MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W16601101 · doi:10.1073/pnas.0510337103

APPLICATION OF GAMING ENGINES IN SIMULATION DRIVEN VISUALIZATION OF CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS

2011· article· en· W16601101 on OpenAlexaff
Amr A. El Nimr, Yasser Mohamed

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Information Technology in Construction · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisualizationFlexibility (engineering)Computer scienceRepresentation (politics)Component (thermodynamics)Systems engineeringHuman–computer interactionEngineeringData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Simulation modelling is an effective approach for analysing construction operations that is not widely used by construction practitioners. Visualization in general, and particularly in construction projects, is a convenient and intuitive way of conveying project information among various project parties. Recently, construction management researchers have been investigating adding a visualization component to construction simulation models in order to make these models more intuitive and appealing to decision makers. These researchers argue that enhancing visualization and spatial representation of construction operations in a simulation environment can improve the adoption of simulation techniques by the industry. Among different industries that make use of advanced visualization technologies, the gaming industry is one of the leaders in utilizing and advancing these technologies. This paper explains the utilization of video game technologies in the development of a framework for construction operations simulation visualization. The framework is based on High Level Architecture (HLA) standards for distributed simulation and allows for hooking different visualization components to the simulation environment with great deal of flexibility. The paper presents the different elements of the framework and discusses the benefits and challenges experienced while using two different gaming engines as visualization portals in the framework.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Information Technology in ConstructionSame topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207