BIM-based draft schedule generation in reinforced concrete-framed buildings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Project schedules have a vital role in the effective management of time, cost, scope and resources in construction projects, and creating schedules requires schedulers with construction knowledge and experience. The increase in the complexity of building projects and the emergence of building information modeling (BIM) in the architecture, engineering and construction industry have encouraged researchers to explore BIM capabilities for automated schedule generation. The scope and capabilities of the developed systems, however, are limited and the link between design and scheduling is still underdeveloped. This paper aims to investigate methods to develop a BIM-based framework to automatically generate schedules for concrete-framed buildings. Design/methodology/approach This system first extracts the required data from the building information model, including elements’ dimensions, quantities, spatial information, materials and other related attributes. It then applies construction rules, prior knowledge and production rate data to create project work-packages, calculate their durations and determine their relationships. Finally, it organizes these results into a schedule using project management software. Findings This system provides an automated and easy-to-use approach to generate schedules for concrete-framed buildings that are modeled in a BIM platform. It provides two schedules for each project, both a sequential and an overlapped solution, which the schedulers can modify into a practical schedule based on conditions and available resources. Originality/value This research project presents an innovative approach to use BIM-based attributes of structural elements to develop list of work-packages and estimate their durations, and then it uses a combination of rule-based and case-based reasoning to generate the schedules.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".