Construction-related commercial dispute hierarchical intelligent mediation and disposal system and method

Abstract

This invention relates to the field of dispute resolution technology, specifically to a hierarchical and intelligent mediation and resolution system and method for construction-related commercial disputes. The method includes: collecting basic case information and evidence data of the construction-related commercial disputes to be resolved, and extracting multi-dimensional dispute characteristic parameters; calling a preset quantitative scoring model for dispute complexity, combining the dispute characteristic parameters for weighted scoring, and generating corresponding dispute level labels; matching the dispute level labels with corresponding level mediation resource pools, and dispatching qualified mediators from the resource pools to handle cases; synchronizing all case data to the mediators' workstations to conduct case mediation and resolution; and dynamically adjusting the dispute level and corresponding mediation resource allocation based on changes in the dispute during case resolution. This allows for the collection of multi-dimensional characteristic parameters of construction-related commercial disputes, quantitative scoring and grading to match corresponding mediation resources, and dynamic adjustment of dispute level and resource allocation.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of dispute resolution technology, and in particular to a hierarchical and intelligent mediation and resolution system and method for commercial disputes involving construction. Background Technology

[0002] In the field of construction engineering commercial dispute resolution, the complexity of construction-related commercial disputes varies greatly due to the industry characteristics such as long project cycles, numerous participating parties, and highly specialized disputed matters. With the continuous advancement of diversified dispute resolution mechanisms, online intelligent mediation systems have been widely applied in pre-litigation and industry-specific mediation scenarios for construction disputes. These systems enable basic functions such as online dispute acceptance, electronic submission of materials, online mediation and negotiation, and electronic signing of agreements. They support the online operation of routine mediation processes, reducing the cost of dispute resolution for parties involved and improving the convenience of dispute resolution to a certain extent.

[0003] However, existing commercial dispute mediation systems for construction projects lack a standardized, quantitative, and tiered grading and resource matching mechanism tailored to the characteristics of construction disputes. Case allocation generally adopts a random or simple territorial allocation model without differentiation, failing to match mediation resources with corresponding professional levels based on the actual complexity of the dispute. This results in a persistent core problem of mismatch between mediation resources and dispute complexity. This leads to the inefficient use of high-quality mediation resources for simple disputes and makes it difficult to guarantee the professionalism and acceptance of complex disputes. Consequently, the overall mediation efficiency and utilization rate of high-quality resources are difficult to improve effectively. Therefore, there is an urgent need for a tiered and intelligent mediation and handling method for commercial disputes involving construction projects. Summary of the Invention

[0004] The purpose of this invention is to provide a hierarchical and intelligent mediation and handling system and method for commercial disputes involving construction projects. It aims to solve the technical problem that existing mediation systems for commercial disputes involving construction projects do not establish a standardized quantitative grading and resource matching mechanism tailored to the characteristics of construction disputes. Case allocation generally adopts an indiscriminate random assignment or a simple territorial allocation mode, which fails to match mediation resources of corresponding professional levels according to the actual complexity of the dispute, and the mismatch between mediation resources and the complexity of the dispute persists.

[0005] To achieve the above objectives, the present invention employs a hierarchical and intelligent mediation and resolution method for construction-related commercial disputes, comprising the following steps: Collect basic information and evidence data of pending construction-related commercial disputes, and extract multi-dimensional dispute characteristic parameters; The system calls a pre-defined quantitative scoring model for dispute complexity, combines dispute feature parameters to perform weighted scoring, and generates corresponding dispute level labels. Based on the dispute level label, the corresponding mediation resource pool is matched, and qualified mediators are dispatched from the resource pool to take on the cases. All case data is synchronized to the mediators' workstations to facilitate case mediation and handling. The level of dispute and the corresponding allocation of mediation resources will be dynamically adjusted based on the changing circumstances of the dispute during the case handling process.

[0006] Among the steps involved in collecting basic information and evidence data of construction-related commercial disputes pending resolution, and extracting multi-dimensional dispute characteristic parameters: Collect four core dispute characteristic parameters: the amount in dispute, the number of participating parties, the number of disputed items, and the completeness of evidence. Unstructured evidence materials are identified by element identification, and supporting information for the corresponding disputed matters is extracted and associated with the corresponding feature dimensions.

