MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104308428 · doi:10.7492/ijaec.2012.003

Factors Affecting Productivity of Pipe Spool Fabrication

2012· article· en· W2104308428 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Seyed Parham Mosayebi, Aminah Robinson Fayek, Laury Yakemchuk, S. Waters

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Architecture Engineering and Construction · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProductivityFabricationMarine engineeringEngineeringEnvironmental scienceManufacturing engineeringAutomotive engineeringEconomicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Pipe spool fabrication is an early stage in industrial construction projects and is crucial for the successful delivery of a project. Pipe spool fabrication is a complex and uncertain process due to the uniqueness of its products. The productivity of the fabrication process and the factors affecting productivity are therefore of great importance to project managers and construction researchers alike. Being able to identify all of the sig-nificant factors affecting productivity is critical to the ability to accurately estimate productivity and ultimately improve the fabrication process. This paper introduces the factors that affect the productivity of the pipe spool fabrication process that are not accounted for in the production unit of spools. In addition, the impact of each factor on productivity is illustrated, and different methods for modeling these factors are proposed. This paper provides a framework for a more comprehensive approach to estimating the productivity using the production unit of spools.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Architecture Engineering and ConstructionSame topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207