Highway engineering cost data management method and system

Abstract

The invention relates to a data management and analysis technology in the field of highway engineering cost management, in particular to a highway engineering cost data management method and system. Generating an event data snapshot containing a unique event identifier, a timestamp and a data check code, and performing curing storage on the event data snapshot; generating a change influence analysis report based on the cost data change recorded in the event data snapshot and according to rules in a preset cost element association rule base defining cost influence transmission paths and computational logics in a single cost management unit and among different cost management units in the highway engineering project; by capturing the change event data snapshot, analyzing the linkage influence based on the rule base, organizing the event chain and providing tracing, the problem that the linkage influence is difficult to completely record, trace and analyze during dynamic adjustment of the cost data in the prior art is solved.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of data management and analysis in highway engineering cost management, and in particular to a highway engineering cost data management method and system. Background Art

[0002] Highway engineering projects have long lifecycles and involve numerous stakeholders (designers, builders, supervisors, owners, auditors, etc.). Throughout their lifecycles, they generate massive amounts of cost data with diverse structures, including both basic information and dynamically adjusted information. Highway engineering cost data management systems are widely used for information management, providing a unified platform for data entry, review, storage, query, analysis, and report generation, assisting with cost control, progress payment, and final settlement. In practice, cost data management faces challenges. Long project cycles lead to frequent internal and external changes (such as geological adjustments, material price fluctuations, and updated policies and regulations), which trigger dynamic adjustments to cost data. These adjustments often involve multiple interconnected data changes and the definition of responsibilities, rather than simple numerical modifications. In this context of multi-stakeholder involvement and dynamic data adjustments, ensuring compliance records, traceability, and clear division of responsibilities for each adjustment is crucial. These records are fundamental to subsequent cost accounting, audit reviews, and contract dispute resolution. While existing systems provide centralized storage and basic query capabilities, they lack the ability to manage dynamic data versions, analyze change impacts, and maintain complete process documentation. The impact of events like design changes is cascading and multi-dimensional. Failure of the system to fully capture these connections can lead to information gaps.

[0003] If the existing system's record-keeping and tracing mechanisms for multi-dimensional, interrelated adjustments and their approval processes are not robust, it will be difficult to extract a complete chain of evidence when an audit needs to verify the cumulative impact of changes or when cost disagreements arise between contracting parties. Data may be fragmented, and the documentation supporting the changes may not accurately correspond to the data, making tracing difficult or even impossible to restore the facts. Highway projects are often divided into sections or sub-projects, each with its own cost system but interconnected (e.g., material price references, change cost allocations). If the existing system lacks the ability to effectively manage and analyze the inherent logic and impact paths of cross-level and cross-unit data, it will lead to inconsistent data and missed connections during overall project cost monitoring, cost warnings, and settlement summaries, affecting the overall financial situation.

[0004] Highway project funding primarily comes from public finance or private capital, necessitating high transparency, accuracy, and auditability of cost data. If a system simply covers data or records fragmented change notes, failing to establish a complete, logically rigorous, and verifiable adjustment approval chain and version traceability system, it will be difficult to demonstrate management standards, process compliance, and financial value in the face of audits or public inquiries, potentially triggering negative reactions or legal risks. Existing systems are insufficiently capable of ensuring complete recording, accurate tracing, and comprehensive analysis of cascading impacts when dealing with dynamic adjustments, especially those affecting complex projects across multiple sections, making them difficult to meet the stringent requirements of settlement audits and accountability.

[0005] In view of the above problems, the existing technology is in urgent need of improvement. Summary of the Invention

[0006] The purpose of the present invention is to solve the shortcomings of the prior art and to propose a highway engineering cost data management method and system.

[0007] In a first aspect, the present invention provides a method for managing highway engineering cost data, the method comprising the following steps: For change events that affect construction costs in highway engineering projects, the cost data, approval records, supporting documents, and contextual information related to the change events are captured, and event data snapshots containing unique event identifiers, timestamps, and data verification codes are generated and stored in a fixed format. Based on the cost data changes recorded in the event data snapshot, and in accordance with the rules in the preset cost element association rule library that defines the cost impact transmission path and calculation logic within a single cost management unit and between different cost management units in the highway engineering project, the chain effect of the change event on other associated cost elements in the project and on other cost management units or the overall cost of the project transmitted through cross-unit impact rules is analyzed and calculated, and a change impact analysis report is generated; Organize the generated event data snapshots into event chains according to the chronological order of occurrence and the logical causal relationships between them; Based on the event chain and the change impact analysis report, event data snapshot content, change impact analysis report and chain impact path for tracing historical change events are provided.

[0008] In a second aspect, a highway engineering cost data management system is provided, the system comprising: A data capture and snapshot generation module is used to capture cost data, approval records, supporting documents and context information related to the change event, generate an event data snapshot containing a unique event identifier, a timestamp and a data verification code, and solidify and store the event data snapshot; An impact analysis and report generation module is configured to analyze and calculate the chain effects of the change event on other associated cost elements within the project, as well as on other cost management units or the overall project cost transmitted through cross-unit impact rules, based on the cost data changes recorded in the event data snapshot and in accordance with the rules in a preset cost element association rule library that defines the cost impact transmission paths and calculation logic within a single cost management unit and between different cost management units within the highway engineering project, and generate a change impact analysis report. The event chain organization module is used to organize the generated event data snapshots into event chains according to the chronological order of occurrence and the logical causal relationships between them; The tracing and reporting providing module is used to provide event data snapshot content, change impact analysis report and chain impact path for tracing historical change events based on the event chain and the change impact analysis report.

[0009] Compared with the prior art, the present invention has the following beneficial effects: By capturing snapshots of change event data, analyzing chain effects based on a rule base, organizing event chains and providing traceability, the problem in existing technologies that it is difficult to fully record, trace and analyze chain effects when cost data is dynamically adjusted is solved. This has the advantages of improving data transparency, traceability and audit efficiency. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0010] Figure 1 Flow chart of the method of the present invention.

[0011] Figure 2 Schematic diagram of the system structure of the present invention.

[0012] In the figure: 201, data capture and snapshot generation module; 202, impact analysis and report generation module; 203, event chain organization module; 204, traceability and report provision module. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0013] The embodiments of the present invention are described in detail below, and examples of the embodiments are shown in the accompanying drawings, wherein the same or similar reference numerals throughout represent the same or similar elements or elements with the same or similar functions. The embodiments described below with reference to the accompanying drawings are exemplary and are only used to explain the present invention, and are not to be construed as limitations on the present invention. The terms "first" and "second" are used for descriptive purposes only and are not to be construed as indicating or implying relative importance or implicitly indicating the number of technical features indicated. Thus, features defined as "first" and "second" may explicitly or implicitly include one or more of the features. In the description of the present invention, the meaning of "multiple" is two or more, unless otherwise clearly and specifically defined.

