Presentation Cop en Hag en

a
walk in design space -‐ evolu2onary trajectories of architectural compe22ons

structure
1.evolu)on of complex systems
2.the study of architectural compe))ons:
• conceptual basis
• Methodology – case study for architectural compe))ons
a. generalised NK model

b. the architecture
c. Fitness landscape
d. Muta)on and innova)on in NK models

evolu2on of complex systems:
narrow windows of change

Evolu)on :
a joint effect of “environmental” demand and internal constrains that result in rigid
trajectories of change.

narrow windows of change

+
Evolu)on :
a joint effect of “environmental” demand and internal constrains that result in rigid
trajectories of change
=highly path dependent.

Can these concepts be applied in the study of architectural compe))ons?
study of architectural compe22ons
decision making tools

sor)ng poten)al urban futures and projects
compact procedures in space and )me
compact plaLorms of communica)on

conceptual basis and empirical study


conceptual basis: Assemblage Theory
architectural compe))ons as intertwined systems with human and non-‐human,

material and expressive components.
rela)ons of exteriority : exercise of the components’ capaci)es to interact with each
other.

conceptual basis and empirical study
50 swiss architectural compe))ons 19th century
Hypathie II
technical journals of the period from www.seals.ch


empirical study

empirical study
generalised NK-‐model for architectural compe22ons
A tool to simulate the effects of interdependencies on a fitness landscape
describes elements by a string s s1s2…sN
N dimensions (n=1, . . ., N)

Technical elements
F func)ons
Func)onal characteris)cs
The fitness of a complex system could be referring to (produc)on) efficiency or
(product) quality.
The architecture of architectural compe22ons
The ensemble of interdependencies between the complex system’s elements is called
the system’s architecture.
A change in an element’s state can affect both its func)oning but also the func)oning
of others.
The total number of possible combina)ons between the states of elements bounds the
total number of possible “formats” of a compe))on in “design space”
“mutual informa)on”
indicates the extent in which varia)ons (possible states or alleles) along different
dimensions are co-‐occurring in product popula)ons, in other words it can be an
indicator of differen)a)on.
N elements, technical a]ributes, related to “format” of a compe))on

Background of jurors :

number of architects ( majority = architects then 1, else 0)
poli)cal persons ( at least one 1, else 0)
person with technical exper)se ( at least one 1, else 0)
ar)sts ( at least one 1, else 0)
loca)on
Nature of compe))on regard to the par)cipants

open (open 1, else 0)
invited (invited 1, else 0)
limited (limited 1, else 0)
Nature of compe))on regard to the procedures

one / two stage (one stage 0, two or more stages 1)
ideas / defini)ve (ideas 1, defini)ve 0)
the dura)on
the )me frame the compe))on
extension of deadlines for submission (extension 1, else 0)

0 number of architects ( majority = architects then 1, else 0)
1 poli)cal persons ( at least one 1, else 0)
0 person with technical exper)se ( at least one 1, else 0)
0 ar)sts ( at least one 1, else 0)
1 loca)on

0 open (open 1, else 0)
1 invited (invited 1, else 0)
0 limited (limited 1, else 0)

1 one / two stage (one stage 0, two or more stages 1)
0 ideas / defini)ve (ideas 1, defini)ve 0)
the dura)on
1 the )me frame the compe))on
0 extension of deadlines for submission (extension 1, else 0)
F func)onal a]ributes related to characteris)cs of the compe))on
These a]ributes are the “strengths and the weaknesses” that a client -‐ ini)ator has in
mind for using a compe))on to solve a problem
Transparency
the announcement of the compe))on (announced 1, else 0)
the public announcement of the names of jurors at the announcement (announced 1,
else 0)
the published jury report (published 1, else 0)
the SIA (Swiss Engineers et Architects chamber) rules men)oned in jury reports /
announcements / other documents ( men)oned 1, else 0)
the public exhibi)on of results (exhibited 1, else 0)
actualisa)on
first price winners (at least one first prize 1, else 0)
realisa)on of outcome (realised 1, else 0)
loca)on of juror and loca)on of compe))on (at least one juror from the compe))ons
area 1, else 0)
loca)on of winner and loca)on of compe))on
jury sugges)ons ( at least one sugges)on related to execu)on of the outcome 1,else 0)
the fitness W(s) of the compe))on will be:
W(s)= 1/2 (wT + wA )
Where
wT : the fitness value of a]ribute of transparency
wA : the fitness value of a]ribute of actualisa)on
matrix N x F architectural compe))ons
Grey areas :
interdependencies between the a]ributes according mutual informa)on values
Local op)ma:
010110010100 w1= 0.4500
100110010001 w2=0.6000
100110010100 w3=0.7667
101001000110 w4= 0.2833
110100010101 w5=0.5000
110110010001 w6=0.5833
110110011111 w7=0.3667

