CN117808326A - Integrated label evaluation field management platform - Google Patents
Integrated label evaluation field management platform Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CN117808326A CN117808326A CN202410229266.7A CN202410229266A CN117808326A CN 117808326 A CN117808326 A CN 117808326A CN 202410229266 A CN202410229266 A CN 202410229266A CN 117808326 A CN117808326 A CN 117808326A
- Authority
- CN
- China
- Prior art keywords
- evaluation
- expert
- bid
- scoring
- quality
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Pending
Links
- 238000011156 evaluation Methods 0.000 title claims abstract description 357
- 206010000117 Abnormal behaviour Diseases 0.000 claims abstract description 65
- 238000000034 method Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 35
- 238000012502 risk assessment Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 27
- 230000008569 process Effects 0.000 claims abstract description 22
- 238000012545 processing Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 15
- 238000004458 analytical method Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 10
- 238000012549 training Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 4
- 238000007726 management method Methods 0.000 claims description 50
- 238000012854 evaluation process Methods 0.000 claims description 36
- 238000013441 quality evaluation Methods 0.000 claims description 26
- 230000006399 behavior Effects 0.000 claims description 14
- 238000004364 calculation method Methods 0.000 claims description 12
- 238000012937 correction Methods 0.000 claims description 9
- 238000012797 qualification Methods 0.000 claims description 8
- 238000012216 screening Methods 0.000 claims description 6
- 230000004069 differentiation Effects 0.000 claims description 5
- 238000012935 Averaging Methods 0.000 claims description 4
- 230000007246 mechanism Effects 0.000 claims description 4
- 238000012544 monitoring process Methods 0.000 claims description 4
- 238000013439 planning Methods 0.000 claims description 3
- 238000013468 resource allocation Methods 0.000 claims description 3
- 238000012795 verification Methods 0.000 claims description 2
- 238000004891 communication Methods 0.000 abstract description 4
- 238000004140 cleaning Methods 0.000 description 4
- 230000009286 beneficial effect Effects 0.000 description 3
- 230000008901 benefit Effects 0.000 description 3
- 230000007547 defect Effects 0.000 description 3
- 230000000694 effects Effects 0.000 description 3
- 230000000630 rising effect Effects 0.000 description 3
- 230000005856 abnormality Effects 0.000 description 2
- 238000010276 construction Methods 0.000 description 2
- 230000006870 function Effects 0.000 description 2
- 230000010354 integration Effects 0.000 description 2
- 238000012417 linear regression Methods 0.000 description 2
- 230000002159 abnormal effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000007792 addition Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000011161 development Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000000605 extraction Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000010801 machine learning Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000012986 modification Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000004048 modification Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000007637 random forest analysis Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000012552 review Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000006467 substitution reaction Methods 0.000 description 1
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
- G06Q10/06—Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
- G06Q10/063—Operations research, analysis or management
- G06Q10/0637—Strategic management or analysis, e.g. setting a goal or target of an organisation; Planning actions based on goals; Analysis or evaluation of effectiveness of goals
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
- G06Q10/06—Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
- G06Q10/063—Operations research, analysis or management
- G06Q10/0635—Risk analysis of enterprise or organisation activities
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q30/00—Commerce
- G06Q30/06—Buying, selling or leasing transactions
- G06Q30/08—Auctions
Landscapes
- Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
- Human Resources & Organizations (AREA)
- Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- Strategic Management (AREA)
- Entrepreneurship & Innovation (AREA)
- Economics (AREA)
- General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Marketing (AREA)
- Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- General Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
- Development Economics (AREA)
- Educational Administration (AREA)
- Theoretical Computer Science (AREA)
- Accounting & Taxation (AREA)
- Finance (AREA)
- Game Theory and Decision Science (AREA)
- Operations Research (AREA)
- Quality & Reliability (AREA)
- Tourism & Hospitality (AREA)
- Management, Administration, Business Operations System, And Electronic Commerce (AREA)
Abstract
The invention relates to the technical field of communication, and particularly discloses an integrated label evaluation field management platform, which comprises the following steps: the system comprises an expert information management module, a scoring settlement module, a risk analysis early warning module, a scoring quality analysis module, a training assessment module, a project information management module, a scoring process management module and a feedback complaint processing module, wherein the scoring of the scoring expert is weighted according to the job rating of the scoring expert and the participation of the scoring expert, so that deviation caused by subjective judgment is reduced to a certain extent, the objectivity and the accuracy of evaluation are improved, the risk degree of the abnormal behavior is assessed, the fairness of the scoring process is ensured, and meanwhile, the reliability of the scoring quality is assessed, the quality and the accuracy of the scoring are improved, the risk in the project implementation process is reduced, and the project can be ensured to be smoothly carried out according to a preset target and requirement.
Description
Technical Field
The invention relates to the technical field of communication, in particular to an integrated evaluation field management platform.
Background
Along with the expansion of purchasing scale and the perfection of operation mechanism in the related field, fairness and transparency of the bid evaluation process become the focus of social attention, in order to ensure fairness of bid evaluation activities, prevent fraud, improve bid evaluation efficiency, the bid evaluation field management platform is generated, along with the development of electronic and informatization of public resource transactions, traditional bid evaluation field management is difficult to adapt to higher and higher bid evaluation requirements, so that an integrated bid evaluation field management platform is needed to be provided, and the bid evaluation flow is normalized and fair.
