Bidding quotation file auditing method based on power transmission and transformation project

Abstract

The invention discloses a bidding offer file auditing method based on a power transmission and transformation project, and relates to the technical field of file auditing, and the method comprises the following steps: obtaining a bidding offer file, carrying out the preliminary auditing, and recognizing the risk data in a project; establishing an index system based on the risk data and a preset index construction principle; building a project bidding quotation risk assessment model through an analytic hierarchy process and a fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method based on the index system; and applying a to-be-examined file to the project bidding quotation risk assessment model to obtain a risk level of the project, and if the risk level is greater than a preset bearable risk level, proposing an improvement suggestion and adjusting a scheme. According to the invention, by analyzing and evaluating influence factors, effective measures are taken in time for response, risk influence is eliminated or weakened, and the risk management capability of the system is improved, so that the quotation is more advantageous, and the probability of winning bids is increased.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of power transmission and transformation engineering, and more specifically, to a method for reviewing bidding and quotation documents based on power transmission and transformation engineering. Background Art

[0002] In the bidding and quotation of power transmission and transformation projects, accurate and reasonable quotations are important factors to ensure the success of the project. Power transmission and transformation projects include transmission lines, substations, distribution equipment and other aspects. Its complexity requires detailed analysis and evaluation of various technical details and costs during the quotation stage. The bidding quotation document is a key document submitted by the contractor to the owner, which contains information such as the technical plan, engineering cost, and contract terms of the project. The main purpose of reviewing the bidding documents is to ensure that the bidder can complete the project according to the promised conditions and prices, while ensuring the fairness and transparency of the bidding process.

[0003] Power transmission and transformation projects involve multiple technical fields, including electrical engineering, civil engineering, mechanical engineering, etc. The complexity and scale of the project often require detailed technical analysis to ensure the accuracy of the quotation. At the same time, the bid quotation not only includes the cost of equipment and materials, but also involves various costs such as construction, maintenance, labor, and management. Accurate calculation of these costs is crucial to ensure the rationality of the quotation. The market prices of equipment prices, labor costs, and construction materials are constantly fluctuating. Bidders need to grasp market information in real time so that they can make corresponding adjustments in their quotations. Power transmission and transformation projects must comply with national and local regulations and standards, which may affect the design, construction, and use of materials of the project, and thus affect the content and standards of the quotation.

[0004] The above disclosed technical solutions have at least the following technical problems: in the quotation process, various risks that may be encountered during the project implementation process, such as technical risks, construction risks, material supply risks, etc., are often ignored. Existing quotation methods may fail to fully assess these risks. At the same time, existing methods often rely on manual data collection and analysis, which is not only time-consuming and labor-intensive, but also prone to data omissions or errors, resulting in inaccurate quotations. Especially in complex power transmission and transformation projects, the amount of data is huge and the types are various, and manual processing is difficult to meet the accuracy requirements. In view of the above problems, the present invention proposes a solution. Summary of the invention

[0005] In order to overcome the above-mentioned defects of the prior art, an embodiment of the present invention provides a method for reviewing bidding quotation documents based on power transmission and transformation projects, which solves the problem that the existing quotation methods may fail to fully assess these risks by identifying and evaluating risks in the bidding quotation documents.

[0006] To achieve the above object, the present invention provides the following technical solutions: The method for reviewing bidding quotation documents based on power transmission and transformation projects includes the following steps: Obtain bidding and quotation documents and conduct preliminary review to identify potential risk data in the project; establish an indicator system based on risk data and preset indicator construction principles; construct a project bidding and quotation risk assessment model based on the indicator system through hierarchical analysis method and fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method; apply the documents that need to be reviewed to the project bidding and quotation risk assessment model to obtain the risk level of the project. If the risk level is greater than the preset tolerable risk level, propose improvement suggestions or adjustment plans.

[0007] In a preferred embodiment, the bidding quotation document includes a technical solution, a bill of quantities, material unit prices, labor costs, equipment costs, and a construction plan.