010110010100 w1= 0.4500
100110010001 w2=0.6000
100110010100 w3=0.7667 global op)mum
101001000110 w4= 0.2833
110100010101 w5=0.5000
110110010001 w6=0.5833
110110011111 w7=0.3667

010110010100 w1= 0.4500
100110010001 w2=0.6000
100110010100 w3=0.7667
101001000110 w4= 0.2833
110100010101 w5=0.5000
110110010001 w6=0.5833
110110011111 w7=0.3667
100110010100 meaning
1 poli)cal persons ( at least one 1, else 0)
0 person with technical exper)se ( at least one 1, else 0)
0 ar)sts ( at least one 1, else 0)
1 number of architects ( majority = architects then 1, else 0)
1 loca)on

0 invited (invited 1, else 0)
0 limited (limited 1, else 0)
1 open (open 1, else 0)

0 defini)ve (ideas 1, defini)ve 0)
1 two stage (one stage 0, two or more stages 1)
the dura)on
0 extension of deadlines for submission (extension 1, else 0)
0 )me frame
Fitness landscape for architectural compe22ons
100110010100
010110010100 2
100110010100
100110010001 2
100110010100 global op)ma
100110010100
101001000110 6
100110010100
110100010101 3
100110010100
110110010001 3
100110010100
110110011111 4
the global op)mum is in “close” to all the local op)ma
The basins of a]rac)on between the small “distance” local op)ma are not clear
defined and one compe))on can mutate form the one format to the other with small
number of changes (less then 3).
101001000110
010110010100 8
101001000110
100110010001 8
101001000110
100110010100 6
101001000110
101001000110
110100010101 7
101001000110
110110010001 9
101001000110
110110011111 8
the local op)mum with worst fitness value is “far” from all the other op)ma,
that means that it is not easy to get out of its basin of a]rac)on
since we need a big change, a long jump, a simultaneous muta)ons in may elements
Muta2on -‐ innova2on in architectural compe22ons
NK models we can model the effect of changes in the architecture of the system:
in a system’s string
in system’s architecture
(Henderson and Clark 1990)

Muta2on -‐ innova2on in architectural compe22ons
100110010100
010110010100 2
101001000110
110110010001 9
Thank you

Presentation Cop en Hag en

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Presentation Cop en Hag en

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

a

1.evolu)on of complex systems

2.the study of architectural compe))ons:

• Methodology – case study for architectural compe))ons

a. generalised NK model

narrow windows of change

narrow windows of change

=highly path dependent.

decision making tools

decision making tools

conceptual basis and empirical study

decision making tools

conceptual basis: Assemblage Theory

architectural compe))ons as intertwined systems with human and non-­‐human,

decision making tools

conceptual basis and empirical study

50 swiss architectural compe))ons 19th century

technical journals of the period from www.seals.ch

decision making tools

decision making tools

describes elements by a string s s1s2…sN

N dimensions (n=1, . . ., N)

N elements, technical a]ributes, related to “format” of a compe))on

Background of jurors :

Nature of compe))on regard to the par)cipants

Nature of compe))on regard to the procedures

Background of jurors :

Nature of compe))on regard to the par)cipants

Nature of compe))on regard to the procedures

F func)onal a]ributes related to characteris)cs of the compe))on

the ﬁtness W(s) of the compe))on will be:

W(s)= 1/2 (wT + wA )

matrix N x F architectural compe))ons

010110010100 w1= 0.4500

101001000110 w4= 0.2833

010110010100 w1= 0.4500

100110010100 w3=0.7667 global op)mum

101001000110 w4= 0.2833

010110010100 w1= 0.4500

101001000110 w4= 0.2833

Nature of compe))on regard to the par)cipants

Nature of compe))on regard to the procedures

100110010100 global op)ma

(Henderson and Clark 1990)

You might also like

• Methodology – case study for architectural compe))ons

architectural compe))ons as intertwined systems with human and non-‐human,