For example, bulletin numbers: the invention patent of CN110751387B, the label evaluation management platform and method disclosed, relate to the technical field of communication; the evaluation management platform comprises an intelligent positioning system, an exchanger, a server, a wireless controller, an intelligent access control, an intelligent bracelet, an intelligent PAD, an intelligent locker and a mobile recorder and a platform system management module, wherein the evaluation management method is used for executing a platform system management step based on the intelligent positioning system, the exchanger, the server, the wireless controller, the intelligent access control, the intelligent locker and the mobile recorder; the intelligent access control system has the advantages that through an intelligent positioning system, an exchanger, a server, a wireless controller, an intelligent access control device, an intelligent bracelet, an intelligent PAD, an intelligent storage cabinet, a mobile recorder, a platform system management module and the like, the efficiency of entering the process of the mark evaluation personnel in the mark evaluation base is improved, and the effect of illegal personnel control is good.
For example, bulletin numbers: the invention patent of CN112488593B discloses an auxiliary bid evaluation system and method for bidding, comprising a data cleaning module, a bid evaluation module and a bid evaluation module, wherein the data cleaning module is used for acquiring an original expression and cleaning data of the content of the original bidding according to a preset cleaning rule; the classifying module is used for receiving the data-cleaned standard books and acquiring product information in the standard books; classifying the product information according to a preset dividing rule; the information extraction module is used for carrying out importance evaluation on the position parameters and the part-of-speech parameters according to a preset evaluation rule to generate a weight result of the product information; the abstract module is used for extracting the product information, the position parameters and the part-of-speech parameters according to weight proportion to generate an abstract of the product information; and the evaluation module is used for outputting the abstract of the product information to an evaluation staff and acquiring the corresponding evaluation quality input by the evaluation staff.
Based on the above scheme, the present method has some defects in the aspect of evaluation field management, and the defects are specifically shown in the following layers: (1) The current bid evaluation field management lacks a risk identification and evaluation method for abnormal behaviors, can not effectively monitor and early warn the illegal behaviors of related personnel, and can possibly influence the fairness and fairness of the bid evaluation.
(2) The current evaluation management lacks a method for analyzing the evaluation quality, cannot evaluate the reliability of the evaluation quality in a multi-dimensional manner, and may influence the implementation effect of the project and even cause the failure of the project.
Disclosure of Invention
Aiming at the defects of the prior art, the invention provides an integrated label evaluation field management platform which can effectively solve the problems related to the background art.
In order to achieve the above purpose, the invention is realized by the following technical scheme: the invention provides an integrated label evaluation field management platform, which comprises the following components: the expert information management module is used for screening and counting the bid evaluation expert information and obtaining the score information of each bid evaluation expert; the scoring settlement module is used for carrying out differentiation processing on the scores of the bid evaluation experts and obtaining the comprehensive scores of the bidders, wherein the comprehensive scores of the bidders are obtained by carrying out weighting and averaging processing on the scores of the bid evaluation experts; the risk analysis early warning module is used for evaluating and early warning the risk of abnormal behaviors in the evaluation process; the evaluation quality analysis module is used for carrying out multidimensional evaluation on the evaluation quality, feeding back the evaluation result, recombining the expert group to carry out a new round of scoring if the evaluation quality is unqualified, and the evaluation database is used for storing evaluation related information data.
The rating relevant information data includes: the system comprises an expert information set, expert information classification data, job title influence factors corresponding to each job title grade, evaluation number influence factors corresponding to each participation evaluation number range, an evaluation expert abnormal behavior risk evaluation index threshold, critical evaluation number of violations, reference standard evaluation total cost, reference standard evaluation total duration, an evaluation quality evaluation index threshold and an audio and video record of an evaluation process.
In the above scheme, the screening and statistics of the bid evaluation expert information specifically includes: the platform collects personal information and credit information of registered specialists, and the credit information of the specialists is audited according to set standards, wherein the personal information comprises professions, titles and areas, and the credit information comprises qualification and credit; after the verification is passed, expert information which is successfully registered is counted to establish an expert information set, the expert information is classified according to personal information, and the expert information set and expert information classification data are stored in an evaluation database; according to professional association requirements, job title requirements and regional constraint characteristics of the bidding documents, acquiring expert information meeting requirements from a bid evaluation database, randomly extracting expert information from the expert information meeting requirements according to the set number of required experts, and marking the extracted experts as bid evaluation experts.
In the above scheme, the performing the differentiation processing on the scores of the evaluation experts specifically includes: matching the job title level and the participation evaluation times of each evaluation expert with the job title influence factors corresponding to each job title level and the evaluation times influence factors corresponding to each participation evaluation time range stored in the evaluation database respectively to obtain the job title influence factors and the evaluation times influence factors of each evaluation expert; and acquiring correction coefficients to which the set title influence factors and the evaluation times influence factors belong, multiplying the title influence factors and the evaluation times influence factors of each evaluation expert by the correction coefficients to which the set title influence factors and the evaluation times influence factors belong respectively, and adding products corresponding to the title influence factors and the evaluation times influence factors to obtain the scoring weight factors of each evaluation expert.
Further, the scoring settlement module is further used for obtaining the comprehensive scores of all bidders, arranging the comprehensive scores of all bidders according to the sequence from big to small, extracting bidders corresponding to the maximum comprehensive scores, and determining the bidders as winning targets.
In the above scheme, the evaluating and early warning for the abnormal behavior risk in the evaluation process specifically includes: identifying abnormal behaviors of the evaluation expert, and analyzing risk assessment indexes of the abnormal behaviors of the evaluation expert; and acquiring a risk assessment index threshold of the abnormal behavior of the bid evaluation expert from the bid evaluation database, comparing the risk assessment index of the abnormal behavior of the bid evaluation expert with the risk assessment index threshold of the abnormal behavior of the bid evaluation expert, and if the risk assessment index of the abnormal behavior of the bid evaluation expert is higher than the risk assessment index threshold of the abnormal behavior of the bid evaluation expert, carrying out feedback early warning.
