journal article·2026-02-19Open access

Human-Centered AI Perception Prediction in Construction: A Regularized Machine Learning Approach for Industry 5.0

Annamária Behúnová, Matúš Pohorenec, Tomáš Mandičák, Marcel Behún

Applied Sciences· Volume 16· Issue 4

Abstract

Industry 5.0 emphasizes human-centered integration of artificial intelligence in industrial contexts, yet successful adoption depends critically on workforce perception and acceptance. This research develops and validates a machine learning framework for predicting AI-related perceptions and expected impacts in the construction industry under small sample constraints typical of specialized industrial surveys. Specifically, the study aims to develop and empirically validate a predictive AI decision support model that estimates the expected impact of AI adoption in the construction sector based on digital competencies, ICT utilization, AI training and experience, and AI usage at both individual and organizational levels, operationalized through a composite AI Impact Index and two process-oriented outcomes (perceived task automation and perceived cost reduction). Using a dataset of 51 survey responses from Slovak construction professionals collected in 2025, we implement a methodologically rigorous approach specifically designed for limited-data regimes. The framework encompasses ordinal target simplification from five to three classes, dimensionality reduction through theoretically grounded composite indices reducing features from 15 to 7, exclusive deployment of low variance regularized models, and leave-one-out cross-validation for unbiased performance estimation. The optimal model (Lasso regression with recursive feature elimination) predicts cost reduction perception with R2 = 0.501, MAE = 0.551, and RMSE = 0.709, while six classification targets achieve weighted F1 = 0.681, representing statistically optimal performance given sample constraints and perception measurement variability. Comparative evaluation confirms regularized models outperform high variance alternatives: random forest (R2 = 0.412) and gradient boosting (R2 = 0.292) exhibit substantially lower generalization performance, empirically validating the bias-variance trade-off rationale. Key methodological contributions include explicit bias-variance optimization preventing overfitting, feature selection via RFE reducing input space to six predictors (personal AI usage, AI impact on budgeting, ICT utilization, AI training, company size, and age), and demonstration that principled statistical approaches achieve meaningful predictions without requiring large-scale datasets or complex architectures. The framework provides a replicable blueprint for perception and impact prediction in data-constrained Industry 5.0 contexts, enabling targeted interventions, including customized training programs, strategic communication prioritization, and resource allocation for change management initiatives aligned with predicted adoption patterns.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education · Ethics and Social Impacts of AI · Occupational Health and Safety Research

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Faculty of Mining, Ecology, Process Control and Geotechnologies, Institute of Logistics and Transport, Technical University of Kosice, 042 00 Kosice, Slovakia

Faculty of Civil Engineering, Institute of Construction Technology, Economics and Management, Technical University of Kosice, 042 00 Kosice, Slovakia

Faculty of Mining, Ecology, Process Control and Geotechnologies, Institute of Earth Resources, Technical University of Kosice, 042 00 Kosice, Slovakia

Funding

Ministry of Education, Science, Research, and Sport of the Slovak Republic · Slovak Research and Development Agency

References (77)

