sustainability

Article
Developing an Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System for
Performance Evaluation of Pavement Construction Projects
Okan Sirin * , Murat Gunduz and Hazem M. Al Nawaiseh

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Qatar University, Doha P.O. Box 2713, Qatar;
[email protected] (M.G.); [email protected] (H.M.A.N.)
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: This study employs an adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) to identify critical
success factors (CSFs) crucial for the success of pavement construction projects. Challenges such as
construction cost delays, budget overruns, disputes, claims, and productivity losses underscore the
need for effective project management in pavement projects. In contemporary construction manage-
ment, additional performance criteria play a vital role in influencing the performance and success of
pavement projects during construction operations. This research contributes to the existing body of
knowledge by comprehensively identifying a multidimensional set of critical success performance
factors that impact pavement and utility project management. A rigorous literature review and con-
sultations with pavement experts identified sixty CSFs, categorized into seven groups. The relative
importance of each element and group is determined through the input of 287 pavement construction
specialists who participated in an online questionnaire. Subsequently, the collected data undergo
thorough checks for normality, dependability, and independence before undergoing analysis using
the relative importance index (RII). An ANFIS is developed to quantitatively model critical success
factors and assess the implementation performance of construction operations management (COM)
in the construction industry, considering aspects such as clustering input/output datasets, fuzziness
degree, and optimizing five Gaussian membership functions. The study confirms the significance of
three primary CSFs (financial, bureaucratic, and governmental) and communication-related variables
through a qualitative structural and behavioral validation process, specifically k-fold cross-validation.
Citation: Sirin, O.; Gunduz, M.; Al
The outcomes of this research hold practical implications for the management and assessment of
Nawaiseh, H.M. Developing an
overall performance indices in pavement construction projects. The ANFIS model, validated through
Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference
robust testing methodologies, provides a valuable tool for industry professionals seeking to enhance
System for Performance Evaluation of
Pavement Construction Projects.
the success and efficiency of pavement construction endeavors.
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3771. https://
doi.org/10.3390/su16093771 Keywords: adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system; construction project management; pavement
construction; critical success factors
Academic Editor: Marinella Silvana
Giunta

Received: 19 November 2023

Revised: 14 January 2024 1. Introduction
Accepted: 16 January 2024 In this study, we explore the significant growth and management of infrastructure
Published: 30 April 2024 and public utility projects globally, mainly focusing on logistics, transportation, and
highways [1,2]. The increased collaboration among countries in specific domains and
sustainability concerns has driven this rapid growth [3]. Partial ownership and shares
are granted in public transportation systems and logistics routes to manage these semi-
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors.
governmental enterprises.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
Identifying critical success factors (CSFs) for such initiatives is crucial, and our se-
distributed under the terms and
lection is based on findings from various studies recognizing similar criteria in related
conditions of the Creative Commons
domains. While operational and logistics elements influence project performance, our
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// comprehensive analysis reveals a gap in the attention given to pavement construction
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ within CSF analysis [4]. Although CSFs have been extensively studied in general civil
4.0/).

Sustainability 2024, 16, 3771. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16093771 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2024, 16, 3771 2 of 24

projects, including pavements, less attention has been paid to the specific challenges of
pavement construction.
Recognizing this gap, various authors have emphasized the importance of CSF analysis
in pavement construction management [5,6]. CSFs play a vital role in understanding project
success, measuring efficiency and effectiveness [4], and aligning with success-oriented
approaches such as stakeholder returns [7] and sustainability [5,8,9]. However, the need
arises to develop CSFs specifically tailored for pavement construction, considering the
complexities and stages involved.
To address this need, we introduce the concept of pavement construction project
performance (PCPP) factors. These factors are identified through a comprehensive liter-
ature review, building upon existing CSF literature and enhancing it within the context
of pavement construction. The terminology shift to PCPP allows us to implement an
adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) framework, considering intricate internal
linkages between factors across complex tasks. Moreover, this approach facilitates input
from numerous stakeholders at different project stages [10].
To gather insights for developing PCPP factors, we conducted an online questionnaire,
receiving responses from 287 professionals across various sectors in both the public and
private domains. This diverse input enhances the robustness and applicability of the PCPP
framework. In the subsequent sections, we delve into the details of our methodology, the
identified PCPP factors, and the implementation of the ANFIS model, offering a compre-
hensive exploration of the critical aspects of pavement construction project management.

2. Literature Review
2.1. Critical Success Factors in Pavement Construction
The CSF literature has traditionally focused on general road construction; however,
it is necessary to study CSFs from the perspective of pavement construction [11]. Several
authors have identified CSFs from the stakeholders’ viewpoint and measured their success
based on the financial returns and success of stakeholders [4]. Mok et al. [12] supplemented
the theory. However, popular studies by Pinto and Slevin [7], Lima et al. [9], and Goel
et al. [8] have placed a specific focus on sustainability, efficiency, time, and cost. Recently,
customer satisfaction has become a key focus area [13–15]. Moreover, it places specific
emphasis on external factors, including financial factors that affect a project’s success. The
following paragraphs provide detailed perspectives on CSFs in pavement construction and
different schools of thought.
1. Stakeholder management and communication in pavement construction.
Pavement construction projects are complex endeavors that involve multiple stake-
holders, intricate processes, and dynamic challenges. The effective management of these
projects requires a keen focus on CSFs. Stakeholder management is a fundamental aspect
of pavement construction. Engaging in and garnering support from clients, contractors,
designers, subcontractors, and the workforce significantly affects project success [16]. Chal-
lenges in stakeholder management, such as insufficient engagement and unclear objectives,
underscore the importance of addressing stakeholder concerns and fostering effective com-
munication throughout the project lifecycle [17]. Mega-construction projects pose unique
challenges in stakeholder management, emphasizing the need for clear objectives and
collaboration for successful project completion [18]. This perspective on CSF is primarily
based on effective stakeholder management and communication.
2. Sustainable practices in pavement construction.
Another growing perspective on project success associated with pavement construc-
tion involves sustainable practices. With increasing emphasis on sustainability in the global
construction industry, pavement projects are no exception. Adopting circular economy
principles, as advocated by Koc et al. [19], offers opportunities for sustainable pavement
construction. Koc et al. [19] also stated that adopting such methods ensures better project
success because sustainable practices consider the project’s entire lifecycle from inception
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3771 3 of 24

to delivery. Integrating sustainable approaches, such as recycling materials and minimizing

waste, not only contributes to environmental preservation but also yields potential cost
savings. However, context-specific approaches are essential when considering the unique
characteristics of local environments and their constraints [19]. Embracing sustainable
practices in pavement construction fosters environmental responsibility and enhances
project outcomes.
3. Value management techniques for pavement construction.
Implementing value management (VM) principles in pavement construction projects is
critical for their success, particularly in developing countries [20]. The effectiveness of VM
is influenced by factors such as client support and the proficiency of the VM facilitator [20].
Identifying and implementing CSFs in VM leads to more efficient construction projects
and optimizes value while minimizing costs and waste. The unique approach adopted
through VM emphasizes understanding the direct and indirect risks that can affect a project
at any stage. Because VM focuses more on the actual outputs against clearly defined key
performance indicators (KPIs), this method is particularly useful to define what “success”
means explicitly to a running pavement project and how far or close the project execution,
project management, and contractor teams are from achieving it.
4. Organization-based factor rankings in pavement construction.
Differentiating critical success factors based on the organizational background of
project participants is important in pavement construction projects [21]. Factors such as
schedule adherence, budget management, and quality performance significantly influence
overall project success [21]. Understanding organization-based rankings helps to tailor
strategies for improved project outcomes by considering the diverse contexts in which
pavement construction projects operate.
Embracing these factors will improve project outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and envi-
ronmental sustainability in dynamic pavement construction landscapes. Understanding
and implementing CSFs can pave the way for more resilient and successful projects. Future
research should continue to evaluate CSFs in the context of emerging technologies and
evolving construction practices to enhance project success in the pavement construction
industry. Because the objective of this study was to further develop CSFs into actionable
and quantifiable measures (PCPP), it adopted the definition of CSFs in pavement construc-
tion, as success can be directly or indirectly defined by project management, where good
practices and effective ways of execution are developed and established in a non-linear
way across all stages of the project lifecycle. Based on this approach, the literature was used
to define PCPP using 60 factors.

2.2. Development of PCPP

Meeting stakeholder objectives is crucial when assessing the success and efficiency of
a construction project. Several scholarly attempts have been made to address performance
management and project success. The following sections provide a viable definition of
performance management within the context of this study and explain the rationale behind
selecting and utilizing PCPP across the seven classifications. The goal of performance man-
agement in construction project management is to assess and evaluate a project’s efficiency
and success [4]. To this end, other viewpoints and angles were presented. Mok et al. [12]
inferred that stakeholders are crucial for determining the components and measurable vari-
ables that may assist in assessing the success of a construction project from the standpoint
of stakeholder objectives and attainment.
Additionally, Pinto and Slevin [7] considered the time, cost, and execution of several
enabling tasks. Recently, there has been a shift toward a more sustainable and integrated
approach to civil projects [8,9]. As stated previously, studies on pavement project manage-
ment are scarce. Circling back to the adapted definition of CSF, Cooke-Davis [22] defines
PCPPs as important success factors, either direct or indirect, that are affected by project
management and affect project success. They expanded the concept of crucial success
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3771 4 of 24

elements by arguing that identifying such aspects throughout a project lifecycle is a smart
practice. Based on this definition, the classifications adopted for this research were as
follows: (1) operations management, (2) site operations, (3) logistical factors, (4) human-
related factors, (5) bureaucracy and governance, (6) finances, and (7) communication. The
detailed representations are presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Critical success factors developed for PCPP.

