A conceptual approach to track design changes within a multi-disciplinary building information modeling environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Successful management of design changes is critical for the efficient delivery of construction projects. Building information modeling (BIM) is envisioned to play an important role in integrating design, construction and facility management processes through coordinated changes throughout the project life-cycle. BIM currently provides significant benefits in coordinating changes across different views in a single model, and identifying conflicts between different discipline-specific models. However, current BIM tools provide limited support in managing changes across several discipline-specific models. This paper describes an approach to represent, coordinate, and track changes within a collaborative multi-disciplinary BIM environment. This approach was informed by a detailed case study of a large, complex, fast-tracked BIM project where we investigated numerous design changes, analyzed change management processes, and evaluated existing BIM tools. Our approach characterizes design changes in an ontology to represent changed component attributes, dependencies between components, and change impacts. It explores different types of dependencies amongst different design changes and describes how a graph-based approach and dependency matrix could assist with automating the propagation and impact of changes in a BIM-based project delivery process.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".