This paper proposes a probability-based decision-support framework for early stage construction claim governance, in which claim strength is quantified as a claimability index (CI) ranging from 0 to 1 and interpreted as an estimated probability of claim success. A structured claim-level data set was developed, and multiple probabilistic learning models were evaluated under both a conservative escalation policy with a decision threshold of τ = 0.75 and model-specific threshold search. Using Platt-calibrated probabilities with sigmoid calibration and five-fold cross-validation (CV) on the training data, random forest showed the strongest discrimination, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-AUC) of 0.958 and an area under the precision-recall curve (PR-AUC) of 0.977; at τ = 0.75 , it achieved a precision of 1.000, a recall of 0.710, and an F1 score of 0.830. Logistic regression showed slightly lower discrimination, with a ROC-AUC of 0.924 and a PR-AUC of 0.958, together with a precision of 1.000, a recall of 0.645, and an F1 score of 0.784. Threshold search showed that F1-optimal operating points generally fall in the τ ≈ 0.50 – 0.60 range; for example, random forest peaked at τ = 0.60 with an F1 score of 0.900. This result demonstrates that threshold selection is a governance parameter rather than a purely technical setting. Calibration evidence, including the Brier score and reliability diagnostics, supports the use of calibrated CI values for transparent triage, evidence-first strengthening of mid-CI claims, and risk-aligned escalation decisions across negotiation, alternative dispute resolution (ADR), and formal proceedings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shakeri et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: