MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415320052 · doi:10.1016/j.jobe.2025.114421

An evaluation of digital capabilities to enable a sustainable built asset industry: Developing a Consolidated Sustainability Matrix to inform digital use cases and practices

2025· article· en· W4415320052 on OpenAlexafffund
Meisam Jaberi, Charlotte Dautremont, Érik Poirier

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Building Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSustainable Building Design and Assessment
Canadian institutionsUniversité du QuébecÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSustainabilityCertificationAsset (computer security)Key (lock)Quality (philosophy)Set (abstract data type)Respondent

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current digital capabilities supporting the achievement of sustainability goals in the built asset industry tend to focus on isolated aspects such as energy simulation or emissions tracking. This limits the broader application of digital tools and workflows, namely Building Information Modeling (BIM) and Digital Twins (DT), to support achievement of a comprehensive set of sustainability goals across environmental, social, and economic dimensions. One of the many issues hindering this broader perspective is the lack of holistic understanding of how digitalization can enable sustainability in the built asset industry. The research presented in this paper introduces the Consolidated Sustainability Matrix (CSM), a unified framework that synthesizes 189 indicators from 25 certification schemes and 26 standards into 15 categories. Using a four-phase methodology, BIM and DT capabilities were mapped against these indicators. To enhance methodological rigor, two complementary metrics were proposed: a Cumulative Weighted Score (CWS) that accounts for respondent expertise levels, and a Weighted Agreement Score (WAS) that quantifies consensus among participants. The findings reveal that advanced digitalization, particularly sensor-enabled federated models and comprehensive digital twins, can support a considerable number of environmental indicators, especially energy, emissions, and indoor environmental quality management. However, current digital tools show limited support for social and economic sustainability indicators, revealing significant gaps in these areas. The study makes three key contributions: first, the CSM provides a harmonized framework linking sustainability indicators with digital capabilities; second, the CWS and WAS metrics offer robust methods for evaluating digital tool applicability and expert consensus; third, the research presents the first systematic assessment of how BIM and DT can transcend isolated applications to enable integrated sustainability management. These findings provide actionable guidance for industry practitioners and policymakers while identifying critical research and innovation priorities needed to advance digitalization toward more balanced and comprehensive sustainability outcomes in the built asset industry. • The study characterizes sustainability and its operationalization in the built asset industry in a systemic manner through the Consolidated Sustainability Matrix (CSM). • The CSM articulates 189 sustainability indicators across 15 categories, which were identified, extracted and rationalized from 25 globally recognized certification schemes and 26 sustainability standards. • The potential of digitalization to operationalize these indicators through BIM and Digital Twin capabilities is evaluated following a structured and systematic approach. • The study contributes to a more systemic understanding of sustainability and its operationalization in the built asset industry as a departure from studies addressing sustainability from a narrower perspective. • It provides a comprehensive approach to targeting digital capabilities to enable a broader operationalization of sustainability indicators by project stakeholders through the application of existing and emerging processes and technologies. • This study is novel due to the breadth of standards and schemes considered in developing the CSM and the scope of their potential digitalization.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.407
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.320 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Building EngineeringSame topicSustainable Building Design and AssessmentFrench-language works237,207