[0007] In the step of calling a preset dispute complexity quantification scoring model, combining dispute feature parameters to perform weighted scoring, and generating corresponding dispute level labels: The dispute complexity quantification scoring model incorporates weight coefficients corresponding to the four types of feature parameters. After normalizing various feature parameters, multiply them by their corresponding weight coefficients and sum them to obtain the total dispute complexity score; Disputes are categorized into four levels—simple, ordinary, complex, and serious—based on the total score range, and corresponding dispute level labels are generated.

[0008] In the step of classifying disputes into four levels—simple, ordinary, complex, and serious—based on the total score range and generating corresponding dispute level labels: Four scoring threshold ranges are set, corresponding to four levels of disputes; When the rating result falls within the critical range of 5% above or below the tier rating threshold, it will be automatically upgraded by one level for preliminary tiering.

[0009] Among the steps, in the process of matching the mediation resource pool corresponding to the dispute level label and dispatching qualified mediators from the resource pool to take on cases: A four-level mediation resource pool is pre-set, corresponding to four levels of disputes. Personnel in each resource pool are marked with their corresponding professional qualifications, areas of expertise, threshold for accepting cases with a certain amount in dispute, and threshold for the number of cases currently being handled. The system matches the corresponding resource pool based on the dispute level tag, and assigns cases based on the current workload of personnel and the case matching degree. The case matching degree is calculated based on the overlap between the personnel's areas of expertise and the types of disputes.

[0010] Among them, in the step of matching the corresponding resource pool according to the dispute level label, and assigning cases based on the current workload of personnel and the case matching degree, wherein the case matching degree is calculated based on the overlap between the personnel's area of ​​expertise and the type of dispute: Calculate the case matching score and current load rate for each person in the resource pool; Cases are prioritized for those with the highest matching degree and whose number of cases under processing is between 60% and 80% of the rated number of cases under processing. If no one accepts the case, it will be pushed to the next person in order of matching degree from high to low.

[0011] Among the steps involved in synchronizing all case data to the mediators' workstations and carrying out case mediation and handling: Automatically generate a summary of case elements and a list of disputed items, and push them to the mediator's workstation simultaneously; Simultaneously push out mediation reference standards and handling norms for cases of the same type of dispute.

[0012] Among these steps is the dynamic adjustment of the dispute level and corresponding mediation resource allocation based on changes in the dispute during the case handling process: Real-time monitoring of three types of parameters during the case handling process: increase or decrease of disputed items, change in the amount in dispute, and changes in newly added entities; When the total dispute complexity score corresponding to the parameter change triggers the hierarchical scoring threshold, the dispute hierarchical label is automatically adjusted, and the corresponding mediation resource pool is matched synchronously to complete the resource upgrade or downgrade scheduling.

[0013] Specifically, in the step of automatically adjusting the dispute level label and synchronously matching the corresponding level's mediation resource pool when the total dispute complexity score corresponding to the parameter change triggers the level score threshold, and completing the resource upgrade or downgrade scheduling: After the hierarchical adjustment, a case handover list is automatically generated, and the confirmed mediation matters are synchronized to the new personnel in charge. When a level is upgraded, experts in the corresponding higher-level resource pool are automatically added; when a level is downgraded, the case is transferred to the corresponding lower-level resource pool.

[0014] This invention also provides a hierarchical and intelligent mediation and handling system for construction-related commercial disputes, including a data acquisition and extraction module, a complexity classification module, a resource matching and scheduling module, a case synchronization module, and a dynamic adjustment module, wherein: The data acquisition and extraction module is used to collect basic information and evidence materials of construction-related commercial disputes to be handled, and to extract multi-dimensional dispute characteristic parameters. The complexity classification module is used to call a preset dispute complexity quantification scoring model, combine dispute feature parameters to perform weighted scoring, and generate corresponding dispute level labels. The resource matching and scheduling module is used to match the corresponding level of the mediation resource pool according to the dispute level label, and to schedule qualified mediators from the resource pool to take on the cases. The case synchronization module is used to synchronize all case data to the mediator's workstation for case mediation and handling. The dynamic adjustment module is used to dynamically adjust the dispute level and corresponding mediation resource allocation according to the changes in the dispute during the case handling process.

