Abstract Sustainability evaluations are increasingly relevant in the design of products. Within sustainability-related frameworks, circular economy (CE) has gained attention in the last few years, and this has vastly affected design, leading, for example, to design for circularity. This article deals with the wide range of product-level CE assessment tools, out of which some are applied to a case study from the building sector, namely a tiny house made with hemp bricks. Attention was specifically paid to those methods through which a single circularity indicator could be extrapolated. Overall, the objective of this work is to study the convergence of existing CE assessment methods in providing consistent circularity performances. The results show similarities in the overall circularity scores despite differences in the variables used to achieve that final score. Thus, despite the lack of standard methods, the results suggest that many of these tools are sufficiently interchangeable, also in consideration of consistent indications to improve the circularity of the tiny house. This means that consistent inputs are provided to anyone willing to redesign the tiny house with the objective of making it more circular irrespective of the assessment tool used.
摘要 可持续性评估与产品设计的关系日益密切。在与可持续性相关的框架内，循环经济（CE）在过去几年中得到了广泛关注，并对设计产生了巨大影响，例如，循环性设计。本文介绍了一系列产品层面的 CE 评估工具，其中一些应用于建筑领域的案例研究，即用麻砖建造的小房子。文章特别关注那些可以推断出单一循环性指标的方法。总之，这项工作的目的是研究现有的 CE 评估方法在提供一致的循环性能方面的趋同性。结果表明，尽管用于实现最终得分的变量存在差异，但总体循环性得分具有相似性。因此，尽管缺乏标准方法，但结果表明，这些工具中的许多都有足够的互换性，也考虑到了改善小房子循环性的一致指标。这意味着，无论使用哪种评估工具，都可以为任何愿意重新设计小房子的人提供一致的意见，使其更具循环性。
{"title":"Design issues concerning circular economy assessment methods at the product level: a comparative analysis through a case study of a mobile tiny house","authors":"L. Ruiz-Pastor, S. Altavilla, Y. Borgianni","doi":"10.1017/dsj.2024.12","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2024.12","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Sustainability evaluations are increasingly relevant in the design of products. Within sustainability-related frameworks, circular economy (CE) has gained attention in the last few years, and this has vastly affected design, leading, for example, to design for circularity. This article deals with the wide range of product-level CE assessment tools, out of which some are applied to a case study from the building sector, namely a tiny house made with hemp bricks. Attention was specifically paid to those methods through which a single circularity indicator could be extrapolated. Overall, the objective of this work is to study the convergence of existing CE assessment methods in providing consistent circularity performances. The results show similarities in the overall circularity scores despite differences in the variables used to achieve that final score. Thus, despite the lack of standard methods, the results suggest that many of these tools are sufficiently interchangeable, also in consideration of consistent indications to improve the circularity of the tiny house. This means that consistent inputs are provided to anyone willing to redesign the tiny house with the objective of making it more circular irrespective of the assessment tool used.","PeriodicalId":54146,"journal":{"name":"Design Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141383931","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Research Through Design (RTD) needs to reconsider the meaning of “designing” in the research process of “through design.” We propose Research Through Co-design (RTC) as a new application of Control System Theory (CST) that includes a research problem assigned to a co-design process in RTD. It embeds the participatory paradigm through collaborative design practice and makes the research a collaborative process for learning from all the participants. To sustain the RTC theory, we present a cognitive model of RTC. It is a “model for” – rather than a “model of” – describing how the co-design, as a neural network process, works through its nodes’ collaboration to find co-designed solutions and the research answer. Diversity increases as non-experts and non-designers with different backgrounds participate. This is valuable for the RTC learning system. The discussions highlight the possibility of considering (i) the RTC model as useful for describing a robust RTD process through CST; (ii) RTC as a cognitive model for explaining the value of co-design in research processes; and (iii) RTC as a strategy for applying the participative paradigm in formal research. Finally, new insights and implications are highlighted, including using RTC as a predictive tool through artificial intelligence.
