MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2797021855 · doi:10.29173/mocs51

Prefabrication in the Australian context

2017· article· en· W2797021855 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hong Li, Mark Luther, Anthony Mills

Bibliographic record

VenueModular and Offsite Construction (MOC) Summit Proceedings · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrefabricationContext (archaeology)Architectural engineeringEngineeringSettlement (finance)Interpretation (philosophy)Product (mathematics)Civil engineeringConstruction engineeringComputer scienceHistoryArchaeologyWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Australia actually has a long history with prefabricated building since its early settlement days. However, methods of prefabrication have, until the past decade, been relatively few and almost nonexistent with the exception of relocatable school building or portables. The revival of interest in prefabricated building has been quite recent, involving a few selective construction companies, and the interpretation of prefabrication has mainly resulted in a ‘volumetric’ product as the solution. In response to this, first the paper describes the profile of prefabrication in Australia, and then addresses a pathway for the processes and methods to pre-fabrication based on the identified challenges in Australia. This paper presents these ideas and discusses the up and coming directions of prefabrication in Australia.

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)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.122

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModular and Offsite Construction (MOC) Summit ProceedingsSame topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207