Construction 4.0: A comparative analysis of research and practice
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents an overview of the existing literature on Construction 4.0 technologies over the past decade and their most common applications in both research and practice, aimed at achieving three objectives. First, the search for the most relevant articles on Construction 4.0, published in the scientific literature, and small firms that are developing and delivering 4.0 technologies in the construction industry allows to identify the numerous applications associated with Construction 4.0. Second, the applications found in the scientific literature and those identified in practice are classified and compared based on a framework consisting of three distinct axes. Third, the classification framework highlights current research trends and potential areas for future research, which can be summarized as follows: (i) development of hybrid digital solutions; (ii) alignment with effective collection of more structured data, smart interactive web technologies, robotics, autonomous systems, and intelligent built assets; and (iii) strengthen the capacities of artificial intelligence and machine learning.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it