The goal of i2c research is to use informatics systems to bring about fundamental shifts in the manner used to design and manage infrastructure construction projects. The aim is to exploit advances in artificial intelligence to enhance project efficiency, promote sustainability and shape the city of the future.
The Centre was established in 2003 through funding from Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI), Ontario Innovation Fund (OIF), and industry contributions—mainly from the Toronto and Area Road Builders Association (TARBA), Greater Toronto Sewer and Watermain Contractor Association (GTSWCA), and Heavy Construction Association of Toronto (HCAT).
Informatics can be seen as the natural progress of traditional management information systems (MIS) in project management. In contrast to MIS focus on programming, automation and optimization, informatics is focused on modeling and managing knowledge and developing business intelligence tools, which is more subjective and human-centered.
Research Agenda
Three key paradigms guide i2c research agenda. Life cycle management: expanding analyses beyond initial design and the construction to the asset management phase. Citizen empowerment: transferring citizen engagement from a decision making step into a process to enable them to co-create project ideas and scope operations plans. Future city: reconfiguring project management practices to integrate climate change actions in project decision making, and reconfiguring urban infrastructure to enable and benefit from advances in the knowledge economy.
The main themes of research work include the following:
Knowledge capture and re-use (socio-semantic analytics): for the design and construction phases, how can we use advances in informatics to facilitate collaborative generation and use of knowledge? In addition to numerical and stochastic decision support systems, our research work tries to capture the semantics of knowledge. i2c researchers have developed the most comprehensive set of informatics ontologies in the construction domain (with over 4000 concepts); and the first domain ontology (of products, processes, and actors). These do not only capture knowledge in a formalized and consistent manner, but more importantly, support the creation of interoperable, and human-interpretable project management and collaboration environments. With the increased technical agency of citizens and the increasing power of knowledge analytics tools, we use social network analysis to extract ideas and project performance indicators form community debates. The Green 2.0 platform integrates engineering, social interaction, and business management to create a collaborative and user-centred environment for designing, marketing and operating green buildings.
Asset management: for the balance of the life cycle of facilities, how can we enhance operational policies and support rehabilitation decisions to make facilities smarter, more sustainable and achieve higher levels of services? i2c work focuses on organizational change, especially modeling organizational competency and resource utilization. We conducted a comprehensive analysis of the decision making research in construction; and used to propose a redesign of the environmental impact assessment process that aims to foster engagement, life cycle analysis and the co-creation and re-use of knowledge. We used machine learning to predict road segment conditions using data that is free and context-sensitive. Instead of a generalized deterioration curve, the new algorithm is cognizant of local conditions, such as weather and traffic levels. We are expanding this to study the impacts of different climate change scenarios: what are the costs? What are the impacts on levels of services? The same approach is used to evaluate the efficiency of road maintenance policies: how frequent and how extensive should roads be maintained?
Regenerative sustainability: for facilities in the future city, can we transfer urban infrastructure systems from a thinking mode that focuses on mitigating negative impacts (or community objections) into being a realm where new projects empower communities and become mechanisms for regenerative sustainability. Urban projects analysis is not about reducing impacts on the environment or citizens options. Decision making is not about power. Rather, urban systems are an instrument for innovation democratization and empowerment: citizens to co-creating new solutions to support climate action not only through physical artifacts but also through collaborative behavior change and supportive, community-driven operational policies. We use interactive virtual reality gaming to support urban dialogue; social and semantic network analysis to track patterns of opinion change; and anticipatory computing to distill and deliver relevant big data to citizens.
Courses
i2c is engaged in several related courses:
CIV1281-Asset management (summer course)
The course covers the theory and software systems for asset management as well as organizational and policy-making issues.
CIV1299-Advanced Asset Management and Analytics (summer course)
This course covers the use of operations research and advanced analytics/machine learning algorithms to enhance the analysis of asset management decisions.
CIV1298-BIM (summer course)
The course is not limited to the theory and techniques of BIM, but, more importantly, focuses on the management of BIM: reengineering work processes to enable full exploitation of the technology—especially in a globalized company, where expertise are distributed.
CIV1299-Virtual Construction (summer course)
This course covers advanced topics in construction informatics, including advanced BIM applications; linked data tools; social and semantic analytics; virtual reality systems;
CIV1299-The business of knowledge in civil engineering (Fall semester)
The course investigates the relationship between civil informatics, globalization and the knowledge economy in forming new business models for the evolving “infrastructure industry”.
Semantic models for construction and infrastructure systems:
i2c teams started working on developing ontological models for construction and infrastructure systems in 2002. Our work in this area was amongst the earliest application of this approach in construction and, now, one of the most comprehensive. Traditionally, modeling work in construction focused on the classification of products and, later, product data models (such as IFC) as well as standardized models of process data. Our work advocated two major shifts. First, focusing on semantics rather than data modeling. By virtue, this is the core objective of ontology. Second, and more uniquely, emphasizing the role and need to model actors in addition to products and processes. This is not just limited to project players [P12, P23], but also non-professional stakeholders such as members of the community [P19]. This stems from the belief that knowledge is a social phenomenon that emerges within networks of human beings. Later, this approach enabled us to contribute to the formalized use of social network analysis in capturing and re-using knowledge embedded in social dialogue in project management practices [P38, P40, P44].
An informatics ontology is a formal description of what we know about a domain of discourse. It includes hierarchies (taxonomies) of concepts, their relationships and the axioms (limitations) that describe their behavior. Informatics ontologies interact very well with data standards to support interoperable computer programs as well as human interpretation (linguistic-savvy). While ontologies are related more to knowledge representation (rather than reasoning), they are normally used to complement AI tools to enhance their decision support capabilities.
We developed a set of ontologies to represent knowledge with the underlying belief that knowledge representation should balance the need for reasoning and the needs for communication to make decisions. This included developing ontologies for urban infrastructure products [P30], processes in infrastructure and construction domain [P27], actors and roles [P19, P23], green construction [P24], and finance of privatize infrastructure systems [P15]. These ontologies were used to develop AI-enabled web-based systems for corporate memory [P12]; process integration in virtual organizations [P26]; integrating sustainability in the routing of urban utilities [P29]; and social semantic communication in construction [P10].
Currently, the ontology network encompasses 4,000 concepts. It was the core semantic model in two major Canadian research projects. The first, funded by JIIRP (Joint Infrastructure Interdependency Program), which aimed at creating an interoperable understanding of the concepts of risk and interdependency across urban infrastructure systems [C52]. The second, funded by CANARIE, established an online, real-time platform for integrated management of intelligent transportation systems (ONE-ITS). The expertise of these project enabled us to develop the first domain ontology for construction (DOCK) [P36].
Current research work relates to the use of linked data systems to create interoperability between ontologies and other data standards. This is because no one ontology will be able to present all the concepts and needs of the AEC domain. Equally important, we need to link AEC ontologies with those of other related domain to meet the expanding (business integration) needs of knowledge organization. At the ontological level, we developed an approach for margining ontologies using lattice algebra [P28]. At the data integration level, the Green 2.0 project updated IFC to enable the use of social network analysis. Our work went beyond the scope of BFC to consider the semantics of comments and their networks [P42]. More importantly, actors and their networks are an essential part of the linkage process. In other words, we combine data of the physical products with the semantics of their context and the actors who are generating the knowledge.
Semantic models for construction and infrastructure systems:
i2c teams started working on developing ontological models for construction and infrastructure systems in 2002. Our work in this area was amongst the earliest application of this approach in construction and, now, one of the most comprehensive. Traditionally, modeling work in construction focused on the classification of products and, later, product data models (such as IFC) as well as standardized models of process data. Our work advocated two major shifts. First, focusing on semantics rather than data modeling. By virtue, this is the core objective of ontology. Second, and more uniquely, emphasizing the role and need to model actors in addition to products and processes. This is not just limited to project players [P12, P23], but also non-professional stakeholders such as members of the community [P19]. This stems from the belief that knowledge is a social phenomenon that emerges within networks of human beings. Later, this approach enabled us to contribute to the formalized use of social network analysis in capturing and re-using knowledge embedded in social dialogue in project management practices [P38, P40, P44].
An informatics ontology is a formal description of what we know about a domain of discourse. It includes hierarchies (taxonomies) of concepts, their relationships and the axioms (limitations) that describe their behavior. Informatics ontologies interact very well with data standards to support interoperable computer programs as well as human interpretation (linguistic-savvy). While ontologies are related more to knowledge representation (rather than reasoning), they are normally used to complement AI tools to enhance their decision support capabilities.
We developed a set of ontologies to represent knowledge with the underlying belief that knowledge representation should balance the need for reasoning and the needs for communication to make decisions. This included developing ontologies for urban infrastructure products [P30], processes in infrastructure and construction domain [P27], actors and roles [P19, P23], green construction [P24], and finance of privatize infrastructure systems [P15]. These ontologies were used to develop AI-enabled web-based systems for corporate memory [P12]; process integration in virtual organizations [P26]; integrating sustainability in the routing of urban utilities [P29]; and social semantic communication in construction [P10].
Currently, the ontology network encompasses 4,000 concepts. It was the core semantic model in two major Canadian research projects. The first, funded by JIIRP (Joint Infrastructure Interdependency Program), which aimed at creating an interoperable understanding of the concepts of risk and interdependency across urban infrastructure systems [C52]. The second, funded by CANARIE, established an online, real-time platform for integrated management of intelligent transportation systems (ONE-ITS). The expertise of these project enabled us to develop the first domain ontology for construction (DOCK) [P36].
Current research work relates to the use of linked data systems to create interoperability between ontologies and other data standards. This is because no one ontology will be able to present all the concepts and needs of the AEC domain. Equally important, we need to link AEC ontologies with those of other related domain to meet the expanding (business integration) needs of knowledge organization. At the ontological level, we developed an approach for margining ontologies using lattice algebra [P28]. At the data integration level, the Green 2.0 project updated IFC to enable the use of social network analysis. Our work went beyond the scope of BFC to consider the semantics of comments and their networks [P42]. More importantly, actors and their networks are an essential part of the linkage process. In other words, we combine data of the physical products with the semantics of their context and the actors who are generating the knowledge.
Stakeholder management in infrastructure project development
Stakeholder management has been a major area of interest to i2c researchers. Lately, our interest and contribution in this field evolved into the use of social media in reaching out to communities [P38, P44, P47]. Beyond the engagement, our work over the last five years has focused on conducting an in-depth socio-semantic analysis of the contents and social networks of project discussion networks (PDN). (social) Network analysis is used for capturing knowledge in contrast to its traditional usage in construction research: study communication and organizational structures of projects. We developed the first extensive analysis of PDN. Instead of using off-the-shelf tools, we have developed and validated new algorithms specific to PDN [P40].
Contextualizing the definition of sustainability: Using a Game-With-A-Purpose (GWAP), this service exposes citizens to a set of already existing indices for sustainability. They are asked to classify input (such as tweets) created by other citizens over the PDN according to the categories in the indices. Analyzing their input helps modify the structure of existing indices to reflect the needs/attitudes of local community. Instead of using static indices or directly asking users for formal inputs, such a semi-structured approach will balance the need for professional rigor and, at the same time, will reflect context-sensitivity [P41].
Understanding PDNs within project context: the objectives of this service are twofold: semantic analysis of terms and concepts discussed by users over the PDN for clustering the ideas and topics discussed [P51]; and to study patterns of influence among end-users (nodes) [P44].
S3: Analysis of opinion dynamics: nodes of a PDN express their opinion in the form of subject-sentiment dyads. Each discussion is composed of statements, and each statement discusses an aspect of the project (a subject) by supporting or opposing it (the sentiment) [P46, P50]. We study these dyads and their evolution as the participants’ social network changes.
S4: Customized user communications: use recommender systems to customize communication to stakeholders based on their social and semantic profile. This service uses a publish/subscribe system to link each user to a set of project documents that matches their profiles (needs). In cases where no relevant project documents are available about the desired topic, the user will be directed to the relevant knowledge sources on the web (especially Wikipedia) [P47].
S5: Analyzing knowledge constructs: This service will explore the usage of the material provided to users and will analyze the links/similarities between them to detect concept patterns [P52]. This is to be used to extract knowledge constructs from the unstructured data of users and their input/documents [P54]. Collating these constructs will help discover a common concept mosaic (a bottom-up ontology).
i2c students developed a platform for social network analytics, community engagement and communication systems in infrastructure construction and asset management domains. We are calling it Crowd2Know. The platform offers the following services
- Knowledge Pull: extracting knowledge from crowd chatter
- Visualization of the community: a graphical visualization of the network of the community;
- Profiles of the users: analysis of the bios of users engaged in the discussions;
- Identification of sub-communities: groups that are closer to each other than to the overall network;
- Semantic analysis of contents: extraction of keywords and their frequencies.
- Knowledge Push: Customizing the delivery of knowledge to users through a recommender system.
Social BIM and green building management
Green 2.0 is a project supported by CANARIE (an R&D arm for the Ministry of Industry in Canada) to develop a middleware platform for integrated, multi-stakeholder, socio-technical analysis of green buildings. Green 2.0 combined BIM with social network analysis and online, automated analysis of energy usage [P42]. The Green 2.0 platform was the first to embed unstructured and semantic user interactions into BIM. Unlike using BCF, Green 2.0 approach provides users with a seamless ability to exchange views and ideas in an open manner. Furthermore, BIM was connected to a standardized software to evaluate energy usage in buildings. Project teams can study different project designs and, for each, they can estimate the expected energy usage. Providing access for such features to end-users is a major component in securing their support for greener options.
