MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3089017776 · doi:10.1145/3395027.3419598

Automatic Generation of Electrical Plan Documents from Architectural Data

2020· article· en· W3089017776 on OpenAlexafffund
Melissa Cote, Alireza Rezvanifar, Alexandra Branzan Albu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHandwritten Text Recognition Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPlan (archaeology)Floor planComputer scienceProcess (computing)Architectural planCode (set theory)Stack (abstract data type)Software engineeringTask (project management)Architectural engineeringElectrical equipmentSystems engineeringArchitectureEngineering drawingEngineeringElectrical engineeringProgramming languageSet (abstract data type)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores a novel application of document generation: the automatic creation of residential electrical plans from architectural data. Electrical plan documents, crucial to all residential construction and renovation projects, are currently generated manually by electrical designers who must adhere to the local electrical code and follow industry best practices. The designers decide the type and location of all household electrical devices and outlets based on the architectural floor plans. This is a tedious, highly repetitive, and time-consuming task. We propose a procedural approach to automate the generation of residential electrical plans via a stack-based finite state machine model that mimics the electrical designer's thought process. The system receives 2D architectural data (e.g. wall location) as input and yields a customized electrical plan as output. Experimental results on a variety of architectural layouts of bathrooms, bedrooms, and kitchens are very promising and demonstrate the approach's functionality and usefulness. This paper paves the way for new algorithmic tools facilitating the design cycle of building projects.

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 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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.931
Threshold uncertainty score0.250

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHandwritten Text Recognition TechniquesFrench-language works237,207