MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402131202 · doi:10.3390/buildings14092738

A Hybrid Decision Support System for Partition Walls

2024· article· en· W4402131202 on OpenAlexaff
Samaneh Momenifar, Yuxiang Chen, Farook Hamzeh

Bibliographic record

VenueBuildings · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPartition (number theory)Decision support systemComputer scienceSystems engineeringMaterials scienceEngineeringArtificial intelligenceMathematicsCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Partition walls play a crucial role in buildings, influencing their aesthetics, functionality, and integration with other architectural elements. However, the selection process for partition wall types is often challenging due to the multitude of options available, varying decision criteria, and inadequate decision-making practices in the Architecture, Engineering, and Construction (AEC) industry. To address these challenges and improve decision-making, a hybrid Decision Support System (DSS) named PartitionWall Pro is proposed. This tool combines both document-driven and model-driven approaches to assist in the selection and design of partition walls. The document-driven aspect utilizes a choosing-by-advantages (CBA) model to compare the advantages of different partition wall options, while the model-driven component employs computational design models to analyze the structural integrity of unreinforced masonry partition walls. Validation procedures ensure the reliability and accuracy of the DSS in practical applications. Through case studies involving a warehouse and a school, the study demonstrates how the DSS simplifies decision-making processes and encourages the adoption of cost-effective partition wall solutions. The results underline the potential of the DSS to enhance efficiency, foster stakeholder discussions, and improve communication in building design projects, thereby offering valuable insights for researchers and industry professionals alike, ultimately transforming partition wall design practice.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.727
Threshold uncertainty score0.262

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBuildingsSame topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207