Complex Adaptive Systems and performance-oriented heterogeneity in architectural form-finding
-
Upload
leonidas-leo -
Category
Documents
-
view
13 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Complex Adaptive Systems and performance-oriented heterogeneity in architectural form-finding
1 | P a g e
Initial readings
1. Alisa Andrasek // Open Synthesis – Toward a Resilient Fabric of Architecture
2. John H. Holland // Hidden Order – How Adaptation Builds Complexity
Nomenclature
cas Complex Adaptive Systems
COMPLEX ADAPTIVE SYSTEMS AND PERFORMANCE‐ORIENTED HETEROGENEITY
IN ARCHITECTURAL FORM‐FINDING
The aim of the following literature review is to provide a theoretical framework for
supporting the argument that complex adaptive systems can produce performance‐oriented
heterogeneous structures through bottom‐up design based on their adaptation ability
towards inputs from their environment, such as reaction towards light. The existing literature
on cas is investigated in order to provide the basis for understanding cas behavior, with a
particular focus on their ability to adapt and generate complexity out of simplicity. Moreover,
the concept of heterogeneity is reviewed from the perspective of philosophy and
performance‐oriented architecture, while the last part of the literature review focuses on the
application of these concepts in contemporary architectural design. The acquired knowledge
and findings from this review will be used as the basis for further research and application of
these concepts on performance‐oriented architectural form‐finding.
Complex Adaptive Systems
In order to realize the potential of cas, some of the existing literature on cas behavior is
presented below, beginning with one of the first formal studies on cas, conducted by scientist
John Holland in the first half of the 90s. Taking place in the same period, the work of biologist
S. Kauffman is presented afterwards, approaching the topic from a more biological
perspective. Moreover, an earlier text which offers a clear example about cas behavior by
cognitive scientist D. Hofstadter is reviewed, followed by a key work of writer J.L. Borges that
expands on the idea of complexity from a more philosophical standpoint. Finally, the section
ends with the work of Holland that focuses on the adaptation ability of cas.
In the first chapter of his book on cas [Holland, 1995], Holland describes through various
examples the omnipresence of cas in different scales of natural and artificial systems, and
attempts to organize the basic elements that constitute every cas into seven distinct
categories. According to him, the seven basic elements are divided into four properties and
three mechanisms, which are aggregation, nonlinearity, flows and diversity, and tagging,
internal modeling and building blocks in respect. His research was one of the first scientific
insights on cas and understanding cas behavior, along with the research work of S. Kauffman.
Kauffman’s work [Kauffman, 1995] focused mainly on the mechanisms of evolving self‐
organization systems, such as cellular structures, and the collective emergence in them,
2 | P a g e
similar to cas’ aggregation property and adaptation ability in Holland’s work. According to him,
there is particular interest in the ability of these systems to generate complexity out of
simplicity, referred as ‘Order for free’ [Kauffman, 1995, p.30]. Through his research on
ontogeny, more concepts and mechanisms of these systems are presented, such as
coevolution, adaptation, cell specialization, and order out of chaos. Every genomic network
that controls an organism’s development can exist either in a highly ordered, chaotic, or in‐
between state [Kauffman, 1995, p.31], while each network’s state is controlled by the number
of inputs in the system and the rules governing it [Kauffman, 1995, p.86].
The observation of Kauffman of ‘Order for Free’ is also described in the essay Ant Fugue,
written by D. Hofstadter [1979], which presents many similarities with Holland’s cas. In his
essay, Hofstadter uses the example of an ant colony to illustrate how a group of relatively
unintelligent parts, namely ants, following a set of simple rules, has the ability to form a kind
of intelligence and complex behavior when aggregated in big numbers [Hofstadter, 1979,
p.166], which is the ant colony in this case. Some of the properties mentioned include
specialization [Hofstadter, 1979, p.169], multiple layers of organization, constant change and
adaptation [Hofstadter, 1979, p.170], and signals acting as lever points or creating new
behaviors in the system [Hofstadter, 1979, p.171], each of which can be assigned to one of
the seven basic elements of Holland. The ideas of holism and reductionism, or top‐down and
bottom‐up approaches, are mentioned as two different ways for understanding cas
[Hofstadter, 1979, p.159], while their combination is essential in order to get a better
understanding of a system’s complex behavior.
