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 OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.511
Threshold uncertainty score0.525

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.063
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