MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791722668 · doi:10.29007/gpnx

Extending IFC for Fire Emergency Real-Time Management Using Sensors and Occupant Information

2018· paratext· en· W2791722668 on OpenAlexaff
Roshanak Eftekharirad, Mazdak Nik‐Bakht, Amin Hammad

Bibliographic record

VenueEasyChair preprint · 2018
Typeparatext
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEvacuation and Crowd Dynamics
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOccupancyBuilding information modelingEmergency managementPlan (archaeology)Context (archaeology)Computer scienceFacility managementDamagesConstruction engineeringArchitectural engineeringOperations researchRisk analysis (engineering)EngineeringOperations managementScheduling (production processes)BusinessGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increasing complexity of buildings has brought some difficulties for emergency response. When fires occur in a building, limited perception regarding the disaster area and occupants can increase the probability of injuries and damages. Thus, the availability of comprehensive and timely information may help understand the existing conditions and plan an efficient evacuation. For this purpose, Building Information Modeling (BIM) should be integrated with three sets of information: (1) occupancy that defines the type of space usage; (2) occupants’ information; and (3) sensory data. The Industry Foundation Classes (IFC), as a standard of BIM, has the definitions for all areas, volumes, and elements of a building. IFC also has the basic definitions of sensor and occupant entities. However, these entities do not provide enough dynamic and accurate information for supporting emergency management systems. This paper aims to extend IFC for fire emergency real-time management using sensors and occupants’ information. The specific objectives of this paper are: (1) extending IfcSensor entity for occupant’s sensors; (2) adding new attributes to IfcOccupant to support emergency response operations and defining a new entity for occupancy; and (3) defining the relationships between sensors, occupants, occupancy, time series, and building components in the context of building evacuation. The feasibility of the proposed method is discussed using a case study.

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)0.006
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.259 · 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
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

Citations9
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEasyChair preprintSame topicEvacuation and Crowd DynamicsFrench-language works237,207