MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2807801518 · doi:10.14288/1.0365783

Quality control and quality assurance in hybrid mass timber high-rise construction : a case study of the Brock Commons

2018· article· en· W2807801518 on OpenAlexaff
Francisco Calderón

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality (philosophy)Quality assuranceControl (management)BusinessOperations managementEngineeringEnvironmental scienceEconomicsService (business)MarketingManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wood has seen a resurgence recently as a construction material driven by technological advances and a growing concern for the environment. Although an increasing amount of mass timber high-rises are being built all around the world, lack of information and outdated preconceptions are some of the obstacles that are keeping mass timber products from increasing their market share in high-rise construction. Academia and industry leaders must keep track of the progress that is being made and inform the general public as innovation and technological advances continue to take place. In this context, the University of British Columbia has recently completed the construction of the Brock Commons Tallwood House. This 18-story residence building employs two reinforced concrete cores and a mass timber structure composed of cross laminated timber panels, glued-laminated columns, and parallel strand lumber columns. With this, the building is currently the tallest wood building in the world and a testament to the suitability of engineered wood elements for high-rise construction. Aiming to address the lack of information surrounding mass timber high rise construction, this thesis documents the quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) practices that were put in place during the delivery of the building. The main objective of this research was to identify and present lessons learned from the application of these QA/QC practices. To do this, various QA/QC practices were identified and analyzed by reviewing the project specifications and other project documents, reviewing recognized industry standards, and interviewing various members of the project team. This study found a series of comprehensive and well-planned QA/QC practices that were put in place by the project team and that were appropriate to comply with the project requirements. This study concluded that most of these practices are replicable and advisable for future projects. The different QA/QC practices that were identified and the lessons learned from their application are presented in this thesis.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.598
Threshold uncertainty score0.819

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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 venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207