[0014] like Figure 1 A highway engineering cost data management method is shown, the method comprising the following steps: S101. For change events that affect construction costs in highway engineering projects, capture cost data, approval records, supporting documents, and contextual information related to the change events, generate event data snapshots containing a unique event identifier, timestamp, and data verification code, and solidify and store the event data snapshots; S102. Based on the cost data changes recorded in the event data snapshot, and in accordance with the rules in the preset cost element association rule library that defines the cost impact transmission paths and calculation logic within a single cost management unit and between different cost management units within the highway engineering project, analyze and calculate the chain effects of the change event on other associated cost elements within the project, as well as on other cost management units or the overall project cost transmitted through cross-unit impact rules, and generate a change impact analysis report. S103, organizing the generated event data snapshots into an event chain according to the chronological order of occurrence and the logical causal relationship between them; S104. Based on the event chain and the change impact analysis report, provide event data snapshot content, change impact analysis report and chain impact path for tracing historical change events.

[0015] A change event refers to any event occurring during project execution that directly or indirectly impacts the project cost, such as a design change or material price adjustment. Its purpose is to trigger the recording and analysis of relevant cost data. This method captures the cost data, approval records, supporting documents, and contextual information associated with the change event and generates an event data snapshot containing a unique event identifier, timestamp, and data verification code. This event data snapshot, for each captured change event, involves a one-time, structured collection and packaging of the relevant cost data, approval records, supporting documents, and contextual information at the time of the change event. This snapshot, containing a unique event identifier, timestamp, and data verification code, serves to fully, accurately, and immutably record the status and basis of the change event, providing original evidence for subsequent traceability. The generated event data snapshot is then stored in a persistent storage medium or system with high reliability, tamper-proofing, or version control capabilities. This can be achieved using blockchain technology, WORM storage devices, or database systems with strict access controls and audit logs. This ensures the long-term preservation and data integrity of the event data snapshot and prevents unauthorized modification or deletion.

[0016] The cost element association rule library is a pre-established set of rules that stores the cost impact transmission paths and calculation logic between cost elements within highway engineering projects and between different cost management units. It can be implemented as a rule engine, graph database, or structured rule list. It is primarily used to automatically analyze and calculate the chain reaction effects of change events on project costs. Chain reaction effects refer to the cascading, multi-level impacts caused by a change event on other associated cost elements, other cost management units, or the overall project cost through the paths and logic defined in the cost element association rule library. Its main purpose is to comprehensively and accurately reveal the true scope and extent of the change event's impact.

[0017] An event chain is a sequence or network structure formed by organizing solidified and stored event data snapshots according to the chronological order of their occurrence and the logical causal relationships between them. It can be implemented in the form of a linked list, tree structure, or directed acyclic graph (DAG). Its main purpose is to provide a clear and complete change history track, making it easier for users to trace and understand the entire change process.

[0018] The solution of this application implements the traceability and impact analysis of highway project cost data through the following steps: First, when any change event that affects cost occurs in a highway project, the system immediately captures all key information related to the event, including the specific cost data change, relevant approval process records, documents supporting the change decision, and the contextual information at the time. This captured information is encapsulated into a structured event data snapshot, which is assigned a unique identifier, recorded with a precise timestamp, and calculated with a data checksum to ensure its integrity. This event data snapshot is then stored in a secure and reliable storage system that ensures data integrity and prevents unauthorized modification or deletion, providing an unalterable original record for subsequent tracing. Next, based on the specific cost data changes recorded in the event data snapshot, the system consults a pre-established cost element association rule library. This rule library details the relationships between different cost elements within the highway project, as well as the cost impact transmission paths and calculation methods. It also includes the impact transmission rules and calculation logic across different cost management units. Based on these rules, the system automatically analyzes and calculates the impact of the current change event on other directly or indirectly related cost elements within the project, as well as the cascading impacts on other cost management units and the overall project cost through cross-unit rules. After the analysis is complete, the system generates a detailed change impact analysis report, clearly listing the affected cost elements, the degree of impact, and the path through which the impact was transmitted. Simultaneously, the system organizes the newly generated event data snapshot along with all previously stored snapshots, aligning them according to their actual chronological order and the logical causal relationships between them, to form a complete event chain. This event chain constitutes a complete historical record of project cost changes. Finally, users can conveniently perform traceability queries based on this event chain and the generated change impact analysis report through the system interface. Users can select any historical change event to view the details of its corresponding event data snapshot, obtain the change impact analysis report triggered by the event, and visually view the specific transmission path of the cascading impact of the change event on the project cost. In this way, the solution of this application provides a comprehensive, systematic, and reliable capability for tracing and impact analysis of highway project cost data.

[0019] As one embodiment of the present invention, when the characteristics of a change event match multiple rules in a cost element association rule library, based on the cost data changes recorded in the event data snapshot and in accordance with the rules in the cost element association rule library that define the cost impact transmission path and calculation logic within a single cost management unit and between different cost management units in a highway engineering project, the chain effect of the change event on other associated cost elements in the project, as well as on other cost management units or the overall project cost transmitted through cross-unit impact rules, is analyzed and calculated. The steps of generating a change impact analysis report include: Obtaining relationship information between rules preset for the multiple matched rules in the cost element association rule library, the relationship information between rules including at least one of a priority of the rule, a mutually exclusive condition of the rule, and a trigger dependency condition of the rule; Determining a set of rules to be executed and an execution order of the rules in the set of rules to be executed from the matched multiple rules based on the obtained relationship information between the rules; Based on the cost data changes recorded in the event data snapshot, and in accordance with the determined execution order of the rules in the rule set to be executed, as well as the cost impact transmission path and calculation logic defined in the rules, the rules in the rule set to be executed are executed, and the chain effect of the change event on other related cost elements in the project and other cost management units or the overall project cost transmitted through cross-unit impact rules is analyzed and calculated to generate a change impact analysis report.

