shown in the following formula (7):

[0114] (7);

[0115] in, This represents the evaluation result for the historical usage frequency dimension, i.e., the historical usage frequency dimension score; This indicates the historical usage frequency of the candidate system in historical engineering project information; The median of the historical usage frequency of the candidate system is used as a benchmark reference point to represent the "average level". This represents the smoothing index, which can be set to 0.1 to control the steepness of the S-curve. The curve becomes steeper as the number of users increases, and the difference in historical usage frequency has a more significant impact on the historical usage frequency dimension score; when... The curve is flatter, and the impact of historical usage frequency differences on the historical usage frequency dimension score is more nuanced.

[0116] It is understandable that the candidate system being used multiple times indicates that the candidate system is more reliable and that the evaluation result of the candidate system in the dimension of historical usage frequency is higher. However, to avoid the evaluation result of the historical usage frequency dimension of a high-frequency candidate system being several times that of other candidate systems, which would limit system diversity, a saturation parameter is selected to increase the upper limit, while limiting the benefits of frequency growth in the evaluation result of historical usage frequency dimension.

[0117] Specifically, based on the current price of the candidate system, the evaluation result in the price dimension is obtained, as shown in the following formula (8):

[0118] (8);

[0119] in, This represents the total price of the multiple current prices of the candidate solutions; This represents the lowest price among the multiple current prices of the candidate solution; This represents the highest price among the multiple current prices of the candidate solution; This indicates the evaluation result in the price dimension, i.e., the price dimension score. The value ranges from 0 to 1.0, with a larger value being better. An ideal value of 1.0 indicates the most competitive price.

[0120] Furthermore, the weight of the technology dimension. It can be set to 0.3, the weight of the performance dimension. It can be set to 0.2, which is the weight of the historical usage frequency dimension. It can be set to 0.2, the weight of the price dimension. It can be set to 0.3.

[0121] It should be noted that the weights of each dimension can be adjusted according to the project type indicated by the user's engineering requirements. For example, if the project type is an economy project, the weight of the price dimension can be adjusted accordingly. Increase the weight of the performance dimension from 0.3 to 0.5; if the project type is a high-performance project, then the weight of the performance dimension can be increased. Increase from 0.3 to 0.4; if the project type is standard, the weights set above can be used for each dimension.

[0122] In one implementation, optionally, the target system is selected from the candidate system set based on the price to be evaluated and / or the multi-dimensional evaluation results, including at least one of the following:

[0123] If the user's engineering requirements meet the first requirement scenario, then the candidate system with the multi-dimensional score corresponding to the multi-dimensional evaluation result that is greater than the score threshold and the lowest price to be evaluated is selected from the candidate system set as the target system. The first requirement scenario is a requirement scenario related to the system price.

[0124] If the user engineering requirements meet the second requirement scenario, then the candidate system with the highest multi-dimensional score corresponding to the multi-dimensional evaluation result is selected from the candidate system set as the target system. The second requirement scenario is a requirement scenario related to multi-dimensional evaluation.

[0125] If the user's engineering requirements meet the third requirement scenario, then the candidate system with the highest performance dimension score corresponding to the multi-dimensional evaluation results is selected from the candidate system set as the target system. The third requirement scenario is a requirement scenario related to system performance.

[0126] In this embodiment of the invention, the first demand scenario is a demand scenario related to system price, which can be understood as an economic demand scenario; the second demand scenario is a demand scenario related to multi-dimensional evaluation, which can be understood as a standard demand scenario; and the third demand scenario is a demand scenario related to system performance, which can be understood as a high-performance demand scenario.

[0127] Specifically, if the user's engineering requirements meet the first requirement scenario, then firstly, multiple candidate systems whose multi-dimensional scores corresponding to the multi-dimensional evaluation results are greater than the score threshold are selected from the candidate system set, and then the candidate system with the lowest price to be evaluated is selected from these multiple candidate systems as the target system.

[0128] If the user's engineering requirements meet the second requirement scenario, then the candidate system with the highest multi-dimensional score corresponding to the multi-dimensional evaluation results is selected from the candidate system set as the target system.

[0129] If the user's engineering requirements meet the third requirement scenario, then the candidate system with the highest performance dimension score corresponding to the performance dimension evaluation result in the multi-dimensional evaluation results is selected from the candidate system set as the target system.

