MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293169025 · doi:10.3390/su141610455

Use of KROQI as a Level-2 Common Data Environment in the French Construction Industry

2022· article· en· W4293169025 on OpenAlexafffund
Marin Bedoiseau, David Bolonio, Conrad Boton

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsVariety (cybernetics)Work (physics)Plan (archaeology)Government (linguistics)Construction industryComputer scienceKnowledge managementBusinessProcess managementEngineeringConstruction engineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The implementation of a common data environment (CDE) in the construction industry appears to be crucial for organizing and managing the flow of important information within construction projects effectively. However, it is observed that the investments and the costs associated with setting up such environments are often dissuasive, particularly for small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). By launching the Plan BIM 2022 in 2017, the French government aimed to combat the emerging digital divide between large and small construction companies. At the heart of this state-funded plan was the development of a CDE-like collaborative platform called KROQI. The work presented in this article proposes a three-level matrix to characterize common data environments based on computer-supported collaboration work theories. The paper demonstrates how KROQI can be characterized as a level-2 CDE solution. Based on a preliminary study, it explores the perception and satisfaction of practitioners with respect to the features proposed by KROQI. The results show that, among the large variety of features proposed, some are hardly ever used. Therefore, while KROQI appears to be an excellent industry-wide solution aimed at federating initiatives towards digital collaboration centered around BIM models, there is definitely room for improvement.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207