MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318943137 · doi:10.37256/dmt.3120231856

Building Information Modeling (BIM) and Robotic Manufacturing Technological Interoperability in Construction – A Cyclic Systematic Literature Review

2023· article· en· W4318943137 on OpenAlexafffund
Walid Anane, Ivanka Iordanova, Claudiane Ouellet‐Plamondon

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Manufacturing Technology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersMitacs
KeywordsInteroperabilityBuilding information modelingOperationalizationEngineeringBridge (graph theory)Systems engineeringInformation modelManufacturing engineeringComputer scienceEngineering managementKnowledge managementSoftware engineeringOperations managementWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The architectural engineering and construction (AEC) industry is undergoing a digital transformation that progressively improves its performance, productivity, and competitiveness. This digital shift is accelerated through building information modeling (BIM) which facilitates technological integrations. BIM has significantly contributed to digitizing design and management activities. However, it has not yet sufficiently demonstrated its interoperability with digital manufacturing processes, such as robotic manufacturing (RM). It is from this perspective that this work will review the current literature’s stance on the technological interoperability of BIM and RM tools through the systematic literature review (SLR) method. This literature review aims to identify research avenues to operationalize RM through BIM tools in construction. The study conducted in this research is progressive; it builds on the identified research gaps and investigates potential research avenues to be undertaken. The results revealed that computational design (CD) could serve as a bridge between BIM and RM. They also revealed that RM is operationalizable in off-site construction (OSC) through BIM and CD.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.748
Threshold uncertainty score0.971

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.199 · 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
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

Citations19
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Manufacturing TechnologySame topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207