MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379419119 · doi:10.1061/jcemd4.coeng-12891

Crane Mat Layout Optimization Based on Agent-Based Greedy and Reinforcement-Learning Approach

2023· article· en· W4379419119 on OpenAlexaff
Ghulam Muhammad Ali, Ahmed Bouferguène, Mohamed Al‐Hussein

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Construction Engineering and Management · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReinforcement learningModular designPlan (archaeology)Computer scienceIndustrial engineeringEngineeringTransport engineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The growing prevalence of modular construction, while it offers benefits in terms of productivity and sustainability, has led to increased use of heavy mobile cranes and related resources on construction sites. One significant resource associated with crane use is the crane mat, which offers practical mobile crane ground support against poor soil-bearing capacity. Due to increased use of crane mats, crane mat layout plans/drawings have become increasingly significant in today’s construction industry. The present work describes an automated crane mat optimization framework for preparing crane mat layout plans/drawings built on an agent-based greedy algorithm and reinforcement learning. The proposed framework employs these approaches to achieve the maximum area with the minimum number of crane mats. The proposed framework is found to decrease the time required for preparing a crane mat layout plan/drawing (approximately 97% time saving) with more uniform and efficient crane mat planning outcomes (approximately 63% crane mat material reduction).

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score0.518

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.171 · 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 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 venueJournal of Construction Engineering and ManagementSame topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207