MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2955314730 · doi:10.29173/mocs90

Integrating Computational Design to Improve the Design Workflow of Modular Construction

2019· article· en· W2955314730 on OpenAlex
Tom Greenough, Matthew Smith, Aaron Mariash

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueModular and Offsite Construction (MOC) Summit Proceedings · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicArchitecture and Computational Design
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkflowModular designSystems engineeringComputer scienceBuilding information modelingSoftware engineeringQuality (philosophy)Process (computing)AutomationManufacturing engineeringEngineeringDatabaseOperations managementScheduling (production processes)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The construction industry’s productivity has stagnated since the 1960s while in the same period, manufacturing and technology industries have seen vast improvements. The construction industry is coming under increased pressure to provide better value through improved quality and performance and as a result developers and constructors are looking to alternative forms of construction. In a process that borrows concepts from the manufacturing and technology sectors, such as automation and 3D modelling, Prefabricated Volumetric Construction (modular construction) is a highly versatile approach with the potential to deliver substantial cost savings, faster project delivery times, higher quality construction with less waste and emissions, and an increase in worker safety. This paper will explore the integration of computational design into the design workflow of modular construction through several project examples. The following topics will be covered: creation and assembly of parametric modules in the Revit Building Information Model (BIM) software, using the visual programming tool Dynamo; the linkage of the BIM to the analytical model; and the extraction of results and the manipulation and display of data using Grasshopper, a visual programming language and environment plugin, for Rhinoceros a 3D modeler. This integration has been found to reduce the time required to develop the building model, the drawings, the analytical model and complete the design while improving the consistency and accuracy of all.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.481
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.177 · 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