Comparison of BIM Collaboration Paradigms for Digital Twin
Readiness: Centralized Files, Decentralized Clouds, and
Distributed Blockchains

Rui Zhao, ruizhao@hku.hk

The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Island, Hong Kong

Yijie Wu, wuyijie@hku.hk

The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Island, Hong Kong

Jinfeng Lou, waseljf@connect.hku.hk

The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Island, Hong Kong

Zhe Chen, chenzhe@hku.hk

The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Island, Hong Kong

Liupengfei Wu, liupengfeiwu@connect.hku.hk

The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Island, Hong Kong

Fan Xue*, xuef@hku.hk

The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Island, Hong Kong

This is the authors’ version of the paper:
Zhao, R., Wu, Y., Lou, J., Chen, Z., Wu, L., & Xue, F. (2021). Comparison of
Digital Twin readiness of BIM collaboration paradigms: centralized file,
decentralized cloud, and distributed blockchain. In Proceedings of the 38th
International Conference of CIB W78, Luxembourg, 13-15 October, pp 315-325.
DOI: 10.46421/2706-6568.38.2020.paper032
The final version is freely available at: https://itc.scix.net/pdfs/w78-2021-paper-032.pdf

Abstract
Building information modeling (BIM) has been widely used as the information hub for
collaborations and has increasingly been mandated in the construction industry over the past
decade. From the information perspective, there have been three BIM-based exchange
paradigms: (i) file-based, (ii) cloud-based, and (iii) blockchain-based. Digital twin (DT) emerges
as an integration of both the physical and virtual worlds so that a product synchronizes with its
real-time digital representation. However, the readiness of multi-stakeholder BIM collaborations
for DT is not a solved problem. This paper compares the DT readiness over the three paradigms'
network models of information exchange links. It provides a thorough overview of BIM
collaborations using centralized files, cloud-based methods, and distributed blockchains. The
benefits and drawbacks are also discussed. The comparative results of the three BIM
collaboration paradigms may accelerate mobilizing BIM toward DT.

Keywords: BIM collaboration, information interoperability, blockchain BIM, cloud BIM, network
model

Proc. of the Conference CIB W78 2021, 11-15 October 2021, Luxembourg

Zhao et al. 2021 Comparison of BIM Collaboration Paradigms for Digital Twin Readiness

1 Introduction

Many building projects in the Architecture, Engineering, Construction, and Operations (AECO)
industry involve complex, multidisciplinary, and multi-stakeholder collaborations and
information exchanges (Xue et al., 2021). Building Information Modeling (BIM) can be used as a
framework for all asset databases to build digital models of buildings or civil infrastructure,
allowing for seamless digital data exchange (Eastman et al., 2011). BIM has been widely used as
the information hub and increasingly mandated in the AECO industry over the past decade
(Succar, 2009). And BIM is increasingly recognized as an IT-based approach to building integrity,
virtual prototyping, modeling, distributed access, storage, and building data maintenance (Singh
et al., 2011). The wealth of data in BIM provides a brand-new way for people to design, maintain
and operate a building.
The core of BIM is the collaborative process in construction projects. The correct and ef�icient
BIM implementation will help project participants and stakeholders, including owners, architects,
engineers, contractors, and suppliers, get the best out of the collaborative agreement while
increasing productivity and effectiveness (Lu et al., 2013). The essence of collaboration is digital
information exchange. Digital Twin (DT) emerges as an integration of both the physical and
virtual worlds so that each industrial product gets a real-time digital representation. The physical
world is transmitted to virtual models via sensors to complete simulation, validation, and
dynamic adjustment. The simulation results can feed, automatically or manually, back to the
physics world to respond to changes and improve their operation (Qi & Tao, 2018).
Combining BIM and DT technology can signi�icantly reduce energy demand in residential
buildings in construction and operational phases and reduce processing and approval cycles
while increasing transparency and collaboration (Alonso et al., 2019). Given the critical role of
BIM collaboration in building projects, it is crucial that we need understand the collaborative
process in BIM-enabled projects that increase productivity and ef�iciency (Lu et al., 2013). From
the perspective of information exchange, DT has three paradigms for data readability in BIM
collaboration: (i) �ile-based, (ii) cloud-based, and (iii) blockchain-based (Lou et al., 2020). The
paradigms' information exchange networks impact the DT readiness and ef�iciencies.
Studies show that interoperability is vital to cooperation using BIM (Oraee et al., 2019).
Recent research direction was the shared data exchange networks to facilitate interoperability
among BIM users (Comiskey et al., 2017). Likewise, increasing attention is paid to the de�inition
of effective models and arrangements of cooperation (Zhang & Ashuri, 2018). Nevertheless, the
readiness of multi-stakeholder BIM collaboration for DT is an unsolved problem, which arises
from synchronizing real-time information (Xue et al., 2020).
This paper aims to compare the DT readiness of the three paradigms based on the network
models of information exchange links. DTs in construction are reviewed in Section 2. Section 3
re�lects on the centralized BIM �iles, decentralized clouds, and distributed Blockchains. A thought
experiment is presented in Section 4 for testing the paradigms. Section 5 discusses the �indings
and possible future directions.

