This example connects source-plan quantities, scoped calculation checks, construction estimates, trade packages and a dependency schedule. The original plans, signed agreements, geotechnical report and detailed private provenance remain in the project record.
Confidence model
Construction-only analyst planning model; synthetic cases are not measured reliability or professional acceptance.
Foundation central/range comes from signed source scope plus quantity changes, unquoted unit-rate benchmarks and a separate declared revision exposure.
Other trade factors are explicit judgment: generally 90%/100%/120%; MEP 90%/100%/130%; proposed wardrobes 50%/100%/175%. No current trade response is implied.
Shared-factor weights are analyst assumptions, not fitted project correlations. Seed and all ranges are recorded.
Source supervision and temporary facilities are replaced with weekly costs once; old fixed amounts, old foundation overlay and flat 10% reserve are excluded from sampling.
Compression premiums apply only to $176,000 of identified source labor at coefficient 3. The tested 80% pace boundary is not a verified crash limit.
Field production is repriced through the dependency network. Procurement, foundation, cure/test and inspections are protected; extension adds time-related site cost.
The expected-cost optimum is different from the selected coverage allowance. Cost/time percentiles are marginal; joint share is counted from the paired cases.
No calendar completion is promised: design/permit/site and external utility readiness remain unresolved. Soil/code/design checks stay separate from these economic scenarios.
Unpriced revision allowance bounds are study assumptions, not maximum loss; actual tails and source changes may exceed the modeled range.
Whole-dollar and whole-week presentation retains full-precision inputs and calculation results.