Method for evaluating importance of project standard

Abstract

This application discloses a method for evaluating the importance of engineering project standards. First, a reference vector is established according to the items specified in each standard. The reference vector not only characterizes the specific items constrained by each standard, but also, through a first weight, expresses the relative importance of each dimension of each preset standard under the condition of the chosen alternative, based on its own coordination capability under the constraints of each preset standard. Furthermore, through a second weight, it expresses the relative importance of each dimension of each preset standard under the condition of the chosen alternative, based on its coordination capability with other nearby historical engineering projects under the constraints of each preset standard. The method in this application also realizes the application of electronic digital data processing technology in the field of engineering standards.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This application relates to the field of electronic digital data processing technology, and more particularly to a method for digital computing or data processing specifically applicable to a particular application, specifically a method for evaluating the importance of engineering project standards. Background Technology

[0002] During the planning phase of a new urban area, there is ample room for maneuver in urban construction projects, providing conditions for overall project planning. However, in projects such as the renovation of old residential areas or in the gaps between historical urban construction projects, adhering to the project standards adopted during the new urban area planning phase could lead to numerous problems. For example, excessively tall buildings might obstruct the natural lighting of existing structures. Therefore, achieving coordination between new and old projects at the design standard level is a pressing issue that needs to be addressed.

[0003] For example, patent publication number CN113946770A, titled "A Marine Engineering Standard Information Management System" (main classification number: G06F16 / 958), based on the design of a website for managing marine engineering standard information, achieves real-time dynamic updates and personalized services, significantly improving the level of enterprise standard data management, reducing enterprise standard management workflows, and preventing losses caused by unclear standard validity information. On the one hand, this demonstrates the great potential of electronic digital data processing technology in the field of engineering standards; on the other hand, it also shows that there is still a broad prospect for technological expansion in this field. Summary of the Invention

[0004] This application provides a method for evaluating the importance of engineering project standards, in order to at least partially solve the above-mentioned technical problems.

[0005] The embodiments of this application adopt the following technical solutions:

[0006] In a first aspect, embodiments of this application provide a method for evaluating the importance of engineering project standards, the method comprising:

[0007] Each pair of conflicting items in the alternative solutions for the target project is aligned with the dimensions of a preset reference vector to obtain a first vector. The conflicting item pair is a pair of design items that cannot simultaneously satisfy different preset standards when the alternative solutions are formulated according to those standards. The dimensions of the reference vector correspond one-to-one with each item specified by the preset standards, and each dimension represents the first weight and second weight of the item to which it belongs. The first weight when an alternative solution corresponding to the item exists in the target project is less than the first weight when no alternative solution exists. The second weight when an available solution applicable to the item exists in a historical project adjacent to the target project is less than the second weight when no alternative solution exists. The dimension also represents a third weight, which is positively correlated with the degree of safety hazard of its corresponding dimension when the preset standards are not met.

[0008] Each of the first vectors is input into a pre-trained SVM prediction model to obtain an evaluation result; the evaluation result is used to characterize the feasibility of the alternative solutions under the constraints of the preset criteria.

[0009] If the evaluation result indicates that the alternative is not feasible, the content of at least one of the conflicting items in the alternative is adjusted under the constraints of the preset criteria until the evaluation result indicates that it is feasible.

[0010] In an optional embodiment of this specification, the method further includes:

[0011] Identify sample project pairs; the sample project pairs include sample projects that are geographically close to each other in historical projects and share facilities;

[0012] Based on the data collected for the sample project, a sample input is constructed, along with labels corresponding to the sample input;

[0013] The SVM prediction model is obtained by training the preset model using the sample input and the label.

[0014] In an optional embodiment of this specification, the method further includes:

[0015] The tags include the following construction dimensions: construction safety, environmental protection, and construction cost.

[0016] In an optional embodiment of this specification, the method further includes:

[0017] The value of the construction safety dimension is negatively correlated with the frequency of use of the shared facilities during construction; and / or,

[0018] The value of the construction cost dimension is positively correlated with the frequency of use of the shared facilities during the construction process.

[0019] In an optional embodiment of this specification, the method further includes:

[0020] The tags include the following operational dimensions: operational safety dimension, operational cost dimension, and the difference between the actual and expected usage efficiency of the sample project corresponding to the sample input; the sample project corresponding to the sample input is the sample project constructed after the sample project.

[0021] In an optional embodiment of this specification, the method further includes:

[0022] The value of the operational safety dimension is negatively correlated with the frequency of use of the shared facilities during operation; and / or,

[0023] The value of the operating cost dimension is positively correlated with the frequency of use of the shared facilities during operation.

