Evolutionary design assistants for architecture

In its parallel pursuit of an increased competitivity for design offices and more pleasurable and easier workflows for designers, artificial design intelligence is a technical, intellectual, and political challenge. While human-machine cooperation has become commonplace through Computer Aided Design (CAD) tools, a more improved collaboration and better support appear possible only through an endeavor into a kind of artificial design intelligence, which is more sensitive to the human perception of affairs. Considered as part of the broader Computational Design studies, the research program of this quest can be called Artificial / Autonomous / Automated Design (AD). The current available level of Artificial Intelligence (AI) for design is limited and a viable aim for current AD would be to develop design assistants that are capable of producing drafts for various design tasks. Thus, the overall aim of this thesis is the development of approaches, techniques, and tools towards artificial design assistants that offer a capability for generating drafts for sub-tasks within design processes. The main technology explored for this aim is Evolutionary Computation (EC), and the target design domain is architecture. The two connected research questions of the study concern, first, the investigation of the ways to develop an architectural design assistant, and secondly, the utilization of EC for the development of such assistants. While developing approaches, techniques, and computational tools for such an assistant, the study also carries out a broad theoretical investigation into the main problems, challenges, and requirements towards such assistants on a rather overall level. Therefore, the research is shaped as a parallel investigation of three main threads interwoven along several levels, moving from a more general level to specific applications. The three research threads comprise, first, theoretical discussions and speculations with regard to both existing literature and the proposals and applications of the thesis; secondly, proposals for descriptive and prescriptive models, mappings, summary illustrations, task structures, decomposition schemes, and integratory frameworks; and finally, experimental applications of these proposals. This tripartite progression allows an evaluation of each proposal both conceptually and practically; thereby, enabling a progressive improvement of the understanding regarding the research question, while producing concrete outputs on the way. Besides theoretical and interpretative examinations, the thesis investigates its subject through a set of practical and speculative proposals, which function as both research instruments and the outputs of the study. The first main output of the study is the “design_proxy” approach (d_p), which is an integrated approach for draft making design assistants. It is an outcome of both theoretical examinations and experimental applications, and proposes an integration of, (1) flexible and relaxed task definitions and representations (instead of strict formalisms), (2) intuitive interfaces that make use of usual design media, (3) evaluation of solution proposals through their similarity to given examples, and (4) a dynamic evolutionary approach for solution generation. The design_proxy approach may be useful for AD researchers that aim at developing practical design assistants, as has been examined and demonstrated with the two applications, i.e., design_proxy.graphics and design_proxy.layout. The second main output, the “Interleaved Evolutionary Algorithm” (IEA, or Interleaved EA) is a novel evolutionary algorithm proposed and used as the underlying generative mechanism of design_proxybased design assistants. The Interleaved EA is a dynamic, adaptive, and multi-objective EA, in which one of the objectives leads the evolution until its fitness progression stagnates; in the sense that the settings and fitness values of this objective is used for most evolutionary decisions. In this way, the Interleaved EA enables the use of different settings and operators for each of the objectives within an overall task, which would be the same for all objectives in a regular multi-objective EA. This property gives the algorithm a modular structure, which offers an improvable method for the utilization of domain-specific knowledge for each sub-task, i.e., objective. The Interleaved EA can be used by Evolutionary Computation (EC) researchers and by practitioners who employ EC for their tasks. As a third main output, the “Architectural Stem Cells Framework” is a conceptual framework for architectural design assistants. It proposes a dynamic and multi-layered method for combining a set of design assistants for larger tasks in architectural design. The first component of the framework is a layer-based, parallel task decomposition approach, which aims at obtaining a dynamic parallelization of sub-tasks within a more complicated problem. The second component of the framework is a conception for the development mechanisms for building drafts, i.e., Architectural Stem Cells (ASC). An ASC can be conceived as a semantically marked geometric structure, which contains the information that specifies the possibilities and constraints for how an abstract building may develop from an undetailed stage to a fully developed building draft. ASCs are required for re-integrating the separated task layers of an architectural problem through solution-based development. The ASC Framework brings together many of the ideas of this thesis for a practical research agenda and it is presented to the AD researchers in architecture. Finally, the “design_proxy.layout” (d_p.layout) is an architectural layout design assistant based on the design_proxy approach and the IEA. The system uses a relaxed problem definition (producing draft layouts) and a flexible layout representation that permits the overlapping of design units and boundaries. User interaction with the system is carried out through intuitive 2D graphics and the functional evaluations are performed by measuring the similarity of a proposal to existing layouts. Functioning in an integrated manner, these properties make the system a practicable and enjoying design assistant, which was demonstrated through two workshop cases. The d_p.layout is a versatile and robust layout design assistant that can be used by architects in their design processes

