MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Improving Design Coordination for Building Projects. II: A Collaborative System

2001· article· en· W2036178893 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Construction Engineering and Management · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceProcess (computing)The InternetDomain (mathematical analysis)Collaborative designInformation sharingBuilding information modelingDesign technologySystems designSystems engineeringEngineering managementKnowledge managementSoftware engineeringWorld Wide WebEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this paper is to utilize recent advances in information technology and computer collaboration tools to improve coordination and increase productivity in the design of building projects. Based on a structured information model, presented in a companion paper, a collaborative design system is developed incorporating (1) a client-server environment for representing building data, recording design rationale, and effectively managing design changes; and (2) Internet-based collaboration tools for sharing documents, reviewing changes, and conferencing among remote design participants. Implementation issues and the perceived changes imposed on the traditional design process are discussed, and an example application is worked to demonstrate the applicability and features of the developed prototype. The developments made in this paper provide guidelines for modeling complex information-dependent processes in the construction domain.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.765
Threshold uncertainty score0.451

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.185 · 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