1999
DOI: 10.1016/s0925-5273(98)00241-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On the sensitivity of project variability to activity mean duration

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
17
0

Year Published

2003
2003
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
4
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 38 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Cho and Yum [109] propose an uncertainty importance measure to measure the effect of the variability in an activity's duration on the variability of the overall project duration. Elmaghraby et al [110] investigate the impact of changing the mean duration of an activity on the variability of the project duration. Finally, Gutierrez and Paul [111] present an analytical treatment of the effect of activity variance on the expected project duration.…”
Section: Test Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Cho and Yum [109] propose an uncertainty importance measure to measure the effect of the variability in an activity's duration on the variability of the overall project duration. Elmaghraby et al [110] investigate the impact of changing the mean duration of an activity on the variability of the project duration. Finally, Gutierrez and Paul [111] present an analytical treatment of the effect of activity variance on the expected project duration.…”
Section: Test Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One different element that might create concerns to the decision maker is the variability of the outcomes but, to the best of our knowledge, variability has by itself to date never been studied in the context of stochastic resource-constrained project scheduling except for Ballestín and Leus [3], who observe a trade-off between expected makespan and makespan variability. For the record, we should point out that makespan variance has been studied in the absence of resource constraints, notably by Elmaghraby et al [11], who distinguish both mean and variance of the project duration as the two prime performance measures of concern, by Gutierrez and Paul [17], who examine the impact of variability in activity durations on mean project duration, and by Cho and Yum [6], whose focus is more on the sensitivity of makespan variability.…”
Section: Esmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This included criticism of PERT and the beta-distribution [29][30][31], and the treatment of project management as being not only deterministic [32]. The modeling of the uncertainty of project phenomena began to be considered as assumptions about attributes considered static broadened [33][34][35][36][37][38][39]. System dynamics began to be used for modeling the nonlinear effects of feedback loops in projects [40][41][42][43] and the modeling of projects under diffuse or probabilistic assumptions [44][45][46][47][48].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%