MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Digital Integration in Construction: A Case Study on Common Data Environment Implementation for a Metro Line Project

2025· article· en· W4414948238 on OpenAlexaff
Samuel da Silva, Conrad Boton

Bibliographic record

VenueInfrastructures · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkflowSoftware deploymentAutomationConsistency (knowledge bases)StakeholderCloud computingField (mathematics)Data integrationSystem integration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines the deployment of a Common Data Environment (CDE) during the extension of a major North American metro line—an infrastructure project marked by complex stakeholder dynamics and fragmented digital practices. Employing a four-phase action research approach (diagnosis, planning, implementation, evaluation), the research identifies inefficiencies in existing document management through contract reviews, field observations, and stakeholder interviews. In response, three standardized processes were introduced to streamline document workflows within the Autodesk Construction Cloud (ACC). These processes enabled partial automation of data handling, reduced reliance on manual inputs, and improved the consistency of information exchanges. While constrained by limited governance and executive engagement, the initiative demonstrates the potential of CDEs to support digital integration and automation in construction. Findings highlight the need for early planning, field-level support, and a strategic framework to ensure sustainable adoption. The results contribute practical insights for leveraging CDEs to enhance automation in large-scale infrastructure projects.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0090.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 venueInfrastructuresSame topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207