MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3035916000 · doi:10.36680/j.itcon.2020.018

A review of augmented reality applied to underground construction

2020· review· en· W3035916000 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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

VenueJournal of Information Technology in Construction · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAugmented Reality Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAugmented realityConstruction industryVisualizationState (computer science)Construction engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringData scienceRisk analysis (engineering)Engineering managementSystems engineeringBusinessHuman–computer interactionArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unintentional striking of underground utilities from construction activities often results in high economic consequences. Advanced technology and sophisticated visualization techniques such as augmented reality (AR) has the potential to play a significant role in mitigating such devastating consequences. To better understand the state-of-the-art technology of AR applications in the underground construction industry, it is important to identify challenges and barriers. This paper provides a systematic literature review of applications in the construction industry in general in which journal articles were reviewed, analysed, and summarized. Through this method, the main challenges associated with AR were revealed and feasible solutions were suggested. Issues were found with 1) data collection; 2) modelling and alignment barriers; 3) hardware limitations; 4) tracking; and 5) managing data. This research examined an efficient solution to the problems of AR by proposing a framework for future implementation with main applications in the United States, Canada, and Australia.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.946
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.291 · 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