The idea of complexity building up from some basic elements is also presented from
another perspective in the short story ‘The Library of Babel’ by J.L. Borges [Borges, 1998], first
published in 1941, which focuses on the ‘indefinite and perhaps infinite number’ [Borges,
1998, p.1] of possibilities created from the combination of these elements. His story presents
the complexity of the universe and its bottom‐up structure through its analogy with a library
that contains every book that has or will ever exist [Borges, 1998, p.4]. His basic elements,
namely letters and symbols, when combined form text in pages, leading to books, shelves full
of books, and hexagonal galleries [Borges, 1998, p.2]. Some of the properties of cas, such as
aggregation and the formation of meta‐agents, meta‐meta‐agents and so on, along with the
ability of generating meaning in something that is comprised of individually meaningless
elements, are all evident in his story.
Focusing more on the adaptation ability of cas systems, it is mentioned by Holland [1992]
[1995] that an agent follows sets of rules, each of which is activated based on inputs from its
environment, creating different rule combinations that lead to increased complexity and each
rule becomes a building block [Holland, 1995, p.51]. The next step in achieving adaptation is
credit assignment, which refers to the process of assigning each rule a strength factor, in order
to assess its importance based on the system’s accumulated experience [Holland, 1995, p.53].
Moreover, adaptation can be achieved through rule discovery, referring to the creation of new
offspring rules derived from parent rules through mutation and crossing‐over procedures
[Holland, 1995, p.65,70].
3 | P a g e
Performance – Oriented Heterogeneity and Deleuze
As it is shown, the adaptation ability of agents can lead eventually to nonlinear
aggregations of increased complexity, generating different formations across a system’s
structure. The concept of heterogeneity needs to be introduced here, as described in
philosophy by Gilles Deleuze in his book with Felix Guattari One Thousand Plateaus [Deleuze,
Guattari, 2004] through smooth and striated space. Deleuze assigns multiple characteristics
to these two terms, but a general interpretation could explain smooth space as highly dynamic
and constantly changing, similar to cas and bottom‐up approaches, while striated space is
more rigid and inflexible, similar to formal and top‐down approaches.
According to Deleuze, the two spaces always coexist and the one transforms the other in
different ways [Deleuze, Guattari, 2004, p.474]. Smooth is fundamentally characterized by
heterogeneity, but its sole existence would lead to amorphous results due to its constant
change, while its coexistence with striated generates a different kind of heterogeneous space
that allows a better definition of change within a rigid structure [Deleuze, Guattari, 2004]. In
natural systems smooth precedes striated, with striated taking over smooth, but the latter
reappears in a different level through the striated structure and interacts with it [Deleuze,
Guattari, 2004, p.480]. Other interesting states between the two involve the transition from
the one to the other, their change of state, as well as their superposition [Deleuze, Guattari,
2004, p.482]. According to Deleuze, the interaction forces between smooth and striated are
also their most interesting characteristic, while he mentions that ‘even the most striated city
gives rise to smooth spaces’ [Deleuze, Guattari, 2004, p.500].
Examining heterogeneity from an architectural and environmental performance‐oriented
perspective, the work of Michael Hensel is highly engaged with achieving heterogeneity in
buildings for the creation of different microclimates within the same structure in order to
maximize building performance [Hensel, 2013]. Opposed to conventional environmental
design approaches, Hensel’s approach aims in generating smoother spaces that are closer to
ecosystems and natural processes, while the importance of boundaries and transitions
between spaces is mentioned, similar to the transition between smooth and striated space.
