Semantic Material Bank: A web-based linked data approach for building decommissioning and material reuse
Open accessAbstract
One of the barriers to circular construction is the lack of availability or visibility of reusable materials and components at the right time and place. Therefore, this paper suggests a digital solution based on identified key stakeholders’ information requirements and market motivations. This solution helps close the material loop between the decommissioning phase and the new construction phase through semantic technology-based information exchanges among stakeholders. The proposed ontologies are twofold: 1) a Decommissioning & Reuse Ontology (DOR) that enriches information models with circular and End-of-Life cycle information while 2) the Ontology for Environmental Product Declaration (OEPD) digitalising standardised and comparable sustainable information. Both ontologies are employed in the Semantic Material Bank (SMB) proof-of-concept: a BIM-compliant digital urban mining solution through which defined stakeholders can evaluate the availability and status of reusable and recyclable elements for future construction projects.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The review found that a substantial share of papers suggest building upon existing BIM frameworks for MPs components and their interrelations.
“In terms of MPs components and their interrelations, a substantial share of papers suggest building upon existing BIM frameworks”
From Digital material passports in the AEC industry: a scoping review and conceptualisation of future research challenges (2025) · cites this paper as Akbarieh, Teferle, & O'Donnell, 2023
The available indexed passages are publication metadata and a bibliography (section labeled “169 (2 by Unilu),” page unspecified). Searches for material-passport components, their interrelations, and existing BIM frameworks found no passage reporting that a substantial share of papers recommends building on those frameworks. (LLM, conf=0.72)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 7
- Akbarieh, A., Jayasinghe, L.B., Waldmann, D., Teferle, F.N. 2020. BIM-Based End-of-Lifecycle Decision Making and Digital Deconstruction: Literature Review. Sustainability 12(7): 2670.
- Cai, G., Waldmann, D. 2019. A material and component bank to facilitate material recycling and component reuse for a sustainable construction: concept and preliminary study. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy 21(10): 2015–2032.
- Honic, M., Kovacic, I., Rechberger, H. 2019. Concept for a BIM-based Material Passport for buildings. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science; 225.
- Karlapudi, J., Valluru, P., Menzel, K. 2021. Ontology approach for Building Lifecycle data management. ASCE International Conference on Computing in Civil Engineering; Florida, 12–14 September 2021.
- Kedir, F., Bucher, D.F., Hall, D.M. 2021. A Proposed Material Passport Ontology to Enable Circularity for Industrialized Construction. European Conference on Computing in Construction; Dublin, 26–28 July 2021.
- Mêda, P., Hjelseth, E., Calvetti, D., Sousa, H. 2021. Enabling circular construction information flows using data templates – conceptual frameworks based on waste audit action. European Conference on Computing in Construction; Dublin, 26–28 July 2021.
- Sauter, E., Lemmens, R., Pauwels, P. 2019. CEO & CAMO ontologies: a circulation medium for materials in the construction industry. International Symposium on Life-Cycle Civil Engineering (IALCCE); Ghent, 28–31 October 2018.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Veliz Reyes, A., Olmez, D., Grout, J., & Carr, A. (2025) · Architectural Engineering and Design Management · doi:10.1080/17452007.2025.2579731 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
- Authors
- Akbarieh, A., Teferle, F. N., & O’Donnell, J.
- Venue
- ECPPM 2022 - eWork and eBusiness in Architecture, Engineering and Construction 2022
- Publisher
- CRC Press
- Published
- 2023-03-08
- Pages
- 69-76
- OpenAlex
- W4323568847
- Cited by
- 12
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 2
- FWCI
- 10.37
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- orbilu.uni.lu
- Licence
- cc-by-nc-sa
- Locations
- CRC Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Open Repository and Bibliography (University of Luxembourg) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › BIM and Construction Integration
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Semantic Web and Ontologies
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Sustainable Supply Chain Management
- Keywords
- material reuse, circular construction, semantic web, linked data, ontology (information science), environmental product declarations, urban mining, building information modeling, stakeholder information exchange, material loops, recyclable building materials
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
