MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143561132 · doi:10.5555/2433508.2433913

Advanced simulation of tower crane operation utilizing system dynamics modeling and lean principles

2010· article· en· W2143561132 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

VenueWinter Simulation Conference · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTower craneSwingTowerProcess (computing)Computer scienceEngineeringSimulationMechanical engineeringCivil engineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tower cranes are one of the major equipments used in the construction of high-rise buildings. Simulation is an effective tool in modeling complex construction operations such as tower crane lifting. Lean principles combined with a simulation module can significantly reduce the cost and improve time management of construction. This paper presents an integrated system dynamics model with Lean concepts to simulate tower crane operations. This paper also presents a new type of tower crane with the following innovative futures: 1) two jibs; 2) propellers to swing the crane; and 3) wireless video monitoring technology. This double-jib crane will potentiality improve the productivity of the crane operation. A case example is presented and the results of the model are used to illustrate the advantages of utilizing a double-jib crane in the construction process. The results indicate that advance simulation techniques can minimize the resource requirements of crane operation.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.503
Threshold uncertainty score0.539

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.226 · 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