Citation :

Mahesh Kumar C L, Lalit Bhausing Pawar, Kavya K M, Sharath Hanavadi Premakumar, Sandhya V, Sagar K. Sonawane6, Prashant Sunagar, "A Unified Digital Twin Framework for Autonomous Lifecycle Management of Civil Infrastructure: Integrating Cyber–Physical Systems, AI-Driven Predictive Analytics, and Real-Time Optimization," International Journal of Civil Engineering, vol. 13, no. 8, pp. 487-518, 2026. Crossref, https://doi.org/10.14445/23488352/IJCE-V13I8P129

Abstract

Civil infrastructure assets are managed today through inspection cycles and calendar-based interventions that observe an asset only at discrete instants, so deterioration between visits is inferred rather than measured. Digital Twin (DT) research has addressed parts of this problem, but published frameworks remain confined either to a single lifecycle phase or to a single enabling technology, and few report reproducible validation against public benchmarks. This paper presents a unified DT framework that couples a cyber-physical sensing and communication layer, an entropy-weighted multi-sensor fusion scheme, a hybrid physics-plus-machine-learning surrogate, extended Kalman assimilation for continuous model updating, and a constrained multi-objective optimisation layer that closes the loop from measurement to intervention across all five lifecycle phases of an asset. The contribution is threefold: a phase-invariant state formulation in which design, construction, operation, maintenance and end-of-life are expressed as a single evolving state trajectory; an adaptive physics-to-data blending coefficient calibrated on held-out data rather than fixed a priori; and a reliability-constrained decision layer in which maintenance actions are selected subject to an explicit failure-probability bound. The framework is exercised on a provisional synthetic dataset generated deterministically from a calibrated finite element model of a three-span reinforced concrete girder bridge, and is benchmarked against traditional, IoT-only and AI-only baselines under an identical protocol. All reported results are simulation outcomes; no field validation, laboratory validation or real-time deployment has been performed. The DT configuration attains 96.0% detection accuracy, with a 95% Wilson interval of 95.0 to 96.8, and an area under the curve of 0.98, against 90.0% and 0.92 for the strongest AI-only baseline, every pairwise difference being significant at p below 0.001 after Holm-Bonferroni adjustment. Remaining useful life error falls from 4.80 to 1.30 years, median end-to-end latency from 250 ms to 120 ms, and the annual failure rate from 0.080 to 0.020, raising twenty-year reliability from 0.202 to 0.670 with a discounted break-even at year 5.8. Detection accuracy remains at or above 92% across high-temperature, heavy-load and seismic operating states. A component ablation attributes the margin principally to environmental normalisation at 7.4 percentage points, the physics constraint at 6.0 and continuous assimilation at 4.8, rather than to model capacity, which is held constant against the AI-only baseline. Deployment barriers - interoperability, cybersecurity, cost, power and validation under uncertainty - are quantified and mapped to mitigation measures and residual risk, and a reproducibility statement specifies the dataset generator, splits, hyperparameters, seeds and computing environment, from which every reported figure is exactly reproducible.

Keywords

Building information modelling, Cyber-physical systems, Data assimilation, Digital twin, Lifecycle management, Predictive maintenance, Structural health monitoring.