Green 2.0 takes BIM from the realm of a digital platform into the realm of a socially-based collaborative platform for decision making. We give people the controls of BIM software to suggest, choose, study and innovate new means to design and operate their facilities. Through publishing BIM to all stakeholders (professionals, public and business) we can harness the intelligence of the crowd.
The Scope of Green 2.0 Project
Asset management
i2c research in asset management focuses on the areas of decision support systems, data management and analytics, and organizational and policy-making issues. Aware of the essential role and need for a cultural change, we conducted a critical review of research work on decision-making models over the last 50 years. We analyzed the modeling approach, AI tools used, nature of analysis parameters, as well as epistemological assumptions. We developed a framework for reconsidering the whole process of decision making in construction and asset management practices [P39]. The proposed approach promotes evolutionary, bottom-up discovery of knowledge and consensus building. Similarly, we are studying means to revamp pre-project planning (and environmental impact assessment) to expedite approvals while promoting engagement and sustainability [P24]. We present an implementation of the proposed decision-making framework that balances the power between citizens and project proponents and promotes the co-creation of project features and plans [P48].
Research teams from i2c developed a competency assessment framework to help “change management” in municipalities. The aim is to enable efficient implementation of asset management beyond the limited scope of maintenance scheduling or even life cycle costing assessment [P45]. On a bi-annually basis, we run a survey with OGRA for assessing asset management practices and competencies in Ontario’s smaller municipalities.
Research teams from i2c developed an ontology-based GIS system to coordinate the planning of urban infrastructure systems [P29]. The system analyzes the routing of urban water-mains through a three-dimensional semantic analysis. The first dimension represents the physical and socio-economic attributes of the area under study. The second dimension represents the physical and sustainability features of the pipe system suggested. The third dimension represents the decision criteria, which can encompass features such as life cycle costing, impact on traffic, the impact of maintenance on nearby businesses, and community and environmental impacts. This included developing a new ontology [P30], and a platform to enrich GIS with semantic features [B2]. Other work developed models and decision support systems to help integrate project planning and optimize construction work [P6, P14, P21].
Data reliability and collection features high in this thrust. We studied subsurface utility engineering (SUE) role (and return on investments) in enhancing data reliability [P22]. Similarly, we analyzed the life cycle costs of smart infrastructure systems to justify and optimize investments in real-time data collection [P4]. To this end, i2c researchers collaborated with colleagues in Mechanical Engineering to study the use and value of energy harvesting from civil infrastructure using piezoceramic materials [C47, C51].
Currently, we are using data analytics and machine learning to help discover patterns of asset deterioration and efficiency of maintenance programs. We developed an interactive system and map to help municipal decision makers predict road conditions in the near future [P53]. We are also investigating the use of new technologies in data collection: drones, apps, and social media [P31]. The emphasis is to help municipalities (especially smaller ones) assess the gaps and investments needs and coordinate decision making [B5]. We are also using data analytics for studying means to scope (bundle) projects in a manner to optimize costs, but at the same time, enhance the competitiveness of local small and medium contractors.
To address the limitations and diversity of data in the asset management domain, i2c researchers use machine learning to help process unstructured data. For example, working with colleagues in the transportation domain, we are using socio-semantic analytics of user satisfaction and travel patterns to guide decision making of transit (mobility) projects. Linking usage patterns and project features is at the core of optimizing asset management decisions: which operational policies have the greatest impacts on levels of services? Which rehabilitation work will have the greatest impact on energy consumption? Which new projects will have the greatest impact on overall system efficiency? In essence, we expand the options pool: do we need a behavior change or a re-design of operational policies, or rehabilitation of facilities, or to build a new one? Such considerations are at the core of any investment for (future) assets in the smart city, especially in relation to driverless cars.
ONE ITS project (funded also by CANARIE in 2007), represented a way to implement i2c vision of integrated semantic-based operations of infrastructure assets. The project developed an ontology for infrastructure interdependency, including modeling of threats, vulnerabilities and risks [C52]. This was used to power a middleware engine to study roadway incidents and coordinate actions accordingly, including the dispatch of emergency personnel and reconfiguring traffic flow as needed.
Construction business
i2c researchers have developed a set of case studies on assessing traditional marketing decisions such as market attractiveness and competition levels [P16]. We are also very interested in the impacts of globalization on construction [P35]. More importantly, we are keen on understanding the interaction between globalization, the knowledge economy, and BIM and their collective impacts on business models [C57, C60]. The impact and analysis of new knowledge-enabled business models go beyond the boundaries of business management or making a profit into re-shaping the overall structure of the industry and public decision making [B1].
Green 2.0 implements a BPM platform for integrating information and product supply chains. For this, we are re-using a semantic process synchronization mechanism, previously developed by one of i2c students [P26]. The aim is to embed business process management within BIM to coordinate the flow of tasks—based on the semantics of each process. The users of such business processes are not only engineering professionals and owner representatives, but also the contractors and the suppliers as well as end-users. All have access and ability to customize the delivery of information—increasing their ability to enrich the knowledge exchanges and participate in developing and selecting options.
Constructability and value engineering analysis
While the bulk of i2c work in the last few years focused on the use of informatics and knowledge management to enhance construction and project management practices, i2c researchers still work on non-IT side of the domain—especially the areas of constructability and value analysis. They worked on documenting and analyzing innovative construction practices in bridge construction such as the rotating deck construction method [P14]. Because we see constructability and value engineering as one continuum for the implementation of construction knowledge, we coupled these two approaches together. This included case studies such as the analysis of smart educational rooms and urban street redesign [P21]. To take our knowledge beyond the level of case analysis, we focused in one of the main projects on developing a comprehensive value-based model for design optimization [P20]. In this work, we provided a new and unique model for capturing stakeholder values, analyzing different design options and their (miss)matches, and using an optimization technique (data envelopment analysis) to link the two concepts: what is valuable to users and what is technically feasible. The same approach was later used in the Green 2.0 model. In this case, however, we captured both user and professional preferences through analysis of the social networks and the semantics of their comments [C55]—showcasing, one possible scenario of bottom-up decision making using chaotic input [as suggested in B5].