[0015] This invention discloses a hierarchical and intelligent mediation and handling system and method for construction-related commercial disputes. The system collects basic case information and evidence data of the construction-related commercial disputes to be handled, extracts multi-dimensional dispute characteristic parameters, calls a preset quantitative scoring model for dispute complexity, and performs weighted scoring based on the dispute characteristic parameters to generate corresponding dispute level labels. It matches the dispute level labels with corresponding level mediation resource pools and dispatches qualified mediators from the resource pools to handle cases. It synchronizes all case data to the mediators' workstations to conduct case mediation and handling. Based on changes in the dispute during case handling, it dynamically adjusts the dispute level and corresponding mediation resource allocation. By collecting multi-dimensional characteristic parameters of construction-related commercial disputes, and through quantitative scoring and grading to match corresponding mediation resources, the system can dynamically adjust the dispute level and resource allocation. Therefore, by collecting multi-dimensional dispute characteristic parameters and quantitatively scoring and classifying them, a unified and reproducible standard for determining dispute levels can be established. This objectively distinguishes the complexity of different construction disputes, replacing the subjective manual grading model and ensuring uniformity of level determination standards and traceability of results. By matching the dispute level with the corresponding level of mediation resource pool and dispatching suitable personnel, precise matching of personnel and cases can be achieved. This ensures that disputes of different complexities are matched with mediators of appropriate professional qualifications, fundamentally solving the problem of mismatch between mediation resources and dispute complexity. This avoids the ineffective use of high-quality mediation resources for simple cases and ensures the professionalism and party acceptance of mediation in complex disputes, thus optimizing the overall allocation efficiency and utilization rate of mediation resources. Through dynamic adjustment of dispute levels and mediation resources during the handling process, the system can adapt to the dynamic changes in dispute complexity during mediation, promptly upgrading or downgrading resources and ensuring resource adaptability throughout the entire case handling cycle, further improving the overall efficiency of dispute handling and the success rate of mediation. Attached Figure Description

[0016] To more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention or the prior art, the drawings used in the description of the embodiments or the prior art will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, the drawings described below are only some embodiments of the present invention. For those skilled in the art, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative effort.

[0017] Figure 1 This is a flowchart illustrating the steps of the hierarchical and intelligent mediation and handling method for construction-related commercial disputes of the present invention.

[0018] Figure 2 This is a flowchart of steps S100 of the present invention.

[0019] Figure 3 This is a flowchart of steps S200 of the present invention.

[0020] Figure 4 This is a flowchart of steps S203 of the present invention.

[0021] Figure 5 This is a flowchart of steps S300 of the present invention.

[0022] Figure 6 This is a flowchart of steps S302 of the present invention.

[0023] Figure 7 This is a flowchart of steps S400 of the present invention.

[0024] Figure 8 This is a flowchart of steps S500 of the present invention.

[0025] Figure 9 This is a flowchart of steps S502 of the present invention.

[0026] Figure 10 This is a schematic diagram of the structural principle of the hierarchical and intelligent mediation and handling system for construction-related commercial disputes of the present invention.

[0027] 601 - Data Acquisition and Extraction Module, 602 - Complexity Classification Module, 603 - Resource Matching and Scheduling Module, 604 - Case Synchronization Module, 605 - Dynamic Adjustment Module. Detailed Implementation

[0028] Exemplary embodiments will now be described in detail, examples of which are illustrated in the accompanying drawings. When the following description relates to the drawings, unless otherwise indicated, the same numbers in different drawings represent the same or similar elements. The embodiments described in the following exemplary embodiments do not represent all embodiments consistent with this application.

[0029] The terminology used in this application is for the purpose of describing particular embodiments only and is not intended to be limiting of the application. The singular forms “a,” “the,” and “the” used in this application and the appended claims are also intended to include the plural forms unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. It should also be understood that the term “and / or” as used herein refers to and includes any or all possible combinations of one or more of the associated listed items.

