MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318339150 · doi:10.31586/wjcea.2023.569

A framework for the evaluation of the decision between onsite and offsite construction using life cycle analysis (LCA) concepts and system dynamics modeling

2023· article· en· W4318339150 on OpenAlexaff
Adekunle Mofolasayo

Bibliographic record

VenueTrends journal of sciences research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFactory (object-oriented programming)Transport engineeringEngineeringYardConstruction managementCivil engineeringConstruction engineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The decision to choose between onsite and offsite construction is important in the effort toward sustainable construction. Offsite construction is often promoted as an environmentally friendly approach to construction operations. However, previous studies have shown that there is a lack of clarity on the environmental trade-offs between onsite and offsite construction. Factors that can affect the decision to build onsite or offsite include the availability of a local offsite manufacturing facility, the distance of the offsite factory to the final place of use, the proximity of the site to the local supply of material and labor, etc. This study provides a framework to apply the system dynamic modeling technique to evaluate how various factors can affect the environmental impact of the building construction phase (for onsite or offsite construction methods). The system dynamic model (using Vensim software) that was developed provides a platform that allows users to input variables such as the distance that is expected for transportation of labor, material, and equipment to both the onsite facility and the offsite construction location, factors associated with the use of equipment for construction, the distance needed for transportation of building panels or modules from the offsite facility to the final site, etc. Among other things, the model showed that an increase in the distance from the offsite yard to the final construction site increases the total impacts of transportation of completed modules. An increase in the number of trips for the transportation of material to the onsite construction location increases the total impact of onsite construction. In terms of the environmental impact of construction, none of the two methods of construction gives an absolute superiority over the other. The environmental performance of offsite and onsite depends on various associated factors. It is recommended that building practitioners review various factors that are peculiar to their projects to make an informed decision on the best construction methods.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.205
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrends journal of sciences researchSame topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207