MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2294379639

Component-based modeling of complete buildings

2011· article· en· W2294379639 on OpenAlexaff
Luc Leblanc, Jocelyn Houle, Pierre Poulin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Modeling in Geospatial Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComponent (thermodynamics)SubdivisionComputer scienceEmbeddingRepresentation (politics)Tree (set theory)InterdependenceSeries (stratigraphy)Theoretical computer scienceEngineering drawingArtificial intelligenceMathematicsEngineeringCivil engineeringGeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Figure 1: Variations on a building. Top: Random variations on the distribution of apartments, secondary corridors, rooms, and furniture for one randomly generated configuration of wings in a multi-storey building. Bottom: Random variations on the wing shapes and their content. We present a system to procedurally generate complex models with interdependent elements. Our system relies on the concept of components to spatially and semantically define various elements. Through a series of successive statements executed on a subset of components selected with queries, we grow a tree of components ultimately defining a model. We apply our concept and representation of components to the generation of complete buildings, with coherent interior and exterior. It proves general and well adapted to support subdivision of volumes, insertion of openings, embedding of staircases, decoration of façades and walls, layout of furniture, and various other operations required when constructing a complete building.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.158 · 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 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

Citations22
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topic3D Modeling in Geospatial ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207