Experiment 04 / Research concept

Find avoidable cost and rework

Research conceptScope / Resources / Execution / Operations

Examine what the work is meant to achieve, what it requires, and what could change.

Construction costs reflect decisions about scope, design, materials, procurement, installation, and operation. Some costs are necessary to meet the project’s requirements. Others may arise from duplicated scope, unnecessary customization, incomplete coordination, repeated handling, or work performed using superseded information.

We’re exploring how AI agents could examine those decisions together, identify supported opportunities to reduce cost, and prepare alternatives before purchases, fabrication, or installation make changes expensive.

Material prices, labor availability, freight charges, and trade measures can change while a project is being designed and built. We’re also exploring how AI agents could monitor those changes, establish which purchases and work packages are actually exposed, and prepare responses while the team still has options.

The questionCan AI help project teams deliver the required performance with less total cost and rework, without transferring the problem to another trade, project phase, or building operator?

A principle across the lab

Valid and early signal.

Valid: establish the basis.

Use identifiable, current evidence relevant to the affected work. Keep confirmed facts, reported information, and AI inferences distinguishable. Identify missing or conflicting information.

Early: preserve time to act.

Identify a concern before a decision or commitment becomes difficult or costly to change, with enough time for the team to investigate and respond.

Prepare a useful response.

Explain what changed, the supporting evidence, what remains uncertain, the affected work, and when a response is needed to preserve the available options.

For this experiment, look for supported concerns before affected work is purchased, fabricated, installed, or concealed. Check market changes against actual quotations and commitments while the team still has time to respond.

01 / The experiment

What we would test

Connect the cost to the required outcome.
Trace a work package’s quantities, materials, labor, equipment, and commercial commitments back to the requirements it must satisfy.
Examine why a component, finish, installation method, or review is required. Distinguish specified performance and contractual obligations from design preferences, estimating assumptions, and established practices.
Agents identify where the basis is unclear and prepare the questions needed to establish whether a proposed change is worth investigating.
Look for work that could be eliminated or simplified.
Investigate whether the required outcome could be achieved with fewer components, standard products, simpler assemblies, or a different installation method.
Could one coordinated detail replace several custom details? Could prefabrication reduce repeated field assembly? Could a revised delivery sequence avoid double handling or temporary storage? Could a design change remove an installation task and its associated inspection and maintenance requirements?
Agents prepare alternatives for the responsible professionals to assess. Removing an item from an estimate would need to correspond to an acceptable change in the work.
Recognize conditions that could lead to rework.
Compare current design information, approved submittals, fabrication releases, installation plans, and available field observations.
Look for discrepancies that could cause work to be removed, modified, repeated, or rejected: conflicting dimensions, changed equipment requirements, unresolved coordination comments, missing access provisions, or superseded drawings still being used.
Identify the affected locations, trades, and planned activities. Where records do not establish the field condition, prepare a targeted inspection or measurement request.
04
Provide valid and early signal.
Bring supported concerns forward while the team can still change the design, amend a purchase, revise fabrication, or adjust the installation sequence.
Each finding should explain:
- What changed or appears inconsistent.
- Which current records or observations support the finding.
- What remains uncertain.
- Which purchases, work packages, or installed work could be affected.
- When a response is needed to preserve the available options.
- Who needs to review the proposed response.
An unresolved discrepancy before fabrication may offer a practical opportunity to prevent rework. The same discrepancy discovered after installation requires a different response and cost assessment.
Compare the full consequences of each alternative.
Evaluate proposed changes using comparable scope, quantities, rates, supplier information, and construction methods.
Include the cost of redesign, coordination, cancellation, restocking, replacement, temporary works, testing, and schedule disruption where applicable. Consider effects on adjacent trades, maintenance access, energy use, reliability, and future replacement.
Agents prepare a recommendation showing the assumptions and trade-offs. Designers assess technical acceptability, contractors assess execution, and authorized parties decide whether to proceed.
Establish what was actually avoided.
After an accepted change, track the resulting design revisions, procurement adjustments, field work, and cost records.
Distinguish an estimated opportunity from an authorized reduction in scope, a reduced commitment, or a verified reduction in expenditure. Keep projected operating benefits separate from construction savings.
Where the proposal prevents work that has not yet occurred, retain the evidence supporting the expected avoided cost. Do not present that estimate as a measured saving or count the same benefit again under another experiment.

