MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3044390034 · doi:10.29173/ijic217

Development of Automated Top-Down Construction System for Low-rise Building Structures

2020· article· en· W3044390034 on OpenAlex
Aparna Harichandran, Benny Raphael, Abhijit Mukherjee

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

VenueInternational Journal of Industrialized Construction · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Education, IndiaDivision of Human Resource DevelopmentIndian Institute of Technology MadrasCurtin University of TechnologyDepartment of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, India
KeywordsAutomationConstruct (python library)Structural systemFrame (networking)Function (biology)Computer scienceEngineeringSystems engineeringMechanical engineeringCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Automation is the best solution for achieving high productivity and quality in the construction industry at reduced cost and time. The main objective of this study is to develop an economical automated construction system (ACS) for low-rise buildings. The incremental development of the construction system and the structural system through different versions of laboratory prototypes are described in this paper. These ACS prototypes adopt a top-down construction method. This method involves the building of the structural system step by step from the top floor to the bottom floor by connecting and lifting structural modules. ACS prototype 1 consist of wooden structural modules and electric motor system. ACS prototype 2 has a highly automated custom designed hydraulic motor system to construct steel structural frame. ACS prototype 3 is a partially automated system where the steel structural modules are connected manually. These prototypes were evaluated on the basis of function, cost and efficiency of operations. Based on overall performance, ACS prototype 3 is identified as the best economical option for the construction of low-rise buildings. When the speed of construction is more important than cost, the ACS prototype 2 is the apt solution. This paper describes the challenges in developing an ACS and the criteria to evaluate its performance. It also includes a preliminary framework for the development of an automated construction monitoring system and its experimental evaluation. This machine learning-based framework is to identify the operations of ACS from sensor measurements using Support Vector Machines. Most of the operations are identified reasonably well and the best identification accuracy is 96%. The future studies are focusing on to improve the accuracy of operation identification, further development of the monitoring system and the ACS for actual implementation in construction sites.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.601
Threshold uncertainty score0.819

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.239 · 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