Smart city and innovation democratization
The next frontier in i2c research relates to the role of informatics and asset management in the city of the future. With the challenges of climate change and the opportunities of the smart city, public agencies have to re-engineer their role to be more proactive and to lead a consorted effort to enhance the efficiency of urban systems, and levels of services [P13, P48]. At the core of this change is a paradigm shift in the role of citizens in the smart city. Lately, community objections have stopped or delayed many large projects—resulting in budget escalation. Using ontologies, analytics and BIM, students developed tools for customizing the delivery of information to project stakeholders [P10, P33, P47]. We developed means for profiling communities, their views, and the dynamics of their opinion as project scope and features change. In collaboration with colleagues in transportation, we used the same approach for profiling the ideas and satisfaction levels of transit users: what are the topics of interest, how do they change with group dynamics and how do these impact information diffusion and opinion making [P50]. At the surface, these tools provide a more effective means for understanding and communicating with communities. At a deeper level, it is a major step in supporting a multi-stakeholder approach for the generation of knowledge; and collecting and creating models for the role and use of data in planning and operational decisions for smart systems (such as driverless cars).
In 2003, the city of Toronto, after formal and extensive public consultation and numerous amendments to design, started constructing a dedicated lane for streetcars in St. Clair Street. A community group did not approve of the project and sued the city—stopping the project for months and causing the loss of millions of dollars [P21]. In 2018, the city faced the same problem in King Street. Instead of a mentality of “design, then consult the community, and eventually build”, a pilot project is currently underway to restrict car access to the street during rush hours. Observation and healthy debates about the pilot are ongoing. This highlights the future of project decision making: behavior change is integral in any project; prototyping as an interim step in realizing project values and impact; and the centrality of community approval to any new project. This example and others highlight the value of piloting in decision making in today’s socio-technical culture. In many cases, such physical prototyping will not be feasible. The next best thing is a data-rich and interactive virtual reality portal such as the one suggested here.
FutureTalks is a research initiative at UofT based in the Munk School of Global Affairs, with collaboration from 30+ professors, NGOs and public agencies, which aims to engage citizens in generating sustainable futures for Toronto. The objective is not just to develop a scenario or a plan. The aim is to study and develop an environment for empowering citizens to lead imagining futures for their city, co-developing policies and collaborating in decision making [P25, P37]. The result is a city with empowered citizens and more resiliency, especially in regards to climate change and the deployment of smart systems. The project will engage 100,000 citizens in Toronto through high-touch (face-to-face events), and high-tech tools. In the latter, we plan to use interactive virtual gaming to help visualize scenarios; social network analysis to profile citizen groups; semantic analysis to capture ideas and opinion dynamics; and cognitive and anticipatory computing to find, customize and deliver relevant big data to citizens as they deliberate and innovate [P41, P43, P47].
Publications
[1] Names in boldface: Graduate students supervised; Underlined names: Undergraduate students supervised.
| Book Chapters & Peer-Reviewed Reports |
B6. Piryonesi, M. and El-Diraby, T. E. (2018). Using data analytics for cost-effective prediction of road conditions: the case of pavement condition index, FHWA Report HRT-18-065 (peer reviewed); winner, ASCE/FHWA data analytics award
B5. Nik Bakht, M., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2015). Towards Bottom-up Decision Making and Collaborative Knowledge Generation in Urban Infrastructure Projects through Online Social Media. In Matei, S. A., Russell, M. G., Bertino, E. (Eds.) Transparency in Social Media--Tools, Methods and Algorithms for Mediating Online Interactions (pp. 145-164). Springer Publ., New York, NY.
B4. El-Diraby, T. E. (2015). From Deep Blue to Watson: the nature and role of semantic systems in civil informatics. In Issa, R., Mutis, I. (Eds.) Ontology in the AEC industry: a decade of research and development in architecture, engineering, and construction (pp. 97-120). ASCE Publ., Reston, VA.
B3. Nik Bakht, M., Kinawy, S., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2014). Construction Management and Public Participation. In Garrett, M. (Ed.). Encyclopedia of transportation: social science and policy, (Vols. 1-4). SAGE Publ., Thousand Oaks, CA.
B2. El-Diraby, T. E. and, Osman, H. M. (2009). Ontologies for linking CAD/GIS. In Karimi, H., and Akinci, B. (ed.) CAD and GIS Integration (pp. 171-181). CRC Press-Taylor & Francis Publishers, ISBN: 9781420068054.
B1. El-Diraby, T. E. (2006). Infrastructure development in the knowledge city. In Smith, I. (ed). Intelligent Computing in Engineering and Architecture (pp. 175-185). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
| Journal Papers (submitted) |
P56 Piryonesi, M. and El-Diraby, T. E. (2018). “A machine-learning powered decision-support tool for quantifying the impact of climate change on road infrastructure”. Construction and Building Materials (submitted).
P55. Piryonesi, M. and El-Diraby, T. E. (2018). “Data analytics in asset management: cost-effective prediction of pavement condition index”. J of Infrastructure Systems (Submitted)
P54. Piryonesi, M. and El-Diraby, T. E. (2018). Using data analytics algorithms to address the limitations of road performance data size and stochasticity”. Computing in Civil Engineering (Submitted).
P53. El-Diraby, T. E., Shalaby, A. S., and Hosseini, M. (2018). “Linking social, semantic and sentiment analyses to support modeling transit customers’ satisfaction: towards formal study of opinion dynamics”. Sustainable Cities and Society (2nd review).
P52. Nik Bakht, M., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2017) “Beyond Chatter: Profiling Community Discussion Networks in Urban Infrastructure Projects”. Infrastructure Systems (2nd review).
| Journal Papers (Published) |
P51 Aragao, R. R., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2019). “Using Blockmodeling for capturing project knowledge constructs: the case of energy analysis in the construction phase of oil and gas facilities”. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 39, 214-226.
P50 Aragao, R. R., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2019). “Using network analytics to capture knowledge: three cases in collaborative energy-oriented planning for oil and gas facilities”. Cleaner Production, 209, 1429-1444
P49 Nik Bkht, M., Hosseini, M., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2018). “Game-based crowdsourcing to support collaborative definition of sustainability in green projects”. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 38, 501-513.
P48. Bucci, M., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2018). “The functions of knowledge management processes in urban impact assessment: the case of Ontario”. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 36(3), 265-280.
P47. Kinawy, S., El-Diraby, T. E., and Konomi, H. (2018). “Customizing information delivery to project stakeholders”. Sustainable Cities and Society, 38(4), 286-300.
P46. Hosseini, M., El-Diraby, T. E., and Shalaby, A. S. (2018). “Supporting sustainable system adoption: socio-semantic analysis of transit rider debates on social media”. Sustainable Cities and Society, 38(4), 123-136.
P45. Ismaili, D., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2017). “Organizational competency in urban water infrastructure asset management”. Canadian J. of Civil Engineering, 44(12), 1056-1070.