[0020] Among them, the relationship information between rules refers to the data or attributes pre-set for each rule in the cost element association rule library, which describes the interaction or constraint between the rule and other rules. It can include the priority of the rule, the mutually exclusive conditions of the rule, the triggering dependency conditions of the rule, etc. Its purpose is to provide a basis for the system to intelligently select and organize the execution of rules when processing complex change events; the priority of the rule refers to the attribute value used to determine the relative execution order of these rules when multiple rules are matched by a change event at the same time. It can be expressed in numerical size, hierarchical relationship or specific identifier. Its purpose is to ensure that key or more general rules can be processed first; the mutually exclusive conditions of the rules refer to the constraints that define that certain rules cannot be executed at the same time as other rules under certain circumstances. It can be expressed as a logical expression or a list of rule identifiers. Its purpose is to avoid inaccurate analysis results due to the execution of contradictory or repeated rules; the triggering dependency conditions of the rules refer to the definition of a certain A constraint specifies that a rule can only be executed after a specific precondition is met (for example, another rule has been executed and produced a specific result, or event data meets a specific state). This constraint can be expressed as a logical judgment or a reference to system state / data. Its purpose is to ensure that the rules are executed in the correct logical order and reflect the actual path of cost impact transmission. The set of rules to be executed refers to the subset of rules that need to be executed by the system for impact analysis after screening and judging the relationship information between rules from all rules matching the characteristics of the change event. Its purpose is to exclude rules that are inapplicable, conflicting, or should not be executed currently, thereby improving the efficiency and accuracy of the analysis. The execution order of rules in the set of rules to be executed refers to the order in which the rules in the set of rules to be executed are actually executed by the system. It is determined based on the relationship information between rules, such as the rule priority and trigger dependency conditions. Its purpose is to ensure that the calculation of cost impact is carried out according to the logically correct path and steps, reflecting the actual transmission process of chain effects.

[0021] Specifically, when a change event occurs and matches multiple rules in the cost element association rule library, the system first retrieves the pre-set inter-rule relationship information for these matching rules, including rule priorities, mutually exclusive conditions, and trigger dependencies. This information serves as rule metadata, guiding rule execution. Next, the system evaluates and filters the matching rules based on this inter-rule relationship information. For example, it prioritizes rules based on priority; excludes pairs of rules that cannot be executed simultaneously based on mutually exclusive conditions; and constructs a rule execution chain based on trigger dependencies. Through this process, the system intelligently determines an optimal set of rules to be executed and plans their execution order. This selection and sorting process ensures the logical correctness of rule execution and avoids analytical bias caused by rule conflicts and improper execution order. Finally, based on the cost data changes recorded in the event data snapshot, the system executes the rules in the set of rules to be executed strictly according to the determined execution order. Each rule is executed according to its defined cost impact transmission path and calculation logic, gradually analyzing and calculating the chain reaction caused by the change event, including the direct impact on other related cost elements within the project, as well as the indirect impact on other cost management units or the overall project cost through cross-unit impact rules. Through this orderly and accurate rule execution, the system can generate comprehensive and reliable change impact analysis reports.

[0022] As an embodiment of the present invention, the steps of defining the cost impact transmission path and calculation logic within a single cost management unit and between different cost management units in a highway engineering project in the cost element association rule library include: Obtain engineering structure information of highway engineering projects, cost impact fact information contained in historical change data, and cross-cost management unit impact information contained in project-specific agreements; Based on the acquired engineering structure information, the direct cost element associations within a single cost management unit are identified. Based on the cost impact fact information contained in the acquired historical change data, recurring cost impact patterns are identified. Based on the cross-cost management unit impact information contained in the acquired project-specific agreements, the impact logic of explicit agreements across cost management units is identified. By combining the identified direct cost element associations, recurring cost impact patterns, and clearly agreed impact logic, candidate cost impact transfer paths and calculation logic are generated; Review the generated candidate cost impact transfer paths and calculation logic to form the final impact transfer paths and calculation logic; The final impact transfer path and calculation logic formed will be used as the cost impact transfer path and calculation logic within a single cost management unit and between different cost management units in a highway engineering project defined in the cost element association rule library.

[0023] Among them, cost impact fact information refers to the impact relationship and changes between actual cost elements recorded in historical change data. Specifically, it can be obtained by analyzing and extracting records of historical change events, relevant approval documents, on-site visas, engineering negotiation records, etc. Its purpose is to discover and summarize the objective laws of cost impact from actual engineering experience; cost impact pattern refers to the impact relationship between cost elements that appear repeatedly and have a certain regularity in historical change data. Specifically, it can be obtained by processing a large amount of historical cost change data through data mining or statistical analysis methods. Its purpose is to identify those non-explicit or indirect but actual cost impact associations; audit refers to the process of evaluating and confirming the generated candidate rules. Specifically, it can be manually reviewed by experts or teams with rich experience in highway engineering cost management, or combined with automated verification tools for auxiliary inspection. Its purpose is to ensure the accuracy, rationality and applicability of the rules, and to exclude errors or rules that do not conform to the actual situation.

[0024] The solution of this application systematically identifies and constructs association rules between cost elements by comprehensively utilizing information from three different sources: engineering structure information, historical change data, and project-specific agreements of highway engineering projects. First, engineering structure information provides a natural, hierarchical basis for association between elements within the cost management unit. Second, the cost impact factual information and recurring cost impact patterns in the historical change data supplement the dynamic impact relationships summarized based on actual engineering experience that may not be fully reflected in the structure. Third, project-specific agreements clarify the specific impact logic stipulated in the contract or agreement, especially across different management units. Combining these three types of information can generate a set of candidate rules that comprehensively reflect various potential cost impact relationships. Subsequently, by reviewing these candidate rules, accurate and effective rules can be screened out to form a final rule base.

[0025] As an embodiment of the present invention, the steps of generating candidate cost impact transfer paths and calculation logic based on the identified direct cost element associations, recurring cost impact patterns, and clearly agreed impact logic include: Detect discrepancies between direct cost element linkages, recurring cost impact patterns, and explicitly agreed impact logic for the same impact transfer path or calculation logic; If a discrepancy is detected, the system obtains the preset heterogeneous information conflict handling rules tailored to the characteristics of the highway engineering project. The heterogeneous information conflict handling rules define the priority of acceptance between different information sources and the conditions under which different information sources are applicable under specific highway engineering project conditions. Processing the detected differences according to the obtained heterogeneous information conflict processing rules to determine a single impact logic to be adopted for the differences, or determining an impact logic to be adopted that includes conditional branches for the differences; Candidate cost impact transfer paths and calculation logic are generated by combining the parts of direct cost element associations where no differences are detected, the parts of recurring cost impact patterns where no differences are detected, the parts of explicitly agreed impact logic where no differences are detected, and the single impact logic to be adopted or the impact logic to be adopted containing conditional branches determined when differences are detected.