Classification 1: Operation Management-Related Factors Classification 2: Contractor/Site-Related Factors

Establishment of a material supply management system. Experience of the contractor.
Employment of skilled individuals to operate tools and
Establishment of a quality management system.
machinery.
Establishment of a management system to mitigate surface Timely review of construction material prior to use (submittal
topography problems. review, samples).
Establishment of a change management tool to mitigate the
Examination of sub-contractors’ qualifications.
impact of changes.
Establishment of a health and safety management system on the Periodic review and control of operational issues at site level
construction site. between the management and operations team.
Establishment of a project management plan (PMP). Assessment of site geological conditions.
Establishment of a site security system. Review of existing utility maps.
Establishment of a schedule management system. Inspecting the site before paving operation.
Establishment of a weather-protection system for construction
Employing a sub-contractor management system.
materials.
Implementation of environmental management system. Establishment of a site security system.
Setting up a conflict and claims resolution management system. Readiness of contractor for urgent works imposed by the client.
Periodic review and management of key performance indicators
Establishment of a risk management system.
(KPIs) by the contractor.
Classification 3: Logistics-Related Factors Classification 4: Human-Related Factors
Establishment of a transportation system for delivery of raw
Establishment of a plan for short staffing of manpower.
materials.
Managing employee demotivation because of frequent
Establishment of a logistics management system.
relocations.
Establishment of a transport system for site staff. Training programs (i.e., safety, technical, etc.) for workforce.
Establishment of an employee empowerment management
Enterprise resource planning software for logistic operations.
system.
Establishment of a resources management system for
Measurement of employee satisfaction during project lifetime.
interruptions during asphalt paving operations.
Availability of sufficient asphalt feeders. Welfare of workforce.
Establishment of a maintenance management system for
Monitoring the productivity of employees on a regular basis.
machinery and tools.
Availability of incentive mechanisms for its employees by the
Classification 5: Bureaucracy- and Governance-Related Factors
contractor.
Staff compliance with relevant laws and regulations Timely payment to its staff and subcontractors by the contractor.
Timely payment to the contractor by the client Observance of the code of ethics by employees.
Effective government regulations easing import/export Classification 6: Financial Factors
Availability of a system to manage finances (financial
Timely acquisition of necessary permits by the contractor.
management systems).
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3771 5 of 24

Table 1. Cont.

Establishment of a control mechanism to reduce public

Expenditure management and protocols on spending.
interference.
Establishment of a traffic management plan off-site. Certification of credit payments in a timely manner.
Continually assessing stakeholder satisfaction throughout the Timely communication of the contractor’s payment time to the
project. employer.
Audit system to periodically assess contractors’ compensation
Capturing best practices and lessons learned.
for delayed payments.
Establishment of handing over and close-out procedures.
Classification 7: Communication-Related factors
Establishment of a communication system (employees,
stakeholders, sub-contractors, vendors, etc.).
Communication of the project management plan (PMP) to all
stakeholders.
Conducting regular progress meetings with the employer and
consultants.
Setting up a document management system.
Employment of information communication technology (ICT)
during project administration.
Timely communication of design issues to the client.

2.3. ANFIS Application in Engineering, Construction, and Management Research

Aydin and Kisi [23] suggested that the complexity of construction is generally gov-
erned by complex interactions owing to the varying nature of the external environment.
This presents two significant challenges when creating a model for construction: (1) multi-
dimensional interactions across various data/touch points and (2) elements of probabilistic
and non-probabilistic uncertainty [24]. Accurate predictions, often aided by artificial
intelligence (AI), are beneficial for the construction industry [25,26].
In recent decades, there has been a notable surge in the use of neuro-fuzzy method-
ologies in construction and management research [26]. The neuro-fuzzy approach has
recently been implemented in AI to resolve the vagueness of data and reach significant
conclusions [27,28]. Naji et al. [29] asserted that fuzzy approaches offer distinct advan-
tages over alternative decision-making provision approaches, such as the analytical order
and network methods. Specifically, the authors noted that the fuzzy approach excels in
establishing relationships while creating a foundation for decision-making and evaluation.
Pavement performance indicators, including the IRI, ESAL, SN, and AGE data, were pre-
dicted utilizing the ANFIS method by Terzi [6]. In the work of H. Ziari et al. [30], nine
variables influencing pavement condition were considered, and the accuracy of the group
method of data handling (GMDH) and the adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS)
models in forecasting pavement performance across short and long terms of a pavement
life cycle were analyzed.
Khalef and El-Adaway [31] asserted that the ANFIS technique’s clustering in a fuzzy
mechanism account for the uncertainty of opinions when rating an item, resulting in a more
reliable model even with limited and continuous datasets. Based on recent developments
in the ANFIS and its application in the construction industry to help overcome uncertainty,
this study applies this technique to propose and test a PCPP model. Addressing real-world
challenges often demands intelligent systems capable of exhibiting human-like expertise
in a particular domain, adjusting to evolving environments, and providing explicable
insights into their decision-making processes and actions. This paper aims to employ the
adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS). Expanding on this theme, Sadrossadat
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3771 6 of 24

et al. [32] explored the potential use of ANFIS for predicting the resilient modulus of flexible
pavement subgrade soils and obtained results that showed the method’s robustness.

2.4. Point of Departure

As the construction industry strives for seamless project delivery with tight schedules,
budgets, and quality constraints, understanding and harnessing the power of CSFs has
become imperative. This point of departure sets the context for this study, which aims to
explore and evaluate diverse perspectives surrounding CSFs in pavement construction.
Extensive research has revealed a wealth of information on CSFs, highlighting their
significance in project success across various construction domains. Stakeholder man-
agement has emerged as a fundamental aspect of effective engagement and support of
clients, contractors, designers, subcontractors, and the workforce. Sustainable practices
like circular economy principles have garnered attention because of their environmental
benefits and cost-saving potential. VM techniques and total quality management (TQM)
are critical for enhancing project success, streamlining processes, and optimizing quality
outcomes. Organization-based rankings further underscore the importance of tailoring
strategies based on the backgrounds of the project participants.
Despite the abundance of research on CSFs in construction, there is a shortage of
comprehensive studies focusing specifically on pavement construction management. This
study aims to bridge this gap by consolidating and analyzing the existing literature to
provide a thorough understanding of the key CSFs in pavement construction. By leveraging
fuzzy inference systems (FIS) and the Delphi method, this study aims to develop a robust
framework for evaluating and prioritizing CSFs in this specialized domain.
This study contributes to pavement construction management by presenting an em-
pirical model that aids practitioners in making informed decisions, mitigating risks, and
optimizing project outcomes. This study seeks to empower construction professionals to
enhance their management practices and improve the overall performance of pavement
construction projects by identifying and quantifying the critical factors.

3. Research Methodology
This study employed quantitative and fuzzy inference system modeling approaches
to achieve its research goals. The study aimed to quantify the significance of PCPP factors
identified through a comprehensive literature review. An online questionnaire was admin-
istered to a diverse group of international participants to capture perceptions that could be
generalized to a larger population. The questionnaire yielded substantial data that were
analyzed to derive meaningful insights.
The questionnaire used in this study consisted of three sections. The first section
provided an overview of the scope of the study, the second section presented information
on the practitioners’ backgrounds, and the third used a five-point Likert scale to rank
the significance of a particular PCPP factor. The data were analyzed to ascertain the
trustworthiness of the rankings and detect intergroup disparities among the practitioners.
Subsequently, the RIIs were computed for each factor. This technique, which uses ANFIS,
is frequently used to detect imprecise circumstances and biased data conveyed through
descriptive linguistics [29].
After completing the qualitative stage, which involved identifying pertinent factors,
the ANFIS implementation process required five distinct phases to construct the proposed
model. The ANFIS model was formulated by defining a fuzzy membership function linked
to the input variable. Subsequently, a fuzzy clustering (FC) technique was employed to
determine the most suitable number of fuzzy rules. The proposed ANFIS evaluation frame-
work was formulated using aggregation and defuzzification techniques. The subsequent
step involved developing eight ANFIS models categorized into two levels to predict the
efficacy of PCPP employment. ANFIS models, specifically ANFIS 1–7, were developed to
predict the PCPP primary factor groups at the initial level. Subsequently, ANFIS 8 received
the inputs from the outputs of the major group elements at the second level. In the final
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3771 7 of 24

stage, three validation techniques were used to assess the efficacy of the PCPP performance
Sustainability 2024, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW
model. 7 of 24
These methods include structural, behavioral, and k-fold cross-validation. Figure 1
depicts the process involved in the model development.

Figure 1.
Figure 1. Process approach for
Process approach for evolving
evolving the
the ANFIS–PCPP
ANFIS–PCPP assessment
assessment model.
model.