[0030] It should be understood that although the terms first, second, third, etc., may be used in this application to describe various information, such information should not be limited to these terms. These terms are only used to distinguish information of the same type from one another. For example, without departing from the scope of this application, first information may also be referred to as second information, and similarly, second information may also be referred to as first information. Depending on the context, the word "if" as used herein may be interpreted as "when," "when," or "in response to determination."

[0031] Please see Figures 1-9 This invention provides a hierarchical and intelligent mediation and resolution method for commercial disputes involving construction projects, comprising the following steps: S100: Collect basic information and evidence data of construction-related commercial disputes pending resolution, and extract multi-dimensional dispute characteristic parameters; In this implementation, basic case information and evidence data of construction-related commercial disputes to be handled are collected, and multi-dimensional dispute characteristic parameters are extracted. Specifically, this includes: S101: Collect four core dispute characteristic parameters: amount in dispute, number of participating parties, number of disputed items, and completeness of evidence; S102: Identify elements in unstructured evidence materials, extract supporting information for the corresponding disputed matters, and associate it with the corresponding feature dimensions.

[0032] Among them, the basic information of pending construction-related commercial disputes is collected through structured forms on the online acceptance portal, and evidence data is received through the electronic material upload channel; the core dispute characteristic parameters of the four categories are extracted according to the following rules: the amount in dispute is directly extracted from the amount claimed in the lawsuit; the number of participating parties includes all parties involved in the dispute, including the contracting party, the subcontractor, and the contractor; the number of disputed items is counted as independent disputed items; the completeness of evidence is calculated based on the coverage ratio of the disputed items corresponding to the submitted evidence; unstructured evidence materials are processed using a trained construction document element recognition model to automatically extract five key fields from each piece of evidence: issuing entity, issuance time, disputed item, amount involved, and signature status; the extracted supporting information is associated with the corresponding dispute characteristic dimension according to the disputed item category to generate a standardized dispute characteristic parameter dataset; In addition, basic information for pending construction-related commercial disputes is collected through structured forms on the online acceptance platform, while evidence data is received through the electronic material upload channel. The core dispute characteristic parameters described in the four categories are extracted according to the following rules: the case amount is directly extracted from the claim amount; the number of participating parties includes all parties involved in the dispute, including the contracting party, contractor, and subcontractor; the number of disputed items is counted as independent disputed matters; and the completeness of evidence is calculated based on the coverage ratio of the submitted evidence corresponding to the disputed items. During the calculation, evidence is divided into two categories: core evidence and auxiliary evidence. Contracts, engineering visas, settlement statements, and acceptance records are considered core evidence, with a single weight of 0.7; correspondence, communication records, and application forms are considered auxiliary evidence, with a single weight of 0.3. The cumulative weight of evidence corresponding to a single disputed item reaches 0.7. If the number of items is 10 or above, it is determined that the disputed item has been covered. The completeness of evidence is the ratio of the number of covered disputed items to the total number of disputed items. Unstructured evidence materials are processed using a trained construction document element recognition model. This model uses non-standard business documents such as engineering visa forms, work contact forms, progress reports, settlement statements, and acceptance records in the construction field, which number in the tens of thousands or above, as training samples. After manual annotation of five key fields, namely the issuing entity, the date of issuance, the disputed item, the amount involved, and the signature status, the model has been fine-tuned. The overall recognition accuracy of the model fields is no less than 95%, and the recognition accuracy of the core fields of the amount involved and the issuing entity is no less than 98%. It can automatically extract the five key fields from each piece of evidence. The extracted supporting information is associated with the corresponding dispute feature dimension according to the disputed item category to generate a standardized dispute feature parameter dataset.

[0033] S200: Calls the preset dispute complexity quantification scoring model, combines dispute feature parameters to perform weighted scoring, and generates corresponding dispute level labels; In this implementation, a preset dispute complexity quantification scoring model is invoked, and a weighted score is applied based on dispute feature parameters to generate a corresponding dispute level label. Specifically, this includes: S201: The dispute complexity quantification scoring model incorporates weight coefficients corresponding to the four types of feature parameters; S202: After normalizing various feature parameters, multiply them by the corresponding weight coefficients and sum them to obtain the total dispute complexity score; S203: Based on the total score range, disputes are divided into four levels: simple, ordinary, complex, and serious, and corresponding dispute level labels are generated.