[0026] Among them, heterogeneous information conflict processing rules refer to pre-set processing principles and methods for resolving inconsistent descriptions of the same cost impact relationship or calculation logic from different information sources (such as engineering structure, historical data, project agreements). They can be implemented in the form of rule sets, decision trees, priority lists or conditional logic expressions. Their purpose is to provide a basis for handling information conflicts and ensure that the final impact logic is reasonable and reliable; adoption priority refers to the order or weight of determining which source information to use first when different information sources have different descriptions of the same impact relationship. It can be implemented in the form of numerical weights, hierarchical sorting or dynamic selection based on specific conditions. Its purpose is to provide a clear decision-making basis for conflict resolution; the conditions for applying different information sources under specific highway engineering project conditions refer to the rules that stipulate that a specific information source should be used first or only in specific stages, specific types of changes, specific contract terms or other specific situations of highway engineering projects. It can It is implemented by means of conditional judgment statements, situation matching rules or parameter thresholds, with the aim of making conflict handling rules more targeted and flexible, and adapting to the complexity of highway engineering projects; a single influence logic to be adopted refers to the only influence relationship or calculation logic description that is finally determined to be adopted for a certain influence relationship or calculation logic with differences after conflict handling. It can be implemented in the form of a certain formula, a fixed transmission path or a single association relationship, with the aim of eliminating conflicts and forming a clear single logic; the influence logic to be adopted containing conditional branches refers to the logic that is finally determined to be adopted for a certain influence relationship or calculation logic with differences after conflict handling, which is a composite logic that selects different influence relationships or calculation logics according to specific conditions. It can be implemented by means of if-then-else structure, table lookup logic or multi-condition judgment, with the aim of retaining the validity of information from different sources under specific conditions and forming a more comprehensive logical description.

[0027] The solution of this application detects potential data discrepancies or inconsistencies by detecting discrepancies between information from three different sources: project structure information, historical change data, and project-specific agreements, regarding the same cost impact transfer path or calculation logic. Once a discrepancy is detected, the system retrieves pre-defined conflict resolution rules specifically tailored to the characteristics of highway engineering projects. These rules detail how to prioritize information when conflicts arise between different sources, and which sources should be prioritized or exclusively applied under the specific conditions of highway engineering projects. Based on these conflict resolution rules, the system resolves the detected discrepancies. This resolution may result in a single, most reliable impact logic that replaces all conflicting descriptions, or it may result in a logic with conditional branches based on the conditions defined in the rules, where one impact logic is applied when a specific condition is met and another is applied when the condition is not met. Finally, these single or conditional branched impact logics identified after conflict resolution are combined with direct cost element associations, recurring cost impact patterns, and explicitly agreed-upon impact logics for which no discrepancies were detected during the conflict resolution process to generate the final candidate cost impact transfer paths and calculation logics. This process effectively integrates information from various sources and resolves conflicts through a regularized conflict resolution mechanism, ensuring the accuracy and reliability of the generated candidate logic. This goes beyond the basic solution, which simply combines information from different sources, by introducing a conflict detection and resolution mechanism. This allows the generated cost impact transfer paths and calculation logic to more accurately reflect actual conditions, avoiding incorrect transfers and calculations caused by information conflicts. This provides a more solid and reliable foundation for subsequent cost data tracing and impact analysis.

[0028] As an embodiment of the present invention, a preset heterogeneous information conflict handling rule specific to the characteristics of a highway engineering project is obtained. The heterogeneous information conflict handling rule defines the priority of acceptance between different information sources and the conditions for applying different information sources under specific highway engineering project conditions. The steps include: Monitor changes in specific external conditions related to highway engineering project management, which indicate situations that may affect the effectiveness of rules for handling conflicts between heterogeneous information; When a change in a specific external condition is detected, one or more existing preset heterogeneous information conflict processing rules specific to the characteristics of the highway engineering project associated with the detected change in the specific external condition are identified; Based on the monitored changes in specific external conditions, the applicability of one or more identified existing heterogeneous information conflict processing rules under the current highway engineering project conditions is evaluated to obtain applicability evaluation results; If the applicability evaluation result determines that the applicability of one or more existing heterogeneous information conflict processing rules has decreased, then the one or more existing heterogeneous information conflict processing rules are adjusted according to the monitored specific external condition changes, or new heterogeneous information conflict processing rules are created to replace or supplement the one or more existing heterogeneous information conflict processing rules to form updated heterogeneous information conflict processing rules; The updated heterogeneous information conflict processing rules that are valid under the current project conditions are obtained as the preset heterogeneous information conflict processing rules targeting the characteristics of the highway engineering project.

[0029] Among them, changes in specific external conditions refer to external factors or changes in the internal environment of the project that may affect the effectiveness of heterogeneous information conflict handling rules. These can be reflected in the form of policy and regulatory updates, market price fluctuations, technical standard adjustments, and changes in project management models. Heterogeneous information conflict handling rules refer to a set of pre-set rules used to resolve contradictions or inconsistencies between different information sources (such as engineering structure information, historical change data, and project-specific agreements) when defining cost impact transmission paths and calculation logic. They can use priority lists, conditional judgment logic, weighted average algorithms, etc. to define the acceptance order, conditions, and conflict resolution methods of different information sources. The applicability assessment result refers to the evaluation of the effectiveness, accuracy, or applicability of the identified existing heterogeneous information conflict handling rules under the influence of current specific external condition changes. It can be expressed in the form of scoring, grading, Boolean judgment (applicable / not applicable), etc. The updated heterogeneous information conflict handling rules refer to a set of heterogeneous information conflict handling rules that have been adjusted or newly created to reflect changes in the current project environment and external conditions. They can modify the parameters, priorities or conditions of existing rules, or add completely new rules to handle new conflict types or scenarios.

[0030] The solution of this application monitors changes in specific external conditions related to highway engineering project management to promptly identify situations that may affect the effectiveness of heterogeneous information conflict handling rules. When such changes are detected, the system identifies the existing heterogeneous information conflict handling rules associated with the change. Subsequently, based on the monitored changes in external conditions, the applicability of these identified existing rules under the current project conditions is evaluated, resulting in a quantitative applicability assessment result. If the assessment results indicate that the applicability of existing rules has decreased, these rules are adjusted based on the changes in external conditions, or new rules are created to replace or supplement the original rules, thereby forming updated heterogeneous information conflict handling rules. Finally, the updated rules that are valid under the current project conditions are obtained and used as the default rules for subsequent heterogeneous information conflict handling. This process forms a dynamic feedback loop, allowing the rules used to handle heterogeneous information conflicts to continuously adapt to changes in the project environment. This dynamic adjustment mechanism ensures that the conflict handling rules used when generating candidate cost impact transfer paths and calculation logic are always the most up-to-date and effective, thereby improving the accuracy and reliability of the generated results. By applying this dynamically updated heterogeneous information conflict handling rule to process the differences between information from different sources such as engineering structure information, historical change data, project-specific agreements, etc., it can ensure that the final cost impact transmission path and calculation logic are more in line with the actual situation of the current project, thereby improving the accuracy of subsequent cost impact analysis.

