MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415764156 · doi:10.29173/mocs318

A Rapid Literature Review of Environmental Performance of Offsite Building Construction Industry

2025· article· W4415764156 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Tadesse Zelele, Dena Shamsollahi, Chen Xue, Aryan Hojjati, SeyedReza RazaviAlavi, Sang Jun Ahn, Amirhossein Mehdipoor, Ahmed Bouferguène, Mohamed Al‐Hussein, Osama Moselhi

Bibliographic record

VenueModular and Offsite Construction (MOC) Summit Proceedings · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Greenhouse gasConstruction industryLife-cycle assessmentFoundation (evidence)Modular construction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The construction industry consumes about 36% of the total energy and releases up to 39% of global CO2. If no appropriate measures are taken, the figure may double in the next two decades. Therefore, the construction sector is considering several measures to mitigate carbon emissions. In this regard, modular and panelized construction, which is collectively called offsite construction (OSC), is steadily gaining momentum. Several studies demonstrate that life cycle assessment (LCA) is a practical tool for evaluating the performance of OSC in greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction. Although a reasonable number of previous studies on OSC exist in the context of Canada, only a few apply LCA based on actual case studies. Realizing this fact, a collaborative research team from Concordia University, the University of Alberta, and NRC is undertaking an ongoing research project with the goal of decarbonization of the construction industry through OSC. As a foundation of this large ongoing research project, this study aims to review LCA related studies focusing on actual case studies in the context of OSC.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.742
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 designOther design
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModular and Offsite Construction (MOC) Summit ProceedingsSame topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207