MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2316164171 · doi:10.1061/40513(279)104

IFC-Based Data Model for Integrated Maintenance Management

2000· article· en· W2316164171 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohammad A. Hassanain, Thomas Froese, Dana J. Vanier

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Research Council CanadaPublic Works and Government Services Canada
KeywordsInteroperabilityComputer scienceInformation modelSystems engineeringData modelingDomain (mathematical analysis)Software engineeringObject modelObject (grammar)EngineeringWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents an object model for maintenance management of roofing systems as a case study to demonstrate the applicability of a proposed generic framework for integrating the maintenance management of built-assets. The model builds upon the Industry Foundation Classes (IFCs) (Releases 2.0 and 2.x) to define object requirements and relationships for the exchange and sharing of maintenance information between applications. Maintenance Management is one of the defined projects within the Facilities Management (FM) domain committee of the International Alliance of Interoperability (IAI). The paper proposes several extensions to the IFC's including the representation of functional requirements, assessed conditions of objects, inspection and maintenance tasks, and libraries of non-project specific information. Usage scenarios are provided to illustrate the use of the model to carry out selected processes.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0090.008
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.004

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations14
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207