References

1. Shi Qiu et al., “Exploring the Impact of Digital Twin Technology in Infrastructure Management: A Comprehensive Review,” Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 395-417, 2025.
   [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
2. Chongjie Kang et al., “Digital Twin Technologies for Bridge Lifecycle Management—Literature Insights and a Pilot Study on the Nibelungen Bridge,” Results in Engineering, vol. 28, pp. 1-19, 2025.
   [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
3.  Hessam Kaveh, and Reda Alhajj, “Advancing Civil Infrastructure with Digital Twins: A Review of Applications and Challenges,” Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, vol. 31, no. 8, pp. 828-842, 2025.
   [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
4. Ahmad Baghdadi, “A Comprehensive Review of Digital Twin Implementation in Construction: Current Trends and Future Directions,” Construction Innovation,” Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 3622-3636, 2025.
   [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
5. Helly Kamdar, “Digital Twins and Automation in Construction Project Lifecycle Management,” Emerging Engineering and Mathematics, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 74-83, 2025.
   [Publisher Link]
6. Zhiyan Sun et al., “Approach Towards the Development of Digital Twin for Structural Health Monitoring of Civil Infrastructure: A Comprehensive Review,” Sensors, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 1-41, 2024.
   [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
7. Hossein Naderi, and Alireza Shojaei, "Digital twin technologies for civil infrastructure: Current state and future directions," Automation in Construction, vol. 156, 2023.
   [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
8. Fei Tao et al., “Digital Twin in Industry: State-of-the-Art,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 2405-2415, 2019.
   [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
9. Rui Zhang et al., “Digital Twin and its Applications: A Survey,” The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol. 123, no. 11-12, pp. 4123-4136, 2022.
   [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
10. Adam Thelen et al., “A Comprehensive Review of Digital Twin - Part 1: Modeling and Twinning Enabling Technologies,” Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, vol. 65, no. 12, pp. 1-75, 2022.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
11. Michael G. Kapteyn, Jacob V. R. Pretorius, and Karen E. Willcox, “A Probabilistic Graphical Model Foundation for Enabling Predictive Digital Twins at Scale,” Nature Computational Science, vol. 1, no. 5, pp. 337-347, 2021.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
12. Feng Jiang et al., “Digital Twin and its Implementations in the Civil Engineering Sector,” Automation in Construction, vol. 130, pp. 1-38, 2021.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
13. Werner Kritzinger et al., “Digital Twin in Manufacturing: A Categorical Literature Review and Classification,” IFAC-PapersOnLine, vol. 51, no. 11, pp. 1016-1022, 2018.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
14. Song Honghong et al., “Digital Twin Enhanced BIM to Shape Full Life Cycle Digital Transformation for Bridge Engineering,” Automation in Construction, vol. 147, pp. 1-40, 2023.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
15. M. Pregnolato et al., “Towards Civil Engineering 4.0: Concept, Workflow and Application of Digital Twins for Existing Infrastructure,” Automation in Construction, vol. 141, pp. 1-15, 2022.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
16. Haidar Hosamo Hosamo et al., “A Review of the Digital Twin Technology in the AEC-FM Industry,” Advances in Civil Engineering, vol. 2022, pp. 1-17, 2022.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
17. Itxaro Errandonea, Sergio Beltrán, and Saioa Arrizabalaga, “Digital Twin for Maintenance: A Literature Review,” Computers in Industry, vol. 123, 2020.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
18. Deuk-Young Jeong et al., “Digital Twin: Technology Evolution Stages and Implementation Layers with Technology Elements,” IEEE Access, vol. 10, pp. 52609-52620, 2022.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
19. Michael Grieves, and John Vickers, “Digital Twin: Mitigating Unpredictable, Undesirable Emergent Behavior in Complex Systems,” Transdisciplinary Perspectives on Complex Systems, pp. 85-113, 2016.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
20. Louise Wright, and Stuart Davidson, “How to Tell the Difference between a Model and a Digital Twin,” Advanced Modeling and Simulation in Engineering Sciences, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1-13, 2020.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
21. Yuanliang Yang et al., “Research Progress and Prospect of Digital Twin in Bridge Engineering,” Advances in Structural Engineering, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 333-352, 2024.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
22. Samad M. E. Sepasgozar, “Differentiating Digital Twin from Digital Shadow: Elucidating a Paradigm Shift to Expedite a Smart, Sustainable Built Environment,” Buildings, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 1-16, 2021.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
23. Marios Impraimakis, and Evangelia Nektaria Palkanoglou, “A Generative Adversarial Network Optimization Method for Damage Detection and Digital Twinning by Deep AI Fault Learning: Z24 Bridge Structural Health Monitoring Benchmark Validation,” Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, vol. 68, no. 11, pp. 1-21, 2025.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
24. Stefan Wernitz et al., “A New Open-Database Benchmark Structure for Vibration-based Structural Health Monitoring,” Structural Control and Health Monitoring, vol. 29, no. 11, pp. 1-26, 2022.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
25. Jabez Nesackon Abraham et al., “Unsupervised Learning-Based Anomaly Detection for Bridge Structural Health Monitoring: Identifying Deviations from Normal Structural Behaviour,” Sensors, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 1-20, 2026.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
26. Qiuchen Lu et al., “Digital Twin-Enabled Anomaly Detection for Built Asset Monitoring in Operation and Maintenance,” Automation in Construction, vol. 118, 2020.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
27. Kay Rogage et al., “Beyond Digital Shadows: Digital Twin used for Monitoring Earthwork Operation in Large Infrastructure Projects,” AI in Civil Engineering, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1-21, 2022.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
28. Linjun Lu et al., “Modeling Heterogeneous Spatiotemporal Pavement Data for Condition Prediction and Preventive Maintenance in Digital Twin-Enabled Highway Management,” Automation in Construction, vol. 174, 1-19, 2025.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
29. Diana Davletshina, Varun Kumar Reja, and Ioannis Brilakis, “Automating Construction of Road Digital Twin Geometry using Context and Location Aware Segmentation,” Automation in Construction, vol. 168, pp.1-17, 2024.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
30. Somin Park et al., “Natural Language Instructions for Intuitive Human Interaction with Robotic Assistants in Field Construction Work,” Automation in Construction, vol. 161, pp. 1-57, 2024.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]