In the above scheme, the multi-dimensional evaluation is performed on the evaluation quality, and the evaluation result is fed back, and the specific process is as follows: acquiring the number of times of illegal behaviors of an expert in the bid evaluation process, acquiring the total bid evaluation cost and the total bid evaluation duration, acquiring the critical bid evaluation number of times, the total reference standard bid evaluation cost and the total reference standard bid evaluation duration from a bid evaluation database, and calculating a bid evaluation quality evaluation index; and acquiring a bid evaluation quality evaluation index threshold from the bid evaluation database, comparing the bid evaluation quality evaluation index with the bid evaluation quality evaluation index threshold, and if the bid evaluation quality evaluation index is lower than the bid evaluation quality evaluation index threshold, performing feedback early warning.
Further, the method further comprises the following steps: the system comprises a project information management module, a label evaluation process management module and a feedback complaint processing module; the project information management module is used for planning and managing the evaluation mark project and comprises project background, project target, scheduling and resource allocation; the evaluation process management module is used for realizing the audio and video monitoring of the whole evaluation process and the supervision and management of the evaluation process, and storing the audio and video record of the evaluation process into the evaluation database; the feedback complaint processing module is used for providing feedback and complaint channels and supporting the problem feedback and complaint function mechanism of personnel.
Compared with the prior art, the embodiment of the invention has at least the following advantages or beneficial effects:
(1) The invention provides the integrated evaluation field management platform, the evaluation of the evaluation expert is weighted according to the job title level and the participation evaluation times of the evaluation expert, the deviation caused by subjective judgment is reduced, the risk degree of the abnormal behavior is evaluated by identifying the abnormal behavior of the evaluation expert, the fairness of the evaluation process is ensured, the reliability of the evaluation quality is evaluated, the quality and the accuracy of the evaluation are improved, and the risk in the project implementation process is reduced.
(2) The invention provides a scoring and settlement module, which sets weights for scoring of bid evaluation experts according to the job ratings of the bid evaluation experts and the participation times of the bid evaluation, and can reflect the professional ability and experience level of different bid evaluation experts in the bid evaluation process and the importance degree of influence on projects by setting the weights, so that the deviation caused by subjective judgment is reduced to a certain extent, and the objectivity and accuracy of evaluation are improved.
(3) The risk analysis early warning module provided by the invention is used for identifying the abnormal behaviors of the label evaluation expert and evaluating the risk degree of the abnormal behaviors, so that measures are taken to prevent and reduce the improper behaviors, and the fairness of the label evaluation process is facilitated.
(4) The invention provides an evaluation quality analysis module, which evaluates the reliability of evaluation quality through three dimensions of the occurrence times of illegal behaviors of related personnel, the total evaluation cost and the total evaluation duration in the evaluation process, is beneficial to improving the quality and the accuracy of the evaluation, reduces the risk in the project implementation process and ensures that the project can be smoothly carried out according to the preset target and requirement.
Drawings
The invention will be further described with reference to the accompanying drawings, in which embodiments do not constitute any limitation of the invention, and other drawings can be obtained by one of ordinary skill in the art without inventive effort from the following drawings.
FIG. 1 is a schematic flow chart of the method of the present invention.
Detailed Description
The technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings in the embodiments of the present invention, and it is apparent that the described embodiments are only some embodiments of the present invention, but not all embodiments, and all other embodiments obtained by those skilled in the art without making creative efforts based on the embodiments of the present invention are included in the protection scope of the present invention.
Referring to fig. 1, the present invention provides an integrated label evaluation field management platform, which includes: and the comment database is used for storing comment related information data.
Specifically, the evaluation related information data specifically includes: the expert information sets, expert information classification data, job title influence factors corresponding to each job title grade, evaluation number influence factors corresponding to each participation evaluation number range, reference joint connecting lines corresponding to each abnormal behavior, evaluation expert abnormal behavior risk evaluation index threshold, critical evaluation violation number, reference standard evaluation total cost and reference standard evaluation total duration, evaluation quality evaluation index threshold and audio and video records of the evaluation process.
And the expert information management module is used for screening and counting the bid evaluation expert information.
Specifically, screening and counting the bid evaluation expert information, wherein the specific analysis process is as follows: the platform collects personal information of registered experts, wherein the personal information of the experts comprises basic personal information of the experts, professional qualification, working experience and other related proving materials, the platform carries out auditing on qualification and reputation of the experts according to set standards, after the auditing is passed, expert information which is successfully registered is counted to establish an expert information set, meanwhile, the expert information is classified according to the profession, the title and the area, and the expert information set and expert information classification data are stored in an evaluation standard database.
In a specific embodiment, the registration specialists comprise an external specialist and an internal specialist, the external specialist and the internal specialist register by means of self-recommendation or recommendation, and in the bid evaluation, the external specialist refers to independent specialists which are not affiliated with a buyer or a bidding institution, and are invited to participate in the bid evaluation committee, and the bid documents are evaluated to provide expertise and advice. The advantage of the external expert is that it is able to provide objective and fair comments independent of any bidder and buyer, and the external expert is usually an expert in a field, such as an engineer, an accountant or other professionals, with a rich expertise and experience, and the participation of the external expert helps to ensure the fairness and transparency of the rating process. Internal specialists are those specialists belonging to the purchasing or bidding entity, typically staff or expert technicians within the purchasing or bidding entity. The internal expert has deeper knowledge of the business of the buyer or the bidding unit, and can better grasp the purchasing requirements and the review standard of the unit. The role of internal experts in the bid evaluation process is mainly to provide technical examination of the bidding documents and evaluation of the bidders' qualification, ability and experience.
