MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078284897 · doi:10.5555/2429759.2430281

Towards the smart construction site: improving productivity and safety of construction projects using multi-agent systems, real-time simulation and automated machine control

2012· article· en· W2078284897 on OpenAlexaff
Amin Hammad, Faridaddin Vahdatikhaki, Cheng Zhang, Mohammed Mawlana, Ahmad Doriani

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProductivityBuilding information modelingControl (management)Construction site safetyComputer scienceConstruction managementSystems engineeringConstruction industryEngineeringRisk analysis (engineering)Construction engineeringCivil engineeringArtificial intelligenceOperations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the increasing complexity of construction projects grows the challenge of securing safety and achieving desirable productivity as the chief priorities of the construction industry. Addressing these issues requires robust mechanisms for on-site real-time data capturing, information processing and decision-making. The current research aims to further investigate the concept of the Smart Construction Site where workers, equipment, and materials are continuously tracked, and the collected information is processed in near real time to update the design model and the simulation of upcoming tasks, and to provide navigation guidance and safety warnings in case of potential collisions. The objective of our research is to improve the productivity and safety of heavy construction projects by integrating 3D design models (e.g. highway models) with the managerial and operational processes of heavy construction using advanced agent technology and multi-agent systems, real-time simulation, and automated machine control. 1

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 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.805
Threshold uncertainty score0.568

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations20
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207