Project pre-evaluation method and device and electronic equipment

Abstract

The invention discloses a pre-evaluation method and device of a project and electronic equipment. The method comprises the following steps of: obtaining basic data of a software project in a plurality of dimensions, the basic data comprises a construction necessity score of a first-level index, an investment rationality score of the first-level index, a management normativity score of the first-level index, a subordinate second-level index score of a construction target of the first-level index and a subordinate second-level index score of an early-stage completion condition of the first-level index; inputting the basic data into an evaluation model for evaluating the software project in an early stage to obtain a comprehensive evaluation value, the evaluation model being used for evaluating the software project; and according to the comprehensive evaluation value, determining a project level to which the software project belongs. According to the method and the device, the technical problem that accurate evaluation cannot be performed before the software project is started due to emphasis on evaluation of the later effect of the project in related technologies is solved.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present application relates to the field of data processing, and in particular to a method, device and electronic equipment for pre-evaluation of a project. Background Art

[0002] The evaluation and assessment system for investment and construction projects is of great significance for improving project investment benefits and optimizing resource allocation. The relevant technologies focus on evaluating the effects of the later stages of the project and rely on a large amount of historical data and actual data during operation. It is impossible to conduct accurate assessments in the early stages of a project or when data is insufficient, especially for new or innovative projects.

[0003] To address the above-mentioned problems, no effective solution has been proposed yet. Summary of the invention

[0004] The embodiments of the present application provide a method, device and electronic device for pre-assessment of a project, so as to at least solve the technical problem that the related art focuses on evaluating the effects of the project in the later stage and cannot accurately evaluate the software project before it is launched.

[0005] According to one aspect of an embodiment of the present application, a method for pre-evaluation of a project is provided, comprising: obtaining basic data of a software project in multiple dimensions, wherein the basic data include: a construction necessity score of a first-level indicator, an investment rationality score of a first-level indicator, a management standardization score of a first-level indicator, a score of a subordinate second-level indicator of a construction target of a first-level indicator, and a score of a subordinate second-level indicator of a preliminary completion status of a first-level indicator; inputting the basic data into an evaluation model to perform a pre-evaluation of the software project to obtain a comprehensive evaluation value, wherein the evaluation model is used to evaluate the software project; and determining the project level to which the software project belongs based on the comprehensive evaluation value.

[0006] Optionally, the basic data is input into the evaluation model to conduct a preliminary evaluation of the software project to obtain a comprehensive evaluation value, including: obtaining the first weight corresponding to the construction necessity score, the second weight corresponding to the investment rationality score, the third weight corresponding to the management standardization score, the fourth weight corresponding to the subordinate secondary indicator score of the construction target, and the fifth weight corresponding to the subordinate secondary indicator score of the preliminary completion status; the first weight, construction necessity score, the second weight, investment rationality score, the third weight, management standardization score, the fourth weight, the subordinate secondary indicator score of the construction target, the fifth weight, and the subordinate secondary indicator score of the preliminary completion status are input into the evaluation model to determine the comprehensive evaluation value.

[0007] Optionally, the construction necessity score is determined in the following manner: inputting the descriptive information of the software project into the evaluation model; determining a first value, a second value, a third value, and a fourth value from the descriptive information based on the evaluation model, wherein the first value is used to indicate whether the software project meets the necessity of supporting business development, the second value is used to indicate whether the software project is for supporting internal digital transformation, the third value is used to indicate whether the software project meets the technological evolution, and the fourth value is used to indicate whether the software project meets the relevant necessity of industrial digitalization or whether it has income; determine the construction necessity score based on the first value, the second value, the third value, and the fourth value.

[0008] Optionally, the investment rationality score is determined in the following manner: determine a fifth value and a sixth value from the description information based on the evaluation model, wherein the fifth value is used to indicate whether a reasonable investment estimate has been made for the software project, and the sixth value is used to indicate the investment change rate of the software project compared with the previous project, and the investment change rate is determined based on the current investment amount corresponding to the software project and the planned investment amount of the previous project; determine the investment rationality score based on the fifth value and the sixth value.

[0009] Optionally, the management standardization score is determined in the following manner: determine the seventh value, the eighth value and the ninth value from the description information based on the evaluation model, wherein the seventh value is used to indicate whether the software project has designated a project manager and a main engineering manager in the planning stage, the eighth value is used to indicate whether the software project has designated a construction unit project manager in the planning stage, and the ninth value is used to indicate whether the software project has designated a procurement manager in the planning stage; determine the management standardization score based on the seventh value, the eighth value and the ninth value.

[0010] Optionally, the scores of the subordinate secondary indicators of the construction target are determined in the following manner: determining the cumulative revenue amount, cumulative investment amount and a tenth value of the software project from the description information based on the evaluation model, wherein the tenth value is used to indicate whether the description information of the software project contains historical data sources and the current period revenue calculation process; determining the expected input-output ratio value of the secondary indicator in the scores of the subordinate secondary indicators of the construction target based on the cumulative revenue amount and the cumulative investment amount; determining the number of effective quantifiable capability indicators from the description information based on the evaluation model; determining the expected demand effectiveness score of the secondary indicator in the scores of the subordinate secondary indicators of the construction target based on the number of effective quantifiable capability indicators; determining the cost saving score of the secondary indicator from the description information based on the evaluation model; determining the scores of the subordinate secondary indicators of the construction target based on the expected input-output ratio value of the secondary indicator, the expected demand effectiveness score of the secondary indicator and the cost saving score of the secondary indicator.

[0011] Optionally, the scores of the subordinate secondary indicators of the previous completion status are determined in the following manner: according to the evaluation model, the current construction period score of the previous project of the secondary indicator, the investment completion score of the previous project of the secondary indicator, and the post-evaluation score of the previous project of the secondary indicator are determined from the descriptive information; based on the current construction period score, the investment completion score and the post-evaluation score, the scores of the subordinate secondary indicators of the previous completion status are determined.

[0012] Optionally, determining the project level of the software project based on the comprehensive evaluation value includes: when the comprehensive evaluation value is greater than or equal to a first scoring threshold, determining that the project level of the software project is the first level; when the comprehensive evaluation value is less than the first scoring threshold and greater than or equal to a second scoring threshold, determining that the project level of the software project is the second level, wherein the first scoring threshold is greater than the second scoring threshold, and the first level is higher than the second level; when the comprehensive evaluation value is less than the second scoring threshold and greater than or equal to a third scoring threshold, determining that the project level of the software project is the third level, wherein the second scoring threshold is greater than the third scoring threshold, and the second level is higher than the third level; when the comprehensive evaluation value is less than the third scoring threshold, determining that the project level of the software project is the fourth level, wherein the third level is higher than the fourth level.

[0013] According to another aspect of an embodiment of the present application, a pre-evaluation device for a project is also provided, including: an acquisition module, used to acquire basic data of a software project in multiple dimensions, wherein the basic data include: a construction necessity score of a first-level indicator, an investment rationality score of a first-level indicator, a management standardization score of a first-level indicator, a subordinate second-level indicator score of a construction target of a first-level indicator, and a subordinate second-level indicator score of a preliminary completion status of a first-level indicator; an evaluation module, used to input the basic data into an evaluation model to perform a preliminary evaluation of the software project to obtain a comprehensive evaluation value, wherein the evaluation model is used to evaluate the software project; a determination module, used to determine the project level to which the software project belongs based on the comprehensive evaluation value.