3.1. Questionnaire Development and Preparing Input Linguistic Variables

The survey
survey comprised
comprisedthree threesections.
sections.The The first
first section
section provided
provided an an overview
overview of
of the
the study. The second section of the survey collected basic demographic
study. The second section of the survey collected basic demographic data from the partic- data from the
participants. Section
ipants. Section three
three of the of the study
study pertainedpertained
to the to the significance
significance of the of
60 the
PCPP60 PCPP
metricsmetrics
while
while
delvingdelving into
into the the importance
importance of the of the seven
seven PCPP PCPP
areas. areas. To ensure
To ensure the validity
the validity of the of the
ques-
questions, 18 construction
tions, 18 construction experts
experts andand 3 university
3 university professorsreviewed
professors reviewedthe the questionnaire.
questionnaire.
Subsequently,
Subsequently,aapreliminary
preliminaryinvestigation
investigationwas wasconducted
conducted involving
involving managers
managers employed
employed in
the construction sector, and their input was considered to enhance the
in the construction sector, and their input was considered to enhance the questionnaire. questionnaire. An
improved
An improvedversion of the
version ofsurvey was subsequently
the survey was subsequently administered. The survey
administered. was completed
The survey was com-
by 287 participants who were asked to rate the significance of 60 PCPP
pleted by 287 participants who were asked to rate the significance of 60 PCPP factors factors and seven
and
factor
seven groups on a five-point
factor groups Likert scale.
on a five-point LikertThescale.
scaleThe
ranges were
scale fromwere
ranges 1 (notfrom
important)
1 (not to
im-5
(extremely
portant) to important),
5 (extremelywith intermediate
important), values of 2 (slightly
with intermediate important),
values of 2 (slightly3important),
(moderately3
important),
(moderatelyand 4 (very important).
important), and 4 (very important).
The feedback providedby
The feedback provided bythe
therespondents
respondentswas was thoroughly
thoroughly examined
examined to identify
to identify in-
instances of carelessness or outliers. This study evaluated negligent
stances of carelessness or outliers. This study evaluated negligent responses using responses using
a re-a
sponse pattern in which a respondent may consistently choose to respond similarly to a
sequence of items [33]. Outliers may indicate typical or divergent observations. This study
employed group ratings and standard deviations to quantify the careless responses re-
lated to average factor rankings. SPSS version 25 software was utilized for statistical
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3771 8 of 24

response pattern in which a respondent may consistently choose to respond similarly to

a sequence of items [33]. Outliers may indicate typical or divergent observations. This
study employed group ratings and standard deviations to quantify the careless responses
related to average factor rankings. SPSS version 25 software was utilized for statistical anal-
yses, encompassing the identification of multivariate outliers through regression analyses.
According to Hair et al. [33], Mahala–Nobis distances denote the distance squared and
standard in units between the observation vector and sample mean vector for all variables.
The probability of a Mahala–Nobis distance of less than 0.001 for 14 responses was found
to be less than 0.001.
A total of 14 responses were deemed ineligible for inclusion, resulting in a final dataset
of 273 responses. The study participants represented diverse managerial and technical
roles, including managers, department heads, project directors, facility executives, high-
ranking engineers, engineers, and quantity surveyors, spanning both public and private
sectors. Most participants (75%) had over 15 years of experience in the construction sector.
The study participants comprised 48% contractors, 28% consultant firms, 15% owner
representatives, and 9% designers. In total, 63% of the participants were employed in
the private industry, whereas 37% were engaged in public sector occupations. The study
participants had diverse professional backgrounds in the construction sector, particularly
infrastructure and road construction. Thus, the present study draws on insights from
a diverse cohort of construction industry practitioners and specialists with substantial
expertise in PCPP.
The normality of the data was assessed using the Shapiro–Wilk normality test (Ws)
in SPSS. The Ws method was used to ascertain the correlation between the ideal normal
scores and input data. When the score approached 1, the data exhibited a higher degree
of normal distribution. Consequently, the null hypothesis was deemed acceptable for the
normally distributed data. Moreover, for the data to exhibit normality, p-values indicating
statistical significance must exceed a threshold of 0.05. The computed Ws values for these
factors range from 0.773 to 0.863. Furthermore, according to the Ws report used as a
test, the import values for the items were below 0.05. Consequently, the data exhibited a
deviation from normality, as determined via the Shapiro–Wilk test (1965), thereby requiring
non-parametric tests for data analysis.
A reliability analysis was conducted using SPSS to ascertain the consistency of the
variables and scales, utilizing Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient. The alpha coefficient
is a statistical measure that does not rely on an assumption of data normality. It is com-
puted by taking the mean internal correlation between each individual attribute and the
number of characteristics. The coefficient alpha is a measure of internal consistency ranging
from zero to one, where a higher value indicates a greater strength of consistency within
the items being measured. According to Naji et al. [29], a Cronbach’s alpha exceeding
0.7 indicates a highly reliable level. The alpha values of the factors in classifications 01 to
07 were 0.728, 0.821, 0.922, 0.897, 0.950, 0.879, and 0.855, respectively. Because all values
exceeded a threshold of 0.7, it can be concluded that all seven classifications exhibited a
high degree of reliability. The alpha coefficient for the adjusted variables was 0.899. Hair
et al. [33] concluded that the individual properties of the variables were reliable for further
investigation because all alpha values exceeded 0.7.
Another non-parametric test of independence that identifies the relationship between
categorical variables (i.e., whether the variables are independent or related) is the chi-
squared test. Naji et al. [29] employed a chi-square value to examine the presence of
noteworthy distinctions in factor rankings among respondent groups. This study deter-
mined whether these differences could be attributed to gaps in knowledge, differences in
decision-making abilities, bias, mixed understanding, or numerous project contexts. Naji
et al. [29] employed a method to examine the distinctions between respondents from vari-
ous sectors, namely groups with no representation or underrepresentation. No noteworthy
differences were observed between the groups when the chi-square value surpassed the
criticality value. The present study involved the computation of the critical chi-square val-
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3771 9 of 24

ues, which were determined to be 27.34 and 135.84. Chi-square analysis yielded outcomes
indicating that all values surpassed the critical values. Based on the data characteristics, it
can be concluded that the properties displayed by individual variables are dependent and
suitable for additional examination.

3.2. Relative Importance Index for PCPP

The survey data were analyzed using the relative importance index (RII). This method-
ology has been effectively implemented in previous research endeavors [34] in the construc-
tion industry [29,35]. The RII was used to determine the hierarchy of factors and groups
based on their degree of significance with respect to PCPP. The RII formula used in this
study is given in Equation (1).
5
∑ j =1


RII = wj / ( h ∗ n ) (1)

The formula for calculating the RII involves the weighting given to each factor by
the respondents, denoted as wj , which ranges from 1 to 5. “h” represents the highest
weight, which is 5, whereas “n” represents the total study participants. The RII metric was
normalized within an interval of zero to one, where zero denotes non-inclusivity. A higher
RII score indicates greater significance of the PCPP factor. The RIIs were subsequently
ranked according to the presentation provided in Appendix A. Naji et al. [29] established
that a factor is deemed significant when its RII exceeds 59%. The findings of the study
revealed that each factor exhibited RII of no less than 76.66%, signifying that every factor
and factor group analyzed had a noteworthy influence on the PCPP. A literature review and
expert evaluation supported the validity of the procedures employed to select these factors.

4. Proposed Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System Model

4.1. Membership Functions
When real-world variables are not easily quantified because of subjective factors,
membership functions (MFs) can be used as representations, as Seresht and Fayek [36]
suggested. Membership functions are used by Gao et al. [3] to transform abstract fuzzy
concepts into specific values. Seresht and Fayek [37] explained that a fuzzy set can be mea-
sured using the MF. The MF was employed to delineate the correspondence between every
individual point within the input space of the system and its corresponding membership
value. Fundamentally, membership was quantified using numerical values ranging from
zero to one. Naji et al. [29] recommended using fuzzy MFs to classify Likert scale responses.
The numerical values of the MFs were determined using expert judgment or historical data,
as described by Larsen et al. [38].
Gaussian MFs were employed to fuzzify and represent the inputs. This was achievable
because of their ability to provide a more dependable performance evaluation system,
enable a seamless transition through fuzzy levels to demonstrate the correlation between
the input and output precisely, and produce fewer rules. Moreover, utilizing the Gaussian
methodology yields resilient membership functions because of its ability to reduce the
measure of freedom [10,29,36]. Five linguistic terms were chosen for each variable and
factor to indicate the level of each input variable based on responses to a Likert scale
ranging from 1 to 5. The ANFIS model defines the degree of membership within a range of
zero to one. According to Jang [39], the ANFIS learning process can be divided into two
distinct stages: (1) adaptation of the learning weights and (2) adaptation of the nonlinear
membership functions. The distinctive attribute of ANFIS allows for the recognition of
intricacy, rendering it highly appropriate for modeling intricate predicaments [29]. Figure 2
illustrates the MFs representing CF2-01, which pertains to clearly defined objectives. This
factor functions as an input to produce an output for the group factor CF2, which pertains
to site operations.
 Sustainability 2024, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 24

Sustainability 2024, 16, 3771 10 of 24

Figure2.2.Membership
Figure Membershipfunction
functionvalue—PCPP
value—PCPPfactor
factorCF2-01.
CF2-01.

AsAs illustrated
illustrated in
in Figure
Figure 2, 2, this
thisresearch
researchmademadeuseuseofofthethe
five MFs:
five EI =
EI {σ
MFs: {σ 10.62; μ=
= 10.62;
µ = 100}, VI {σ = 10.62; µ = 68}, MI {σ = 10.62; µ = 45}, SI {σ = 10.62; µ = 22.5}, and NI=
100}, VI {σ = 10.62; μ = 68}, MI {σ = 10.62; μ = 45}, SI {σ = 10.62; μ = 22.5}, and NI {σ
10.62;
{σ μ =µ
= 10.62; 0.1}, where
= 0.1}, σ isσ the
where standard
is the standarddeviation
deviationandandμµisisthethe mean.
mean. Similar MFs
MFs were
were
implementedusing
implemented usingeach
eachfactor
factorasasanan input
input to to obtain
obtain thethe factor
factor group
group function
function as the
as the out-
output,
put, which
which was used
was then then used
as an as an input
input to getto get
the the overall
overall PCPPPCPPindexindex
as theas the output.
output.

4.2.
4.2.Adaptive
Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy
Neuro-FuzzyInference
InferenceSystem
System
The
TheANFIS
ANFISmodel
modelisisaahybrid
hybridsystem
systemthat
thatcombines
combinesthe thecapabilities
capabilitiesof ofartificial
artificialneural
neural
networks
networks(ANNs)(ANNs)and andinference
inferencesystems.
systems.Therefore,
Therefore,linguistic
linguisticand andnumeric
numericrankings
rankingswerewere
integrated
integratedtotodemonstrate
demonstrate this issue,
this as shown
issue, as shown by Naji et al.et
by Naji [29].
al. Fuzzy logic was
[29]. Fuzzy logicemployed
was em-
to illustrate
ployed and validate
to illustrate the practicality
and validate of knowledge
the practicality and wasand
of knowledge implemented
was implementedto model to
the expected input and output datasets [26]. A significant limitation
model the expected input and output datasets [26]. A significant limitation associated associated with fuzzy
with
logic
fuzzypertains to the to
logic pertains substantial amount
the substantial of time
amount of and
timeresources
and resourcesrequired to calculate
required the
to calculate
membership functions and rules within a multifaceted system. One
the membership functions and rules within a multifaceted system. One of the constraints of the constraints of
ANN
of ANN is the significant
is the effort
significant required
effort to determine
required the most
to determine suitable
the most network
suitable configuration.
network configu-
Fuzzy logic and ANNs were integrated to create the ANFIS outcomes.
ration. Fuzzy logic and ANNs were integrated to create the ANFIS outcomes. This ap- This approach
involves translating
proach involves a solution
translating into a fuzzy
a solution into ainference system system
fuzzy inference that canthat
be expressed using
can be expressed
linguistic terminology. The resulting ANFIS model offers an enhanced
using linguistic terminology. The resulting ANFIS model offers an enhanced predictive predictive ability,
leading
ability, to improved
leading transparency
to improved and model
transparency validation
and [36]. The ANFIS
model validation [36]. Theis ANFIS
structured into
is struc-
five layers, as shown in Figure 3. The strata were arranged in the following
tured into five layers, as shown in Figure 3. The strata were arranged in the following order.
The structure includes the primary layer as the input layer, which also includes input
order.
parameters in relation to functional members and predicts the output using the Gaussian
function in Equation (2).
−( x −un )2
γin ( x ) = e 2σn 2 (2)
where “x” is the input value (linguistic variable), “un ” is the center, and “σn ” represents the
spreading parameter of the Gaussian function. The c-means-based fuzzy inference system
(FCM) randomly assigns a set of coefficients to different data samples and automatically
chooses the number of clusters. The method continues this approach until convergence
is achieved, at which time each cluster centroid “c j ” must be computed based on its
membership level for “n” data points, as expressed in Equation (3).

∑nk=1 wi,jm xi
cj = (3)
∑nk=1 wi,jm
Sustainability 2024, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 24
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3771 11 of 24

P11 Fuzzification
Layer
Normalization
Layer
Defuzzification
Layer
W1 W1
X1 P12 ll N f1
P1n
W1 1f

P21
X2 P22 ll
W2
N W2
f2 W2 2f Youtput

P2n
Wn nf
Pn1
Wn Wn
X1 Pn2 ll N fn
Pnn

Figure 3. ANFIS as a performance evaluation index.

Based on the cluster

The structure includesk-th
thedegree,
primary anylayer
“xi ”as
hasthea input
set of layer, whichwalso
coefficients, i,j isincludes
the clustering
input
degree, and “m” is the fuzzy partition matrix exponent. Assuming
parameters in relation to functional members and predicts the output using the Gaussiana predefined criterion,
FCM separates
function the elements
in Equation (2). of the dataset from a finite collection. Hence, the main
objective function is to be reduced to a minimum, (
and )
the “Φ” clusters can be calculated
using Equation (3). 𝛾 (𝑥) = 𝑒 (2)
The fuzzy logic rules are based on the “If–Then” rule known as fuzzy implications
where
or “𝑥” is the
conditional input value
statements. (linguistic
Hence, if dualvariable),
inputs and “𝑢 signal
” is theoutputs
center,exist,
and “𝜎 the”equation
represents is
the spreading parameter
displayed as Equation (4). of the Gaussian function. The c-means-based fuzzy inference
system (FCM) randomly assigns a set of coefficients to different data samples and auto-
matically chooses the numberI fofx clusters.
is Ti and The method
y is S i , then zcontinues
=D this approach until con- (4)
vergence is achieved, at which time each cluster centroid “𝑐 ” must be computed based
where x and y are input
on its membership variables;
level for “n” dataTipoints,
and Si asareexpressed
fuzzy sets; D is the output
in Equation (3). value; and z
is a crisp polynomial function of the input and output variables and is equal to fi (x, y).
Based on the two variables in (5), the 𝑐next ∑layer 𝑤 , is 𝑥the fuzzification layer. The result is
= (3)
∑ 𝑤,
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3771 12 of 24

conveyed through the nodes expressed in Equation (5) after multiplying the input by a
predetermined weight.
wn = γun ( x ) × γvn (y) (5)
The member functions were normalized to calculate the weight ratio in the third layer
using Equation (6).
wn
wn = (6)
∑ wn
n

In the fourth layer, the defuzzification process uses square nodes to sum the fuzzy
logic rules expressed in Equation (7).

w n f n = w n .( t n x + s n y + d n ) (7)

where tn , sn , and dn are linear constraints. The last layer (fifth) aggregates the preceding
layers and concludes Equation (8).

∑ wn f n
∑ wn f n =
n
Output( f ) = (8)
n ∑ wn
n

The ANFIS model comprises three distinct phases: development, training, and verifi-
cation. The quantity and classification of the MFs were established during the construction
phase. To construct an ANFIS model, it is necessary to partition the input and output
data into sets of rules. Employing a fully connected approach has been demonstrated as a
viable means of achieving this objective, as evidenced by Abdulshahed et al. [40]. Using
the FC methodology involves constructing a model framework that relies on the clustering
of input and output datasets, the degree of fuzziness exhibited by the clusters, and the
optimization of membership functions, as noted by Tiruneh et al. [26].
The clustering process involves applying unsupervised machine learning techniques
to partition a given dataset into distinct clusters or groups. Within each cluster, the data
points exhibit a high degree of similarity, whereas those belonging to different clusters
demonstrate dissimilarity. Clusters are formed based on the proximity of the data points
within the same cluster, which indicates similarity, whereas data points in different clusters
are distinct in terms of their spatial arrangement [29]. The FC method enhances conven-
tional clustering techniques by enabling a data point to be linked to multiple clusters and
allocating membership likelihoods in each cluster. Furthermore, this methodology offers
the benefit of enhanced precision and requires fewer regulations, as evidenced by studies
conducted by Benmouiza and Cheknane [41].
Consequently, to achieve a limited number of imprecise rules, a method for generat-
ing fuzzy rules was implemented in this study, which combined the ANFIS with fuzzy
clustering (FC). FC was utilized to methodically construct the fuzzy MF and a fuzzy set
of rules for the ANFIS. Following the establishment of preliminary fuzzy rules, the FC
method was employed to ascertain the most advantageous cluster radius values for each
input and output variable. This was performed to minimize the root-mean-square error
(RMSE) associated with the forecasts generated by the fuzzy rule-oriented system.
The ANFIS model employed a training dataset comprising 80% of the available data,
and the remaining 20% was reserved for validation. To initiate the training process of the
ANFIS model, it is necessary to generate pairs of training data that correspond to the inputs
and outputs of the model. The membership function parameters can be modified during
the learning process. The optimization of the aforementioned parameters was facilitated
through controlled learning using the input–output datasets presented as model training
data. Takagi–Sugeno fuzzy rules denote the arithmetic associations between the inputs and
outputs, which are determined using variables based on fuzzy linguistics. The primary aim
of the ANFIS is to integrate the benefits and principles of fuzzy logic with a neural network
learning algorithm, as stated by Naji et al. [29]. Fuzzy if-rules are commonly referred to as
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3771 13 of 24

fuzzy-dependent statements in the field of fuzzy logic. The fuzzy logic rules are based on
the “If–Then” rule, known as fuzzy implications or conditional statements.