P44. Nik Bakht, M., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2017). “Project collective mind: unlocking project social discussion networks”. Automation in Construction, 84(12), 50-69.
P43. Kinawy, S., Nik Bakht, M., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2017). “Knowledge mismatches in stakeholder communication: the case of the Leslie and Ferrand transit stations, Toronto, Canada”. Sustainable Cities and Society, 34(10), 239-249.
P42. El-Diraby, T. E., Krijnen, T., and Papagelis, M (2017). “Green2.0: integrated BIM-based analysis of green buildings”. Automation in Construction, 82(10), 59-74.
P41. Nik Bakht, M. and El-Diraby, T. E. (2016). “SUSTWEETABILITY: a social annotation game for exposing public community's perspective on sustainability of urban infrastructure”. International J. of Human-Computer Studies, 89. 54-72.
P40. Nik Bakht, M., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2016). “Communities of interest–interest of communities: social and semantic analysis of communities in infrastructure discussion networks”. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, 31(1), 34-49.
P39. Nik Bakht, M., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2015). “Synthesis of decision-making research in construction”. Construction Engineering and Management, 141(9), 04015027.
P38. Nik Bakht, M., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2014). “Hidden social networks that drive online public involvement in infrastructure construction: case study of light rail transit projects in North America”. Transportation Research Record, TRB, #2453/Planning.
P37 El-Diraby, T. E. (2013). “Civil infrastructure decision making as a chaotic sociotechnical system: role of information systems in engaging stakeholders and democratizing innovation”. Infrastructure Systems, 19(4), 355-362.
P36. El-Diraby, T. E. (2013). “A domain ontology for construction knowledge”. Construction Engineering and Management, 139(7), 23-34.
P35. Cariaga, I., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2013). “Marketing Canadian housing construction products in Mexico”. Construction Engineering and Management, 139(6), 1-9.
P34. El-Diraby, T. E. (2013). “Validating ontologies in informatics systems: approaches and lessons learned for AEC”. Information Technology in Construction (ITcon), 19(28), 474-493.
P33 Zhang, J. and El-Diraby, T. E. (2012). “Social semantic portal for coordinating construction communication”. Computing in Civil Engineering, 26(1), 90-104.
P32. El-Diraby, T. E. (2012). “Epistemology of construction informatics”. Construction Engineering and Management, 138(1), 53-65.
P31. Ballan, S., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2011). “A Value map for communication systems in construction”. Information Technology in Construction (ITcon), 16(44), 745-760.
P30. Osman, H., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2011). “An ontology for construction terms in utility products”. Automation in Construction, 20(8), 1120-1132.
P29. Osman, H., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2011). “A knowledge-enabled system for routing utility infrastructure in urban areas”. Construction Engineering and Management, 137(3), 198-213.
P28. El-Gohary, N., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2011). “Merging architectural, engineering and construction (AEC) ontologies”. Computing in Civil Engineering, 25(2), 109-128.
P27. El-Gohary, N., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2010). “A domain ontology for processes in infrastructure and construction”. Construction Engineering and Management, 136(7), 730-744.
P26. El-Gohary, N., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2010). “A dynamic knowledge-based process integration portal for collaborative construction”. Construction Engineering and Management, 136(3), 316-326.
P25 El-Diraby, T. E. (2009). “E-city Knowware: knowledge middleware for coordinated management of sustainable cities”. Design Management and Technology (Gestão & Tecnologia de Projetos), Brazil 4(2), 3-25.
P24. Surahyo, M., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2009). “A knowledge management system for the environmental costs of highway construction”. Construction Engineering and Management, 135(4), 254-266.
P23. Zhang, J. and El-Diraby T. E. (2009). “SSWP: a social semantic Web portal for effective communication in construction”. J. of Computers, 4(4).
P22. Osman, H., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2007). “Implementation of subsurface utility engineering in Ontario: cases and a cost model”. Canadian J. of Civil Engineering, 34(12), 1529-1541.
P21. Osman, H., El-Gohary, N., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2007). “Integrating value engineering and context sensitive solutions: the case of St. Clair Ave. West transit improvements project". Transportation Research Record, 2025, 81-89.
P20. Cariaga, I., El-Diraby, T. E., and Osman, H. (2007). “Optimizing project scope based on life cycle costs and value achievement: the case of smart educational facilities”. Construction Engineering and Management, 133(10), 761-770.
P19. El-Gohary, N., Osman, H. and El-Diraby, T. E. (2006). "Stakeholder management for public private partnership". Int’l J. of Project Management, 24(7), 595-604.
P18. Osman, H., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2006). “Ontological modeling of infrastructure products and related concepts,” Transportation Research Record No. 1984, Highway Facility Design.
P17. El-Diraby, T. E., Lima, C., and Fies, B. (2006). “Strategies for incorporating data exchange standards and classification systems in e-business taxonomies”. Information Technology Management, XVI(4), 26-38.
P16. El-Diraby, T. E. Costa, J., and Singh, S. (2006). “How do contractors evaluate company competitiveness and market attractiveness: the case of Toronto contractors”. Canadian J. of Civil Engineering, 33, 596-608.
P15. El-Diraby, T. E., and Gill, S. (2006). "A taxonomy for construction terms in privatized infrastructure finance: toward a semantic cross-industry exchange of knowledge”. Construction Management and Economics, 24(2), 271-285.
P14. El-Diraby, T. E. and Zhang, J. (2006). “Constructability analysis of the bridge superstructure rotation construction method: the case of China”. Construction Engineering and Management, 132(4), 353-362.
P13. El-Diraby, T. E. (2006). “A web-services environment for collaborative management of product life cycle costs”. Construction Engineering and Management, 132(3), 300-313.
P12. El-Diraby, T. E. and Zhang, J. (2006). “A semantic framework for corporate memory management in building construction”. Automation in Construction, 15(4), 504-521.
P11. Lima, C., El-Diraby, T. E., and Stephens, J. (2005). “Ontology-based optimization of knowledge management in e-construction”. Information Technology in Construction (ITCON), 10(21), 305-327.
P10. El-Diraby, T. E., and Wang, B. (2005). “e-society portal: integrating urban highway construction projects into the knowledge city”. Construction Engineering and Management, 132(11), 1196-1211.
P9. El-Diraby, T. E., Lima, C., and Fies, B. (2005). “A domain taxonomy for construction concepts: toward a formal ontology for construction knowledge”. Computing in Civil Engineering, 19(3), 394-406.
P8. El-Diraby, T. E., and Brecino, F. (2005). “A taxonomy for outside plant construction in telecommunication infrastructure: supporting knowledge-based virtual teaming”. Infrastructure Systems, 11(2), 111-121.
