MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2953803669 · doi:10.22260/isarc2019/0020

Cartesian Points Visualization in Game Simulation for Analyzing Geometric Representations of AEC Objects in IFC

2019· article· en· W2953803669 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jiansong Zhang, Yunfeng Chen, Rui Liu, Luciana Debs

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ... ISARC · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicManufacturing Process and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisualizationComputer scienceBuilding information modelingSchema (genetic algorithms)Data visualizationRepresentation (politics)Human–computer interactionSoftware engineeringInformation retrievalArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cartesian Points Visualization in Game Simulation for Analyzing Geometric Representations of AEC Objects in IFC Jiansong Zhang, Yunfeng Chen, Rui Liu and Luciana Debs Pages 144-151 (2019 Proceedings of the 36th ISARC, Banff, Canada, ISBN 978-952-69524-0-6, ISSN 2413-5844) Abstract: Industry foundation classes (IFC) is widely accepted as a promising standard for building information modeling (BIM). IFC data can be processed with many open toolkits such as IfcOpenShell and java standard data access interface (JSDAI), which greatly supports BIM research and technology development. However, IFC data is not intuitive and requires training to understand it fully. As the core of almost any IFC data, understanding geometric representation is critical in most BIM research and technology development. The official IFC schema specifications provide detailed explanations of entities and attributes in IFC, which are helpful for gaining such understanding. However, understanding the explanations in the specifications requires certain knowledge and background. To facilitate an easier understanding of IFC data and to promote a wider adoption of IFC-based BIM, in this paper, an interactive visualization of the formation of fundamental 3D representations of a selected architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) object was created in game simulation in a first-person view. The interactive simulation can help people gain understanding of 3D geometric formation and representation in IFC in an intuitive and speedy manner, which is expected to achieve retention of such knowledge comparable to or better than the conventional way of reading the specifications. The visualization was tested by 14 volunteers in comparison to reading the IFC schema specifications. A survey based on the experiment showed that the game simulation-based visualization was significantly easier to understand and took significantly less time to understand comparing to reading the specifications. Keywords: BIM; IFC; Geometric Information; AEC Objects; Game Simulation; Visualization; Cartesian Points DOI: https://doi.org/10.22260/ISARC2019/0020 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)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the ... ISARCSame topicManufacturing Process and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207