## 3 Results
Case I allows no time-reduction measures--all processes are delivered using methods assumed for the baseline. Case II offers a choice between the baseline methods and options coming only from the first group (Table 2). Case III makes it possible to choose from the baseline option and both options of time-reducing measures. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Case** & \(\mathbf{\lambda}\) & **E(s\({}_{4}\)–73)** & **E(s\({}_{5}\)–104)** & **E(s\({}_{6}\)–155)** & **E(s\({}_{7}\)–50)** & **E(s\({}_{8}\)–77)** & **E(s\({}_{13}\)–124)** & **E(s\({}_{15}\)–200)** \\ \hline I & 0 & 2.0170 & 2.4767 & 3.5912 & 0.8064 & 0.8705 & 4.1804 & 6.8009 \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{II} & 0 & 0.5744 & 1.1926 & 1.7892 & 0.3075 & 0.567 & 1.6492 & 1.5647 \\  & 1 & 0.8067 & 1.3093 & 1.9607 & 0.4225 & 0.6224 & 1.899 & 1.9133 \\  & 2 & 1.0812 & 1.4799 & 2.1809 & 0.5515 & 0.6938 & 2.2433 & 2.3916 \\  & 3 & 1.3551 & 1.6813 & 2.4390 & 0.6728 & 0.7593 & 2.6359 & 2.9381 \\  & 4 & 1.5962 & 1.8885 & 2.7090 & 0.7656 & 0.8186 & 3.0373 & 3.5479 \\  & 6 & 1.8647 & 2.1944 & 3.1113 & 0.8064 & 0.866 & 3.6283 & 4.6561 \\  & 8 & 1.9758 & 2.3692 & 3.3577 & 0.8064 & 0.8705 & 3.9299 & 5.5422 \\  & 10 & 2.0126 & 2.4507 & 3.4987 & 0.8064 & 0.8705 & 4.0787 & 6.1302 \\  & 12 & 2.0170 & 2.4695 & 3.5582 & 0.8064 & 0.8705 & 4.1432 & 6.4640 \\  & 14 & 2.0170 & 2.4752 & 3.5813 & 0.8064 & 0.8705 & 4.1678 & 6.6369 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Expected values of delayed start dates of processes. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & & **Minimal** & **Maximal** & **Mode** & **Expected** & **Cost** \\ \multirow{2}{*}{\(i\)} & **Process Name** & **Duration (Days)** & **Duration (Days)** & **(Days)** & **Value (Days)** & **(EUR)** \\ \cline{3-6}  & & \(\mathbf{t_{ali}}\) & \(\mathbf{t_{bi1}}\) & \(\mathbf{t_{mi1}}\) & \(\mathbf{t_{t1}}\) & \(\mathbf{c_{i1}}\) \\ \hline
2 & Frame & 32 & 44 & 35 & 37 & 25,000,000 \\
3 & Roof (structure) & 17 & 27 & 22 & 150,000 \\
4 & Roof (cladding) & 21 & 36 & 27 & 28 & 185,000 \\
5 & Facade & 39 & 57 & 48 & 48 & 195,000 \\
6 & External works & 36 & 43 & 38 & 39 & 160,000 \\
7 & Partitions & 16 & 29 & 21 & 22 & 355,000 \\
8 & Systems & 20 & 24 & 28 & 24 & 720,000 \\
9 & Plastering & 12 & 25 & 20 & 19 & 180,000 \\
10 & Screeds & 21 & 33 & 24 & 26 & 340,000 \\
11 & Decoration & 19 & 29 & 24 & 24 & 250,000 \\
12 & Floors & 14 & 24 & 16 & 18 & 95,000 \\
13 & Joinery & 24 & 31 & 26 & 27 & 620,000 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Parameters of the first group of options of process duration compression measures. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & & **Minimal** & **Maximal** & **Mode** & **Expected** & **Cost** \\ \multirow{2}{*}{\(i\)} & **Process Name** & **Duration (Days)** & **Duration (Days)** & **(Days)** & **Value (Days)** & **(EUR)** \\ \cline{3-6}  & & \(\mathbf{t_{ai2}}\) & \(\mathbf{t_{bi2}}\) & \(\mathbf{t_{mi2}}\) & \(\mathbf{t_{t2}}\) & \(\mathbf{c_{i2}}\) \\ \hline
2 & Frame & 30 & 39 & 33 & 34 & 26,500,000 \\
3 & Roof (structure) & 16 & 21 & 20 & 19 & 165,000 \\
4 & Roof (cladding) & 16 & 30 & 20 & 22 & 200,000 \\
5 & Facade & 36 & 51 & 39 & 42 & 220,000 \\
6 & External works & 31 & 40 & 37 & 36 & 180,000 \\
7 & Partitions & 15 & 25 & 20 & 20 & 380,000 \\
8 & Systems & 15 & 22 & 26 & 21 & 900,000 \\
9 & Plastering & 10 & 23 & 15 & 16 & 200,000 \\
10 & Screeds & 17 & 28 & 21 & 22 & 355,000 \\
11 & Decoration & 17 & 25 & 21 & 21 & 285,000 \\
12 & Floors & 12 & 20 & 16 & 16 & 100,000 \\
13 & Joinery & 20 & 29 & 23 & 24 & 705,000 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Parameters of the second group of options of process duration compression measures. Figure 5 shows how the optimal lag (\(\lambda\)) and the total cost \(C(\lambda)\) (penalties plus cost of schedule compression measures) depend on the penalty rate. Please note that the penalty per unit of time is calculated as a percentage (i.e., penalty rate defined in the contract) of the value assigned to a process.