It should be explained that, in this embodiment, the expert's self-recommendation and recommended participation in the bid evaluation are two different expert selection modes, and the expert's self-recommendation refers to that the expert actively submits an application to a buyer or a bidding unit to express his willingness to participate in the bid evaluation work, and the self-recommendation expert usually has a certain professional background and experience, and has interest and enthusiasm for the bid evaluation work. Expert recommendation is the recommendation of appropriate experts to a buyer or a bidding entity by other individuals or institutions, usually based on approval of the expert ability and reputation of the recommended person, and often by the same party, industry association, professional institution or academic community, etc., who have a certain knowledge of the expert's ability and quality.
In a specific embodiment, the qualification and reputation of the expert are checked according to the set standard, for example, the platform checks whether the expert has a professional qualification certificate, the participation period of the expert and whether the expert has a bad behavior record in the industry, and if the expert does not have a professional qualification certificate, or the participation period of the expert is lower than the set period, or the expert has a bad behavior record, the platform refuses the registration application of the expert.
It should be explained that, in this embodiment, expert information is classified according to professions, job titles, and areas, and specific embodiments are as follows: the method comprises the steps of respectively establishing labels for three dimensions of a specialty, a title and an area, simultaneously establishing three sets, wherein the three sets comprise a specialty set, a title set and an area set, and the three sets respectively classify experts from the three dimensions of the specialty, the title and the area, and the sets can be mutually combined so as to search the experts meeting the conditions.
According to professional association requirements, job title requirements and regional constraint characteristics of the bidding documents, acquiring expert information meeting requirements from a bid evaluation database, randomly extracting expert information from the expert information meeting requirements according to the set number of required experts, and marking the extracted experts as bid evaluation experts.
In a specific embodiment, the platform is based on professional association requirements, job title requirements and regional constraint characteristics of a bidding document, such as a highway construction project bidding project, wherein the bid evaluation expert is required to have civil engineering, road and bridge engineering, traffic engineering or related professional background, has advanced engineer title, and requires the expert to come from provinces or surrounding areas where the highway construction is located, and the platform screens qualified experts according to the requirements of the bidding project.
And the scoring settlement module is used for carrying out differentiation processing on the scores of the bid evaluation experts and obtaining the comprehensive scores of the bidders, wherein the comprehensive scores of the bidders are obtained by carrying out weighting and averaging processing on the scores of the bid evaluation experts.
Specifically, the grading of each bid evaluation expert is subjected to differentiation treatment, and the specific analysis process is as follows: and matching the job title level and the participation evaluation times of each evaluation expert with the job title influence factors corresponding to each job title level and the evaluation times influence factors corresponding to each participation evaluation time range stored in the evaluation database respectively to obtain the job title influence factors and the evaluation times influence factors of each evaluation expert.
It should be understood that a plurality of job title influencing factors and evaluation number influencing factors are preset in the evaluation database, wherein the job title influencing factors are in one-to-one correspondence with job title grades, are used for reflecting the scoring weights given by the experts with different job title grades, and the evaluation number influencing factors are in one-to-one correspondence with the evaluation number range, and are used for reflecting the scoring weights given by the experts participating in different evaluation numbers.
And acquiring correction coefficients to which the set title influence factors and the evaluation times influence factors belong, multiplying the title influence factors and the evaluation times influence factors of each evaluation expert by the correction coefficients to which the set title influence factors and the evaluation times influence factors belong respectively, and adding products corresponding to the title influence factors and the evaluation times influence factors to obtain the scoring weight factors of each evaluation expert.
It should be explained that, the scoring weight factors of each scoring expert can be obtained from the database directly through a linear regression model, in the linear regression, a least square method and other techniques are used to fit a linear model, so as to obtain the weight of each feature, and the weights can be expressed as the contribution of each feature to the final score, and can also be obtained through calculation in the following calculation mode, wherein the specific calculation expression is as follows:wherein->Indicate->Scoring weight factor of individual scoring expert, +.>Representing natural constant->Indicate->Role influencing factors of individual rating specialists, < ->Indicate->The number of bid evaluation influence factors of individual bid evaluation experts, < ->Indicating the correction factor to which the set title influencing factor belongs,/-)>Indicating the correction factor to which the set bid evaluation number influence factor belongs,/-)>Number representing each evaluation expert +.>，/>Representing the total number of rating experts.
It should be explained that, in this embodiment, the scoring weight factor of the rating expert is determined by the job title influencing factor and the rating number influencing factor of the rating expert, the higher the job title of the rating expert is, the larger the rating number is, the corresponding job title influencing factor and the rating number influencing factor are, the larger the scoring weight factor of the rating expert is, and the correction coefficient to which the job title influencing factor and the rating number influencing factor belong is introduced at the same time to reflect the weight of the job title and the rating number on the rating influence of the expert, thereby improving the accuracy of the calculation result.
Further, the comprehensive score of each bidder is obtained, and the specific analysis process is as follows: and obtaining the scores of the bid-scoring experts on the bidders, performing product operation on the score weight factors of the bid-scoring experts and the pre-increase evaluation scores of the unit values corresponding to the score weight factors to obtain the pre-increase evaluation scores of the bid-scoring experts, summing the pre-increase evaluation scores of the bid-scoring experts with the original scores to obtain the comprehensive scores of the bid-scoring experts on the bidders, and finally summing the comprehensive scores of the bid-scoring experts on the bidders to obtain the comprehensive scores of the bidders.
