Automatic Recognition of Common Structural Elements from Point Clouds for Automated Progress Monitoring and Dimensional Quality Control in Reinforced Concrete Construction
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This manuscript provides a robust framework for the extraction of common structural components, such as columns, from terrestrial laser scanning point clouds acquired at regular rectangular concrete construction projects. The proposed framework utilizes geometric primitive as well as relationship-based reasoning between objects to semantically label point clouds. The framework then compares the extracted objects to the planned building information model (BIM) to automatically identify the as-built schedule and dimensional discrepancies. A novel method was also developed to remove redundant points of a newly acquired scan to detect changes between consecutive scans independent of the planned BIM. Five sets of point cloud data were acquired from the same construction site at different time intervals to assess the effectiveness of the proposed framework. In all datasets, the framework successfully extracted 132 out of 133 columns and achieved an accuracy of 98.79% for removing redundant surfaces. The framework successfully determined the progress of concrete work at each epoch in both activity and project levels through earned value analysis. It was also shown that the dimensions of 127 out of the 132 columns and all the slabs complied with those in the planned BIM.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it