4.3. Development of the ANFIS–PCPP Assessment Model

The present study employed the ANFIS as a predictive tool to assess the success of the
PCPP implementation. The analysis was based on 60 success factors for performance and
the seven key groups identified by Jang [39]. The primary objective of employing the ANFIS
methodology was to evaluate the correlations among the input variables, the performance
factors, and the seven cluster groups, namely CF1 to CF7. This study evaluated the
associations between the aforementioned groups and the success of PCPP in ascertaining
the performance index value, which is contingent on the implementation efficacy of these
factors. Consequently, the following connections were established for evaluation using the
ANFIS:
• Level: Operational Management Systems-Related Factors (CF1) = ANFIS of (CF1-01 to
CF01-12).
• Level: Site Operations-Related Factors (CF2) = ANFIS of (CF2-01 to CF2-12).
• Level: Logistics-Related Factors (CF3) = ANFIS of (CF3-01 to CF3-07).
• Level: Human-Related Factors (CF4) = ANFIS of (CF4-01 to CF4-10).
• Level: Bureaucracy- and Governance-Related Factors (CF5) = ANFIS of (CF5-01 to
CF5-08).
• Level: Financial Factors (CF6) = ANFIS of (CF6-01 to CF6-05).
• Level: Communication-Related Factors (CF7) = ANFIS of (CF7-01 to CF7-06).
The present study involved the development of eight ANFIS models on dual levels
aimed at forecasting the successful implementation of the PCPP. As illustrated in Figure 4,
ANFIS models 1 to 7 were initially constructed to forecast the primary determinants of the
PCPP clusters. Subsequently, the results stemming from the primary factors of the group
were integrated into ANFIS 8 at the secondary level. The ANFIS model generated fuzzy
rules based on the number of linguistic terms for each variable. In this study, 335 fuzzy rules
were developed to forecast the PCPP performance index. The integration of the ANFIS
with FC was utilized to implement a technique for generating fuzzy rules characterized
by fuzziness. The objective of this approach was to determine the optimal number of
fuzzy rules. The FC method was systematically employed to generate fuzzy membership
functions (MFs) and rules as the basis for the ANFIS, as reported by Naji et al. [29]. This
study employed the ANFIS toolbox in MATLAB software (R2020) to generate a model. The
inputs were defined as PCPP factors, whereas the group factors represented the outputs.
The inputs for the overall PCPP index were defined as the PCPP group factors, as depicted
in Figure 4. The datasets were partitioned into two distinct subsets: one for training and
the other for validating the model.

4.4. The Validation Principles of the PCPP Model

The model was trained and validated using two distinct approaches, structural and
behavioral, as documented in previous studies [26,42]. This proposition is subsequently
validated through a case study conducted by Naji et al. [29].

4.5. Structural Validation

Structural validation involves a qualitative assessment of the dimensional consistency
of a given model. This is achieved by recognizing various performance factors. The
preceding section discusses the derivation of the factors affecting the performance of the
PCPP as part of the structural validation test. These factors were obtained through a
thorough literature review and were subsequently validated by industry and RII experts.
 membership functions (MFs) and rules as the basis for the ANFIS, as reported by Naji et
al. [29]. This study employed the ANFIS toolbox in MATLAB software (R2020) to generate
a model. The inputs were defined as PCPP factors, whereas the group factors represented
the outputs. The inputs for the overall PCPP index were defined as the PCPP group fac-
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3771 14 of 24
tors, as depicted in Figure 4. The datasets were partitioned into two distinct subsets: one
for training and the other for validating the model.

Figure 4. ANFIS–PCPP framework for assessing the overall PCPP index.

Figure 4. ANFIS–PCPP framework for assessing the overall PCPP index.

4.4. The
4.6. Validation
Behavioral Principles of the PCPP Model
Validation
The
A model wasbehavioral
quantitative trained and validated
validity using
test was two distinct
performed. approaches, structural
Cross-validation and
with a k-fold
behavioral,isasa documented
coefficient commonly employedin previous studies [26,42].
behavioral This proposition
methodology is subsequently
for evaluating the efficacy
validated
and through
versatility of aancase studymodel.
ANFIS conductedThisby Naji et al.uses
technique [29].statistical analysis to enable
the generalization of independent datasets. Various cross-validation techniques, such
4.5.bootstrapping,
as Structural Validation
the disjoint sets test, jackknife test, Monte Carlo test, and three-way
split Structural
test, have been reported
validation by Khalef
involves and El-Adaway
a qualitative [31]. K-fold
assessment of thecross-validation
dimensional con- was
performed to mitigate the potential effects of sampling bias and overfitting.
sistency of a given model. This is achieved by recognizing various performance factors. This study
employs a cross-validation
The preceding algorithm,
section discusses specifically
the derivation ofthe
thek-fold
factorsmethod,
affecting which is a component
the performance of
of the jackknife test. A k-fold cross-validation approach is used
the PCPP as part of the structural validation test. These factors were obtained to assess the effectiveness
through a
of the ANFIS
thorough model.
literature This and
review technique involves partitioning
were subsequently validated the completeand
by industry dataset into k
RII experts.
identical subgroups, where k−1 subsets are used to train the model while reserving one
subset for validation
4.6. Behavioral Validationor testing against other datasets [29,36]. The k-fold cross-validation
technique involves repeating the entire process k times while altering the test and training
A quantitative behavioral validity test was performed. Cross-validation with a k-fold
data samples.
coefficient is a commonly employed behavioral methodology for evaluating the efficacy
Furthermore, reducing errors using a range of error approximation metrics deter-
and
minedversatility
the mostofsuitable
an ANFIS model.
model. TheThis technique
efficacy uses statistical
of cross-validation analysis
can to enable
be attributed the
to the
generalization of independent datasets. Various cross-validation techniques,
utilization of the entire series of instances for validation and training, with each instance such as boot-
strapping,
being the disjoint
exclusively sets test,
employed jackknife test,
for validation onlyMonte
once. Carlo test, and
The k-fold three-way split
cross-validation test,
method
have been reported by Khalef and El-Adaway
comprises a series of sequential steps as follows: [31]. K-fold cross-validation was performed
to mitigate the potential effects of sampling bias and overfitting. This study employs a
1. The dataset is partitioned into k homogeneous subgroups.
cross-validation algorithm, specifically the k-fold method, which is a component of the
2. One subgroup was selected for testing, and the remaining k−1 subgroups were
jackknife test. A k-fold cross-validation approach is used to assess the effectiveness of the
retained for training.
ANFIS model. This technique involves partitioning the complete dataset into k identical
3. The model was calibrated using training subsets and was subsequently used to
subgroups, where k−1 subsets are used to train the model while reserving one subset for
generate predictions for the test subset.
validation or testing against other datasets [29,36]. The k-fold cross-validation technique
4. Various statistical tests were conducted to assess the accuracy of the optimal model
involves repeating the entire process k times2 while altering the test and training data sam-
prediction, including the RMSE and R , as outlined by Naji et al. (2022) [29].
ples.
The mean of the
Furthermore, root-square-mean-error
reducing errors using a range (RSME) was used
of error to calculatemetrics
approximation the difference
deter-
between the predicted
mined the most suitable model.value (by the
The classifier
efficacy model)
of and the
cross-validationactual
can values
be of a variable.
attributed to the
The correlation coefficient (R 2 ) is the correlation between the observed values of the re-
utilization of the entire series of instances for validation and training, with each instance
sponse variable and the predicted values of the response variable made by the model [29].
Equations (9) and (10) provide mathematical formulations for the statistical error parame-
ters and represent the mathematical expressions of the RSME and R2 , respectively.

Σ (Y − X)2
RSME = (9)
n
 between the predicted value (by the classifier model) and the actual values of a variable.
The correlation coefficient (R2) is the correlation between the observed values of the re-
sponse variable and the predicted values of the response variable made by the model [29].
Equations (11) and (12) provide mathematical formulations for the statistical error param-
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3771 eters and represent the mathematical expressions of the RSME and R2, respectively.
15 of 24
Ʃ (Y − X)
RSME = (11)
n
(Σ(X, Y) − (Σ(X).Σ(Y)))2
R2 =    (Ʃ(X, Y)
2− Ʃ(X).
  Ʃ(Y)
 )² (10)
R²
Σ =X(Ʃ(X

2  (12)
2
−) Σ− Ʃ(X Σ Y)2 − −
. (Ʃ(Y
X ) ). Σ Y
Ʃ(Y) )
whereX,X,Y,
where Y,and
and X,X, are
are the
the average
average outcomes
outcomes of of the
themodel,
model,experiment,
experiment,and andmodel
modeloutput,
output,
respectively, and n is the amount of data gathered. The model
respectively, and n is the amount of data gathered. The model with the lowest with the lowest error error
sta-
tistics (RMSE) and highest R 2 value
2 was the one that was most accurately
statistics (RMSE) and highest R value was the one that was most accurately calibrated. calibrated. Ac-
cording to previous research, the value of R
According to previous research, the value of R must be higher than 0.8 and close to 1 foraa
2 must
2 be higher than 0.8 and close to 1 for
stronglylinked
strongly linkedmodel
model [29].
[29]. A
A study
study conducted
conducted by by Naji
Naji et
etal.
al.[29]
[29]established
establishedthat thatutilizing
utilizing
10-foldcross-validation
10-fold cross-validation can can yield
yield dependable
dependable variance
variance while
while minimizing
minimizingcomputational
computational
complexity.The
complexity. ThePCPP
PCPPmodel
modelwas wasdeveloped
developedusing using 287
287 datasets
datasets partitioned
partitioned into
into 10 10 dis-
distinct
tinct subgroups. Nine models were employed for training, and
subgroups. Nine models were employed for training, and the final model was reserved the final model was re-
served for testing against the optimal coefficient values obtained
for testing against the optimal coefficient values obtained during the training phase. Theduring the training
phase. The
process wasprocess
iteratedwas iterated
10 times 10 timesthat
to ensure to ensure
validationthat was
validation was conducted
conducted for each
for each generation
into which the data were partitioned. The optimal coefficient was selected from a from
generation into which the data were partitioned. The optimal coefficient was selected set of
a set
10 of 10 coefficients
coefficients based onbased on itstoability
its ability produceto produce
the lowest theRMSE
lowestvalue.
RMSEFigurevalue.5Figure
shows5a
shows a flowchart
flowchart outliningoutlining the complete
the complete k-fold cross-validation
k-fold cross-validation process. process.

