Integrating 3D modeling, sustainability and cost estimating at the conceptual design stage of bridges
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Integrated 3D modeling adaptation to infrastructure has been slow due to technical challenges, such as the lack of interoperability between software. To fill this gap, a versatile model with 3D modeling capabilities was developed to assist in designing sustainable bridges at the conceptual design stage. The model incorporates a rule-based expert system and four modules, namely, 3D CAD modeling, bridge sustainability rating system (BrSRS), bridge environmental performance strategy mapping (BrEPSM), and conceptual cost estimation. The 3D CAD module was developed using the Graphics.DrawLine method. The BrSRS and BrEPSM modules were developed by amalgamation of the identified pertinent sustainable and footprint indicators. The model aims to provide bridge type recommendations, allow customization of a sustainable bridge, illustrate forecasted footprint levels, present the conceptual design in AutoCAD’s 3-dimensional (3D) mode, facilitate a recalculation process when the bridge’s dimensions are altered, and generate a conceptual cost estimate.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".