为提升建造效率，桥梁工程广泛采用预制装配的工业化建造方式。然而，现场工序的临时调整极易引发装配失效，导致工期延误与成本超支，违背快速建造初衷。按既定单节段循环工序下料生产的斜拉桥预制构件，如何在调整后的双节段循环工序下实现装配协调，是服从总体进度决策时面临的关键难题。该文融合无应力状态法和容差分配法，首先构建了基于机器学习的斜拉桥装配容差区间反演方法，再引入非负无量纲指标作为独立优化目标，以表征施工可操作性；然后采用GA-BPNN代理模型结合NSGA-Ⅱ多目标优化算法，在结构安全性与设计最优性之间进行权衡寻优，并结合先验误差储备反演了某斜拉桥各部件的被动装配容差区间；最后融合工程前行节段实测数据，建立了面向主动容错的斜拉桥装配容差设计框架。结果表明：该区间反演方法能在保障结构安全性和设计最优性的前提下，有效提升施工现场的可操作性；与被动容差设计相比，主动容差设计方法可使G2梁段主梁拼装角度容差区间提升1.4倍，使斜拉索S16无应力索长容差区间提升2.1倍；主动容差分析框架通过调整后续部件的容差范围，可实现对装配失效场景的自适应应对，减少停工与返工现象。

To enhance construction efficiency, prefabricated and assembled industrialized construction methods are widely adopted in bridge engineering. However, on-site procedural adjustments can easily lead to assembly failures, resulting in schedule and cost overruns, which contradict the original intention of rapid construction. For cable-stayed bridge prefabricated components produced according to the original single-segment cyclic process, how to achieve assembly coordination under the adjusted dual-segment cyclic process is a key challenge when complying with overall schedule decisions. Integrating the unstressed state method and tolerance allocation approach, this paper first develops a machine learning-based inversion method for the assembly tolerance intervals of cable-stayed bridges. Then a non-negative dimensionless indicator is introduced as an independent optimization objective to characterize construction operability. Next, a GA-BPNN surrogate model combined with the NSGA-Ⅱ multi-objective optimization algorithm is adopted to conduct a trade-off optimization between structural safety and design optimality. By incorporating prior error reserves, the passive assembly tolerance ranges for various components of a cable-stayed bridge are inversely derived. Finally, integrating field-measured data from preceding construction segments, an assembly tolerance design framework for cable-stayed bridges oriented toward active fault tolerance is established. Results demonstrate that the proposed interval inversion method effectively enhances on-site operability while ensuring structural safety and design optimality. Compared with passive tolerance design, the active tolerance design approach increases the tolerance interval for the girder splicing angle of segment G2 by 1.4 times and that for the unstressed cable length of stay S16 by 2.1 times. Moreover, the active tolerance analysis framework enables adaptive adjustment in assembly failure scenarios by modifying tolerance ranges of subsequent components, thereby reducing the occurrence of work stoppages and reworks.