MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2803126621 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2017-0177

Sequential dependency structure matrix based framework for leveling of a tower crane lifting plan

2018· article· en· W2803126621 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Seung‐Ho Kim, Sangyong Kim, Dongoun Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicProduct Development and Customization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidad de La FronteraDongseo University
KeywordsPlan (archaeology)Design structure matrixScheduling (production processes)Tower craneEngineeringTowerMaterial handlingIntuitionComputer scienceOperations researchIndustrial engineeringOperations managementSystems engineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent construction projects involving the building of extremely tall and large structures have increased the demand for various major equipment, including tower cranes (TCs). However, most lifting plans for TCs at construction sites are performed based on the experience and intuition of the site manager as opposed to a systematic process of rational work. This study presents a framework for scheduling TCs using sequential characteristics of a dependency structure matrix (DSM) to efficiently improve the lifting plan of TCs. In this research, a real world construction case study involving a TC in charge of three buildings was examined. The results of the case study indicated that the scheduling of TC using sequential DSM was useful in leveling the TC lifting plan in terms of ease of use, especially in the typical floor cycle lifting planning. Therefore, the TC lifting plan based on sequential DSM presents a more precise and systematic TC lifting plan.

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)0.003
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.209
Teacher spread0.196 · 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
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicProduct Development and CustomizationFrench-language works237,207