In an article written by Hight, Hensel and Menges [2009], a space is defined as
heterogeneous by the existence of ‘a diverse range of items or qualities’ [Hight et al, 2009,
p.12], while the importance of transitions and boundaries is mentioned again. Some of the
ideas of Deleuze can be found embedded in this article, such as the concept of smooth and
striated for describing heterogeneous and homogeneous space in respect. Deleuze’s ideas
about the constant coexistence of smooth and striated and the possible relationships between
the two are used by the authors for proposing the need for the coexistence of homogeneous
and heterogeneous space within the same structure [Hight et al, 2009, p.16]. This idea is used
for presenting an ecological approach towards architectural design, through a system whose
elements react locally to internal and external parameters, such as structural or light inputs,
adapting and becoming locally discontinuous and diverse, and leading in the generation of
heterogeneous spaces, while the overall coherence of the structure is retained [Hight et al,
2009, p.34]. The similarities of this model with cas and the concepts of bottom‐up, top‐down
and order out of chaos are evident.
This approach is also explored in another article by Hensel and Menges [2008], in which a
system’s ability to respond to internal and external forces, such as environmental parameters,
renders it highly adaptable and offers the potential for a fundamental performance‐oriented
4 | P a g e
approach towards architectural design. Moreover, a bottom‐up approach is suggested,
designing from the micro‐scale in order to achieve a truly heterogeneous space that interacts
with its environment and produces unpreceded levels of performance [Hensel, Mengel, 2008,
p.207].
Architectural Applications of Complex Adaptive Systems and Heterogeneity
Shifting the focus towards architectural design, the current research and application of
cas in architectural design is reviewed, along with a number of related projects. The section
starts with reviewing the article of Alisa Andrasek on “Open Synthesis”, written in a period in
which these ideas are being explored by an increasing number of architects, and providing a
clear description of their potential for architectural design.
In her article for Log magazine [2012], A. Andrasek places architecture within the scientific
and cultural framework of its time, in which the emergence of advanced computing systems
and the ubiquitous use of code have created new opportunities and ideas in most scientific
fields, philosophy and architecture, leading to a phenomenal exchange of information and
knowledge, along with the blurring of boundaries between the various disciplines. The
concept of agent systems is used for the description of cas [Andrasek, 2012, p.50], while the
potential of these systems in architectural design lies in their adaptation and emergence
ability, and in generating complexity out of simplicity. Their application can also be found on
the new trajectories that architecture is engaging, such as materiality, resilient systems,
generative design, nonlinearity and bottom‐up approaches. Moreover, multi‐agent systems
are used in object‐oriented programming for achieving heterogeneity which can result in
complex, adaptive and resilient outputs [Andrasek, 2012, p.49].
Looking at existing projects placed within this framework, the work of Biothing, led by A.
Andrasek, is based on agent systems for creating generative design through the use of data
and making use of their adaptation ability (fig.1,2). Moreover, student projects from the
research cluster of Andrasek at the Bartlett School of Architecture present features of agent
adaptation based on data inputs and the generation of heterogeneity, such as the Robofoam
project (fig.3).
Figure 1 ‐ FissurePort project / Biothing // Competition proposal from Biothing for the port terminal in
Kaohsiung, Taiwan
5 | P a g e
Another interesting agent‐based example is the work of Roland Snooks and Robert Stuart‐
Smith from Kokkugia. According to R. Snooks [Snooks, 2012], a combination and constant
negotiation between bottom‐up and top‐down approaches needs to be implemented in
design in order to maximize their potential, described as ‘messy computation’ [Snooks, 2012,
p.60], and consisting Kokkugia’s main design approach. An example is Kokkugia’s project
‘Fibrous Tower’, in which an initial geometry is modified through environmental and structural
inputs in order to generate a heterogeneous structure through agent‐based design (fig.4).