[0024] In an optional embodiment of this specification, the method further includes:

[0025] If the evaluation result indicates that the alternative is not feasible, the option with the largest comprehensive weight value among the conflicting items is adjusted; the comprehensive weight value is positively correlated with both the first weight value and the second weight value.

[0026] In an optional embodiment of this specification, the method further includes:

[0027] If the evaluation result indicates that the alternative is not feasible, adjustments should be avoided for the third weight values ​​of the conflicting items that are not zero.

[0028] In an optional embodiment of this specification, the method further includes, prior to the following:

[0029] When the alternative solutions are detected to be complete, an available vector is generated; the dimensions of the available vector correspond one-to-one with each item specified by the preset standard.

[0030] For each item included in the alternative solutions, determine whether the alternative solutions include an alternative to that item, and obtain a first determination result;

[0031] Based on the first judgment result, determine the first weight of each dimension and add it to the available vector;

[0032] For each item included in the alternative solutions, determine whether there is an available solution that can be applied to the target project in historical projects that are close to the location of the target project, and obtain a second determination result;

[0033] Based on the second judgment result, determine the second weight of each dimension and add it to the available vector;

[0034] The available vector with the first weight and the second weight added is used as the reference vector.

[0035] In an optional embodiment of this specification, the method further includes at least one of the following:

[0036] The degree of safety hazard includes the degree of construction safety hazard and the degree of operational safety hazard;

[0037] When an adjustment to the alternative is detected, the first weight of the reference vector is updated according to the adjusted alternative.

[0038] The third weight when the second weight in a certain dimension is not zero is greater than the third weight when the second weight in that dimension is zero.

[0039] If a risk event has occurred in a historical project that is close to the location of the target project and corresponds to an available solution in a certain dimension, the third weight of that dimension is configured to the maximum value.

[0040] If the third weight of a certain dimension is configured to the maximum value, and the first weight of that dimension is greater than the preset weight threshold, then the alternative solution is directly determined to be infeasible.

[0041] Secondly, embodiments of this application also provide an apparatus for evaluating the importance of engineering project standards, the apparatus being used to implement the method steps in the first aspect.

[0042] Thirdly, embodiments of this application also provide an electronic device, including:

[0043] Processor; and

[0044] A memory configured to store computer-executable instructions, which, when executed, cause the processor to perform the steps of the method described in the first aspect.

[0045] Fourthly, embodiments of this application also provide a computer-readable storage medium storing one or more programs that, when executed by an electronic device including multiple applications, cause the electronic device to perform the steps of the method described in the first aspect.

[0046] The above-described technical solutions adopted in the embodiments of this application can achieve the following beneficial effects:

[0047] This application provides a method for evaluating the importance of engineering project standards. First, a reference vector is established according to the items specified in each standard. The reference vector not only characterizes the specific items constrained by each standard, but also, through a first weight, expresses the relative importance of each dimension of each preset standard under the condition of the preset standard by considering the coordination ability of the alternative solutions to the target engineering project under the constraints of each preset standard. Furthermore, through a second weight, it expresses the relative importance of each dimension of each preset standard under the condition of the alternative solutions by considering their coordination ability with other nearby historical engineering projects under the constraints of each preset standard. In other words, the method in this specification provides a highly comprehensive evaluation of the importance of preset standards. Moreover, since the first vector in this application is aligned with conflicting items, only conflicting items are considered, while non-conflicting items are not, which helps avoid wasting data processing resources. Furthermore, the method in this specification employs an SVM prediction model to process the data and analyze the feasibility of alternative solutions. This model can improve model robustness and reduce the risk of overfitting by maximizing the classification margin, making it particularly suitable for data-scarce scenarios and maintaining stable performance even with imbalanced data. The method in this application also realizes the application of electrical digital data processing technology in the field of engineering standards. Attached Figure Description

[0048] Figure 1 A schematic diagram illustrating the process of an engineering project standard importance evaluation method provided in the embodiments of this specification;

[0049] Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of the structure of an electronic device in an embodiment of this specification. Detailed Implementation

[0050] The present invention will now be described in further detail with reference to the accompanying drawings and specific embodiments. Similar elements in different embodiments are referred to by related similar element reference numerals. In the following embodiments, many details are described to facilitate a better understanding of the present application. However, those skilled in the art will readily recognize that some features may be omitted in different situations, or may be replaced by other elements, materials, or methods. In some cases, certain operations related to the present application are not shown or described in the specification. This is to avoid obscuring the core parts of the present application with excessive description. For those skilled in the art, detailed description of these related operations is not necessary; they can fully understand the related operations based on the description in the specification and general technical knowledge in the art.

