MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408623108 · doi:10.51594/estj.v6i2.1830

Building Information Modelling (BIM) for construction project management: A literature bibliometric analysis approach

2025· article· en· W4408623108 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEngineering Science & Technology Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBuilding information modelingComputer scienceEngineeringConstruction engineeringOperations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Being a multidisciplinary sector by nature, construction projects have historically been managed in a complex, dangerous, resource-wasting, imprecise manner that has been found to increase carbon emissions. Building information modelling (BIM) facilitates simulation, collaboration among project stakeholders, and the progression of BIM from 3D spatial representation to 10D industrialized production, all of which enhance the construction project management process throughout the lifecycle of a building. Based on such precedent and benefits, one could want to do bibliometric analysis to find out how many documents have been published on BIM for construction project management. In this study, a bibliometric analysis was employed to further explore the research subject. The Scopus database (www.scopus.com) and widely available tools were used to generate and analyse 246 published documents. Data obtained from the Scopus database was uploaded into the VOSviewer software to conduct further subject-matter analysis to delve deeper into particular documents received from Scopus. Utilizing data retrieved from Scopus, clusters networks analyses of ranking, co-authorship, co-occurrence, co-citation, citation, and bibliography are created and uploaded to the VOSviewer (www.vosviewer.com) tool. Findings reveal that the top countries for literature research and the cluster network of BIM for construction project management publications are the United States, the United Kingdom, Italy, China, Australia, India, Taiwan, Canada, France, Malaysia, and Iran. stating that African scholars need to formalize more of their writings and strengthen collaboration with other industrialized nations on this topic. Keywords: Building Information Model (BIM), Construction Project Management, Bibliometric Analysis, Vosviewer, Visualisation, Network.

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 categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesBibliometrics
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.569
Threshold uncertainty score0.852

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.1580.198
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.221 · 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