MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2320184521 · doi:10.22260/isarc2011/0051

Multi-Agent-Based Approach for Real-Time Collision Avoidance and Path Re-Planning on Construction Sites

2011· article· en· W2320184521 on OpenAlexafffund
Cheng Zhang, Amin Hammad, Jamal Bentahar

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ... ISARC · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaInstitut de Recherche Robert-Sauvé en Santé et en Sécurité du Travail
KeywordsCollision avoidanceComputer scienceNegotiationMotion planningCollisionPath (computing)DownloadMulti-agent systemOperations researchControl (management)Work (physics)Distributed computingComputer securityArtificial intelligenceEngineeringComputer networkWorld Wide WebRobot

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: Collisions on construction sites are one of the major causes of fatal accidents. The complexity of equipment operations require detailed planning and better real-time control of the work. Research involving artificial intelligence in construction industry has been done to enhance communication between team workers and resolve distributed problems, for example, agent systems have been used for construction claims and dynamic rescheduling negotiation. However, little research has focused on real-time control of construction equipment operations using agents to improve safety on site. The present paper proposes a multi-agent-based approach to provide real-time support to the construction staffs. Collision avoidance is achieved by informing workers and equipment operators about potential collisions, and by providing re-planning for equipment. A prototype system has been developed to and the functionalities of different agents are successfully tested.

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)0.001
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations13
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the ... ISARCSame topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207