An exploration of how connectionist systems can be used to model Important aspects of design reasoning is presented: the way design appears to involve memory; and a ‘holistic’ kind of reasoning by which designs appear to emerge from that memory. A simple connectionist system is used to demonstrate how information about schemata (in this case, subfloor construction types) is stored implicitly after the system is exposed to a number of specific examples. New schemata can emerge from this information. The paper includes a discussion of design, a comparison between a connectionist and a frame-based approach to representing design knowledge, a technical explanation of a connectionist system, and the demonstration of an implemented example.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlexanderC, 1964Notes on the Synthesis of Form (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA)
2.
AlexanderC, 1972, “The city is not a tree”, in Human Identity in the Urban Environment Eds BellGTyrwhittJ (Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, Middx) pp 401–428
3.
BarrAFeigenbaumE A, 1981The Handbook of Artificial Intelligence, Volume I (Pitman, London)
4.
ChaitDJensenM, 1987MacBrain 2.0 User's ManualNeuronics, Cambridge, MA
5.
ChurchlandP S, 1987, “Epistemology in the age of neuroscience”Journal of Philosophy84544–555
CollinsA MLoftusE F, 1975, “A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing”Psychological Review82407–428
8.
CoyneR D, 1988Logic Models of Design (Pitman, London)
9.
CoyneR DNewtonS, 1990, “Design reasoning by association”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design1739–56
10.
CoyneR DPostmusA, 1990, “Spatial applications of neural networks in computer-aided design”Al in Engineering5(1) 9–22
11.
CoyneR DNewtonSSudweeksF, 1989, “Modelling the emergence of schemas in design reasoning”, in Proceedings of Modeling Creativity and Knowledge-Based Creative Design Eds GeroJ SMaherM L (University of Sydney, Sydney) pp 173–205
DreyfusH, 1981, “Misrepresenting human intelligence”, in Artificial Intelligence: The Case Against Ed. BornR (Croom Helm, Andover, Hants) pp 41–54
14.
DyerM GFlowersMHodgesJ, 1986, “EDISON: An engineering design invention system operating naively”Artificial Intelligence in Engineering1(1) 36–44
15.
FodorJ, 1968, “The appeal to tacit knowledge in psychological explanation”Journal of Philosophy65627–640
16.
GeroJ S, 1988, “Prototypes: A basis for knowledge-based design”, in Symposium on Knowledge-based Design in Architecture Eds GeroJ SOksalaT (Helsinki University of Technology, Helsinki) pp 3–8
17.
HayesP J, 1985, “The second naive physics manifesto”, in Formal Theories of the Commonsense World Eds HobbsJ RMooreR C (Ablex, Norwood, NJ) pp 1–36
18.
HopfieldJ J, 1982, “Neural networks and physical systems with emergent collective computational abilities”Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA792554–2558
19.
LansdownJ, 1987, “The creative aspects of CAD: A possible approach”Design Studies8(2) 76–81
20.
McClellandJ LRumelhartD E (Eds), 1987Parallel Distributed Processing: Explorations in the Microstructure of Cognition, Volume 2: Psychological and Biological Models (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA)
21.
McClellandJ LRumelhartD EHintonG E, 1987, “The appeal of parallel distributed processing”, in Parallel Distributed Processing: Explorations in the Microstructure of Cognition, Volume 1, Foundations Eds RumelhartD EMcClellandJ L (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) pp 3–44
22.
McLaughlanSGeroJ S, 1989, “Requirements of a reasoning system to support innovative and creative design activity”Knowledge-Based Systems2(1) 62–71
23.
MaherM LZhaoF, 1987, “Using experience to plan the synthesis of new designs”, in Expert Systems in Computer-aided Design Ed. GeroS (North-Holland, Amsterdam) pp 349–369
24.
MichalskiR S, 1983, “A theory and methodology of inductive learning”Artifical Intelligence20111–161
25.
MinskyM, 1975, “A framework for representing knowledge”, in The Psychology of Computer Vision Ed. WinstonP H (McGraw-Hill, New York) pp 211–277
MitchellW J, 1990The Logic of Architecture (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA)
28.
MoneoR, 1978, “On typology”Oppositions1323–45
29.
NavinchandraD, 1987Exploring Innovative Designs by Relaxing Criteria and Reasoning from Precedence Knowledge PhD thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA)
30.
QuinlanJ R, 1979, “Discovering rules by induction from large collections of examples”, in Expert Systems in the Micro-electronic Age Ed. MichieD (Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh) pp 168–201
31.
RosenblattF, 1962Principles of Neurodynamics (Spartan Press, East Lansing, MI)
32.
RosenmanM AGeroJ S, 1989, “Creativity in design using a prototype approach”, in Proceedings of Modeling Creativity and Knowledge-based Creative Design Eds GeroJ SMaherM L (University of Sydney, Sydney) pp 207–232
RumelhartD EMcClellandJ L, (Eds), 1987aParallel Distributed Processing: Explorations in the Microstructure of Cognition, Volume 1, Foundations (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA)
35.
RumelhartD EMcClellandJ L, 1987b, “On learning the past tense of English verbs”, in Parallel Distributed Processing: Explorations in the Microstructure of Cognition, Volume 2, Psychology and Biological Models Eds McClellandJ LRumelhartD E (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) pp 216–271
36.
RumelhartD ESmolenskyPMcClellandJ LHintonG E, 1987, “Schemata and sequential thought processes in PDP models”, in Parallel Distributed Processing: Explorations in the Microstructure of Cognition, Volume 1, Foundations Eds RumelhartD EMcClellandJ L (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) pp 7–57
37.
SchankR C, 1982Dynamic Memory: A Theory of Reminding and Learning in Computers and People (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)
