# BIM-Based Model Checking: A Scientometric Analysis and Critical Review
## 1 Introduction  
Building information modeling (BIM) plays a crucial role in the digital transformation of the architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) industry, serving as a bridge between the physical and virtual worlds. The information it carries forms the foundation of digital data in the AEC domain. However, as the data expands, errors and losses occur during the design, modification, and conversion processes of BIM models, due to human negligence or conflicts between heterogeneous data. These omissions can significantly impact the quality of buildings, and even endanger user safety. Therefore, the comprehensive checking of BIM data is essential. However, manual checking methods are inefficient, especially when assessing enormous amounts of abstract data in complex projects. For example, according to the \"Singapore Fire Safety and Shelter Department Fire Code 2.3.5\", \"Basement exit staircases which are vertically aligned with the exit staircases of non-basement storeys shall be separated from such other exit staircases\". This rule involves multiple interrelated building objects, requiring inspectors to expend considerable effort comparing and switching between multiple design documents. In contrast, similar issues have been automatically batch processed in the CORENET ePlanCheck project in Singapore [1]. This demonstrates the potential of automated checking tools, which can rival or even surpass human capabilities. Consequently, numerous researchers are striving to develop high-performance automated tools for BIM model checking. A unified terminology has not yet been established in this field because the checking process of BIM models involves multiple stages and various techniques. The ISO [2] does not include terms related to it, such as \"Model checking\", \"BIM-checking\", or \"Code compliance checking\", etc. In relevant articles, terms such as \"automated compliance checking (ACC)\", \"automated rule checking (ARC)\", and \"BIM-based model checking (BMC)\" are commonly used but easily confused. ACC and ARC are not limited to the AEC domain. For example, in computer science [3] or pharmacology [4], they represent different meanings. Therefore, for an accurate description, they should be restricted to the AEC domain, such as \"ACC in the AEC domain\" or \"ARC for BIM models\". It is worth noting that BIM has become the hallmark of three-dimensional modeling in the AEC industry. BMC explicitly identifies BIM models as the checking objects, but it does not emphasize automation, so manual checking should also be included. However, due to the focus of researchers on automation, the automation aspect of BMC is usually taken as default and does not require additional clarification. For a uniform expression, this study primarily adopts BMC to refer to the automated compliance checking of BIM models. [PERSON] [5] successfully used decision tables to compute steel structures, marking the beginning of BMC research. Subsequently, many researchers have proposed new theories and methods. [PERSON] et al. [6] conducted a comprehensive survey of ACC technology in the Industry 4.0, finding that 40.5% of ACC research, spanning business, law, AEC, and computer science, was associated with AEC. This demonstrates that the AEC domain has become the primary application area for ACC technology, signifying significant investment from the construction industry in this aspect. [PERSON] et al. [7] analyzed the maturity of digital building permits and processes, a broader process than BMC, including not only rule checking but also reviews of government-required workflows. [PERSON] found that technologies related to rule checking have undergone significant modernization, while the organizational structures and workflow development have lagged behind the new technologies. This point was also discussed in the article by [PERSON] [8], who stated that national policies are one of the necessary conditions for ACC development. From a macro perspective, BMC benefits multiple stakeholders.