Development of a prefabricated construction productivity estimation model through BIM and data augmentation processes
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
The accuracy of productivity estimates remains a significant challenge due to limited data availability. This research addresses the need for precise productivity estimation in construction by integrating data augmentation techniques, onsite time study data, and Building Information Modeling (BIM) for automated quantity take-offs and design complexity analysis of steel connections. By examining design complexity, the method provides productivity estimates for project zones, sequences, and individual components, improving overall production management. Four data augmentation techniques—normal noise, interpolation, clustering, and Bayesian Linear Regression—were evaluated to enhance time study data. The augmented dataset was used to train an Artificial Neural Network, validated through case studies. The study identified the normal noise method as the most effective, significantly improving time estimation accuracy. Specifically, the proposed approach yielded a 58%–71% enhancement over current industry estimates and a 2.1%–31.1% improvement compared to models without data augmentation. This research enables managers to optimize resource allocation and reduce potential project delays.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it