Figure 5. ANFIS–PCPP k-fold cross-validation diagram.

Figure 5. ANFIS–PCPP k-fold cross-validation diagram.

4.7. Results and Analysis

This study employed the ANFIS to construct a model for PCPP. The ANFIS methodol-
ogy uses a fuzzy inference system model to convert a provided input into a desired output.
This forecast entails the utilization of membership functions, fuzzy logic operators, and if–
then rules within the fuzzy logic framework. This study employed FC to produce a training
dataset encompassing significant synthetic data. The MATLAB ANFIS Toolbox program
was used because of the considerable effort required for aggregation and defuzzification
calculations. The output of the PCPP model was generated by developing eight ANFIS
models using the MATLAB Toolbox. The datasets were partitioned into two segments,
resulting in an outcome of 0.00975 following the training procedure, which indicated a
commendable performance, as depicted in Figure 6. The network was subjected to training
and testing/validation in 80% and 20% ratios, respectively. Suitable parameters for the
fuzzy inference system and hybrid training methods were selected using Gaussmf. The
ANFIS 3 network training utilized loaded datasets comprising six inputs and one out-
put parameter. The ANFIS networks were trained using these datasets to ensure precise
data generalization for the evaluation of the CF3. The model that underwent 157 epochs
yielded the optimal training error values. Figure 5 shows a flowchart of the complete k-fold
cross-validation process.
 parameters for the fuzzy inference system and hybrid training methods were selected us-
ing Gaussmf. The ANFIS 3 network training utilized loaded datasets comprising six in-
puts and one output parameter. The ANFIS networks were trained using these datasets
to ensure precise data generalization for the evaluation of the CF3. The model that under-
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3771 went 157 epochs yielded the optimal training error values. Figure 5 shows a flowchart
16 of 24 of
the complete k-fold cross-validation process.

(a)

Sustainability 2024, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 17 of 24

(b)

(c)
Figure 6. 6.(a)
Figure (a)CF3 input-outputvariables;
CF3 input-output variables; (b) ANFIS
(b) ANFIS modelmodel variables’
variables’ three-dimensional
three-dimensional surface
surface plots;
plots;
andand (c) ANFIS
(c) ANFIS training
training error plot.
error plot.

This study involved the development of input parameters, consisting of 60 variables,

output parameters comprising seven groups, and an overall PCPP indicator. Five MFs are
developed for each variable. The authors employed FC and Gaussian MF to construct a
comprehensive and optimal fuzzy rule set of 335 rules to characterize the behavior of the
system. The outcomes of the fuzzy assessment model (ANFIS 8) were expressed through
the process group indices and primary output, the overall performance index, which was
quantified using the toolbox. Table 2 presents the statistical performance indicators,
RMSE, and R2.
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3771 17 of 24

This study involved the development of input parameters, consisting of 60 variables,

output parameters comprising seven groups, and an overall PCPP indicator. Five MFs are
developed for each variable. The authors employed FC and Gaussian MF to construct a
comprehensive and optimal fuzzy rule set of 335 rules to characterize the behavior of the
system. The outcomes of the fuzzy assessment model (ANFIS 8) were expressed through
the process group indices and primary output, the overall performance index, which was
quantified using the toolbox. Table 2 presents the statistical performance indicators, RMSE,
and R2 .

Table 2. RMSE and R2 values for training and validating data of ANFIS models.

ANFIS Model RMSE R2

Training data (ANFIS 1) 5.556 0.958
Validating data (ANFIS 1) 3.002 0.966
Training data (ANFIS 2) 5.122 0.987
Validating data (ANFIS 2) 2.988 0.924
Training data (ANFIS 3) 6.112 0.914
Validating data (ANFIS 3) 3.123 0.928
Training data (ANFIS 4) 6.001 0.955
Validating data (ANFIS 4) 3.236 0.967
Training data (ANFIS 5) 5.891 0.988
Validating data (ANFIS 5) 2.689 0.923
Training data (ANFIS 6) 5.612 0.958
Validating data (ANFIS 6) 3.269 0.967
Training data (ANFIS 7) 5.236 0.965
Validating data (ANFIS 7) 3.211 0.954
Training data (ANFIS 8) 5.699 0.978
Validating data (ANFIS 8) 3.265 0.989

As previously stated, the dataset was divided into two subsets, with 80% allocated to
the training set and 20% allocated to the testing/validation set. The process of validating
data is crucial for assessing the model’s efficacy and resilience. In addition, a 10-fold
cross-validation was conducted for the training set. During the validation process, the
training dataset was partitioned into ten subsets for each of the ten iterations. Nine
of these subsets were used to train each model, and the remaining subset was used to
validate and report the accuracy of each model. The accuracy of the model was reported
in each iteration. Consequently, the mean accuracy of the cross-validation for each model
was computed by averaging the accuracies obtained from all iterations. The average
accuracy obtained through cross-validation was used to select the optimal model. Table 2
presents the statistical performance indicators RMSE and R2 for the optimal ANFIS models
numbered 1–8.
The sum squared error assessment outcomes are presented in Figure 7, where the
momentum value was set to 0.9, and the learning rate varied between 0.6 and 0.9. As
shown in Figure 3, a minimum RMSE of 2.689 is observed. Additionally, it is evident
that the training plot (blue) closely adheres to the pattern of the data-testing plot (red). A
smaller learning rate requires a larger number of epochs to attain an equivalent RMSE.
However, if a significant learning rate is established, the number of required epochs is
reduced. Excessively rapid convergence may lead to suboptimal global weight estimation,
causing a decline in the accuracy of forecast outcomes.
 shown in Figure 3, a minimum RMSE of 2.689 is observed. Additionally, it is evident that
the training plot (blue) closely adheres to the pattern of the data-testing plot (red). A
smaller learning rate requires a larger number of epochs to attain an equivalent RMSE.
However, if a significant learning rate is established, the number of required epochs is
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3771 18 of 24
reduced. Excessively rapid convergence may lead to suboptimal global weight estimation,
causing a decline in the accuracy of forecast outcomes.

Figure 7. Training (blue) and testing (red) data plotting diagram.

Figure 7. Training (blue) and testing (red) data plotting diagram.

4.8. Discussion of Results

4.8. Discussion of Results
The findings contribute
The findings valuable insights
contribute for effective
valuable insightsproject management
for effective projectin this
management in this
complex and dynamic industry. The factors are discussed based on the outcomes
complex and dynamic industry. The factors are discussed based on the outcomes of this of this
research below:research below:
Financial Factors: Sound Factors:
Financial financial Sound
management plays
financial a pivotal role
management in achieving
plays a pivotalpro- role in achieving
ject success within pavement
project success construction.
within pavement We underscore
construction. theWe
importance
underscore ofthe
strategic fi-
importance of strategic
nancial planning, the implementation
financial of transparent payment
planning, the implementation policies,
of transparent and the
payment execution
policies, and the execution
of stakeholder-specific
of stakeholder-specific financial analyses.financial analyses. Theintegration
The collaborative collaborative integration
of these compo- of these compo-
nents plays a crucial role in ensuring the seamless execution and successful completion of completion of
nents plays a crucial role in ensuring the seamless execution and successful
pavement projects.
pavement projects.
Bureaucratic andBureaucratic
Governmental and Governmental
Factors: The role Factors: The role ofprocesses
of bureaucratic bureaucraticandprocesses
gov- and gover-
nance in complex
ernance in navigating navigating complex regulatory
regulatory frameworks frameworks is highlighted.
is highlighted. Stakeholders Stakeholders
are are urged
urged to adeptlyto adeptly
manage manage these recognizing
these factors, factors, recognizing
them asthem as imperative
imperative elements elements
contrib-contributing to
uting to projectproject success.
success. The nuanced
The nuanced understanding
understanding and effective
and effective management
management of bu-of bureaucratic
reaucratic and governmental factors are integral to overcoming regulatory challenges and and ensuring
and governmental factors are integral to overcoming regulatory challenges
ensuring projectproject success.
success.
Communication-Related Variables: ClearVariables:
Communication-Related Clear communication
communication pathways, bothpathways,
within theboth within the
project team andproject
withteam and stakeholders,
external with external stakeholders,
are highlighted areas
highlighted as essential
essential for for issue resolution,
issue resolu-
risk mitigation, and the alignment of project objectives. The
tion, risk mitigation, and the alignment of project objectives. The recognition of commu- recognition of communication-
nication-related variables as key contributors to project success underscores the need need
related variables as key contributors to project success underscores the for for proactive
communication strategies throughout
proactive communication strategies throughout all project phases. all project phases.
In summation, Inthissummation,
study not only thisadvances
study notour only advances our
understanding of understanding
critical success fac- of critical success
factors but also offers practical insights for project practitioners
tors but also offers practical insights for project practitioners and stakeholders in the pave- and stakeholders in the
pavement construction industry. The recommendations
ment construction industry. The recommendations derived from the study, especially in derived from the study, especially
the realms ofin financial
the realmsmanagement,
of financial management,
regulatory regulatory
navigation,navigation, and communication strate-
and communication
gies, provide a comprehensive framework for enhancing the success rates of pavement
construction projects.
Project managers can leverage the PCPP model in the ways listed below:
Informed Decision-Making:
The PCPP model serves as a predictive tool enabling project managers to make well-
informed decisions. It equips them with insights at different project stages, aiding in
resource allocation, risk mitigation, and project scheduling.
Risk Mitigation Strategies:
The PCPP model assists project managers in identifying and mitigating potential risks
and challenges. By anticipating issues through the model’s predictions, project managers
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3771 19 of 24

can implement proactive risk mitigation strategies, reducing the likelihood of unforeseen
obstacles during construction.
Optimizing Project Outcomes:
Project managers can utilize the PCPP model to optimize project outcomes. The
model’s ability to provide insights into critical success factors will help project managers
prioritize efforts and allocate resources effectively for enhanced project performance.

