MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7106015545 · doi:10.7939/83017

Development of a Question Answering System Over Building Codes using Retrieval Augmented Generation

2025· dissertation· en· W7106015545 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Alberta Library · 2025
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMultimodal Machine Learning Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetric (unit)Rank (graph theory)Code (set theory)Adaptation (eye)Scheme (mathematics)Question answeringKey (lock)Data retrieval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Building codes establish standards for the design, construction, and safety of buildings, ensuring structural integrity, fire protection, and accessibility. However, they are extensive, complex, and frequently updated, making manual querying time-consuming. A promising solution is a Question Answering (QA) system built on Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) or its extension, Multi-modal RAG (MRAG). RAG integrates a retriever with a Large Language Model (LLM), while MRAG employs Vision Language Models (VLMs) capable of processing both text and images. This study first evaluated retrieval methods for the National Building Code of Canada (NBCC), comparing pre-trained and fine-tuned LLMs. Results showed Elasticsearch to be the most effective retriever, while fine-tuning LLMs on NBCC data significantly improved domain-specific response generation. Since RAG struggles with tabular data, MRAG was explored as a means to incorporate tabular information. Different input formats, LaTeX and images of tables, were tested, with image-based inputs performing better, though still limited. To address this, Low Rank Adaptation (LoRA) was applied for fine-tuning VLMs on tabular NBCC datasets. Fine-tuned VLMs, particularly Qwen2.5-VL-3B, showed marked improvements, recording a relative 105 percent performance gain. Finally, fine-tuned VLMs were integrated into MRAG and evaluated on a manually prepared NBCC QA dataset that included both text and tables. In addition to these, MRAG framework based on commercial VLMs were also tested on the same dataset, resulting in multiple MRAG frameworks built with either open-source fine-tuned or commercial VLMs. The effectiveness of each end-to-end MRAG framework was then assessed using a combined metric that considered accuracy, ROUGE score, BERT score, and time. Among open-source models, the fine-tuned Qwen2.5 series achieved the best performance, benefiting from their strong reasoning and visual question answering capabilities. Among commercial models, Gemini-2-Flash and Gemini-2.5-Pro delivered the highest overall scores, 0.69 and 0.67 respectively.

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.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.883
Threshold uncertainty score0.883

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.241
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