[0051] Furthermore, the features, operations, or characteristics described in the specification can be combined in any suitable manner to form various embodiments. At the same time, the steps or actions in the method description can be rearranged or adjusted in a manner obvious to those skilled in the art. Therefore, the various orders in the specification and drawings are only for the clear description of a particular embodiment and do not imply a necessary order, unless otherwise stated that a particular order must be followed.

[0052] The serial numbers assigned to components in this document, such as "first" and "second," are used only to distinguish the described objects and have no sequential or technical meaning. The terms "connection" and "linkage" used in this application, unless otherwise specified, include both direct and indirect connections (linkages).

[0053] The technical solutions provided by the various embodiments of this application are described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings.

[0054] like Figure 1 As shown, the method for evaluating the importance of engineering project standards in this specification includes the following steps:

[0055] S100: Align each conflicting item pair in the alternative schemes of the target project with the dimensions of the preset reference vector to obtain each first vector.

[0056] The engineering projects described in this specification are outputs of buildings or structures, encompassing stages such as planning, surveying and design, procurement, construction, commissioning, and final acceptance, and must be completed within specific timeframes, budgets, and quality standards. The technical solutions described in this specification are applicable to the redevelopment of gaps between already developed land parcels, and the renovation of existing projects—projects requiring construction between other completed projects during the design phase. The target engineering projects in this specification are those requiring construction between existing projects.

[0057] Alternative solutions are design schemes for the target engineering project. Alternative solutions may include at least some of the following: overall planning and design concept (e.g., project positioning, technical indicators, ecological design), professional technical solution design (e.g., architecture, structural engineering, electromechanical systems, special engineering), technical documentation system (e.g., design specifications, design drawings), implementation support system (e.g., cost control, construction organization, change management), and compliance assurance content (standards, contract terms, environmental protection design).

[0058] The alternative solutions in this manual are formulated under the constraints of preset standards. These preset standards are those that must be considered during the design phase of the project, and may include, but are not limited to, national standards, industry standards, and enterprise standards. Examples of mandatory national standards include: building structure safety standards (such as GB 50009, "Code for Design of Building Structures"), fire protection facility configuration standards (such as GB 50016, "Code for Fire Protection Design of Buildings"), and energy conservation and environmental protection indicators (such as GB 50189, "Standard for Energy Conservation Design of Public Buildings"). Recommended industry standards include: construction technology standards (such as GB / T 50666, "Code for Construction of Concrete Structures"), material testing standards (such as JGJ 52-2006, "Standard for Quality and Testing Methods of Sand and Stone for Ordinary Concrete"), and equipment installation standards (such as GB / T 51292-2018, "Technical Standard for Indoor Coverage Systems of Wireless Communication").

[0059] The conflict pairs in this specification refer to a pair of design matters concerning the target project that cannot simultaneously meet different preset standards when the alternative solutions are formulated according to those standards. For example, the "load-bearing walls of Building A in the target project" and "fire escape routes in the target project" in the alternative solutions may constitute a conflict pair. The load-bearing walls of Building A happen to be located on the fire escape routes of the target project, creating a conflict. Removing the load-bearing walls directly or eliminating the fire escape routes altogether will create safety hazards.

[0060] The reference vectors in this specification were established based on preset standards when the alternative solutions were formulated. Each dimension of the reference vector corresponds one-to-one with each item specified in the preset standards, and each dimension represents the first weight and second weight of the item to which it belongs. The first weight indicates whether there is an alternative solution corresponding to that item in the target project, and the second weight indicates whether there are available solutions applicable to that item in historical projects located near the target project. The first weight can represent the target project's own coordination capability regarding that item. The second weight can represent the coordination capability between projects regarding that item.

[0061] In an optional embodiment of this specification, when the completion of the alternative solution formulation is detected, an available vector is generated; the dimensions of the available vector correspond one-to-one with each item specified by the preset standard; for each item included in the alternative solution, it is determined whether the alternative solution includes an alternative solution for that item, and a first determination result is obtained; based on the first determination result, the first weight of each dimension is determined and added to the available vector; for each item included in the alternative solution, it is determined whether there is an available solution for that item that can be applied to the target project in historical projects adjacent to the location of the target project, and a second determination result is obtained; based on the second determination result, the second weight of each dimension is determined and added to the available vector; the available vector with the first weight and the second weight added is used as the reference vector.

