MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2936876376 · doi:10.29173/mocs8

Integration of BIM and Computer Simulations in Modular Construction, A Case Study

2016· article· en· W2936876376 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chengke Wu, Rui Jiang, Xiao Li

Bibliographic record

VenueModular and Offsite Construction (MOC) Summit Proceedings · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChongqing Graduate Student Research Innovation Project
KeywordsBuilding information modelingModular designBridge (graph theory)Modular constructionComputer scienceDiscrete event simulationModularity (biology)Systems engineeringProductivityConstruction industryEvent (particle physics)Construction engineeringSoftware engineeringEngineeringSimulationOperations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Construction Sector has long been criticized for its lower productivity compared with other industries. To address the problem, recent years, new construction methods and information techniques such as modular construction and Building Information Modelling (BIM) are developed and implemented. Besides, computer simulations, like Discrete Event Simulation (DES) and Agent Based Simulation (ABS), are also incorporated in construction sector. Despite contributions of the 3 techniques to the industry have been investigated respectively by many researches, more benefits could be brought if they are applied simultaneously. However, there is no comprehensive research yet to combine all of them in a single project. To bridge the research gap, this paper first briefly introduces strengths and current applications of the 3 techniques; then a framework integrating them together containing simulation module, BIM database module and decision making module is constructed; finally, a case study of a multistoried canteen project is demonstrated to further explain functions of the framework.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.208
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 designCase report
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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