MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2332618398 · doi:10.1061/9780784412329.078

Providing Query Support to Leverage BIM for Construction

2012· article· en· W2332618398 on OpenAlexaff
Madhav Prasad Nepal, Sheryl Staub‐French, Rachel Pottinger

Bibliographic record

VenueConstruction Research Congress 2012 · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceBuilding information modelingLeverage (statistics)OntologyFlexibility (engineering)Software engineeringSystems engineeringDatabaseData miningEngineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Building information modeling (BIM) is an emerging technology and process that provides rich and intelligent design information models of a facility, enabling enhanced communication, coordination, analysis, and quality control throughout all phases of a building project. Although there are many documented benefits of BIM for construction, identifying essential construction-specific information out of a BIM in an efficient and meaningful way is still a challenging task. This paper presents a framework that combines feature-based modeling and query processing to leverage BIM for construction. The feature-based modeling representation implemented enriches a BIM by representing construction-specific design features relevant to different construction management (CM) functions. The query processing implemented allows for increased flexibility to specify queries and rapidly generate the desired view from a given BIM according to the varied requirements of a specific practitioner or domain. Central to the framework is the formalization of construction domain knowledge in the form of a feature ontology and query specifications. The implementation of our framework enables the automatic extraction and querying of a wide-range of design conditions that are relevant to construction practitioners. The validation studies conducted demonstrate that our approach is significantly more effective than existing solutions. The research described in this paper has the potential to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of decision-making processes in different CM functions.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.007
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations6
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConstruction Research Congress 2012Same topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207