5. Conclusions
This study utilized an adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) to identify
the CSFs in pavement construction. We collected valuable data on the CSFs specific to
pavement construction by administering an online questionnaire to industry experts. The
ANFIS model was then employed to analyze the relationships among these factors and
assess their impact on project success. The findings revealed the key CSFs and their relative
importance in the context of pavement construction projects.
The results of this study could be beneficial in the construction industry by providing
insights into the prioritization of efforts and resources for effective project management.
Furthermore, the application of ANFIS demonstrates its potential as a powerful tool for
analyzing complex relationships and deriving meaningful conclusions in the construc-
tion domain.
The findings of this study are specific to pavement construction and may not be directly
applicable to other construction sectors. Further research and validation are recommended
to ensure the generalizability and applicability of the identified CSFs. Nonetheless, the
results presented in this study provide a valuable foundation for future studies and the
practical implementation of pavement construction.
Overall, this study contributes to the body of knowledge by providing insights into
CSFs in pavement construction and showcasing the potential of ANFIS as a decision-
support tool. These findings can guide industry professionals and researchers to improve
project outcomes, enhance construction practices, and contribute to the advancement of the
construction industry.

6. Recommendations
This study sheds light on the CSFs that drive project success in pavement construction
management. This research provides valuable insights into the key elements influencing
project outcomes in this domain by synthesizing the existing literature and employing
advanced analytical methods, such as fuzzy inference systems (FIS) and Delphi. Several
recommendations for future studies are presented to enrich our understanding and improve
pavement construction practices.
First, future research should evaluate the dynamic interplay among different CSFs in
pavement construction management. Researchers can uncover the complex relationships
between stakeholder management, sustainable practices, VM techniques, and effective
communication by conducting longitudinal studies and analyzing project data from various
regions and contexts. Understanding how these factors interact with and influence each
other will allow for more targeted and effective project management strategies.
Second, integrating emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence and data
analytics, holds significant promise for the construction industry, including pavement
construction management. Future studies should evaluate the application of AI-powered
decision support systems to optimize CSFs and enhance project performance. Leveraging
AI algorithms and predictive models can provide real-time insight and facilitate proactive
decision-making, leading to better project outcomes. Additionally, research efforts should
be extended to encompass the impact of external factors such as regulatory changes, eco-
nomic fluctuations, and geopolitical influences on pavement construction projects. Analyz-
ing how these macro-level variables interact with CSFs can help construction stakeholders
adapt to changing environments and develop resilient project management strategies.
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3771 20 of 24

Finally, incorporating the perspectives of multiple stakeholders, including clients,

contractors, designers, and workers, is essential for comprehensive research on pavement
construction management. Future studies should emphasize participatory approaches
involving all relevant parties in the research process to foster a collective understanding of
CSFs and promote collaborative decision-making.
By addressing these recommendations and advancing the knowledge base of critical
success factors in pavement construction management, researchers can drive continual
improvements in project delivery, enhance efficiency, and contribute to the sustainable
development of transportation infrastructure. As the construction industry evolves, this
study serves as a steppingstone toward more informed and effective decision-making,
ultimately leading to the successful completion of pavement construction projects world-
wide. Project management teams should pay close attention to the top three main CSF
groupings—financial, bureaucratic, and governmental—and communication-related fac-
tors, based on the findings of this study. The authors advise project management teams to
build additional acceptable performance indicators to monitor total project performance
and establish corrective measures for underperforming areas.
This study adds to the extant body of knowledge by filling in the following knowledge
gaps regarding CSF in pavement construction projects: (1) the absence of a comprehensive
and accurate definition of CSFs and (2) the requirement for models to evaluate the efficacy
of frameworks that predict minimizing the effects of change orders for various work
conditions. The prediction model can assist owners, project management teams, decision-
makers, and construction professionals in improving their CSF evaluations.
Based on the key findings of this study, project management teams should pay close
attention to the top three main CSF groupings: financial, bureaucratic, government, and
communication-related factors. The authors advise project management teams to build
additional acceptable performance indicators to monitor total project performance and
establish corrective measures for underperforming areas. The primary drawback of the
proposed methodology is the possibility of subjectivity in the quantitative evaluation of
the CSF elements for paving construction projects. Instructions or guidelines regarding
performance indicators should be defined to ensure uniformity among assessors.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, O.S. and M.G.; methodology, O.S., M.G. and H.M.A.N.;
software, H.M.A.N.; validation, O.S. and M.G.; formal analysis, H.M.A.N.; investigation, O.S.,
M.G. and H.M.A.N.; data curation, H.M.A.N.; writing—original draft preparation, O.S., M.G. and
H.M.A.N.; writing—review and editing, O.S., M.G. and H.M.A.N.; visualization, O.S., M.G. and
H.M.A.N.; supervision, O.S. and M.G.; project administration, O.S. and M.G. All authors have read
and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding. The publication of this article was funded by
the Qatar National Library.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Data are contained within the article.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix A
Dear Respondent,
The questionnaire presented below is part of an ongoing research titled “Performance
Measurement of Pavement Construction Projects Through Structural Equation Modelling”
in the Department of Civil and Architectural Engineering at Qatar University.
Responding to the questions will indeed take some of your valuable time. We seek
your help and guiding responses to help us identify the critical success factors that indicate
performance measures for pavement construction projects. We aim to assist contractors,
business owners, consultancy experts, and academics with a reliable tool to strategize
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3771 21 of 24

in identifying action plans and project completion to abide by project milestones and
achieve the desired quality. This would help avoid unnecessary costs and unwanted
disputes between the various stakeholders. Responses and opinions expressed shall be
kept confidential.
Thank you for your time.
7 classifications that govern 60 critical success factors are mentioned below. Kindly
provide the suitable importance grade on pavement construction project success:
Importance Level–
1. Not Important
2. Slightly Important
3. Moderately Important
4. Very Important
5. Extremely Important
Example:
“Accurate estimation of essential design factors before project initiation” has a pro-
found impact on the overall success of pavement construction projects. Thus, accurate
estimation of essential design factors has an extremely important (Number 5) impact on
pavement management performance.

Classification 1: Operations Management-Related Factors Rank

Factor
Establishment of material supply management system
Establishment of a quality management system
Establishment of a management system to mitigate surface topography problems
Establishment of a change management tool to mitigate the impact of changes.
Establishment of a health and safety management system on the construction site
Establishment of a project management plan (PMP)
Establishment of a site security system
Establishment of a schedule management system
Employing a sub-contractor management system
Implementation of environmental management system
Setting up a conflict and claims resolution management system
Establishment of a risk management system
Classification 2: Contractor/Site-Related Factors
Factor
Experience of the contractor
Employment of skilled individuals to operate tools and machinery
Timely review of construction material prior to use (submittal review, samples)
Examination of sub-contractors’ qualifications
Periodic review and control of operational issues at site level between the management and
operations team
Assessment of site geological conditions
Review of existing utility maps
Inspecting the site before paving operation
Establishment of a weather-protection system for construction materials
Establishment of a site security system
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3771 22 of 24

Readiness of contractor for urgent works imposed by the client

Periodic review and management of key performance indicators (KPIs) by the contractor
Classification 3: Logistics-Related Factors
Factor
Establishment of a transportation system for delivery of raw materials
Establishment of a logistics management system
Establishment of a transport system for site staff
Enterprise resource planning software for logistic operations
Establishment of a resources management system for interruptions during asphalt paving operations
Availability of sufficient asphalt feeders
Establishment of a maintenance management system for machinery and tools
Classification 4: Human-related Factors
Factor
Establishment of a plan for short-staffing of manpower
Managing employee demotivation because of frequent relocations
Training programs (i.e., safety, technical, etc.) for workforce
Establishment of an employee empowerment management system
Measurement of employee satisfaction during project lifetime
Welfare of workforce
Monitoring the productivity of employees on a regular basis
Availability of incentive mechanisms for its employees by the contractor
Timely payment to its staff and subcontractors by the contractor
Observance of the code of ethics by employees
Classification 5: Bureaucracy- and Governance-Related Factors
Factor
Staff compliance with relevant laws and regulations
Timely payment to the contractor by the client
Effective government regulations easing import/export
Timely acquisition of necessary permits by the contractor
Establishment of a control mechanism to reduce public interference
Establishment of a traffic management plan off-site
Continually assessing stakeholder satisfaction throughout the project
Capturing best practices and lessons learned
Establishment of handing over and close-out procedures
Classification 6: Financial Factors
Factor
Availability of a system to manage finances (financial management systems)
Expenditure management and protocols on spending
Certification of credit payments in a timely manner
Timely communication of the contractor’s payment time period to the employer
Audit system periodically to assess contractors’ compensation for delayed payments
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3771 23 of 24

