MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2746274752 · doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2017.08.017

Method to Enable LCA Analysis through Each Level of Development of a BIM Model

2017· article· en· W2746274752 on OpenAlexafffund
M. Dupuis, Alain April, Pascal Lesage, Daniel Forgues

Bibliographic record

VenueProcedia Engineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersHydro-Québec
KeywordsBuilding information modelingLife-cycle assessmentInformation modelEngineeringComputer scienceData model (GIS)Systems engineeringDatabaseProduction (economics)Operations managementArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Whole Building life cycle assessment (LCA) calculations are increasingly done using building information modeling (BIM) data exports, but some challenges need to be overcome. BIM models lack data for a whole building LCA analysis. To counter this lack of detailed information, manual inputs are often required when using a static BIM model and cannot easily consider recalculations over the duration of the project. This paper presents a method to automatically perform LCA calculations early, at the first level of a BIM model's development (i.e. the LOD100 level), and to allow for easier updates of the calculation throughout the evolution of the BIM model. To achieve this goal, a novel data layer and format is proposed. This data layer fills the information gap between extracted BIM data and existing LCA data provided by common LCA databases such as ecoinvent.

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)0.003
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.008

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations45
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProcedia EngineeringSame topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207