{"title":"Research through co-design","authors":"Daniele Busciantella-Ricci, Sofia Scataglini","doi":"10.1017/dsj.2023.35","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2023.35","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Research Through Design (RTD) needs to reconsider the meaning of “designing” in the research process of “through design.” We propose Research Through Co-design (RTC) as a new application of Control System Theory (CST) that includes a research problem assigned to a co-design process in RTD. It embeds the participatory paradigm through collaborative design practice and makes the research a collaborative process for learning from all the participants. To sustain the RTC theory, we present a cognitive model of RTC. It is a “model for” – rather than a “model of” – describing how the co-design, as a neural network process, works through its nodes’ collaboration to find co-designed solutions and the research answer. Diversity increases as non-experts and non-designers with different backgrounds participate. This is valuable for the RTC learning system. The discussions highlight the possibility of considering (i) the RTC model as useful for describing a robust RTD process through CST; (ii) RTC as a cognitive model for explaining the value of co-design in research processes; and (iii) RTC as a strategy for applying the participative paradigm in formal research. Finally, new insights and implications are highlighted, including using RTC as a predictive tool through artificial intelligence.","PeriodicalId":54146,"journal":{"name":"Design Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139529931","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Ilmenau is a relatively small town in a beautiful landscape, close to the centre of Germany. Since 1894 it has been the home of a Technical College which after World War II and through some permutations became today’s Technische Universität Ilmenau. For 70 years the university has contributed to Design Science. It is interesting to note that the fundamentals were developed in practice, at the Carl Zeiss company in Jena; it was only later that the new ideas were further developed for academic research and teaching in Ilmenau. The origins at Zeiss Jena still account for the main application area at Technische Universität Ilmenau today: Precision Engineering which, in addition to mechanical, has always included electric, electronic, control, software, and even optical components (“mechatronics” before the term was coined). This article – written by three (out of four in total) of the professors who were and are, respectively, in charge over almost 50 out of the 70 years – tells the story of Design Science in Ilmenau: background, beginnings, development, contributions to research, teaching, and transfer to industry. As Ilmenau was situated in the German Democratic Republic (“East Germany”) between 1949 and 1990, the story is not free of political and societal implications, some of them quite surprising.
{"title":"Ilmenau’s contributions to Design Science","authors":"Günter Höhne, C. Weber, S. Husung","doi":"10.1017/dsj.2023.33","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2023.33","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Ilmenau is a relatively small town in a beautiful landscape, close to the centre of Germany. Since 1894 it has been the home of a Technical College which after World War II and through some permutations became today’s Technische Universität Ilmenau. For 70 years the university has contributed to Design Science. It is interesting to note that the fundamentals were developed in practice, at the Carl Zeiss company in Jena; it was only later that the new ideas were further developed for academic research and teaching in Ilmenau. The origins at Zeiss Jena still account for the main application area at Technische Universität Ilmenau today: Precision Engineering which, in addition to mechanical, has always included electric, electronic, control, software, and even optical components (“mechatronics” before the term was coined). This article – written by three (out of four in total) of the professors who were and are, respectively, in charge over almost 50 out of the 70 years – tells the story of Design Science in Ilmenau: background, beginnings, development, contributions to research, teaching, and transfer to industry. As Ilmenau was situated in the German Democratic Republic (“East Germany”) between 1949 and 1990, the story is not free of political and societal implications, some of them quite surprising.","PeriodicalId":54146,"journal":{"name":"Design Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139439145","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Improving designers’ ability to identify manufacturing constraints during design can help reduce the time and cost involved in the development of new products. Different design for additive manufacturing (DfAM) tools exist, but the design outcomes produced using such tools are often evaluated without comparison to existing tools. This study addresses the research gap by directly comparing design performance using two design support tools: a worksheet listing DfAM principles and a manufacturability analysis software tool that analyzes compliance with the same principles. In a randomized-controlled study, 49 nonexpert designers completed a design task to improve the manufacturability of a 3D-printed part using either the software tool or the worksheet tool. In this study, design outcome data (creativity and manufacturability) and design process data (task load and time taken) were measured. We identified statistically significant differences in the number of manufacturability violations in the software and worksheet groups and the creativity of the designs with novel build orientations. Results demonstrated limitations associated with lists of principles and highlighted the potential of software in promoting creativity by encouraging the exploration of alternative build orientations. This study provides support for using software to help designers, particularly nonexpert designers who rely on trial and error during design, evaluate the manufacturability of their designs more effectively, thereby promoting concurrent engineering design practices.
