MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2954104000 · doi:10.22260/isarc2019/0095

Ontology-Based Knowledge Modeling for Frame Assemblies Manufacturing

2019· article· en· W2954104000 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shi An, Pablo Martı́nez, Rafiq Ahmad, Mohamed Al‐Hussein

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ... ISARC · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOntologyComputer scienceFrame (networking)Modular designProduct (mathematics)AutomationManufacturing engineeringInformation modelBuilding information modelingProcess (computing)DownloadSoftware engineeringKnowledge modelingEngineeringWorld Wide WebDomain knowledgeOperations managementMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ontology-Based Knowledge Modeling for Frame Assemblies Manufacturing Shi An, Pablo Martinez, Rafiq Ahmad and Mohamed Al-Hussein Pages 709-715 (2019 Proceedings of the 36th ISARC, Banff, Canada, ISBN 978-952-69524-0-6, ISSN 2413-5844) Abstract: As modular construction becomes popular, an increasing number of products are prefabricated in an offsite construction environment. While improving the productivity and efficiency of construction-oriented production, it also raises the complexity of process planning. Although the specifications of a product are fully defined by Building Information Models (BIM), no information is provided on how construction products are manufactured and assembled. This paper proposes an ontology-based approach aimed to link construction-oriented product assemblies and manufacturing resources using manufacturing operations. By identifying intersections of connecting members of a product assembly, feasible manufacturing methods and resources are determined based on expert knowledge and machine configurations. The proposed approach is validated using a wood frame assembly. Keywords: Building information modeling; Ontology modeling; Offsite construction; Construction automation; Construction manufacturing DOI: https://doi.org/10.22260/ISARC2019/0095 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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.206 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations16
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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