Coming up with project alternatives and being able to effectively describe,
explain, and evaluate them are influential in Architecture/Engineering/Construction
decision making. Our research takes the "Bay Street" project as
our test case, and studies how the CIFE iRoom may be used for describing cross-disciplinary
decision factors pertained to specific project alternatives.

The CIFE iRoom constitutes of three front-projected smartboard
displays, which are connected to three PC computers that are interlinked by
an event-heap.
We developed various application scenarios based on the "Bay Street"
test case, in which unforeseen site condition had caused substantial schedule
delay and the project executives were using the CIFE iRoom to communicate
their acceleration proposals to the decision makers. There were two engineering
problems:
(1) How to describe and explain product, process, organization, and cost
decision factors that are interlinked with one another in a project alternative?
(2) How to evaluate project alternatives against functional requirements,
incorporate "what-if" predictions, and come up with new alternatives
for further description, explanation, and evaluation?
To date, we have come up with application scenarios and enabled the CIFE
iRoom to support real-time cross referencing among:
- one/multiple 4D model(s) from one/multiple view port(s) (Common Point
Technogies)
- a project schedule (Microsoft Project)
- a cost estimate (Microsoft Excel)
- a CIFE iRoom date slider (aka time controller)
- an organization/process model (Vite SimVision)
- a product model (AutoDesk Architectural Desktop)

Real-time cross referenceing among two different 4D models,
a project schedule, and a date slider is one of the various application examples
that we developed based on the Bay Street test case.
Our work in developing the CIFE iRoom infrastructure and extending the CIFE
application suite contibuted to the description and explanation of a project
alternative. However, to support further evaluative tasks and "what-if"
predictions, we found that the project alternatives were highly coupled such
that they hindered the creative and efficient manipulation of product/process/organization
options embodied in a project alternative. Such inflexibility undermined the
efficiency and value of creativity during the decision-making process. To
address this setback, we look into ways in which we synthesize heterogeneous
options and information in support for decision-making tasks. We are currently
developing an extensible relationship structure that has the potential to
flexibly integrate project options (product/process/organization) with decision
factors (cost/time/precedence relationship/functional requirements). At the
same time, we are designing an "executive dashboard", an interactive
decision network, which orients CIFE iRoom decision making.

Project options involve an array of product, process, and
organization choices. Our test case illustrated that once options are coupled
into an alternative, it would be cumbersome for one to decouple individual
options for evaluations or predictions, and thus undermines the value of creativity
and interactions in AEC decision making.