摘要 提高设计人员在设计过程中识别制造限制的能力，有助于减少开发新产品所需的时间和成本。目前存在不同的增材制造设计（DfAM）工具，但对使用这些工具产生的设计结果的评估往往没有与现有工具进行比较。本研究针对这一研究空白，直接比较了使用两种设计支持工具的设计性能：一种是列出 DfAM 原则的工作表，另一种是分析是否符合相同原则的可制造性分析软件工具。在一项随机对照研究中，49 名非专家设计师使用软件工具或工作表工具完成了一项设计任务，以提高 3D 打印部件的可制造性。在这项研究中，我们测量了设计结果数据（创造性和可制造性）和设计过程数据（任务负荷和所用时间）。我们发现，软件组和工作表组的可制造性违规数量以及采用新构建方向的设计的创造性在统计学上存在显著差异。研究结果表明了与原则清单相关的局限性，并强调了软件通过鼓励探索其他构建方向来促进创造力的潜力。这项研究支持使用软件来帮助设计人员，尤其是在设计过程中依赖尝试和错误的非专业设计人员，更有效地评估其设计的可制造性，从而促进并行工程设计实践。
{"title":"Exploring the impact of design tool usage on design for additive manufacturing processes and outcomes","authors":"Hannah D. Budinoff, Sara McMains, Sara Shonkwiler","doi":"10.1017/dsj.2023.34","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2023.34","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Improving designers’ ability to identify manufacturing constraints during design can help reduce the time and cost involved in the development of new products. Different design for additive manufacturing (DfAM) tools exist, but the design outcomes produced using such tools are often evaluated without comparison to existing tools. This study addresses the research gap by directly comparing design performance using two design support tools: a worksheet listing DfAM principles and a manufacturability analysis software tool that analyzes compliance with the same principles. In a randomized-controlled study, 49 nonexpert designers completed a design task to improve the manufacturability of a 3D-printed part using either the software tool or the worksheet tool. In this study, design outcome data (creativity and manufacturability) and design process data (task load and time taken) were measured. We identified statistically significant differences in the number of manufacturability violations in the software and worksheet groups and the creativity of the designs with novel build orientations. Results demonstrated limitations associated with lists of principles and highlighted the potential of software in promoting creativity by encouraging the exploration of alternative build orientations. This study provides support for using software to help designers, particularly nonexpert designers who rely on trial and error during design, evaluate the manufacturability of their designs more effectively, thereby promoting concurrent engineering design practices.","PeriodicalId":54146,"journal":{"name":"Design Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139383912","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Product graphics interchange formats (GIFs) employ this format to show the features of the product and make up for the lack of physical experience online. These GIFs have been widely applied in domains such as e-shopping and social media, aiming to interest and impress viewers. Contrary to this wide application, most designers in this domain lack expertise and produce GIFs of varied quality. Moreover, the knowledge of techniques to enhance viewers’ engagement with product GIFs is also lacking. To bridge the gap, we conducted a series of studies. First, we collected and summarized seven design factors referring to existing literature and semi-structured interviews. Then, the impacts of these design factors were revealed through an online study with 106 product GIFs among 307 participants. The results showed that visual-related factors such as color contrast and moving intensity mainly impact viewers’ interest, while content-related factors such as scenario and style matching impact viewers’ impressions. The simplicity of GIFs also impressed viewers with a quick viewing mode. Finally, we conducted a workshop and verified that these results support large-scale production of product GIFs. Our studies might support the codesign methods of product GIFs and enhance their quality in design practice.