2 Digital twins in the construction industry

A DT is a virtual representation that serves as a physical object or process (NIC, 2017). The DT
concept and practices have proved successful for monitoring, data analytics, and decision-making
in various industries, such as smart city and manufacturing. In addition, DT has been integrated
with BIM and technologies such as the Internet of things (IoT), light detection and ranging
(LiDAR), and data mining to facilitate construction in the construction industry.
DT frameworks can be developed for information updating to update BIM with IoT sensors
and perform compliance checks between as-built and as-planned models (Lee et al., 2021).
Furthermore, the applications of DT to anomaly detection or fragility assessment have also been
demonstrated in cases such as bridge collapse (Lin et al., 2021) and built asset monitoring (Lu et
al., 2020). Besides, DT can better understand the construction progress and the corresponding
collaborative networks, making the bottleneck predictions and decision-making more successful
(Lin & Wu, 2021; Pan & Zhang, 2021).
Proc. of the Conference CIB W78 2021, 11-15 October 2021, Luxembourg

Zhao et al. 2021 Comparison of BIM Collaboration Paradigms for Digital Twin Readiness

However, the existing pilot DTs in construction were mainly under constrained laboratory
settings. The data sharing for DTs, referred to as BIM collaboration with DTs, is crucial to
transplanting the pilot DT systems into the real-world construction industry. DTs' real-time,
detailed, and large-scale natures make it signi�icantly challenging to coordinate DTs into BIM
collaboration and guarantee the ef�iciency, �idelity, and security of information sharing, updating,
and tracking.
Emerging technologies, such as cloud computing and blockchain, have been introduced into
the BIM collaboration for DT readiness. Cloud computing, for example, is an innovation delivery
enabler for BIM, IoT, and virtual reality in construction. Bello et al. (2020), which can be derived,
could be essential for DT in the construction industry. Blockchain, integrating the chain structure
with the encryption and distribution features, is another promising technology for transactions
in dynamic DTs (Das et al., 2021; Xue & Lu, 2020). To further analyze and compare the traditional
�ile-based and the emerging cloud-and blockchain-based BIM collaboration, the following of this
paper will introduce the de�initions, typical application scenes and practice, advantages, and
disadvantages of these three paradigms.

3 BIM collaboration paradigms

3.1 Centralized files
The centralized �ile model represents the conventional collaboration over a �ile, where the hub of
interoperability is the BIM �ile. At the top-most level, the BIM tools allow users to work together
to improve the building artifact's view. Collaborative efforts are greatly enhanced if the partners
can share their models to view, analyze, edit, and develop (Eastman et al., 2011).
Since the 1970s, when computer-aided design (CAD) was introduced, there have been
interoperability issues between engineering software systems (Pratt, 1993). As a result, �ilebased data exchange methods such as DXF, IGES, and SAT were developed to exchange geometric
entities between CAD structures (Light & Gossard, 1982). In the late 1980s, the manufacturing
industry faced more complex interoperability problems, developing product information
exchange technologies in ISO-STEP (Standard for the Exchange of Product) model code, also
known as the ISO 10303 Standard (Fowler, 1996). For data modeling, standard reusable structure
libraries, and methods to develop various exchange functions based on speci�ic data schemes, the
STEP has provided EXPRESS language (ISO 1994) (Schenck & Wilson, 1994). With this
technology, object-based data schemes have been created in over 20 production and electronics
areas (Eastman, 1999).
In the past, the U.S. AECO industry had spent more than $15 billion to address BIM
collaborative operations due to insuf�icient interoperability (Eastman et al., 2011). To address
the above issues, BuildingSMART was promoted as an Industry Foundation Class (IFC), the ISOSTEP technology-based building product model exchange program that people had already
worked to develop in the mid-1990s (Young, 2005). The IFC model offers several options for
de�ining building objects, procedures, and other data in a publicly accessible data schema. It was
designed as a framework model that addresses the broader range of construction, engineering,
building, and operation (Bjö rk, 1995). It offers numerous methods of form de�inition and means
of representing relationships between objects. IFC aims to display all information related to a
building, from the building's feasibility and the design to the construction, operation, and
exchanges (Shayeganfar et al., 2008).
As shown in Figure 1, a 'sender' can use the IFC �iles in the local BIM model and pass the �iles
to recipients. The 'receiver' imports the model from the received IFC �iles. Appropriate importing
modules convert the IFC �iles with local data bindings. IFC extensions and standards can thus
solve the interoperability problem between various BIM users. A well-analyzed IFC �ile helps
extend the coverage and interoperability of BIM users (Ren et al., 2018).
An example is the BIM Collaboration Format (BCF) in IFC with data requirements. A
traditional BCF work�low de�ines a �ile-based transfer, sometimes via e-mails or other
communications, of issues. Therefore, it is dif�icult to analyze and quickly overview the whole
series of problems (van Berlo & Krijnen, 2014). Besides, certain information can be missed or
Proc. of the Conference CIB W78 2021, 11-15 October 2021, Luxembourg

Zhao et al. 2021 Comparison of BIM Collaboration Paradigms for Digital Twin Readiness

untraceable in exporting and importing an IFC model from one software. Manual rede�ining data
takes time and is susceptible to human error (Wan et al., 2004). Even with direct IFC �ile support,
missing information in the import/export of IFC �iles, particularly undetected ones, can be a
signi�icant issue (Kiviniemi, 2006). To �ix the case of information loss, developers can manually
or semi-automatically search for possible information loss before �ile exchange to avoid/reduce
anonymous information missing during the �ile exchange (Ren et al., 2018).

Figure 1. Centra lized BIM colla bora tion proces s

3.2 Decentralized clouds
Since the mid-2010s, cloud BIM has become a new �ield in the AECO industry as a rapidly evolving
technology (Wong et al., 2014). Cloud computing is a paradigm that enables users to access a
shared pool of con�igurable computing resources on-demand, e.g., networks, servers, storage,
applications, or software (Pearson & Benameur, 2010). Cloud BIM is believed to allow project
partners and design disciplines to share and exchange design data requirements and solutions
(Redmond et al., 2012).
Cloud storage includes both the programs provided as services over the Internet and the
hardware and systems in data centers (Juan & Zheng, 2014). There are three primary categories
of cloud products (Pearson & Benameur, 2010): Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) for total enterprise
applications, Platform-as-a-Service (PaaS) for remote platform development and customization,
and Technology-as-a-Service (TaaS) for processing and storage infrastructure leasing. Besides,
hybrid clouds incorporate the public and private cloud models (Sengupta et al., 2011). The public
clouds offer services to the general public, while private clouds are designed and operated by
individual entities—similar to conventional database management.
As shown in Figure 2, users access cloud BIM data and information via cloud-based software
and hardware. Ideally, a cloud BIM system eliminates complex infrastructure spend on hardware,
software, and storage management, which means signi�icant savings in IT resource consumption
for AECO. Any user can use any web browser on any device to upload their BIM models to the
cloud, edit and re-save them there, or download them to their devices, such as iPads, laptops, or
desktop computers. From there, they can start projects, create central �iles and invite
collaborators.
Proc. of the Conference CIB W78 2021, 11-15 October 2021, Luxembourg