[0031] As an embodiment of the present invention, based on the monitored changes in specific external conditions, the applicability of one or more identified existing heterogeneous information conflict processing rules under the current highway engineering project conditions is evaluated, and the steps of obtaining the applicability evaluation results include: Obtaining a set of preset evaluation indicators corresponding to the monitored specific external condition change type and the identified one or more existing heterogeneous information conflict processing rule features; For each evaluation indicator in the obtained preset evaluation indicator set, the evaluation value of the evaluation indicator is determined based on the degree of influence of the monitored specific external condition changes on one or more identified existing heterogeneous information conflict processing rules in the evaluation indicator dimension, and combined with the specific constraints of the current highway engineering project; The evaluation values ​​of all evaluation indicators in the preset evaluation indicator set are integrated to obtain the applicability evaluation results of one or more existing heterogeneous information conflict processing rules under the current highway engineering project conditions.

[0032] Among them, the preset evaluation indicator set refers to a set of predefined evaluation dimensions used to measure the applicability of heterogeneous information conflict processing rules under specific project conditions. It can be customized according to different types of external condition changes, rule types or project characteristics. For example, it can include dimensions such as the compliance impact, economic impact, timeliness impact, data availability, and implementation complexity of the rules. Its purpose is to provide a multi-angle and structured evaluation framework for rule applicability evaluation; the evaluation indicator refers to each specific evaluation dimension in the preset evaluation indicator set, such as "compliance impact" or "economic impact". Its purpose is to decompose the complex concept of applicability into An operational and quantifiable evaluation unit; the evaluation value refers to the quantitative evaluation result determined for each evaluation indicator according to a specific method, which can be expressed in the form of numerical scores, grade divisions or percentages, and its purpose is to convert qualitative impact levels and constraints into calculable and comparable data; the evaluation value of all evaluation indicators in the comprehensive preset evaluation indicator set refers to the use of a certain aggregation method to integrate the evaluation values ​​of each evaluation indicator into a single or multi-dimensional final evaluation result, which can adopt methods such as weighted summation, hierarchical analysis method, fuzzy comprehensive evaluation, etc., and its purpose is to provide an evaluation conclusion that comprehensively reflects the overall applicability of the rules.

[0033] The solution of this application achieves quantitative and multi-dimensional consideration of rule applicability by refining the applicability evaluation process of heterogeneous information conflict handling rules into three steps: obtaining an evaluation indicator set, evaluating each indicator item and determining an evaluation value, and finally a comprehensive evaluation value. First, a preset evaluation indicator set corresponding to the type of external condition change and the characteristics of the rule is obtained to ensure the targeted evaluation. Different changes and rules require different impact aspects. Then, for each evaluation indicator, the evaluation value is determined based on the degree of impact of the external condition change on the rule on that indicator and the specific constraints of the project. This process combines external changes, rule characteristics, and project reality, so that the evaluation value can reflect the actual performance and potential impact of the rule in the current project environment. For example, external condition changes may lead to reduced rule execution efficiency, while a tight project schedule will amplify the negative impact of this reduced efficiency. By combining constraints, the evaluation value can more accurately reflect this comprehensive impact. Finally, the evaluation values ​​of all evaluation indicators are combined to obtain the overall applicability evaluation result. By aggregating the evaluation of multiple dimensions, the one-sidedness of a single indicator is avoided, providing a more comprehensive and objective judgment of the rule applicability. This step-by-step, quantitative, and comprehensive evaluation method makes the judgment of the applicability of existing rules no longer a simple condition matching, but an in-depth analysis based on multiple factors and multiple perspectives. It can more accurately identify the advantages and disadvantages of the rules under the current project conditions, and provide solid data support for whether the rules need to be adjusted or replaced in the future.

[0034] As an embodiment of the present invention, the steps of comprehensively evaluating the evaluation values ​​of all evaluation indicators in the preset evaluation indicator set to obtain the applicability evaluation results of one or more identified existing heterogeneous information conflict processing rules under the current highway engineering project conditions include: Obtaining preset evaluation preference configurations associated with various stakeholders involved in the highway engineering project, wherein the evaluation preference configurations define the weights or priorities assigned by each stakeholder to different evaluation indicators in the preset evaluation indicator set; Based on the evaluation values ​​of all evaluation indicators in the preset evaluation indicator set and the evaluation preference configuration of each stakeholder, the applicability evaluation results from the perspective of each stakeholder are calculated separately; Identify the differences between the applicability assessment results from different stakeholders’ perspectives; According to the preset consensus formation strategy for the characteristics of multi-party negotiation in highway engineering projects, the differences are negotiated to form a final applicability evaluation result that reflects the consensus of multiple parties or is acceptable, which serves as the applicability evaluation result of one or more existing heterogeneous information conflict processing rules identified under the current highway engineering project conditions.

[0035] Evaluation preference configuration refers to the degree of emphasis or inclination that each stakeholder places on different evaluation indicators during the evaluation process. This can be defined through weight coefficients, priority rankings, or focus descriptions. The applicability assessment results from each stakeholder's perspective refer to the applicability evaluation of the heterogeneous information conflict handling rules from that stakeholder's perspective, calculated based on the unified evaluation indicator values ​​but incorporating each stakeholder's individual evaluation preference configurations. This can be calculated through weighted summation, scoring, or ranking. Differences refer to inconsistencies or disagreements between the applicability assessment results from different stakeholder perspectives. These can manifest themselves in differences in evaluation scores, applicability judgments, or rule priority rankings. Consensus-building strategies refer to the pre-set rules and processes used to address differences in evaluation results among stakeholders and guide all parties to reach consensus or an acceptable outcome. This can be achieved through consultation meetings, expert review, voting, or automated adjudication based on pre-set rules. The final applicability assessment result refers to the final assessment conclusion that is commonly recognized or acceptable to multiple parties after consensus-forming strategy processing and is used to guide the application of heterogeneous information conflict processing rules. It can be expressed in the form of a weighted average, a consensus score, or a result determined according to the arbitration rules.

[0036] The solution of this application obtains the evaluation preference configuration associated with each stakeholder involved in the highway engineering project, so that the evaluation process can fully consider the demands of all parties. Based on the evaluation values ​​of all evaluation indicators in the preset evaluation indicator set, and in accordance with the evaluation preference configuration of each stakeholder, the applicability evaluation results from the perspective of each stakeholder are calculated separately to ensure that the evaluation results can reflect the true demands of all parties. Identify the differences between the applicability evaluation results from the perspective of each stakeholder to provide a prerequisite for effective negotiation. According to the preset consensus formation strategy, the differences are negotiated to form a final applicability evaluation result that reflects the consensus of multiple parties or is acceptable. The entire process incorporates the preferences of all parties into the evaluation calculation, bridges the differences through negotiation, and forms a result recognized by all parties, thereby improving the accuracy and fairness of the evaluation results.