[0130] Furthermore, the method may also include:

[0131] Output the configuration information, pricing information, multi-dimensional evaluation results, applicable scenario suggestions, and comparison results between the target system and other candidate systems in the candidate system set, excluding the target system. The comparison results include price comparison results and multi-dimensional evaluation comparison results.

[0132] The following is a specific example to illustrate the cost analysis method described in the embodiments of the present invention.

[0133] The user project is the selection project for the central air conditioning system of the office building.

[0134] 1. The device parameter constraints include:

[0135] Cooling capacity ≥ 500 kW; voltage ≤ 10 kV; energy efficiency ratio ≥ 3.5; noise ≤ 75 dB; project location; procurement method: open bidding; project time: 2026.

[0136] 2. The equipment knowledge base includes:

[0137]

[0138]

[0139]

[0140] 3. The system solution template library includes:

[0141]

[0142]

[0143]

[0144] 4. Query the candidate system set based on equipment parameter constraints:

[0145] The query statement is as follows:

[0146]

[0147] 5. The query execution process is as follows:

[0148] (1) Indexing and positioning: The candidate system set, including 3 candidate systems, can be quickly located by the system type "Central Air Conditioning System" and the professional label "Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning".

[0149] (2) Equipment parameter constraint filtering:

[0150] System A:

[0151] The cooling capacity is 510, which meets the requirements.

[0152] The voltage is 8.5V, which meets the requirements.

[0153] The energy efficiency ratio is 3.4, which is not met. The entire system A is pruned, and subsequent parameter checks are stopped.

[0154] System B:

[0155] The cooling capacity is 560, which meets the requirements.

[0156] The voltage is 9.2V, which meets the requirements.

[0157] The energy efficiency ratio is 3.6, which meets the requirements.

[0158] The noise level is 72, which meets the requirements. System B passes all constraints.

[0159] System C:

[0160] The cooling capacity is 610, which meets the requirements.

[0161] The voltage is 9.8V, which meets the requirements.

[0162] Energy efficiency ratio of 4.0, which meets the requirements;

[0163] The noise level is 68, which meets the requirements. System C passes all constraints.

[0164] Result returned: {System B, System C} is returned directly.

[0165] 6. Obtain the price to be appraised based on the price appraisal model:

[0166] System B:

[0167] Current price = 90 × 1.0 (joint venture) + 8 × 4 × 1.0 = 90 + 32 = 1.22 million yuan;

[0168] The price to be appraised = 122 / (1.15 × 0.95 × 1.05) = 1,063,500 yuan.

[0169] System C:

[0170] Current price = 90 × 1.3 (imported) + 8 × 5 × 1.2 = 117 + 48 = 165 million yuan;

[0171] The price to be appraised = 165 / (1.15 × 0.95 × 1.05) = 1,438,300 yuan.

[0172] 7. Multi-dimensional evaluation results (weights: w1=0.3, w2=0.2, w3=0.2, w4=0.3):

[0173] System B:

[0174] Assessment results in the technical dimension = 0.85, the energy efficiency ratio just meets the standard, and other parameters are excellent;

[0175] Performance dimension evaluation results = 0.85, cooling capacity redundancy 12%, energy efficiency ratio redundancy 2.9%;

[0176] Evaluation results of the historical usage frequency dimension = 0.77, 42 times used, higher than the median of 30 times;

[0177] Evaluation results in the price dimension = 0.56, the price is reasonable;

[0178] Multidimensional evaluation result = 0.3×0.85 + 0.2×0.85 + 0.2×0.77 + 0.3×1 = 0.879.

[0179] System C:

[0180] Assessment results in the technical dimension = 0.95, all parameters are significantly exceeded;

[0181] Performance dimension evaluation results = 0.90, cooling capacity redundancy 22%, energy efficiency ratio redundancy 14.3%;

[0182] The historical usage frequency metric is 0.33, indicating 18 uses, which is below the median.

[0183] Evaluation results in the price dimension = 0.00, highest price, no cost advantage;

[0184] Multidimensional evaluation result = 0.3×0.95 + 0.2×0.90 + 0.2×0.33 + 0.3×0.00 = 0.591.

[0185] 8. Output target system:

[0186] The user's engineering requirements align with the first requirement scenario, and the target system is System B.

[0187] The user's engineering requirements align with the second requirement scenario, and the target system is System B.

