MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

LEVERAGING EXISTING HERITAGE DOCUMENTATION FOR ANIMATIONS: SENATE VIRTUAL TOUR

2017· article· en· W2748389517 on OpenAlexaffabout
A. Dhanda, Stephen Fai, Katie Graham, Gawel Walczak

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œinternational archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences/International archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDocumentationWorkflowComputer scienceWorld Wide WebLeverage (statistics)Point (geometry)Technical documentationMultimediaDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The use of digital documentation techniques has led to an increase in opportunities for using documentation data for valorization purposes, in addition to technical purposes. Likewise, building information models (BIMs) made from these data sets hold valuable information that can be as effective for public education as it is for rehabilitation. A BIM can reveal the elements of a building, as well as the different stages of a building over time. Valorizing this information increases the possibility for public engagement and interest in a heritage place. Digital data sets were leveraged by the Carleton Immersive Media Studio (CIMS) for parts of a virtual tour of the Senate of Canada. For the tour, workflows involving four different programs were explored to determine an efficient and effective way to leverage the existing documentation data to create informative and visually enticing animations for public dissemination: Autodesk Revit, Enscape, Autodesk 3ds Max, and Bentley Pointools. The explored workflows involve animations of point clouds, BIMs, and a combination of the two.

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)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.004

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.242 · 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
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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œinternational archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences/International archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciencesSame topic3D Surveying and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207