It should be understood that a plurality of pre-rising evaluation scores of unit values are preset in the bid evaluation database, the pre-rising evaluation scores of the unit values correspond to the scoring weight factors one by one, and the pre-rising evaluation scores are used for further correcting the scores of bid evaluation experts and improving the accuracy of the scores given by each bid evaluation expert.
And determining the final winning bid object according to the comprehensive scores of all bidders.
It should be explained that, the comprehensive score of each bidder may be obtained by not only further analyzing the scoring weight factor of each bid evaluation expert through a machine learning integration model, and combining the prediction results of a plurality of basic models by using an integration method such as random forest or gradient promotion to obtain a more accurate and robust comprehensive score, and analyzing to obtain the comprehensive score of each bidder, but also calculating by combining the scoring weight factor of each bid evaluation expert in the following calculation manner, where the specific calculation expression is:wherein->Indicate->Comprehensive score of individual bidders->Indicate->The personal evaluation expert pairs->Scoring, ->Pre-rising evaluation score representing corresponding unit value of scoring weight factor, ++>Number indicating each bidder->，/>Representing the total number of bidders.
It should be explained that, in this embodiment, the comprehensive score is obtained by weighting scores of multiple label evaluation experts and summing and averaging the scores after weighting, so that deviation of the label evaluation experts caused by subjective factors can be effectively reduced, and reliability of label evaluation quality is improved.
In a specific embodiment, weights are set for scoring of the bid evaluation expert according to the job rating of the bid evaluation expert and the number of times of participation in bid evaluation, and the professional ability and experience level of different bid evaluation experts in the bid evaluation process and the importance degree of influence on the project can be reflected by setting the weights, so that deviation caused by subjective judgment is reduced to a certain extent, and objectivity and accuracy of evaluation are improved.
Specifically, the final bid-winning object is determined, and the specific analysis process is as follows: and arranging the comprehensive scores of all bidders according to the sequence from large to small, extracting bidders corresponding to the maximum comprehensive scores, and determining the bidders as winning targets.
And the risk analysis early warning module is used for evaluating and early warning the risk of abnormal behaviors in the bid evaluation process.
Specifically, the abnormal behavior risk in the evaluation process is evaluated and pre-warned, and the specific analysis process is as follows: and identifying the abnormal behaviors of the evaluation expert, and analyzing an evaluation expert abnormal behavior risk assessment index, wherein the evaluation expert abnormal behavior risk assessment index represents data obtained by quantitatively assessing the evaluation expert behavior risk and is used for evaluating the abnormal behaviors of the evaluation expert, and the abnormal behaviors comprise, but are not limited to, exceeding a permission area, contacting with abnormal personnel and using a communication tool.
It should be explained that, the risk assessment index of abnormal behavior can be obtained through monitoring of related instruments, and can also be obtained through calculation in the following manner, and the specific calculation process is as follows: identifying the position of the evaluation expert by using an infrared sensing device, positioning the position points of each joint of the evaluation expert, thus constructing a joint connecting line of the evaluation expert, carrying out the overlapping comparison of the joint connecting line of the evaluation expert and the reference joint connecting lines corresponding to various abnormal behaviors stored in an evaluation database, extracting the lengths of the overlapped joint connecting lines, extracting the lengths of the reference joint connecting lines corresponding to various abnormal behaviors, and obtaining the lengths of the reference joint connecting lines according to a formulaCalculating abnormal behaviors and +.>Similarity of abnormal behavior, wherein +_>Representing abnormal behavior and +.>Similarity of class abnormal behavior states, +.>Joint connection line and +.>Length of joint articulation line coincident between reference joint articulation lines corresponding to abnormal-like behavior, ++>Indicate->Reference joint line length corresponding to abnormal behavior like +.>Numbering representing various abnormal behaviors>，/>Indicating the total number of categories of abnormal behavior.
Ordering the similarity between the abnormal behaviors of the evaluation expert and various abnormal behaviors from large to small, obtaining the abnormal behavior corresponding to the maximum similarity, marking the abnormal behavior as a target abnormal behavior, and comprehensively calculating the risk assessment index of the abnormal behaviors of the evaluation expert, wherein the calculation expression is as follows:wherein->Risk assessment index for representing abnormal behaviors of evaluation expert>Representing the similarity of the abnormal behavior of the rating expert to the target abnormal behavior,/o->Indicating the duration of the expert abnormal behaviour of the rating scale, < >>Risk abnormality factor corresponding to similarity representing set target abnormal behavior, < ->And representing the risk abnormality factor corresponding to the set unit duration.
And acquiring a risk assessment index threshold of the abnormal behavior of the bid evaluation expert from the bid evaluation database, comparing the risk assessment index of the abnormal behavior of the bid evaluation expert with the risk assessment index threshold of the abnormal behavior of the bid evaluation expert, and if the risk assessment index of the abnormal behavior of the bid evaluation expert is higher than the risk assessment index threshold of the abnormal behavior of the bid evaluation expert, carrying out feedback early warning.
In a specific embodiment, the risk degree of the abnormal behavior is evaluated by identifying the abnormal behavior of the rating specialist, so that measures are taken to prevent and reduce the improper behavior, and the fairness of the rating process is ensured.
And the evaluation quality analysis module is used for carrying out multidimensional evaluation on the evaluation quality, feeding back an evaluation result, and recombining the expert group to carry out a new round of scoring if the evaluation quality is unqualified.