[0034] S2031: Set four-level scoring threshold ranges, corresponding to four levels of disputes respectively; S2032: When the scoring result is within the critical range of 5% above or below the level scoring threshold, it will be automatically upgraded by one level for preliminary classification.

[0035] The dispute complexity quantification scoring model incorporates weight coefficients for four types of feature parameters: 0.4 for the amount in dispute, 0.3 for the number of disputed items, 0.15 for the number of participating parties, and 0.15 for the completeness of evidence. The sum of all weight coefficients is 1. Each feature parameter is first linearly normalized according to a preset range, mapping its physical value to a standard value range of 0 to 1. The normalization calculation is the ratio of the actual parameter value to the maximum value within the parameter's range. The normalized parameter values ​​are multiplied by their corresponding weight coefficients and then summed to obtain the total dispute complexity score within the 0 to 1 range. Four preset scoring threshold ranges are defined: 0 to 0.25 corresponds to the simple level, 0.25 to 0.5 to the ordinary level, 0.5 to 0.75 to the complex level, and 0.75 to 1 to the severe level. When the total score falls within a 5% threshold range for each level (e.g., a score of 0.24 is 5% of the upper limit of 0.25 for the simple level), the score is considered complete. Within the critical range, the level is automatically raised by one level to perform a preliminary classification as ordinary, generating a corresponding dispute level label.

[0036] S300: Match the corresponding level of mediation resource pool based on the dispute level label, and dispatch qualified mediators from the resource pool to take on the case; In this implementation, a mediation resource pool corresponding to the dispute level is matched based on the dispute level label, and mediators with the appropriate qualifications are dispatched from the resource pool to take on cases. Specifically, this includes: S301: A four-level mediation resource pool is preset, corresponding to four levels of disputes. The personnel in each resource pool are marked with their corresponding professional qualifications, areas of expertise, case threshold for acceptance, and threshold for the number of cases in progress. S302: Match the corresponding resource pool according to the dispute level tag, and assign cases based on the current workload of personnel and the case matching degree. The case matching degree is calculated based on the overlap between the personnel's area of ​​expertise and the type of dispute.

[0037] S3021: Calculate the case matching degree and current load rate of each person in the resource pool; S3022: Prioritize pushing cases to personnel with the highest matching degree and whose number of cases under handling is between 60% and 80% of the rated number of cases under handling. If no one accepts the case, it will be pushed to the next person in order of matching degree from high to low.

[0038] The mediation resource pools at Level 4 are pre-established according to the professional qualification levels of personnel, corresponding to four dispute levels. Personnel information within each resource pool is labeled with their corresponding professional qualifications, areas of expertise, case thresholds for accepting cases with a specific amount in dispute, and a threshold for the number of cases currently being handled. For the simplified level, the threshold for accepting cases with a specific amount in dispute is below 500,000 yuan, and the threshold for the number of cases currently being handled is 20. For the ordinary level, it is between 500,000 and 5 million yuan, and the threshold is 15 cases. For the complex level, it is between 5 million and 20 million yuan, and the threshold is 8 cases. For the major level, it is above 20 million yuan, and the threshold is 5 cases. The case matching degree is calculated as the proportion of overlap between the personnel's areas of expertise and the types of disputes to the total number of disputes. When assigning cases, priority is given to personnel with the highest matching degree and whose number of cases currently being handled is between 60% and 80% of the total number of cases currently being handled. If the first personnel does not respond within 15 minutes, the case is then passed to the next personnel in descending order of matching degree.

[0039] S400: Synchronizes all case data to the mediator's workstation to carry out case mediation and handling; In this implementation, all case data is synchronized to the mediator's workstation to facilitate case mediation and handling. Specifically, this includes: S401: Automatically generates a summary of case elements and a list of disputed items, and pushes them synchronously to the mediator's workstation; S402: Simultaneously push out mediation reference standards and handling norms for cases of the same type of dispute.