[0014] According to another aspect of the embodiment of the present application, there is also provided an electronic device, including: a memory and a processor, the memory being used to store program instructions; the processor being connected to the memory and being used to execute the pre-assessment method for implementing the above-mentioned project.

[0015] According to another aspect of the embodiments of the present application, a non-volatile storage medium is provided, which includes a stored computer program, wherein the device where the non-volatile storage medium is located executes the pre-evaluation method of the above-mentioned project by running the computer program.

[0016] According to another aspect of the embodiments of the present application, a computer program product is provided, including computer instructions, which implement the pre-evaluation method of the above-mentioned project when executed by a processor.

[0017] In an embodiment of the present application, basic data of a software project in multiple dimensions is obtained, wherein the basic data includes: a construction necessity score of a first-level indicator, an investment rationality score of a first-level indicator, a management standardization score of a first-level indicator, a subordinate second-level indicator score of the construction target of a first-level indicator, and a subordinate second-level indicator score of the preliminary completion status of a first-level indicator; the basic data is input into an evaluation model to conduct a preliminary evaluation of the software project to obtain a comprehensive evaluation value, wherein the evaluation model is used to evaluate the software project; based on the comprehensive evaluation value, the project level to which the software project belongs is determined, thereby achieving the purpose of conducting a comprehensive evaluation of the project before the software project is launched, thereby achieving the technical effect of helping decision makers quickly identify the potential value and risks of the project, thereby solving the technical problem that the related technology focuses on evaluating the effects of the later stage of the project and cannot accurately evaluate the software project before it is launched. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0018] The drawings described herein are used to provide a further understanding of the present application and constitute a part of the present application. The illustrative embodiments of the present application and their descriptions are used to explain the present application and do not constitute an improper limitation on the present application. In the drawings:

[0019] Figure 1 It is a hardware structure block diagram of a computer terminal for implementing a pre-assessment method for a project according to an embodiment of the present application;

[0020] Figure 2 is a flow chart of a method for pre-assessment of a project according to an embodiment of the present application;

[0021] Figure 3 It is a structural diagram of a pre-evaluation device for a project according to an embodiment of the present application. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0022] In order to enable those skilled in the art to better understand the solution of the present application, the technical solution in the embodiments of the present application will be clearly and completely described below in conjunction with the drawings in the embodiments of the present application. Obviously, the described embodiments are only part of the embodiments of the present application, not all of the embodiments. Based on the embodiments in the present application, all other embodiments obtained by ordinary technicians in this field without creative work should fall within the scope of protection of the present application.

[0023] It should be noted that the terms "first", "second", etc. in the specification and claims of the present application and the above-mentioned drawings are used to distinguish similar objects, and are not necessarily used to describe a specific order or sequence. It should be understood that the data used in this way can be interchangeable where appropriate, so that the embodiments of the present application described herein can be implemented in an order other than those illustrated or described herein. In addition, the terms "including" and "having" and any of their variations are intended to cover non-exclusive inclusions, for example, a process, method, system, product or device comprising a series of steps or units is not necessarily limited to those steps or units clearly listed, but may include other steps or units that are not clearly listed or inherent to these processes, methods, products or devices.

[0024] The information collected in the embodiments of the present application is information and data authorized by the user or fully authorized by all parties, and the collection, storage, use, processing, transmission, provision, disclosure and application of the relevant data comply with the relevant laws, regulations and standards of the relevant regions, take necessary confidentiality measures, do not violate public order and good morals, and provide corresponding operation entrances for users to choose to authorize or reject automated decision-making results; if the user chooses to reject, the expert decision-making process will be entered.

[0025] In related technologies, common evaluation methods include: 1. On-site investigation and observation method: Through investigation and observation of the actual project site, understand the implementation of system functions and identify deficiencies and potential problems in the project. 2. Data collection and analysis method: By collecting data during the project operation, including business indicators, user satisfaction, project execution status, etc., data analysis is performed to evaluate the overall performance of the project. 3. Expert method: Through the professional knowledge and experience of experts, the information performance of the project is evaluated and feedback is provided to ensure the rationality and feasibility of the project performance. 4. Comparative analysis method: By comparing the performance level of the project in the industry, its relative competitive advantage or gap is determined so that corresponding improvement measures can be taken. 5. Comprehensive evaluation method: Based on the above methods, a comprehensive evaluation report of the project is obtained to help improve the level of informatization construction and promote the improvement and optimization of subsequent projects.

[0026] Although the evaluation methods in related technologies can comprehensively evaluate the operation of projects through data collection, expert evaluation, on-site investigation and other means, they have the following problems and defects in terms of future investment benefits, resource allocation optimization and project risk prediction before the project starts: 1. Lack of pre-prediction ability: The existing technology focuses more on evaluating the performance of the later stage of the project, and cannot accurately predict the feasibility, potential risks, and benefits before the project starts, resulting in insufficient basis for investment decisions, which is easy to cause resource waste or inefficient allocation. 2. Imperfect indicator system: The indicators of the existing evaluation system are mainly based on the operation of the project. The key indicators such as cost, benefit, and risk required for the preliminary evaluation are not fully covered, making it difficult to comprehensively evaluate the comprehensive performance of the project, especially in terms of resource allocation and investment return prediction. 3. Lack of a perfect feedback mechanism: The current comprehensive performance evaluation of informatization is often carried out after the project is completed. The purpose of the evaluation is to summarize experience and provide guidance for future project management. However, the existing technology lacks a perfect feedback mechanism to feed back the results of the post-evaluation to the pre-evaluation link to improve the decision-making and evaluation model of future projects. This lack of feedback leads to the inability to correct and avoid errors and risks in project management in a timely manner. 4. Lack of dynamism: In the process of implementation, information technology projects are often affected by various factors such as technological development, policy changes and market environment. Existing evaluation methods cannot flexibly adjust evaluation standards and indicators in the early stages of a project and lack consideration of these dynamic factors. 5. Strong data dependence: Existing technologies rely on a large amount of historical data and actual data during operation, and cannot be accurately evaluated in the early stages of a project or when data is insufficient, especially for new or innovative projects.

[0027] In order to solve some problems existing in the related art, the present application embodiment provides a project pre-evaluation method, which can be run on Figure 1 In the computer terminal shown, the computer terminal is explained below.

[0028] The project pre-assessment method embodiment provided in the embodiment of the present application can be executed in a mobile terminal, a computer terminal or a similar computing device. Figure 1 The hardware structure block diagram of a computer terminal for implementing a project pre-evaluation method is shown. Figure 1As shown, the computer terminal 10 may include one or more (102a, 102b, ..., 102n are used to illustrate) processors (the processor may include but is not limited to a processing device such as a microprocessor MCU or a programmable logic device FPGA), a memory 104 for storing data, and a transmission module 106 for communication functions connected via a wired and / or wireless network. In addition, it may also include: a display, a keyboard, a cursor control device, an input / output interface (I / O interface), a universal serial bus (USB) port (which may be included as one of the ports of the I / O interface), a network interface, and a BUS bus. Those skilled in the art can understand that Figure 1 The structure shown is only for illustration and does not limit the structure of the above electronic device. Figure 1 More or fewer components as shown, or with Figure 1 Different configurations shown.

