Apparently it has arrived. Plan Review Utilizing AI

[Leo LaLone]

Very interesting and informative podcast series right now on the Ezra Klein Show. First episode covers the current state of affairs of LLM/AI, and how to most effectively use the tools at hand. And to address an earlier statement about not losing our jobs to AI before we all retire; We're talking months now, not years. If you haven't begun to learn how to use AI in your work on the daily, I would suggest you start NOW!

Opinion | How Should I Be Using A.I. Right Now? (Published 2024)

Give your A.I. a personality, spend 10 hours experimenting, and other practical tips from Ethan Mollick.

www.nytimes.com

Okay, 2 cups of coffee and an hour and 17 minutes...and yes very informative. Happy to say I did not TLDR (too long didn't read) or TLSTI (too long slept thru it). Both seem to be a "thing" for me these days, in spite of my passion for all things A.I. I will say this...this is a snapshot. It's already 3 days old and things have changed...new revelations, new deep dives, new uses, new models or versions and new approaches to all of this. There is no doubt we are creating a digital life form. How soon it becomes a Building Official or a log home designer is anybody's guess. But "sooner" is a good bet. "Better, Faster, Cheaper, Safer".

 

[bill1952]

We're talking months now, not years. If you haven't begun to learn how to use AI in your work on the daily, I would suggest you start NOW!

Do I get a pass for being retired?

 

[Leo LaLone]

Do I get a pass for being retired?

No. But you can wave as we pass by.

 

[bill1952]

I know I'm at the end of the parade. Heck, even my code change proposal will be nearly the last one heard a week from Monday.

 

[Leo LaLone]

So yesterday I started a text conversation with GPT4o about log home plans & design. Stunned I am with the breadth of knowledge he she it disgorged. It is voice activated so I'm off to buy a good microphone and headset (don't want to bother the wife with endless conversations going on in my office. I should say one sided conversations.) I can give it a voice...probably not Scarlett Johansson. Hmmmm.... how about a Swedish accent and I'll call him Svenn?

 

[SDS]

I would go with Wilfred Brimley....I think he would be thorough but fair as an AI plan reviewer's voice.

 

[Jean Tessmer-HI]

Recently, my Town Manager returned from a conference where the topic of AI (Artificial Intelligence) in building plan review was discussed. Intrigued by the possibilities, I've been tasked with researching this emerging technology and its potential applications in our field.

The idea of automating plan review through AI is fascinating and could revolutionize the way we work. AI algorithms can potentially analyze building plans much faster than a human, identifying code violations or inconsistencies with remarkable accuracy. This could not only speed up the approval process but also free up valuable time for us to focus on other critical aspects of our jobs.

However, I'm also aware that implementing AI in such a complex and nuanced field comes with its own set of challenges. There are questions about the technology's ability to interpret codes that often require human judgment, and concerns about the initial cost of implementation.

I would love to hear from anyone who has experience with AI in building plan review:

1. What software or platforms are you using, and how have they performed so far?
2. What are the most significant benefits you've observed?
3. Have you encountered any challenges or limitations?
4. What was the process of implementation like, and what costs were involved?
5. Do you think AI can ever fully replace human expertise in this field, or will it serve more as a supplementary tool?

Your insights will be invaluable as we consider venturing into this new territory. I'm particularly interested in any case studies, research papers, or firsthand accounts you can share.

On the ADA aspect I personally am worried Ai won't understand civil rights or understand that every inch of a walkway from the ADA parking stalls to the public walkways, sidewalks, entrances on the entire site, needs to be build-able and yield physically usable components and elements. I think they will need a lot of canned notes that will cover their results, which means they won't need to really apply the standards to protect the contractor and owners. There will or might be serious gaps. A human with experience in construction and detail plan reviews will still be necessary. Only takes one error to drive a lawsuit. How will it check plans and details?

 

[Jean Tessmer-HI]

Recently, my Town Manager returned from a conference where the topic of AI (Artificial Intelligence) in building plan review was discussed. Intrigued by the possibilities, I've been tasked with researching this emerging technology and its potential applications in our field.

The idea of automating plan review through AI is fascinating and could revolutionize the way we work. AI algorithms can potentially analyze building plans much faster than a human, identifying code violations or inconsistencies with remarkable accuracy. This could not only speed up the approval process but also free up valuable time for us to focus on other critical aspects of our jobs.

However, I'm also aware that implementing AI in such a complex and nuanced field comes with its own set of challenges. There are questions about the technology's ability to interpret codes that often require human judgment, and concerns about the initial cost of implementation.

I would love to hear from anyone who has experience with AI in building plan review:

1. What software or platforms are you using, and how have they performed so far?
2. What are the most significant benefits you've observed?
3. Have you encountered any challenges or limitations?
4. What was the process of implementation like, and what costs were involved?
5. Do you think AI can ever fully replace human expertise in this field, or will it serve more as a supplementary tool?

Your insights will be invaluable as we consider venturing into this new territory. I'm particularly interested in any case studies, research papers, or firsthand accounts you can share.

How will it know the best certifications and test procedures based on human bio-mechanics, safety, what if the bias for slip resistance is based on how slippery the surface is to slide boxes on. I have had that one presented as an accepted specification too. Boxes are not humans.

 

[Inspector Gadget]

Like I said elsewhere seconds ago, the AI plan check people want you to feed them your designer's copyrighted plans to "train" it, using said copyrighted works without recompense.

