61–70 of 103 posts
«Why we did it»; would rather have a “How we did it”. The why gave me AI generated marketing material feelings. Tailscale’s article about NAT traversal is an example of how to write “how we did it”: https://tailscale.com/blog/how-nat-traversal-works
I cannot wait for the day when tech companies become players in the construction industry because it looks like it is the only way forward to make a change. To think that everything has been digitalized a long time ago, yet contract law cannot properly deal with delineating responsibilities between GC and Architects, who are still sending 2D drawings to each other. Imagine, all this information about quantities and d…
- Counting all the doors: https://www.getanchorgrid.com/developer/docs/endpoints/drawi... - Extracting schedules in architectural drawings: https://www.getanchorgrid.com/developer/docs/endpoints/drawi...
and use Claude or any other AI tool to wire up the UI
We're releasing toilets (division 10) later this week, then floors and pipes next.
Your smart features looks like a game changer? Nice job!
I cannot wait for the day when tech companies become players in the construction industry because it looks like it is the only way forward to make a change. To think that everything has been digitalized a long time ago, yet contract law cannot properly deal with delineating responsibilities between GC and Architects, who are still sending 2D drawings to each other. Imagine, all this information about quantities and d…
I ran the example doors given and it missed 9 swinging doors, some that were in double swing pairs, and a few that were just out on their own not clustered. Not bad overall though
Yep we're constantly improving we're currently above 0.87 for doors we're thinking of adding a params for the ROC curve so that you can decide your own optimal thresholds depend on when false positive true positive rate is acceptable
I hope you succeed because it would be great to have a standard API for this data, but I would advise on one of two directions: become the standard by being close to 100% accurate at finding symbols (one symbol doesn't seem to cut it in our testing) or make a great, comprehensive workflow for a small subset of the market and become standard that way.
In both cases, you cannot do a broad 'market test', you need to spend many hours with a specific sub-set of users in construction.
Disclaimer: I'm a co-founder of Provision.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Re. "CAD/BIM", technically speaking CAD doesn't imply BIM, and the industry's promotion of BIM is akin to AI promotion among software engineering teams - the benefits aren't clear upon detailed review of the advertised capabilities. The CAD part, on the other hand, is generally recognized as the essential tooling for the profession and I'm surprised to hear that it just is a "wonderful aspiration".
"The profession" actually is a wide variety of trades, not just architects and contractors. Electricians, plumbers etc. where CAD is not yet widely spread. Which hopefully will change in the near future, with open source BIM tool chains, boosted by generative/agentic AI.. Finally, a huge source of confusion and execution hiccups will be overcome.
> OCR for construction documents does not work I'm reminded of the Xerox JBIG2 bug back in ~2013, where certain scan settings could silently replace numbers inside documents, and bad construction-plans were one of the cases that led to it being discovered. [0] It wasn't overt OCR per se , end-user users weren't intending to convert pixels to characters or vice-versa. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0O6UXrOZJo&t=…
JBIG2 does glyph binning, as you say not exactly OCR, but similar. So chunks of the image that look sufficiently similar get replaced with a reference to a single instance.
How can we describe OCR that wouldn't match this definition exactly?