[0029] It should be noted that the one or more processors and / or other data processing circuits described above may generally be referred to herein as "data processing circuits". The data processing circuits may be embodied in whole or in part as software, hardware, firmware, or any other combination thereof. In addition, the data processing circuit may be a single independent processing module, or may be incorporated in whole or in part into any of the other components in the computer terminal 10. As described in the embodiments of the present application, the data processing circuit acts as a processor control (e.g., selection of a variable resistor terminal path connected to an interface).

[0030] The memory 104 can be used to store software programs and modules of application software, such as program instructions / data storage devices corresponding to the pre-assessment method of the project in the embodiment of the present application. The processor executes various functional applications and data processing by running the software programs and modules stored in the memory 104, that is, realizing the pre-assessment method of the above-mentioned project. The memory 104 may include a high-speed random access memory, and may also include a non-volatile memory, such as one or more magnetic storage devices, flash memory, or other non-volatile solid-state memory. In some examples, the memory 104 may further include a memory remotely arranged relative to the processor, and these remote memories may be connected to the computer terminal 10 via a network. Examples of the above-mentioned network include, but are not limited to, the Internet, an intranet, a local area network, a mobile communication network, and combinations thereof.

[0031] The transmission module 106 is used to receive or send data via a network. The specific example of the above network may include a wireless network provided by a communication provider of the computer terminal 10. In one example, the transmission module 106 includes a network adapter (Network Interface Controller, NIC), which can be connected to other network devices through a base station so as to communicate with the Internet. In one example, the transmission module 106 can be a radio frequency (RF) module, which is used to communicate with the Internet wirelessly.

[0032] The display may be, for example, a touch screen liquid crystal display (LCD) that enables a user to interact with a user interface of the computer terminal 10 .

[0033] It should be noted that, in some optional embodiments, the above Figure 1 The computer terminal shown may include hardware elements (including circuits), software elements (including computer code stored on a computer-readable medium), or a combination of hardware elements and software elements. It should be noted that Figure 1 This is merely one example of a particular embodiment and is intended to illustrate the types of components that may be present in the computer terminal described above.

[0034] In the above-mentioned operating environment, an embodiment of the present application provides an embodiment of a pre-assessment method for a project. It should be noted that the steps shown in the flowchart of the accompanying drawings can be executed in a computer system such as a set of computer executable instructions, and although the logical order is shown in the flowchart, in some cases, the steps shown or described can be executed in an order different from that shown here.

[0035] Figure 2 is a flowchart of a method for pre-assessment of a project according to an embodiment of the present application, such as Figure 2 As shown, the method comprises the following steps:

[0036] Step S202, obtaining basic data of the software project in multiple dimensions, wherein the basic data includes: the construction necessity score of the first-level indicator, the investment rationality score of the first-level indicator, the management standardization score of the first-level indicator, the subordinate second-level indicator score of the construction target of the first-level indicator, and the subordinate second-level indicator score of the preliminary completion status of the first-level indicator.

[0037] In the above step S202, obtaining basic data of the software project in multiple dimensions refers to collecting and organizing key information and quantitative indicators used to evaluate the performance of the software project in the early stages. These basic data cover multiple aspects of evaluating whether the software project is worth investing in, whether the investment is reasonable, whether the management is standardized, whether the expected goals are clear, and whether the completion of the early projects is good. By establishing data interfaces with various systems, basic data related to the project can be obtained. Specifically, it includes:

[0038] 1. Construction necessity score: This is a first-level indicator used to evaluate whether a software project is necessary to build, that is, whether the project can promote business development, optimize processes, improve service quality and efficiency, support digital transformation, or adapt to technological evolution. A high score means that the project has made significant contributions in these aspects and is an important basis for starting a project.

[0039] 2. Investment rationality score: Also a first-level indicator, it is used to determine whether the investment in a software project is reasonable, including the evaluation of the investment amount and the comparison with the investment change of the previous project. A reasonable investment project should have a clear estimation basis, and the investment change rate should be within an acceptable range to avoid over-investment or under-investment of resources.

[0040] 3. Management Standardization Score: This is to assess whether the project has established a clear division of labor and responsibilities at the management level, including the designation of relevant management personnel. Good management standardization is the key to ensuring the smooth execution of the project, and can avoid inefficiency and project delays caused by unclear responsibilities.

[0041] 4. Scores of the secondary indicators under the construction target: This level of indicators further refines the project's expected goals, including specific indicators such as cost savings, expected input-output ratio, and expected demand results. By evaluating these secondary indicators, we can gain an in-depth understanding of the project's expected economic and social benefits and determine whether the project can achieve its intended goals.

[0042] 5. Subordinate secondary indicator scores of previous completion status: This part evaluates the completion status of the previous or previous projects, including the current construction period, investment completion status and post-evaluation results, etc., which is used to determine whether the timing of project launch is appropriate and whether the conditions for launch are met.

[0043] Step S204, inputting the basic data into the evaluation model to perform preliminary evaluation on the software project to obtain a comprehensive evaluation value, wherein the evaluation model is used to evaluate the software project.

[0044] In the above step S204, the evaluation model is a mathematical model or algorithm, which calculates the comprehensive performance score of the software project, i.e. the above comprehensive evaluation value, based on the input basic data through the set evaluation rules and weight system. The design of the evaluation model needs to fully consider the characteristics of software projects in different industries, such as technical feasibility, economic benefits, risk management, etc. in the field of communications, to ensure the accuracy and applicability of the evaluation results. The model may include a variety of algorithms, such as weighted average, regression analysis, machine learning, etc., to achieve a comprehensive evaluation of the comprehensive performance of the software project. The comprehensive evaluation value is a quantitative indicator that can intuitively reflect the expected performance of the software project before it is launched, including the potential benefits, cost control capabilities, management efficiency, and risk level of the project.

[0045] Before conducting an assessment, we first identify the wrong values, duplicate values, and missing values ​​in the input basic data, and perform preprocessing or prompt the user to re-enter the data. For missing values, we use methods such as mean filling to ensure data integrity. At the same time, we standardize data from different sources to give them a unified data format and dimension, which is convenient for subsequent analysis and calculation. For example, we convert the amount data into 10,000 yuan, and convert the percentage data into decimal form.

[0046] Step S206: Determine the project level to which the software project belongs based on the comprehensive evaluation value.

