MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2183555822 · doi:10.1109/wsc.2008.4736355

An integrated CAD and simulation model for concrete operations

2008· article· en· W2183555822 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

Venue2008 Winter Simulation Conference · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisual Basic for ApplicationsDowntownSlabCADComputer scienceSoftwareEngineering drawing3d modelCivil engineeringEngineeringArchitectural engineeringStructural engineeringProgramming languageGeographyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pouring a concrete raft slab is a classic problem in down-town projects because it requires special arrangements to be made with city authorities to close the area around the project during the operation. City authorities allow this only during the weekends that puts a lot of pressure on construction staff to finish pouring the concrete in a limited amount of time. In this paper, a simulation model for predicating the pouring time is introduced. This integrated model consists of: Special Purpose Simulation (Simphony), Microsoft Access, Visual Basic for Application (VBA) and AutoCAD software. Moreover, in this paper the sensitive parameters are analyzed and recommendations for choosing pouring concrete sub-contractors are provided. Additionally the proposed model is applied to a practical case for defining the required time for pouring a lower raft slab for “The Bow” project in downtown Calgary.

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 score0.750
Threshold uncertainty score0.658

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.232 · 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