Classification 7: Communication-related factors

Factor
Establishment of a communication system (employees, stakeholders, sub-contractors, vendors, etc.)
Communication of the project management plan (PMP) to all stakeholders.
Conducting regular progress meetings with the employer and consultants
Setting up a document management system
Employment of information communication technology (ICT) during project administration
Timely communication of design issues to the client

References
1. Malik, A.; Parks, B.; Russell, B.; Lin, J.J.; Walsh, K.; Solomon, K.; Zhang, S.; Elston, T.; Goodman, S. Banking on the Belt and Road:
Insights from a New Global Dataset of 13,427 Chinese Development Projects; AidData at William & Mary: Williamsburg, VA, USA,
2021; pp. 23–36.
2. Sun, D. China’s partnership diplomacy in the Middle East. In Routledge Handbook on China–Middle East Relations; Routledge: New
York, NY, USA, 2021; pp. 299–311.
3. Gao, J.; Heng, F.; Yuan, Y.; Liu, Y. A Novel Machine Learning Method for Multiaxial Fatigue Life Prediction: Improved Adaptive
Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System. Int. J. Fatigue 2024, 178, 108007. [CrossRef]
4. Akomah, B.B.; Ahinaquah, L.K.; Mustapha, Z. Skilled labour shortage in the building construction industry within the central
region. Balt. J. Real Estate Econ. Constr. Manag. 2020, 8, 83–92. [CrossRef]
5. Huang, R.; Yeh, C. Development of an assessment framework for green highway construction. J. Chin. Inst. Eng. 2008, 31, 573–585.
[CrossRef]
6. Terzi, S. Modeling for Pavement Roughness Using the ANFIS Approach. Adv. Eng. Softw. 2013, 57, 59–64. [CrossRef]
7. Pinto, J.K.; Slevin, D.P. Critical success factors in effective project implementation. In Project Management Handbook; Wiley: New
York, NY, USA, 1988; Volume 479, pp. 167–190.
8. Goel, A.; Ganesh, L.S.; Kaur, A. Project management for social good: A conceptual framework and research agenda for socially
sustainable construction project management. Int. J. Manag. Proj. Bus. 2020, 13, 695–726.
9. Lima, L.; Trindade, E.; Alencar, L.; Alencar, M.; Silva, L. Sustainability in the construction industry: A systematic review of the
literature. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 289, 125730. [CrossRef]
10. Gunduz, M.; Elsherbeny, H.A. Critical assessment of contract administration using multidimensional fuzzy logic approach. J.
Constr. Eng. Manag. 2021, 147, 04020162. [CrossRef]
11. Babon-Ayeng, P.; Kissi, E.; Tannor, R.A.; Aigbavboa, C.; Badu, E. Critical success factors (CSFs) for the adoption of green
construction concepts in road construction in Ghana. Int. J. Constr. Manag. 2022, 1–10. [CrossRef]
12. Mok, K.Y.; Shen, G.Q.; Yang, J. Stakeholder management studies in mega construction projects: A review and future directions.
Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2015, 33, 446–457. [CrossRef]
13. Chan, A.P.C.; Yung, E.H.K.; Lam, P.T.I.; Tam, C.M.; Cheung, S.O. Application of Delphi method in selection of procurement
systems for construction projects. Constr. Manag. Econ. 2001, 19, 699–718. [CrossRef]
14. Kärnä, S. Analysing customer satisfaction and quality in construction–the case of public and private customers. Nord. J. Surv. Real
Estate Res. 2004, 2, 67–80.
15. Maloney, W.F. Construction product/service and customer satisfaction. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2002, 128, 522–529. [CrossRef]
16. Fewing, A. Stakeholder Management in Pavement Construction Projects. J. Constr. Manag. 2023, 45, 237–252.
17. Loosemore, M. Challenges in Stakeholder Management for Pavement Construction Projects. Constr. Res. Rev. 2023, 18, 511–526.
18. Mashali, S.; Lee, J.; Smith, P. Stakeholder Management in Mega Pavement Construction Projects. J. Mega Constr. 2023, 32, 789–802.
19. Koc, E.; Tan, C.; Johnson, M. Sustainable Practices in Pavement Construction: A Circular Economy Perspective. J. Sustain. Constr.
2023, 28, 103–120.
20. Abu-Khader, M.; Abdullatif, N. Value Management Techniques in Pavement Construction Projects: The Case of Jordan. Int. J.
Value Eng. 2021, 15, 801–816.
21. Phelan, R.; Brown, K.; Turner, L. Organization-Based Factor Rankings in Pavement Construction Projects. Constr. Eng. J. 2019, 52,
1323–1340.
22. Gao, J.-X.; Heng, F.; Yuan, Y.-P.; Liu, Y.-Y. Fatigue Reliability Analysis of Composite Material Considering the Growth of Effective
Stress and Critical Stiffness. Aerospace 2023, 10, 785. [CrossRef]
23. Aydin, K.; Kisi, O. Applicability of a fuzzy genetic system for crack diagnosis in Timoshenko beams. J. Comput. Civ. Eng. 2015, 29,
04014073. [CrossRef]
24. Mawdesley, M.J.; Al-Jibouri, S. Modelling construction project productivity using systems dynamics approach. Int. J. Product.
Perform. Manag. 2010, 59, 18–36.
25. Elmousalami, H.H. Artificial intelligence and parametric construction cost estimate modeling: State-of-the-art review. J. Constr.
Eng. Manag. 2020, 146, 03119008. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2024, 16, 3771 24 of 24

26. Tiruneh, G.G.; Fayek, A.R.; Sumati, V. Neuro-fuzzy systems in construction engineering and management research. Autom. Constr.
2020, 119, 103348. [CrossRef]
27. Azimi, Y.; Sahandi, P.; Shirmohammadi, N. Prüfer conditions under the amalgamated construction. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1703.03962.
28. Kv, S.; Pillai, G.; Peethambaran, B. Prediction of landslide displacement with controlling factors using extreme learning adaptive
neuro-fuzzy inference system (ELANFIS). Appl. Soft Comput. 2017, 61, 892–904. [CrossRef]
29. Naji, K.K.; Gunduz, M.; Naser, A.F. An adaptive neurofuzzy inference system for the assessment of change order management
performance in construction. J. Manag. Eng. 2022, 38, 04021098. [CrossRef]
30. Ziari, H.; Sobhani, J.; Ayoubinejad, J.; Hartmann, T. Analysing the Accuracy of Pavement Performance Models in the Short and
Long Terms: GMDH and ANFIS Methods. Road Mater. Pavement Des. 2016, 17, 619–637. [CrossRef]
31. Khalef, R.; El-Adaway, I.H. Automated identification of substantial changes in construction projects of airport improvement
program: Machine learning and natural language processing comparative analysis. J. Manag. Eng. 2021, 37, 04021062. [CrossRef]
32. Sadrossadat, E.; Heidaripanah, A.; Osouli, S. Prediction of the Resilient Modulus of Flexible Pavement Subgrade Soils Using
Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference Systems. Constr. Build. Mater. 2016, 123, 235–247. [CrossRef]
33. Hair, J.; Anderson, R.; Babin, B.; Black, W. Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective; Pearson Prentice-Hall: Upper Saddle
River, NJ, USA, 2010; Volume 7.
34. Shrestha, K.K.; Shrestha, P.P. Change orders on road maintenance contracts: Causes and preventive measures. J. Leg. Aff. Disput.
Resolut. Eng. Constr. 2019, 11, 04519009. [CrossRef]
35. Gunduz, M.; Tehemar, S.R. Assessment of delay factors in construction of sport facilities through multi criteria decision making.
Prod. Plan. Control 2020, 31, 1291–1302. [CrossRef]
36. Seresht, N.G.; Fayek, A.R. Neuro-fuzzy system dynamics technique for modeling construction systems. Appl. Soft Comput. 2020,
93, 106400. [CrossRef]
37. Seresht, N.; Fayek, A. Application of fuzzy logic integrated with system dynamics in construction modeling. In Proceedings of
the International Construction Specialty Conference of the Canadian Society for Civil Engineering (ICSC) (5th: 2015), Vancouver,
BC, Canada, 7–10 June 2015; University of British Columbia: Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2015.
38. Larsen, J.K.; Shen, G.Q.; Lindhard, S.M.; Brunoe, T.D. Factors affecting schedule delay, cost overrun, and quality level in public
construction projects. J. Manag. Eng. 2016, 32, 04015032. [CrossRef]
39. Jang, J.-S.R. ANFIS: Adaptive-network-based fuzzy inference system. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 1993, 23, 665–685. [CrossRef]
40. Abdulshahed, A.M.; Longstaff, A.P.; Fletcher, S.; Myers, A. Thermal error modelling of machine tools based on ANFIS with fuzzy
c-means clustering using a thermal imaging camera. Appl. Math. Model. 2015, 39, 1837–1852. [CrossRef]
41. Benmouiza, K.; Cheknane, A. Clustered ANFIS network using fuzzy c-means, subtractive clustering, and grid partitioning for
hourly solar radiation forecasting. Theor. Appl. Clim. 2019, 137, 31–43. [CrossRef]
42. Khan, M.A.; Zafar, A.; Farooq, F.; Javed, M.F.; Alyousef, R.; Alabduljabbar, H. Geopolymer concrete compressive strength via
artificial neural network, adaptive neuro fuzzy interface system, and gene expression programming with k-fold cross validation.
Front. Mater. 2021, 8, 621163. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.