[0047] In the above step S206, the project level is usually divided into several levels such as "excellent", "good", "pass" and "fail". The level classification standard is based on industry experience, enterprise goals and the design of the evaluation model, aiming to map the comprehensive evaluation value of the software project into an easy-to-understand classification system to help decision makers quickly judge the overall quality of the project. Specifically, the "excellent" level means that the software project performs well in most evaluation dimensions, has a high construction necessity, investment rationality and management standardization, has significant expected returns, and controllable risks. It is a project worthy of priority investment and promotion. The "good" level means that the software project performs well in most evaluation dimensions and has investment value as a whole, but there may be room for improvement in some aspects, which requires decision makers to further consider and optimize resource allocation. The "pass" level indicates that the basic evaluation indicators of the software project have reached the minimum requirements for startup, but there are still some risks and uncertainties, which need to be closely monitored during the project execution and the strategy needs to be adjusted in time. The "fail" level means that the software project performs poorly in key evaluation dimensions, there are major risks or the benefits are not obvious, and decision makers should consider reducing investment or re-evaluating the feasibility of the project.

[0048] After determining the project level to which the software project belongs, decision makers can adjust the project investment amount, optimize resource allocation, or even cancel the project when necessary to avoid wasting resources based on the level results. For example, for projects with an "excellent" level, the investment amount can be increased as appropriate during the total investment planning stage to accelerate the project progress; while for projects with a "failed" level, the investment amount should be reduced or some projects should be canceled, and a decision on whether to start the project should be made after re-evaluation. The pre-evaluation method not only provides a scientific basis for investment decisions for software projects, but also helps companies in different industries optimize project management processes, achieve reasonable resource allocation, and improve overall investment benefits and project success rates.

[0049] Through the above steps S202 to S206, the purpose of comprehensively evaluating the project before the software project is launched is achieved, thereby achieving the technical effect of helping decision makers quickly identify the potential value and risks of the project, thereby solving the technical problem that the related technology focuses on evaluating the effects of the later stage of the project and cannot accurately evaluate the software project before it is launched. The following is an explanation.

[0050] In step S204 of the pre-evaluation method of the above project, basic data is input into the evaluation model to conduct a preliminary evaluation of the software project to obtain a comprehensive evaluation value, including: obtaining the first weight corresponding to the construction necessity score, the second weight corresponding to the investment rationality score, the third weight corresponding to the management standardization score, the fourth weight corresponding to the subordinate secondary indicator score of the construction target, and the fifth weight corresponding to the subordinate secondary indicator score of the preliminary completion status; the first weight, construction necessity score, second weight, investment rationality score, third weight, management standardization score, fourth weight, subordinate secondary indicator score of the construction target, fifth weight, and subordinate secondary indicator score of the preliminary completion status are input into the evaluation model to determine the comprehensive evaluation value.

[0051] In the embodiment of the present application, the comprehensive evaluation value obtained from the preliminary evaluation of the software project can be determined by the following formula:

[0052]

[0053] Among them, i-CORE represents the above comprehensive evaluation value; K1 represents the first weight; CN represents the construction necessity score; K2 represents the second weight; RI represents the investment rationality score; K3 represents the third weight; MN represents the management standardization score; K4 represents the weight of the construction target of the first-level indicator; m i Indicates the fourth weight; CO i Indicates the score of the subordinate secondary indicators of the construction target; K5 indicates the weight value of the preliminary completion of the primary indicator; n i Indicates the fifth weight; HC i The scores of subordinate secondary indicators that indicate the preliminary completion status of the primary indicator.

[0054] In another optional embodiment, the comprehensive evaluation value can be applied to the improvement of internal performance indicators such as CPU usage, memory usage, I / O response time, network delay, etc. For example, a multi-objective optimization algorithm can be designed to ensure that resources are optimally allocated while effectively improving various performance indicators. If based on priority queues and genetic algorithms (GA), the specific algorithm implementation framework is as follows:

[0055] 1. Data collection and preprocessing: Convert unstructured basic data into structured data that can be processed by machine learning algorithms, which may include data cleaning, normalization, and feature selection.

[0056] 2. Build an evaluation model: Identify key features that affect the overall evaluation value, such as expected improvement, cost, risk, and other factors. Use machine learning algorithms, such as random forests, support vector machines, or neural networks, to train an evaluation model based on historical project data. The goal is to learn how to predict the overall effect of a project on performance improvement from project characteristics.

[0057] 3. Project evaluation and priority sorting: For each project, use the trained evaluation model to calculate the evaluation value of the comprehensive improvement of performance indicators such as CPU usage, memory usage, I / O response time, network latency, etc. Based on the comprehensive evaluation value, all projects are sorted from high to low priority to form an optimization project queue.

[0058] 4. Multi-objective optimization and resource allocation: First, define the objective function. The objective function should comprehensively consider the degree of performance improvement and resource cost. The degree of improvement and cost of multiple performance indicators can be added or multiplied to form a multi-objective function. Then initialize the genetic algorithm and create an initial population. Each individual represents a different resource allocation scheme, where resources include hardware upgrades, software optimization, etc. Each scheme corresponds to the optimization project queue sorted in step 3. For each individual in the population, use the objective function to calculate its fitness or score. The score reflects the balance effect of the resource allocation scheme between improving performance indicators and resource costs. Perform selection, crossover, and mutation operations in the genetic algorithm to generate a new population until the preset termination condition is reached, such as the maximum number of iterations or meeting a specific fitness threshold. Select the best individual from the final population as the optimal resource allocation scheme, which will be used to guide the improvement of internal performance indicators such as CPU usage, memory usage, I / O response time, and network latency.

[0059] 5. Implementation and monitoring: Based on the optimal resource allocation plan, prioritize high-priority optimization projects and reasonably allocate hardware, software, and human resources. During the implementation of the project, continuously monitor changes in indicators such as CPU usage, memory usage, I / O response time, and network latency to evaluate the effectiveness of project implementation. If the monitoring results show that some projects have not achieved the expected results or that resource allocation needs to be adjusted, you can rerun steps 2 to 4 to dynamically optimize the model and resource allocation.

[0060] 6. Evaluation model update: Feedback the implementation results to the evaluation model to update the model parameters and improve the accuracy and reliability of future evaluations. Continuously collect new project data, regularly train and update the evaluation model to ensure that it can adapt to the latest trends and needs of system performance improvement.

[0061] Through the above algorithm framework, the comprehensive evaluation value is not only used for project sorting, but also combined with the genetic algorithm to form a multi-objective optimization method to guide the effective allocation of resources, thereby achieving maximum improvement in key performance indicators such as CPU utilization, memory usage, I / O response time, and network latency.

[0062] In the pre-assessment method of the above-mentioned project, the construction necessity score is determined in the following manner: the description information of the software project is input into the evaluation model; a first value, a second value, a third value and a fourth value are determined from the description information according to the evaluation model, wherein the first value is used to indicate whether the software project meets the necessity of supporting business development, the second value is used to indicate whether the software project is for supporting internal digital transformation, the third value is used to indicate whether the software project meets the technological evolution, and the fourth value is used to indicate whether the software project meets the relevant necessity of industrial digitalization or whether it has income; the construction necessity score is determined based on the first value, the second value, the third value and the fourth value.

