# Interoperability of Digital Tools for the Monitoring and Control of Construction Projects
## 5 Conclusions  
The use of technologies for monitoring and control in construction projects involves challenges and opportunities for the AIC industry. With the current progress, it has been possible to facilitate data acquisition in the field due to the key features offered by their implementation, including automation, digitization, integration and interoperability, which are supported by the Industry 4.0 revolution. While there is a wide range of technologies on the market that promise different functions, their use and the interoperability among them are still limited. The contribution of this research is to show an analysis of the integration and interoperability of digital tools for monitoring and control of construction projects during the execution phase. The most widely used technologies in recent decades, such as BIM, unmanned aerial vehicles and photogrammetry, are technologies that present a greater compatibility, which allows for a reduction in the fragmentation of information and automation to a certain extent, since human support is still required. As evidenced, BIM is a tool with a great capacity to store data and it allows for the dissemination of this information to stakeholders. BIM marks a new paradigm, and the interoperability and integration it has with different technologies allows us to improve the efficiency of information management in construction due to the unification of information. In summary, BIM was characterized by generating connections with emerging technologies in the industry and, therefore, its potential is evidently superior to that of other technologies. A limitation that emerged from the research was the limited evidence found in the literature. Although technological advances have increased, the AEC industry has slowly adopted these innovative techniques, even more so for the function and stage of focus of this research. Implementing this type of technique in monitoring and control is still considered experimental in nature and, therefore, requires a significant investment from companies (whether public or private). Only a minority of companies dare to innovate and leave behind the traditional method. Another limitation of the study was that a set of tools was not applied in a real case of professional practice with the objective of analyzing and evaluating the benefits and obstacles of implementing this type of technologies associated \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Criteria**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Frequency of Performance**} \\ \cline{2-4}  & **Good** & **Intermediate** & **Poor** \\  & **(2)** & **(1)** & **(0)** \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Interoperability} & AR; BIM; DT; GIS; IoT; & BDA; CC; CDE; DL; DM; & \\  & PHT & DS; EC; ES; II; MAA; MC; & ARCA; SN \\  & & ML; MR; SMT; VR & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Virtualization} & AR; ARCA; BDA; DL; DT; & \\  & EC; ES; GIS; II; IoT; ML; & \\  & MR; PHT; VR & & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Decentralization} & BIM; CC; CDE; DS; ML & AR; ARCA; DL; DT; IoT; \\  & & MAA; MR; SMT; SN; VR & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Real-time capacity} & AR; ARCA; BDA; BIM; & \\  & CC; CDE; DL; DM; DS; & \\  & EC; ES; GIS; II; IoT; MR; & \\  & PHT; VR & & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Service orientation} & BDA; BIM; CC; CDE; DS; & AR; ARCA; DL; DM; \\  & GIS; II; IoT; PHT; SMT & & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Flexibility} & BIM; CC; CDE; DS; IoT; & \\  & PHT; SN & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 15: Frequencies obtained according to the criteria for CT.  
with Construction 4.0; therefore, it is recommended to carry out studies in real cases and evaluate the impact of their implementation from a quantitative and qualitative perspective. On the other hand, it is difficult to point out which technology or technologies will lead the monitoring and control process, since the technologies investigated in this paper will not necessarily be the technologies used in the medium term.