Show source-provided references
1. Industry 4.0 and Industry 5.0-Inception, conception and perception10.1016/j.jmsy.2021.10.006 ↗
2. Identifying industry 5.0 contributions to sustainable development: A strategy roadmap for delivering sustainability values10.1016/j.spc.2022.08.003 ↗
3. Regona, M., Yigitcanlar, T., Xia, B., and Li, R.Y.M. (2022). Opportunities and adoption challenges of AI in the construction industry: A PRISMA review. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex., 8.10.3390/joitmc8010045 ↗
4. Brigato, L., and Iocchi, L. (2021, January 10–15). A close look at deep learning with small data. Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR), Milan, Italy.10.1109/ICPR48806.2021.9412492 ↗
5. James, G., Witten, D., Hastie, T., and Tibshirani, R. (2021). An Introduction to Statistical Learning with Applications in R, Springer. [2nd ed.].10.1007/978-1-0716-1418-1 ↗
6. A survey of regularization strategies for deep models10.1007/s10462-019-09784-7 ↗
7. Performance evaluation of classification algorithms by k-fold and leave-one-out cross validation10.1016/j.patcog.2015.03.009 ↗
8. Hastie, T., Tibshirani, R., and Friedman, J. (2009). The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, Springer. [2nd ed.].10.1007/978-0-387-84858-7 ↗
9. Nahavandi, S. (2019). Industry 5.0-A human-centric solution. Sustainability, 11.10.3390/su11164371 ↗
10. Roles of artificial intelligence in construction engineering and management: A critical review and future trends10.1016/j.autcon.2020.103517 ↗
11. Integrating BIM and AI for smart construction management: Current status and future directions10.1007/s11831-022-09830-8 ↗
12. Na, S., Heo, S., Han, S., Shin, Y., and Roh, Y. (2022). Acceptance model of artificial intelligence (AI)-based technologies in construction firms: Applying the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) in combination with the Technology–Organisation–Environment (TOE) framework. Buildings, 12.10.3390/buildings12020090 ↗
13. Musarat, M.A., Hameed, N., Altaf, M., Alaloul, W.S., and Shafiq, N. (2021, January 7–8). Digital transformation of the construction industry: A review. Proceedings of the International Conference on Decision Aid Sciences and Application (DASA), Sakheer, Bahrain.10.1109/DASA53625.2021.9682303 ↗
14. Digital transformation in the construction industry: A bibliometric review
15. Tjebane, M.M., Musonda, I., and Okoro, C.S. (2022). Organisational factors of artificial intelligence adoption in the South African construction industry. Front. Built Environ., 8.10.3389/fbuil.2022.823998 ↗
16. Na, S., Heo, S., Choi, W., Kim, C., and Whang, S.W. (2023). Artificial intelligence (AI)-Based technology adoption in the construction industry: A cross national perspective using the technology acceptance model. Buildings, 13.10.3390/buildings13102518 ↗
17. Understanding the implications of digitisation and automation in the context of Industry 4.0: A triangulation approach and elements of a research agenda for the construction industry10.1016/j.compind.2016.09.006 ↗
18. Prospects, drivers of and barriers to artificial intelligence adoption in project management10.1108/BEPAM-12-2022-0195 ↗
19. Regularization studies of linear discriminant analysis in small sample size scenarios with application to face recognition10.1016/j.patrec.2004.09.014 ↗
20. Cross-validation failure: Small sample sizes lead to large error bars10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.06.061 ↗
21. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology10.2307/249008 ↗
22. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view10.2307/30036540 ↗
23. Diffusion of Innovations, 5th edition, Everett M. Rogers. Free Press, New York, NY (2003), 551 pages10.1016/j.jmig.2007.07.001 ↗
24. Bias-variance tradeoff in machine learning: Theoretical formulation and implications to structural engineering applications10.1016/j.istruc.2022.10.004 ↗
25. Alves, J., Lima, T.M., and Gaspar, P.D. (2023). Is industry 5.0 a human-centred approach? A systematic review. Processes, 11.10.3390/pr11010193 ↗
