MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2956256454 · doi:10.24928/2019/0250

Predicting Performance Indicators Using BIM and Simulation for a Wall Assembly Line

2019· article· en· W2956256454 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAssembly Line Balancing Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAssembly lineLine (geometry)Solid modelingReliability engineeringEngineeringMechanical engineeringArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Off-site home construction allows for the construction of building components to be completed in an off-site facility. The floors, walls, and roof are constructed on separate production lines, then shipped together to site for installation. This type of home construction presents a good opportunity to utilize lean manufacturing principles allied with simulation methods to better industrialize the home building process. This paper presents a case study of a well-known panelized residential home manufacturer, where the focus is the wall assembly line. Multiple key performance indicators (KPIs) are calculated in order to forecast production for each project and key result indicators (KRIs) are used to predict the outcomes of multiple projects. The predicted performance indicators are found through a simulation model of the production line using quantity take-offs extracted from BIM models. The analysis of these performance indicators will be used to evaluate project feasibility when the project is built in an off-site construction facility.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.395

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.227 · 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