An architecture knowledge base connects approved project information with its source, revision, applicability and access rules. A useful AI pilot retrieves cited evidence for one recurring task and checks it against the firm’s accepted answer.
Choose a question before connecting an archive
Ask a designer or project architect which recurring search takes too long. The task might be locating a firm-approved wall detail, finding an owner’s accessibility preference or retrieving the basis for a specified assembly. Describe the current inputs, people and output.
Choose a question that already has an accepted answer. That gives the pilot a reference for evaluating retrieval and citations. A broad instruction to “make our files intelligent” gives the team no clear way to decide whether the first result helped.
Separate current guidance from project history
Office standards, approved typical details and completed project drawings serve different purposes. Keep those roles visible. A historical detail may reflect a client exception, an old code edition or a field condition that does not apply to the new project.
Record author, source issue, approval status and applicability. If the library contains conflicting versions, the result should show the conflict instead of presenting a single answer with false certainty.
A hypothetical pilot
Start with a small set of approved wet-area details and ask where a particular waterproofing transition is documented. Check whether the retrieved citation shows the actual transition, whether it is current and which receiving wall and floor conditions it assumes.
Then ask a question the library does not answer. A useful result identifies missing evidence and asks for the responsible designer’s decision. It should not invent a firm standard to satisfy every prompt.
Knowledge-base pilot worksheet
| Check | Sources | Review question |
|---|---|---|
| First task | Recurring question and current handoffs | Which specific search or decision should the pilot improve? |
| Source scope | Approved library and project record | Which documents may the pilot use, and which are excluded? |
| Source identity | Project, discipline, issue and revision | Can a reviewer identify exactly where the answer came from? |
| Applicability | Use, jurisdiction, criteria and project conditions | What conditions make the precedent relevant or unsuitable? |
| Access | Firm permissions and client restrictions | Who may view each source and its extracted answer? |
| Answer evidence | Retrieved result and original document | Does the citation support the specific claim? |
| Known questions | Reviewer-approved question and answer set | Can the pilot find the accepted evidence and identify absent answers? |
| Maintenance | Document owner, review date and change process | Who keeps the library current and removes superseded guidance? |
Keep permissions and evidence together
Identify the permitted audience before adding client records. Check that a person cannot retrieve information they are not authorized to see through either a document link or an extracted answer. Test the actual access behavior of the selected tool.
For sources in Microsoft libraries, the SharePoint and OneDrive guide covers Groundbook’s selected-file import workflow. Importing a review package is a different scope from searching a firm’s entire archive.
Work through one improvement with us
CSI’s National CAD Standard overview provides context for consistent drawing identification and organization. Source checked October 13, 2026.
Groundbook’s drawing-set knowledge graph connects information within a supplied review set. This educational guide describes how to plan a broader firm knowledge workflow, rather than promising automatic firm-wide archive indexing.
Bring one task and a sample document to a free 30-minute AEC AI workflow consultation. We will diagnose the handoffs, identify a useful starting point and work through a practical example together.