[0063] In the embodiment of the present application, the construction necessity score CN can be determined by the following formula:

[0064] CN=N1×20+N2×20+N3×20+N4×40

[0065] Among them, N1 represents the above-mentioned first value, that is, whether the software project meets the necessity of supporting business development and whether it has specific business development goals. If so, the value is 1, if not, the value is 0; N2 represents the above-mentioned second value, that is, whether the software project is for supporting internal digital transformation and whether it has specific digital transformation content. If so, the value is 1, if not, the value is 0; N3 represents the above-mentioned third value, that is, whether the software project meets the technological evolution and whether it has specific evolution goals. If so, the value is 1, if not, the value is 0; N4 represents the above-mentioned fourth value, that is, whether the software project meets the necessity of industrial digitalization or whether it has income, and whether it has specific industrial digital content. If so, the value is 1, if not, the value is 0.

[0066] Specifically, the business development category is to evaluate whether the projects to be built (such as software projects) can promote business development, optimize business processes, improve service quality and efficiency, and expand new business goals. The digital transformation support category is to evaluate whether the projects to be built have the characteristics of improving capabilities in data collection and integration, data purification and processing, data service visualization, and data value realization. The technology evolution category refers to the evaluation of whether the projects to be built need to optimize, upgrade or transform existing IT systems or platforms in order to adapt to and utilize the latest development trends in information technology to improve the performance, reliability and adaptability of the system to ensure that it can meet future business needs and technological development requirements. Industry digitalization category / income category: Industry digitalization is to evaluate whether the software projects to be built use digital technologies (such as big data, cloud computing, the Internet of Things, artificial intelligence, etc.) to upgrade and optimize their production, management and service processes to enhance the efficiency and flexibility of the system; the income category refers to the project's ability to bring business income to meet the business's revenue growth needs.

[0067] In the pre-evaluation method of the above-mentioned project, the investment rationality score is determined in the following manner: a fifth value and a sixth value are determined from the description information based on the evaluation model, wherein the fifth value is used to indicate whether a reasonable investment estimate has been made for the software project, and the sixth value is used to indicate the investment change rate of the software project compared with the previous project, and the investment change rate is determined based on the current investment amount corresponding to the software project and the planned investment amount of the previous project; based on the fifth value and the sixth value, the investment rationality score is determined.

[0068] In some embodiments of the present application, the investment rationality score RI may be determined by the following formula:

[0069] RI=N5×50+N6×50

[0070] Among them, N5 represents the above-mentioned fifth value, that is, whether the software project has undergone reasonable investment estimation and has a corresponding calculation process or basis. The unit of the investment amount is ten thousand yuan, rounded to two decimal places. If so, the value is 1, if not, the value is 0; N6 represents the above-mentioned sixth value, that is, the investment change rate of the software project compared with the previous project, investment change rate = (current investment amount - corresponding to the previous project's planned investment amount) / corresponding to the previous project's planned investment amount. If it decreases by 10% or more, the value is 1; if it decreases by less than 10%, the value is 0.8; if it increases by less than 10%, the value is 0.6; if it increases by 10% or more, the value is 0.

[0071] Specifically, the investment amount refers to the estimated amount of project investment in the planning stage. It is used to evaluate whether the estimated investment amount of the current project is reasonable, and there should be a corresponding calculation process or basis. The investment change is to judge the rationality of the project investment based on the investment change rate of the current project investment amount compared with the planned investment of the previous project.

[0072] In the pre-evaluation method of the above-mentioned project, the management standardization score is determined in the following manner: the seventh value, the eighth value and the ninth value are determined from the descriptive information according to the evaluation model, wherein the seventh value is used to indicate whether the software project has designated a project manager and a main project manager in the planning stage, the eighth value is used to indicate whether the software project has designated a construction unit project manager in the planning stage, and the ninth value is used to indicate whether the software project has designated a procurement manager in the planning stage; the management standardization score is determined based on the seventh value, the eighth value and the ninth value.

[0073] In the embodiment of the present application, the management normativeness score MN can be determined by the following formula:

[0074] MN=N7×50+N8×25+N9×25

[0075] Among them, N7 represents the seventh value mentioned above, that is, whether the software project has designated a project manager and a main engineering manager in the planning stage. If so, the value is 1, if not, the value is 0; N8 represents the eighth value mentioned above, that is, whether the software project has designated a construction unit project manager in the planning stage. If so, the value is 1, if not, the value is 0; N9 represents the ninth value mentioned above, that is, whether the software project has designated a procurement manager in the planning stage. If so, the value is 1, if not, the value is 0.

[0076] In the pre-evaluation method of the above-mentioned project, the scores of the subordinate secondary indicators of the construction target are determined in the following manner: the cumulative income amount, the cumulative investment amount and the tenth value of the software project are determined from the description information according to the evaluation model, wherein the tenth value is used to indicate whether the description information of the software project contains the historical data source and the current period income calculation process; based on the cumulative income amount and the cumulative investment amount, the expected input-output ratio score of the secondary indicator in the scores of the subordinate secondary indicators of the construction target is determined; based on the evaluation model, the number of effective quantifiable capability indicators is determined from the description information; based on the number of effective quantifiable capability indicators, the expected demand effectiveness score of the secondary indicator in the scores of the subordinate secondary indicators of the construction target is determined; based on the evaluation model, the cost saving score of the secondary indicator is determined from the description information; based on the expected input-output ratio score of the secondary indicator, the expected demand effectiveness score of the secondary indicator and the cost saving score of the secondary indicator, the scores of the subordinate secondary indicators of the construction target are determined.

[0077] In the embodiment of the present application, the subordinate secondary indicator score CO of the construction target i It includes the secondary indicator expected input-output ratio score CO1, the secondary indicator expected demand effectiveness score CO2, and the secondary indicator cost saving score CO3. Specifically, CO1 can be determined by the following formula:

[0078] CO1=(E1 / E2-1)×70×N10

[0079] Among them, E1 represents the cumulative income amount (including this period), E2 represents the cumulative investment amount (or the cumulative investment amount, including this period), N10 represents the tenth value mentioned above, that is, whether the description information of the software project contains the historical data source and the current period income calculation process. If so, the value is 1, if not, the value is 0; 70 represents the scoring coefficient for the investment-production ratio in the reference standard specification, which can be set according to the actual situation and the value is 70; the corresponding m at this time is i m1 represents the weight of the expected input-output ratio of the secondary indicator, which should satisfy m1+m2+m3=100%. The specific value can be set according to the importance. For projects with income, the value is 80%, and for projects without income, the value is 0. The expected input-output ratio refers to the ratio of the cumulative income amount of the project (including the actual income of the previous period and the expected income of the current period) to the cumulative investment amount (including the actual investment of the previous period and the investment of the current period) after a series of calculations. This ratio is used to evaluate the income of projects with income relative to the total investment of the project, so as to judge the investment benefits of the project.

[0080] CO2 can be determined by the following formula:

[0081] CO2=EB×100

[0082] Among them, EB represents the score of the number of expected demand effectiveness capability indicators. If the number of effective quantifiable capability indicators is ≥3, the EB value is 0.6; if the number of effective quantifiable capability indicators is ≥5, the EB value is 0.8; if the number of effective quantifiable capability indicators is ≥8, the EB value is 1; if the number of effective quantifiable capability indicators is <3, the EB value is 0; the corresponding m i m2 represents the weight of the expected demand effect of the secondary indicator, which should satisfy m1+m2+m3=100%. The specific value can be set according to the importance. For projects with income, the value is 10%, and for projects without income, the value is 90%. The expected demand effect is to evaluate the performance improvement of the project's business needs. It usually includes aspects such as service quality and efficiency improvement, social and economic benefit improvement, business support capability improvement, and system processing capability improvement. The evaluation factors of the expected demand effect are composed of capability indicators. Each project can select general capability indicators, or select / set characteristic capability indicators according to the different characteristics of the project.