[0040] The case element summary is automatically generated by extracting four core information categories from the dispute characteristic parameters: case number, party name, amount in dispute, and core disputed items. The disputed item list is generated by classifying and listing the extracted independent disputed items. The case element summary and the disputed item list are simultaneously pushed to the homepage of the corresponding mediator's work terminal. Mediation reference standards and handling norms for cases of the same dispute type are matched and retrieved from the preset local construction dispute adjudication case database. Common mediation amount ranges, dispute handling rules, and mediation time limit requirements for similar cases in the same region in the past year are screened and pushed to the mediator's work terminal simultaneously with the case data. In addition, the case element summary is automatically generated by extracting four core information categories from the dispute characteristic parameters: case number, party names, amount in dispute, and core disputed items. The disputed item list is generated by classifying and listing the extracted independent disputed items one by one. The case element summary and the disputed item list are simultaneously pushed to the homepage of the corresponding mediator's work terminal. Mediation reference standards and handling norms for cases of the same dispute type are matched and retrieved from the preset local construction dispute judgment case database. The local construction dispute judgment case database adopts a monthly update mechanism, and the latest effective construction dispute judgment documents and mediation settlement documents of local courts are synchronized every month. The minimum number of valid reference cases under each dispute type is set to 30. When the number of cases corresponding to a single dispute is insufficient, the search scope is automatically expanded to cases of the same region or the same type in the same province in the past three years to supplement the search. The common mediation amount range, dispute handling rules and mediation time limit requirements of the matched cases are filtered and pushed to the mediator's work terminal simultaneously with the case data.

[0041] S500: Dynamically adjust the dispute level and corresponding mediation resource allocation based on changes in the dispute during the case handling process.

[0042] In this implementation, the dispute level and corresponding mediation resource allocation are dynamically adjusted based on changes in the dispute during case handling. Specifically, this includes: S501: Real-time monitoring of changes in three types of parameters during the case handling process: increase or decrease of disputed items, change in the amount in dispute, and addition of new parties; S502: When the total dispute complexity score corresponding to the parameter change triggers the hierarchical scoring threshold, the dispute hierarchical label is automatically adjusted, and the corresponding mediation resource pool is matched synchronously to complete the resource upgrade or downgrade scheduling.

[0043] S5021: After the hierarchical adjustment, a case handover list is automatically generated, and the confirmed mediation matters are synchronized to the new person in charge; S5022: When upgrading a level, automatically add experts from the corresponding higher-level resource pool; when downgrading a level, transfer cases to the corresponding lower-level resource pool.

[0044] During case handling, the system monitors changes in three parameters every 30 minutes: the number of disputed items, the amount in dispute, and the addition of new participants. When parameters change, the total dispute complexity score is recalculated. When the recalculated total score triggers a level-based scoring threshold, the dispute level label is automatically adjusted. After level adjustment, the corresponding level's mediation resource pool is matched synchronously to upgrade or downgrade mediation resources. A case handover list is automatically generated after level adjustment, containing three categories: confirmed mediation matters, fixed undisputed facts, and submitted evidence, and is simultaneously pushed to the new personnel's workstation. When the level is upgraded, experts with advanced construction engineering qualifications in the corresponding higher-level resource pool are automatically added to participate in case handling. When the level is downgraded, the case is transferred to mediators in the corresponding lower-level resource pool.

[0045] Corresponding to the aforementioned embodiments of the hierarchical and intelligent mediation and handling method for construction-related commercial disputes, this application also provides embodiments of a hierarchical and intelligent mediation and handling system for construction-related commercial disputes.

[0046] Figure 10 This is a block diagram illustrating a hierarchical and intelligent mediation and handling system for construction-related commercial disputes, according to an exemplary embodiment. (Refer to...) Figure 10 The system may include a data acquisition and extraction module 601, a complexity classification module 602, a resource matching and scheduling module 603, a case synchronization module 604, and a dynamic adjustment module 605, wherein: The data acquisition and extraction module 601 is used to collect basic information and evidence materials of construction-related commercial disputes to be handled, and extract multi-dimensional dispute characteristic parameters. The complexity classification module 602 is used to call a preset dispute complexity quantification scoring model, combine dispute feature parameters to perform weighted scoring, and generate corresponding dispute level labels. The resource matching and scheduling module 603 is used to match the corresponding level of the mediation resource pool according to the dispute level label, and to schedule qualified mediators from the resource pool to take on the case. The case synchronization module 604 is used to synchronize all case data to the mediator's work terminal to carry out case mediation and handling. The dynamic adjustment module 605 is used to dynamically adjust the dispute level and corresponding mediation resource allocation according to the changes in the dispute during the case handling process.