P7. El-Diraby, T. E., and Kashif, K. (2005). "A distributed ontology architecture for knowledge management in highway construction". Construction Engineering and Management, 131(5), 591-603.
P6. El-Diraby, T. E., Abdulhai, B., and Pramod, K. C. (2005). “Integrated analysis of operation and feasibility of urban transit infrastructure: the case of Toronto monorail”. Canadian J. of Civil Engineering, 32(1), 58-71.
P5. El-Diraby, T. E., and O’Connor, J. T. (2004). “Lessons learned in designing research methodology in construction management field research”. Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 130(2), 109-114.
P4. El-Diraby, T. E., and Rasic, I. (2004). “Model for life cycle cost analysis of smart materials and intelligent devices”. Computing in Civil Engineering, 18(2), 115-119.
P3. Rivard, H., Froese, T., Waugh, L., El-Diraby, T., Mora, R., Torres, H., Gill, S., and O’Reilly, T. (2004). “Case studies on the use of information technology in the Canadian construction industry”. Information Technology in Construction (ITcon), 9(2), 19-34.
P2. El-Diraby, T. E., and O’Connor, J. T. (2001). "Model for evaluating bridge construction plans". Construction Engineering and Management, 127(5), 399-405.
P1. O’Connor, J. T., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2000). “Urban freeway bridge re-construction planning: the case of Mockingbird Bridge”. Construction Engineering and Management, 126(1), 61-67.
| Conference Papers |
C78 Williams, S., Robinson, J., Poland, B., Teelucksingh, C., Wong, W., El-Diraby, T., Slater, K., Pajouhesh, P., and Benzakin, G. (2019). FutureTalks: A Case Study in Transdisciplinary Co-production for Transformative Urban Sustainability, International Transdisciplinarity Conference 2019
C77 Aragao, A. and El-Diraby, T. E. (2019). “Automating representation and retrieval of unstructured data in construction”. 36th International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction (ISARC), Banff, AB, Canada (Submitted).
C76 Dorrah, D., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2019). “Modular construction: saving cost and time beyond project initiation”. 36th International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction (ISARC), Banff, AB, Canada (Submitted).
C75 El-Diraby, T. E., Zarli, A., and El-Darieby, M. (2019). “The automation of the softer side of smart city: a socio-semantic roadmap”. 36th International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction (ISARC), Banff, AB, Canada (Submitted).
C74 El-Diraby, T. E., Kinawy, S., & Piryonesi, S. M. (2017). “A comprehensive review of approaches used by Ontario municipalities to develop road asset management plans”. 96th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board (No. 17-00281), Washington, D.C.
C73. Piryonesi, M., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2017). “A data analytics solution for predicting the pavement condition index of roads using the most affordable attributes”. Construction Specialty Conference, CSCE, Vancouver, BC.
C72 Aragao, A. and El-Diraby, T. E. (2017). “A knowledge map based on network analysis to support energy decisions on the construction phase”. Construction Specialty Conference, CSCE, Vancouver, BC.
C71. Hosseini, M., Shalaby, A. S., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2017). “Social media analytics for measuring transit customer satisfaction and dynamics of online transit discussions”. CUTA Annual Fall Conference, Vancouver, BC.
C70. Hosseini, M., Shalaby, A. S., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2017). “Measuring customer satisfaction in public transit using online social media”. 96th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
C69. Hosseini, M., Nik Bakht, M., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2016). “Social sentiment for sustainability of infrastructure mega-projects”. 33rd Annual Conf., CIB-W78, Brisbane Australia.
C68. El-Diraby, T. E., Krijnen, T. F., and Papagelis, M. (2016). “Green 2.0: socio-technical analytics of green buildings”. 33rd Annual Conf., CIB-W78, Brisbane Australia.
C67. Papagelis, M., Krijnen, T. F., Elshenawy, M., Konomi, T., Fang, R., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2016). “Green2. 0: enabling complex interactions between buildings and people”. 19th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing Companion. ACM.
C66. Nik Bakht, M., Hosseini, M. and El-Diraby, T. E. (2015). “Sustweetability: infrastructure sustainability-related topic classification in social media”. 32nd Annual Conf., CIB-W78, Eindhoven, the Netherlands.
C65. Nik Bakht, M., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2015). “Topic modeling for infrastructure-related discussions in online social media”. Construction Specialty Conf., CSCE., Vancouver, Canada.
C64. Aragao, R., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2015). “Brazilian and Canadian oil & gas industries – similarities, differences, challenges and perspectives for a sustainable industry”. Construction Specialty Conf., CSCE., Vancouver, Canada.
C63. Nik Bakht, M., Kinawy, S., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2015). “News and social media as performance indicators for public involvement in transportation planning—the Eglinton Crosstown project in Toronto”. 94th Annual Meeting, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D. C.
C62. Nik Bakht, M., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2014) “Ordinary people–extraordinary projects! From big data to knowledge in stakeholder management for construction megaprojects”. European Conf. on Product and Process Modeling, Vienna, Austria.
C61. Nik Bakht, M., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2014). “Infrastructure discussion networks: analyzing social media debates of LRT projects in North American cities". 93rd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
C60. Mazen, I., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2013). “Business model for BIM-based services”. 30th Annual Conf., CIB-W78, Beijing, China.
C59. Kinawy, S., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2013). “Semantic wayfinding for infrastructure projects”. 30th Annual Conf., CIB-W78, Beijing, China.
C58. Nik Bakht, M., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2013). “What does social media say about the infrastructure Construction project?”. 30th Annual Conf., CIB-W78, Beijing, China.
C57. Mazen, I., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2013). “Business models for selling AEC knowledge over the Cloud”. 4th Construction Specialty Conf., CSCE, Montreal, QC.
C56. Nik Bakht, M., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2013). “Analyzing infrastructure discussion networks: order of “influence” in chaos of “followers”. 4th Construction Specialty Conf., CSCE, Montreal, QC.
C55. Kinawy, S., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2012). “Communicating functions and impacts to urban communities: an ontology for the infrastructure construction industry”. 29th Annual Workshop, CIB-W78, Beirut, Lebanon.
C54. El-Diraby, T. E. (2011). “Infrastructure as a socio-technical chaotic system”. 28th Annual Workshop, CIB-W78, Sophia-Antipolis, France.
C53. El-Diraby, T. E. (2011). “e-city systems: civil infrastructure systems in the e-society”. E-Society Conf., IDCI, Avila, Spain.
C52. Abu Beih, M., El-Diraby, T. E., and Abdulhai, B. (2010). “Coordinating urban incident management using web 2.0 tools, intelligent software agents and ontologies“. 27th Annual Workshop, CIB-W78, Cairo, Egypt.