[0062] The reference vector obtained at this point cannot show which items conflict. The determination of which items conflict can be based on human experience. Optionally, when an adjustment to the alternative is detected, the first weight of the reference vector is updated according to the adjusted alternative.

[0063] In this specification, the first and second weights are not determined solely by the importance of the standard itself, but also by considering the situation of the target project and the situation of historical projects. This reflects the relativity of the importance of the standard while enabling the quantification of this importance.

[0064] The first weight when an alternative solution exists in the target project for the matter is less than the first weight when no alternative solution exists (the higher the value of the first weight, the more irreconcilable the conflict is within the project under the constraints of the preset standard, and the more significant the importance of the conflict pair corresponding to the preset standard. In the dimension where there is no conflict, the first weight value can be directly assigned to 0. The specific value of the first weight value can be combined with human experience to a certain extent). The second weight when a usable solution applicable to the target project exists in a historical project adjacent to the target project is less than the second weight when no usable solution applicable to the target project exists (the higher the value of the second weight, the less feasible the conflict is to be coordinated between projects under the constraints of the preset standard, and the more significant the importance of the conflict pair corresponding to the preset standard. The specific value of the second weight value can be combined with human experience to a certain extent).

[0065] In this specification, the dimension also represents a third weight; the third weight is positively correlated with the degree of safety hazard of its corresponding dimension when the preset standard is not met. For example, the third weight of the fire protection facility dimension is relatively high, while the third weight of the noise facility dimension is relatively low. Specific values ​​can be determined empirically. In an optional embodiment of this specification, the degree of safety hazard includes the degree of construction safety hazard and the degree of operational safety hazard, then the third weight can include both the construction third weight and the operational third weight.

[0066] In an optional embodiment of this specification, the third weight when the second weight in a certain dimension is not zero is greater than the third weight when the second weight in that dimension is zero. A second weight of zero indicates that the target project is part of a nearby historical project, and the target project can be considered an extension of that nearby historical project, indicating a closer relationship between the two projects. A second weight not being zero indicates that the ability to mitigate conflict between projects is not ideal; therefore, the third weight value is increased to characterize the spread of the consequences of a risk event to the nearby historical project.

[0067] Furthermore, in an optional embodiment of this specification, if a risk event has occurred in a certain dimension of an available solution corresponding to a historical project adjacent to the target project, the third weight of that dimension is configured to the maximum value. This indicates that even if an available solution exists, but that solution itself is in a relatively imperfect state in the adjacent historical project, if a risk event involving that available solution occurs in the adjacent historical project, or even if it is necessary to call upon facilities in the target project with the same or similar dimensions, then the setting of that dimension needs to be given more attention.

[0068] If the third weight of a certain dimension is configured to its maximum value, and the first weight of that dimension is greater than a preset weight threshold (empirical value), then the alternative solution is directly determined to be infeasible. In this embodiment, the judgment can be made without using an SVM prediction model, because in this case, the alternative solution has significant potential risks, both for itself and for providing corresponding facility resources to nearby historical engineering projects, so a direct judgment can be made.

[0069] S102: Input each of the first vectors into the pre-trained SVM prediction model to obtain the evaluation results.

[0070] The core idea of ​​the Support Vector Machine (SVM) technology used in this specification is to maximize the classification margin by finding the optimal hyperplane, thereby improving the model's generalization ability. SVM separates data of different classes by finding a hyperplane (a straight line in two-dimensional space, a plane in high-dimensional space) in the feature space. This hyperplane must satisfy the condition that the distance from the two classes of sample points to it is maximized (i.e., the margin is maximized).

[0071] The design and optimization of Support Vector Machine (SVM) models follow several natural laws and mathematical principles, mainly reflected in the following aspects:

[0072] 1. Geometric Principle: Maximum Margin Separation. The core objective of SVM is to find a hyperplane that maximizes the geometric margin between the two classes of data. This idea originates from the principle of "minimum energy consumption" in nature—just as water droplets tend to form the smallest surface area to remain stable, SVM achieves robustness of the classification boundary by maximizing the margin.

[0073] 2. Potential Energy Minimization in Physics. The optimization problem of SVM can be compared to the potential energy minimization problem in a physical system: Primitive Problem: The constrained optimization is transformed into an unconstrained problem using the Lagrange multiplier method, similar to finding the extrema of the potential energy function under constraints. Dual Problem: The stability of the solution is ensured using the KKT conditions, similar to equilibrium state analysis in mechanics.

[0074] 3. Sparsity in biology. SVM relies only on support vectors (i.e., key sample points close to the hyperplane) for classification, similar to the selective response of biological neural systems to key stimuli, exhibiting both sparsity and efficiency.

