MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2550273880 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2014-0296

Benchmark Alberta’s architectural, engineering, and construction industry knowledge of building information modelling (BIM)

2016· article· en· W2550273880 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Basel Abdulaal, Ahmed Bouferguène, Mohamed Al‐Hussein

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBuilding information modelingIntegrated project deliveryBenchmark (surveying)GlobeConstruction industryBuilding industryProject managementEngineering managementConstruction engineeringEngineeringBusinessSystems engineeringOperations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Construction professionals agree that building information modelling (BIM) will revolutionize the architectural, engineering, and construction (AEC) industry and its impact will be felt by all project stakeholders including owners and facility managers. Statistics show that many owners and other stakeholders perceive BIM as a technology that can make project delivery more efficient because it allows project information to be fully integrated. In the future, owners are expected to demand the use of BIM to prevent over-budget and over-time project delivery. However, as we are preparing this contribution the level of implementation and use of BIM varies widely across the globe. This paper probes the state of BIM in Alberta from three points of view: (i) the current understanding and implementation, (ii) the motivations driving its use, and (iii) the challenges hindering its implementation. The findings of this paper are extracted from individual responses to a web-based survey that was proposed to professionals in the Albertan AEC/FM industries.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score0.246

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.165
Teacher spread0.160 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207