Investigation of automation opportunities in warehouse management in construction supply chains using convolutional neural networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The building industry is strongly reliant on materials, which account for 55%-60% of its expenses. However, due to outdated and time-consuming approaches, inadequate inventory management prevails. This is where developing technologies such as Deep Learning (DL) might help uncover solutions. Surprisingly, very little scientific research on DL has been conducted for this purpose. As a result, this study looks into the prospect of automating construction warehouse management by employing CNN for object detection and counting. During the initial investigation, 23 studies out of 26 used Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN) for image processing and object detection. Secondly, a model was developed and compared its accuracy to that of human counting and discovered that the model outperformed people. Industry professionals were interviewed to discuss the findings. Industry professionals highlighted the advantages and disadvantages of using such an automated system in construction warehouses. In conclusion, this study shows that the CNN base model outperforms people in counting materials, and the proposed automated inventory management system has significant industry potential.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".