[0188] The user's engineering requirements align with the third requirement scenario, and the target system is System C.

[0189] Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of the architecture of the application system for the cost analysis method described in an embodiment of the present invention. Figure 2 As shown, the application system of the cost analysis method, referred to as the cost analysis system, includes an offline construction module and a real-time recommendation module. Specifically, the offline construction module is used for:

[0190] Based on historical engineering project information and equipment knowledge base, an engine is built to construct the equipment knowledge base;

[0191] Based on historical engineering project information and the system solution template library, build the system solution template library using the engine.

[0192] Configure the price assessment model based on the price data and price assessment model configuration engine.

[0193] The real-time recommendation module is specifically used for:

[0194] Based on equipment parameter constraints, equipment knowledge base, system solution template library, and system-level filtering engine, obtain a set of candidate systems;

[0195] Based on the current price of the candidate system and the price evaluation model, obtain the price to be evaluated for the candidate system;

[0196] Obtain multi-dimensional evaluation results of candidate systems;

[0197] The target system is selected from the candidate system set based on the price to be evaluated and / or the results of multi-dimensional evaluation.

[0198] In summary, the cost analysis method described in this invention provides a set of candidate systems for real-time user engineering needs by offline construction of an equipment knowledge base, a system solution template library, and a price evaluation model. This solves the problem of system-equipment disconnect in existing technologies. Furthermore, it aligns the current prices of candidate systems based on at least one of brand, region, procurement method, and time to obtain the price to be evaluated for each candidate system. This allows for real-time response to market changes. Additionally, it evaluates candidate systems across at least two dimensions—technology, performance, historical usage frequency, and price—to obtain multi-dimensional evaluation results. This enables the selection of a target system from the candidate system set based on the price to be evaluated and / or the multi-dimensional evaluation results, achieving highly efficient intelligent cost estimation solution recommendation.

[0199] Reference Figure 3 This invention also provides a cost analysis device, comprising:

[0200] The first acquisition module 301 is used to acquire a set of candidate systems that meet the user's project requirements, the set of candidate systems including multiple candidate systems provided for the user project;

[0201] The obtaining module 302 is used to obtain the price to be evaluated of the candidate system based on the price evaluation model and the current price of the candidate system. The price evaluation model is used to align the current price in at least one of brand, region, procurement method and time.

[0202] Evaluation module 303 is used to evaluate the candidate system on at least two of the following dimensions: technology, performance, historical usage frequency, and price, to obtain multi-dimensional evaluation results.

[0203] The selection module 304 is used to select a target system from the candidate system set based on the price to be evaluated and / or the multi-dimensional evaluation results.

[0204] Optionally, in the aforementioned cost analysis device, the first acquisition module 301 is specifically used for:

[0205] Based on the user's engineering requirements, obtain the equipment parameter constraints;

[0206] Based on the device parameter constraints, candidate systems that meet the user's engineering requirements are obtained from the device knowledge base to form a candidate system set. The device knowledge base is constructed based on historical engineering project information and includes information on multiple historical systems, device information of devices in the historical systems, and parameters of the devices.

[0207] Optionally, in the aforementioned cost analysis method, the apparatus further includes:

[0208] The second acquisition module is used to acquire the current price of the candidate system and the historical usage frequency of the candidate system according to the system solution template library. The system solution template library is constructed based on historical engineering project information and includes information on multiple historical systems, the historical usage frequency of the historical systems, equipment information of the equipment in the historical systems, and the historical usage quantity of the equipment.

[0209] Optionally, in the aforementioned cost analysis method, the obtaining module 302 is specifically used for:

[0210] Obtain the price correlation coefficient corresponding to the candidate system, wherein the price correlation coefficient includes at least one of the brand coefficient, region coefficient, procurement method coefficient, and time coefficient;

[0211] The price to be evaluated for the candidate system is obtained based on the price evaluation model, the price correlation coefficient, and the median of multiple current prices of the candidate system.

[0212] Optionally, in the aforementioned cost analysis method, the evaluation module 303 is specifically used for:

[0213] The evaluation results for each of at least two of the following dimensions are obtained for the candidate system: technology dimension, performance dimension, historical usage frequency dimension, and price dimension.

[0214] A multi-dimensional evaluation result is obtained based on the evaluation result of each of the at least two dimensions and the weight of each of the dimensions.