Specifically, the method comprises the steps of performing multidimensional evaluation on the evaluation quality, and feeding back an evaluation result, wherein the specific process is as follows: and acquiring the number of times of illegal behaviors of an expert in the bid evaluation process, acquiring the total bid evaluation cost and the total bid evaluation duration, and simultaneously acquiring the critical bid evaluation number of times, the total reference standard bid evaluation cost and the total reference standard bid evaluation duration from a bid evaluation database.
And carrying out ratio operation on the number of occurrences of the violation and the number of violations of the critical evaluation, respectively making difference between the total evaluation cost and the total evaluation time length and the reference standard value to obtain deviation values corresponding to the total evaluation cost and the total evaluation time length, respectively carrying out ratio operation on the deviation values corresponding to the total evaluation cost and the total evaluation time length and the reference standard total evaluation cost and the reference standard total evaluation time length, finally carrying out product operation on the number of occurrences of the violation, the ratio corresponding to the total evaluation cost and the total evaluation time length and the corresponding evaluation quality influence factors, and summing the results to obtain an evaluation quality evaluation index, wherein the evaluation quality evaluation index represents data obtained by quantitatively evaluating the quality of the evaluation result and is used for reflecting the reliability of the evaluation result obtained by the expert group.
Specifically, the evaluation index of the quality of the evaluation mark is specifically calculated as:wherein->Representing the evaluation index of quality of the evaluation mark,/->Indicating the number of occurrences of the offence +.>Indicating total price of the rating scale, ->Indicating the total time length of evaluation mark->Indicating critical evaluation number of violations ++>Indicating total costs of reference standard commentary +.>Indicating the total time length of reference standard commentary, +.>Indicating the set reference allowable deviation cost, +.>Indicating the set reference tolerance period, +.>Marking quality influence factors corresponding to the occurrence times of the set illegal behaviors are represented, and the marking quality influence factors are ++>Indicating the quality influence factor of the bid evaluation corresponding to the set total bid evaluation cost, < ->And representing the bid evaluation quality influence factors corresponding to the set bid evaluation total time length.
It should be explained that, in this embodiment, the evaluation index of the quality of the bid is determined by three factors of the occurrence number of the offence, the total bid evaluation cost and the total bid evaluation duration, and the smaller the occurrence number of the offence, the smaller the deviation between the total bid evaluation cost and the total bid evaluation duration and the reference standard value, the larger the evaluation index of the quality of the bid is, which indicates that the quality of the bid is more reliable, and meanwhile, the evaluation quality influencing factors corresponding to the occurrence number of the offence, the total bid evaluation cost and the total bid evaluation duration are introduced, thereby improving the accuracy of the calculation result.
And acquiring a bid quality evaluation index threshold from a bid evaluation database, wherein the bid quality evaluation index threshold is a preset critical value for quality evaluation, comparing the bid quality evaluation index with the bid quality evaluation index threshold, and if the bid quality evaluation index is lower than the bid quality evaluation index threshold, performing feedback early warning.
In a specific embodiment, the reliability of the evaluation quality is evaluated through three dimensions of the occurrence times of the illegal behaviors of related personnel, the total evaluation expense and the total evaluation duration in the evaluation process, so that the quality and the accuracy of the evaluation are improved, the risk in the project implementation process is reduced, and the project is ensured to be smoothly carried out according to the preset target and requirement.
In a specific embodiment, the integrated label evaluation field management platform further includes: the training assessment module is used for carrying out regular training assessment on related personnel, wherein the related personnel comprise mark evaluation experts, mark tenderers and staff of mark tendering agency, so that professional literacy and career morals of the mark evaluation experts are improved, understanding of the mark evaluation experts on laws and regulations and mark tendering files is enhanced, the mark evaluation can be carried out according to laws and regulations, and meanwhile, the capability of organizing and managing mark evaluation sites of the staff of the mark tenderers and the mark tendering agency is improved.
An integrated label evaluation field management platform, further comprising: the system comprises a project information management module, a label evaluation process management module and a feedback complaint processing module.
The project information management module is used for planning and managing the evaluation mark project and comprises project background, project target, scheduling and resource allocation.
And the evaluation process management module is used for realizing the audio and video monitoring of the whole evaluation process and the supervision and management of the evaluation process, and storing the audio and video record of the evaluation process into the evaluation database.
The feedback complaint processing module is used for providing a feedback and complaint channel and supporting the problem feedback and complaint function mechanism of personnel.
In a specific embodiment, the invention provides an integrated evaluation field management platform, which sets weight for the evaluation of the evaluation expert according to the job title level and the participation evaluation times of the evaluation expert, reduces the deviation caused by subjective judgment, evaluates the risk degree of abnormal behaviors by identifying the abnormal behaviors of the evaluation expert, ensures the fairness of the evaluation process, evaluates the reliability of the evaluation quality, is beneficial to improving the quality and accuracy of the evaluation, and reduces the risk in the project implementation process.
The foregoing is merely illustrative of the structures of this invention and various modifications, additions and substitutions for those skilled in the art can be made to the described embodiments without departing from the scope of the invention or from the scope of the invention as defined in the accompanying claims.
Claims (10)
1. An integrated label evaluation field management platform, which is characterized by comprising:
the expert information management module is used for acquiring management information of the bid evaluation items, carrying out screening statistics on the bid evaluation expert information, and acquiring scoring information of each bid evaluation expert;
the scoring settlement module is used for carrying out differentiation processing on the scores of the bid evaluation experts and obtaining the comprehensive scores of the bidders, wherein the comprehensive scores of the bidders are obtained by carrying out weighting and averaging processing on the scores of the bid evaluation experts;
the risk analysis early warning module is used for acquiring related data of the bid evaluation process and carrying out evaluation early warning on abnormal behavior risks in the bid evaluation process;
and the evaluation quality analysis module is used for carrying out multidimensional evaluation on the evaluation quality, feeding back an evaluation result, and recombining the expert group to carry out a new round of scoring if the evaluation quality is unqualified.