Dagstuhl News January - December 2006

"Dagstuhl News" is a publication edited especially for the members of the Foundation "Informatikzentrum Schloss Dagstuhl" to thank them for their support. The News give a summary of the scientific work being done in Dagstuhl. Each Dagstuhl Seminar is presented by a small abstract describing the contents and scientific highlights of the seminar as well as the perspectives or challenges of the research topic

What to bid and when to stop

Negotiation is an important activity in human society, and is studied by various disciplines, ranging from economics and game theory, to electronic commerce, social psychology, and artificial intelligence. Traditionally, negotiation is a necessary, but also time-consuming and expensive activity. Therefore, in the last decades there has been a large interest in the automation of negotiation, for example in the setting of e-commerce. This interest is fueled by the promise of automated agents eventually being able to negotiate on behalf of human negotiators.Every year, automated negotiation agents are improving in various ways, and there is now a large body of negotiation strategies available, all with their unique strengths and weaknesses. For example, some agents are able to predict the opponent's preferences very well, while others focus more on having a sophisticated bidding strategy. The problem however, is that there is little incremental improvement in agent design, as the agents are tested in varying negotiation settings, using a diverse set of performance measures. This makes it very difficult to meaningfully compare the agents, let alone their underlying techniques. As a result, we lack a reliable way to pinpoint the most effective components in a negotiating agent.There are two major advantages of distinguishing between the different components of a negotiating agent's strategy: first, it allows the study of the behavior and performance of the components in isolation. For example, it becomes possible to compare the preference learning component of all agents, and to identify the best among them. Second, we can proceed to mix and match different components to create new negotiation strategies., e.g.: replacing the preference learning technique of an agent and then examining whether this makes a difference. Such a procedure enables us to combine the individual components to systematically explore the space of possible negotiation strategies.To develop a compositional approach to evaluate and combine the components, we identify structure in most agent designs by introducing the BOA architecture, in which we can develop and integrate the different components of a negotiating agent. We identify three main components of a general negotiation strategy; namely a bidding strategy (B), possibly an opponent model (O), and an acceptance strategy (A). The bidding strategy considers what concessions it deems appropriate given its own preferences, and takes the opponent into account by using an opponent model. The acceptance strategy decides whether offers proposed by the opponent should be accepted.The BOA architecture is integrated into a generic negotiation environment called Genius, which is a software environment for designing and evaluating negotiation strategies. To explore the negotiation strategy space of the negotiation research community, we amend the Genius repository with various existing agents and scenarios from literature. Additionally, we organize a yearly international negotiation competition (ANAC) to harvest even more strategies and scenarios. ANAC also acts as an evaluation tool for negotiation strategies, and encourages the design of negotiation strategies and scenarios.We re-implement agents from literature and ANAC and decouple them to fit into the BOA architecture without introducing any changes in their behavior. For each of the three components, we manage to find and analyze the best ones for specific cases, as described below. We show that the BOA framework leads to significant improvements in agent design by wining ANAC 2013, which had 19 participating teams from 8 international institutions, with an agent that is designed using the BOA framework and is informed by a preliminary analysis of the different components.In every negotiation, one of the negotiating parties must accept an offer to reach an agreement. Therefore, it is important that a negotiator employs a proficient mechanism to decide under which conditions to accept. When contemplating whether to accept an offer, the agent is faced with the acceptance dilemma: accepting the offer may be suboptimal, as better offers may still be presented before time runs out. On the other hand, accepting too late may prevent an agreement from being reached, resulting in a break off with no gain for either party. We classify and compare state-of-the-art generic acceptance conditions. We propose new acceptance strategies and we demonstrate that they outperform the other conditions. We also provide insight into why some conditions work better than others and investigate correlations between the properties of the negotiation scenario and the efficacy of acceptance conditions.Later, we adopt a more principled approach by applying optimal stopping theory to calculate the optimal decision on the acceptance of an offer. We approach the decision of whether to accept as a sequential decision problem, by modeling the bids received as a stochastic process. We determine the optimal acceptance policies for particular opponent classes and we present an approach to estimate the expected range of offers when the type of opponent is unknown. We show that the proposed approach is able to find the optimal time to accept, and improves upon all existing acceptance strategies.Another principal component of a negotiating agent's strategy is its ability to take the opponent's preferences into account. The quality of an opponent model can be measured in two different ways. One is to use the agent's performance as a benchmark for the model's quality. We evaluate and compare the performance of a selection of state-of-the-art opponent modeling techniques in negotiation. We provide an overview of the factors influencing the quality of a model and we analyze how the performance of opponent models depends on the negotiation setting. We identify a class of simple and surprisingly effective opponent modeling techniques that did not receive much previous attention in literature.The other way to measure the quality of an opponent model is to directly evaluate its accuracy by using similarity measures. We review all methods to measure the accuracy of an opponent model and we then analyze how changes in accuracy translate into performance differences. Moreover, we pinpoint the best predictors for good performance. This leads to new insights concerning how to construct an opponent model, and what we need to measure when optimizing performance.Finally, we take two different approaches to gain more insight into effective bidding strategies. We present a new classification method for negotiation strategies, based on their pattern of concession making against different kinds of opponents. We apply this technique to classify some well-known negotiating strategies, and we formulate guidelines on how agents should bid in order to be successful, which gives insight into the bidding strategy space of negotiating agents. Furthermore, we apply optimal stopping theory again, this time to find the concessions that maximize utility for the bidder against particular opponents. We show there is an interesting connection between optimal bidding and optimal acceptance strategies, in the sense that they are mirrored versions of each other.Lastly, after analyzing all components separately, we put the pieces back together again. We take all BOA components accumulated so far, including the best ones, and combine them all together to explore the space of negotiation strategies.We compute the contribution of each component to the overall negotiation result, and we study the interaction between components. We find that combining the best agent components indeed makes the strongest agents. This shows that the component-based view of the BOA architecture not only provides a useful basis for developing negotiating agents but also provides a useful analytical tool. By varying the BOA components we are able to demonstrate the contribution of each component to the negotiation result, and thus analyze the significance of each. The bidding strategy is by far the most important to consider, followed by the acceptance conditions and finally followed by the opponent model.Our results validate the analytical approach of the BOA framework to first optimize the individual components, and then to recombine them into a negotiating agent