[0083] CO3 can be determined by the following formula:

[0084] CO3=N11×100

[0085] Among them, N11 indicates whether the software project can achieve cost savings and provide a detailed calculation process for expected cost savings or materials that can prove the expected cost savings; if yes, the value is 1, if not, the value is 0; if the cost savings is a monetary unit of 10,000 yuan, round it off to two decimal places. The corresponding m i m3 represents the cost saving weight of the secondary indicator, which should satisfy m1+m2+m3=100%. The specific value can be set according to the importance, and the value is 10%. Cost saving refers to whether the project can directly or indirectly save costs after the completion of the construction. It is used to evaluate whether the project can achieve cost savings and provide a detailed calculation process for the expected cost savings to ensure that the project can achieve the expected economic benefits.

[0086] In the pre-evaluation method of the above-mentioned project, the scores of the subordinate secondary indicators of the previous completion status are determined in the following way: according to the evaluation model, the current construction period score of the previous project of the secondary indicator, the investment completion score of the previous project of the secondary indicator, and the post-evaluation score of the previous project of the secondary indicator are determined from the descriptive information; based on the current construction period score, investment completion score and post-evaluation score, the scores of the subordinate secondary indicators of the previous completion status are determined.

[0087] In the embodiment of the present application, the subordinate secondary indicator score HC of the previous completion status i Including: (secondary indicator of the previous project) current construction period score HC1, investment completion score HC2 and post-evaluation score HC3. Specifically, HC1 can be determined by the following formula:

[0088] HC1=N12×100

[0089] Among them, N12 indicates whether the construction period of the previous project is behind the standard construction period. If so, the value is 0, if not, the value is 1. The corresponding n i The current construction period is n1, which represents the weight of the current construction period of the previous project of the secondary indicator. It should satisfy n1+n2+n3=100%. The specific value can be set according to the importance, and the value is 25%. The current construction period refers to the comparison between the construction progress of the previous project in the current stage and the standard construction period. It is used to evaluate whether there is a delay in the construction period of the previous project, so as to evaluate whether the current project has the conditions for starting; in addition, for projects that are started too late and have not completed the small signature in the planning start-up stage, the current construction period score is 0.

[0090] HC2 can be determined by the following formula:

[0091] HC2=N13×100

[0092] Among them, N13 represents the progress of the investment completion of the previous project, and its value is the current accounting completion rate of the project (accounted amount / investment amount at the time point); the corresponding n i n2 represents the weight of the investment completion of the previous project of the secondary indicator, which should satisfy n1+n2+n3=100%. The specific value can be set according to the importance, and the value is 25%. Investment completion is evaluated based on the current accounting completion rate of the previous project (accounted amount / investment amount at the time point), where the investment amount at the time point refers to the latest investment amount that can be obtained for the project at the time point of the evaluation (for example, the approved amount after the feasibility study is approved). It is used to judge the progress of investment completion of the previous project to determine whether the current project has the conditions to start. HC3 can be determined by the following formula:

[0093] HC3=N14×100

[0094] Among them, N14 represents the post-evaluation score of the previous project. If the score is greater than or equal to 85 points, the value is 1; if it is greater than or equal to 70 points and less than 85 points, the value is 0.8; if it is greater than or equal to 60 points and less than 70 points, the value is 0.6; if it is less than 60 points, the value is 0. The corresponding n i n3 represents the post-evaluation weight of the previous project of the secondary indicator, which should satisfy n1+n2+n3=100%. The specific value can be set according to the importance, and the value is 50%. The post-evaluation situation refers to the post-evaluation of the previous project, and the overall performance and effectiveness of the project are judged by its score. This indicator is used to evaluate the comprehensive performance of the project's early investment and construction, and provide a reference for the launch of the current project.

[0095] In step S206 of the pre-assessment method for the above-mentioned project, the project level to which the software project belongs is determined based on the comprehensive assessment value, including: when the comprehensive assessment value is greater than or equal to the first scoring threshold, determining that the project level to which the software project belongs is the first level; when the comprehensive assessment value is less than the first scoring threshold and greater than or equal to the second scoring threshold, determining that the project level to which the software project belongs is the second level, wherein the first scoring threshold is greater than the second scoring threshold, and the first level is higher than the second level; when the comprehensive assessment value is less than the second scoring threshold and greater than or equal to the third scoring threshold, determining that the project level to which the software project belongs is the third level, wherein the second scoring threshold is greater than the third scoring threshold, and the second level is higher than the third level; when the comprehensive assessment value is less than the third scoring threshold, determining that the project level to which the software project belongs is the fourth level, wherein the third level is higher than the fourth level.

[0096] In an embodiment of the present application, the project level of the software project is determined according to different comprehensive evaluation values. For example, the first level may be "excellent", the second level may be "good", the third level may be "pass", and the fourth level may be "unqualified".

[0097] In another optional embodiment, artificial intelligence algorithms can be introduced for data analysis and prediction, and machine learning algorithms can be used to conduct in-depth analysis of a large amount of historical project data collected (including data collected in the early stage of this project) to mine potential patterns and correlations in the data. For example, cluster analysis can be used to identify the characteristics and development trends of different types of projects; regression algorithms can be used to predict future investment changes, user satisfaction and other indicators of the project. The solution can obtain more accurate data analysis results and prediction information, provide a more forward-looking and accurate basis for project decision-making, and enhance the company's ability to respond to project risks.

[0098] The pre-evaluation method for a project provided in the embodiment of the present application has the following advantages: 1. It is capable of comprehensively evaluating the feasibility, potential benefits and risks of a project, enhancing the accuracy of investment decisions, and avoiding investment duplication and waste of resources. 2. An evaluation index system covering multiple dimensions such as project costs, effectiveness, risks, and benefits has been established, which can more comprehensively and meticulously evaluate the comprehensive performance of the early stages of a project, making up for the problem of insufficient existing technical indicators. 3. It is capable of flexibly adjusting evaluation indicators according to changes in technology, market, etc. during the implementation of the project, and has strong dynamic response capabilities to ensure the timeliness and accuracy of the evaluation. 4. It does not rely on a large amount of historical data during the operation of the project. Through preliminary research and simulation analysis, etc., it can provide targeted evaluations in the early stages of the project, which is suitable for new projects or innovative projects.

[0099] Figure 3 is a structural diagram of a pre-evaluation device for a project according to an embodiment of the present application, such as Figure 3 As shown, the device comprises:

[0100] The acquisition module 30 is used to acquire basic data of the software project in multiple dimensions, wherein the basic data includes: the construction necessity score of the first-level indicator, the investment rationality score of the first-level indicator, the management standardization score of the first-level indicator, the subordinate second-level indicator score of the construction target of the first-level indicator, and the subordinate second-level indicator score of the preliminary completion status of the first-level indicator;

[0101] An evaluation module 32 is used to input basic data into an evaluation model to perform a preliminary evaluation on the software project to obtain a comprehensive evaluation value, wherein the evaluation model is used to evaluate the software project;

[0102] The determination module 34 is used to determine the project level to which the software project belongs based on the comprehensive evaluation value.

