MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2953662108 · doi:10.22260/isarc2019/0060

Text Detection and Classification of Construction Documents

2019· article· en· W2953662108 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Narges Sajadfar, Sina Abdollahnejad, Ulrich Hermann, Yasser Mohamed

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ... ISARC · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceOptical character recognitionInformation retrievalSet (abstract data type)Bounding overwatchTask (project management)Minimum bounding boxArtificial intelligenceClass (philosophy)Character (mathematics)Document processingDownloadDeep learningDocument management systemData setControl (management)Natural language processingImage (mathematics)World Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Text Detection and Classification of Construction Documents Narges Sajadfar, Sina Abdollahnejad, Ulrich Hermann and Yasser Mohamed Pages 446-452 (2019 Proceedings of the 36th ISARC, Banff, Canada, ISBN 978-952-69524-0-6, ISSN 2413-5844) Abstract: Large construction projects generate thousands of documents that require a careful management. The classification of documents is an important step in document management and control. Construction documents are generated in different formats, many of which are unstructured and contain drawings and images, which makes the task of document classification and control even more challenging. In this paper, a dataset of 5000 documents is used as a case study. Optical Character Recognition (OCR) bounding boxes are applied to extract text from the set of documents. In the next step, two classification methods are applied. One based on a predefined set of keywords and another based on deep learning long short- term memory (LSTM) network. The challenges of the proposed approaches are discussed in relation to OCR bounding box locations with different document layout and how to obtain a set of representative key words for each class. Initial results of the study are encouraging and show that OCR technique combined with text classification is a powerful method for construction documents’ control and can reach an accuracy of 92%. Keywords: Construction document; Text detection; Classification; Data mining; Optical Character Recognition (OCR); Deep Learning DOI: https://doi.org/10.22260/ISARC2019/0060 Download fulltext Download BibTex Download Endnote (RIS) TeX Import to Mendeley

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.185 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the ... ISARCSame topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207