Figure 2 FissurePort project / Biothing // Façade generated through agent adaptation
Figure 3 – Robofoam Project / MArch GAD, Bartlett School of Graduate Studies / 2012‐13 // Agent
system, adaptation based on heat inputs and heterogeneity
Figure 4 – Fibrous Tower / Kokkugia // Hybrid design combining bottom‐up and top‐down design
approach. Initial geometry modified through agents reacting to environmental and structural inputs
6 | P a g e
In terms of environmental performance‐oriented design and heterogeneity, the work of
M. Hensel, although not being related to agent systems, is the most representative example.
The project ‘M‐Velope’ of Hensel’s research practice OCEAN is such an example, in which a
façade structure generates climatic and spatial heterogeneity through the use of non‐
standarised panels (fig.5) [Hensel, 2013, p.109‐110].
Another example that should be mentioned because of the project’s engagement with
performance through data inputs, although structural, as well as the use of agent systems and
heterogeneity through adaptation, is the ProtoHouse project by Softkill Design (fig.6), based
on structural analysis of voxelised space for the generation of fibre structure [Softkill, 2012].
Looking at projects focusing on heterogeneity through agent systems, the project
“Cellular Forms” of Andy Lomas (fig.7) should be mentioned. According to him [Lomas, 2014],
the project focuses on generative bottom‐up growth systems, which are controlled by local
rules based on internal or external inputs, similar to Holland’s cas, and result in highly
heterogeneous outputs with prevailing smooth qualities. The principle of minimum input‐
maximum output is implemented, while iterating the system’s parameters generates highly
differentiated outputs. In addition, the concept of light inputs is tested for generating nutrient
creation and, in turn, cellular growth and heterogeneity [Lomas, 2014, p.4].
Figure 5 – M‐Velope / OCEAN // Screen wall comprised of non‐standarised panels generated based on
light inputs. Climatic and spatial heterogeneity, extended threshold
Figure 6 – ProtoHouse / Softkill design // Agent system adapting locally to inputs from structural
analysis and generating reinforced and heterogeneous structure
7 | P a g e
Finally, combining the concepts of bottom‐up growth, cas, heterogeneity and
performance, the work of Neri Oxman is of high interest. In one of her papers [Oxman, 2007],
the concept of performance‐oriented form‐finding through light inputs is explored, in which
an initial geometry is analysed and modified based on light intensity and direction, resulting
in heterogeneous outputs. However, this approach was limited by the need of generating an
initially predefined geometry [Oxman, 2007, p.681], so Oxman’s later and ongoing research
focuses on drawing inspiration from biological mechanisms and using concepts such as cell
differentiation, growth and self‐organising structures [Oxman, 2015]. An interesting example
is the project ‘Wanderers: Wearables for Interplanetary Pilgrims’, in which different growth
systems are explored, producing highly differentiated and heterogeneous results (fig.8)
[Oxman, 2015, p.107].
Conclusion
All in all, by reviewing the existing literature on cas behavior, along with the concept of
performance‐oriented heterogeneity and the application of these concepts in architectural
form‐finding, a theoretical foundation that supports the initial argument and provides the
basis for further research has been set.
It was shown that a number of projects focus on agent‐driven design, but the need for an
initial geometry exists in most of them. On the other hand, projects aiming for performance‐
driven heterogeneity usually have highly striated qualities. As a result, there seems to be a
gap in the existing literature on the combination of the two systems for a fundamentally
bottom‐up approach towards generative and performance‐driven form‐finding through the
Figure 8 – Wanderers / Neri Oxman // Grown heterogeneous structures based on cellular growth, cell
differentiation and self‐organisation
Figure 7 – Cellular Forms / Andy Lomas // Bottom‐up approach and use of agent system with local
adaptation and external or internal inputs that produce heterogeneous and highly variable results
8 | P a g e
use of agent systems and environmental data inputs in generating heterogeneous outputs.
