Vanier, D J (1994) A parsimonious classification system to extract project-specific building codes. PhD thesis, Universite de Montreal, Canada.
Abstract
This thesis describes an exploratory, applied research project to develop a classification system for the National Building Code of Canada. The thesis describes the status of information technologies in the construction industry; it identifies strategic technologies for the industry, and it investigates potential technologies for the delivery of electronic codes. The thesis also describes prototypes and tools developed in the course of this research including electronic building code checklists, electronic thesauri, rotated indexes, hypertext building codes, and building code classification schemas. The result of this research is the National Building Code of Canada Classification System. The Classification System includes a methodology of identify key concepts in the building code as well as procedures to extract the concepts, their properties and the relations contained in the document. The thesis discusses the advantages of such a system and suggests potential products based on the NBCC Classification System.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Davidson, C H |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Canada |
| Index terms: | methodology, information technology, building code, prototype, construction industry, Canada |
| Subjects: | modelling and simulation, computing systems, regulatory law, industry analysis, Geography, research methods |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Geographical Context, Legal Issues, Research Practice, Digital Applications |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here