Explicating concepts in reasoning from function to form by two-step innovative abductions

The mechanism of design reasoning from function to form is suggested to consist of a two-step inference of the innovative abduction type. First is an inference from a desired functional aspect to an idea, concept, or solution principle to satisfy the function. This is followed by a second innovative abduction, from the latest concept to form, structure, or mechanism. The intermediate entity in the logical reasoning, the concept, is thus made explicit, which is significant in following and understanding a specific design process, for educating designers, and to build a logic-based computational model of design. The idea of a two-step ab- ductive reasoning process is developed from the critical examination of several propositions made by others. We use the notion of innovative abduction in design, as opposed to such abduction where the question is about selecting among known alternatives, and we adopt a previously proposed two-step process of abductive reasoning. However, our model is different in that the two abductions used follow the syllogistic pattern of innovative abduction. In addition to using a schematic example from the literature to demonstrate our derivation, we apply the model to an existing, empirically derived method of conceptual design called “parameter analysis” and use two examples of real design processes. The two synthetic steps of the method are shown to follow the proposed double innovative abduction scheme, and the design processes are presented as sequences of double abductions from function to concept and from concept to form, with a subsequent deductive evaluation step

Studying design abduction in the context of novelty

Design abduction has been studied over the last several decades in order to increase our understanding in design reasoning. Yet, there is still considerable confusion and ambiguity regarding this topic. Some scholars contend that all regressive inferences in design — and design is mostly done by such backwards or regressive reasoning — are in fact abductions. Others focus on formal syllogistic forms in their attempt to clarify abduction. In contrast, we argue here that a defining characteristic of abduction is the production of, or the potential to produce, novel outcomes. Novelty is shown to be relative and depend mostly on what is known to the “reasoner” at the time of making the inference. Novelty is also shown to not necessarily be part of the direct outcome of an abductive inference; but rather, an attribute of an abductive design strategy that is intended to produce a new idea

The role of abduction in production of new ideas in design

The pragmatist philosopher Peirce insisted that besides deduction and induction there is a third main form of inference, abduction, which is the only type of inference capable of producing new ideas. Also he defined abduction as a stage of the methodological process in science, where hypotheses are formed to explain anomalies. Basing on these seminal ideas, scholars have proposed modified, widened or alternative definitions of abduction and devised taxonomies of abductive inferences. Influenced by Peirce’s seminal writings and subsequent treatments on abduction in philosophy of science, design scholars have in the last 40 years endeavoured to shed light on design by means of the concept of abduction. The first treatment was provided by March in 1976. He viewed that abduction, which he called “productive reasoning”, is the key mode of reasoning in design. He also presented a three-step cyclic design process, similar to Peirce’s methodological process in science. Among the many other later treatments of design abduction, Roozenburg’s definition of explanatory and innovative abduction is noteworthy. However, an evaluation of the related literature suggests that research into abduction in design is still in an undeveloped stage. This research shows gaps in coverage, lack of depth and diverging outcomes. By focusing on the differences between science and design as well as on empirical knowledge of different phenomena comprising design, new conceptions of abduction in design are derived. Given the differences of context, abduction in design shows characteristics not yet found or identified in science. For example, abduction can occur in connection to practically all inference types in design; it is a property of an inference besides an inference itself. A number of the most important abductive inference types as they occur in design are identified and discussed in more detail.Peer reviewe

ANALYZING RID METHODOLOGY THROUGH THE LENS OF INNOVATIVE ABDUCTION

The literature reports that abduction is inherent to design reasoning. The Radical Innovation Design methodology is analyzed using the lens of Kroll and Koskela's two-step innovative abduction. In the first phase (Problem Setting), the Knowledge Design process follows a two-step selective abduction and the Problem Design process comprises abduction followed by deduction. This illustrates the specific reasoning employed when identifying the right problem on which to innovate. In the second phase (Problem Solving), the reasoning follows two-step innovative abduction

Reasoning in Design: Idea Generation Condition Effects on Reasoning Processes and Evaluation of Ideas

Reasoning is at the core of design activity and thinking. Thus, understanding and explaining reasoning in design is fundamental to understand and support design practice. This paper investigates reasoning in design and its relationship to varying foci at the stage of idea generation and subsequent performance of ideas developed. Understanding reasoning in design and its relationship to the performance of ideas generated is important to understand design activity, which can be used to develop tools or methods that can improve the effectiveness of design teams. Protocol analyses were conducted to investigate idea generation sessions of two industry cases. Reasoning was found to appear in sequences of alternating reasoning types where the initiating reasoning type was decisive. The study found that abductive reasoning led to more radical ideas, whereas deductive reasoning led to ideas being for project requirements, but having a higher proportion being rejected as not valuable. The study sheds light on the conditions that promote these reasoning types. The study is one of the first of its kind and advances an understanding of reasoning in design by empirical means and suggests a relationship between reasoning and idea performance. Findings of the study further allows for a way to analyse and improve the performance of idea generation in design teams

Empirically analysing design reasoning patterns: Abductive-deductive reasoning patterns dominate design idea generation

Reasoning is a fundamental process in design activity, and it provides a way to understand design behaviour. Theories and models of design propose reasoning that follows abductive-deductive patterns. At the micro-level, these patterns are untested. This study analyses verbal reasoning patterns at the micro-level for group idea generation using protocol analyses of concurrent verbalisations from five design teams with industry participants. The results show that reasoning in design activity across 218 ideas follows general patterns of abductive-deductive reasoning. At the individual idea level, the reasoning patterns are disorderly and enter into micro-patterns of inference. The study concludes that understanding reasoning at early-stage idea generation processes is indicative of the mental models and abductive-deductive reasoning that are prevalent in design activity

Adapting the fbs model of designing for usage-driven innovation processes

There has been rising interest in confronting formal models of design with practical design methods, in order to understand better both and to explore how they can improve each other. In this article, we try to map the Radical Innovation Design (RID) methodology in Gero’s Function-Behavior-Structure (FBS) framework. We encounter difficulties in doing so, and propose new constructs extending the FBS framework to account for some processes in RID. For instance, FBS is extended to describe the early stages of RID, where usages are analyzed to identify the appropriate situations and problems on which to innovate. We present a short practical case study to illustrate the relevance of these concepts. Our findings join those of others who have investigated the use of FBS to illustrate innovative projects, where requirements are unclear. We propose perspectives for future research, notably pursuing this work with the situated FBS framework.</jats:p