Computational intelligence based complex adaptive system-of-systems architecture evolution strategy

The dynamic planning for a system-of-systems (SoS) is a challenging endeavor. Large scale organizations and operations constantly face challenges to incorporate new systems and upgrade existing systems over a period of time under threats, constrained budget and uncertainty. It is therefore necessary for the program managers to be able to look at the future scenarios and critically assess the impact of technology and stakeholder changes. Managers and engineers are always looking for options that signify affordable acquisition selections and lessen the cycle time for early acquisition and new technology addition. This research helps in analyzing sequential decisions in an evolving SoS architecture based on the wave model through three key features namely; meta-architecture generation, architecture assessment and architecture implementation. Meta-architectures are generated using evolutionary algorithms and assessed using type II fuzzy nets. The approach can accommodate diverse stakeholder views and convert them to key performance parameters (KPP) and use them for architecture assessment. On the other hand, it is not possible to implement such architecture without persuading the systems to participate into the meta-architecture. To address this issue a negotiation model is proposed which helps the SoS manger to adapt his strategy based on system owners behavior. This work helps in capturing the varied differences in the resources required by systems to prepare for participation. The viewpoints of multiple stakeholders are aggregated to assess the overall mission effectiveness of the overarching objective. An SAR SoS example problem illustrates application of the method. Also a dynamic programing approach can be used for generating meta-architectures based on the wave model. --Abstract, page iii

Spatial primitives and knowledge organization in planning and architecture: some experimental notes

n/

The Emerging Nature of Participation in Multispecies Interaction Design

Interactive technology has become integral part of daily life for both humans and animals, with animals often interacting with technologized environments on behalf of humans. For some, animals' participation in the design process is essential to design technology that can adequately support their activities. For others, animals' inability to understand and control design activities inevitably stands in the way of multispecies participatory practices. Here, we consider the essential elements of participation within interspecies interactions and illustrate its emergence, in spite of contextual constraints and asymmetries. To move beyond anthropomorphic notions of participation, and consequent anthropocentric practices, we propose a broader participatory model based on indexical semiosis, volition and choice; and we highlight dimensions that could define inclusive participatory practices more resilient to the diversity of understandings and goals among part-taking agents, and better able to account for the contribution of diverse, multispecies agents in interaction design and beyond