Zhao et al. 2021 Comparison of BIM Collaboration Paradigms for Digital Twin Readiness

Figure 2. Devices for cloud BIM colla bora tion

Cloud BIM technology is recognized as a cost-effective alternative to conventional data
sharing and storage methods (Mahamadu et al., 2013). Outsourced data processing can offer
signi�icant upfront and maintenance costs and scalability (Fathi et al., 2012). Furthermore, a
cloud BIM creates a decentralized environment that integrates multiple stakeholders (Juan &
Zheng, 2014).
However, impediments, such as security threats and business secrets, exist against the
adoption of cloud BIMs (Sengupta et al., 2011). There are concerns about the impact of
pervasiveness, transparency, and multi-party participation on data integrity and privacy, too
(Takabi et al., 2010). Plus, there is a lack of cloud-speci�ic BIM standards. As more cloud BIM
services are developed, standardization among them becomes essential. Open standards, such as
IFC or BCF, should be expanded to meet cloud BIM applications' requirements (Afsari et al., 2016).

3.3 Distributed blockchains
Blockchain is a distributed file system (DFS) consisting of a sequence of Cryptography-generated
data blocks (Crosby et al., 2016). Blockchain is an impactful digital transformation technology in
many industries (Di Giuda et al., 2020). The main idea behind blockchain is creating a digital trust
when data is equally distributed across many nodes and no actor has complete control over the
network. As a result, blockchain can radically alter an enterprise's practices. The success of
blockchain applications shows a slew of advantages, including mutual learning, instant data
sharing, automatic contract execution, cybersecurity, and enhanced teamwork (Nawari &
Ravindran, 2019).
Figure 3 shows a blockchain system comprising of four building blocks generally:
(1) Shared ledger,
(2) Encrypted data,
(3) Consensus, and
(4) Smart contracts.
A shared ledger is a distributed record of network transactions. It stores essential information
about business objects, such as the current values of object attributes and the transaction history
that created those current values.

Proc. of the Conference CIB W78 2021, 11-15 October 2021, Luxembourg

Zhao et al. 2021 Comparison of BIM Collaboration Paradigms for Digital Twin Readiness

Figure 3. Com ponents of Blockcha in

Encrypted data ensures transactions' validity and authentication. Thus, encryption is a critical
component of blockchains' enhanced security, rendering distributed networks more dif�icult to
compromise on the web. Besides, consensus refers to the use of the network's capacity to validate
data transactions.
The consensus model is at the heart of blockchain and makes principles such as trust, trade,
and ownership possible. When new participants enter a blockchain network or apply the
blockchain to a new use case, the consensus system updates automatically.
Lastly, smart contracts are commercial or noncommercial arrangements embedded in a
transaction database and executed automatically in conjunction with the transactions. Contracts
in the blockchain world are called smart contracts. When it applies computerized protocols to
enforce contract terms, various contract terms can be converted into machine language to ensure
that the contract terms are adhered to, and the agreement is completed. Smart contracts are
designed to ensure that one party keeps its commitment to the other. One aim of smart contracts
is to lower authentication and enforcement costs. (Nawari & Ravindran, 2019).

Figure 4. Blockcha in-ba s ed BIM colla bora tion

An archive of all modi�ications to the BIM �ile can be permanently recorded through the
blockchain and help handle changes to the model during construction by negotiating edit
Proc. of the Conference CIB W78 2021, 11-15 October 2021, Luxembourg

Zhao et al. 2021 Comparison of BIM Collaboration Paradigms for Digital Twin Readiness

permissions and storing the design. One distinctive feature of BIM in construction projects is the
large amount of data stored in the model. One solution is to combine BIM and a distributed
database to achieve a valuable information source shared by multiple users in a single project
(Xue & Lu, 2020). As shown in Figure 4, in the context of this innovation, The BIM model used in
the project is composed of reliable and unchanging information sources that can be accessed and
queried by all participants projects such as BIM customers, clients, architects, building structure
designers, building service designers and other professionals, so that they could make
transactions in BIM through the process of blockchain. Since there is often a lack of trust between
project participants resulting in wasted time and unnecessary data validation, storing traceable
and immutable data in a blockchain database can effectively avoid this lack of con�idence. (Di
Giuda et al., 2020).
Blockchain technology and smart contracts facilitate project work�low and coordination and
increase transparency in the development process. Since all transactions are speci�ic to the user's
point in operation time, project participants tend to perform better due to increased
accountability. (Alonso et al., 2019). The programmability of blockchain allows smart contracts,
which are contracts written in code, effectively. Both parties de�ine their rights and obligations
through the smart contract on the chain, and the owner can monitor the execution process. The
contract results ensure consistency in contract formation and execution and achieve machine
trust, improving transparency and reducing operational costs (Giancaspro, 2017).
Blockchain networks mean that no one node has full access to all information in the network.
By accepting more than one key, transactions can bene�it from an additional layer of
authentication provided by multiple signature authentication. If more than half of the nodes are
hacked, hackers will obtain full access to the network (Kshetri, 2017). A stable system that
adheres to the necessary licensing standards can provide effective interoperability by serving as
a reliable medium for data repositories and data sharing and maintaining participant
identi�iability and authentication (Hasan & Salah, 2018). Additionally, blockchain will provide a
safe and open Proof of Delivery (PoD) mechanism for transporting and delivering physical assets
(Li et al., 2021).
While blockchain can bring numerous new opportunities to the AECO industry, there are also
challenges and risks. Since the calculation outcomes are immutable, defective code will jeopardize
project data integrity or result in �inancial loss. Before deploying the computerized code, the
parties must ensure sound (Narayanan et al., 2016). Other threats arise as a result of blockchains'
vulnerability to attacks from their peer-to-peer network. A 51% assault on the network is needed
to sabotage the blockchain consensus algorithm. It requires more than half the hash and
computational power in the blockchains using the Working Proof (PoW) protocol (Nakamoto &
Bitcoin, 2008) by obtaining other mining bathrooms and amassing the computing force
equivalent to the current hash rates as a miner.

4 Thought experiment on the digital twin readiness

Figure 5 shows an IDEF0 (Icam DEFinition for Function Modeling) diagram of a thought
experiment on DT readiness. The left arrow indicates inputs; the right-hand shows the outputs as
experimental metrics. The bottom arrow lists the three BIM collaboration paradigms to test. The
top arrow represents the control parameters, such as the number of BIM user nodes and
stakeholder groups. As shown in Figure 5, the experiment will use the same BIM collaboration
cases to benchmark the centralized model, decentralized cloud model, and distributed blockchain
model. The parameter sensitivity can be tested with tunable values to the nodes, trades, and task
groups. The �inal results will quantify the DT readiness of different BIM collaboration paradigms
regarding latency, error, and transmission ef�iciency. A �inally weighted sum can tell us the overall
rankings.

Proc. of the Conference CIB W78 2021, 11-15 October 2021, Luxembourg

Zhao et al. 2021 Comparison of BIM Collaboration Paradigms for Digital Twin Readiness

5 Discussion

Figure 5 IDEF0 diagram of a thought experiment

BIM opens new avenues to co-work in the construction industry. With the ful�illed value of BIM
collaboration, stakeholders can deliver tasks and share information more effectively. For the
exchange of project information and knowledge, the collaborative process using BIM is critical. A
deep understanding of the ways of BIM collaborations has potential bene�its for BIM users. When
AECO industries worldwide are increasingly mandating BIMs, DT-ready BIM collaborations will
contribute to project coordination, communication, resource and knowledge sharing, and
innovations.
This paper presents a systematic overview of existing BIM collaboration paradigms for DT
readiness. The most straightforward solution is �ile-based centralized BIM collaboration. The
one-way �ile transfer method and inability to function at the object level remain its drawbacks.
The performance, low-cost, real-time, and on-demand access to data are praised for cloud-based
BIMs. However, cloud BIM also faces several challenges, including a lack of cloud BIM standards
and operational and legal problems, e.g., privacy, information security, insuf�icient technical staff,
and clarity of ownership and responsibility. Alternatively, blockchain-based distributed BIM
collaboration can track information and ensure BIM data security. However, the new blockchain
thinking needs further validation and considerations by the AECO industry, e.g., security,
scalability, and usability.
Future research can be directed to the following areas. One potential research area is
developing algorithms to collaborate large-scale BIMs in complex network environments with
less computation time and resources. Secondly, future research can incorporate arti�icial
intelligence to �ill in lost data in BIM collaboration smartly. Thirdly, Researchers can develop
methodologies to bene�it from linking (blockchain-based) BIM implementation with a DT
framework. Fourthly, the potentials of blockchain can be validated and benchmarked for BIM
collaborations. Fifthly and �inally, a general approach for experimentation and assessment is
further suggested.

Acknowledgments

The work presented in this paper was supported by Hong Kong Research Grant Council (RGC)
under General Research Fund (GRF) No. 17200221.

Proc. of the Conference CIB W78 2021, 11-15 October 2021, Luxembourg

Zhao et al. 2021 Comparison of BIM Collaboration Paradigms for Digital Twin Readiness

References

Afsari, K., Eastman, C. M., & Shelden, D. R. (2016). Cloud-based BIM data transmission: current status and
challenges 33rd International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction (ISARC
2016), https://doi.org/10.22260/ISARC2016/0129
Alonso, R., Borras, M., Koppelaar, R. H. E. M., Lodigiani, A., Loscos, E., & Yöntem, E. (2019). SPHERE: BIM
Digital
Twin
Platform
Sustainable
Places
2019,
https://doi.org/10.3390/proceedings2019020009
Bello, S. A., Oyedele, L. O., Akinade, O. O., Bilal, M., Delgado, J. M. D., Akanbi, L. A., Ajayi, A. O., & Owolabi, H.
A. (2020). Cloud computing in construction industry: Use cases, benefits and challenges.
Automation in Construction, 103441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2020.103441
Björk, B.-C. (1995). Requirements and information structures for building product data models. VTT
Technical Research Centre of Finland. 951-38-6030-2
Comiskey, D., McKane, M., Jaffrey, A., Wilson, P., & Mordue, S. (2017). An analysis of data sharing platforms
in multidisciplinary education. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 13(4), 244-261.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17452007.2017.1306483
Crosby, M., Pattanayak, P., Verma, S., & Kalyanaraman, V. (2016). Blockchain technology: Beyond bitcoin.
Applied Innovation, 2(6-10), 71.
Das, M., Tao, X., & Cheng, J. C. (2021). BIM security: A critical review and recommendations using encryption
strategy
and
blockchain.
Automation
in
Construction,
126,
103682.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2021.103682
Di Giuda, G. M., Pattini, G., Seghezzi, E., Schievano, M., & Paleari, F. (2020). The construction contract
execution through the integration of blockchain technology. In Digital transformation of the design,
construction and management processes of the built environment (pp. 27-36). Springer, Cham.
Eastman, C. M. (1999). Building product models: computer environments, supporting design and construction.
CRC press. 0849302595
Eastman, C. M., Eastman, C., Teicholz, P., Sacks, R., & Liston, K. (2011). BIM handbook: A guide to building
information modeling for owners, managers, designers, engineers and contractors. John Wiley &
Sons. 0470541377
Fathi, M. S., Abedi, M., Rambat, S., Rawai, S., & Zakiyudin, M. Z. (2012). Context-aware cloud computing for
construction
collaboration.
Journal
of
Cloud
Computing,
2012,
1.
https://doi.org/10.5171/2012.644927
Fowler, J. (1996). STEP architecture and methodology. PDT Solutions, Bentham, UK, 16.
Giancaspro, M. (2017). Is a 'smart contract'really a smart idea? Insights from a legal perspective. Computer
law & security review, 33(6), 825-835. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2017.05.007
Hasan, H. R., & Salah, K. (2018). Blockchain-based proof of delivery of physical assets with single and
multiple
transporters.
Ieee
Access,
6,
46781-46793.
https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2866512
Juan, D., & Zheng, Q. (2014). Cloud and open BIM-based building information interoperability research.
Journal of Service Science and Management, 2014. https://doi.org/10.4236/jssm.2014.72005
Kiviniemi, A. (2006). Ten years of IFC-development–Why are we not yet there. Keynote lecture at the 2006
Joint International Conference on Computing and Decision Making in Civil and Building
Engineering, Montreal, Canada.
Kshetri, N. (2017). Blockchain's roles in strengthening cybersecurity and protecting privacy.
Telecommunications policy, 41(10), 1027-1038. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2017.09.003
Lee, D., Lee, S. H., Masoud, N., Krishnan, M., & Li, V. C. (2021). Integrated digital twin and blockchain
framework to support accountable information sharing in construction projects. Automation in
Construction, 127, 103688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2021.103688
Li, X., Wu, L., Zhao, R., Lu, W., & Xue, F. (2021). Two-layer Adaptive Blockchain-based Supervision model for
off-site
modular
housing
production.
Computers
in
industry,
128,
103437.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2021.103437
Light, R., & Gossard, D. (1982). Modification of geometric models through variational geometry. ComputerAided Design, 14(4), 209-214. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-4485(82)90292-5
Lin, J.-R., & Wu, D.-P. (2021). An approach to twinning and mining collaborative network of construction
projects.
Automation
in
Construction,
125,
103643.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2021.103643
Lin, K., Xu, Y.-L., Lu, X., Guan, Z., & Li, J. (2021). Digital twin-based collapse fragility assessment of a longspan cable-stayed bridge under strong earthquakes. Automation in Construction, 123, 103547.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2020.103547

Proc. of the Conference CIB W78 2021, 11-15 October 2021, Luxembourg

Zhao et al. 2021 Comparison of BIM Collaboration Paradigms for Digital Twin Readiness

Lou, J., Lu, W., & Xue, F. (2020). A review of BIM data exchange method in BIM collaboration The 25th
International Symposium on Advancement of Construction Management and Real Estate
(CRIOCM2020),
Lu, Q., Xie, X., Parlikad, A. K., & Schooling, J. M. (2020). Digital twin-enabled anomaly detection for built asset
monitoring in operation and maintenance. Automation in Construction, 118, 103277.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2020.103277
Lu, W., Zhang, D., & Rowlinson, S. (2013). BIM collaboration: A conceptual model and its characteristics.
Proceedings of the 29th Annual Association of Researchers in Construction Management (ARCOM)
Conference,
Mahamadu, A.-M., Mahdjoubi, L., & Booth, C. (2013). Challenges to BIM-cloud integration: Implication of
security issues on secure collaboration 2013 IEEE 5th International Conference on Cloud Computing
Technology and Science, Bristol, UK. https://doi.org/10.1109/CloudCom.2013.127
Nakamoto, S., & Bitcoin, A. (2008). A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. Bitcoin.–URL: https://bitcoin.
org/bitcoin. pdf, 4.
Narayanan, A., Bonneau, J., Felten, E., Miller, A., & Goldfeder, S. (2016). Bitcoin and cryptocurrency
technologies: a comprehensive introduction. Princeton University Press. 1400884152
Nawari, N. O., & Ravindran, S. (2019). Blockchain and building information modeling (BIM): Review and
applications
in
post-disaster
recovery.
Buildings,
9(6),
149.
https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings9060149
NIC. (2017). Data for the Public Good. London: National Infrastructure Commission, UK.
https://www.nic.org.uk/publications/data-public-good/
Oraee, M., Hosseini, M. R., Edwards, D. J., Li, H., Papadonikolaki, E., & Cao, D. (2019). Collaboration barriers
in BIM-based construction networks: A conceptual model. International Journal of Project
Management, 37(6), 839-854. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2019.05.004
Pan, Y., & Zhang, L. (2021). A BIM-data mining integrated digital twin framework for advanced project
management.
Automation
in
Construction,
124,
103564.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2021.103564
Pearson, S., & Benameur, A. (2010). Privacy, security and trust issues arising from cloud computing. 2010
IEEE Second International Conference on Cloud Computing Technology and Science,
https://doi.org/10.1109/CloudCom.2010.66
Pratt, M. (1993). Geometric methods for computer-aided design. Fundamental development of computeraided geometric modeling, 271-319.
Qi, Q., & Tao, F. (2018). Digital twin and big data towards smart manufacturing and industry 4.0: 360 degree
comparison. Ieee Access, 6, 3585-3593. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2793265
Redmond, A., Hore, A., Alshawi, M., & West, R. (2012). Exploring how information exchanges can be
enhanced
through
Cloud
BIM.
Automation
in
Construction,
24,
175-183.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2012.02.003
Ren, R., Zhang, J., & Dib, H. N. (2018). BIM interoperability for structural analysis. Construction Research
Congress
2018:
Construction
Information
Technology,
https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784481264.046
Schenck, D. A., & Wilson, P. R. (1994). Information modeling the EXPRESS way. Oxford University Press.
0195358643
Sengupta, S., Kaulgud, V., & Sharma, V. S. (2011). Cloud computing security--trends and research directions.
2011 IEEE World Congress on Services, https://doi.org/10.1109/SERVICES.2011.20
Shayeganfar, F., Anjomshoaa, A., & Tjoa, A. M. (2008). A smart indoor navigation solution based on building
information model and google android. International Conference on Computers for Handicapped
Persons, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-70540-6_157
Singh, V., Gu, N., & Wang, X. (2011). A theoretical framework of a BIM-based multidisciplinary collaboration
platform.
Automation
in
Construction,
20(2),
134-144.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2010.09.011
Succar, B. (2009). Building information modelling framework: A research and delivery foundation for
industry
stakeholders.
Automation
in
Construction,
18(3),
357-375.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2008.10.003
Takabi, H., Joshi, J. B., & Ahn, G.-J. (2010). Securecloud: Towards a comprehensive security framework for
cloud computing environments. 2010 IEEE 34th Annual Computer Software and Applications
Conference Workshops, https://doi.org/10.1109/COMPSACW.2010.74
van Berlo, L., & Krijnen, T. (2014). Using the BIM collaboration format in a server based workflow. Procedia
Environmental Sciences, 22, 325-332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proenv.2014.11.031
Wan, C., Chen, P.-H., & Tiong, R. L. (2004). Assessment of IFCs for structural analysis domain. Journal of
Information Technology in Construction (ITcon), 9(5), 75-95. https://doi.org/10.1.1.120.4108
Proc. of the Conference CIB W78 2021, 11-15 October 2021, Luxembourg

Zhao et al. 2021 Comparison of BIM Collaboration Paradigms for Digital Twin Readiness

Wong, J., Wang, X., Li, H., & Chan, G. (2014). A review of cloud-based BIM technology in the construction
sector. Journal of information technology in construction, 19, 281-291.
Xue, F., Guo, H., & Lu, W. (2020). Digital Twinning Construction Objects: Lessons Learned from Pose
Estimation Methods 37th CIB W78 Information Technology for Construction Conference (CIB
W78), https://doi.org/10.46421/2706-6568.37.2020.paper023
Xue, F., & Lu, W. (2020). A semantic differential transaction approach to minimizing information
redundancy for BIM and blockchain integration. Automation in Construction, 118, 103270.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2020.103270
Xue, F., Wu, L., & Lu, W. (2021). Semantic enrichment of building and city information models: A ten-year
review.
Advanced
Engineering
Informatics,
47,
101245.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2020.101245
Young, N. (2005). Interoperability: A growing understanding and momentum. Interoperability Int.
BuildingSmart Conf,
Zhang, L., & Ashuri, B. (2018). BIM log mining: Discovering social networks. Automation in Construction, 91,
31-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2018.03.009

Proc. of the Conference CIB W78 2021, 11-15 October 2021, Luxembourg