[0037] As an embodiment of the present invention, according to a preset consensus-building strategy tailored to the characteristics of multi-party negotiation in highway engineering projects, the steps of negotiating differences include: Select the corresponding negotiation path from the consensus formation strategy based on the nature and scope of the differences; In the negotiation process, the consensus-building strategy guides stakeholders to discuss and adjust differences based on the decision-making process and rules. Until an assessment result that meets the preset consistency criteria is reached, or a final determination is made according to the arbitration mechanism defined in the consensus formation strategy to form a final applicability assessment result that reflects multi-party consensus or is acceptable.

[0038] Among them, the consensus formation strategy refers to a set of preset methodologies used to guide the various stakeholders of highway engineering projects to reach consensus on differences in applicability assessment results. It can include different negotiation models, decision-making rules and dispute resolution mechanisms, with the aim of providing structured guidance for multi-party negotiations. The negotiation path refers to a specific process or model that is preset to guide the parties to discuss and adjust for different types or degrees of differences. It can be achieved through online communication, offline meetings, expert reviews, etc., with the aim of selecting appropriate negotiation methods based on the characteristics of the differences. The decision-making process and rules refer to the specific steps in the negotiation path used to regulate the behavior of all parties, advance the discussion process, and determine how to make decisions. and agreements, which may include the order of speaking, evidence submission requirements, voting rules, principles for adopting opinions, etc., with the aim of ensuring the order and fairness of the negotiation process; the preset consistency standard refers to the objective or subjective conditions for judging whether the parties have reached a consensus. It can be set as the numerical difference of the evaluation results being less than a certain threshold, or all key stakeholders clearly expressing their acceptance of a certain adjusted result. Its purpose is to provide a basis for judging the negotiation results; the arbitration mechanism refers to the preset method or institution used to compulsorily determine the final result when no consensus can be reached through negotiation. It can be submitting the dispute to the highest decision-making level of the project, a third-party arbitration institution, or executing it in accordance with the contract agreement. Its purpose is to provide a dispute resolution channel for failed negotiations.

[0039] After identifying discrepancies between the applicability assessment results from the perspectives of various stakeholders, the proposed solution avoids unregulated, free negotiation and instead incorporates a pre-defined consensus-building strategy tailored to the specific characteristics of multi-party negotiations in highway engineering projects. This strategy enables the system to select the most appropriate negotiation path from the strategy based on the specific nature and impact of the discrepancies. For example, for discrepancies with relatively minor impact, a quick online communication path might be chosen; for discrepancies with relatively large impact, an expert review meeting might be chosen. Once the negotiation path is determined, the system guides stakeholders through orderly discussion and adjustments within the selected path according to the decision-making process and rules pre-defined in the consensus-building strategy. This set of processes and rules standardizes the behavior of all parties, ensures fairness and efficiency in the negotiation process, and prevents negotiations from falling into chaos or deadlock. By adhering to the pre-defined process and rules, all parties can more effectively express their views, provide evidence, and make targeted adjustments to the assessment results. This process continues until the assessment results reached by all parties meet the pre-defined consistency criteria, indicating consensus has been reached. However, given the complexity of highway engineering projects and the diverse interests of all parties, negotiations do not always lead to consensus. Therefore, the solution of this application further provides a way to make a final determination based on the arbitration mechanism defined in the consensus formation strategy. It is precisely because of the existence of this arbitration mechanism that even if the negotiation fails to reach a complete consensus, the final decision can be made according to the preset rules or by the preset agency, thereby ensuring the timely generation and acceptability of the final applicability assessment results. This structured and rule-based negotiation and arbitration mechanism overcomes the arbitrariness and inefficiency of simple negotiation, increases the possibility of reaching consensus, and provides a backup mechanism for dispute resolution, thereby effectively solving the problem that the positions and concerns of various stakeholders in highway engineering projects vary greatly, and it is difficult to reach a consensus through simple negotiation.

[0040] As an embodiment of the present invention, the steps of comprehensively evaluating the evaluation values ​​of all evaluation indicators in the preset evaluation indicator set to obtain the applicability evaluation results of one or more identified existing heterogeneous information conflict processing rules under the current highway engineering project conditions include: Get the evaluation value of each evaluation indicator in the preset evaluation indicator set, denoted as V = {v_1, v_2, ..., v_n}; Obtain the weights assigned by each stakeholder involved in the highway project to different evaluation indicators in the preset evaluation indicator set, denoted as W_Subj = {W_1, W_2, ..., W_m}, where W_j = {w_j1, w_j2, ..., w_jn} represents the weight of the jth stakeholder to the i-th evaluation indicator; For each stakeholder sub_j involved in the highway project, based on the evaluation value V of the evaluation index and the weight configuration W_j of the stakeholder, the applicability evaluation result R_j_pers from the perspective of the stakeholder is calculated. The calculation formula is: R_j_pers = Σ(w_ji * v_i), where i ranges from 1 to n; Obtain the preset consensus-building parameters used to integrate the evaluation results of various stakeholders. The consensus-building parameters include the influence coefficient of each stakeholder in the final consensus formation, denoted as A = {alpha_1, alpha_2, ...,alpha_m}, and the preset dispute resolution rules; Based on the applicability assessment results R_Subj_perspective = {R_1_pers, R_2_pers, ..., R_m_pers} from each stakeholder perspective and in combination with the consensus-based parameters, the final applicability assessment result R_final is generated through at least one of the following methods: Method 1: Based on the influence coefficient A, the applicability evaluation results R_Subj_perspective of each stakeholder perspective are weighted and aggregated. The calculation formula is: R_final = Σ(alpha_j * R_j_pers), where j ranges from 1 to m; Method 2: If there are differences between the applicability assessment results from the perspectives of various stakeholders, the stakeholders will be guided to discuss and adjust the differences according to the preset negotiation rules until an assessment result that meets the preset consistency standards is reached; if no consensus is reached through negotiation, the final determination will be made according to the dispute resolution rules to form the final applicability assessment result R_final.

