Seventh Annual Workshop on Space Operations Applications and Research (SOAR 1993), volume 1

This document contains papers presented at the Space Operations, Applications and Research Symposium (SOAR) Symposium hosted by NASA/Johnson Space Center (JSC) on August 3-5, 1993, and held at JSC Gilruth Recreation Center. SOAR included NASA and USAF programmatic overview, plenary session, panel discussions, panel sessions, and exhibits. It invited technical papers in support of U.S. Army, U.S. Navy, Department of Energy, NASA, and USAF programs in the following areas: robotics and telepresence, automation and intelligent systems, human factors, life support, and space maintenance and servicing. SOAR was concerned with Government-sponsored research and development relevant to aerospace operations. More than 100 technical papers, 17 exhibits, a plenary session, several panel discussions, and several keynote speeches were included in SOAR '93

Fourth Conference on Artificial Intelligence for Space Applications

Proceedings of a conference held in Huntsville, Alabama, on November 15-16, 1988. The Fourth Conference on Artificial Intelligence for Space Applications brings together diverse technical and scientific work in order to help those who employ AI methods in space applications to identify common goals and to address issues of general interest in the AI community. Topics include the following: space applications of expert systems in fault diagnostics, in telemetry monitoring and data collection, in design and systems integration; and in planning and scheduling; knowledge representation, capture, verification, and management; robotics and vision; adaptive learning; and automatic programming

The Use of Games and Crowdsourcing for the Fabrication-aware Design of Residential Buildings

State-of-the-art participatory design acknowledges the true, ill-defined nature of design problems, taking into account stakeholders' values and preferences. However, it overburdens the architect, who has to synthesize far more constraints into a one-of-a-kind design. Generative Design promises to equip architects with great power to standardize and systemize the design process. However, the common trap of generative design is trying to treat architecture simply as a tame problem. In this work, I investigate the use of games and crowdsourcing in architecture through two sets of explorative questions. First, if everyone can participate in the network-enabled creation of the built environment, what role will they play? And what tools will they need to enable them? And second, if anyone can use digital fabrication to build any building, how will we design it? What design paradigms will govern this process? I present a map of design paradigms that lie at the intersections of Participatory Design, Generative Design, Game Design, and Crowd Wisdom. In four case studies, I explore techniques to employ the practices from the four fields in the service of architecture. Generative Design can lower the difficulty of the challenge to design by automating a large portion of the work. A newly formulated, unified taxonomy of generative design across the disciplines of architecture, computer science, and computer games builds the base for the use of algorithms in the case studies. The work introduces Playable Voxel-Shape Grammars, a new type of generative technique. It enables Game Design to guide participants through a series of challenges, effectively increasing their skills by helping them understand the underlying principles of the design task at hand. The use of crowdsourcing in architecture can mean thousands of architects creating content for a generative design system, to expand and open up its design space. Crowdsourcing can also be about millions of people online creating designs that an architect or a homeowner can refer to increase their understanding of the complex issues at hand in a given design project and for better decision making. At the same time, game design in architecture helps find the balance between algorithmically exploring pre-defined design alternatives and open-ended, free creativity. The research reveals a layered structure of entry points for crowd-contributed content as well as the granular nature of authorship among four different roles: non-expert stakeholders, architects, the crowd, and the tool-makers