02 / Changing market conditions

Keep cost assessments current as market conditions change.

Agents monitor dated supplier quotations, quote expirations, purchasing commitments, escalation provisions, delivery updates, and trade-contractor staffing information. External information about tariffs, inflation, commodity prices, and labor markets provides additional context.

They connect each potential change to specific project requirements and commitments. Which materials remain unpurchased? Which prices are contractually fixed? Which quotations need reconfirmation? Which upcoming activities depend on crews whose availability has not been established?

Each finding distinguishes an announced change, its applicable effective date, a supplier’s stated response, and a confirmed effect on the project. A news report may justify an inquiry; it does not establish that a particular purchase will cost more or less.

Agents prepare updated comparisons and possible responses, including alternative sourcing, acceptable substitutions, revised purchase timing, prefabrication, or changes to installation sequence. The comparison accounts for storage, financing, cancellation, quality, schedule, and operating consequences.

For labor, agents examine trade-specific crew commitments and reported production rates against upcoming work. They investigate whether the issue is workforce availability, productivity, access, or coordination, so the proposed response addresses the actual constraint.

The project team receives a supported assessment of what changed, what is exposed, when a decision is needed, and which options remain practical.

03 / Illustrative scenarios

Prepare the decision while options remain.

A ceiling layout could require completed work to be reopened.

A revised mechanical layout places ductwork across the space needed to service a valve above a finished ceiling. Framing and duct fabrication are approaching release.

Agents compare the revised layout with the valve’s maintenance requirements, access-panel locations, coordination comments, and planned installation sequence. They identify the potential conflict before the affected work is fabricated or enclosed.

Could a coordinated change prevent removal and replacement later?

The agents prepare alternatives such as adjusting the duct route, relocating the valve, or revising the ceiling access arrangement.

For each option, they identify affected drawings and trades, required technical reviews, fabrication changes, installation consequences, and cost assumptions. If the drawings do not establish the available clearance, they prepare a specific field measurement request.

The design and construction teams receive a coordinated proposal while there is still time to act. The selected solution must provide the required access and remain acceptable for system performance, construction, and operation.

A supplier’s price may change before the planned purchase.

A material quotation is approaching expiration while the project team is still resolving a selection. The supplier reports that pricing may change because of an announced tariff adjustment or an expiring upstream quotation.

Which purchasing decision preserves the best available option?

Agents identify the affected purchase, check the quotation’s terms and exclusions, and request confirmation of the price, availability, and applicable charges. They compare purchasing now, retaining the planned purchase date, and evaluating an acceptable alternative.

The recommendation shows the consequences of each option, including whether an early purchase would create storage or redesign exposure. If an announced charge is later withdrawn or reduced, agents check whether the supplier’s price and the project’s contractual terms reflect that change.

04 / Evidence of value

What would establish value

Did the system provide a valid signal early enough for the team to prevent unnecessary cost or rework?

Identify a credible change, establish the project’s actual exposure, and prepare a decision before the available options narrow.

Supported concerns identified before affected work is purchased, fabricated, installed, or concealed.
Accepted opportunities to eliminate or simplify work while meeting project requirements.
Less removal, replacement, repeated handling, and material waste.
Less effort spent investigating and coordinating each issue.
Cost comparisons that account for consequences across trades and building operations.
Clear separation of estimated opportunities, authorized changes, and verified results.
A record of unsupported alerts, missed issues, and unintended consequences.