AI is theft.

 

[bill1952]

Like I said elsewhere seconds ago, the AI plan check people want you to feed them your designer's copyrighted plans to "train" it, using said copyrighted works without recompense.

AI is theft.

It has surprised me a little how AI seems welcomed at ICC, while NFPA is nearly violently opposed to allowing any access. NFPAs basis is intellectual property - copyright - not wanting to give it away. While anti-trust issues are still mentioned at beginning committee meeting, AI is the bigger issue. It will be interesting to see if they can keep the NFPA codes and standards out of the AI knowledge, as well as interesting to see how it affects the ICC intellectual property.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

It has surprised me a little how AI seems welcomed at ICC, while NFPA is nearly violently opposed to allowing any access. NFPAs basis is intellectual property - copyright - not wanting to give it away. While anti-trust issues are still mentioned at beginning committee meeting, AI is the bigger issue. It will be interesting to see if they can keep the NFPA codes and standards out of the AI knowledge, as well as interesting to see how it affects the ICC intellectual property.

The ICC has already sued UpCodes for copyright infringement. UpCodes is still on-line, so either the case hasn't been settled yet, or the ICC lost. Does anyone know?

All I have found is that a federal District court dismissed the lawsuit in 2021. The ICC appealed, and in 2022 the federal Court of Appeals agreed with most of the ICCs points and sent the case back to the District court for further action. I don't know what has happened since then.

 

[steveray]

The ICC has already sued UpCodes for copyright infringement. UpCodes is still on-line, so either the case hasn't been settled yet, or the ICC lost. Does anyone know?

All I have found is that a federal District court dismissed the lawsuit in 2021. The ICC appealed, and in 2022 the federal Court of Appeals agreed with most of the ICCs points and sent the case back to the District court for further action. I don't know what has happened since then.

Once it becomes "law" it has to be publishable/ reproducible...My guess is ICC keeps losing on those grounds and that is why they are trying for more legislative support for their "pro-codes" act...Which on the surface looks good, but also puts more referenced standards out of reach of most code professionals....Hell, I can't even get ACI 318 "for free" with my paid ICC premium access subscription...And there are more and more referenced standards pushed in every cycle...

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

Once it becomes "law" it has to be publishable/ reproducible...My guess is ICC keeps losing on those grounds and that is why they are trying for more legislative support for their "pro-codes" act...Which on the surface looks good, but also puts more referenced standards out of reach of most code professionals....Hell, I can't even get ACI 318 "for free" with my paid ICC premium access subscription...And there are more and more referenced standards pushed in every cycle...

Oh, I know. 30 years ago the firm I worked for bought a copy of ASTM Standards in Building Codes. Back then, IIRC it cost over $1,000. Today it's only available on-line, by subscription -- and you can't find the price on their web site. You have to contact Sales. The ASTM web site says the current ASTM Standards in Building Codes includes more than 2,400 standards. YIKES!

To buy the PDF versions of just the 2024 I-Codes I would need for this state will cost (IIRC) approximately $1,250. I didn't even price the printed books, even though I prefer the printed versions. I'm more than a bit upset at the ICC, because my professional membership used to include a free copy of the PDF codes. Now it just gives me "free" access to the on-line versions.

 

[Yikes]

On the ADA aspect I personally am worried Ai won't understand civil rights or understand that every inch of a walkway from the ADA parking stalls to the public walkways, sidewalks, entrances on the entire site, needs to be build-able and yield physically usable components and elements. I think they will need a lot of canned notes that will cover their results, which means they won't need to really apply the standards to protect the contractor and owners. There will or might be serious gaps. A human with experience in construction and detail plan reviews will still be necessary. Only takes one error to drive a lawsuit. How will it check plans and details?

Unfortunately, many architects I know currently operate like this, relying on canned notes in stead of verifying that their design actually meets the prescriptive requirements contained within the canned notes.

 

[bill1952]

The NFPA view is once AI "sees" the copyrighted text, there is no getting it back. It seems to me the Up-Codes issue will be moot when every AI system has digested a copy of the codes. Every answer will be on line. I don't know how long it will be free but sure probably less than an ICC subscription.

I asked Google "what is the occupant load factor for a restaurant per IBC" and got "The IBC defines occupant load factors for restaurants in Table 1004.5. The specific factor depends on the type of space: 15 square feet per person for seating with tables, 7 square feet per person for standing areas (like a dance floor), and 200 square feet per person for kitchens. The total occupant load is the sum of the loads calculated for each specific area. "

 

[steveray]

The NFPA view is once AI "sees" the copyrighted text, there is no getting it back. It seems to me the Up-Codes issue will be moot when every AI system has digested a copy of the codes. Every answer will be on line. I don't know how long it will be free but sure probably less than an ICC subscription.

I asked Google "what is the occupant load factor for a restaurant per IBC" and got "The IBC defines occupant load factors for restaurants in Table 1004.5. The specific factor depends on the type of space: 15 square feet per person for seating with tables, 7 square feet per person for standing areas (like a dance floor), and 200 square feet per person for kitchens. The total occupant load is the sum of the loads calculated for each specific area. "

So almost correct.....

 

[bill1952]

So almost correct.....

Yes. Not bad for a model A. (My mom's first car.) As AI get bigger and more sophisticated, I think it will get much more accurate. Rather frightening, especially for Ray Bradbury aficionados.