MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367323216 · doi:10.1061/jcemd4.coeng-13109

Planning of Mobile Crane Walking Operations in Congested Industrial Construction Sites

2023· article· en· W4367323216 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Construction Engineering and Management · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsPCL Construction (Canada)University of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLift (data mining)Modular designMotion planningObstaclePlannerTower craneEngineeringRoboticsSet (abstract data type)Computer scienceMobile robotObstacle avoidanceRobotSimulationArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The trend toward more compact designs and congested site layouts makes it challenging for lift planners to provide feasible lift paths for mobile cranes, confronting the added risk of potential collisions when maneuvering through on-site obstacles. In some cases, particularly in congested industrial modular projects, it is inevitable for mobile cranes to walk with loads to a position with sufficient clearance to perform the lifts and place the objects in their final set position. This study contributes to the body of knowledge by introducing a comprehensive lift planning framework to plan complicated lifts involving mobile crane walking operations. Due to the lack of reliable and accurate plans for such lifts in practice and the added complexities, they are often eluded by practitioners compared with the more straightforward pick-and-set scenarios. This study proposes an algorithm for optimized planning of crane walking–involved lift operations borrowing an obstacle avoidance technique from robotics. The proposed path planner thoroughly considers site constraints and crane configurations to prevent collision between the crane body and the load with preinstalled objects. Actual case studies are presented to validate the efficiency of the proposed algorithm. The system generated the presented real-world lift in less than 5 min, satisfying the operations’ optimality, safety, and feasibility.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.195
Threshold uncertainty score0.439

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.209 · 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