What is the Difference between ALICE Core and Pro?

Overview

ALICE is an AI-powered software platform that allows construction professionals to simulate their entire project, building it many times virtually before they build it physically. 

Every ALICE project has the same workflow:

  1. Plan: input the scope and define the construction logic and resources required.
  2. Derisk, Optimize, and Optioneer: Using the explore page, identify risks, optimize your schedule, and explore novel scenarios.
  3. Analyze: Use the insights that have surfaced to make decisions to positively impact your project.

The differences between Core and Pro are primarily in the plan phase of the workflow:

  • Core starts by importing your P6 schedule and allows you to plan at a per-task level. 
  • Pro starts by uploading a BIM and allows you to plan at a per-element level. Recipes are used to define repeatable series of tasks and the logic relationships between them.
  • Both Core and Pro enable the same impact and value via derisking, optimization and optioneering. 

For detailed instructions on project setup, see Set Up a Project in Core and Set Up a Project in Pro


Summary Table of Major Technical Differences:

  Core Pro
Primary mode of planning Task-based, logic and resources are defined per-task Element-based, tasks, logic, and resources are defined in a recipe
P6 Interoperability P6 schedules can be imported, and ALICE schedules can be exported and imported to P6 ALICE schedules can be exported and imported to P6
Model Visualization No 4D, visualization occurs via gantt chart 4D compatible, BIM to CIM conversion may be necessary.
Typical User Scheduler or planner Integrated project teams
Average Setup Time 1-20 hours 20-100 hours

 

How to decide whether to use Core or Pro

Consider how much time you can dedicate to the risk analysis and optioneering process. 

  • Core has a much faster set-up time- 1-20 hours on average. If you don’t have much time and have an idea of exactly where you want to focus your efforts, Core is a good choice.
  • Pro requires more time in the setup process, 20-100 hours, because you’re integrating the schedule with a 3D or 2D model and creating a rule-set via recipes. It’s best used when your team has a goal of analyzing and optimizing the entire schedule and can invest the time required for the holistic analysis.

Consider how important 4D planning and 3D visualization are to your project goals

  • Core does not support integration with 2D or 3D models, and all visualization is done through the gantt chart. If 4D planning and model-based visualization are not important to your goals, use Core.
  • Pro supports 4D planning by integrating your schedule and a visual model, typically a BIM. If you already have a model and 4D planning is of high importance, use Pro.

 

Frequently Asked Questions about Core and Pro:

Why was Core built?
Our customers asked us to make it easier and faster to set up a project in ALICE. Core is designed to drastically reduce setup time, so project teams can get into the value-creating work of optioneering more quickly.

Are Core and Pro interoperable?
Users can start a project in Pro, export the schedule, and import it into Core. It is not currently possible to start in Core and transition into Pro.

Where do I create recipes in Core?
Core does not use recipes. All planning is done at the task level in Core. Recipes can be created and used in Pro.

What skills are needed to operate Core and Pro?
With Core, some scheduling experience is helpful, as you'll need to be able to interpret a Gantt chart and define logic ties using common scheduling concepts such as Finish to Start.
With Pro, we recommend having access to someone with VDC experience to help you integrate a model into your schedule.
For both Core and Pro, an understanding of constructibility is important. You don't need any special AI or data analysis experience, these topics are included as part of standard training.

 

To learn more, check out Supported Use Cases for Core and Pro 

Was this article helpful?
0 out of 0 found this helpful