[0215] Optionally, in the aforementioned cost analysis method, the selection module 304 is specifically used for at least one of the following:

[0216] If the user's engineering requirements meet the first requirement scenario, then the candidate system with the multi-dimensional score corresponding to the multi-dimensional evaluation result that is greater than the score threshold and the lowest price to be evaluated is selected from the candidate system set as the target system. The first requirement scenario is a requirement scenario related to the system price.

[0217] If the user engineering requirements meet the second requirement scenario, then the candidate system with the highest multi-dimensional score corresponding to the multi-dimensional evaluation result is selected from the candidate system set as the target system. The second requirement scenario is a requirement scenario related to multi-dimensional evaluation.

[0218] If the user's engineering requirements meet the third requirement scenario, then the candidate system with the highest performance dimension score corresponding to the multi-dimensional evaluation results is selected from the candidate system set as the target system. The third requirement scenario is a requirement scenario related to system performance.

[0219] It should be noted that the cost analysis device provided in the embodiments of the present invention can execute the above-described cost analysis method. Therefore, all embodiments of the above-described cost analysis method are applicable to the cost analysis device and can achieve the same or similar technical effects.

[0220] This invention also provides a cost analysis device, such as... Figure 4 As shown, it includes:

[0221] The processor 401, memory 402, transceiver 403, and programs or instructions stored in the memory 402 and executable on the processor 401; when the processor 401 executes the programs or instructions, it implements the various processes of the above-described cost analysis method embodiments and achieves the same technical effect. To avoid repetition, these will not be described again here.

[0222] The transceiver 403 is used to receive and send data under the control of the processor 401.

[0223] Among them, Figure 4In this context, the bus architecture can include any number of interconnected buses and bridges, specifically connecting various circuits of one or more processors represented by processor 401 and memory represented by memory 402. The bus architecture can also connect various other circuits such as peripheral devices, voltage regulators, and power management circuits, which are well known in the art and therefore will not be described further herein. The bus interface provides an interface. Transceiver 403 can be multiple elements, including transmitters and receivers, providing a unit for communicating with various other devices over a transmission medium. For different user equipment, the user interface 404 can also be an interface capable of connecting external or internal devices, including but not limited to keypads, displays, speakers, microphones, joysticks, etc.

[0224] The processor 401 is responsible for managing the bus architecture and general processing, while the memory 402 can store the data used by the processor 401 when performing operations.

[0225] This invention also provides a computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program. When executed by a processor, the computer program implements the various processes of the above-described cost analysis method embodiments and achieves the same technical effects. To avoid repetition, it will not be described again here. The computer-readable storage medium may be a read-only memory (ROM), a random access memory (RAM), a magnetic disk, or an optical disk, etc.

[0226] This invention also provides a computer program product, including computer instructions. When the computer instructions are executed by a processor, they implement the various processes of the above-described cost analysis method embodiments and achieve the same technical effects. To avoid repetition, they will not be described again here.

[0227] It should be noted that, in this document, the terms "comprising," "including," or any other variations thereof are intended to cover non-exclusive inclusion, such that a process, method, article, or apparatus that comprises a list of elements includes not only those elements but also other elements not expressly listed, or elements inherent to such a process, method, article, or apparatus. Unless otherwise specified, an element defined by the phrase "comprising one..." does not exclude the presence of other identical elements in the process, method, article, or apparatus that includes that element.

[0228] Through the above description of the embodiments, those skilled in the art can clearly understand that the methods of the above embodiments can be implemented by means of software plus necessary general-purpose hardware platforms. Of course, they can also be implemented by hardware, but in many cases the former is a better implementation method. Based on this understanding, the technical solution of the present invention, in essence, or the part that contributes to the prior art, can be embodied in the form of a software product. The computer software product is stored in a storage medium (such as ROM / RAM, magnetic disk, optical disk) and includes several instructions to cause a terminal (which may be a mobile phone, computer, server, air conditioner, or network device, etc.) to execute the methods described in the various embodiments of the present invention.

