[aakashprasad91]

We infer the applicable codes from the project metadata + the drawings themselves.

The location + occupancy/use type tells us the governing code families (e.g., IBC/IRC, ADA, NFPA, local amendments), and then we parse the sheets for callouts, annotations, assemblies, and spec sections to map them to the relevant provisions.

So the system knows when to check (e.g., plumbing fixture clearances) because of the objects it detects in the drawings, and it knows what code to check based on jurisdiction + building type + what’s being shown in that detail.

The model still flags with human-review intent so designer judgment stays in the loop.

[testUser1228]

Gotcha, so the model is identifying elements on the sheets and determining when to run code checks? Is the model running thousands of code checks per drawing set? I would imagine there are lots of elements that could trigger that

[aakashprasad91]

Yep, the model identifies objects/conditions on sheets (fixtures, stairs, rated walls, landings, etc.) and triggers the relevant checks automatically. It can run thousands of checks per project, but we only surface high-confidence findings where the combination of geometry + annotations + code context points to a real risk. Humans stay in the loop to confirm what matters.