2. The integrated label field management platform of claim 1, wherein: the evaluation mark database is used for storing evaluation mark related information data;
the rating relevant information data includes: the system comprises an expert information set, expert information classification data, job title influence factors corresponding to each job title grade, evaluation number influence factors corresponding to each participation evaluation number range, an evaluation expert abnormal behavior risk evaluation index threshold, critical evaluation number of violations, reference standard evaluation total cost, reference standard evaluation total duration, an evaluation quality evaluation index threshold and an audio and video record of an evaluation process.
3. The integrated label field management platform of claim 1, wherein: the screening and statistics of the bid evaluation expert information specifically comprises the following steps:
the platform collects personal information and credit information of registered specialists, and the credit information of the specialists is audited according to set standards, wherein the personal information comprises professions, titles and areas, and the credit information comprises qualification and credit;
after the verification is passed, expert information which is successfully registered is counted to establish an expert information set, the expert information is classified according to personal information, and the expert information set and expert information classification data are stored in an evaluation database;
according to professional association requirements, job title requirements and regional constraint characteristics of the bidding documents, acquiring expert information meeting requirements from a bid evaluation database, randomly extracting expert information from the expert information meeting requirements according to the set number of required experts, and marking the extracted experts as bid evaluation experts.
4. The integrated label field management platform of claim 1, wherein: the differential processing of the scores of the evaluation experts specifically comprises the following steps:
matching the job title level and the participation evaluation times of each evaluation expert with the job title influence factors corresponding to each job title level and the evaluation times influence factors corresponding to each participation evaluation time range stored in the evaluation database respectively to obtain the job title influence factors and the evaluation times influence factors of each evaluation expert;
and acquiring correction coefficients to which the set title influence factors and the evaluation times influence factors belong, multiplying the title influence factors and the evaluation times influence factors of each evaluation expert by the correction coefficients to which the set title influence factors and the evaluation times influence factors belong respectively, and adding products corresponding to the title influence factors and the evaluation times influence factors to obtain the scoring weight factors of each evaluation expert.
5. The integrated label field management platform of claim 1, wherein: the calculation formula of the comprehensive score of each bidder is as follows:
，
in the method, in the process of the invention,indicate->Comprehensive score of individual bidders->Indicate->The personal evaluation expert pairs->Scoring, ->Pre-rising evaluation score representing corresponding unit value of scoring weight factor, ++>The number of each bidder is indicated,，/>representing the total number of bidders>Number representing each evaluation expert +.>，/>Representing the total number of rating experts.
6. The integrated label field management platform of claim 5, wherein: the scoring settlement module further comprises a step of obtaining the comprehensive scores of all bidders, a step of arranging the comprehensive scores of all bidders according to the sequence from large to small, a step of extracting bidders corresponding to the maximum comprehensive scores, and a step of determining the bidders as winning targets.
7. The integrated label field management platform of claim 2, wherein: the assessment and early warning for the abnormal behavior risk in the evaluation and marking process specifically comprises the following steps:
identifying abnormal behaviors of the evaluation expert, and analyzing risk assessment indexes of the abnormal behaviors of the evaluation expert;
and acquiring a risk assessment index threshold of the abnormal behavior of the bid evaluation expert from the bid evaluation database, comparing the risk assessment index of the abnormal behavior of the bid evaluation expert with the risk assessment index threshold of the abnormal behavior of the bid evaluation expert, and if the risk assessment index of the abnormal behavior of the bid evaluation expert is higher than the risk assessment index threshold of the abnormal behavior of the bid evaluation expert, carrying out feedback early warning.
8. The integrated label field management platform of claim 2, wherein: the multi-dimensional evaluation is carried out on the evaluation quality, and the evaluation result is fed back, and the specific process is as follows:
acquiring the number of times of illegal behaviors of an expert in the bid evaluation process, acquiring the total bid evaluation cost and the total bid evaluation duration, acquiring the critical bid evaluation number of times, the total reference standard bid evaluation cost and the total reference standard bid evaluation duration from a bid evaluation database, and calculating a bid evaluation quality evaluation index;
and acquiring a bid evaluation quality evaluation index threshold from the bid evaluation database, comparing the bid evaluation quality evaluation index with the bid evaluation quality evaluation index threshold, and if the bid evaluation quality evaluation index is lower than the bid evaluation quality evaluation index threshold, performing feedback early warning.
9. The integrated label field management platform of claim 8, wherein: the evaluation quality evaluation index comprises the following specific calculation expression:
，
in the method, in the process of the invention,quality evaluation for showing evaluation markEstimate index, ->Indicating the number of occurrences of the offence +.>Indicating total price of the rating scale, ->Indicating the total time length of evaluation mark->Indicating critical evaluation number of violations ++>Indicating total costs of reference standard commentary +.>Indicating the total time length of reference standard commentary, +.>Indicating the set reference allowable deviation cost, +.>Indicating the set reference tolerance period, +.>Marking quality influence factors corresponding to the occurrence times of the set illegal behaviors are represented, and the marking quality influence factors are ++>Indicating the quality influence factor of the bid evaluation corresponding to the set total bid evaluation cost, < ->And representing the bid evaluation quality influence factors corresponding to the set bid evaluation total time length.