[0075] 4. Kernel Techniques for High-Dimensional Space Mapping. Data can be implicitly mapped to a higher-dimensional space using kernel functions (such as Gaussian kernels and polynomial kernels) to solve nonlinear problems. This process follows the continuity principle of the characteristic space; even if the original space is inseparable, linear boundaries may still be found in the higher-dimensional space.

[0076] 5. Minimizing structural risk in statistics. SVM balances classification error and model complexity by introducing slack variables (soft margins) and penalty parameter C, which conforms to Occam's razor principle (simple models preferred) and the bias-variance tradeoff.

[0077] SVM integrates geometric, physical, biological, and statistical principles, and its design fully embodies the universal principles of "efficiency, stability, and self-adaptation" found in nature.

[0078] Since the pairs of conflicting items may not be unique, the first vector may also not be unique. There is a one-to-one correspondence between the pairs of conflicting items and the first vector. Each first vector needs to be examined separately.

[0079] The evaluation results in this specification are used to characterize the feasibility of the alternative solutions under the constraints of the preset criteria. The evaluation result can be a multi-dimensional vector, with each dimension corresponding one-to-one with a conflict pair, representing the degree of conflict for each pair, that is, quantifying the consequences of such conflict. The quantification result for each dimension can be a normalized numerical value. The range of this value can be learned through the model training process. Technical personnel can then conduct further evaluations based on the evaluation results expressed by this multi-dimensional vector to guide the execution of subsequent steps.

[0080] In an optional embodiment of this specification, the SVM prediction model can be trained through the following steps: First, a sample project pair is determined (i.e., two historical projects constitute a pair). The sample projects included in the sample project pair are those historical projects that are geographically adjacent and share facilities (such as fire lanes, power transformers, green belts, drainage systems, etc.). Second, a sample input is constructed based on data collected from the sample project pair (the process of constructing the sample is similar to the aforementioned process of determining the first vector. The input model is the first vector of the historical project in the sample project pair that was completed later), and a label corresponding to the sample input (since the historical project has been completed, or even operated for some time, the conflicts exhibited during its construction and operation have already had factual consequences. For example, to ensure the installation of load-bearing walls, the historical project compressed the space of fire lanes, or shared fire lanes with other facilities (such as parking lots), resulting in a fire incident not being handled in a timely manner, causing operational safety risks. These factual consequences can serve as the basis for determining feasibility). Third, the preset model is trained using the samples and the labels (supervised learning) to obtain the SVM prediction model.

[0081] It should be noted that the data selected for constructing the sample was not based on conflicts encountered during the design process of historical engineering projects, but rather on events that occurred during construction and operation. For example, if a fire lane was blocked by parking lot during operation, then data from the fire lane design and parking lot planning would be used to construct the sample. Labels are constructed based on the consequences of this blockage. If the blockage of the fire lane is temporary and only poses a hazard, the feasibility of the label representation will not be too low. If an accident has actually occurred, causing damage, the feasibility of the label representation will be very low.

[0082] In an optional embodiment of this specification, the label includes construction and operation dimensions, and the information for each dimension must indicate which dimension of the preset standard the corresponding risk belongs to.

[0083] Construction dimensions include: construction safety (e.g., unreasonable building spacing design restricts the placement of construction machinery, leading to certain construction risks), environmental protection, and construction cost. The construction safety dimension (expressing the degree of negative impact; the more severe the negative impact, the lower the value) is negatively correlated with the frequency of use of shared facilities during construction (if shared facilities are required with other historical projects, it indicates inherent defects in the project's land use or design, potentially posing safety hazards to existing projects sharing these facilities); and / or, the construction cost dimension is positively correlated with the frequency of use of shared facilities during construction.

[0084] Operational dimensions include: operational safety (e.g., whether there is a risk in the connecting corridor between two buildings, expressing the degree of negative impact; the more severe the negative impact, the lower the value), operational cost, and the difference between the actual and expected usage efficiency of the sample project corresponding to the sample input (actual usage efficiency characterizes resource utilization; for example, repeated construction of load-bearing walls results in lower actual usage efficiency; the greater the difference, the lower the value, indicating that the standard has not met expectations); the sample project corresponding to the sample input is the one constructed after the sample project. Specifically, the operational safety dimension is negatively correlated with the frequency of use of the shared facilities during operation (e.g., in the event of a risk event, the public facility may be over-occupied and unable to function properly); and / or, the operational cost dimension is positively correlated with the frequency of use of the shared facilities during operation.

[0085] The vast majority of engineering projects meet the preset standards. However, we cannot rule out the possibility of some instances of shoddy workmanship, such as substituting sea sand for building sand. Therefore, we can construct the third weight portion of the sample input based on these events and their consequences. Since the third weight is also obtained using data from the sample engineering project pairs, it can be characterized from both the perspective of the engineering project itself and the relationships between engineering projects.

[0086] S104: If the evaluation result indicates that the alternative is not feasible, the content of at least one of the conflicting items in the alternative is adjusted under the constraints of the preset standards until the evaluation result indicates that it is feasible.

[0087] If the alternative plan is not feasible, it indicates that there are significant construction safety hazards and / or operational safety hazards. If construction is still carried out according to the alternative plan, the same mistakes will be repeated in the past, and the alternative plan needs to be adjusted.

[0088] As for how to adjust, technicians can determine it based on their experience. In an optional embodiment of this specification, if the evaluation result indicates that the alternative solution is not feasible, the pair of conflicting items with the largest comprehensive weight value is adjusted; the comprehensive weight value is positively correlated with both the first weight value and the second weight value. If the evaluation result indicates that the alternative solution is not feasible, adjustments should be avoided for the pairs of conflicting items where the third weight value is not zero. A non-zero third weight value indicates that the dimension of its corresponding preset standard is related to security and should not be easily changed. If changes must be made, caution should be exercised.

[0089] This application provides a method for evaluating the importance of engineering project standards. First, a reference vector is established according to the items specified in each standard. The reference vector not only characterizes the specific items constrained by each standard, but also, through a first weight, expresses the relative importance of each dimension of each preset standard under the condition of the alternative project, based on its own coordination capability under the constraints of each preset standard. Furthermore, through a second weight, it expresses the relative importance of each dimension of each preset standard under the condition of the alternative project, based on its coordination capability with other nearby historical engineering projects under the constraints of each preset standard. In other words, the method in this specification provides a highly comprehensive evaluation of the importance of preset standards. Moreover, since the first vector in this application is aligned with conflicting items, only conflicting items are considered, while non-conflicting items are not, which helps avoid wasting data processing resources. Furthermore, the method in this specification employs an SVM prediction model to process the data and analyze the feasibility of alternative solutions. This model can improve model robustness and reduce the risk of overfitting by maximizing the classification margin, making it particularly suitable for data-scarce scenarios and maintaining stable performance even with imbalanced data. The method in this application also realizes the application of electrical digital data processing technology in the field of engineering standards.

[0090] Furthermore, this specification also provides an apparatus for evaluating the importance of engineering project standards, used to implement the above-described method steps. This apparatus can execute the methods in any of the foregoing embodiments and achieve the same or similar technical effects, which will not be elaborated further here.

[0091] Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of the structure of an electronic device according to an embodiment of this application. Please refer to it. Figure 2At the hardware level, the electronic device includes a processor, and optionally also includes an internal bus, a network interface, and memory. The memory may include main memory, such as high-speed random-access memory (RAM), or non-volatile memory, such as at least one disk drive. Of course, the electronic device may also include other hardware required for other business operations.

[0092] The processor, network interface, and memory can be interconnected via an internal bus, which can be an ISA (Industry Standard Architecture) bus, a PCI (Peripheral Component Interconnect) bus, or an EISA (Extended Industry Standard Architecture) bus, etc. This bus can be divided into address bus, data bus, control bus, etc. For ease of representation, Figure 2 The symbol is represented by a single double-headed arrow, but this does not mean that there is only one bus or one type of bus.

[0093] Memory is used to store programs. Specifically, programs may include program code, which includes computer operation instructions. Memory may include main memory and non-volatile memory, and provides instructions and data to the processor.

[0094] The processor reads the corresponding computer program from non-volatile memory into main memory and then runs it, forming a logical-level importance evaluation device for engineering project standards. The processor executes the program stored in memory and specifically performs any of the aforementioned importance evaluation methods for engineering project standards.