[0103] In the evaluation module in the pre-evaluation device of the above-mentioned project, the evaluation module is also used to obtain the first weight corresponding to the construction necessity score, the second weight corresponding to the investment rationality score, the third weight corresponding to the management standardization score, the fourth weight corresponding to the subordinate secondary indicator score of the construction target, and the fifth weight corresponding to the subordinate secondary indicator score of the early completion status; the first weight, construction necessity score, the second weight, investment rationality score, the third weight, management standardization score, the fourth weight, the subordinate secondary indicator score of the construction target, the fifth weight, and the subordinate secondary indicator score of the early completion status are input into the evaluation model to determine the comprehensive evaluation value.

[0104] In the acquisition module in the pre-evaluation device of the above-mentioned project, the acquisition module is also used to input the description information of the software project into the evaluation model; determine the first value, the second value, the third value and the fourth value from the description information according to the evaluation model, wherein the first value is used to indicate whether the software project meets the necessity of supporting business development, the second value is used to indicate whether the software project is for supporting internal digital transformation, the third value is used to indicate whether the software project meets the technological evolution, and the fourth value is used to indicate whether the software project meets the relevant necessity of industrial digitalization or whether it has income; determine the construction necessity score based on the first value, the second value, the third value and the fourth value.

[0105] In the acquisition module in the pre-evaluation device of the above-mentioned project, the acquisition module is also used to determine a fifth value and a sixth value from the description information based on the evaluation model, wherein the fifth value is used to indicate whether a reasonable investment estimate has been made for the software project, and the sixth value is used to indicate the investment change rate of the software project compared with the previous project, and the investment change rate is determined based on the current investment amount corresponding to the software project and the planned investment amount of the previous project; based on the fifth value and the sixth value, the investment rationality score is determined.

[0106] In the acquisition module in the pre-evaluation device of the above-mentioned project, the acquisition module is also used to determine the seventh value, the eighth value and the ninth value from the description information according to the evaluation model, wherein the seventh value is used to indicate whether the software project has designated a project manager and a main project manager in the planning stage, the eighth value is used to indicate whether the software project has designated a construction unit project manager in the planning stage, and the ninth value is used to indicate whether the software project has designated a procurement manager in the planning stage; based on the seventh value, the eighth value and the ninth value, the management standardization score is determined.

[0107] In the acquisition module in the pre-evaluation device of the above-mentioned project, the acquisition module is also used to determine the cumulative income amount, the cumulative investment amount and the tenth value of the software project from the description information according to the evaluation model, wherein the tenth value is used to indicate whether the description information of the software project contains historical data sources and the current period income calculation process; determine the expected input-output ratio of the secondary indicator in the subordinate secondary indicator score of the construction target according to the cumulative income amount and the cumulative investment amount; determine the number of effective quantifiable capability indicators from the description information according to the evaluation model; determine the expected demand effectiveness score of the secondary indicator in the subordinate secondary indicator score of the construction target according to the number of effective quantifiable capability indicators; determine the cost saving score of the secondary indicator from the description information according to the evaluation model; determine the subordinate secondary indicator score of the construction target according to the expected input-output ratio of the secondary indicator, the expected demand effectiveness score of the secondary indicator and the cost saving score of the secondary indicator.

[0108] In the acquisition module in the pre-evaluation device of the above-mentioned project, the acquisition module is also used to determine the current construction period score of the previous project of the secondary indicator, the investment completion score of the previous project of the secondary indicator, and the post-evaluation score of the previous project of the secondary indicator from the description information based on the evaluation model; based on the current construction period score, investment completion score and post-evaluation score, determine the subordinate secondary indicator score of the previous completion situation.

[0109] In the determination module in the pre-evaluation device of the above-mentioned project, the determination module is also used to determine that the project level to which the software project belongs is the first level when the comprehensive evaluation value is greater than or equal to the first scoring threshold; when the comprehensive evaluation value is less than the first scoring threshold and greater than or equal to the second scoring threshold, determine that the project level to which the software project belongs is the second level, wherein the first scoring threshold is greater than the second scoring threshold, and the first level is higher than the second level; when the comprehensive evaluation value is less than the second scoring threshold and greater than or equal to the third scoring threshold, determine that the project level to which the software project belongs is the third level, wherein the second scoring threshold is greater than the third scoring threshold, and the second level is higher than the third level; when the comprehensive evaluation value is less than the third scoring threshold, determine that the project level to which the software project belongs is the fourth level, wherein the third level is higher than the fourth level.

[0110] It should be noted that Figure 3 The pre-assessment device of the project shown is used to perform Figure 2 The pre-evaluation method of the project shown, therefore the relevant explanations in the pre-evaluation method of the above project are also applicable to the pre-evaluation device of this project, and will not be repeated here.

[0111] An embodiment of the present application also provides an electronic device, which includes a memory and a processor, wherein the memory is used to store program instructions; the processor is connected to the memory and is used to execute a pre-assessment method for implementing the above-mentioned project.

[0112] An embodiment of the present application further provides a non-volatile storage medium, which includes a stored computer program, wherein a device where the non-volatile storage medium is located executes the pre-evaluation method of the above-mentioned project by running the computer program.

[0113] An embodiment of the present application also provides a computer program product, including computer instructions, which, when executed by a processor, implement the steps of the pre-assessment method for a project in each embodiment of the present application.

[0114] The embodiments of the present application also provide a computer program, which, when executed by a processor, implements the steps of the pre-assessment method for a project in each embodiment of the present application.

[0115] The serial numbers of the above-mentioned embodiments of the present application are for description only and do not represent the advantages or disadvantages of the embodiments.

[0116] In the above embodiments of the present application, the description of each embodiment has its own emphasis. For parts that are not described in detail in a certain embodiment, please refer to the relevant description of other embodiments.

[0117] In the several embodiments provided in this application, it should be understood that the disclosed technical content can be implemented in other ways. Among them, the device embodiments described above are only schematic. For example, the division of the units can be a logical function division. There may be other division methods in actual implementation. For example, multiple units or components can be combined or integrated into another system, or some features can be ignored or not executed. Another point is that the mutual coupling or direct coupling or communication connection shown or discussed can be through some interfaces, indirect coupling or communication connection of units or modules, which can be electrical or other forms.

[0118] The units described as separate components may or may not be physically separated, and the components shown as units may or may not be physical units, that is, they may be located in one place or distributed on multiple units. Some or all of the units may be selected according to actual needs to achieve the purpose of the present embodiment.

[0119] In addition, each functional unit in each embodiment of the present application may be integrated into one processing unit, or each unit may exist physically separately, or two or more units may be integrated into one unit. The above-mentioned integrated unit may be implemented in the form of hardware or in the form of software functional units.

