Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents an interactive computer-aided site layout model to support site planning in a computer-aided design (CAD) environment and expands upon a model presented earlier by the writers. The developed model performs its task at two levels: Site representation, and site space analysis and allocation. The site representation is carried out using an open architecture supported by object-based concepts. The model offers three tiers of objects: (1) site objects, (2) construction objects, and (3) constraint objects. This structure facilitates the creation of new objects and reuse of domain knowledge, which allows for the gradual expansion and enrichment of the model’s knowledge base. At the space analysis and allocation level, the model introduces a geometric reasoning approach to analyze site space for finding an optimum or near-optimum location for facilities. This feature facilitates easy visualization of the site planning process and encourages user participation. The model is structured in three main modules: Database, Project Module, and Layout Control Module. The functionality of each module, along with their interconnectivity is described. The model is implemented using Visual Basic for Applications in AutoCAD environment and Microsoft Access. A numerical example of an actual site layout is presented to illustrate the functionality of the developed model.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.003 |
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".