MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391104463 · doi:10.3390/buildings14010285

Design for Manufacturing and Assembly (DfMA) in Construction: A Holistic Review of Current Trends and Future Directions

2024· review· en· W4391104463 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBuildings · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSustainabilityThematic analysisEngineeringTransformative learningManagement scienceProcess managementEngineering managementComputer scienceQualitative research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The construction industry, despite its anticipated significant growth, has struggled with low productivity over the past two decades. Design for manufacturing and assembly (DfMA), a methodology with a history of success in other industries, presents a promising solution to enhancing efficiency in construction. This article reviews the current state of DfMA in the construction industry, identifies the most recent research themes in the field of DfMA, and provides recommendations for future DfMA research based on the existing research gaps. The paper employs a mixed-method approach, combining quantitative bibliometric analysis and qualitative thematic analysis. Using Scopus as the literature database, the study identified 43 relevant articles published between 2013 and 2023. The bibliometric analysis reveals a growing interest in DfMA research, with an upward trend in publications over the years. The thematic analysis categorizes DfMA research topics into six main themes: Innovation and Technology Trends, Sustainability and Environmental Impact, Regulatory and Policy Considerations, Collaborative Approach, Applications, Benefits, and Challenges, and Project Lifecycle. Each theme is explored in-depth, providing insights into the transformative impact of technology, environmental considerations in DfMA, regulatory challenges, collaborative strategies, varied applications, and the project lifecycle phases influenced by DfMA. The article concludes by presenting identified research gaps and offering recommendations for future DfMA research. It emphasizes the need for a holistic approach, continued collaboration, and a focus on unexplored aspects of regulatory frameworks and the entire project lifecycle. This study sets a new benchmark in DfMA research by employing a novel mixed-method approach and providing unprecedented insights into the multifaceted role of DfMA in advancing construction industry practices. It serves as a valuable resource for researchers, practitioners, and stakeholders in the construction industry by offering a comprehensive understanding of DfMA’s current state and guiding future research endeavors.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.935
Threshold uncertainty score0.910

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.277 · 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