[0008] In a preferred embodiment, the acquisition of bid quotation documents and preliminary review to identify potential risk data in the project are specifically as follows: collecting and organizing bid quotation documents; preliminary screening of bid quotation documents based on basic characteristics of risk data, wherein the basic characteristics include uncertainty and objectivity; and final identification of the preliminary screened bid quotation documents based on a preset risk checklist to obtain a risk data list, wherein the preset risk checklist contains all possible risks.

[0009] In a preferred embodiment, the indicator construction principles include relevance, measurability, timeliness, interpretability, and balance.

[0010] In a preferred embodiment, the indicator system is established based on risk data and indicator construction principles, specifically: identifying bid and quotation risk data and evaluating the degree and weight of risk; after identifying the risk data, combining the indicator construction principles, establishing an indicator system and testing the reliability of risk assessment indicators through Cronbach's coefficient.

[0011] In a preferred embodiment, the project bidding and quotation risk assessment model is constructed based on the index system through the hierarchical analysis method and the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method, specifically: a hierarchical structure model is established, and the hierarchical levels include a target layer, a criterion layer, and an index layer; based on the scaling method, the indicators of each level are compared pairwise to obtain a judgment matrix in each level of the index system; each level is single-sorted and consistency-checked to calculate the eigenvalue and eigenvector of the judgment matrix to obtain the weight of each indicator; Based on the comprehensive weight of all factors to the top-level goal, the set of single-ranking data of all levels is calculated to obtain the total hierarchical ranking; the fuzzy evaluation value of each indicator is combined with its weight to construct a fuzzy relationship matrix; the fuzzy evaluation of each indicator is integrated into an overall evaluation through weighted average; the fuzzy result of the comprehensive evaluation is converted into a specific risk level to obtain a project bidding quotation risk assessment model.

[0012] In a preferred embodiment, the single sorting and consistency check for each level is specifically as follows: calculating the product of each row of elements in the judgment matrix; calculating the nth root of the product of each row of elements: converting the nth root of the product of each row of elements into a eigenvector and normalizing it; calculating the maximum eigenroot of the judgment matrix; and calculating the consistency index and ratio based on the maximum eigenroot.

[0013] In a preferred embodiment, the document to be reviewed is applied to the project bidding and quotation risk assessment model to obtain the risk level of the project. If the risk level is greater than the preset tolerable risk level, improvement suggestions are made and the plan is adjusted, specifically: the sorted data is input into the risk assessment model; the model is run to calculate the risk level of the project and an tolerable risk level threshold is set; the risk level output by the model is compared with the preset tolerable risk level; if the risk level is higher than the preset tolerable risk level, the project team needs to conduct an in-depth analysis of the source of the risk and make targeted improvement suggestions; according to the improvement suggestions, the project plan is adjusted accordingly, and the adjustments include technical solution improvement, cost control, contract terms adjustment and strengthened management; data is re-collected and the risk assessment model is applied; if the risk level is still higher than the threshold, improvement suggestions are continued to be made and the plan is adjusted until the risk level drops to an tolerable range.

[0014] The technical effects and advantages of the method for reviewing bidding quotation documents for power transmission and transformation projects of the present invention are as follows: 1. The present invention analyzes and evaluates the influencing factors, takes effective measures in a timely manner to deal with them, eliminates or weakens the impact of risks, and improves its own risk management capabilities, thereby making the quotation more advantageous and increasing the chance of winning the bid.

[0015] 2. The present invention accurately identifies the bidding risks of construction projects and uses corresponding technical or economic means to make reasonable countermeasures to ensure smooth bidding and effectively deal with various risks arising in the project construction process after winning the bid. This enables contractors to maximize profits while ensuring quality. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0016] Figure 1 The present invention is a schematic diagram of the structure of a method for reviewing bidding quotation documents for power transmission and transformation projects. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0017] The following will be combined with the drawings in the embodiments of the present invention to clearly and completely describe the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention. Obviously, the described embodiments are only part of the embodiments of the present invention, not all of the embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by ordinary technicians in this field without creative work are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0018] Embodiment 1, Figure 1 The present invention provides a method for reviewing bidding quotation documents based on power transmission and transformation projects, comprising the following steps: S1, obtain the bidding quotation documents and conduct preliminary review to identify risk data in the project; The bidding quotation documents include technical proposal, bill of quantities, material unit price, labor cost and equipment cost; Convert all quotation data into a unified format so that the engineering quantity, unit price, and labor cost have consistent units and measurement methods. Apply data cleaning tools and scripts to remove duplicates, correct data format errors, and fill in missing values ​​to ensure data integrity and consistency. Enter the data into the database, sort it by category, and mark the source of each quotation data.

