MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390951791 · doi:10.55300/archvisual.v3i1.1712

Keuntungan, Batasan, dan Tantangan Penggunaan Building Information Modeling dalam Proses Pembelajaran

2023· article· id· W4390951791 on OpenAlexaff
Muhammad Rafli Alrizqi, Ilham Fazri

Bibliographic record

VenueArchvisual Jurnal Arsitektur dan Perencanaan · 2023
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldComputer Science
TopicEdcuational Technology Systems
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesComputer scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Studi ini melihat bagaimana menerapkan Building Information Modeling (BIM) di lingkungan kampus sebagai metode pembelajaran konstruksi. BIM adalah teknologi yang semakin populer dalam industri konstruksi yang membantu meningkatkan akurasi dan efisiensi proses perencanaan, desain, dan pengelolaan proyek. Namun, dapat ada beberapa masalah dan hambatan saat menerapkan BIM di kalangan mahasiswa dan dosen di lingkungan kampus. Dalam penelitian ini, literatur dan kuesioner digunakan untuk mengumpulkan data dari mahasiswa di salah satu universitas di Yogyakarta. Data tersebut mencakup pengetahuan mahasiswa tentang BIM, pengalaman mereka menggunakannya, dan pendapat mereka tentang apa yang baik dan buruk dari BIM dalam proses pembelajaran. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa sebagian besar siswa tahu tentang BIM. Namun, penelitian ini juga menemukan beberapa masalah yang menghalangi pemanfaatan BIM di kampus yaitu sumber daya dan infrastruktur, kurikulum yang belum sepenuhnya terintegrasi dengan BIM, dan kendala dalam aksesibilitas perangkat lunak BIM. Selain itu, penelitian ini melihat kemungkinan pengembangan OpenBIM sebagai solusi untuk meningkatkan kolaborasi dan fleksibilitas dalam penggunaan BIM di lingkungan kampus. Dengan membangun ekosistem digital yang berkelanjutan, penerapan BIM di kampus dapat memberikan manfaat yang signifikan bagi mahasiswa dalam mempersiapkan diri untuk dunia kerja yang semakin terdigitalisasi dan berorientasi teknologi.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.005

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchvisual Jurnal Arsitektur dan PerencanaanSame topicEdcuational Technology SystemsFrench-language works237,207