Based on this observation, further work and research will be made, in order to explore the
generative potential of such an approach for architectural form‐finding that is fundamentally
related to performance and closer to an integrated design approach from the macro scale to
the building scale. In this way, it is believed that a novel high resolution output can be
achieved, both in terms of performance and form. Finally, the concept of growing structures
and biological processes such as cell division and differentiation might present a good starting
point towards achieving this approach.
References
ANDRASEK, A., 2012. Open Synthesis – Toward a Resilient Fabric of Architecture. LOG,
25, 45‐54
BORGES, J.L., 1998. The Library of Babel. Collected Fictions. New York: Penguin Books
DELEUZE G., GUATTARI F., 2004. The Smooth and The Striated. A Thousand Plateaus.
London: Continuum
HENSEL, M., MENGES, A., 2009. The Heterogeneous Space of Morpho‐Ecologies. Space
Reader: Heterogeneous Space In Architecture. UK: John Wiley and Sons
HENSEL, M., 2013. AD Primers: Performance‐Oriented Architecture. UK: John Wiley and
Sons
HIGHT, C., HENSEL M., MENGES, A., 2009. En route: Towards a Discourse on
Heterogeneous Space beyond Modernist Space‐Time and Post‐Modernist Social
Geography. Space Reader: Heterogeneous Space In Architecture. UK: John Wiley and
Sons
HOFSTADTER, D., 1979. Prelude… Ant Fugue. Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden
Braid. New York, USA: Basic Books
HOLLAND, J., 1995. Hidden Order: How Adaptation Builds Complexity. Cambridge:
Perseus Books
HOLLAND, J., 1992. Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems. Cambridge,
Massachusetts, USA: The MIT Press
KAUFFMAN, S., 1995. At Home in the Universe: The Search for Laws of Self‐Organization
and Complexity. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press
LOMAS, A., 2014. Cellular Forms: An artistic exploration of Morphogenesis. Available
from: http://www.andylomas.com/extra/andylomas_paper_cellular_forms_aisb50.pdf
[Accessed December 2015]
OXMAN, N., 2007. Get Real: Towards Performance Driven Computational Geometry.
International Journal of Architectural Computing (IJAC). UK, 4(5), 663 ‐684
OXMAN, N., 2015. Templating Design for Biology and Biology for Design. AD Material
Synthesis: Fusing the Physical and the Computational. UK: John Wiley and Sons
SNOOKS, R., 2012. Volatile Formation, LOG, 25, 55‐62
SOFTKILL Design, 2012. Dezeen magazine [online]. Available from:
http://www.dezeen.com/2012/10/23/protohouse‐by‐softkill‐design (Accessed:
26/12/2015)
9 | P a g e
Image References
Fig.1 ‐ Biothing, [image] At: http://www.biothing.org/?attachment_id=394 (Accessed:
03/12/15)
Fig.2 ‐ Biothing, [image] At: http://www.biothing.org/?attachment_id=280 (Accessed:
03/12/15)
Fig.3 – Robofoam [image] At: http://www.daghancam.com/#!bartlett‐2012‐
13/zoom/c1c0x/imageu0a (Accessed: 03/12/15)
Fig.4 – Kokkugia [image] At: http://www.robertstuart‐smith.com/rs‐sdesign‐fibrous‐
tower (Accessed: 26/12/15)
Fig.5 – OCEAN [image] At: HENSEL, M., 2013. AD Primers: Performance‐Oriented
Architecture. UK: John Wiley and Sons, p.110
Fig.6 – Softkill Design [image] At: http://www.3ders.org/articles/20130213‐protohouse‐
2‐first‐3d‐printed‐home‐can‐be‐assembled‐within‐a‐day.html (Accessed: 03/12/15)
Fig. 7 – Andy Lomas [image] At: http://www.andylomas.com/cellularFormImages
[Accessed: 03/12/15]
Fig.8 – Oxman, N. [image] At: http://thecreatorsproject.vice.com/blog/neri‐oxmans‐
bacteria‐infested‐spacesuits‐are‐grown‐not‐designed [Accessed: 28/12/15]