[0095] The above is as stated in this application. Figure 1The illustrated embodiment discloses a method for evaluating the importance of engineering project standards, which can be applied to or implemented by a processor. The processor may be an integrated circuit chip with signal processing capabilities. During implementation, each step of the above method can be completed by integrated logic circuits in the processor's hardware or by instructions in software form. The processor can be a general-purpose processor, including a Central Processing Unit (CPU), a Network Processor (NP), etc.; it can also be a Digital Signal Processor (DSP), an Application Specific Integrated Circuit (ASIC), a Field-Programmable Gate Array (FPGA), or other programmable logic devices, discrete gate or transistor logic devices, or discrete hardware components. It can implement or execute the methods, steps, and logic block diagrams disclosed in the embodiments of this application. The general-purpose processor can be a microprocessor or any conventional processor. The steps of the method disclosed in the embodiments of this application can be directly manifested as execution by a hardware decoding processor, or execution by a combination of hardware and software modules in the decoding processor. The software module can reside in a mature storage medium in the field, such as random access memory, flash memory, read-only memory, programmable read-only memory, electrically erasable programmable memory, or registers. This storage medium is located in memory, and the processor reads information from the memory and, in conjunction with its hardware, completes the steps of the above method.

[0096] The electronic device can also perform Figure 1 A method for evaluating the importance of engineering project standards was developed and implemented. Figure 1 The functions of the embodiments shown are not described in detail here.

[0097] This application also proposes a computer-readable storage medium that stores one or more programs, the programs including instructions that, when executed by an electronic device including multiple applications, perform any of the aforementioned methods for evaluating the importance of engineering project standards.

[0098] Those skilled in the art will understand that embodiments of this application can be provided as methods, systems, or computer program products. Therefore, this application can take the form of a completely hardware embodiment, a completely software embodiment, or an embodiment combining software and hardware aspects. Furthermore, this application can take the form of a computer program product embodied on one or more computer-usable storage media (including but not limited to disk storage, CD-ROM, optical storage, etc.) containing computer-usable program code.

[0099] This application is described with reference to flowchart illustrations and / or block diagrams of methods, apparatus (systems), and computer program products according to embodiments of this application. It will be understood that each block of the flowchart illustrations and / or block diagrams, and combinations of blocks in the flowchart illustrations and / or block diagrams, can be implemented by computer program instructions. These computer program instructions can be provided to a processor of a general-purpose computer, special-purpose computer, embedded processor, or other programmable data processing apparatus to produce a machine, such that the instructions, which execute via the processor of the computer or other programmable data processing apparatus, generate instructions for implementing the flowchart... Figure 1 One or more processes and / or boxes Figure 1 A device that provides the functions specified in one or more boxes.

[0100] These computer program instructions may also be stored in a computer-readable storage medium that can direct a computer or other programmable data processing device to function in a particular manner, such that the instructions stored in the computer-readable storage medium produce an article of manufacture including instruction means, which are implemented in a process Figure 1 One or more processes and / or boxes Figure 1 The function specified in one or more boxes.

[0101] These computer program instructions may also be loaded onto a computer or other programmable data processing equipment to cause a series of operational steps to be performed on the computer or other programmable equipment to produce a computer-implemented process, thereby providing instructions that execute on the computer or other programmable equipment for implementing the process. Figure 1 One or more processes and / or boxes Figure 1 The steps of the function specified in one or more boxes.

[0102] In a typical configuration, a computing device includes one or more processors (CPU), input / output interfaces, network interfaces, and memory.

[0103] Memory may include non-persistent storage in computer-readable media, such as random access memory (RAM) and / or non-volatile memory, such as read-only memory (ROM) or flash RAM. Memory is an example of computer-readable media.

[0104] Computer-readable media includes both permanent and non-permanent, removable and non-removable media that can store information using any method or technology. Information can be computer-readable instructions, data structures, modules of programs, or other data. Examples of computer storage media include, but are not limited to, phase-change memory (PRAM), static random access memory (SRAM), dynamic random access memory (DRAM), other types of random access memory (RAM), read-only memory (ROM), electrically erasable programmable read-only memory (EEPROM), flash memory or other memory technologies, CD-ROM, digital versatile optical disc (DVD) or other optical storage, magnetic tape, magnetic magnetic disk storage or other magnetic storage devices, or any other non-transferable medium that can be used to store information accessible by a computing device. As defined herein, computer-readable media does not include transient computer-readable media, such as modulated data signals and carrier waves.

[0105] It should also be noted that the terms "comprising," "including," or any other variations thereof are intended to cover non-exclusive inclusion, such that a process, method, article, or apparatus that comprises a list of elements includes not only those elements but also other elements not expressly listed, or elements inherent to such a process, method, article, or apparatus. Without further limitation, an element defined by the phrase "comprising one..." does not exclude the presence of other identical elements in the process, method, article, or apparatus that includes said element.

[0106] Those skilled in the art will understand that embodiments of this application can be provided as methods, systems, or computer program products. Therefore, this application can take the form of a completely hardware embodiment, a completely software embodiment, or an embodiment combining software and hardware aspects. Furthermore, this application can take the form of a computer program product embodied on one or more computer-usable storage media (including, but not limited to, disk storage, CD-ROM, optical storage, etc.) containing computer-usable program code.