C51. Kulkarni, V., Waechter, D., Ben Mrad, El-Diraby, T., and Prasad, E. (2010). “Energy harvesting using Piezoceramics”. 4th Int’l Conf. on Micro- and Nanosystems-ICMNS4, Montréal, QC.
C50. Kulkarni, V., Gubarenko, S., Ben Mrad, R., El-Diraby, T., and Prasad, E. (2010). “Energy harvesting using Piezoceramics and Piezoceramic fibres”. US Navy Workshop, Pittsburgh, PA.
C49. Kinawy, S., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2010). “e-Society: a community engagement framework for construction projects”. Construction Research Congress, ASEC, Banff, AB.
C48. El-Diraby, T. E. (2010). “Semantic representation of infrastructure interdependencies: rethinking infrastructure design and management”. Construction Research Congress, ASEC, Banff, AB.
C47. Kulkarni, V., Waechter, D., Ben Mrad, El-Diraby, T., Somayajula, N. Nemana, S., and Prasad, E. (2009). “Development of energy harvesting modules based on Piezoceramics”. CanSmart Workshop, Montreal QC.
C46. Zhang, J., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2009). “A social web approach to managing information and knowledge in the AEC industry”. 3rd Int’l Conf. Engineering Management and Service Sciences (EMS 2009), Beijing, China
C45. El-Diraby, T. E. (2009). “Keynote speech: social web—putting people on the knowledge bus”. 5th Conf. on Information and Knowledge Management in Building and Construction, CIB-W102, CIB, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
C44. Kinawy, S., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2009). “Wiki approach to share construction domain knowledge”. 5th Conf. on Information and Knowledge Management in Building and Construction, CIB-W102, CIB, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
C43. Zhang, J., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2009). “Mapping actors and roles in construction knowledge”. Construction Research Congress, ASCE, Seattle, WA.
C42. Abou-Beih, M. O., Abdulhai, B., El-Diraby, T. E., and EL-Darieby, M. (2008). “SWIM: framework based on virtual organizations paradigm, ontologies, and semantic web technologies for real-time incident management”. 87th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
C41. Kinawy, S., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2008). “Effective semantic web-based solutions for civil engineering”. Annual Workshop, CIB-W78, Santiago, Chili.
C40. El-Diraby, T. E. (2008). “Trends and policies for construction informatics”. Conf. of the Saudi Association of Engineers, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
C39. Bucci, M., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2008). “Managing the environmental assessment process: challenges and lessons”. Conf. of the Saudi Association of Engineers, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
C38. El-Diraby, T. E., and Zhang, J. (2007). “Modeling the role of actors”. Construction Research Congress, ASCE, Grand Bahama Island, Bahamas.
C37. Osman, H., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2007). “Fuzzy decision support model for macro level routing of urban infrastructure”. Construction Research Congress, ASCE, Grand Bahama Island, Bahamas.
C36. Osman, H., El-Gohary, N., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2007). "Integrating value engineering and context sensitive solutions: the case of St. Clair Ave. West transit improvements project". 86th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
C35 El-Diraby, T. E. (2006). “Infrastructure development in the knowledge city”. 13th EG-ICE Workshop, Ascona, Switzerland.
C34. Osman, H., and El-Diraby, T.E. (2006). “Interoperable decision support system for routing buried urban infrastructure”. ASCE Joint Int’l Conf. on Computing and Decision Making in Civil and Building Engineering, Montreal, QC.
C33. El-Gohary, N., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2006). “Human-based ontology merging to support stakeholder collaboration”. ASCE Joint Int’l Conf. on Computing and Decision Making in Civil and Building Engineering, Montreal, QC.
C32. Osman, H., and El-Diraby, T.E. (2006) “Context-sensitive design of urban streets: a value engineering approach”. 34th Canadian Society of Civil Engineering Annual Conf., Calgary, AB.
C31. El-Diraby, T. E., Burrell, B., Chan, T. and Komarnicki, V. (2006). “The teaching of sustainability-related courses in Canadian Engineering Programs”. 34th Canadian Society of Civil Engineering Annual Conf., Calgary, AB.
C30. Zhang, J., El-Gohary, N., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2006). “Value analysis of smart educational spaces: understanding the needs of engineering students”. 3rd Int’l Research Symposium, Salford Centre for Research & Innovation, Salford, UK.
C29. Osman, H., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2006). “Ontological modeling of Infrastructure Products and Related Concepts”. 85th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
C28. El-Diraby, T. E. (2005). “e-infrastructure: a roadmap for semantic web-based project development for civil infrastructure systems”. Int’l Conf. on Systems, Man and Cybernetics (SMC), IEEE, Honolulu, HI.
C27. Surahyo, M., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2005). “Environmental costs in highway construction”. 84th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
C26. El-Gohary, N., M., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2005). “Ontology merging for inter-organizational collaboration in infrastructure development”. 22nd Annual Workshop, CIB-W78, Dresden, Germany.
C25. El-Diraby, T. E. (2005). “A semantic knowledge management environment for product life cycle cots”. Int’l Conf. on Computing in Civil Engineering, ASCE, Cancun, Mexico.
C24. Abdel-Rahman, A., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2005). “A schema for performance measurements in infrastructure assets”. 1st Infrastructure Specialty Conf., CSCE, Toronto, ON.
C23. El-Gohary, N., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2005). “Collaborative design of urban infrastructure systems”. Construction Specialty Conf., CSCE, Toronto, ON.
C22. Osman, H., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2005). “Subsurface utility engineering in Ontario: cases and lessons learned”. 1st Infrastructure Specialty Conf., CSCE, Toronto, ON.
C21. El-Diraby, T. E. and Wang, B. (2005). “A prototype e-society portal: using a semantic model to represent sustainability aspects of highway projects to local communities”. Construction Research Congress, ASCE, San Diego, CA.
C20. El-Diraby, T. E., Abdulhai, B., and Pramod, K. C. (2004). “Feasibility of urban transit infrastructure: the case of Toronto monorail”. 2nd Gulf Roads Conf., Abu Dabi, UAE.
C19. El-Diraby, T. E. (2004). “Supporting ontology management through self-describing concepts”. European Conf. on Product and Process Modeling, Istanbul, Turkey.
C18. El-Diraby, T. E., and Zhang, J. (2004). “Semantic documentation of lessons learned in the building construction industry”. 11th Int’l Conf. on Concurrent Engineering, ISPE, Beijing, China.
C17. El-Diraby, T. E. (2004). “Semantic supply chains for highway product development”. 83rd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
C16. Lima, C., Fies, B., El-Diraby, T. A., and Lefrancois, G. (2003). "The challenge of using a domain Ontology in KM solutions: the e-COGNOS experience". 10th Int’l Conf. on Concurrent Engineering: Research & Applications, ISPE, Madeira Island, Portugal.
