MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413135109 · doi:10.1139/dsa-2025-0001

AIoT-powered drones in the construction industry: a review

2025· review· en· W4413135109 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zeerak Waryam Sajid, Fahim Ullah, Siddra Qayyum, Rehan Masood, Hina Inam, Ahsen Maqsoom

Bibliographic record

VenueDrone Systems and Applications · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScopusDroneNexus (standard)ChinaLeverage (statistics)Construction industryWeb of scienceSystematic reviewEngineeringKnowledge managementData sciencePolitical scienceComputer scienceConstruction engineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The digital revolution in construction is driving the nexus of emerging technologies. Technologies, such as the Artificial Intelligence of Things (AIoT), are transforming the sector by enhancing efficiency, promoting sustainability, and fostering innovation in construction projects. However, extant literature has failed to document integrated applications of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Internet of Things (IoT). The interface of AIoT with drones and their applications in the construction industry is underreported. To address this gap, the current study systematically reviewed literature from the Scopus and Web of Science repositories to uncover the applications of AIoT-enabled drones. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) protocols were applied to review 33 highly relevant articles. The results show applications of AIoT-powered drones in various construction sectors such as land surveying and site selection, site layout, analytics and logistical planning, quality and progress monitoring, safety management, regulatory compliance, facility and asset management, and disaster management. Theoretical and practical implications, challenges, and future directions for research and industry to adopt AIoT-powered drones are reported. This study is a pioneering effort investigating the applications of AIoT-powered drones in the construction industry with equal benefits for researchers, academics, and industry practitioners

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0100.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.262 · 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
GenreReview

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 venueDrone Systems and ApplicationsSame topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207