MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2981832329 · doi:10.1080/24751448.2019.1640541

Defining Geometry Levels for Optimizing BIM for VR: Insights from Traditional Architectural Media

2019· article· en· W2981832329 on OpenAlexaffabout
Katie Graham, Cailen Pybus, N. Arellano, Joey Doherty, L. Chow, Stephen Fai, Tyler Grunt

Bibliographic record

VenueTechnology|Architecture + Design · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVirtual realityBuilding information modelingProcess (computing)Block (permutation group theory)Computer scienceArchitectural engineeringWork (physics)ParliamentHuman–computer interactionMultimediaEngineeringGeometryPolitical scienceOperations managementMechanical engineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Virtual reality (VR) provides a unique opportunity for sharing culturally significant spaces that are not physically accessible. For an effective portrayal of these spaces, it is beneficial to use digital assets that are developed with geometrically data, such as building information models (BIM). Unfortunately, the conversion of BIM to a publicly accessible VR is fraught with challenges. A process for translating a complex BIM to a curated publicly accessible VR by organizing the elements into four defined “geometry levels” is developed in this work and examined using the case study of the centre block of the Parliament Hill national historic site of Canada.

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)0.005
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Citations17
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTechnology|Architecture + DesignSame topic3D Surveying and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207