[0041] The evaluation preference configuration defines the weight or emphasis each stakeholder places on different evaluation indicators in the preset evaluation indicator set. This can be achieved by assigning a weight vector to each stakeholder, where each component in the vector corresponds to an evaluation indicator in the preset evaluation indicator set, indicating the stakeholder's emphasis on that indicator. The influence coefficient reflects the relative importance or voice of each stakeholder in the final consensus-building process. It can be determined based on factors such as the stakeholder's investment proportion in the project, management level, and contractual agreements. The dispute resolution rules define the mechanism for determining the final evaluation result when the stakeholders cannot reach an agreement through negotiation. This can be achieved by designating an entity with final decision-making power (such as the owner or a third-party expert committee) or by pre-setting a set of scoring and adjudication processes. Weighted aggregation is a method of integrating multiple evaluation results. Its principle is to linearly combine the evaluation results according to the corresponding weights of each evaluation result (here, the influence coefficient). The negotiation rules define the process and standards for discussing and adjusting differences in evaluation results among stakeholders. This can be achieved by stipulating the meeting organization method, the scope of discussion topics, the way opinions are expressed, and the process for proposing and adopting modification suggestions.

[0042] Obtaining the weights W_Subj assigned by each stakeholder involved in the highway project to different evaluation indicators within the pre-set evaluation indicator set reflects the varying levels of interest placed on these indicators by different stakeholders and provides a basis for subsequent weighted calculations. For each stakeholder involved in the highway project, based on the evaluation value V of the evaluation indicator and the stakeholder's weight W_j, the suitability assessment result R_j_pers from that stakeholder's perspective is calculated. This calculation takes into account the varying preferences of different stakeholders for the same evaluation indicator, making the assessment results more personalized and targeted. To integrate the assessment results of various stakeholders, this solution introduces consensus-building parameters, including the influence coefficient A of each stakeholder in reaching the final consensus, as well as pre-set dispute resolution rules. The influence coefficient A reflects the influence and importance of each stakeholder in the project, while the dispute resolution rules provide a solution for situations where consensus cannot be reached. Based on the suitability assessment results R_Subj_perspective from each stakeholder's perspective and combined with the consensus-building parameters, the final suitability assessment result R_final is generated through two methods. Method 1 uses a weighted aggregation approach, averaging the assessment results of each stakeholder based on their influence coefficient A to produce a comprehensive assessment result. This simple and direct approach is suitable for situations where all parties have relatively consistent opinions or where quick decisions are needed. Method 2 focuses on negotiation and dispute resolution. When there are discrepancies in the assessment results of various stakeholders, discussion and adjustments are facilitated to achieve consensus. If negotiation fails, the final decision is made according to the dispute resolution rules, ensuring the fairness and credibility of the assessment process.

[0043] like Figure 2 A highway engineering cost data management system is shown, the system comprising: The data capture and snapshot generation module 201 is used to capture cost data, approval records, supporting documents, and context information related to the change event, generate an event data snapshot containing a unique event identifier, a timestamp, and a data verification code, and solidify and store the event data snapshot; The impact analysis and report generation module 202 is configured to analyze and calculate the chain effects of the change event on other associated cost elements within the project, as well as on other cost management units or the overall project cost transmitted through cross-unit impact rules, based on the cost data changes recorded in the event data snapshot and in accordance with the rules in a preset cost element association rule library that defines the cost impact transmission paths and calculation logic within a single cost management unit and between different cost management units within the highway engineering project, and generate a change impact analysis report. An event chain organization module 203 is used to organize the generated event data snapshots into an event chain according to the chronological order of occurrence and the logical causal relationship between them; The tracing and reporting providing module 204 is used to provide event data snapshot content, change impact analysis report and chain impact path for tracing historical change events based on the event chain and change impact analysis report.

[0044] The basic principles, main features, and advantages of the present invention are shown and described above. Those skilled in the art should understand that the present invention is not limited to the above embodiments. The above embodiments and descriptions only describe the principles of the present invention. Various changes and improvements are possible without departing from the spirit and scope of the present invention, and such changes and improvements fall within the scope of the invention as claimed.

Claims

1. A highway engineering cost data management method, characterized in that: The method comprises the following steps: For change events that affect construction costs in highway engineering projects, the cost data, approval records, supporting documents, and contextual information related to the change events are captured, and event data snapshots containing unique event identifiers, timestamps, and data verification codes are generated and stored in a fixed format. Based on the cost data changes recorded in the event data snapshot, and in accordance with the rules in the preset cost element association rule library that defines the cost impact transmission path and calculation logic within a single cost management unit and between different cost management units in the highway engineering project, the chain effect of the change event on other associated cost elements in the project and on other cost management units or the overall cost of the project transmitted through cross-unit impact rules is analyzed and calculated, and a change impact analysis report is generated; Organize the generated event data snapshots into event chains according to the chronological order of occurrence and the logical causal relationships between them; Based on the event chain and the change impact analysis report, event data snapshot content, change impact analysis report and chain impact path for tracing historical change events are provided.

2. A highway engineering cost data management method according to claim 1, characterized in that: When the characteristics of the change event match multiple rules in the cost element association rule library, the steps of generating a change impact analysis report include: analyzing and calculating the chain effects of the change event on other associated cost elements in the project, as well as other cost management units or the overall project cost transmitted through cross-unit impact rules, based on the cost data changes recorded in the event data snapshot and according to the preset rules in the cost element association rule library that define the cost impact transmission path and calculation logic within a single cost management unit and between different cost management units in the highway engineering project. Obtaining relationship information between the matched multiple rules that has been preset for the rules in the cost element association rule library; Determining a set of rules to be executed and an execution order of the rules in the set of rules to be executed from the matched multiple rules based on the obtained relationship information between the rules; Based on the cost data changes recorded in the event data snapshot, and in accordance with the determined execution order of the rules in the set of rules to be executed, as well as the cost impact transmission path and calculation logic defined in the rules, the rules in the set of rules to be executed are executed, and the chain effects of the change event on other related cost elements in the project and other cost management units or the overall cost of the project transmitted through cross-unit impact rules are analyzed and calculated to generate a change impact analysis report.

3. A highway engineering cost data management method according to claim 2, characterized in that: The relationship information between rules includes at least one of the priority of the rules, the mutually exclusive conditions of the rules, and the trigger dependency conditions of the rules.

4. A highway engineering cost data management method according to claim 1, characterized in that: The steps of defining the cost impact transfer path and calculation logic within a single cost management unit and between different cost management units in the highway engineering project in the cost element association rule library include: Obtain engineering structure information of highway engineering projects, cost impact fact information contained in historical change data, and cross-cost management unit impact information contained in project-specific agreements; Based on the acquired engineering structure information, direct cost element associations within a single cost management unit are identified; based on the acquired cost impact fact information contained in the acquired historical change data, recurring cost impact patterns are identified; based on the acquired cross-cost management unit impact information contained in the acquired project-specific agreement, the impact logic of explicit agreements across cost management units is identified; generating candidate cost impact transfer paths and calculation logic by combining the identified direct cost element associations, the recurring cost impact patterns, and the explicitly agreed impact logic; Reviewing the generated candidate cost impact transfer paths and calculation logic to form the final impact transfer paths and calculation logic; The final impact transfer path and calculation logic formed will be used as the cost impact transfer path and calculation logic within a single cost management unit in the highway engineering project and between different cost management units defined in the cost element association rule library.

