MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2985572923 · doi:10.1080/15623599.2019.1686836

BIM-integrated TOPSIS-Fuzzy framework to optimize selection of sustainable building components

2019· article· en· W2985572923 on OpenAlexaff
Abdulwahed Fazeli, Farzad Jalaei, Mostafa Khanzadi, Saeed Banihashemi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Construction Management · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultiple-criteria decision analysisTOPSISSustainabilityComputer scienceDecision support systemIdeal solutionProcess (computing)Fuzzy logicBuilding information modelingAnalytic hierarchy processManagement scienceSelection (genetic algorithm)Systems engineeringOperations researchRisk analysis (engineering)EngineeringData miningMachine learningArtificial intelligenceOperations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Existence of diverse sustainable materials with distinctive features causes more difficult decision makings for project teams especially when it is intended to use ideal materials from diverse types of sustainable products. Few research studies have been conducted so far on applying Building Information Modeling (BIM) to act as Decision Support System (DSS) using of math works functions and tools in combination with Multiple Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) techniques. The main purpose of this study is to propose a methodology that integrates BIM with decision-making and problem-solving approaches including Fuzzy and TOPSIS in order to efficiently optimize the selection of sustainable building components at the conceptual design stage of building projects. To select the optimum building components, each item is assessed against three major attributes of decision criteria as Design, Economic and Quality factors, which are applied in Multiple Attribute Decision Support System (MADSS) methodology to indicate the various performance of buildings sustainability. This BIM-integrated process is linked to the engine of Matlab software to apply Fuzzy functions on the users’ priority in order to automatically suggest the ideal solutions. The design alternatives suggested by Matlab is validated by Life Cycle Cost (LCC) method to analyze the operational cost of an actual building project. Using this innovative method will make the decision-making procedure more convenient as well as proposing more realistic and reliable final and sustainable optimized choice.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations67
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Construction ManagementSame topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207