[0229] The embodiments of the present invention have been described above with reference to the accompanying drawings. However, the present invention is not limited to the specific embodiments described above. The specific embodiments described above are merely illustrative and not restrictive. Those skilled in the art can make many other forms under the guidance of the present invention without departing from the spirit and scope of the claims, and all of these forms are within the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. A cost analysis method, characterized in that, include: Obtain a set of candidate systems that meet the user's engineering requirements, the set of candidate systems including multiple candidate systems provided for the user's engineering; Based on the price evaluation model and the current price of the candidate system, the price to be evaluated of the candidate system is obtained. The price evaluation model is used to align the current price in at least one of the following: brand, region, procurement method, and time. The candidate system is evaluated on at least two of the following dimensions: technology, performance, historical usage frequency, and price, to obtain multi-dimensional evaluation results. Based on the price to be evaluated and / or the multi-dimensional evaluation results, a target system is selected from the candidate system set.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, Obtain a set of candidate systems that meet the user's engineering requirements, including: Based on the user's engineering requirements, obtain the equipment parameter constraints; Based on the device parameter constraints, candidate systems that meet the user's engineering requirements are obtained from the device knowledge base to form a candidate system set. The device knowledge base is constructed based on historical engineering project information and includes information on multiple historical systems, device information of devices in the historical systems, and parameters of the devices.

3. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, After obtaining a set of candidate systems that meet the user's engineering requirements, the method further includes: Obtain the current price of the candidate system, and obtain the historical usage frequency of the candidate system according to the system solution template library. The system solution template library is constructed based on historical engineering project information, and the system solution template library includes information on multiple historical systems, the historical usage frequency of the historical systems, equipment information of the equipment in the historical systems, and the historical usage quantity of the equipment.

4. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, Based on the price evaluation model and the current price of the candidate system, the price to be evaluated for the candidate system is obtained, including: Obtain the price correlation coefficient corresponding to the candidate system, wherein the price correlation coefficient includes at least one of the brand coefficient, region coefficient, procurement method coefficient, and time coefficient; The price to be evaluated for the candidate system is obtained based on the price evaluation model, the price correlation coefficient, and the median of multiple current prices of the candidate system.

5. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The candidate system is evaluated across at least two of the following dimensions: technology, performance, historical usage frequency, and price, to obtain multi-dimensional evaluation results, including: The evaluation results for each of at least two of the following dimensions are obtained for the candidate system: technology dimension, performance dimension, historical usage frequency dimension, and price dimension. A multi-dimensional evaluation result is obtained based on the evaluation result of each of the at least two dimensions and the weight of each of the dimensions.

6. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, Selecting a target system from the candidate system set based on the price to be evaluated and / or the multi-dimensional evaluation results, including at least one of the following: If the user's engineering requirements meet the first requirement scenario, then the candidate system with the multi-dimensional score corresponding to the multi-dimensional evaluation result that is greater than the score threshold and the lowest price to be evaluated is selected from the candidate system set as the target system. The first requirement scenario is a requirement scenario related to the system price. If the user engineering requirements meet the second requirement scenario, then the candidate system with the highest multi-dimensional score corresponding to the multi-dimensional evaluation result is selected from the candidate system set as the target system. The second requirement scenario is a requirement scenario related to multi-dimensional evaluation. If the user's engineering requirements meet the third requirement scenario, then the candidate system with the highest performance dimension score corresponding to the multi-dimensional evaluation results is selected from the candidate system set as the target system. The third requirement scenario is a requirement scenario related to system performance.

7. A cost analysis device, characterized in that, include: The acquisition module is used to acquire a set of candidate systems that meet the user's project requirements. The set of candidate systems includes multiple candidate systems provided for the user's project. The acquisition module is used to obtain the price to be evaluated of the candidate system based on the price evaluation model and the current price of the candidate system. The price evaluation model is used to align the current price in at least one of the following: brand, region, procurement method, and time. The evaluation module is used to evaluate the candidate system on at least two of the following dimensions: technology, performance, historical usage frequency, and price, to obtain multi-dimensional evaluation results. The selection module is used to select a target system from the candidate system set based on the price to be evaluated and / or the multi-dimensional evaluation results.

8. A cost analysis device, characterized in that, include: A processor, a memory, and a program or instructions stored in the memory and executable on the processor, wherein the processor, when executing the program or instructions, implements the cost analysis method as described in any one of claims 1 to 6.

9. A computer-readable storage medium, characterized in that, The computer-readable storage medium stores a computer program that, when executed by a processor, implements the cost analysis method as described in any one of claims 1 to 6.

10. A computer program product, characterized in that, It includes computer instructions that, when executed by a processor, implement the cost analysis method as described in any one of claims 1 to 6.

Images