Modelling Design Standards for Iraqi Schools Using Building Information Modeling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Schools are the functional type that includes several requirements and standards related to the conceptual, design, constructional and operational aspects.These standards consist of various factors with minimum and maximum values to which the design must adhere.In recent years, Iraqi schools suffer from overcrowding and insufficient facilities.The research problem has identified as the contradiction between the Iraqi standards for schools and the existing schools in terms of the capacity of students, number of classes, available facilities, etc.In addition, the existing school buildings ignore the differences in design specifications related to the student ages and their academic levels.In fact, the same design typology of school was used for different stages of study (primary, intermediate, and secondary), which led to the incompatibility with their requirements.Therefore, this paper seeks to present a methodology for modifying the design parameters of each school type to satisfy the minimum requirements of each study stage facilities.To achieve this aim, the paper adopts building information modelling (BIM) to represent a model for the design standards of educational facilities, and to facilitate the handling of different information, such as descriptive, quantitative, and qualitative values.The digital parametric model of school was built to represent the design constraints and the maximum and minimum limits of the Iraqi standards for school, and to provide the necessary flexibility to change the values within the permissible limits of the standard.This model was implemented using different software tools such as Revit, Planfinder and Grasshopper for Rhino to represent the information of schools in the Iraqi Standards.A methodology for adapting the typical school designs based on the concept of BIM and parametric programming was implemented to generate new designs by adding new spaces or changing the dimensions of existing spaces.The results proved the validity of this method in the derivation of feasible designs by adapting the typical school's designs approved by the Iraqi Ministry of Education.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".