MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409799895 · doi:10.11159/icsect25.182

Automating BIM (IFC) Data Analysis Using LangGraph

2025· article· en· W4409799895 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
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

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on Civil, Structural, and Environmental Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Modeling in Geospatial Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study introduces a novel methodology for automating the analysis of Building Information Modeling (BIM) data using LangGraph and integrating Google's Gemini Large Language Model (LLM) with IfcOpenShell.BIM, and specifically Industry Foundation Class (IFC) files, are widely used in the construction industry for representing and managing building data.However, analyzing this data effectively remains a significant challenge due to its volume and complexity.Additionally, analyzing BIM data typically requires knowledge of different BIM software depending on the application.This research addresses this challenge by creating a workflow that utilizes LangGraph's ability to develop different AI agents designed to handle tasks like extracting element data, analyzing spatial relationships, and categorizing risks based on predefined criteria, without the need for any BIM software at all.The integration of Gemini LLM provides advanced language-based reasoning and decision-making capabilities that allow the system to process complex queries, in human language, and provide valuable insights from the BIM data.As a proof-of-concept, four applications of the LangGraph methodology were created, providing significant insights regarding the strengths and limitations of this framework.The models were validated through hypothetical case studies and real-world applications, and responses were evaluated based on their accuracy, validity, and completeness, demonstrating the framework's effectiveness in analyzing BIM data in construction projects.However, the results also revealed limitations that can affect the system's performance in large-scale real-world applications.These findings suggest that while the proposed system shows great potential, further optimization is needed to enhance its usability and reliability in more complex and large-scale scenarios.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.758

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.209 · 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