[0120] If the integrated unit is implemented in the form of a software functional unit and sold or used as an independent product, it can be stored in a computer-readable storage medium. Based on this understanding, the technical solution of the present application, in essence, or the part that contributes to the prior art or all or part of the technical solution can be embodied in the form of a software product, and the computer software product is stored in a storage medium, including a number of instructions to enable a computer device (which can be a personal computer, a server or a network device, etc.) to perform all or part of the steps of the method described in each embodiment of the present application. The aforementioned storage medium includes: U disk, read-only memory (ROM, Read-Only Memory), random access memory (RAM, Random Access Memory), mobile hard disk, disk or optical disk and other media that can store program codes.

[0121] The above is only a preferred implementation of the present application. It should be pointed out that for ordinary technicians in this technical field, several improvements and modifications can be made without departing from the principles of the present application. These improvements and modifications should also be regarded as the scope of protection of the present application.

Claims

1. A project pre-evaluation method, characterized in that: include: Obtain basic data of the software project in multiple dimensions, wherein the basic data includes: the construction necessity score of the first-level indicator, the investment rationality score of the first-level indicator, the management standardization score of the first-level indicator, the subordinate second-level indicator score of the construction target of the first-level indicator, and the subordinate second-level indicator score of the preliminary completion status of the first-level indicator; Inputting the basic data into an evaluation model to perform a preliminary evaluation on the software project to obtain a comprehensive evaluation value, wherein the evaluation model is used to evaluate the software project; The project level to which the software project belongs is determined based on the comprehensive evaluation value.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The basic data is input into the evaluation model to conduct a preliminary evaluation of the software project to obtain a comprehensive evaluation value, including: Obtaining a first weight corresponding to the construction necessity score, a second weight corresponding to the investment rationality score, a third weight corresponding to the management standardization score, a fourth weight corresponding to the subordinate secondary indicator score of the construction target, and a fifth weight corresponding to the subordinate secondary indicator score of the previous completion status; The first weight, the construction necessity score, the second weight, the investment rationality score, the third weight, the management standardization score, the fourth weight, the subordinate secondary indicator score of the construction goal, the fifth weight, and the subordinate secondary indicator score of the preliminary completion status are input into the evaluation model to determine the comprehensive evaluation value.

3. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The construction necessity score is determined in the following manner: Inputting description information of the software project into the evaluation model; Determine a first value, a second value, a third value, and a fourth value from the description information according to the evaluation model, wherein the first value is used to indicate whether the software project meets the necessity of supporting business development, the second value is used to indicate whether the software project is for supporting internal digital transformation, the third value is used to indicate whether the software project meets the technological evolution, and the fourth value is used to indicate whether the software project meets the necessity of industrial digitalization or whether it has income; The construction necessity score is determined according to the first value, the second value, the third value, and the fourth value.

4. The method according to claim 3, characterized in that The investment justification score is determined as follows: Determine a fifth value and a sixth value from the description information according to the evaluation model, wherein the fifth value is used to indicate whether a reasonable investment estimate has been made for the software project, and the sixth value is used to indicate the investment change rate of the software project compared with the previous project, and the investment change rate is determined according to the current investment amount corresponding to the software project and the planned investment amount of the previous project; The investment rationality score is determined according to the fifth value and the sixth value.

5. The method according to claim 3, characterized in that: The management compliance score is determined as follows: Determine a seventh value, an eighth value, and a ninth value from the description information according to the evaluation model, wherein the seventh value is used to indicate whether the software project has designated a project administrator and a main project administrator in the planning stage, the eighth value is used to indicate whether the software project has designated a construction unit project administrator in the planning stage, and the ninth value is used to indicate whether the software project has designated a procurement administrator in the planning stage; The management standardization score is determined based on the seventh value, the eighth value, and the ninth value.

6. The method according to claim 3, characterized in that: The scores of the secondary indicators under the construction goals are determined in the following way: Determining the accumulated income amount, accumulated investment amount and a tenth value of the software project from the description information according to the evaluation model, wherein the tenth value is used to indicate whether the description information of the software project contains historical data sources and a current period income estimation process; Determine the expected input-output score of the secondary indicator in the secondary indicator score of the construction target based on the cumulative income amount and the cumulative investment amount; Determining the number of valid quantifiable capability indicators from the description information according to the evaluation model; Determine the expected demand effectiveness score of the secondary indicators in the secondary indicator scores under the construction target based on the number of effective and quantifiable capability indicators; Determining a secondary indicator cost saving score from the descriptive information according to the evaluation model; The scores of the subordinate secondary indicators of the construction target are determined based on the expected input-output ratio score of the secondary indicator, the expected demand effectiveness score of the secondary indicator and the cost saving score of the secondary indicator.

7. The method according to claim 3, characterized in that The scores of the subordinate secondary indicators of the above-mentioned preliminary completion status are determined in the following way: Determine the current duration score of the previous project of the secondary indicator, the investment completion score of the previous project of the secondary indicator, and the post-evaluation score of the previous project of the secondary indicator from the description information according to the evaluation model; The subordinate secondary indicator score of the previous completion status is determined based on the current construction period score, the investment completion score and the post-evaluation score.

8. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that: Determining the project level to which the software project belongs based on the comprehensive evaluation value includes: When the comprehensive evaluation value is greater than or equal to a first scoring threshold, determining that the project level to which the software project belongs is the first level; In the case where the comprehensive evaluation value is less than a first scoring threshold and greater than or equal to a second scoring threshold, determining that the project level to which the software project belongs is the second level, wherein the first scoring threshold is greater than the second scoring threshold, and the first level is higher than the second level; In the case where the comprehensive evaluation value is less than a second scoring threshold and greater than or equal to a third scoring threshold, determining that the project level to which the software project belongs is the third level, wherein the second scoring threshold is greater than the third scoring threshold, and the second level is higher than the third level; When the comprehensive evaluation value is less than the third scoring threshold, it is determined that the project level to which the software project belongs is the fourth level, wherein the third level is higher than the fourth level.

9. A pre-evaluation device for a project, characterized in that: include: An acquisition module is used to acquire basic data of the software project in multiple dimensions, wherein the basic data includes: a construction necessity score of a first-level indicator, an investment rationality score of a first-level indicator, a management standardization score of a first-level indicator, a score of a subordinate second-level indicator of a construction target of a first-level indicator, and a score of a subordinate second-level indicator of a pre-completion status of a first-level indicator; An evaluation module, used for inputting the basic data into an evaluation model to perform a preliminary evaluation on the software project to obtain a comprehensive evaluation value, wherein the evaluation model is used to evaluate the software project; A determination module is used to determine the project level to which the software project belongs based on the comprehensive evaluation value.

10. An electronic device, characterized in that: include: A memory and a processor, wherein the memory is used to store program instructions; and the processor is connected to the memory and is used to execute a pre-assessment method for implementing a project as described in any one of claims 1 to 8.

11. A non-volatile storage medium, characterized in that: The non-volatile storage medium includes a stored computer program, wherein the device where the non-volatile storage medium is located executes the pre-assessment method for a project as described in any one of claims 1 to 8 by running the computer program.

12. A computer program product comprising computer instructions, characterized in that: When the computer instructions are executed by a processor, the project pre-evaluation method described in any one of claims 1 to 8 is implemented.

Images