[0047] In this embodiment, the data acquisition and extraction module 601 is used to collect basic case information and evidence data of construction-related commercial disputes to be handled, and extract multi-dimensional dispute feature parameters; the complexity classification module 602 is used to call a preset dispute complexity quantification scoring model, combine the dispute feature parameters to perform weighted scoring, and generate corresponding dispute level labels; the resource matching and scheduling module 603 is used to match the corresponding level of mediation resource pool according to the dispute level label, and schedule qualified mediators from the resource pool to take on the case; the case synchronization module 604 is used to synchronize all case data to the mediator's workstation to carry out case mediation and handling; the dynamic adjustment module 605 is used to dynamically adjust the dispute level and corresponding mediation resource configuration according to the changes in the dispute during the case handling process.

[0048] Regarding the system in the above embodiments, the specific ways in which each module performs operations have been described in detail in the embodiments related to the method, and will not be elaborated here.

[0049] For the system embodiments, since they basically correspond to the method embodiments, the relevant parts can be referred to in the description of the method embodiments. The device embodiments described above are merely illustrative. The units described as separate components may or may not be physically separate, and the components shown as units may or may not be physical units, that is, they may be located in one place or distributed across multiple network units. Some or all of the modules can be selected to achieve the purpose of this application according to actual needs. Those skilled in the art can understand and implement this without creative effort.

[0050] Other embodiments of this application will readily occur to those skilled in the art upon consideration of the specification and practice of the disclosure herein. This application is intended to cover any variations, uses, or adaptations of this application that follow the general principles of this application and include common knowledge or customary techniques in the art not disclosed herein.

[0051] It should be understood that this application is not limited to the precise structure described above and shown in the accompanying drawings, and various modifications and changes can be made without departing from its scope.

Claims

1. A hierarchical and intelligent mediation and handling method for commercial disputes involving construction projects, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: Collect basic information and evidence data of pending construction-related commercial disputes, and extract multi-dimensional dispute characteristic parameters; The system calls a pre-defined quantitative scoring model for dispute complexity, combines dispute feature parameters to perform weighted scoring, and generates corresponding dispute level labels. Based on the dispute level label, the corresponding mediation resource pool is matched, and qualified mediators are dispatched from the resource pool to take on the cases. All case data is synchronized to the mediators' workstations to facilitate case mediation and handling. The dispute level and corresponding mediation resource allocation will be dynamically adjusted based on the changes in the dispute during the case handling process.

2. The hierarchical and intelligent mediation and handling method for construction-related commercial disputes as described in claim 1, characterized in that, In the steps of collecting basic information and evidence data of pending construction-related commercial disputes and extracting multi-dimensional dispute characteristic parameters: Collect four core dispute characteristic parameters: the amount in dispute, the number of participating parties, the number of disputed items, and the completeness of evidence. Unstructured evidence materials are identified by element identification, and supporting information for the corresponding disputed matters is extracted and associated with the corresponding feature dimensions.

3. The hierarchical and intelligent mediation and handling method for construction-related commercial disputes as described in claim 2, characterized in that, In the step of calling the preset dispute complexity quantification scoring model, combining dispute feature parameters to perform weighted scoring, and generating corresponding dispute level labels: The dispute complexity quantification scoring model incorporates weight coefficients corresponding to the four types of feature parameters. After normalizing various feature parameters, multiply them by their corresponding weight coefficients and sum them to obtain the total dispute complexity score; Disputes are categorized into four levels—simple, ordinary, complex, and serious—based on the total score range, and corresponding dispute level labels are generated.

4. The hierarchical and intelligent mediation and handling method for construction-related commercial disputes as described in claim 3, characterized in that, In the step of classifying disputes into four levels—simple, ordinary, complex, and serious—based on the total score range and generating corresponding dispute level labels: Four scoring threshold ranges are set, corresponding to four levels of disputes; When the rating result falls within the critical range of 5% above or below the tier rating threshold, it will be automatically upgraded by one level for preliminary tiering.