C15. El-diraby, T. A., Fies, B., and Lima, C. (2003). “An ontology for construction knowledge management”. Construction Specialty Conf., CSCE, Moncton, NB.
C14. Lima, C., El-diraby, T. A., Fies, B. Zarli, A. and Ferneley, E. (2003). “The E-Cognos Project: current status of and future directions of an ontology-enabled IT solution infrastructure supporting knowledge management in construction”. Construction Research Congress, ASCE, Honolulu, HI.
C13. El-Diraby, T. A. (2003). “A framework for integrated data management in smart infrastructure systems”. Construction Research Congress, ASCE, Honolulu, HI.
C12. El-Diraby, T. E., and Rasic, I. (2002). “A framework for life cycle costing of smart materials in civil infrastructure”. 1st Int’l Workshop on Structural Health Monitoring of Innovative Civil Engineering Structures, ISIS Canada, Winnipeg, MB.
C11. El-Diraby, T. E. (2002). “A unified environment for life cycle cost analysis for construction products”. European Conf. on Product and Process Modeling, Portoroz, Slovenia.
C10. El-Diraby, T. E. (2002). “e-Infrastructure: an interoperable GIS system for infrastructure decision making”. European Conf. on Product and Process Modeling, Portoroz, Slovenia.
C9. El-Diraby, T. E., and Kashif, K. F. (2002). “Modes of application of smart structures and systems in construction”. 1st Int’l Conf. on Construction in the 21st Century, Florida International Univ., Miami, FL.
C8. El-Diraby, T. E. (2002). “e-coordinating infrastructure decisions”. 1st Int’l Conf. on Construction in the 21st Century, Florida International Univ., Miami, FL.
C7. El-Diraby, T. E., and Beheshti, A. (2002). “Reengineering organizations for optimal deployment of smart materials and intelligent devices in civil infrastructure”. Conf. on Health Monitoring and Management of Civil Infrastructure Systems, Int’l Society for Optical Engineering, San Diego, CA.
C6. El-Diraby, T. E., and Kashif, K. F. (2001). "Strategies for managing smart materials and intelligent devices in civil infrastructure". 1st Canada-US Workshop on Smart Materials and Smart Structures, Montreal, QC.
C5. El-Diraby, T. E., and Rasic, I. (2001). "Life cycle costing of smart materials and intelligent devices in civil infrastructure context". 1st Canada-US Workshop on Smart Materials and Smart Structures, Montreal, QC.
C4. El-Diraby, T. E. (2001). “Sustainable infrastructure development-challenges and issues for construction management”. Construction Specialty Conf., CSCE, Victoria, BC.
C3. El-Diraby, T. E., Mohieldin, Y. A., and Basha, I. A. (1999) "A concurrent fuzzy system for risk analysis in construction". 2nd Int’l Conf. on Concurrent Engineering in Construction, Espoo, Finland.
C2. El-Diraby, T. E. (1999). "Classifying reengineering efforts in the bridge design process". 2nd Int’l Conf. on Concurrent Engineering in Construction, Espoo, Finland.
C1. Basha, I. A., El-Diraby, T. E., and El-Shakour, H. A. (1992). “The construction of Ghamrah bridge superstructure using Launching Truss”. Al-Azhar 2nd Int’l Conf. on Civil Engrg., Al-Azhar Univ., Cairo, Egypt.
Research Reports
R13. Dorrah, D., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2018). “Mass timber high rise buildings”. Sidewalk Labs
R12. Piryoesi, M., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2018). “A Survey on Infrastructure Asset Management in Ontario”. Ontario Good Road Association.
R11. Piryoesi, M., and El-Diraby, T. E. (2017). “Data Analytics in Infrastructure Asset Management: Predicting Pavement Condition Index”. Ontario Good Road Association.
R10. El-Diraby, T. E., Kinawy, S. N., and Piryoesi, M. (2015). “Analyzing Approaches Used by Ontario Municipalities to Develop Road Asset Management Plans”. Ontario Good Road Association.
R9. El-Diraby, T. E. (2015). “A social-cyber-physical solution to crowd management in Haram”. Centre of Excellence in Transportation and Crowd Management, Umm Al-Qura University, Saudi Arabia
R8. El-Diraby, T. E., Karney, B., and Colombo, A. (2009). “Incorporating sustainability into infrastructure ROI: the case of leak management”. An Independent Study Funded by the Residential and Civil Construction Alliance of Ontario
R7. El-Diraby, T. E., Wolters, T., and Osman, H. M. (2009). “Benchmarking infrastructure funding in Ontario: towards sustainable policies”. An Independent Study Funded by the Residential and Civil Construction Alliance of Ontario
R6. El-Diraby, T. E. (2007). “Water and wastewater asset management in GTA: challenges and opportunities”, An Independent Study Funded by the Residential and Civil Construction Alliance of Ontario
R5. El-Diraby, T. E., and Osman, H. M. (2005). “Subsurface utility engineering in Ontario: challenges and opportunities”. Technical Report, Ctr. for Information Sys. in Infrastructure & Construction, U. of Toronto
R4. El-Diraby, T. E., and O’Connor, J. T. (1999). “System for evaluating bridge construction plans”. Technical Report, Ctr. for Transportation Research, Austin, TX.
R3. Harrison, R., Waldman, B. F., and El-Diraby, T. E. (1998). “Mitigating the adverse impacts of the Dallas North Central Expressway construction”. Technical Report, Ctr. for Transportation Research, Austin, TX.
R2. El-Diraby, T. E. (1996). “Decision making tools for construction engineers”. Special Report (also in Course material of CE395R-Decison & Risk Analysis - James T. O’Connor, Instructor), Civil Engineering Dept., University of Texas at Austin.
R1. Outland, D., Pearlson, K., El-Diraby, T. E., and others (1996). “GTE-Reengineering the customer response process”. Graduate School of Business, Univ. of Texas.
Other Publications/Technical Presentations
N4. El-Diraby, T. E. (2004). “Coordinated infrastructure design”. Workshop on Infrastructure Interoperability, Public Safety & Emergency Preparedness Canada, Ottawa, ON.
N3. El-Diraby, T. E. (2003). “Cross-industry integration”. Presentations to the industry Program, 10th ISPE International Conference on Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications, Madeira, Portugal.
N2. El-Diraby, T. E. (2000). “Inter-operable infrastructure management systems: an outlook”. 7th Canadian Construction Research Forum, Edmonton, AB.
N1. El-Diraby, T. E., and O’Connor, J. T. (1995). “Urban freeway constructability: big benefits”. CTR Annual Symposium, Center for Transportation Research, Austin, TX.