10. The integrated label field management platform of claim 1, wherein: further comprises: the system comprises a project information management module, a label evaluation process management module and a feedback complaint processing module;
the project information management module is used for planning and managing the evaluation mark project and comprises project background, project target, scheduling and resource allocation;
the evaluation process management module is used for acquiring statistical results of evaluation expert information, realizing audio and video monitoring of the whole evaluation process and supervision and management of the evaluation process, and storing audio and video records of the evaluation process into an evaluation database;
the training assessment module is used for acquiring a bid evaluation flow and assessing a bid evaluation expert according to the bid evaluation flow;
the feedback complaint processing module is used for obtaining the scoring result in the scoring settlement module, providing feedback and complaint channels and supporting the problem feedback and complaint function mechanism of personnel.
Priority Applications (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202410229266.7A CN117808326A (en) | 2024-02-29 | 2024-02-29 | Integrated label evaluation field management platform |
Applications Claiming Priority (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202410229266.7A CN117808326A (en) | 2024-02-29 | 2024-02-29 | Integrated label evaluation field management platform |
Publications (1)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CN117808326A true CN117808326A (en) | 2024-04-02 |
Family
ID=90430537
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202410229266.7A Pending CN117808326A (en) | 2024-02-29 | 2024-02-29 | Integrated label evaluation field management platform |
Country Status (1)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| CN (1) | CN117808326A (en) |
Citations (5)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN114066164A (en) * | 2021-10-20 | 2022-02-18 | 南方电网深圳数字电网研究院有限公司 | Intelligent realization method and device for project bid evaluation |
| CN114418343A (en) * | 2021-12-28 | 2022-04-29 | 珠海大横琴科技发展有限公司 | Project bid evaluation method and device |
| CN116485508A (en) * | 2023-04-11 | 2023-07-25 | 中国移动通信集团内蒙古有限公司 | Mobile intelligent evaluation system and intelligent evaluation supervision method based on cloud technology |
| CN117197900A (en) * | 2023-10-12 | 2023-12-08 | 山东华芙新能源科技有限公司 | Battery anti-theft identification method and device for battery replacement cabinet |
| CN117314601A (en) * | 2023-09-26 | 2023-12-29 | 厦门市政智慧城市科技有限公司 | Evaluation assisting method, system, equipment and storage medium |
-
2024
- 2024-02-29 CN CN202410229266.7A patent/CN117808326A/en active Pending
Patent Citations (5)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN114066164A (en) * | 2021-10-20 | 2022-02-18 | 南方电网深圳数字电网研究院有限公司 | Intelligent realization method and device for project bid evaluation |
| CN114418343A (en) * | 2021-12-28 | 2022-04-29 | 珠海大横琴科技发展有限公司 | Project bid evaluation method and device |
| CN116485508A (en) * | 2023-04-11 | 2023-07-25 | 中国移动通信集团内蒙古有限公司 | Mobile intelligent evaluation system and intelligent evaluation supervision method based on cloud technology |
| CN117314601A (en) * | 2023-09-26 | 2023-12-29 | 厦门市政智慧城市科技有限公司 | Evaluation assisting method, system, equipment and storage medium |
| CN117197900A (en) * | 2023-10-12 | 2023-12-08 | 山东华芙新能源科技有限公司 | Battery anti-theft identification method and device for battery replacement cabinet |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| CN107341619A (en) | A kind of bid information acquisition system and method | |
| US20050071185A1 (en) | Regulatory compliance evaluation system and method | |
| US20070219967A1 (en) | Patent Invalidation | |
| WO2006004131A1 (en) | Company evaluation device, company evaluation program, and company evaluation method | |
| CN113033995B (en) | Evaluation expert selection and management system and method based on 'internet +', and evaluation expert selection and management method based on 'internet +' | |
| Teixeira da Silva et al. | A credit-like rating system to determine the legitimacy of scientific journals and publishers | |
| CN113434575B (en) | Data attribution processing method, device and storage medium based on data warehouse | |
| Amin et al. | Application of optimistic and pessimistic OWA and DEA methods in stock selection | |
| CN116433052A (en) | Intelligent bidding information acquisition data analysis and evaluation system | |
| Shan et al. | Corruption in the public construction sector | |
| Baugh et al. | A matter of appearances: How does auditing expertise benefit audit committees when selecting auditors? | |
| CN111090833A (en) | Data processing method, system and related equipment | |
| CN111798246A (en) | Financial risk grade assessment method and device | |
| Maulidi | The Investigation and elimination of public procurement fraud in government sectors (a case study in Indonesia’s procurement system: cases from 2006 to 2012) | |
| De Felice | Challenges and opportunities in the production of business and human rights indicators to measure the corporate responsibility to respect | |
| Kassinis et al. | Perceptions matter: CEO perceptions and firm environmental performance | |
| CN115577983B (en) | Enterprise task matching method based on block chain, server and storage medium | |
| WO2008127337A1 (en) | Intellectual property examination | |
| CN117808326A (en) | Integrated label evaluation field management platform | |
| Martin et al. | Documenting disparity in minority contracting: Legal requirements and recommendations for policy makers | |
| CN115564591A (en) | Financing product determination method and related equipment | |
| KR102491396B1 (en) | Method And Apparatus for Providing Multi-Dimensional Patent Analysis Service Based on Big Data | |
| Lochner et al. | Calculating, Credible, or Both? Third-Party Monitors and Repeat Players in Federal Campaign Finance Enforcement | |
| CN111899133B (en) | Informationized platform construction method based on civil inspection service | |
| Chen et al. | Quantifying impact factors of corporate financing: engineering consulting firms |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination |