Development of Automated Top-Down Construction System for Low-rise Building Structures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".