[0019] Risk identification is the identification and determination of the possible risks in the project bidding and the extent to which these risks may affect the bidding and project implementation, as well as the possible consequences. Risk identification is the main task of risk identification, identifying the factors that lead to risk occurrence and conducting a qualitative analysis of the consequences of risk. Analyzing and factorizing factors, converting complex things into a series of factors, and discovering the degree of impact on things and the probability of risk are the most important principles of risk identification. In the process of identifying project risks, firstly, the comprehensive risk problems are differentiated into actual risk problems, and then the risk data are analyzed and identified. In the bidding and quotation of engineering projects, risks exist in the links of inquiry, determination of engineering quantity, formulation of construction plan, preparation of unit price items, etc. It is necessary to identify the corresponding risks in each link.

[0020] Risk identification is to analyze the possible causes of losses, which may be the possible risk items, and confirm the effective, positive and direct causes of losses. The former is a measure to identify dangerous factors, and the latter is a method to analyze dangerous accidents. The technology of risk identification is a risk treatment technology related to identifying the causes of losses and dangerous factors. Risk identification analysis is mainly determined by the following aspects: the main risks existing in general projects; the main factors causing risks; the consequences of risks and the extent of the impact.

[0021] Bidding and quotation risk identification analyzes the possible impact of risks in the bidding and quotation process. First, the risk data is analyzed and the risks are classified. In the bidding and quotation risk identification process, most of the risk data are hidden in each step of the bidding process. It is necessary to adopt certain methods based on the characteristics of the project to effectively identify risks and avoid omissions.

[0022] Conduct preliminary review of the bidding documents, specifically: Defining review rules, including price exceeding expectations, material specifications not being met, and unreasonable delivery time; Extract relevant data from the bidding quotation documents, directly read the structured data, and use OCR technology to convert the unstructured data into structured data. The relevant data includes price, material specifications and delivery time; Use the rule engine tool to write rule scripts based on the review rules, define data fields and review logic, and input the extracted data into the rule engine; Mark the data that does not conform to the rules as anomalies, generate a preliminary review report and submit the anomalies for manual review; Identify potential risk data in the project, specifically: Collect and organize bidding quotation documents; Conduct preliminary screening of bid quotation documents based on the basic characteristics of risk data, including uncertainty and objectivity; The preliminary screened bidding quotation documents are finally identified based on a preset risk checklist to obtain a risk data list, wherein the preset risk checklist includes all possible risks.

[0023] After identification begins, first decompose the potential risks of the project. If there are new risks, identify the risk data, events and consequences, and add the new risks to the initial risk list. If there are no new risks, continue to decompose the project until no new risks appear and obtain the project risk list.

[0024] S2, establish an indicator system based on risk data and preset indicator construction principles; When establishing a risk indicator system, indicator construction principles are the basic criteria that guide indicator selection and design. These principles help ensure that the established indicator system is effective, reliable, and can accurately reflect the risk status of the project.

[0025] The biggest feature of power transmission and transformation projects is that they have large investment amounts, long construction time, a large number of participants, and a wide range of involvement, and are affected by the geographical environment and social environment in which they are located. When evaluating bidding risks, there should be a complete and available quantitative indicator system to ensure that the evaluation results have scientific and reasonable credibility. Therefore, the core of risk assessment work lies in building a suitable indicator system and completing the evaluation of the target. When constructing the evaluation indicator system, the following should be combined: Relevance: The indicator should be closely related to the target risk area.

[0026] Measurability: Indicators should be capable of quantitative or qualitative assessment.

[0027] Timeliness: Indicators should reflect the current risk situation and be able to be updated in a timely manner.