5. The hierarchical and intelligent mediation and handling method for construction-related commercial disputes as described in claim 1, characterized in that, In the process of matching the dispute level label with the corresponding level of the mediation resource pool, and then dispatching qualified mediators from the resource pool to take on cases: A four-level mediation resource pool is pre-set, corresponding to four levels of disputes. Personnel in each resource pool are marked with their corresponding professional qualifications, areas of expertise, threshold for accepting cases with a certain amount in dispute, and threshold for the number of cases currently being handled. The system matches the corresponding resource pool based on the dispute level tag, and assigns cases based on the current workload of personnel and the case matching degree. The case matching degree is calculated based on the overlap between the personnel's areas of expertise and the types of disputes.

6. The hierarchical and intelligent mediation and handling method for construction-related commercial disputes as described in claim 5, characterized in that, In the step of matching the corresponding resource pool based on the dispute level label, and assigning cases based on the current workload of personnel and the case matching degree, wherein the case matching degree is calculated based on the overlap between the personnel's areas of expertise and the type of dispute: Calculate the case matching score and current load rate for each person in the resource pool; Cases are prioritized for those with the highest matching degree and whose number of cases under processing is between 60% and 80% of the rated number of cases under processing. If no one accepts the case, it will be passed on to the next person in order of matching degree from high to low.

7. The hierarchical and intelligent mediation and handling method for construction-related commercial disputes as described in claim 1, characterized in that, In the process of synchronizing all case data to the mediators' workstations and carrying out case mediation and handling: Automatically generate a summary of case elements and a list of disputed items, and push them to the mediator's workstation simultaneously; Simultaneously push out mediation reference standards and handling norms for cases of the same type of dispute.

8. The hierarchical and intelligent mediation and handling method for construction-related commercial disputes as described in claim 1, characterized in that, In the step of dynamically adjusting the dispute level and corresponding mediation resource allocation based on changes in the dispute during case handling: Real-time monitoring of three types of parameters during the case handling process: increase or decrease of disputed items, change in the amount in dispute, and changes in newly added entities; When the total dispute complexity score corresponding to the parameter change triggers the hierarchical scoring threshold, the dispute hierarchical label is automatically adjusted, and the corresponding mediation resource pool is matched synchronously to complete the resource upgrade or downgrade scheduling.

9. The hierarchical and intelligent mediation and handling method for construction-related commercial disputes as described in claim 8, characterized in that, When a change in parameters triggers a tiered scoring threshold in the total dispute complexity score, the dispute tier label is automatically adjusted, and the corresponding mediation resource pool is matched synchronously to complete the resource upgrade or downgrade scheduling process. After the hierarchical adjustment, a case handover list is automatically generated, and the confirmed mediation matters are synchronized to the new personnel in charge. When a level is upgraded, experts in the corresponding higher-level resource pool are automatically added; when a level is downgraded, the case is transferred to the corresponding lower-level resource pool.

10. A hierarchical and intelligent mediation and handling system for construction-related commercial disputes, employing the hierarchical and intelligent mediation and handling method for construction-related commercial disputes as described in claim 1, characterized in that... It includes a data acquisition and extraction module, a complexity classification module, a resource matching and scheduling module, a case synchronization module, and a dynamic adjustment module, among which: The data acquisition and extraction module is used to collect basic information and evidence materials of construction-related commercial disputes to be handled, and to extract multi-dimensional dispute characteristic parameters. The complexity classification module is used to call a preset dispute complexity quantification scoring model, combine dispute feature parameters to perform weighted scoring, and generate corresponding dispute level labels. The resource matching and scheduling module is used to match the corresponding level of the mediation resource pool according to the dispute level label, and to schedule qualified mediators from the resource pool to take on the cases. The case synchronization module is used to synchronize all case data to the mediator's workstation for case mediation and handling. The dynamic adjustment module is used to dynamically adjust the dispute level and corresponding mediation resource allocation according to the changes in the dispute during the case handling process.

Images