5. A highway engineering cost data management method according to claim 4, characterized in that: The step of generating candidate cost impact transfer paths and calculation logic based on the identified direct cost element associations, the recurring cost impact patterns, and the explicitly agreed impact logic includes: Detecting differences between the direct cost element associations, the recurring cost impact patterns, and the explicitly agreed impact logic for the same impact transfer path or calculation logic; If the difference is detected, a preset heterogeneous information conflict handling rule specific to the characteristics of the highway engineering project is obtained, wherein the heterogeneous information conflict handling rule defines the priority of acceptance between different information sources and the conditions for applying different information sources under specific highway engineering project conditions; Processing the detected difference according to the obtained heterogeneous information conflict processing rule to determine a single impact logic to be adopted for the difference, or determining an impact logic to be adopted including conditional branches for the difference; By combining the parts of the direct cost element associations where no differences were detected, the parts of the recurring cost impact patterns where no differences were detected, the parts of the explicitly agreed impact logic where no differences were detected, and the single impact logic to be adopted or the impact logic to be adopted containing conditional branches determined when differences are detected, candidate cost impact transfer paths and calculation logic are generated.

6. A highway engineering cost data management method according to claim 5, characterized in that: The steps of obtaining preset heterogeneous information conflict handling rules tailored to the characteristics of highway engineering projects, wherein the heterogeneous information conflict handling rules define the priority of acceptance between different information sources and the conditions for applying different information sources under specific highway engineering project conditions, include: Monitoring changes in specific external conditions related to highway engineering project management, wherein the changes in the specific external conditions indicate situations that may affect the effectiveness of the heterogeneous information conflict handling rules; When a change in the specific external condition is detected, identifying one or more existing preset heterogeneous information conflict processing rules for the highway engineering project characteristics associated with the detected change in the specific external condition; Based on the monitored changes in specific external conditions, the applicability of one or more identified existing heterogeneous information conflict processing rules under the current highway engineering project conditions is evaluated to obtain applicability evaluation results; If the applicability evaluation result determines that the applicability of one or more existing heterogeneous information conflict processing rules has decreased, then adjusting the one or more existing heterogeneous information conflict processing rules based on the monitored specific external condition changes, or creating new heterogeneous information conflict processing rules to replace or supplement the one or more existing heterogeneous information conflict processing rules to form updated heterogeneous information conflict processing rules; The rules valid under the current project conditions in the updated heterogeneous information conflict processing rules are obtained as the preset heterogeneous information conflict processing rules targeting the characteristics of the highway engineering project.

7. A highway engineering cost data management method according to claim 6, characterized in that: The step of evaluating the applicability of one or more identified existing heterogeneous information conflict processing rules under the current highway engineering project conditions based on the monitored specific external condition changes to obtain the applicability evaluation result includes: Obtaining a set of preset evaluation indicators corresponding to the monitored specific external condition change type and the identified one or more existing heterogeneous information conflict processing rule features; For each evaluation indicator in the obtained preset evaluation indicator set, an evaluation value of the evaluation indicator is determined based on the degree of influence of the monitored specific external condition change on the identified one or more existing heterogeneous information conflict processing rules in the evaluation indicator dimension, and in combination with the specific constraints of the current highway engineering project; The evaluation values ​​of all evaluation indicators in the preset evaluation indicator set are integrated to obtain the applicability evaluation results of the identified one or more existing heterogeneous information conflict processing rules under the current highway engineering project conditions.

8. A highway engineering cost data management method according to claim 7, characterized in that: The step of comprehensively evaluating the evaluation values ​​of all evaluation indicators in the preset evaluation indicator set to obtain the applicability evaluation results of the identified one or more existing heterogeneous information conflict processing rules under the current highway engineering project conditions includes: Obtaining a preset evaluation preference configuration associated with each stakeholder involved in the highway engineering project, wherein the evaluation preference configuration defines the weight or focus of each stakeholder on different evaluation indicators in the preset evaluation indicator set; Based on the evaluation values ​​of all evaluation indicators in the preset evaluation indicator set and in accordance with the evaluation preference configuration of each stakeholder, the applicability evaluation results from the perspective of each stakeholder are calculated respectively; Identify the differences between the applicability assessment results from different stakeholders’ perspectives; According to the preset consensus formation strategy for the characteristics of multi-party negotiation in highway engineering projects, the differences are negotiated to form a final applicability evaluation result that reflects the consensus of multiple parties or is acceptable, which serves as the applicability evaluation result of the identified one or more existing heterogeneous information conflict processing rules under the current highway engineering project conditions.

9. A highway engineering cost data management method according to claim 8, characterized in that: The step of negotiating the differences based on a preset consensus-building strategy tailored to the characteristics of multi-party negotiation in highway engineering projects includes: Selecting a corresponding negotiation path from the consensus-forming strategies based on the nature and scope of the differences; In the negotiation path, according to the decision-making process and rules preset in the consensus-building strategy, guide the stakeholders to discuss and adjust the differences; Until an assessment result that meets the preset consistency criteria is reached, or a final determination is made according to the arbitration mechanism defined in the consensus formation strategy to form a final applicability assessment result that reflects multi-party consensus or is acceptable.

10. A highway engineering cost data management system, characterized in that: The system includes: A data capture and snapshot generation module is used to capture cost data, approval records, supporting documents and context information related to the change event, generate an event data snapshot containing a unique event identifier, a timestamp and a data verification code, and solidify and store the event data snapshot; An impact analysis and report generation module is configured to analyze and calculate the chain effects of the change event on other associated cost elements within the project, as well as on other cost management units or the overall project cost transmitted through cross-unit impact rules, based on the cost data changes recorded in the event data snapshot and in accordance with the rules in a preset cost element association rule library that defines the cost impact transmission paths and calculation logic within a single cost management unit and between different cost management units within the highway engineering project, and generate a change impact analysis report. The event chain organization module is used to organize the generated event data snapshots into event chains according to the chronological order of occurrence and the logical causal relationships between them; The tracing and reporting providing module is used to provide event data snapshot content, change impact analysis report and chain impact path for tracing historical change events based on the event chain and the change impact analysis report.

Images