26. Martini, B., Bellisario, D., and Coletti, P. (2024). Human-centered and sustainable artificial intelligence in industry 5.0: Challenges and perspectives. Sustainability, 16.10.3390/su16135448 ↗
27. Human-centric production and logistics system design and management: Transitioning from Industry 4.0 to Industry 5.010.1080/00207543.2023.2246783 ↗
28. Digital transformation in construction—A review
29. A systematic review of the digital transformation of the building construction industry10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3365934 ↗
30. Rane, N. (2023). Integrating building information modelling (BIM) and artificial intelligence (AI) for smart construction schedule, cost, quality, and safety management: Challenges and opportunities. SSRN Electron. J, 4616055.10.2139/ssrn.4616055 ↗
31. Application of artificial intelligence and machine learning for BIM10.1051/smdo/2023005 ↗
32. Bolpagni, M., Bartoletti, I., and Ciribini, A. (2026, February 10). Artificial Intelligence in the Construction Industry: Adoption, Benefits and Risks. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Marzia_Bolpagni/publication/355192584_Artificial_Intelligence_in_the_Construction_Industry_Adoption_Benefits_and_Risks/links/616694e43851f95994f76c33/Artificial-Intelligence-in-the-Construction-Industry-Adoption-Benefits-and-Risks.pdf.
33. Challenges to IoT-enabled predictive maintenance for industry 4.010.1109/JIOT.2019.2957029 ↗
34. Data-driven predictive maintenance planning framework for MEP components based on BIM and IoT using machine learning algorithms10.1016/j.autcon.2020.103087 ↗
35. IoT and fog-computing-based predictive maintenance model for effective asset management in Industry 4.0 using machine learning10.1109/JIOT.2021.3050441 ↗
36. Technology acceptance model: A literature review from 1986 to 201310.1007/s10209-014-0348-1 ↗
37. A comprehensive evaluation of factors influencing acceptance of robotic assistants in field construction work
38. Assessing trust in construction AI-powered collaborative robots using structural equation modeling10.1061/JCCEE5.CPENG-5660 ↗
39. A systematic literature review of influencing factors and strategies of artificial intelligence adoption in the construction industry10.1088/1757-899X/1218/1/012001 ↗
40. Lu, Y., and Deng, Y. (2022). What drives construction practitioners’ acceptance of intelligent surveillance systems? An extended technology acceptance model. Buildings, 12.10.3390/buildings12020104 ↗
41. A machine learning approach to assess differential item functioning in psychometric questionnaires using the elastic net regularized ordinal logistic regression in small samples10.1155/2021/6854477 ↗
42. Regularization methods for fitting linear models with small sample sizes: Fitting the Lasso estimator using R
43. Improving the kernel regularized least squares method for small-sample regression10.1016/j.neucom.2014.12.097 ↗
44. The acceptance of personal protective equipment among Hong Kong construction workers: An integration of technology acceptance model and theory of planned behavior10.1016/j.jsr.2021.09.014 ↗
45. Regression models for ordinal data10.1111/j.2517-6161.1980.tb01109.x ↗
46. Learning from imbalanced data10.1109/TKDE.2008.239 ↗
47. Comparing within-subject classification and regularization methods in fMRI for large and small sample sizes10.1002/hbm.22490 ↗
48. A survey on nonconvex regularization-based sparse and low-rank recovery in signal processing, statistics, and machine learning10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2880454 ↗
49. Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso10.1111/j.2517-6161.1996.tb02080.x ↗
50. Regularization and variable selection via the elastic net10.1111/j.1467-9868.2005.00503.x ↗
51. Leave-one-out cross-validation, penalization, and differential bias of some prediction model performance measures-a simulation study10.1186/s41512-023-00146-0 ↗
52. Is cross-validation valid for small-sample microarray classification?10.1093/bioinformatics/btg419 ↗
53. Efficient leave-one-out cross-validation of kernel fisher discriminant classifiers10.1016/S0031-3203(03)00136-5 ↗
54. Varma, S., and Simon, R. (2006). Bias in error estimation when using cross-validation for model selection. BMC Bioinform., 7.10.1186/1471-2105-7-91 ↗
