MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412690934 · doi:10.22260/isarc2025/0124

Construction Industry Vision Alberta Dataset (CIVAD): Developing a Comprehensive Object Detection Dataset for Diverse Construction Applications

2025· article· en· W4412690934 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mohamed Sabek, Qipei Mei, Gaang Lee, Alireza Golabchi, Vicente A. González

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ... ISARC · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceObject detectionConstruction industryArtificial intelligenceData scienceComputer visionConstruction engineeringEngineeringPattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

Integrating computer vision technologies intothe construction industry has the potential to revolutionize site monitoring, safety management, and quality control.However, a critical gap remains in the availability of specialized datasets tailored to construction sites' distinct conditions and complexities while including sufficient classes representing most items in construction sites.Existing Computer Vision (CV) models often rely on generic training datasets, which limit their effectiveness for specific construction-monitoring-related tasks.Consequently, there is a pressing need for comprehensive domain-specific datasets that can capture the full spectrum of construction-related objects and activities.This study addresses this gap by developing a foundational training dataset called the Construction Industry Vision Alberta Dataset (CIVAD), specifically designed for CV applications in the construction sector.Our dataset included over 50 classes with more than 86,905 images of different objects, such as tools, machinery, safety equipment, and construction materials, to support diverse CV tasks.It utilizes a combination of web scraping, inclusion of existing open-source datasets, and direct data captured from construction sites.A set of novel methods, such as semiauto-labeling with advanced models, such as Grounded SAM and Grounding DINO, were used with our custom algorithms.These models were utilized to process parts of the dataset imagery with humans in the loop.This approach facilitated an efficient and accurate dataset creation process.The CIVAD dataset and methods employed in this study represent a significant step forward in integrating CV technologies across various construction-related applications.

Stored with the screening record, where it is evidence for the labels above.

How this classification was reachedexpand

The three-model screen

all 5,600 screened works →

All three models called this out of scope.

stratum: about_only · design weight: 3321.24 (the sample is stratified; any rate computed without the weight is wrong)
Claude Opus 4.8OUT
genre: infrastructure/announcement
about Canada: no
confidence: medium

Announcement of a computer vision training dataset for construction sites; a domain dataset, not research-system infrastructure.

GPT-5.6 (high)OUT
genre: empirical
about Canada: no
confidence: high

The work develops a construction computer-vision dataset rather than studying research infrastructure or practice.

Grok 4.5OUT
genre: empirical
about Canada: no
confidence: high

Construction-site computer-vision training dataset for industry monitoring, not research infrastructure as object.

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.660
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.007

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the ... ISARCSame topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207