{"title":"Interesting and impressive: exploring design factors for product graphics interchange format to enhance engagement","authors":"Wei Xiang, Tianhui Guo, Wei-yue Gao, Xueyou Wang, Ziyue Lei, Xuanhui Liu, Lingyun Sun","doi":"10.1017/dsj.2023.29","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2023.29","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Product graphics interchange formats (GIFs) employ this format to show the features of the product and make up for the lack of physical experience online. These GIFs have been widely applied in domains such as e-shopping and social media, aiming to interest and impress viewers. Contrary to this wide application, most designers in this domain lack expertise and produce GIFs of varied quality. Moreover, the knowledge of techniques to enhance viewers’ engagement with product GIFs is also lacking. To bridge the gap, we conducted a series of studies. First, we collected and summarized seven design factors referring to existing literature and semi-structured interviews. Then, the impacts of these design factors were revealed through an online study with 106 product GIFs among 307 participants. The results showed that visual-related factors such as color contrast and moving intensity mainly impact viewers’ interest, while content-related factors such as scenario and style matching impact viewers’ impressions. The simplicity of GIFs also impressed viewers with a quick viewing mode. Finally, we conducted a workshop and verified that these results support large-scale production of product GIFs. Our studies might support the codesign methods of product GIFs and enhance their quality in design practice.","PeriodicalId":54146,"journal":{"name":"Design Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2023-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138602491","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Sandeep Krishnakumar, Cynthia Letting, Erin Johnson, Nicolas F. Soria Zurita, Jessica Menold
Abstract Design representations play a crucial role in facilitating communication between individuals in design. Sketches and physical prototypes are frequently used to communicate design concepts in early-stage design. However, we lack an understanding of the communicative benefits each representation provides and how these benefits relate to the effort and resources required to create each representation. A mixed-methods study was conducted with 44 participants to identify whether sketches and physical prototypes led to different levels of cognitive load perceived by a communicator and listener and the characteristics that shape their cognitive load during communication. Results showed that listeners perceived higher levels of mental and physical demands when understanding ideas as low-fidelity physical prototypes, as compared to sketches. No significant differences were found in the cognitive load levels of communicators between the two conditions. Qualitative analyses of post-task semi-structured interviews identified five themes relating to verbal explanations and visual representations that shape designers’ cognitive load when understanding and communicating ideas through design representations. Results indicate that designers should be aware of the specific objectives they seek to accomplish when selecting the design representation used to communicate. This work contributes to the knowledge base needed for designers to use design representations more effectively as tools for communication.
{"title":"Make it or draw it? Investigating the communicative trade-offs between sketches and prototypes","authors":"Sandeep Krishnakumar, Cynthia Letting, Erin Johnson, Nicolas F. Soria Zurita, Jessica Menold","doi":"10.1017/dsj.2023.31","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2023.31","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Design representations play a crucial role in facilitating communication between individuals in design. Sketches and physical prototypes are frequently used to communicate design concepts in early-stage design. However, we lack an understanding of the communicative benefits each representation provides and how these benefits relate to the effort and resources required to create each representation. A mixed-methods study was conducted with 44 participants to identify whether sketches and physical prototypes led to different levels of cognitive load perceived by a communicator and listener and the characteristics that shape their cognitive load during communication. Results showed that listeners perceived higher levels of mental and physical demands when understanding ideas as low-fidelity physical prototypes, as compared to sketches. No significant differences were found in the cognitive load levels of communicators between the two conditions. Qualitative analyses of post-task semi-structured interviews identified five themes relating to verbal explanations and visual representations that shape designers’ cognitive load when understanding and communicating ideas through design representations. Results indicate that designers should be aware of the specific objectives they seek to accomplish when selecting the design representation used to communicate. This work contributes to the knowledge base needed for designers to use design representations more effectively as tools for communication.","PeriodicalId":54146,"journal":{"name":"Design Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138619592","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Caused by the progressing digitalization in mechanical engineering, a significant demand for information about characteristic process and state variables of technical systems arises. However, since it is oftentimes neither obvious what nor how to measure, the integration of measuring functions, in particular in terms of a retrofit, represents a current challenge in mechanical engineering. In order to overcome this challenge, an approach for the systematic identification of potential measurands is provided in this contribution. For this purpose, the approach of physical effect catalogs is taken up and used for the systematic identification of potential measurands, starting from a physical variable to be determined. Existing catalog systems have two major limitations with respect to the intended identification of cause–effect relationships: They assume an effect to be realized and a consideration of design parameters of a technical system is not intended. These limitations are overcome by linking the fundamental idea of existing catalog systems with the basics of multipole-based modeling. In this way, a multipole-based effect catalog system is developed. It creates the foundation to systematically include the changes and transformations of a process or state variable to be determined into the identification of potential measurands.