[0028] Interpretability: The meaning and calculation method of the indicator should be clear and unambiguous.

[0029] Balance: The indicator system should cover multiple dimensions to avoid emphasizing one aspect.

[0030] Comprehensiveness principle: Comprehensiveness means that the evaluation index system should reflect the status of the evaluation object. A good evaluation index system should be able to comprehensively reflect the overall situation of the enterprise. Theoretically, the constructed evaluation index system can comprehensively reflect the indicators of the index system, and the indicators should be typical, representative and appropriate.

[0031] Systematic principle: This mainly refers to the complete assessment of risk indicators and the establishment of a system. In the design of the indicator system, the logical relationship between each indicator should be fully considered, and the target object should be evaluated from a holistic perspective.

[0032] Normative principle: When selecting indicators, the indicators with high probability of occurrence and high utilization rate are the focus of selection. The main reason is that the indicators with high occurrence rate are generally more representative. In addition, this method of selecting indicators facilitates data collection and analysis.

[0033] The principle of operability: When establishing the system, the selected indicators should be as clear and intuitive as possible, data collection should be as simple and easy to operate as possible, and the data should be easy to calculate and quantify. In addition, it is necessary to ensure that the evaluation indicators reflect all the characteristics of objective reality, so that such an evaluation indicator system is effective and practical, and can be easily operated and compared in the evaluation.

[0034] The steps to establish the indicator system are as follows: Complete theoretical preparation for project bidding and quotation by understanding and mastering relevant theories of bidding and quotation; Identify bid and quotation risk data and assess the extent and weight of risk; After identifying the risk data, we combined the indicator construction principles to establish an indicator system and test the reliability of risk assessment indicators through Cronbach's coefficient; Initial factors were identified by studying the most cutting-edge literature at home and abroad, and experienced experts and scholars were invited to discuss the risk data obtained from the literature research one by one, and the indicator system was improved and sorted out by fully considering the actual situation; The indicators include project scale, project type, project complexity, advance payment and guarantee, project funding situation, contract terms, claims situation, material supply situation, labor resources, inflation, natural conditions, degree of competition in bidding projects, market conditions, qualification level, project saturation, worker quality, enterprise's expected profit, experience in similar projects, construction plan and construction capacity, technical level and management level, enterprise's economic strength, reputation and performance ability, and payment of project funds.

[0035] The reliability of the risk evaluation index of power transmission and transformation project bidding quotation is tested by calculating the Cronbach coefficient. The specific calculation formula is as follows:

[0036] Where N is the number of indicators, is the variance of the mean of the ith indicator, is the variance of the comprehensive evaluation value; The average value of the i-th indicator is:

[0037] Where N is the number of indicators, is the score of the ith indicator.

[0038] The variance of the mean value of the i-th indicator is:

[0039] The comprehensive evaluation value is:

[0040] in, is the score of the ith indicator, is the weight of the ith indicator.

[0041] The variance calculation formula of the comprehensive evaluation value is:

[0042] in, is the average value of the comprehensive evaluation value It should be noted that when the Cronbach's coefficient is greater than 0.9, the indicator system has high intrinsic reliability; when the Cronbach's coefficient is greater than 0.8 and less than 0.9, the indicator system has high intrinsic reliability; when the Cronbach's coefficient is greater than 0.8 and less than 0.7, the indicator system has certain problems, and the reference value of the survey reliability is general; when the Cronbach's coefficient is less than 0.7, the indicator system has major problems, the reliability is very low, and the evaluation has no reference value.

[0043] S3, construct a project bidding quotation risk assessment model based on analytic hierarchy process and fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method; The working principle of the hierarchical analysis method is to compare two elements according to a certain aspect, determine the judgment matrix according to the relative importance of different elements, and obtain the weight of each element index by calculating the maximum characteristic root of the judgment matrix. The judgment matrix in this method is obtained through subjective qualitative analysis by the evaluator, and the maximum characteristic root and the final indicator weight are obtained through quantitative analysis. The relationship between different elements is considered more comprehensively, and the evaluation result has a high reliability. For multi-objective decision-making problems, the problem is decomposed from bottom to top according to the overall goal and its different properties, and finally expressed as a hierarchical structure. The overall goal of the highest level is to deal with the problem through several intermediate layers, which is called the target layer. Through the intermediate measures and guidelines, the result of achieving the overall goal is finally achieved. The intermediate measures and criteria involved are called the criterion layer as intermediate steps. The bottom layer is the various solutions selected to solve the problem, which is called the solution layer.

