Comparative aesthetic assessment of machine learning and human judgment for building wall designs

IF 1.8 3区 艺术学 N/A ARCHITECTURE Architectural Science Review Pub Date : 2023-11-03 DOI:10.1080/00038628.2023.2278500
Seoung Beom Park, Jin-Ho Park, Sejung Jung
{"title":"Comparative aesthetic assessment of machine learning and human judgment for building wall designs","authors":"Seoung Beom Park, Jin-Ho Park, Sejung Jung","doi":"10.1080/00038628.2023.2278500","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"AbstractMachine learning models can potentially provide alternative options in the field of architecture as aesthetic judgment tools, owing to their high capacity and data-driven environments. If a machine learning model can produce aesthetic evaluation results similar to those of humans, the process may be highly promising for further applications in architectural decision-making. In this study, we propose a series of interconnected workflows for a rigorous comparison, including data collection, machine learning, parametric designs, robotic fabrication, and human surveys, to test the compatibility between human judgment and machine learning models in the aesthetic assessment of architectural objects on the same design objects. We observed a wide gap between the aesthetic judgments of the two groups. We discuss certain drawbacks and current limitations to improve the vulnerability of the study process and conclude by providing an outlook for the subsequent direction of a similar study.KEYWORDS: Deep learningTeachable Machineparametric designrobotic fabricationhuman judgement surveyaesthetic assessment Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Data availability statementThe data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, upon reasonable request.Additional informationFundingThis study was supported by the Basic Science Research Program of the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF), funded by the Ministry of Education (NRF-2021R1A2C1093869).","PeriodicalId":47295,"journal":{"name":"Architectural Science Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Architectural Science Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00038628.2023.2278500","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"N/A","JCRName":"ARCHITECTURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

AbstractMachine learning models can potentially provide alternative options in the field of architecture as aesthetic judgment tools, owing to their high capacity and data-driven environments. If a machine learning model can produce aesthetic evaluation results similar to those of humans, the process may be highly promising for further applications in architectural decision-making. In this study, we propose a series of interconnected workflows for a rigorous comparison, including data collection, machine learning, parametric designs, robotic fabrication, and human surveys, to test the compatibility between human judgment and machine learning models in the aesthetic assessment of architectural objects on the same design objects. We observed a wide gap between the aesthetic judgments of the two groups. We discuss certain drawbacks and current limitations to improve the vulnerability of the study process and conclude by providing an outlook for the subsequent direction of a similar study.KEYWORDS: Deep learningTeachable Machineparametric designrobotic fabricationhuman judgement surveyaesthetic assessment Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Data availability statementThe data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, upon reasonable request.Additional informationFundingThis study was supported by the Basic Science Research Program of the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF), funded by the Ministry of Education (NRF-2021R1A2C1093869).
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
建筑墙体设计中机器学习与人类判断的比较美学评价
摘要机器学习模型由于其高容量和数据驱动的环境,可以在建筑领域作为审美判断工具提供潜在的替代选择。如果机器学习模型可以产生与人类相似的美学评估结果,那么该过程在建筑决策中的进一步应用可能非常有前途。在这项研究中,我们提出了一系列相互关联的工作流程进行严格的比较,包括数据收集、机器学习、参数化设计、机器人制造和人类调查,以测试人类判断和机器学习模型在同一设计对象上对建筑对象的美学评估之间的兼容性。我们观察到两组人的审美判断有很大的差距。我们讨论了某些缺点和当前的局限性,以改善研究过程的脆弱性,并通过对类似研究的后续方向进行展望来结束。关键词:深度学习、可教机器、参数化设计、机器人制造、人类判断测量、美学评估披露声明作者未报告潜在利益冲突。数据可用性声明支持本研究结果的数据可在合理要求下从通讯作者处获得。本研究由教育部资助的韩国国家研究基金(NRF)基础科学研究计划(NRF- 2021r1a2c1093869)资助。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
8.70%
发文量
34
期刊介绍: Founded at the University of Sydney in 1958 by Professor Henry Cowan to promote continued professional development, Architectural Science Review presents a balanced collection of papers on a wide range of topics. From its first issue over 50 years ago the journal documents the profession’s interest in environmental issues, covering topics such as thermal comfort, lighting, and sustainable architecture, contributing to this extensive field of knowledge by seeking papers from a broad geographical area. The journal is supported by an international editorial advisory board of the leading international academics and its reputation has increased globally with individual and institutional subscribers and contributors from around the world. As a result, Architectural Science Review continues to be recognised as not only one of the first, but the leading journal devoted to architectural science, technology and the built environment. Architectural Science Review publishes original research papers, shorter research notes, and abstracts of PhD dissertations and theses in all areas of architectural science including: -building science and technology -environmental sustainability -structures and materials -audio and acoustics -illumination -thermal systems -building physics -building services -building climatology -building economics -ergonomics -history and theory of architectural science -the social sciences of architecture
期刊最新文献
Adopting smart technologies to encourage active transportation: a survey of pedestrians and cyclists in Perth, Western Australia Comparison of design education documents and the disconnect between designer priorities, tools, and occupant assumptions Questioning the appropriate angle of view to represent the visual perception of streets: possible answers from a preliminary study Professional architects’ design trade-offs in reinforcement learning-powered agent-based simulation Emergence of eye-tracking in architectural research: a review of studies 1976–2021
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1