55. Cawley, G.C. (2006, January 16–21). Leave-one-out cross-validation based model selection criteria for weighted LS-SVMs. Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE International Joint Conference on Neural Network, Vancouver, BC, Canada.10.1109/IJCNN.2006.246634 ↗
56. Breque, M., De Nul, L., and Petridis, A. (2026, February 10). Industry 5.0: Towards a Sustainable, Human-Centric and Resilient European Industry. European Commission, Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. Available online: https://ideas.repec.org/p/eug/wpaper/ki-bd-20-021-en-n.html.
57. Kagermann, H., Wahlster, W., and Helbig, J. (2013). Recommendations for Implementing the Strategic Initiative Industrie 4.0: Final Report of the Industrie 4.0 Working Group, Acatech (National Academy of Science and Engineering).10.3390/sci4030026 ↗
58. Digitalization and automation in construction project’s life-cycle: A review
59. Prebanić, K.R., and Vukomanović, M. (2021). Realizing the need for digital transformation of stakeholder management: A systematic review in the construction industry. Sustainability, 13.10.3390/su132212690 ↗
60. Pal, U.K., Zhang, C., Haupt, T.C., Li, H., and Su, L. (2024). The evolution of Construction 5.0: Challenges and opportunities. Buildings, 14.10.3390/buildings14124010 ↗
61. Yitmen, I. (Smart Sustain. Built Environ., 2024). Facilitating Construction 5.0 for smart, sustainable and human-centric construction, Smart Sustain. Built Environ., in press.
62. Marović, I., Perić, M., and Hanák, T. (2021). A multi-criteria decision support concept for selecting the optimal contractor. Appl. Sci., 11.10.3390/app11041660 ↗
63. The application of multi-criteria analysis in the evaluation of partnering relations and the selection of a construction company to cooperate with
64. Using of laser scanners in pavement management10.1088/1755-1315/906/1/012077 ↗
65. Fidelis, E., Sherratt, F., and Soeiro, A. (2023). Increasing construction safety through virtual reality. Proceedings of the Digital Transformation of Health and Safety in Construction (CIBW099W123), Porto, Portugal, 21–22 June 2023, International Council for Research and Innovation in Building and Construction.
66. Catalá Pérez, D., Perelló-Marín, M.R., and Carrascosa López, C. (2023). Business Meets Technology: 5th International Conference (BMT 2023), Valencia, Spain, 13–15 July 2023, Editorial Universitat Politècnica de València.
67. Knapčíková, L. (2020). New Approaches in Management of Smart Manufacturing Systems: Knowledge and Practice, Springer.10.1007/978-3-030-40176-4 ↗
68. Egwim, C.N., Alaka, H., Demir, E., Balogun, H., Olu-Ajayi, R., Sulaimon, I., Wusu, G., Yusuf, W., and Muideen, A.A. (2024). Artificial Intelligence in the Construction Industry: A Systematic Review of the Entire Construction Value Chain Lifecycle. Energies, 17.10.3390/en17010182 ↗
69. Internet of things (IoT) for safety and efficiency in construction building site operations10.1038/s41598-024-78931-0 ↗
70. Kagermann, H., Wahlster, W., and Helbig, J. (2013). Recommendations for Implementing the Strategic Initiative Industrie 4.0 (Final Report), National Academy of Science and Engineering.
71. Behind the definition of Industry 4.0: Analysis and open questions10.1016/j.ijpe.2020.107617 ↗
72. BIM-based immersive Virtual Reality for construction workspace planning: A safety-oriented approach10.1016/j.autcon.2020.103160 ↗
73. Yigitcanlar, T., and Cugurullo, F. (2020). The sustainability of artificial intelligence: An urbanistic viewpoint from the lens of smart and sustainable cities. Sustainability, 12.10.3390/su12208548 ↗
74. Human–Robot Collaboration in Construction: Classification and Research Trends10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0002154 ↗
75. Virtual Reality Training for Occupational Risk Prevention: Application Case in Geotechnical Drilling Works
76. SIMURG_CITIES Conceptual Model: Multi-Dimensional and Multi-Layer Performance-Based Assessment of Urban Sustainability at the City Level
77. Digital Virtual Anchors Impact in Entertainment Industry: An Exploration of User Acceptance and Market Insights10.57017/jorit.v4.2(8).01 ↗