[0044] The analytic hierarchy process is specifically: Establish a hierarchical structure model; Based on the 1-9 scale method, the relative importance between the two quotation risk data is determined, and the judgment matrix in each level of the indicator system is obtained; Hierarchical single sorting and consistency checking; Based on the comprehensive weights of all factors to the top-level target, the set of single-ranked data at all levels is calculated to obtain the total hierarchical ranking.

[0045] The hierarchical single sorting and consistency check are specifically as follows: Hierarchical single sorting first determines the eigenvector W of the maximum eigenvalue λmax of the judgment matrix A, and after normalization, it is the level weight of the importance of the corresponding factors of the same level and the factors of the previous level. Hierarchical single sorting is the weight of each factor in the judgment matrix for its criterion. Because the judgment matrix needs to be logically correct, when its consistency check fails, it needs to be modified until the consistency requirement is met.

[0046] Calculate the product K of each row of elements in the judgment matrix:

[0047] calculate The nth root of:

[0048] Normalize the vector

[0049]

[0050] Calculate the maximum eigenvalue of the judgment matrix:

[0051] Find the consistency index and ratio:

[0052]

[0053] It should be noted that when CR≤0.1, it means that the satisfaction with the consistency of the evaluation process is high; when CR≥0.1, it means that the satisfaction with the consistency of the evaluation process is low. When the satisfaction is low, the scores in the judgment matrix should be replanned until the consistency of the evaluation process meets CR≤0.1.

[0054] When consistency is met, hierarchical analysis can be performed. The weights of the upper-level elements C1, C2, ..., Cm are calculated as c1, c2, ..., cm, and then the hierarchical single sorting is performed to obtain the elements of the current level corresponding to Ci as d1, d2, ..., dn single sorting results , then the total sorting results of level D are shown in Table 2.

[0055] Use the consistency ratio formula to check whether the result of the total hierarchical sorting is consistent:

[0056]

[0057] In the formula, represents the consistency index of the lower judgment matrix, It represents the random consistency index of the lower layer judgment matrix. When CR<0.1, the result of the total hierarchical ranking is consistent.

[0058] In the evaluation of project risks, "high", "medium" and "low" are generally used to characterize risks, lacking specific quantitative indicators. Through the fuzzy mathematical tool model, using the principle of fuzzy comprehensive evaluation, combined with the relative weights of different risks determined by the hierarchical analysis method, each risk data is quantitatively scored.

[0059] The fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method is specifically: Construct a set of fuzzy evaluation factors; Construct a scientific and reasonable evaluation set; All factors are reasonably divided into categories according to their importance, and the factors with high importance are analyzed and emphasized. The weight set that matches them is obtained by combining the influence strength of different factors. Each factor is evaluated separately and the fuzzy relationship matrix is ​​obtained; Processing of fuzzy comprehensive evaluation; Calculate and integrate the evaluation indicators; The set of evaluation factors is as follows:

[0060] in, Represents an element;

[0061] Among them, each element Represents all possible total evaluation results. The final result of fuzzy comprehensive evaluation is to obtain the corresponding evaluation result from the evaluation set, and all influencing factors should be fully considered.

[0062] Generally, the importance of each factor in power transmission and transformation varies. In order to better reduce risks, it is necessary to reasonably classify all factors according to their importance. Based on the classification results, the factors with high importance are analyzed and paid attention to. In this method, the weight set can reflect the different importance of each factor. In the calculation process, it is generally Perform weight processing. The set A = {a1, a2, a3, …, am} is the weight set. It should meet the requirements of normalization and non-negativity. The specific calculation formula is as follows:

[0063] The weight is the degree of membership of Ui (i = 1,2,3, … , m) to “importance”.

[0064] To evaluate each factor, it is necessary to construct the relationship R from each evaluation factor T to the evaluation level V one by one, that is, to carry out the fuzzy evaluation work one by one. After identifying each risk, predict the probability of the risk occurring and the possible impact magnitude. The magnitude of the risk level is determined by the probability and the impact degree, that is, M = P * Q. The sources of the risks of the target are extensive, and the probability of each risk occurring may vary due to different environments. The probability is mainly divided into five levels. The first is "very high", and the probability of the risk occurring in this level is 81% - 100%; the second is "relatively high", and the probability of the risk occurring in this level is 61% - 80%; the third is "medium", and the probability of the risk occurring in this level is 41% - 60%; the fourth is "relatively low", and the probability of the risk occurring in this level is 21% - 40%; the fifth is "very low", and the probability of the risk occurring in this level is 0 - 20%. The impact degrees generated when different risks occur are different, and the impact degrees can be divided into five levels according to the magnitude. When the impact generated by the risk is very bad, that is, "severe", when quantitatively studying the impact at this time, it reaches 81% - 100%; when the impact generated by the risk is second only to very bad, that is, "relatively large", when quantitatively studying the impact at this time, it reaches 61% - 80%; when the impact generated by the risk is average, that is, "medium", when quantitatively studying the impact at this time, it reaches 41% - 60%; when the impact generated by the risk is not large, that is, "relatively small", when quantitatively studying the impact at this time, it reaches 21% - 40%; when the impact generated by the risk is very small, that is, "negligible", the quantitative analysis at this time is 0 - 20%.

[0065] Calculate the risk level based on the risk probability and the impact degree, and classify the risk level according to the calculation result, which is divided into major (M > 0.64), relatively large (0.36 < M ≤ 0.64), general (0.16 < M ≤ 0.36), relatively small (0.04 < M ≤ 0.16) and minor (0 < M ≤ 0.04). Among them, p is the person who classifies the i-th risk data in V into a certain level, and q is the number of review experts.

[0066]

[0067] Based on the single matrix, sort out the fuzzy relation matrix R:

[0068]

[0069] ​When evaluating research factors, it should be noted that the evaluation of a single factor can only reflect the effect of the item itself on the evaluation object, but in order to pay full attention to the impact of various factors, fuzzy comprehensive evaluation can be used to obtain correct evaluation results. In combination with the actual situation, the R of a single factor is studied and found that the data in the i-th row position means the influence of the i-th factor on the different factors of the evaluation object studied in the article; the data in the j-th column means the importance level of different factors on the j-th factor of the evaluation object studied in the article.

[0070]

[0071] Each R in the fuzzy relationship matrix is ​​given a certain weight The adjusted fuzzy comprehensive evaluation formula is obtained through processing, which is as follows: B=A*R All weights form a set A, which is a matrix with m weights in one row.

[0072] In the formula, B is the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation set On the basis of , the normalization is used to obtain the evaluation result.

[0073] The normalization steps are: first sum each evaluation index, and then divide the original evaluation index by the sum of the evaluation index b

[0074]

[0075] In the formula, is the normalized fuzzy comprehensive evaluation set,

[0076] is the normalized fuzzy comprehensive evaluation index:

[0077] S4, apply the documents to be reviewed to the project bidding risk assessment model to obtain the risk level of the project. If the risk level is greater than the preset tolerable risk level, make improvement suggestions and adjust the plan.

[0078] The documents to be reviewed are applied to the project bidding and quotation risk assessment model to obtain the risk level of the project. If the risk level is greater than the preset tolerable risk level, improvement suggestions and adjustment plans are put forward, specifically: Input the collated data into the risk assessment model; Run the model to calculate the risk level of the project and set a tolerable risk level threshold; Compare the risk level output by the model with the preset tolerable risk level; If the risk level is higher than the preset tolerable risk level, the project team needs to conduct an in-depth analysis of the risk source and put forward targeted improvement suggestions; Make corresponding adjustments to the project plan based on improvement suggestions; Re-collect data and apply the risk assessment model to verify whether the adjusted risk level meets the requirements of the tolerable risk level; If the risk level is still above the threshold, continue to make improvement suggestions and adjust the plan until the risk level drops to an acceptable level.

[0079] Final decision: After confirming that the risk level is within the company's tolerance range, the project team can make the final decision whether to bid.

[0080] Bidding preparation: Prepare bidding documents based on the adjusted plan to ensure the rationality and competitiveness of the bidding quotation.

[0081] According to the improvement suggestions, the project plan is adjusted accordingly, specifically: Improvement suggestions include technical solution improvement, cost control, contract terms adjustment and management enhancement; Improvement of technical solutions: If the technical risk is high, it is recommended to re-evaluate the technical solution and consider adopting more mature technologies or seeking technical cooperation.

[0082] Cost control: If the financial risk is high, it is recommended to review and optimize the cost budget, consider reducing unnecessary expenses or looking for more cost-effective solutions.

[0083] Adjustment of contract terms: If the legal risk is high, it is recommended to review and revise the contract terms to ensure fairness and legal compliance of the contract terms.

[0084] Strengthen management: If the management risk is high, it is recommended to enhance the capabilities of the project management team or introduce more efficient management tools and processes.

[0085] Adjustment plans include re-quoting, modifying technical or financial plans, and optimizing risk management plans; Re-quote: Re-adjust the bid price based on improvement suggestions to reduce risks and increase the likelihood of winning the bid.

[0086] Modify technical or financial plans: Based on the risk assessment results, adjust the technical plan or financial budget to reduce potential risks.

[0087] Optimize risk management plan: Develop a more detailed risk management plan, including risk prevention and response measures, to ensure that the project can effectively address identified risks during implementation.

[0088] The above formulas are all dimensionless and numerical calculations. The formula is a formula for the most recent real situation obtained by collecting a large amount of data and performing software simulation. The preset parameters in the formula are set by technicians in this field according to actual conditions.

[0089] The above embodiments may be implemented in whole or in part by software, hardware, firmware or any other combination. When implemented by software, the above embodiments may be implemented in whole or in part in the form of a computer program product.

[0090] Those of ordinary skill in the art will appreciate that the modules and algorithm steps of each example described in conjunction with the embodiments disclosed herein can be implemented in electronic hardware, or a combination of computer software and electronic hardware. Whether these functions are performed in hardware or software depends on the specific application and design constraints of the technical solution. Professional and technical personnel can use different methods to implement the described functions for each specific application, but such implementation should not be considered to be beyond the scope of this application.

[0091] In addition, each functional module in each embodiment of the present application may be integrated into one processing module, or each module may exist physically separately, or two or more modules may be integrated into one module.

[0092] The above is only a specific implementation of the present application, but the protection scope of the present application is not limited thereto. Any person skilled in the art who is familiar with the present technical field can easily think of changes or substitutions within the technical scope disclosed in the present application, which should be included in the protection scope of the present application. Therefore, the protection scope of the present application should be based on the protection scope of the claims.

[0093] Finally: The above description is only a preferred embodiment of the present invention and is not intended to limit the present invention. Any modifications, equivalent substitutions, improvements, etc. made within the spirit and principles of the present invention should be included in the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for reviewing bidding documents for power transmission and transformation projects, characterized in that: The following steps are involved: Obtain bid quotation documents and conduct preliminary review to identify risk data in the project; Establish an indicator system based on risk data and preset indicator construction principles; Based on the index system, a risk assessment model for project bidding and quotation is constructed by using the analytic hierarchy process and fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method; The documents that need to be reviewed are applied to the project bidding and quotation risk assessment model to obtain the risk level of the project. If the risk level is greater than the preset tolerable risk level, improvement suggestions are put forward and the plan is adjusted.

2. The method for reviewing bidding quotation documents based on power transmission and transformation projects according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The bidding quotation documents include technical solutions, bill of quantities, material unit prices, labor costs, equipment costs, and construction plans.

3. The method for reviewing bidding quotation documents for power transmission and transformation projects according to claim 2 is characterized in that: The said obtaining of bidding quotation documents and conducting preliminary review to identify potential risk data in the project is as follows: Collect and organize bidding quotation documents; Conduct preliminary screening of bid quotation documents based on the basic characteristics of risk data, including uncertainty and objectivity; The preliminary screened bidding quotation documents are finally identified based on a preset risk checklist to obtain a risk data list, wherein the preset risk checklist includes all possible risks.

4. The method for reviewing bidding quotation documents based on power transmission and transformation projects according to claim 3 is characterized in that: The indicator construction principles include relevance, measurability, timeliness, interpretability, and balance.

5. The method for reviewing bidding quotation documents based on power transmission and transformation projects according to claim 4 is characterized in that: The indicator system is established based on the risk data and indicator construction principles, specifically: Identify bid and quotation risk data and assess the extent and weight of risk; After identifying the risk data, the indicator system is established in combination with the indicator construction principles, and the reliability of the risk assessment indicators is tested through the Cronbach coefficient.

6. The method for reviewing bidding quotation documents based on power transmission and transformation projects according to claim 5 is characterized in that: The project bidding and quotation risk assessment model is constructed based on the index system through the hierarchical analysis method and the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method, specifically: Establish a hierarchical structure model, which includes the target layer, the criterion layer and the indicator layer; Based on the scaling method, the indicators at each level are compared pairwise to obtain the judgment matrix at each level of the indicator system; Perform single sorting and consistency check on each level to calculate the eigenvalue and eigenvector of the judgment matrix and obtain the weight of each indicator; Based on the comprehensive weight of all factors to the top-level target, the set of single-ranked data of all levels is calculated to obtain the total ranking of the levels; Combine the fuzzy evaluation value of each indicator with its weight to construct a fuzzy relationship matrix; The fuzzy evaluation of each indicator is integrated into an overall evaluation through weighted average; The fuzzy results of comprehensive evaluation are converted into specific risk levels to obtain the project bidding quotation risk assessment model.

7. The method for reviewing bidding documents for power transmission and transformation projects according to claim 6 is characterized in that ,The single sorting and consistency check for each level are specifically as follows: Calculate the product of each row of elements in the judgment matrix; Compute the nth root of the product of the elements in each row: Convert the nth root of the product of each row of elements into a eigenvector and normalize it; Calculate the maximum eigenvalue of the judgment matrix; The consistency index and ratio are calculated based on the maximum characteristic root.

8. The method for reviewing bidding quotation documents based on power transmission and transformation projects according to claim 7 is characterized in that: The documents to be reviewed are applied to the project bidding and quotation risk assessment model to obtain the risk level of the project. If the risk level is greater than the preset tolerable risk level, improvement suggestions and adjustment plans are put forward, specifically: Input the collated data into the risk assessment model; Run the model to calculate the risk level of the project and set a tolerable risk level threshold; Compare the risk level output by the model with the preset tolerable risk level; If the risk level is higher than the preset tolerable risk level, the project team needs to conduct an in-depth analysis of the risk source and put forward targeted improvement suggestions; Make corresponding adjustments to the project plan based on the improvement suggestions, including technical solution improvement, cost control, contract terms adjustment and management enhancement; re-collecting data and applying risk assessment models; If the risk level is still above the threshold, continue to make improvement suggestions and adjust the plan until the risk level drops to an acceptable level.

9. The method for reviewing bidding quotation documents based on power transmission and transformation projects according to claim 8 is characterized in that: The fuzzy comprehensive evaluation formula of the fuzzy result of the comprehensive evaluation is: Among them, p is the person who classifies the i-th risk data in V as a certain level, q is the number of review experts, represents the membership of elements in sets T and V, represents the weight set, R represents the fuzzy relationship matrix, B is the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation set, It is the evaluation index for bidding quotation documents.

10. The method for reviewing bidding quotation documents based on power transmission and transformation projects according to claim 9 is characterized in that: The reliability of the risk evaluation index of the bidding quotation for power transmission and transformation projects is tested by calculating the Cronbach coefficient. The specific calculation formula is as follows: Where N is the number of bid quotation document indicators, is the variance of the mean of the ith indicator, is the variance of the comprehensive evaluation value.

Images