MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415354881 · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2025.130050

A multi-user game-based system for planning modular construction activities

2025· article· en· W4415354881 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohamed Assaf, Sena Assaf, Xinming Li, Mohamed Al‐Hussein

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Systems with Applications · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlberta Innovates
KeywordsModular designKey (lock)UsabilityLimitingProtocol (science)Mode (computer interface)Modular construction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Supply chain (SC) planning in modular construction (MC) can be challenging because it requires interconnected and complex activities among various teams and across different project stages. Recently, game engines have been increasingly used to resolve these challenges, as they create realistic virtual environments and simulations of possible scenarios before actual project implementation. However, game engine applications have been restricted to single-user and centralized models, limiting real-time collaboration among MC teams. Within a Design Science Research methodology, this study proposes an intelligent game-based modular planning (GAMMOD) system, supported by multi-user functions, which is flexible in terms of access, allowing for either non-immersive or immersive mode, depending on the available hardware tools, for collaborative planning of the MC-SC. The GAMMOD system integrates a blockchain protocol for data security in the non-immersive mode, while the immersive mode relies on user credentials authorization. The GAMMOD system considers both numerical key performance indicators, such as sustainability, cost, and time, as well as practical ones, including road dimensions, module clearance, and possible clashes. Two distinct case studies, representing different MC types, are presented to illustrate the features of the GAMMOD system. The evaluation tests of the GAMMOD system conducted by 14 MC experts have shown a general consensus on its functionality, with 80% to 100% of the participants agreeing or strongly agreeing on the GAMMOD system’s performance. Additionally, the GAMMOD system demonstrated a usability score of 75.7, surpassing the established threshold of 70. The GAMMOD system is expected to help MC stakeholders make informed, collaborative decisions and develop a shared understanding of decision feasibility, potential conflicts, and constraints before the commencement of the MC project.

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)0.000
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score0.596

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.228 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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 venueExpert Systems with ApplicationsSame topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207