[0107] The above description is merely an embodiment of this application and is not intended to limit this application. Various modifications and variations can be made to this application by those skilled in the art. Any modifications, equivalent substitutions, improvements, etc., made within the spirit and principle of this application should be included within the scope of the claims of this application.

Claims

1. A method of evaluating the importance of standards for an engineering project, characterized by, The method includes: Each pair of conflicting items in the alternative solutions for the target project is aligned with the dimensions of a preset reference vector to obtain a first vector. The conflicting item pair is a pair of design items that cannot simultaneously satisfy different preset standards when the alternative solutions are formulated according to those standards. The dimensions of the reference vector correspond one-to-one with each item specified by the preset standards, and each dimension represents the first weight and second weight of the item to which it belongs. The first weight when an alternative solution corresponding to the item exists in the target project is less than the first weight when no alternative solution exists. The second weight when an available solution applicable to the item exists in a historical project adjacent to the target project is less than the second weight when no alternative solution exists. The dimension also represents a third weight, which is positively correlated with the degree of safety hazard of its corresponding dimension when the preset standards are not met. Each of the first vectors is input into a pre-trained SVM prediction model to obtain an evaluation result; the evaluation result is used to characterize the feasibility of the alternative solutions under the constraints of the preset criteria. If the evaluation result indicates that the alternative solution is not feasible, adjustments are made to the content of at least one pair of conflicting issues in the alternative solutions under the constraints of the preset criteria, until the evaluation result indicates that it is feasible; When the alternative solutions are detected to be complete, an available vector is generated; the dimensions of the available vector correspond one-to-one with each item specified by the preset standard. For each item included in the alternative solutions, determine whether the alternative solutions include an alternative to that item, and obtain a first determination result; Based on the first judgment result, determine the first weight of each dimension and add it to the available vector; For each item included in the alternative solutions, determine whether there is an available solution that can be applied to the target project in historical projects that are close to the location of the target project, and obtain a second determination result; Based on the second judgment result, determine the second weight of each dimension and add it to the available vector; The available vector with the first weight and the second weight added is used as the reference vector; The degree of safety hazard includes the degree of construction safety hazard and the degree of operational safety hazard; When an adjustment to the alternative is detected, the first weight of the reference vector is updated according to the adjusted alternative. The third weight when the second weight in a certain dimension is not zero is greater than the third weight when the second weight in that dimension is zero. If a risk event has occurred in a historical project that is close to the location of the target project and corresponds to an available solution in a certain dimension, the third weight of that dimension is configured to the maximum value. If the third weight of a certain dimension is configured to the maximum value, and the first weight of that dimension is greater than the preset weight threshold, then the alternative solution is directly determined to be infeasible.

2. The method as described in claim 1, characterized in that, The method further includes: Identify sample project pairs; the sample project pairs include sample projects that are geographically close to each other in historical projects and share facilities; Based on the data collected for the sample project, a sample input is constructed, along with labels corresponding to the sample input; The SVM prediction model is obtained by training the preset model using the sample input and the label.

3. The method as described in claim 2, characterized in that, The method further includes: The tags include the following construction dimensions: construction safety, environmental protection, and construction cost.

4. The method as described in claim 3, characterized in that, The method further includes: The value of the construction safety dimension is negatively correlated with the frequency of use of the shared facilities during construction; and / or, The value of the construction cost dimension is positively correlated with the frequency of use of the shared facilities during the construction process.

5. The method as described in claim 2, characterized in that, The method further includes: The tags include the following operational dimensions: operational safety dimension, operational cost dimension, and the difference between the actual and expected usage efficiency of the sample project corresponding to the sample input; the sample project corresponding to the sample input is the sample project constructed after the sample project.

6. The method as described in claim 5, characterized in that, The method further includes: The value of the operational safety dimension is negatively correlated with the frequency of use of the shared facilities during operation; and / or, The value of the operating cost dimension is positively correlated with the frequency of use of the shared facilities during operation.

7. The method as described in claim 1, characterized in that, The method further includes: If the evaluation result indicates that the alternative is not feasible, the option with the largest comprehensive weight value among the conflicting items is adjusted; the comprehensive weight value is positively correlated with both the first weight value and the second weight value.

8. The method as described in claim 1, characterized in that, The method further includes: If the evaluation result indicates that the alternative is not feasible, adjustments should be avoided for the third weight values ​​of the conflicting items that are not zero.

Images