{"title":"A multipole-based effect catalog system for the systematic identification of potential measurands","authors":"G. Vorwerk-Handing, P. Welzbacher, E. Kirchner","doi":"10.1017/dsj.2023.30","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2023.30","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Caused by the progressing digitalization in mechanical engineering, a significant demand for information about characteristic process and state variables of technical systems arises. However, since it is oftentimes neither obvious what nor how to measure, the integration of measuring functions, in particular in terms of a retrofit, represents a current challenge in mechanical engineering. In order to overcome this challenge, an approach for the systematic identification of potential measurands is provided in this contribution. For this purpose, the approach of physical effect catalogs is taken up and used for the systematic identification of potential measurands, starting from a physical variable to be determined. Existing catalog systems have two major limitations with respect to the intended identification of cause–effect relationships: They assume an effect to be realized and a consideration of design parameters of a technical system is not intended. These limitations are overcome by linking the fundamental idea of existing catalog systems with the basics of multipole-based modeling. In this way, a multipole-based effect catalog system is developed. It creates the foundation to systematically include the changes and transformations of a process or state variable to be determined into the identification of potential measurands.","PeriodicalId":54146,"journal":{"name":"Design Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2023-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139203897","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This article explores the ability of ChatGPT to function as a virtual colleague in helping to design materials for higher education design students. Using a self-study methodology, two university educators attempted to collaborate with ChatGPT to create course materials targeted at higher education design students, before reflecting on its strengths and weaknesses during the process. Contextualising ChatGPT as the latest acute example of digital disruptors that design practices and processes have faced, the authors evaluated its current and potential threats and opportunities for the creation of design-focused learning content. The authors found that ChatGPT was a competent partner with regard to saving time, structuring textual content and documentation, and as a brainstorming tool. However, ChatGPT’s weaknesses included content generation that was often generic, usually requiring much human prompting, cajoling, and manual editing to produce desirable outcomes. Overall, ChatGPT was found to excel at its stated functionality as a language model, with some potentially useful functionality for the creation of higher education design course materials and outlines, as well as limitations. The reflections discussed can be used to inform design educators who may want to work with ChatGPT when designing course materials. However, acknowledging limitations and potential ethical challenges, the authors’ caution that educators may have to evaluate for themselves whether ChatGPT’s potential advantages outweigh its disadvantages.
{"title":"Artificial intelligence in design education: evaluating ChatGPT as a virtual colleague for post-graduate course development","authors":"Yaron Meron, Yasemin Tekmen Araci","doi":"10.1017/dsj.2023.28","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2023.28","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article explores the ability of ChatGPT to function as a virtual colleague in helping to design materials for higher education design students. Using a self-study methodology, two university educators attempted to collaborate with ChatGPT to create course materials targeted at higher education design students, before reflecting on its strengths and weaknesses during the process. Contextualising ChatGPT as the latest acute example of digital disruptors that design practices and processes have faced, the authors evaluated its current and potential threats and opportunities for the creation of design-focused learning content. The authors found that ChatGPT was a competent partner with regard to saving time, structuring textual content and documentation, and as a brainstorming tool. However, ChatGPT’s weaknesses included content generation that was often generic, usually requiring much human prompting, cajoling, and manual editing to produce desirable outcomes. Overall, ChatGPT was found to excel at its stated functionality as a language model, with some potentially useful functionality for the creation of higher education design course materials and outlines, as well as limitations. The reflections discussed can be used to inform design educators who may want to work with ChatGPT when designing course materials. However, acknowledging limitations and potential ethical challenges, the authors’ caution that educators may have to evaluate for themselves whether ChatGPT’s potential advantages outweigh its disadvantages.","PeriodicalId":54146,"journal":{"name":"Design Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2023-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139262582","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Over the past years, computational methods based on deep learning—that is, machine learning with multilayered neural networks—have become state-of-the-art in main research areas in computer-aided architectural design (CAAD). To understand current trends of CAAD with deep learning, to situate them in a broader historical context, and to identify future research challenges, this article presents a systematic review of publications that apply neural networks to CAAD problems. Research papers employing neural networks were collected, in particular, from CumInCad a major open-access repository of the CAAD community and categorized into different types of research problems. Upon analyzing the distribution of the papers in these categories, namely, the composition of research subjects, data types, and neural network models, this article suggests and discusses several historical and technical trends. Moreover, it identifies that the publications analyzed typically provide limited access to important research components used as part of their deep learning methods. The article points out the importance of sharing training experiments and data, of describing the dataset, dataset parameters, dataset samples, model, learning parameters, and learning results to support reproducibility. It proposes a guideline that aims at increasing the quality and availability of CAAD research with machine learning.
{"title":"Three decades of machine learning with neural networks in computer-aided architectural design (1990–2021)","authors":"Jinmo Rhee, Pedro Veloso, Ramesh Krishnamurti","doi":"10.1017/dsj.2023.21","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2023.21","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Over the past years, computational methods based on deep learning—that is, machine learning with multilayered neural networks—have become state-of-the-art in main research areas in computer-aided architectural design (CAAD). To understand current trends of CAAD with deep learning, to situate them in a broader historical context, and to identify future research challenges, this article presents a systematic review of publications that apply neural networks to CAAD problems. Research papers employing neural networks were collected, in particular, from CumInCad a major open-access repository of the CAAD community and categorized into different types of research problems. Upon analyzing the distribution of the papers in these categories, namely, the composition of research subjects, data types, and neural network models, this article suggests and discusses several historical and technical trends. Moreover, it identifies that the publications analyzed typically provide limited access to important research components used as part of their deep learning methods. The article points out the importance of sharing training experiments and data, of describing the dataset, dataset parameters, dataset samples, model, learning parameters, and learning results to support reproducibility. It proposes a guideline that aims at increasing the quality and availability of CAAD research with machine learning.","PeriodicalId":54146,"journal":{"name":"Design Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2023-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45331501","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Nick D. Moses, Lauren R. Wojciechowski, S. Daly, K. Sienko
Abstract Engineers must engage project stakeholders effectively if stakeholder needs are to be met, and prototypes are key tools for communicating design form and function. Quality stakeholder engagement in the front end of design processes, in particular, is critical in the success or failure of design projects. As remote stakeholder engagement has become increasingly common as industry trends toward distributed design, there is a need to develop the theory and practices behind effective remote design processes, which have not yet been as well-studied as in-person design. This study explored the prototyping strategies for remote stakeholder engagement during front-end design used by 10 engineering practitioners and 10 senior engineering students through semi-structured interviews. Prototyping strategies were found to overlap with many of the strategies described by prior literature that are not specific to remote engagement modes, though several of these strategies were adapted to the remote context, and three emergent strategies for prototyping in remote engagements were identified. Designers’ perceptions of remote versus in-person prototyping strategies for stakeholder engagement in front-end design, including perceived advantages and limitations, were also explored, and recommendations for educators to better prepare engineering students for hybrid and remote work are provided.
{"title":"Front-end design prototyping strategies during remote stakeholder engagement","authors":"Nick D. Moses, Lauren R. Wojciechowski, S. Daly, K. Sienko","doi":"10.1017/dsj.2023.23","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2023.23","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Engineers must engage project stakeholders effectively if stakeholder needs are to be met, and prototypes are key tools for communicating design form and function. Quality stakeholder engagement in the front end of design processes, in particular, is critical in the success or failure of design projects. As remote stakeholder engagement has become increasingly common as industry trends toward distributed design, there is a need to develop the theory and practices behind effective remote design processes, which have not yet been as well-studied as in-person design. This study explored the prototyping strategies for remote stakeholder engagement during front-end design used by 10 engineering practitioners and 10 senior engineering students through semi-structured interviews. Prototyping strategies were found to overlap with many of the strategies described by prior literature that are not specific to remote engagement modes, though several of these strategies were adapted to the remote context, and three emergent strategies for prototyping in remote engagements were identified. Designers’ perceptions of remote versus in-person prototyping strategies for stakeholder engagement in front-end design, including perceived advantages and limitations, were also explored, and recommendations for educators to better prepare engineering students for hybrid and remote work are provided.","PeriodicalId":54146,"journal":{"name":"Design Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2023-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42977371","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：